The ASLAV runs out of service life in six years. There is no way known a bespoke vehicle can be designed and produced in that time.
MARKMILES77
Active Member
The choice of weapon for the Cavalry Weapon will have an impact on what IFV is chosen later, unless the Cav vehicle and the IFV are going to have different weapons which would seem unlikely. Can't see say the CRV having a 40 mm weapon and the IFV having a 30mm gun.
So whatever gun is chosen for the CRV, potential IFV suppliers are going to have to be able to offer that weapon on their IFV offering.
So whatever gun is chosen for the CRV, potential IFV suppliers are going to have to be able to offer that weapon on their IFV offering.
I'm glad there is a requirement for programmable ammunition whichever calibre is chosen.
Looking at the widespread use of cheap toy UAVs in Syria and Ukraine by various rebel groups, taking these out is going to be an issue given how small they are.
A decent airbursting round looks like a good answer.
Looking at the widespread use of cheap toy UAVs in Syria and Ukraine by various rebel groups, taking these out is going to be an issue given how small they are.
A decent airbursting round looks like a good answer.
MARKMILES77
Active Member
Can't find much out about the LAV 6.0.
Is that the Canadian LAV III upgrade programme?
If so aren't they aiming for a vehicle around the 25 tonne mark which is a significantly lighter vehicle than many of the other potential offerings which are around the 30 tonne mark and up. Presumably that implies less protection than the other potential candidates.
Wouldn't GDLS just offer the Piranha V or do they consider that too far from being MOTS (not that a LAV 6.0 is exactly MOTS either)?
Not immediately... 4750m's exceeds Army's requirements...
Javelin Demonstrates Extended Range Capability in Recent Tests · Lockheed Martin
You might be confusing airburst rounds with proximity-fused rounds. Airburst rounds are programmed for a fixed range, to specifically explode above the target so that shrapnel rains down on the soft targets hidden behind cover.
A proximity-fused round would be better for taking out air targets, but that's not an ideal use of an IFV.
The CRV and the IFV need not necessarily have to use the same main weapon. It really depends on the Australian Army's CONOPs.
The limiting factor in the javelin's range has always been the sight, not the missile itself. A vehicle mounted javelin, with a sight that isn't limited by battery power or the need to cool the thermal etc, is always going to to have a longer range.
It'd make a hell of a lot of sense though. No need to carry two types of ammunition or spares, and cross training of crews would be much simpler with the same gun (ideally it'd be the same turret).
The targets I'm thinking more of are the hovering multi-bladed devices, these are less manoeuvrable and could be targeted with a decent timed round. Not ideal at all but at least it would be something.
It's not a critical requirement atm but it's something I believe will become more of an issue into the future.
-------------
35mm weapons seem to be coming more common, perhaps that's the sweet spot.
Airburst rounds like the 40mm 3P are also used against air targets as they don't expand their shrapnel just downwards but all around. And it comes with a proximity fuse.
The 30mm KETF gives you some 150+ wolfram darts expanding right in front of the target. Should be quite lethal against air targets (including light drones), troops in the open, and lighter structures. I am sceptical of it's after penetration effects against heavier structures, though.
Spike instead of Javelin gives you this lovely attack without LOS capability.
As for calibre. While 35mm or bigger offer several advantages they also comes with a hefty penalty in stored rounds. For example the CV9030 stores 400 rounds while the CV9035 only 280.
When one sports a ATGM the need for heavier calibre also diminishes as the cannon doesn't need to be able to handle heavily armoured targets all by itself.
The 30mm KETF gives you some 150+ wolfram darts expanding right in front of the target. Should be quite lethal against air targets (including light drones), troops in the open, and lighter structures. I am sceptical of it's after penetration effects against heavier structures, though.
Spike instead of Javelin gives you this lovely attack without LOS capability.
As for calibre. While 35mm or bigger offer several advantages they also comes with a hefty penalty in stored rounds. For example the CV9030 stores 400 rounds while the CV9035 only 280.
When one sports a ATGM the need for heavier calibre also diminishes as the cannon doesn't need to be able to handle heavily armoured targets all by itself.
Sorry, I misread something...Yes the CRV and IFV should at least have the same weapon system/caliber. Simpler in terms of logistics and training of crews.
For some reason I kept thinking that the CRV was only going to be MG-armed. Good grief...
Re caliber sizes: hard to tell what will be chosen simply based on ammo. Gotta factor in other things like gun system performance and reliability and turret ergonomics.
Looking at other requirements, I do believe a turreted "assault mortar" for lack of a better term is needed.
If there is any major system that could have made things easier in Afghan/Mali/etc it would be a 120mm turreted mortar capable of delivering fires both indirectly and directly as the situation dictated.
Particularly when operating over large distances it would be invaluable to have something between the +/-30mm weapons and a MBT. The Chinese / Russians have this, and there was even a version proposed with the ASLAV purchase.
If there is any major system that could have made things easier in Afghan/Mali/etc it would be a 120mm turreted mortar capable of delivering fires both indirectly and directly as the situation dictated.
Particularly when operating over large distances it would be invaluable to have something between the +/-30mm weapons and a MBT. The Chinese / Russians have this, and there was even a version proposed with the ASLAV purchase.
Yep, seems like a lay down misere to me, that Javelin will be chosen for that role.
Not necessarily - the javelin will only be chosen if the winning bidder includes that weapon in the package. Since we're not choosing the weapon separately, but part of a weapon package, the ATGM could be just about anything.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The LAV III upgrade will produce a vehicle that is about 28,000 kg. A C-17 could fly two of these. Bigger engine and a vee hull are featured.
Here's the brochure;
http://www.gdlscanada.com/images/pdf/LAV 60.pdf
t68
Well-Known Member
An interesting idea from Bell aircraft at the Melbourne air show, they are proposing the AH-1Z to replace Tiger as its already marinized for the maritime environment, under Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter Upgrade AIR 87 Phase 3 I imagine the need to make the aircraft LHD compatible.
I am not sure how much modifications are needed on the aircraft now to be able to be secured appropriately and if the sensor package is in the same league some of what they are saying makes sence.
Avalon 2015: Bell touts AH-1Z as maritime attack platform for Australia - IHS Jane's 360
Australia plans AHR upgrade AIR 87 Phase 3 contract - CONTRACT UPDATE :: Strategic Defence Intelligence
I am not sure how much modifications are needed on the aircraft now to be able to be secured appropriately and if the sensor package is in the same league some of what they are saying makes sence.
Avalon 2015: Bell touts AH-1Z as maritime attack platform for Australia - IHS Jane's 360
Australia plans AHR upgrade AIR 87 Phase 3 contract - CONTRACT UPDATE :: Strategic Defence Intelligence
t68
Well-Known Member
The way it looks to me is an unsolicited proposell to replace ARH instead of upgrading Tiger
But how much would they get for $1 billion? (BTW that seems an awful lot to upgrade them.. ). Judging from the Korean order, less than 18?
How operational are they now, I had thought by now with the French having operated them off a LHD in combat operations and the Germans operating them in 'Ghan things were finally looking up for them? I don't think we would be junking them.
How operational are they now, I had thought by now with the French having operated them off a LHD in combat operations and the Germans operating them in 'Ghan things were finally looking up for them? I don't think we would be junking them.