Australian Army Discussions and Updates

[Raven22]

As has already been said, there is no way that fixed wing aircraft of any kind can replace the capability of artillery, be it tube or rocket artillery.

In an australian context, a deployed brigade would be lucky to get half a dozen fixed wing CAS missions a day. In a contested air environement, you'd be lucky to get any at all. The missions would have to either be pre-planned against a specific target, which means the aircraft wouldn't be available outside of those times and parameters, or they would be on strip alert, which means they wouldn't be very responsive at all against a target. We can't just have CAS orbiting the whole time, the way the US can.

The beauty of HIMARs, as with any artillery, is that it is responsive in an instant. You've found the enemy gun line? Found the Divisional CP? Found a CSS concentration? Found the FARP? A couple of minutes later, you've got rockets in the air to destroy that target. A formation commander would likely hinge entire parts of his plan around being able to find enemy HVTs/HPTs and destroy them. HIMARs or similar makes this process so much more feasible. It's also one of those weapons that provides the enemy commander with a dilemma, and he would have to expend considerable effort to find and destroy that asset. Even a single battery can have an effect far in excess of its seemingly small size.

The good thing is, this government has proven that if there is a capability out there that we need, they will buy it. I don't think even a billion dollar price tag would lead to sticker shock. I think the biggest issue would simply be manning the system, but I bet the army would convince government they could, then find a way to do it later to avoid missing an opportunity.

 

[PeterM]

How does a purchase of HIMARS compare against buying the AS-9s that was looked into with Land17 Phase 2?

It seems the cost of HIMARS units and supporting gear is quite substantial. If IIRC Land17 ph2 was for around $225m to purchase 18 AS-9 units (plus the AS-10 resupply vehicles) with significant involvement for Australian industry.

I realise the HIMARS and AS-9s have very different uses, but it seems to me the ADF may be better off just resurrecting Land17 phase2. As far as I was aware, this project was very mature before it was cancelled in May 2012.

Update:
It seems there was an article in the Australian on 24/07/2012 that an Abbott-led Coalition government would review the cancelled $225 million contract to buy self-propelled guns. Perhaps this is one of the many options being considered for the 2015 white paper

 

[Raven22]

How does a purchase of HIMARS compare against buying the AS-9s that was looked into with Land17 Phase 2?

It seems the cost of HIMARS units and supporting gear is quite substantial. If IIRC Land17 ph2 was for around $225m to purchase 18 AS-9 units (plus the AS-10 resupply vehicles) with significant involvement for Australian industry.

I realise the HIMARS and AS-9s have very different uses, but it seems to me the ADF may be better off just resurrecting Land17 phase2. As far as I was aware, this project was very mature before it was cancelled in May 2012.

Update:
It seems there was an article in the Australian on 24/07/2012 that an Abbott-led Coalition government would review the cancelled $225 million contract to buy self-propelled guns. Perhaps this is one of the many options being considered for the 2015 white paper

The thing is, an SPG doesn't really do anything an M-777 can't do - it just does most things better. HIMARs does something very different, and would therefore be a far more revolutionary capability for the Army.

SPGs won't be bought. No one in Army is pushing the capability any more.

 

[PeterM]

The thing is, an SPG doesn't really do anything an M-777 can't do - it just does most things better. HIMARs does something very different, and would therefore be a far more revolutionary capability for the Army.

SPGs won't be bought. No one in Army is pushing the capability any more.

Fair call and that does make sense. Thanks for the info

How many HIMARs units would likely be needed if the ADF were to go down that path?

 

[hairyman]

On a different subject, are there any moves afoot to replace our Steyr rifles? If so, what rifles are being considered as the replacement?

 

[t68]

On a different subject, are there any moves afoot to replace our Steyr rifles? If so, what rifles are being considered as the replacement?

I am lead to believe that the F90 has already been selected, but I have used both the L1A1 and the F88 I preferred the L1A1 over the F88 on the range, but the compactness and lightweight of the F88 won me over when working in confined spaces and generally having to carry it and do all the other things as well, always thought the FN SCAR-H would do the job nicely

Modern Firearms - Thales EF88 / F90 assault rifle (Australia)

 

[Raven22]

On a different subject, are there any moves afoot to replace our Steyr rifles? If so, what rifles are being considered as the replacement?

The EF88 (F90) is being bought now to start replacing the 'old' F88s. The idea is by the early 2020s, the fleet will consist of only F88SA2s (the current issue sand coloured rifle) and F90s. The F90s will only be on issue to close combatants, as there is no point in giving that rifle to pogues or training units when the SA2 will do. However, the F90 is only an interim upgrade - there is a program to replace the entire F88 fleet starting in the middle 2020s.

This is actually one reason the F90 is being kept as an evolutionary rather than revolutionary advance over legacy rifles. The risk is if the F90 was too advanced, government wouldn't pay for a replacement rifle, as the F90 would be deemed good enough.

The reality is, there is no point buying a completely new rifle unless technology being fielded actually improves markedly. For instance, why pay to replace the Steyr with, say, the SCAR, when the SCAR would be only very slightly better at best. At the end of the day, it would still be firing the same 5.56mm round. Until caseless ammunition is proven and adopted somewhere, or until someone bites the bullet and adopts a 6.5mm or 6.8mm type round, there is no point whatsoever in replacing the whole fleet of weapons.

 

[Raven22]

For those rifle nerds out there, one interesting change with the introduction of the F90 is that all the weapon handling drills are being changed. That is so the drills are identical for both the legacy F88 and new F90. For instance, since there is no removable barrel in the F90, the drill has been changed so you no longer have to take the barrel off to clesr the weapon. With the introduction of the bolt release catch, the IA on a stoppage is now just to tilt the rifle over and check the chamber, instead of cocking the weapon first. That way if it's simply an empty magazine, the magazine can be changed and bolt released without a need to touch the cocking handle at all. Essentially, he drills are going to what they should have been the whole time.

 

[Bonza]

The reality is, there is no point buying a completely new rifle unless technology being fielded actually improves markedly. For instance, why pay to replace the Steyr with, say, the SCAR, when the SCAR would be only very slightly better at best. At the end of the day, it would still be firing the same 5.56mm round. Until caseless ammunition is proven and adopted somewhere, or until someone bites the bullet and adopts a 6.5mm or 6.8mm type round, there is no point whatsoever in replacing the whole fleet of weapons.

Agree completely, and although I bang on about it a lot, I'm really interested in the idea of improving the performance of 5.56mm ammunition rather than replacing it with a battle rifle or even moving to an intermediate calibre. The US Army has done it with the M855A1, which is supposed to be extremely capable, and the USMC did it with the Mk. 262 SOST (at least I think they're still on that and haven't moved over to the M855A1 just yet). There's also a 77 grain 5.56mm round made for enhanced lethality/performance through a full length rifle barrel, the name escapes me but it's in service with some of the designated marksman rifle variants used by the United States. I can't recall ever having seen any information on "lethality concerns" from armed forces using full-length rifle barrels, as opposed to the carbines, which have their place but appear to have become almost fashionable sometimes.

What do you think of the idea of enhancing the performance of the 5.56mm as opposed to replacing it with a new (or old) calibre, Raven? I'd like to get your thoughts as you're one of the most qualified people on the forum to ask.

 

[Milne Bay]

Agree completely, and although I bang on about it a lot, I'm really interested in the idea of improving the performance of 5.56mm ammunition rather than replacing it with a battle rifle or even moving to an intermediate calibre. The US Army has done it with the M855A1, which is supposed to be extremely capable, and the USMC did it with the Mk. 262 SOST (at least I think they're still on that and haven't moved over to the M855A1 just yet). There's also a 77 grain 5.56mm round made for enhanced lethality/performance through a full length rifle barrel, the name escapes me but it's in service with some of the designated marksman rifle variants used by the United States. I can't recall ever having seen any information on "lethality concerns" from armed forces using full-length rifle barrels, as opposed to the carbines, which have their place but appear to have become almost fashionable sometimes.

What do you think of the idea of enhancing the performance of the 5.56mm as opposed to replacing it with a new (or old) calibre, Raven? I'd like to get your thoughts as you're one of the most qualified people on the forum to ask.

I have read recently of an improved 5.56mm round available to the ADF.
Found reference:
Thales Australia has disclosed it is developing a new family of high-lethality small arms ammunition, including a 5.56 mm round that the company says outperforms 7.62 mm ammunition at all ranges.

ref:The Captain's Journal » Thales Australia On New 5.56 mm Ammunition

MB

 

[Bonza]

I have read recently of an improved 5.56mm round available to the ADF.
Found reference:
Thales Australia has disclosed it is developing a new family of high-lethality small arms ammunition, including a 5.56 mm round that the company says outperforms 7.62 mm ammunition at all ranges.

ref:The Captain's Journal » Thales Australia On New 5.56 mm Ammunition

MB

Very interesting, and a good link. Thanks very much for the info!

 

[bdique]

For those rifle nerds out there, one interesting change with the introduction of the F90 is that all the weapon handling drills are being changed. That is so the drills are identical for both the legacy F88 and new F90. For instance, since there is no removable barrel in the F90, the drill has been changed so you no longer have to take the barrel off to clesr the weapon. With the introduction of the bolt release catch, the IA on a stoppage is now just to tilt the rifle over and check the chamber, instead of cocking the weapon first. That way if it's simply an empty magazine, the magazine can be changed and bolt released without a need to touch the cocking handle at all. Essentially, he drills are going to what they should have been the whole time.

Hi Raven22, thank you very much for this information! Having operated the M16 and the SAR21, the bolt release catch...you take it for granted sometimes. I mean, it's a great time saver to just tilt the rifle, see the empty chamber, swap mags with the bolt still mechanically held back, release the catch - chambering the round and you're good to go right off the bat.

Hope I can get a chance to try the F90 someday...

 

[the road runner]

Thales Australia has disclosed it is developing a new family of high-lethality small arms ammunition, including a 5.56 mm round that the company says outperforms 7.62 mm ammunition at all ranges.

And yet the article talks about CQB Range.As a few ex soldiers and professional shooters have told me ... no one bullet is a silver bullet.Rifles and different calibers can be seen as golf clubs to a golfer.You dont use a putter to drive a golf ball for distance.

Raven with the F-90 being a fixed barrel i assume this will help with accuracy?
Have heard the switch barrel of the F-88 over time can damaged the crown and this will effect accuracy on older model's?

260Rem .. 6.5 or a 6.8 would be a good upgrade ..less recoil than a 308 better BC and shoots flatter. 223 i assume will always be a good CQB round

 

[Bonza]

Thales Australia has disclosed it is developing a new family of high-lethality small arms ammunition, including a 5.56 mm round that the company says outperforms 7.62 mm ammunition at all ranges.

And yet the article talks about CQB Range.As a few ex soldiers and professional shooters have told me ... no one bullet is a silver bullet.Rifles and different calibers can be seen as golf clubs to a golfer.You dont use a putter to drive a golf ball for distance.

Raven with the F-90 being a fixed barrel i assume this will help with accuracy?
Have heard the switch barrel of the F-88 over time can damaged the crown and this will effect accuracy on older model's?

260Rem .. 6.5 or a 6.8 would be a good upgrade ..less recoil than a 308 better BC and shoots flatter. 223 i assume will always be a good CQB round

No one is expecting a silver bullet out of new 5.56mm ammunition types, what they are expecting is a method of increasing lethality without having to replace the entire weapons system with something like an intermediate calibre, which would not necessarily afford the jump in performance to be worth the cost of replacing all service rifles in the inventory (or at least replacing all the rifle upper receivers and barrels in the inventory, which I understand can be done with some of the intermediates on AR-15 type rifles to help with affordability and logistics).

As far as 5.56mm lethality goes it varies from rifle to rifle, but a 20 inch barrel is going to give you substantially different performance with standard M855 than a 14.5 inch carbine barrel. There's a few articles out there on this, have a look around if the topic interests you. I'll put any pertinent links I find here.

 

[the road runner]

No one is expecting a silver bullet out of new 5.56mm ammunition types,

My post was trying to bring some clarity into the caliber debate.Thales state their new 5.56 round will out preform 7.62 at all ranges. I do find that a bit hard to believe. Maybe a bit of marketing form Thales? I don't see how a 70 odd grain bullet will not be effected by wind over distance compared to a 150 odd grain bullet.

As you say different barrel lengths and twist rates will give different performance.
If Thales do pull off a 5.56 that out preforms a 7.62 in a number of areas such as wind resistance,bullet drop better BC ect it would be an engineering feat in itself.

Edit.I also agree with an number of points in your above post ..cost of replacing rifles over a bit more performance ect

Cheers

 

[Bonza]

My post was trying to bring some clarity into the caliber debate.Thales state their new 5.56 round will out preform 7.62 at all ranges. I do find that a bit hard to believe. Maybe a bit of marketing form Thales? I don't see how a 70 odd grain bullet will not be effected by wind over distance compared to a 150 odd grain bullet.

As you say different barrel lengths and twist rates will give different performance.
If Thales do pull off a 5.56 that out preforms a 7.62 in a number of areas such as wind resistance,bullet drop better BC ect it would be an engineering feat in itself.

Edit.I also agree with an number of points in your above post ..cost of replacing rifles over a bit more performance ect

Cheers

And I agree with you that producing a 5.56mm ammunition type that outperforms the 7.62mm NATO ballistically appears, with the info we have, to raise a bit of a question mark. I do know there were some similar claims made about the M855A1 when it was adopted, but I believe they were stating that it only matched/exceeded the standard 7.62mm round in certain metrics/circumstances.

I'll look into it a bit more, as personally I do find it very interesting and if it saves on service weapon procurement then I can't help but think that's a good thing. The F88, as far as I know, has never had any complaints about lethality, but then it's got the 20 inch barrel and twist that the standard 5.56mm ammunition is actually designed for - similarly I haven't heard any complaints around the M16A4 used by the USMC which has the same (I think?) barrel length/twist. I do know they attempted to optimise the M855A1 for carbine-length barrels using faster burning powders and so forth, it'd be interesting to find some actual combat performance figures on the ammunition but I don't imagine the US Army will be too forthcoming about it.

There won't be any silver bullets forthcoming, but a dedicated re-think on how to build an optimised 5.56mm ammunition type is well worth the effort, in my opinion. I don't really think any of the intermediate calibres will have much of a leg up if they can get enhanced performance from the 5.56mm, other than specialist rounds like the subsonic .300 Blackout, which from what I know is made to be optimised for use out of suppressed weapons while retaining as much lethality as possible. I'm sure there's already several special forces units evaluating, if not operating, this new ammunition type. Again the weapon is optimised for shorter barrels and I've seen a video from the producer where they state that they were looking for optimal performance out of a suppressed carbine with an overall length not to exceed that of an MP5-SD. An intriguing concept, certainly, but not really the same as what we're talking about - just mentioning it out of interest.

Anyway this is sort of getting away from Australian Army territory, I'm more interested in possibilities for improved ammunition for the F88/F90 than the raft of intermediate calibres out there. Thus my asking Raven, as he's in a better position to comment than anyone else here that I'm aware of.

 

[Raven22]

Of course new ammunition will enhance capability, but it would do so no matter what weapon was in service. M855A1 has been tested in F88s with the modified gas system and works fine. There is nothing really preventing us from adopting that round (although it would have a port pressure higher than ideal). I'd be amazed if this magic new ammunition Thales is developing didn't have a bullet very close to that of the M855A1, albeit with a different propellant that was better optimised for the F88.

The big advance that will come with the F90 is all the fruit that hangs of it, which means soldiers are more likely to actually hit the thing they are aiming at. Enhanced lethality rounds don't count for much when you miss. There's supposed to be something like $12000 worth of fruit that will come with each F90 destined for an infantry battalion. As long as soldiers are actually trained to use this stuff (a lesson from Afghan), the capability will be enhanced significantly.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

And I agree with you that producing a 5.56mm ammunition type that outperforms the 7.62mm NATO ballistically appears, with the info we have, to raise a bit of a question mark.

It is possible if the 7.62mm round you are comparing to is the standard round of today using its 1950s powder and basic steel, lead FMJ round. To produce a 5.56mm round able to outperform the 7.62mm in presumably lethality it would have abandon the basic FMJ bullet design. This is very problematic due to laws of war banning expanding or exploding ammunition use in small arms (we can thank the Imperial German state trying to make a political point out of the Boer War for that). But it’s not impossible.

 

[Volkodav]

For those rifle nerds out there, one interesting change with the introduction of the F90 is that all the weapon handling drills are being changed. That is so the drills are identical for both the legacy F88 and new F90. For instance, since there is no removable barrel in the F90, the drill has been changed so you no longer have to take the barrel off to clesr the weapon. With the introduction of the bolt release catch, the IA on a stoppage is now just to tilt the rifle over and check the chamber, instead of cocking the weapon first. That way if it's simply an empty magazine, the magazine can be changed and bolt released without a need to touch the cocking handle at all. Essentially, he drills are going to what they should have been the whole time.

As I recall (it was a long time ago and the old brain isn't what it used to be) when the F88 was introduced the was a large number of UDs (in particular when they started to be issued to non combat units) which is what led to removing the barrel to clear the weapon. The first AASAM I attended there were an awful lot of UDs from Steyrs on the range after weapons had been cleared, mostly from mid level officers and SNCOs who had spent years using the SLR. We, as reservists, were still using SLRs so it didn't directly affect us, but as I recall it was at this point they started withdrawing the barrels to check clear. By the time we converted it was part of the drill. So if my recollections are correct it was a (over) reaction to an issue that occurred when the rifle was being introduced relating to everyone's, including instructors, range and safety officers inexperience with a new bit of kit when improved training and increased experience would likely have sufficed.

 

[Bonza]

Of course new ammunition will enhance capability, but it would do so no matter what weapon was in service. M855A1 has been tested in F88s with the modified gas system and works fine. There is nothing really preventing us from adopting that round (although it would have a port pressure higher than ideal). I'd be amazed if this magic new ammunition Thales is developing didn't have a bullet very close to that of the M855A1, albeit with a different propellant that was better optimised for the F88.

The big advance that will come with the F90 is all the fruit that hangs of it, which means soldiers are more likely to actually hit the thing they are aiming at. Enhanced lethality rounds don't count for much when you miss. There's supposed to be something like $12000 worth of fruit that will come with each F90 destined for an infantry battalion. As long as soldiers are actually trained to use this stuff (a lesson from Afghan), the capability will be enhanced significantly.

Thanks for the response, I hadn't thought about peripheral equipment outside of optics, thanks for pointing me in that direction. Interesting to hear they've fired M855A1 out of the F88, I was wondering if its being carbine optimised would have any noticeable effect from longer barrels.

It is possible if the 7.62mm round you are comparing to is the standard round of today using its 1950s powder and basic steel, lead FMJ round. To produce a 5.56mm round able to outperform the 7.62mm in presumably lethality it would have abandon the basic FMJ bullet design. This is very problematic due to laws of war banning expanding or exploding ammunition use in small arms (we can thank the Imperial German state trying to make a political point out of the Boer War for that). But it’s not impossible.

I think that was an issue that came up with the Mk. 262 SOST and another 77-grain open-tip round used by the US Army - I can remember a comment in a story from the USMC claiming their lawyers had looked over the Mk. 262 design and deemed it compatible with the laws of war as they stand. I forget exactly how they justified it but I think it had something to do with the projectile not being designed to expand/fragment, but that effect being a consequence of a different feature of the round. It sounds rather shaky to me, but I'd have to find it again to be sure of what they said.