Land 400

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
The cav vehicle (Combat Reconnaissance Vehicle) shouldn't need separate gun trucks and APC variants, as most of the candidate vehicle designs have space in the rear compartment for 8 troops, even with a two-man 30mm turret. Boxer can fit 8 troops if a remote turret is installed.

Candidate CRV designs include:
Patria AMV
CIO Freccia
Nexter VBCI
GDELS Piranha V
GDLS-C LAV 6.0
CIO VBA/Super AV
ARTEC Boxer
STK Terrex
Some really good options there that could well and truly do the job of an IFV at a stretch even if roled and equipped as a CFV. Just wait and see I suppose on how many and what types are procured. In the deep distant past when I was in the Light Horse we used to rerole from recc to apc as required and fully equipped would have done both roles simultaneously.

Heres hoping the ARA get enough vehicles not only for operational needs but to train and sustain as well. Sufficient for a number of reserve Squadrons attached to the ACRs and the School of Armour whould be great too but unlikely.
 

MickB

Well-Known Member
I wonder how many parts are common to both the Terrex CRV and the Bionix IFV.
If all other requirements are adressed a high commonality of parts may make it worth selecting both for Land 400.

Then include the Primus SPH also by the same manufactuer and the ADFs supply needs could be greatly reduced.

The total number of vehicles may make it worth opening a local production line.
 

rossfrb_1

Member
I wonder how many parts are common to both the Terrex CRV and the Bionix IFV.
If all other requirements are adressed a high commonality of parts may make it worth selecting both for Land 400.

Then include the Primus SPH also by the same manufactuer and the ADFs supply needs could be greatly reduced.

The total number of vehicles may make it worth opening a local production line.
My understanding is that anything big that goes bang for the army must have AFATDS integrated. This being a legacy of the original Land 17 requirement when SPHs were still being considered.
ADM: Land Warfare: Land 17 - Concepts and Capabilities
In the SPH role there are limited options, ie AFATDS is a yank system so no prizes for guessing the sole AFATD compliant SPH.
The original Land 17 also stipulated, amongst other things, a 52 calibre barrel for the SPH. As far as I am aware there is nothing currently available that ticks those two boxes, let alone MRSI etc (Paladin being 39 calibre).

cheers
rb
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
I am not an arms salesman; so I am not trying to push the advantages of any made in Singapore platform for the ADF.
I wonder how many parts are common to both the Terrex CRV and the Bionix IFV.
Other than the battle management system, the two vehicle families have very little in common in terms of commonality of parts. The hull of the Terrex a more modern 8x8 design, built to tight tolerances with a five-axis machine that is by design swim capable (and powered by a Caterpillar C-9 engine); whereas the Bionix is a fording only IFV, with preparation (and powered by a Detroit Diesel 6V 92TA).

Singapore's Minister of Defence has recently announced that the SAF's fleet of armoured vehicles will double in the next 10 years. The Singapore Army in 2030 will certainly be more mobile. The number of units that will operate on wheel or track platforms will almost double by 2024. Singapore will need to stock parts for these vehicles (as part of the planning process); and commonality of parts with the SAF will reduce down time for the ADF's vehicle fleet, in terms of availability of parts stocked. See the quote below taken from the Feb 2014 issue of Asian Military Review for more details:

"Singapore has assumed near-independence in terms of armoured-vehicle production specifically through ST Kinetics (STK). Introduced in 1999 the Bionix Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV) appears in several variants: the Bionix 40/50 has a one-man cupola with a 40 millimetre (1.6 inch) automatic grenade launcher and .50-cal machine gun; Bionix 25 with 25mm (one-inch) ATK M242 cannon in a two-man turret; and Bionix II with 30mm (1.2-in) ATK Mk44 Bushmaster II cannon. An estimated 720 Bionix vehicles are in service. The Singapore Army also has Bionix recovery, bridge-laying and mine-clearing variants.

The STK Terrex eight-wheel-drive vehicle reached FOC in mid-2011, with production beginning via a contract for 135 vehicles to equip three infantry battalions. By early 2013, the initial order had been fulfilled and another contract was believed to have been placed. The 24-tonne Terrex is fully amphibious, and the Infantry Carrier Vehicle (ICV) variant is armed with an EOS R-600 Remote Weapon Station (RWS). A gunshot detection system is mounted on some vehicles, and the Terrex is fitted with a high-tech Battlefield Management System (BMS) from ST Electronics. Additionally, the Command, Control and Information System (CCIS) synchronises dismounted infantry troops fitted with the Advanced Combat Man System (ACMS) to higher headquarters. Singapore has other Terrex types planned: Anti-Tank Guided Missile (using the Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Spike missile); Command, Medical; Pioneer (with obstacle-clearing blade and gap-crossing Heavy Short Trackway Bridge); Reconnaissance, Surveillance and Target Acquisition (RSTA); and STrike OberveR Mission (STORM) for artillery observers. The Terrex was one of four shortlisted vehicles in the US Marine Corps Marine Personnel Carrier (MPC) requirement before the project was frozen in 2013.

Singapore also owns some of the region’s most capable tanks. Taking advantage of a German sell-off, Singapore procured 96 Krauss-Maffei Wegmann (KMW) Leopard 2A4 Main Battle Tanks (MBT), 30 of which were spare-parts donors. They were immediately put through an upgrade programme engineered by IBD Deisenroth Engineering. The resulting Leopard 2SG is fitted with IBD’s Evolution suite that boasts fourth-generation Advanced Modular Armour Protection (AMAP), plus steel slat armour installed on the hull, turret rear and flanks. An Active Protection System (APS) from ADS Gesellschaft of Germany is likely to equip the vehicles but has not been seen publicly to date. Singapore has also inducted Leopard 2 Armoured Recovery Vehicles, Armoured Vehicle-Launched Bridges and Armoured Engineering Vehicles. It is believed Singapore desires a new light tank to replace its retired AMX-13 fleet too.

In late 2009 the army took delivery of the first of 18 Lockheed Martin High-Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS). These truck-mounted 227mm (nine inch) rocket systems with 70km (44 mile) range became operational with the 23rd Battalion in September 2011. In November, Singapore requested the sale of 88 Guided Multiple-Launch Rocket System (GMLRS) pods and associated rockets from Lockheed Martin. Meanwhile, STK is conducting feasibility studies on a 155mm (6.1 inch) Advanced Mobile Gun System based on an eight-wheel-drive chassis. The conceptual 28-tonne vehicle offers improved mobility compared to STK-produced tracked Primus self-propelled and Pegasus towed howitzers."​
If the Primus replacement vehicle works out, it would be quite an interesting vehicle.
 
Last edited:

Monitor66

New Member
I wonder how many parts are common to both the Terrex CRV and the Bionix IFV.
If all other requirements are adressed a high commonality of parts may make it worth selecting both for Land 400.

Then include the Primus SPH also by the same manufactuer and the ADFs supply needs could be greatly reduced.

The total number of vehicles may make it worth opening a local production line.
My reading of the Bionix II is that it might, at just 25 tonnes GVM, be a bit light on WRT protection compared to current generation tracked IFVs such as CV90, Puma, ASCOD, Tulpar etc, which have GVMs in the vicinity of 30-42 tonnes.

There would, however, be no real impediments to procuring Singaporean kit, particularly given that the successful prime contractor for the Land 400 IFV will be an Australian company (in order to meet Australian industry capability requirements). The actual vehicle OEM will play the role of principal sub-contractor in any teaming arrangement with a local prime.
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
My reading of the Bionix II is that it might, at just 25 tonnes GVM, be a bit light on WRT protection compared to current generation tracked IFVs such as CV90, Puma, ASCOD, Tulpar etc, which have GVMs in the vicinity of 30-42 tonnes.

There would, however, be no real impediments to procuring Singaporean kit, particularly given that the successful prime contractor for the Land 400 IFV will be an Australian company (in order to meet Australian industry capability requirements). The actual vehicle OEM will play the role of principal sub-contractor in any teaming arrangement with a local prime.
ASC is very good at welding heavy plate to very tight tolerances, it would be a very good synergy to investigate going forward. Australian defence industry needs to be smarter to prevent black holes as our governments definitely aren't smart enough.
 

Monitor66

New Member
ASC is very good at welding heavy plate to very tight tolerances, it would be a very good synergy to investigate going forward. Australian defence industry needs to be smarter to prevent black holes as our governments definitely aren't smart enough.

The business case for fabricating/manufacturing the Land 400 fleets might work for the IFV with around 450 vehicles likely to be sought, but the CRV buy is small at about 150 vehicles. Economies of scale just aren't there for the CRV buy and it's very difficult to put in place a sustainable local industry plan on those kind of numbers, or at least one that lasts beyond final vehicle deliveries.

When you look at what Polish industry has achieved with the Patria AMV, it has been built on the back of an initial 690-unit order, then a couple of follow-on buys as well.
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
The business case for fabricating/manufacturing the Land 400 fleets might work for the IFV with around 450 vehicles likely to be sought, but the CRV buy is small at about 150 vehicles. Economies of scale just aren't there for the CRV buy and it's very difficult to put in place a sustainable local industry plan on those kind of numbers, or at least one that lasts beyond final vehicle deliveries.

When you look at what Polish industry has achieved with the Patria AMV, it has been built on the back of an initial 690-unit order, then a couple of follow-on buys as well.
Easy answer, equip the reserve RAAC units with the CRV as well. This will provide the required economy of scale to support a local production run, especially if it shares it's turret with the IFV.

Fantasy aside I think I will crawl back in my hole now.
 

Monitor66

New Member
Easy answer, equip the reserve RAAC units with the CRV as well. This will provide the required economy of scale to support a local production run, especially if it shares it's turret with the IFV.

Fantasy aside I think I will crawl back in my hole now.
What I haven't heard much grumbling about is the reduction in cav vehicle numbers under Plan Beersheba via Land 400, which will be something in the order of 40% (approx. 150 vs 257 ASLAV). Be interesting to hear what those in uniform think.

Still on numbers and now that Bushmaster is no longer in the project mix, industry is expecting the project budget to be reduced significantly from the current public $10 billion figure. Probably now no more than $5 billion combined for CRV, IFV and MSV - a figure which includes an ILS and training package for each vehicle type.
 

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Easy answer, equip the reserve RAAC units with the CRV as well. This will provide the required economy of scale to support a local production run, especially if it shares it's turret with the IFV.

Fantasy aside I think I will crawl back in my hole now.
The Reserve Cav units have only just got Bushmaster and will probably get Hawkei in years to come. They can kind of 'mirror' the ARA Brigades with that set up (Hawkei for CRV recon, escort, some direct fire support and scouting roles and Bushmaster for IFV and lift roles) and meet their training requirements, as well as provide capability for lower level operations (think op Anode and Timor level Ops) whilst the ARA prepares for higher level Ops.

I actually don't think it's that bad of a set up to be honest, especially compared to what they were forced to live with, with the M113A1's and the follow-on Landrover fleets...
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
The Reserve Cav units have only just got Bushmaster and will probably get Hawkei in years to come. They can kind of 'mirror' the ARA Brigades with that set up (Hawkei for CRV recon, escort, some direct fire support and scouting roles and Bushmaster for IFV and lift roles) and meet their training requirements, as well as provide capability for lower level operations (think op Anode and Timor level Ops) whilst the ARA prepares for higher level Ops.

I actually don't think it's that bad of a set up to be honest, especially compared to what they were forced to live with, with the M113A1's and the follow-on Landrover fleets...
Very true, still have scars from the M-113 and Landrovers were an insult. Still its nice to dream and would extend production if it was undertaken locally.
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
The Reserve Cav units have only just got Bushmaster and will probably get Hawkei in years to come. They can kind of 'mirror' the ARA Brigades with that set up (Hawkei for CRV recon, escort, some direct fire support and scouting roles and Bushmaster for IFV and lift roles) and meet their training requirements, as well as provide capability for lower level operations (think op Anode and Timor level Ops) whilst the ARA prepares for higher level Ops.

I actually don't think it's that bad of a set up to be honest, especially compared to what they were forced to live with, with the M113A1's and the follow-on Landrover fleets...
Very true, still have scars from the M-113 and Landrovers were an insult. Still its nice to dream and would extend production of the CRV if it was undertaken locally.

I would argue that deployable reserve CAV would be very good value for money. They wouldn't be up to ARA standards but armour saves lives and would give them an edge to stay alive and get up to speed in supporting roles / deployments.
 

Monitor66

New Member
Very true, still have scars from the M-113 and Landrovers were an insult. Still its nice to dream and would extend production of the CRV if it was undertaken locally.

I would argue that deployable reserve CAV would be very good value for money. They wouldn't be up to ARA standards but armour saves lives and would give them an edge to stay alive and get up to speed in supporting roles / deployments.
Whilst at this stage I don't think it's part of the plan under Ph 4 Land 121, if Hawkei gets allocated to ARes cav units this might not be too bad a capability, and would give reasonable deployment options.

Hawkei is quite well protected for its size, mobile and with a smaller logistics burden than the CRV. An RWS would round it off and provide good day/night target detection and observation as well. Hawkei's roof is very weight sensitive however so any RWS would be restricted to 12.7mm/40mm AGL systems around the 200kg mark such as those below:

http://www.rafael.co.il/marketing/SIP_STORAGE/FILES/4/1264.pdf

http://www.rafael.co.il/marketing/SIP_STORAGE/FILES/5/1265.pdf

http://www.kongsberg.com/~/media/KP...s 02-14/Dual RWS february_2013-A4 screen.ashx
 

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Whilst at this stage I don't think it's part of the plan under Ph 4 Land 121, if Hawkei gets allocated to ARes cav units this might not be too bad a capability, and would give reasonable deployment options.

Hawkei is quite well protected for its size, mobile and with a smaller logistics burden than the CRV. An RWS would round it off and provide good day/night target detection and observation as well. Hawkei's roof is very weight sensitive however so any RWS would be restricted to 12.7mm/40mm AGL systems around the 200kg mark such as those below:

http://www.rafael.co.il/marketing/SIP_STORAGE/FILES/4/1264.pdf

http://www.rafael.co.il/marketing/SIP_STORAGE/FILES/5/1265.pdf

http://www.kongsberg.com/~/media/KP...s 02-14/Dual RWS february_2013-A4 screen.ashx
I agree. I also note that 1300 Bushmasters weren't part of the original plan either... If (and by if I mean when) Hawkei gets selected, I can easily imagine follow-on orders just as occurred with Bushmaster.

I think an RWS with a 12.7mm gun / 40mm AGL, plus all the day night sensors is more than enough capability for this vehicle and it's intended role in this scenario as a Reserve CRV to 'mirror' the ARA set up and provide a capability for deployment as needed (though not in the operational CRV role obviously).
 

Abraham Gubler

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
Then include the Primus SPH also by the same manufactuer and the ADFs supply needs could be greatly reduced
I wouldn’t touch the Primus with a ten foot pole. SPGs are meant to be mobile. It’s about as immobile as you can get and still be a tracked vehicle.

What I haven't heard much grumbling about is the reduction in cav vehicle numbers under Plan Beersheba via Land 400, which will be something in the order of 40% (approx. 150 vs 257 ASLAV). Be interesting to hear what those in uniform think.
The number of cars may be being reduced but not the size of the force. An ASLAV unit needs three vehicles to do what you can with two CRVs. That is two ASLAV-25s for two mobile gun turrets with sights and guns and an ASLAV-PC to carry the cav scout. The larger CRV will be able to carry the gun turret and the cav scouts. Also some ASLAV capabilities like the C2, medical and surveillance roles will presumably be conducted by other vehicle types than the CRV.
 

Tassie_Terror

New Member
does it matter how many soldiers the vehicles can carry? Cause I have seen a bunch of people saying the Puma IFV would be a great contender, yet it carries 6 troops compared to the 8 man sections we currently operate.
 

Tassie_Terror

New Member
does it matter how many soldiers the vehicles can carry? Cause I have seen a bunch of people saying the Puma IFV would be a great contender, yet it carries 6 troops compared to the 8 man sections we currently operate.
I realized it kind of does. But I am still interested in the CRV and if that is required to carry any specific number of troops.
 

Ballistic

Member
Hi guys, just found some news on the CRV portion of Land 400 going about the media. Via Janes and PopSci, I took a look around and didn't see it posted here, but sorry if a repost.

I don't know if I can post links or not, so I will just post the portion given from Janes:

BAE Systems and Finnish aerospace and defence group Patria are to jointly bid for the Australian Army's programme to procure a combat reconnaissance vehicle (CRV) platform.

A statement on 22 September said the two companies were offering to meet the requirement - part of Land 400 Phase 2 - with a platform based on Patria's 8x8 Armoured Modular Vehicle (AMV). BAE Systems said it would act as prime contractor in the joint bid.

A spokesperson from BAE Systems Australia told IHS Jane's : "The tender for Land 400 is not expected for some time but together we aim to meet the requirement with an evolved solution." The spokesperson said other details of the joint CRV bid would be released later.
The PopSci article states much the same. Both light on details, but interesting nonetheless.

And just a question in general regarding Land 400. Is there any push for some kind of amphibious vehicle capability for 2RAR? In various training exercises Australian infantry are seen carrying out amphib operations with US Marines and their AAV's. I was just wondering if there is any hint at this capability or is it not going to happen?
 
Top