Australian Army Discussions and Updates

V

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Bob53 said:
Broncos are not proposed as far as I am aware. It’s someone here’s thought bubble. If another vehicle is to be introduced then wait another 5-8 years to go through a selection process.

I’d suggest something like Hanwha is developing or BAEs AAV would be a more likely choice.
South Korea advances plan for next-generation amphibious assault vehicle

…..would be more likely as can be deployed from small amhibs, can self deploy moderate distances across water and carrys a gun so no need for a second support vehicle. In addition is a modern and armoured design with more protection than a Bronco. And might make up on some of the shortfall of IFVs …politics and all that you know….
www.navalnews.com

Latest Details on ROK Marine Corps' New KAAV-2 Amphibious Assault Vehicle - Naval News

While Hanwha and the ROK Marine Corps did not display a mockup of the KAAV-2 (Korean Amphibious Assault Vehicle-2) during ADEX 2021, a Marine Corps service member informed Naval News with the latest details on the program.
www.navalnews.com www.navalnews.com

But that said I can’t see anything this vehicle happening for the ADF, if at all, in less than a 5-8 year window.
Click to expand...
It was my thought bubble, based on my understanding the BvS10 was painted in an Aussie cam scheme several years ago for a defence exhibition /conference. Also my knowledge of conditions in northern Australia during the monsoon season.

AAVs are a completely different matter, comparing them to BvS or Bronco is like comparing a Redback to a Bushmaster.
 
S

Sierra Mike

Member
Volkodav said:
It was my thought bubble, based on my understanding the BvS10 was painted in an Aussie cam scheme several years ago for a defence exhibition /conference. Also my knowledge of conditions in northern Australia during the monsoon season.

AAVs are a completely different matter, comparing them to BvS or Bronco is like comparing a Redback to a Bushmaster.
Click to expand...
yes there was... BAES shipped one over and had it painted up... it was swimming around Williamstown dockyard I think 2012-13 from memory...
 
S

Stampede

Well-Known Member
Redlands18 said:
Australia – M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) | Defense Security Cooperation Agency (dsca.mil)
Looks like Australia will be ordering another 22 HIMARS to add to the 20 already on order, enough to equip 2 Regts worth +Trg+ attrition.
Click to expand...
Interesting that HIMARs numbers are increasing but not at this stage SPG numbers.

Difficult to believe that an additional tranche of SPGs will not be ordered down the track.

Is there ian deal a ratio of HIMARs to SPGS for a given size of brigade / division.


Cheers S
 
O

old faithful

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Stampede said:
Interesting that HIMARs numbers are increasing but not at this stage SPG numbers.

Difficult to believe that an additional tranche of SPGs will not be ordered down the track.

Is there ian deal a ratio of HIMARs to SPGS for a given size of brigade / division.


Cheers S
Click to expand...
I hope we do eventually start manufacture of our own ammunition. For example, we have ordered a similar amount of ammunition as the first order, which includes a mix of standard and extended range rounds. All up for 22 units a total of about 1100 rounds. That won't last long in any kind of conflict.
 
R

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
Stampede said:
Interesting that HIMARs numbers are increasing but not at this stage SPG numbers.

Difficult to believe that an additional tranche of SPGs will not be ordered down the track.

Is there ian deal a ratio of HIMARs to SPGS for a given size of brigade / division.


Cheers S
Click to expand...
Having auto-correct problems? I take it you meant "an ideal ratio".
HIMARS can fire long range missiles and the AS-9 can't. At the heart of the DSR is long range missiles, not close Battlefield support. Every Army will work out for themselves what ratio of all weapon systems they want. The US Army Divisions for example number up to 24,000 personnel which is twice the size of most Divisions around the world.
 
S

Stampede

Well-Known Member
Redlands18 said:
Having auto-correct problems? I take it you meant "an ideal ratio".
HIMARS can fire long range missiles and the AS-9 can't. At the heart of the DSR is long range missiles, not close Battlefield support. Every Army will work out for themselves what ratio of all weapon systems they want. The US Army Divisions for example number up to 24,000 personnel which is twice the size of most Divisions around the world.
Click to expand...
Thanks.

Send some very interesting messages to wife and kids with predictive text.

Quick texts take twice as long due to second text explaining interesting language from first text!!!
 
S

Stampede

Well-Known Member
Redlands18 said:
Having auto-correct problems? I take it you meant "an ideal ratio".
HIMARS can fire long range missiles and the AS-9 can't. At the heart of the DSR is long range missiles, not close Battlefield support. Every Army will work out for themselves what ratio of all weapon systems they want. The US Army Divisions for example number up to 24,000 personnel which is twice the size of most Divisions around the world.
Click to expand...
I guess the future structure of the four main brigades will give some clarity of equipment needs and composition going forward.


Cheers S
 
FormerDirtDart

FormerDirtDart

Well-Known Member
Redlands18 said:
Having auto-correct problems? I take it you meant "an ideal ratio".
HIMARS can fire long range missiles and the AS-9 can't. At the heart of the DSR is long range missiles, not close Battlefield support. Every Army will work out for themselves what ratio of all weapon systems they want. The US Army Divisions for example number up to 24,000 personnel which is twice the size of most Divisions around the world.
Click to expand...
Rocket artillery is not a US Army division level asset. Separate artillery brigades field rocket battalions/batteries as echelon above division assets. However, the USMC fields rocket batteries as divisional assets
 
Tasman

Tasman

Ship Watcher
Verified Defense Pro
Redlands18 said:
Australia – M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) | Defense Security Cooperation Agency (dsca.mil)
Looks like Australia will be ordering another 22 HIMARS to add to the 20 already on order, enough to equip 2 Regts worth +Trg+ attrition.
Click to expand...
Confirmed on Defence government website that the number of HIMARS will now be 42.


Seems that media commentators who are complaining that the price has doubled have not been following ministerial releases.

Tas
 
OldTex

OldTex

Well-Known Member
The esteemed commentators may also be comparing oranges with apples. The US DSCA quotes maximum prices, which are subject to some negotiation, with a raft of technical support costs. The Aust Government quote whole of life costs. In some cases the through life costs can be 2-3 times the acquisition costs.
 
S

Stampede

Well-Known Member
Tasman said:
Confirmed on Defence government website that the number of HIMARS will now be 42.


Seems that media commentators who are complaining that the price has doubled have not been following ministerial releases.

Tas
Click to expand...
I can see a place for HIMARs within the ADF but it seems alot of units relative to the size, composition and number of other vehicles/systems Army currently have or are planning to have.

I'm wondering if the main reason will be down the tract the PrSM which will hopefully have both a land and maritime application for moving targets.

Thoughts


Cheers S
 
A

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Stampede said:
I can see a place for HIMARs within the ADF but it seems alot of units relative to the size, composition and number of other vehicles/systems Army currently have or are planning to have.

I'm wondering if the main reason will be down the tract the PrSM which will hopefully have both a land and maritime application for moving targets.

Thoughts


Cheers S
Click to expand...
It’s 2 Regiments, plus a training unit’s worth. I’m not sure that is a huge capability in comparison to the scale of the rest of Army…

Royal Regiment of Australian Artillery presently has 6 Regiments worth of artillery and associated systems another 2 on top is a fair expansion, but our artillery stocks even including the upcoming HIMARS are not extensive…

Even if one took that view, well - Arty is not known as the ‘god of war’ for no reason… On this basis, I say like most everything else, what we are buying isn’t nearly enough…
 
S

Stampede

Well-Known Member
ADMk2 said:
It’s 2 Regiments, plus a training unit’s worth. I’m not sure that is a huge capability in comparison to the scale of the rest of Army…

Royal Regiment of Australian Artillery presently has 6 Regiments worth of artillery and associated systems another 2 on top is a fair expansion, but our artillery stocks even including the upcoming HIMARS are not extensive…

Even if one took that view, well - Arty is not known as the ‘god of war’ for no reason… On this basis, I say like most everything else, what we are buying isn’t nearly enough…
Click to expand...
On those numbers I'd agree.
Just having a brain lapse and thinking in terms of SPG's only and there limited numbers for what looks like only one Regt.

No doubt the M777 will soldier on.
Arty regt numbers going forward I cannot say.

Agree with god of war as has being shown again in Europe.

Cheers S
 
B

Bob53

Well-Known Member
This is copied from the RAN thread. Appears a question mark on the costs of Himars rounds being purchased.

asiapacificdefencereporter.com

HIMARS price increase doesn’t add up - APDR

On August 18 the State Department notified Congress of a HIMARS sale to Australia valued at US $975 million ($1.529 billion) for 22 launchers and associated rockets.
asiapacificdefencereporter.com asiapacificdefencereporter.com
 
O

old faithful

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Bob53 said:
This is copied from the RAN thread. Appears a question mark on the costs of Himars rounds being purchased.

asiapacificdefencereporter.com

HIMARS price increase doesn’t add up - APDR

On August 18 the State Department notified Congress of a HIMARS sale to Australia valued at US $975 million ($1.529 billion) for 22 launchers and associated rockets.
asiapacificdefencereporter.com asiapacificdefencereporter.com
Click to expand...
He has calculated the cost of pods as 1 round. I think he says 190 rounds. Is actually 190 pods. Most pods contain 6 rounds, closer to 800 rounds.
 
OldTex

OldTex

Well-Known Member
old faithful said:
He has calculated the cost of pods as 1 round. I think he says 190 rounds. Is actually 190 pods. Most pods contain 6 rounds, closer to 800 rounds.
Click to expand...
There is also the difference in the number of pods and other items that don't seem to raise a red flag in KB's calculations (never let facts stand in the way of a great headline). For a similar number of launchers in the Aug 23 notification there have been an additional 40 pods of various types (yes the May 22 notification also had 10 ATACMS which have not been repeated). In addition there is mention of M1084A2 Resupply vehicles, trailers, 9300-SL60TN forklift and sideloaders for which no quantities have been mentioned in the recent DSCA notification.
All of these factors plus exchange rates and inflation contribute to the increase from US$385 million to US$975 million in the space 15 months.
 
M

Massive

Well-Known Member
Stampede said:
I can see a place for HIMARs within the ADF but it seems alot of units relative to the size, composition and number of other vehicles/systems Army currently have or are planning to have.

I'm wondering if the main reason will be down the tract the PrSM which will hopefully have both a land and maritime application for moving targets.

Thoughts

Cheers S
Click to expand...
Personally I find this quite reassuring. The intent of the DSR was to prioritise elements of capability and this to me is the first evidence that this prioritisation is taking place.

Ideally this will continue and the HIMARS capability will approximate Brigade/Army Group size in time.

It does not offset my disappointment in the SPG order reduction though. The lesson I would take from Ukraine is more SPG not less - three regiments with 24 SPG per regiment (8 per battery) would make more sense to me.

HIMARS is very manpower efficient. And so are SPG. Overweight in these capabilities makes sense to me.

Regards,

Massive
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top