A quick read up on the Tigon shows some models have limited water crossing ability depending on armour and weapons fit.
Don't think this translates into open ocean capability, pretty sure this vehicle in its current form would need to be put ashore by landing craft.
Would take a large redesign to turn it into a fully capable Amphibious Combat Vehicle along the lines of an Amtrac or similar.
To say large redesign is a bit of a stretch. While it is certainly true that the design would need some evolution to develop full ocean-going capability I did say “based off” the Tigon 6x6.
The Tigon 6x6 can host a crew of two and 11 dismounts in the personnel carrier variant. It is powered by a Caterpillar C9.3 530 hp engine coupled to a full automatic Allison 4500SP transmission and is fitted with independent whishbone suspensions with coil spring and shock absorber. Optional equipment that can be fitted on the TIGON include: Water Jet propulsion, Central Tyre Inflation System (CTIS), Automatic Fire Suppression System (AFSS), NBC protection system, thermal driver periscope and Identification Friend or Foe (IFF). The prototype already underwent company tests in Korea, is amphibious, and is propulsed in water by two waterjets that ensure an 8.5 km/h speed, allowing to traverse large bodies of open water under its own power. The amphibious performance is affected by the weapon system and level of ballistic protection selected by the user. Maximum speed on road being 100 km/h. cruise range is estimated at 1,000 km. Four different weapon systems are currently on offer for the Tigon: a crew-served 12.7mm machine gun, and three types of RWS ranging from 12.7mm machine gun to 30mm cannon to 90mm gun. The vehicle’s weight varies from 21t to 22t depending on what weapon is selected.
With some evolution seems like a pretty good fit for the role our light amphibious forces (at this point 2nd RAR) will be expected to play during distributed maritime ops. Filling a gap between the Bushmaster and Boxer/Redback. Amphibious operations aren’t only about fully-fledged amphibious assaults from open ocean; you’re right we have heavier vehicles and landing craft for that.
If we are heading down the distributed littoral operations path the DSR seems to suggest then we won’t have enough landing craft for all tasks. The ability for relatively small teams of 2nd RAR to traverse bodies of water in protected vehicles (bays, rivers, channels, estuaries, between islands etc) across the Indo Pacific archipelago independently and discretely with a low footprint ahead of a main landing force, for reconnaissance, security, advanced force operations will be necessary. Especially if we will be deploying A2D2 missile systems across multiple locations. The TIGON offers majority of what is required for this, it doesn’t need to be the best armoured or carry its heaviest weapons options in order to be this. You can always fit additional protection or weapons once ashore.
Also, the Koreans have the tracked Korea Amphibious Assault Vehicle (KAAV) they have been developing to draw lessons from for any evolution required. This is another potential option. Of course, there are other Amphibious Combat Vehicle options, the BAE ACV 1.1 for example, but not built by Hanwha at the Geelong factory. It is a moot point anyway; the decision is made.
The post was just an “alternative path” thought bubble that offered a way to get a Lynx combat vehicle system for commonality and also work for the Geelong factory (sadly jobs, electorates and political factors do come into Defence procurement, always have and always will) to ensure its survival (again an important factor for strategic indigenous capability development).
As it stands Hanwha will need to develop alternative redback variants if ADF is develop a complete mechanised battalion (not nearly enough IMHO), but that is another story. The Redback is a fine vehicle, but alone it doesn't constitute the capability to conduct mechanised operations.
