ADF General discussion thread

[Stampede]

Having a read of the recent Navy magazine there is an article about Army's future Littoral Manoeuvre Project.
This project is to replace the in service LCM -8 and LARC-V's plus acquire other smaller water craft.
This is a large project that will both add numbers and introduce new capability's.
Of interest was the suggestion that the LCM-8 replacement would compose two separate platforms.

Littoral Manoeuvre Vessel Heavy ( LMV-H ) - 1200 tonne or more in size for inter theatre Projection and sustainment
Littoral Manoeuvre Vessel Medium ( LMV-M ) .
also
Littoral Manoeuvre Vessel Amphibious ( LMV-A ) - LARC-V replacement
Littoral Manoeuvre Vessel Patrol ( LMV-P ) - Various small craft.

Of interest for myself was the LCM-8 replacement.
I was initially of the understanding this was to be of one size and some what larger in size than the existing LCM-8 craft.

LAND 8710 Phase 1 ( Capability element 1 ) LCM - 8 Replacement.
LAND 8710 Phase 1 ( Capability element 2 ) LARC-V Replacement.

Maybe I have the wrong perception re these purchases.
I'm curious as to what the Littoral Manoeuvre Vessel Heavy ( LAND 8710 Phase 2 ) looks like in terms of size and expectation.
I thought it was more along the lines of Navantia's offering of their Kodal 75 / 90 offerings.
Something either similar of 50 % bigger than the in service LCM -8

A ( LMV- H ) 1200 tonne vessel looks more like a ship than a landing craft.

In my opinion such a large vessel is vital for the ADF.


Can anyone assist and clarify the above .


Regards S

 

[Redlands18]

Having a read of the recent Navy magazine there is an article about Army's future Littoral Manoeuvre Project.
This project is to replace the in service LCM -8 and LARC-V's plus acquire other smaller water craft.
This is a large project that will both add numbers and introduce new capability's.
Of interest was the suggestion that the LCM-8 replacement would compose two separate platforms.

Littoral Manoeuvre Vessel Heavy ( LMV-H ) - 1200 tonne or more in size for inter theatre Projection and sustainment
Littoral Manoeuvre Vessel Medium ( LMV-M ) .
also
Littoral Manoeuvre Vessel Amphibious ( LMV-A ) - LARC-V replacement
Littoral Manoeuvre Vessel Patrol ( LMV-P ) - Various small craft.

Of interest for myself was the LCM-8 replacement.
I was initially of the understanding this was to be of one size and some what larger in size than the existing LCM-8 craft.

LAND 8710 Phase 1 ( Capability element 1 ) LCM - 8 Replacement.
LAND 8710 Phase 1 ( Capability element 2 ) LARC-V Replacement.

Maybe I have the wrong perception re these purchases.
I'm curious as to what the Littoral Manoeuvre Vessel Heavy ( LAND 8710 Phase 2 ) looks like in terms of size and expectation.
I thought it was more along the lines of Navantia's offering of their Kodal 75 / 90 offerings.
Something either similar of 50 % bigger than the in service LCM -8

A ( LMV- H ) 1200 tonne vessel looks more like a ship than a landing craft.

In my opinion such a large vessel is vital for the ADF.


Can anyone assist and clarify the above .


Regards S

At this stage only the LCM-8 and LARC-V replacement projects have started, the LMV-H and Riverine Patrol Craft projects are still several years away from starting up yet. The LMV-H is basically a replacement for the RANs decommissioned Balikpapan's class LCH, Vessels of this size would be currently beyond the Army's experience and expertise to operate, so there is some question as to whether they would actually be Army or RAN(though with an Army presence).
The LCM-8 replacement appears is going to be bigger, with improved Range, Endurance, Liveability, Speed and Seakeeping a higher priority then an increase in Load carrying capability. I think the Kodal 90 is the more likely contender then the 75, which probably fits more into a LCM-1E replacement whenever that happens.

 

[Stampede]

At this stage only the LCM-8 and LARC-V replacement projects have started, the LMV-H and Riverine Patrol Craft projects are still several years away from starting up yet. The LMV-H is basically a replacement for the RANs decommissioned Balikpapan's class LCH, Vessels of this size would be currently beyond the Army's experience and expertise to operate, so there is some question as to whether they would actually be Army or RAN(though with an Army presence).
The LCM-8 replacement appears is going to be bigger, with improved Range, Endurance, Liveability, Speed and Seakeeping a higher priority then an increase in Load carrying capability. I think the Kodal 90 is the more likely contender then the 75, which probably fits more into a LCM-1E replacement whenever that happens.

Yes I was thinking more of the Kodal 90 or other manufactures equivalent.
Did not know a LCH replacement actually had traction and a project allocation.
I trust it gets the nod and is not just a long term fantasy.

Actually surprised it is not given more of a priority.
How many times in the last couple of years would such a capability have been used both for military training and also HADR.


Regards S

 

[Bob53]

Looks like the ABC has not finished with the SAS. The firefight was over, but NZ SAS soldiers say what they saw an Australian do next disturbed them
I wonder how far they plan to keep digging. I suspect Cosgrove is a target in this.
Meanwhile young Australians say they would not defend Australia.
https://www.news.com.au/technology/...t/news-story/8457efb71097a8395230cc38d08d5747
When they get pumped full of self loathing and crap about what an ugly racist, misogynistic, intolerant country is from an early age no wonder. Anzac Day won’t last another 10 years.

 

[phreeky]

Anzac Day won’t last another 10 years.

People have been saying things like that since I was a kid (longer ago than I'd like to admit).

People generally won't fight a senseless war well. Against an unprovoked aggressor of their own home is a completely different story. I can imagine how the stats would've looked during the Vietnam war. IMO it's a nothing article.

 

[Bob53]

People have been saying things like that since I was a kid (longer ago than I'd like to admit).

People generally won't fight a senseless war well. Against an unprovoked aggressor of their own home is a completely different story. I can imagine how the stats would've looked during the Vietnam war. IMO it's a nothing article.

Well the question was asked if Australia was in the same circumstances as the Ukraine would you fight. This article pre the current war touches n this also. How the 'woke' generation will be unwilling to defend Australia

 

[phreeky]

Well the question was asked if Australia was in the same circumstances as the Ukraine would you fight.

I think it's naive to expect the same answer from somebody when their livelihood isn't at threat vs when it very much is.

Unless you know the answer to those same questions from Ukrainians prior to this (and 2014) happening - and even then, their threat level was already higher - then I don't see that you've got a good baseline for a comparison.

I've worked with a lot of "kids" (i.e. 18yo), and us more, ah, "mature" guys often will take the piss out of them. The typical "kids these days" and so on. The reality is though that they're basically the same as what we were - sure, personal interests have changed and I think it's fair to say that there's somewhat less "national pride" in a blind senseless way, but certainly no lack of will to argue or fight for what's "right".

 

[hauritz]

The Russian invasion of the Ukraine really does emphasis just how hard it would be to invade Australia. The Russians were struggling to push much more than a couple of hundred kilometres into the Ukraine despite already being on the border and having several months to prepare and position their forces.

Putting all that aside I think the citizenry of just about any country would be willing to stand up to invaders. You are after all defending family, friends and country all of which are massive motivators.

I think a more pertinent question would be whether Australians would be willing to fight in other people's wars. In World War one and two ordinary Australians and New Zealanders showed a willingness to fight wars on the other side of the planet. I can't see that happening now.

 

[Morgo]

theaustralian.com.au/nation/defence/defence-minister-peter-dutton-puts-new-strike-force-on-fast-track/news-story/bbad2aea8981c344033f9f0881188f97

Dutton announcing $3.5bn (unclear if it’s new money or rebadged) for JASSM and NSM purchases and guided weapons manufacturing. ABC reporting that Raytheon will manage missile production initially which seems very sensible.

The article is paywalled so I don’t have the full details but it’s there for those that have an Oz subscription.

 

[cdxbow]

Well the question was asked if Australia was in the same circumstances as the Ukraine would you fight. This article pre the current war touches n this also. How the 'woke' generation will be unwilling to defend Australia

That's a rubbish, fact free opinion piece by a man who is neither intelligent nor perceptive. A hard right Christian culture warrior, he had to stand down from the ministry because he got caught with his piece of fluff. He is intellectually and morally challenged.

I have absolutely no doubt, should Australia be threatened in a an existential way that the Australian population would be falling over themselves to enlist, just as it happened in WWII. Just as it happened in the Ukraine.

The Russian invasion of the Ukraine really does emphasis just how hard it would be to invade Australia. The Russians were struggling to push much more than a couple of hundred kilometres into the Ukraine despite already being on the border and having several months to prepare and position their forces.

Putting all that aside I think the citizenry of just about any country would be willing to stand up to invaders. You are after all defending family, friends and country all of which are massive motivators.

I think a more pertinent question would be whether Australians would be willing to fight in other people's wars. In World War one and two ordinary Australians and New Zealanders showed a willingness to fight wars on the other side of the planet. I can't see that happening now.

I suspect we will have enough trouble regionally to keep everyone entertained.

 

[CJR]

Meanwhile young Australians say they would not defend Australia.
https://www.news.com.au/technology/...t/news-story/8457efb71097a8395230cc38d08d5747

Found the actual poll... Total sample size is 1000 (which, assuming random sampling is large enough to be meaningful), but each age cohort is much smaller (130-190), rendering them statistically dubious (assuming random sampling) as a representation of the true opinion of that cohort.

Then, digging into details the cohorts with low support for staying and fighting (18-24, 25-34) are about 70% female in this survey (vs expected about 50-50 in the population as a whole) while the cohorts with the strongest support for staying and fighting (55-64, 65+) were disproportional male (75% and 91%). In general you'd expect that this gender bias would explain a LOT of the results (men tending more towards stay and fight, women more towards get out with the kids and grandparents... as we've actually seen in Ukraine).

Yeah, so that says it's riddled with bias and actually doesn't support the IPA and news.com.au implications that "modernz kidz R sissy" and "communazisocialist non-murder-abo-fun-good history R make us week".

 

[vonnoobie]

Found the actual poll... Total sample size is 1000 (which, assuming random sampling is large enough to be meaningful), but each age cohort is much smaller (130-190), rendering them statistically dubious (assuming random sampling) as a representation of the true opinion of that cohort.

Then, digging into details the cohorts with low support for staying and fighting (18-24, 25-34) are about 70% female in this survey (vs expected about 50-50 in the population as a whole) while the cohorts with the strongest support for staying and fighting (55-64, 65+) were disproportional male (75% and 91%). In general you'd expect that this gender bias would explain a LOT of the results (men tending more towards stay and fight, women more towards get out with the kids and grandparents... as we've actually seen in Ukraine).

Yeah, so that says it's riddled with bias and actually doesn't support the IPA and news.com.au implications that "modernz kidz R sissy" and "communazisocialist non-murder-abo-fun-good history R make us week".

Thanks for digging that up mate. What I would like to see is the gender break down in each age group because that would give a truer sense of willingness to stay and fight. One can to an extent understand you can't always get a perfect group of people in a random survey so they should at least give as many of the statistics involved rather then less then the bare basics.

 

[the road runner]

Raytheon and LM have been named as strategic partners for the Commonwealths sovereign guided weapons capability

Australian government names Raytheon, Lockheed as strategic partners in guided weapons - APDR (asiapacificdefencereporter.com)

Looks like Australia will be getting Long range missile's early for the RAAF F-18 fleet ,delivery's to begin in 2024.
HOBART and ANZAC class ships will also have NSM delivery's sped up to 2024
We shall also receive new sea mines in 2024, the announcement shall be made today by Mr Dutton

Australia to acquire new strike weapons early (msn.com)

 

[Arclighy]

Well the question was asked if Australia was in the same circumstances as the Ukraine would you fight. This article pre the current war touches n this also. How the 'woke' generation will be unwilling to defend Australia

As soon as l see the term "woke" used a a pejorative term, l immediately roll my eyes and look for a good book to read. To be 'woke' is, "aware of and actively attentive to important facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)" (Webster Dictionary). I won't attempt to speak for others here, but I for one am happy to be called "woke". They are things that are important to me and all those around me, and I aspire to be aware of and active in. The person who wrote the article doesn't know what he is talking about!

 

[old faithful]

As soon as l see the term "woke" used a a pejorative term, l immediately roll my eyes and look for a good book to read. To be 'woke' is, "aware of and actively attentive to important facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)" (Webster Dictionary). I won't attempt to speak for others here, but I for one am happy to be called "woke". They are things that are important to me and all those around me, and I aspire to be aware of and active in. The person who wrote the article doesn't know what he is talking about!

But it has a different meaning among the majority of western population, just as "gay" no longer really means happy, cheerful and carefree.....

 

[Arclighy]

But it has a different meaning among the majority of western population, just as "gay" no longer really means happy, cheerful and carefree.....

But it has a different meaning among the majority of western population, just as "gay" no longer really means happy, cheerful and carefree.....

The term has been weaponised by some who have a particular agenda to push. I am more than happy to push back at those who use it pejoratively.

 

[old faithful]

Careful about using "push back" as well lol!

 

[Volkodav]

As soon as l see the term "woke" used a a pejorative term, l immediately roll my eyes and look for a good book to read. To be 'woke' is, "aware of and actively attentive to important facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)" (Webster Dictionary). I won't attempt to speak for others here, but I for one am happy to be called "woke". They are things that are important to me and all those around me, and I aspire to be aware of and active in. The person who wrote the article doesn't know what he is talking about!

History is full of individuals with no interest in military service, who have stood up to defend the families, homes, way of life. On the flipside history also has far too many cowardly warmongers who talk tough, belittle others and disappear when they are in any danger themselves.

There are also those who claim to defend others when what they are really doing is asserting themselves over people they see as unworthy, while the common person, despite their fear, fights anyway.

 

[Arclighy]

Careful about using "push back" as well lol!

Lol. I certainly will!

 

[Vivendi]

Found the actual poll... Total sample size is 1000 (which, assuming random sampling is large enough to be meaningful), but each age cohort is much smaller (130-190), rendering them statistically dubious (assuming random sampling) as a representation of the true opinion of that cohort.

Then, digging into details the cohorts with low support for staying and fighting (18-24, 25-34) are about 70% female in this survey (vs expected about 50-50 in the population as a whole) while the cohorts with the strongest support for staying and fighting (55-64, 65+) were disproportional male (75% and 91%). In general you'd expect that this gender bias would explain a LOT of the results (men tending more towards stay and fight, women more towards get out with the kids and grandparents... as we've actually seen in Ukraine).

Yeah, so that says it's riddled with bias and actually doesn't support the IPA and news.com.au implications that "modernz kidz R sissy" and "communazisocialist non-murder-abo-fun-good history R make us week".

"There are lies, damned lies and statistics"... Lies, damned lies, and statistics - Wikipedia