Australian Army Discussions and Updates

[Raven22]

I don’t see a great deal of utility in an RWS with a 30mm cannon. It’s hard to imagine the scenarios where that would be useful. It’s worth pointing out that the light weight 30mm has a very low muzzle velocity, and isn’t suited for anti-armour use. For a recon vehicle, it might be handy at suppressing ATGM teams, but not a lot else. An RWS with HMG/GMG and Javelin/Spike would be far more useful for just about everything.

Also, uparming the Hawkei to Level IV armour doesn’t seem to be all that helpful. Only the passenger compartment is armoured, so it would still be very easy to disable the vehicle, which isn’t ideal in a recon vehicle. In a vehicle where stealth and mobility are the main protection, up armouring is a step backwards.

 

[t68]

How does the MSV differ in their requirements to the IFV, and is a tracked capability a done deal as per the RFI

review of MSV-specific requirements is necessary
to include a broader range of IFV-based MSV variants

However, in order to better understand cost versus capability trade-offs and through-life ownership costs, information was also requested on solutions based on tracked APCs and wheeled AFVs in the IFV role.

do you think what the blog below in the cost v capability view has any merit?
SNAFU!: Land 400 Phase 3 looks impressive. Too bad it'll be killed.

As thrilling as Phase 3 would be, I'm betting that they're gonna go wheels and Phase 2 gets expanded to cover the IFV role. The cost, benefit equation just doesn't favor tracks. With the survivability found in many of the vehicles in Phase 2 coming close to that of their Phase 3 counterparts the added cost of tracked vehicles just doesn't make sense.

 

[the road runner]

do you think what the blog below in the cost v capability view has any merit?
SNAFU!: Land 400 Phase 3 looks impressive. Too bad it'll be killed.

You would think any land platform operating in the Australian Bush during the wet season , would have to have a tracked vehicle in the tool box..
Once the rains kick in ,in some bush communities you are stranded . Surly a tracked vehicle would operate in these conditions better than a wheeled vehicle
Australia/Asia is surrounded by tropical conditions. Surly this also favours a tracked vehicle,when going "off road"

It would be good to have a comparison of "tracked Vs wheeled vehicles" ,in such muddy conditions.
I was under the impression that wheeled vehicles (Such as Boxer and the like) would operate on roads and bush tracks while the "tracked vehicles" would operate in full on off road conditions ?

I am betting Army want a tracked IFV so they can operate in harsh conditions !

The number of Vehicles for " Land 400 Phase 3" may drop as Raven has stated ,and we may end up getting 100 odd extra Boxers.... But we would be doing Army no justice if we just purchased an "all wheel fleet"

 

[t68]

You would think any land platform operating in the Australian Bush during the wet season , would have to have a tracked vehicle in the tool box..
Once the rains kick in ,in some bush communities you are stranded . Surly a tracked vehicle would operate in these conditions better than a wheeled vehicle
Australia/Asia is surrounded by tropical conditions. Surly this also favours a tracked vehicle,when going "off road"

It would be good to have a comparison of "tracked Vs wheeled vehicles" ,in such muddy conditions.
I was under the impression that wheeled vehicles (Such as Boxer and the like) would operate on roads and bush tracks while the "tracked vehicles" would operate in full on off road conditions ?

I am betting Army want a tracked IFV so they can operate in harsh conditions !

The number of Vehicles for " Land 400 Phase 3" may drop as Raven has stated ,and we may end up getting 100 odd extra Boxers.... But we would be doing Army no justice if we just purchased an "all wheel fleet"

Must have missed that post by Raven. I guess its going to come down to wether they believe that a reduced fleet of tracked vehicle mixed with wheeled can deliver the same outcomes, by reducing the order for phase 2 to fit the budget will they have to do the same with phase 3 if they go the preferred way of Puma?

 

[the road runner]

To clarify ...Ravens post number 5740.. he thinks its unlikely we will get the full 450 vehicle numbers of Land 400 Phase 3.

I am assuming we may get an extra "100 odd Boxers" and 300 odd Phase 3 vehicles... just to make up numbers ..
As i said, i am "Assuming "
We just don't know ,it could go either way ... Cancel Phase 3 and go a full Boxer fleet... Reduced numbers of Phase 3 Vehicles.. Get tracked vehicles for phase 3, ... Split the buy between Boxer and Tracked vehicles for Phase 3..

Guess time will tell mate

 

[zhaktronz]

You would think any land platform operating in the Australian Bush during the wet season , would have to have a tracked vehicle in the tool box..
Once the rains kick in ,in some bush communities you are stranded . Surly a tracked vehicle would operate in these conditions better than a wheeled vehicle
Australia/Asia is surrounded by tropical conditions. Surly this also favours a tracked vehicle,when going "off road"

It would be good to have a comparison of "tracked Vs wheeled vehicles" ,in such muddy conditions.
I was under the impression that wheeled vehicles (Such as Boxer and the like) would operate on roads and bush tracks while the "tracked vehicles" would operate in full on off road conditions ?

I am betting Army want a tracked IFV so they can operate in harsh conditions !

The number of Vehicles for " Land 400 Phase 3" may drop as Raven has stated ,and we may end up getting 100 odd extra Boxers.... But we would be doing Army no justice if we just purchased an "all wheel fleet"

Nobody will be conducting mechanised offensive operations in Northern Australia during the wet season - you might well have armoured vehicles that can get through the mud, but their supply chain, very much bound to wheels sure won't be.

 

[Raven22]

Must have missed that post by Raven. I guess its going to come down to wether they believe that a reduced fleet of tracked vehicle mixed with wheeled can deliver the same outcomes, by reducing the order for phase 2 to fit the budget will they have to do the same with phase 3 if they go the preferred way of Puma?

They didn’t reduce the order of Phase 2 to fit the budget, the reduced number was based on how many vehicles are required for the new orbat. The 225 was based on how many ASLAVs were in service a few years ago, while the new Plan KEOUGH structures don’t need as many.

 

[Raven22]

To clarify ...Ravens post number 5740.. he thinks its unlikely we will get the full 450 vehicle numbers of Land 400 Phase 3.

I am assuming we may get an extra "100 odd Boxers" and 300 odd Phase 3 vehicles... just to make up numbers ..
As i said, i am "Assuming "
We just don't know ,it could go either way ... Cancel Phase 3 and go a full Boxer fleet... Reduced numbers of Phase 3 Vehicles.. Get tracked vehicles for phase 3, ... Split the buy between Boxer and Tracked vehicles for Phase 3..

Guess time will tell mate

A reduced buy of Phase 3 vehicles would simply because not as many vehicles are needed to mechanise the new infantry battalion structures. Having a mixed fleet of wheeled and tracked vehicles for Phase 3 would be the worst of all possible worlds. You would lose the advantages of either mode of transport and massively increase the training and support costs.

Assuming a battalion had a mix of wheeled and tracked vehicles, you would lose the advantages in tactical mobility because the wheeled vehicles couldn’t go the same places as the tracked. You would also lose the operational mobility advantages of wheels as the tracked vehicles would slow you down. You would have to train infantry soldiers on both the boxer and the tracked vehicle, essentially doubling the training burden and adding an additional pers management issue within each battalion to balance qualifications. Plus you’d double the support bill for the battalion, as the A1/A2 would have to have qualified maintainers for both, cart around spare tyres as well as spare track etc etc.

I certainly can’t see a mixed buy of wheeled and tracked. An all wheeled fleet could be a possibility, but the line ‘equivalent mobility to the M1A1 MBT’ or whatever it is would make this less unlikely for anything other than pure budgetaryreasons. Wheeled vehicles still don’t have the same tactical mobility as tracked, plus have more compromises when it comes to protection.

 

[t68]

They didn’t reduce the order of Phase 2 to fit the budget, the reduced number was based on how many vehicles are required for the new orbat. The 225 was based on how many ASLAVs were in service a few years ago, while the new Plan KEOUGH structures don’t need as many.

Thanks Raven

Do you happen to have a link to Plan Keogh as I have searched the Defence website with no luck, only two reference I found is Army newspaper with 1CSSB and contact mag for a article about 2RAR

Defence Newspapers | Army News

2 RAR will be called 2 RAR (Amphib) - Royal Australian Regiment Corporation

Defence Newspapers | Army News keogh#folio=14

 

[Boagrius]

Quick question to those in the know. I've heard conflicting views on whether or not Lynx is simply an evolution of the Marder or a clean sheet design? I always assumed it was the latter...

 

[camo_jnr_jnr]

Quick question to those in the know. I've heard conflicting views on whether or not Lynx is simply an evolution of the Marder or a clean sheet design? I always assumed it was the latter...

Similarities such as driver hatch, exhaust and turret placement heavily indicate it being an evolved marder. Put them side by side and it's hard to not see it. Plus Rheinmetall are known to have purchased a number of ex German army Marders a few years ago.

 

[Raven22]

Thanks Raven

Do you happen to have a link to Plan Keogh as I have searched the Defence website with no luck, only two reference I found is Army newspaper with 1CSSB and contact mag for a article about 2RAR

Defence Newspapers | Army News

2 RAR will be called 2 RAR (Amphib) - Royal Australian Regiment Corporation

Defence Newspapers | Army News keogh#folio=14

I doubt there is a link with much information for Plan KEOGH, as it isn’t well developed yet. However, it is basically the next step on from Plan BEERSHEEBA, which was more or less completed at the end of last year when 2/14 got some tanks. Plan KEOGH includes all the recent changes like giving M113s and PMVs back to the infantry, reducing the size of infantry platoons, re-organising the ACR, giving 2 RAR over to 1 Div etc.

 

[aussienscale]

Similarities such as driver hatch, exhaust and turret placement heavily indicate it being an evolved marder. Put them side by side and it's hard to not see it. Plus Rheinmetall are known to have purchased a number of ex German army Marders a few years ago.

The answer is "Sort of"

Not a lot of info out there, but the below are both good reads with some reference to Marder

https://www.armyrecognition.com/ger...t_specifications_pictures_video_12906165.html

https://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.com.au/2016/12/marders-to-jordan.html

Cheers

 

[Boagrius]

Similarities such as driver hatch, exhaust and turret placement heavily indicate it being an evolved marder. Put them side by side and it's hard to not see it. Plus Rheinmetall are known to have purchased a number of ex German army Marders a few years ago.

The answer is "Sort of"

Not a lot of info out there, but the below are both good reads with some reference to Marder

https://www.armyrecognition.com/ger...t_specifications_pictures_video_12906165.html

https://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.com.au/2016/12/marders-to-jordan.html

Cheers

Thanks both of you for the info. I wonder if the residual "Marder DNA" would be any kind of hindrance? Hopefully it's possible for the Army to get a close look at both Puma and Lynx to see how they stack up together.

 

[Massive]

G

My tip in descending order of likeliness is:
Puma/Lynx
Boxer
Other vehicle with Lance turret
Any other vehicle

Can you put a Lance Turret on a Puma without significant modification? Thought the Puma turret was unmanned, off-axis (with the main gun aligned on the centreline).

My expectation is that the Lynx will be chosen.

regards,

Massive

 

[ADMk2]

G


Can you put a Lance Turret on a Puma without significant modification? Thought the Puma turret was unmanned, off-axis (with the main gun aligned on the centreline).

My expectation is that the Lynx will be chosen.

regards,

Massive

If it can’t, I would imagine Rheinmetall is furiously working on such an option right about now...

 

[Stampede]

Hi all

Current Edition : Army News Paper : Department of Defence

A nice article in the current Army Newspaper about the winning boxer CRV.
If these are the final specs then a 30mm gun with 3 crew plus 4 seats.
So I hope that clarify s the gun car, plus other vehicle flavours.
Certainly a tight time frame to have the first vehicles for training in 2020.
Trust the project goes well

Regards S

 

[MARKMILES77]

You would think any land platform operating in the Australian Bush during the wet season , would have to have a tracked vehicle in the tool box..
Once the rains kick in ,in some bush communities you are stranded . Surly a tracked vehicle would operate in these conditions better than a wheeled vehicle
Australia/Asia is surrounded by tropical conditions. Surly this also favours a tracked vehicle,when going "off road"

It would be good to have a comparison of "tracked Vs wheeled vehicles" ,in such muddy conditions.
I was under the impression that wheeled vehicles (Such as Boxer and the like) would operate on roads and bush tracks while the "tracked vehicles" would operate in full on off road conditions ?

I am betting Army want a tracked IFV so they can operate in harsh conditions !

The number of Vehicles for " Land 400 Phase 3" may drop as Raven has stated ,and we may end up getting 100 odd extra Boxers.... But we would be doing Army no justice if we just purchased an "all wheel fleet"

What really is the difference in mobility between a modern Wheeled vehicle (8 wheel drive, traction control central tire inflation system etc) and a tracked vehicle.
I am sure there is a difference but I suspect the gap is much narrower than people believe. Would love to see a comparison myself.


I also think the logistics advantages of wheels are grossly under-appreciated.
A wheeled vehicle will travel as much as 3 times as far as a tracked vehicle using the same amount of fuel.
The extra logistics burden for fuel , if tracks are used, is simply massive. Three fuel trucks for every one a wheeled force would need. This alone may out weigh any other advantage that tracks have.
And you can bet that fuel will be carried in wheeled vehicles even if the Fighting Vehicles are tracked!

 

[Todjaeger]

What really is the difference in mobility between a modern Wheeled vehicle (8 wheel drive, traction control central tire inflation system etc) and a tracked vehicle.
I am sure there is a difference but I suspect the gap is much narrower than people believe. Would love to see a comparison myself.


I also think the logistics advantages of wheels are grossly under-appreciated.
A wheeled vehicle will travel as much as 3 times as far as a tracked vehicle using the same amount of fuel.
The extra logistics burden for fuel , if tracks are used, is simply massive. Three fuel trucks for every one a wheeled force would need. This alone may out weigh any other advantage that tracks have.
And you can bet that fuel will be carried in wheeled vehicles even if the Fighting Vehicles are tracked!

Tracked vehicles tend to have lower ground pressures than wheeled vehicles of similar weight, and IIRC even some of the very heavy tracked vehicles like MBT's sometimes have lower ground pressures than lighter wheeled vehicles. As a result some soils/terrains can support a tracked vehicle with traction, that a wheeled vehicle might sink into or have little traction.

A potential work around for some wheeled vehicles would be to have over-sized tyres and/or adjust the level of inflation to provide more or less surface area depending on needs. One must keep in mind though that by having more/over-sized tyres, one also adds to what can be damaged or destroyed to achieve a mobility kill.

As for the range of wheeled vs. tracked vehicles, I can believe that a wheeled vehicle on a road is more fuel efficient than a tracked vehicle. What I am less certain of is whether that holds true when off-road or in very rough terrain.

 

[Joe Black]

Tracked vehicles tend to have lower ground pressures than wheeled vehicles of similar weight, and IIRC even some of the very heavy tracked vehicles like MBT's sometimes have lower ground pressures than lighter wheeled vehicles. As a result some soils/terrains can support a tracked vehicle with traction, that a wheeled vehicle might sink into or have little traction.

As for the range of wheeled vs. tracked vehicles, I can believe that a wheeled vehicle on a road is more fuel efficient than a tracked vehicle. What I am less certain of is whether that holds true when off-road or in very rough terrain.

I wonder if there are rubber tracks that can quickly and easily be put over the wheels and taken off in the field, that will help a 8x8 wheeled turned into a tracked vehicle. Suddenly the Boxer CRV with rubber tracks could potentially be used as a tracked infantry fighting vehicle in wet and muddy condition.

Something like this perhaps: Rubber over tyre track - Cautrac