Meaning that neither Boxer nor Terrex is in service with a turret or as an IFV/CRV, thereby raising their technical risk profile, particularly for Terrex.
Integration of an ATGW on any turret solution proposed is also another risk red flag, however minor. Rheinmetall has not done this with the Lance turret I understand. So the MOTS Plus case for both must be weakened.
Other CRV contenders can point to a lower risk migration pathway between MOTS and MOTS Plus vehicle proposals. Boxer and Terrex have more work to do in that respect. How the CoA assesses this risk is the big unknown. Perhaps they won't discriminate against either vehicle all that much, we'll have to see.
Both vehicles have good reputations in themselves (and Boxer is German so will be excellent technically) but they come to Land 400 Ph 2 in a weaker position than the other likely vehicle contenders. This does not mean they are lesser vehicles, just not in service in as close a configuration to meet the requirement as the other candidate CRVs.
Ah, I understand and I think you are right. Thanks for the explanation.
Rheinmetall and KMW can probably point to the modular system approach of the Boxer and their integration of Eurospike onto the Puma turret but it's questionable how many browny points are in for this.
Another question is if other contenders have to seriously rebuild their turrets in order to accomodate the required gun size.
Rheinmetall and KMW can probably point to the modular system approach of the Boxer and their integration of Eurospike onto the Puma turret but it's questionable how many browny points are in for this.
Another question is if other contenders have to seriously rebuild their turrets in order to accomodate the required gun size.
Re weapon systems, 30mm will be the minimum calibre. This requires VBCI for instance to change to a different turret entirely (T40 40mm CTAS). Freccia will almost certainly be offered (if it is offered) with the HITFIST-30, which requires few if any changes to accept the ATK Bushmaster II 30mm; GD may offer the Kongsberg MCT-30 remote turret which has the Bushmaster II as standard. BAE (offering AMV) also has this same option, as well as the 30mm turret on the CV9030 which is a BAE product (thereby maximising workshare).
So I don't think many OEMs will need to rebuild their turrets; doing so would raise their risk and cost profile and weaken their MOTS Plus claim.
It will be interesting to see if GD offers a turret from CMI, which I understand is what Saudi Arabia has gone for with their latest LAV 700 order. Not sure if it's 25mm or 30mm though.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The Saudi Arabia order to GD Canada is for 900 vehicles of which 700 will have turrets from CMI. Several calibres will be used for these turrets.
Defence Technology Review : DTR MAR 2015, Page 1
Please no, its bad enough Conroy stayed when the likes of Combet left but the thought of him as defmin is sole destroying.I see that Lt Gen Campbell has just been announced as the new Chief of Army. It will be a very warm and productive relationship if Senator Conroy ever becomes the Defence Minister
Remember Senate Estimates on border protection? Conroy accused him of being a govt. stooge. It was probably the most abhorrent questioning of a serving officer that I have ever heard.
He's a left wing dinosaur, like Gillard, and rather than being ambivalent about the ADF actually resents the fact they exist at all. The worst thing about his treatment of Campbell in Estimates is that Conroy knew damn well that no serving member or public servant is in a position to discuss matters the minister has gagged them on, Labor did it often enough while in power and there was no way Morrison was going to give his people the right to freely discuss the mechanics of the PMs pet policy. If it happened in the work place Conroy would be labelled a work place bully.
knightrider4
Active Member
ARH Tiger
Do you guys think the ARH will be ditched in favour of the AH-1Z? I read that Bell is marketing it here in Australia.
Do you guys think the ARH will be ditched in favour of the AH-1Z? I read that Bell is marketing it here in Australia.
Short answer, no.
RubiconNZ
The Wanderer
Speaking of Bell did anyone catch the statement by the Bell Sales VP that Australia is a potential customer for the Osprey. I cannot remember whether it was him or the article which inferred a buy of around 10 was being considered specifically for Spec Forces.
Which was news to me, and I hadn't caught anything else suggesting it.
Edit: I found the article in Aviation Week here.
Which was news to me, and I hadn't caught anything else suggesting it.
Edit: I found the article in Aviation Week here.
Last edited:
Agree, too late for that now that so much time and money has been invested and the type is finally over the hump and deployable. Then again when it comes time for MLU if the costs prove too high compared to replacement that could change. It all comes down to how much money there is and how urgent the requirement is perceived to be, i.e. Super Sea Sprite, but in that case, although there was meant to be light at the end of the tunnel it hadn't achieve IOC yet and more critically the SH-60Bs were getting pretty worn out from all the extra work they had to do while the Sprites were sorted, similar but different situation.
Just as an aside, link attached from DSCA on Pakistan FMS on AH-1Z Viper. Interesting pricing
Pakistan - AH-1Z Viper Attack Helicopters and AGM-114R Hellfire II Missiles | The Official Home of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency
Pakistan - AH-1Z Viper Attack Helicopters and AGM-114R Hellfire II Missiles | The Official Home of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency
cdxbow
Well-Known Member
The $952 million is something like the supposed cost to upgrade the tigers. It looks comprehensive too, so a real price. Putting my taxpayers hat on, and remembering the old homily about 'throwing good money after bad, I'd rather see the money spent on new helicopters rather than upgrade the tigers. Especially if it is for something that works, off the shelf, does what you want it too, and is used by the US etc.Just as an aside, link attached from DSCA on Pakistan FMS on AH-1Z Viper. Interesting pricing
Pakistan - AH-1Z Viper Attack Helicopters and AGM-114R Hellfire II Missiles | The Official Home of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency
t68
Well-Known Member
I'd agree with that as long as the Viperis better than the Tiger in the CONOPS that they set out for it and the ROE is sustainable long term over tiger.
Also that link supplied from my IPhone was not readable but are the airframes in question new build or refurbished?
cdxbow
Well-Known Member
Doesn't say specifically. This is the guts:
"...sale of 15 AH-1Z Viper Attack Helicopters, 32 T-700 GE 401C Engines (30 installed and 2 spares), 1000 AGM-114 R Hellfire II Missiles in containers, 36 H-1 Technical Refresh Mission computers, 17 AN/AAQ-30 Target Sight Systems, 30 629F-23 Ultra High Frequency/Very High Frequency Communication Systems, 19 H-764 Embedded Global Positioning System/Inertial Navigation Systems, 32 Helmet Mounted Display/Optimized Top Owl, 17 APX-117A Identification Friend or Foe, 17 AN/AAR-47 Missile Warning Systems, 17 AN/ALE-47 Countermeasure Dispenser Sets, 18 AN/APR-39C(V)2 Radar Warning Receivers, 15 Joint Mission Planning Systems, and 17 M197 20mm Gun Systems. Also included are system integration and testing, software development and integration, aircraft ferry, support equipment, spare and repair parts, tools and test equipment, publications and technical documentation, personnel training and training equipment, U.S. government and contractor engineering, technical, and logistics support services, and other related elements of logistics and program support."
Are 2 spare engines a low number for the number of craft?
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
The link does not say specifically. It does mention that the sale would not have any impact on US military readiness, so this either means new build, or rebuilds of retired/excess aircraft or airframes.
I honestly would not be to concerned about the aircraft being refurbished, if they were zero-timing the re-used components, given that the programme would be a known quantity/quality for the actual rebuild itself. The RAN SH-2G(A) Seasprites were rebuilt SH-2F's which were modified into -G's, and the mechanical portions were all fine. The problem there was that desired avionics package was totally new and different and the targets and goalposts kept being 'moved'.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Not necessarily. The engines used by the AH-1Z are the same as used aboard some versions of the UH-1, SH-2G, and some versions of the H-60 helicopter. Other versions of GE's T-700 engine are used aboard a number of other helicopter designs and variants (25 different types total, over 11k engines installed) I would expect that not only is the design quite reliable and robust, there should be significant and rapid support available.
Also given that Pakistan already operates other AH-1 versions, then Pakistan likely has a good handle on what quantity they will need to support the version, and when they will likely need more.
Latest issue of Defence Technology Review with Land 400 content:
Defence Technology Review : DTR APR 2015, Page 1