Redlands18
Well-Known Member
The only new Amphibious Vehicles being looked at, at this stage is the LARC-V replacement, which is part of Land 8710 Phase 1, but heard nothing lately.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Will they fit on the new LST-100s? I suspect that will be the limiting factor for the riverine patrol boat project. You are not going to get a boat with the range to be self deployable.
It’s 36m x 14m, not a chance.
Eureka Naval Craft: Maritime Defense & Rescue Vessels
Explore Eureka Naval Craft and its revolutionary defense, rescue, patrol, interdiction, reconnaissance and attach solutions for maritime professionals.
www.eureka.navy
‘AIRCAT Bengal, a 36 m LOA – Patrol/ Interdiction/ Reconnaissance/ Attack/ Air Defense/ Logistics/ Medivac vessel with a 1,000 nm range @ 38 kts cruising (46-50 kts max speed – load depending). The crew is 5-7 (depending upon mission) and can accommodate between 15-17 persons (mission depending) in addition to the crew. Vessel capable of being equipped with defense systems and armed for contested littoral operations with pervasive drone and anti-ship missile threats. Optional primary armament includes three (3) 30mm remote weapon stations, each with individual radar coverage paired with a 360 4D hemispheric radar and full spectrum optronics, as well as onboard ATGMs, drones, and numerous remote and manual machine guns. The vessel has space on the aft deck for 2 x 20 ft ISO mission/ weapon payload containers (capable of carrying swarming loitering munition drones, anti-ship missiles, air defense, torpedoes, sea mines, and/or mine countermeasure systems).’
On another note.
5RAR and 7 RAR have re linked to form 5/7 RAR again.
It is now a battalion of 4 Rifle companies.
We have gone from a Regular Army of 6 and half Infantry battalions, to one of 5 and a half.
I know it's a modern world and defence is planning on a model of area denial, but is 5 battalions able to support an Army of 30,000?
I really hope some serious investment into A Res Infantry is planned, and raising their standards of training and equipment.
5RAR and 7 RAR have re linked to form 5/7 RAR again.
It is now a battalion of 4 Rifle companies.
We have gone from a Regular Army of 6 and half Infantry battalions, to one of 5 and a half.
I know it's a modern world and defence is planning on a model of area denial, but is 5 battalions able to support an Army of 30,000?
I really hope some serious investment into A Res Infantry is planned, and raising their standards of training and equipment.
Redlands18
Well-Known Member
Bushmaster missile launchers with a range of 250 kilometres could soon be in place across the Top End
The Albanese government has approved a tender process that will pit the StrikeMaster mobile missile launcher against the American-made High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS), currently being used by Ukrainian forces.
www.abc.net.au
I assume Strikemaster/NSM competes against HIMARS/PrSM Increment 2. So its a 2 missile NSM system, 250km ranged, high stealth cruise missile v a 2 missile PrSM system, 400km ranged, lower stealth ballistic missile.The Albanese Government launched a tender process this week that will see the Bushmaster based Strikemaster against the HIMARS for the shore based AShM project. A Strikemaster order may come at the expense of a 2nd HIMARS regiment.
Bushmaster missile launchers with a range of 250 kilometres could soon be in place across the Top End
The Albanese government has approved a tender process that will pit the StrikeMaster mobile missile launcher against the American-made High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS), currently being used by Ukrainian forces.
Given than NSM is in service with (soon to be) a local manufacturing factory, and PrSM Inc 2 is yet to be designed or produced (and won't be until later in the decade), I would have thought that the Strikemaster offers a faster path to the desired capability. There is a lower range against the PrSM but I would have thought the NSM makes up for that with its stealth and sea skimming attributes.
I can imagine that PrSMs, in particular increment 2s are going to be in high demand for the remainder of the decade and well into next, so getting access to an overseas production line will be difficult in the near to medium term.
I am confused with the HIMARS ordering. Is this article saying that the Strikemaster may replace the second 20 HIMARS already announced, or that it may come at the expense of future HIMARS orders above the 42.
If its the former, I'm thinking that cancelling another American procurement during a Trump presidency might be asking for a frowny face.
The 42x HIMARS are already on order. They are to equip the existing planned 14th Regiment RRAA (and the School of Artillery, Trade Training Bandiana, etc).
There was also planned under FSP2020 and apparently carried over into NDS2024 a "land based maritime strike" capability sought in Regimental strength for Army, which is what this is assessing.
No HIMARS are being cancelled, this assessment is whether to acquire more beyond the current 42x systems or seek an alternative platform such as Strikemaster. Personally I think ADF should be seriously considering Typhon MRC as well against both, but maybe that's just me... Having Tomahawk Block IV/V and, SM-6 already in-service, Mk.41VLS and an array of suitable prime movers and an extensive local trailer manufacturing industry all available in Australia and a dearth of genuine long-ranged strike as opposed to short-medium ranged strike in the ADF would seemingly make Typhon MRC a no-brainer...
Do we know the role of 5/7 RAR in Darwin?
I think the intention was to have them as light infantry , but I realistically don’t know what that looks like in 2024 and beyond.
Maybe an issue with googles and flippers for the maritime stuff!!!!
Given the distances up north , surely there must be enough bushmasters to provide a Full Battalion lift
Either integrated or on call.
Any clarity in the public realm
Cheers S
Takao
The Bunker Group
You have the maths the wrong way around. Quite frankly, we've always had too much infantry for an Army our size - especially during peacetime - but the post-23 changes highlights that even more. We have one (barely ) Regt of artillery, a Bn worth of IFV, three Regt of A-vehicles and a Sqn(+) of combat engineer vehicles. We have enough comms support for a single Bde and enough tactical log for a Bde. What's the point in having more than 3 Bn of infantry? The other 2.5 are either worthless (without the supporting elements needed for a combined arms effect) or dead.
Noting infantry is the second fastest trade to train and you can build junior numbers rapidly, I've been failing to see actual justification for two Bn/Bde for a while now.
Urh - talk about a solution looking for a problem. Strikemaster would be the worst option to pick. HiMARS gives range, Australian production and commonality with the existing Army stock; Mk 70 gives Australian production for some and commonality with the RAN, although with a higher bill; Black Sky gives us cheapness and any platform (including Hilux) with Australian production and a clear way ahead to NSM range. Sometimes we allow industry too much say in what we buy....The Albanese Government launched a tender process this week that will see the Bushmaster based Strikemaster against the HIMARS for the shore based AShM project. A Strikemaster order may come at the expense of a 2nd HIMARS regiment.Bushmaster missile launchers with a range of 250 kilometres could soon be in place across the Top End
The Albanese government has approved a tender process that will pit the StrikeMaster mobile missile launcher against the American-made High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS), currently being used by Ukrainian forces.
When were the second batch of HIMARS contracted?The 42x HIMARS are already on order. They are to equip the existing planned 14th Regiment RRAA (and the School of Artillery, Trade Training Bandiana, etc).
There was also planned under FSP2020 and apparently carried over into NDS2024 a "land based maritime strike" capability sought in Regimental strength for Army, which is what this is assessing.
No HIMARS are being cancelled, this assessment is whether to acquire more beyond the current 42x systems or seek an alternative platform such as Strikemaster. Personally I think ADF should be seriously considering Typhon MRC as well against both, but maybe that's just me... Having Tomahawk Block IV/V and, SM-6 already in-service, Mk.41VLS and an array of suitable prime movers and an extensive local trailer manufacturing industry all available in Australia and a dearth of genuine long-ranged strike as opposed to short-medium ranged strike in the ADF would seemingly make Typhon MRC a no-brainer...
I am struggling to understand what you mean.
For starters....trade training.
Ok, WW1 or WW2 is over, and the modern grunt can be trained quickly. But, as with any job, skilled junior managers can't be trained quickly, it's a combination of experience and training. Even a rifle section needs to be experienced.
We will have HIMARs etc soon.
How will those assets be used.
They will need to be protected, by who?
What will the goals be for the ADF?
Just plonk HE at targets, then move on?
Role of the infantry...to size and hold ground. That is still and will always be relevant.
You don't or shouldn't use other assets to do that, or you are wasting their particular capability.
During the Timor crisis, non infantry units such as Artillery and field engineers were used as infantry to make up for the lack of Infantry numbers, what if we suddenly needed arty and engineers....
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Okay I will bite. What is trade is the fastest to train for Army?
As a side note, I still remain unsold on the notion of RAA fielding land-based AShM batteries as part of an A2/AD 'strategy'. I still believe that the chokepoints which could make A2/AD tactics work are just too far removed from Australia for the ADF to effectively make use of, or sustain.
On Typhon, my thoughts exactly.The 42x HIMARS are already on order. They are to equip the existing planned 14th Regiment RRAA (and the School of Artillery, Trade Training Bandiana, etc).
There was also planned under FSP2020 and apparently carried over into NDS2024 a "land based maritime strike" capability sought in Regimental strength for Army, which is what this is assessing.
No HIMARS are being cancelled, this assessment is whether to acquire more beyond the current 42x systems or seek an alternative platform such as Strikemaster. Personally I think ADF should be seriously considering Typhon MRC as well against both, but maybe that's just me... Having Tomahawk Block IV/V and, SM-6 already in-service, Mk.41VLS and an array of suitable prime movers and an extensive local trailer manufacturing industry all available in Australia and a dearth of genuine long-ranged strike as opposed to short-medium ranged strike in the ADF would seemingly make Typhon MRC a no-brainer...
I know Typhon uses SM-6 as a strike missile, but is there any reason what so ever Typhon launch SM-6 couldn't be tasked by another system for its other roles, i.e. by an air defence battery or data from a CEC equipped wedgetail?
Is there a place for light infantry?
Apparently we are to have light infantry out of Darwin, motorised in Brisbane and Mechanised with the new IFV’s in Townsville.
In this day and age I can understand the last two as they are mounted and mobile.
I can understand special forces, air mobile or marine light forces.
Just not sure how light Infantry are placed going forward today.
If I recall correctly the original plan for Plan Beersheba had a Brigade with two light Infantry Battalions in each Brigade.
Mobility was to be provided by the appropriate asset , APC or PMV on a needs basis.
Infantry not integrated.
In time this was to evolve.
So not sure what and how 5/7RAR are to operate!
it’s a long walk to anywhere up north.
Cheers S
5/7 are to be light infantry, with a maritime role.
Light infantry can hitch a ride with APC, or Bushmasters, choppers, light vehicles, or by foot.
I can say with some authority, that doing anything on foot in a wet season tropical environment is hell.
Will be interesting to see what role the Army want modern infantry to actually do.
It seems that the powers that be are reluctant to use infantry as infantry. In Afghanistan, they used the Comandos and SASR in roles that could have been done by infantry, and used infantry to train and mentor ANA, which could have been done by SF....
Light infantry can hitch a ride with APC, or Bushmasters, choppers, light vehicles, or by foot.
I can say with some authority, that doing anything on foot in a wet season tropical environment is hell.
Will be interesting to see what role the Army want modern infantry to actually do.
It seems that the powers that be are reluctant to use infantry as infantry. In Afghanistan, they used the Comandos and SASR in roles that could have been done by infantry, and used infantry to train and mentor ANA, which could have been done by SF....
There is more in the public domain on USMC and US Army approaches it is tempting to think the Australian set up is changing to match.
Light infantry might not be tasked with taking ground but with force protection for missile and surveillance units placed in advance of a conflict (and potentially within the adversary’s existing strike range, because it will be too dangerous to send large amphibs into threatened areas when the shooting starts). As I think you suggested earlier in the thread the likely adversaries for the infantry will be small SF teams (just as somebody else’s light infantry, on some other island, will be attempting to protect their missiles from Australian SF teams).
MARKMILES77
Active Member
That is not what the article says:No HIMARS are being cancelled, this assessment is whether to acquire more beyond the current 42x systems or seek an alternative platform such as Strikemaster.
Looks like it might be a money saving excercise.
The second batch of HIMARs has not been contracted, as far as I know, there was only a FMS request for a possible purchase.
No. Both sets have been contracted. If that article said otherwise, it was wrong. Something I am noticing more and more regularly among Australia's defence rags...
42x are on order already. This project is for a second regiment above and beyond what we already have planned.