Australian Defence Industry

[Todjaeger]

Probably the most extensive list of Australian Defence companies can be found here:

http://www.yaffa.com.au/defencesuppliers/browse.php

This site lets you navigate through all the listed companies and provides links to their websites. All the info you seek should be able to be obtained that way.

Cheers.

AD

I found that, as well as http://www.apnbig.com.au/anzidecc/search/

They gave me listing of sites, the only trouble is it can be hard to tell the size of the company as well as if it is publicly or privately held, or a subsidary.

I'll keep plugging away at it

Thanks!

 

[gf0012-aust]

Probably the most extensive list of Australian Defence companies can be found here:

http://www.yaffa.com.au/defencesuppliers/browse.php

This site lets you navigate through all the listed companies and provides links to their websites. All the info you seek should be able to be obtained that way.

Cheers.

AD

You'll find a stack of Def Industry books avail at the next LandWarfareConf. The annual publication is normally made available to delegates - and its pretty comprehensive (as well as being useful as its a hard cover pub'n)

 

[Todjaeger]

You'll find a stack of Def Industry books avail at the next LandWarfareConf. The annual publication is normally made available to delegates - and its pretty comprehensive (as well as being useful as its a hard cover pub'n)

Are these events generally open to non-defence industry people, but those with an interest in the topic (like me?) If so, I'll have to see if there are any occurring near me. Also, is the Land Warfare conference an Australian (as in takes place there) conference?

 

[FutureTank]

Australian Defence Industry capability for Land400

This thread seems to have been abandoned for a while.
I wonder if the Aus Def Ind is able to manufacture a really good vehicle design that will also export to equip a more select range of forces with needs that are uniquely satisfied by the design. In other words are they able to take on an innovative design despite departure from the current 'market' standard.
What this requires of course is assuming market leadership by a sector not though of in this role by most of the global military exporters.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Are these events generally open to non-defence industry people, but those with an interest in the topic (like me?) If so, I'll have to see if there are any occurring near me. Also, is the Land Warfare conference an Australian (as in takes place there) conference?

my humble apols for the tardy lateness of reply and for missing the questions you asked re this.

• Land Warfare Conf is an Australian mainland event. It does have an international guest list and includes both Defence staff and military industry participants. Its rotated between various major capital cities
• The actual LWC conference material is restricted to delegates and attendees. Its not made available on the internet etc...

The US does have a number of similar events run annually (everywhere!) - but they've hardened up on the attendee criteria - depending on what the event is you typically must be either invited or have the requisite security clearances. The fees to participate are pretty ugly sometimes. eg there are events where it will cost $850+ per day, some on new technologies (which are invitation only) have been as high as $2800 for the day. Frightening but not infrequent. :shudder

A lot of the US ones require pre-registration so as to allow security checking to be done in time.

 

[FutureTank]

they've hardened up on the attendee criteria - depending on what the event is you typically must be either invited or have the requisite security clearances.

Yes, days are gone when one could attend NDU in Washington DC for $250

 

[gf0012-aust]

Yes, days are gone when one could attend NDU in Washington DC for $250

actually existing NDU sessions are cheaper than that. They're typically $150-$200.

In real terms NDU is more of a hybrid of ADFA and MIT or SIT. Their conferences tend to be aspirational rather than task/requirements focussed

 

[FutureTank]

I had to pay for motel also (2 days)
Aspirational....it was depressing as I saw it

 

[Big-E]

Yes, days are gone when one could attend NDU in Washington DC for $250

NDU... yuck, that's for desk jockeys.

I prefer going to SWATLANT conferences at Oceana... that's where the real good stuff is. The Naval Acadamy puts on some good stuff to. It is so rare I make it to the Beltway these days I am actually going to plan a trip soon.

I was doing some liason work with SPAWAR and got to go to some FORCENET lectures... coms subject isn't exactly my forte but what the hell.

 

[sammo]

NDU... yuck, that's for desk jockeys.

I prefer going to SWATLANT conferences at Oceana... that's where the real good stuff is. The Naval Acadamy puts on some good stuff to. It is so rare I make it to the Beltway these days I am actually going to plan a trip soon.

I was doing some liason work with SPAWAR and got to go to some FORCENET lectures... coms subject isn't exactly my forte but what the hell.

well my brother has just been doing some cpbg over in aussie land he said he went to a police seminar and it was ok but some things needed to be touched up on:rel

 

[Big-E]

well my brother has just been doing some cpbg over in aussie land he said he went to a police seminar and it was ok but some things needed to be touched up on:rel

I like going to the occasional conference but some of these pros spend too much time talking about problems rather than implementing solutions. There is nothing like getting into the field rather than having to go to lectures and conferences every week. I know staffers in the beltway that spend too much time doing NDU crap whose time would be better spent actually doing some policy implementation. Thankfully I don't fall into the pencilpusher crowd and actually live and implement doctrine and policy that comes out of experience. I am happy to lecture some of that as I have done in the past but these meeting can become quite drole. I have also noticed that 90% of them focus on GWOT rather than some of the other real world problems we face. I feel we are losing perspective.

 

[FutureTank]

What sells?

I'm curious - what is it that Australian Defence manufacturers could make that will generate good export potential?

By good I mean a substantial and visible 'flagship' product which is indisputably Australian and World quality.

 

[Izzy1]

If an all-Aussie company could get hold of BAE Australia's Autonomous Systems section and fund it, then I'm certain Australian UAV/UCAV technology could become a world beater.

From the reports we get here, the section is very highly regarded and seen as key to BAE's future UCAV plans and largely centre of an intergartion process with similar sections in the UK and US. Interesting to note that most of BAE's previously-classified UAV tech demonstrators (Herti, Corax) all had heavy Australian input and of course were tested out there.

 

[RubiconNZ]

Well the quickest things that come to my mind:
Nulka Active Decoys, In-service with RAN and the US Navy
Metal Storm: Capability ready to fill lots of markets from personal weapons to shipborne heavy weapons.
Bushmaster; Continued marketing should see an increased market, it seems likely the Netherlands will make a purchase.

Although alot of work done in partnership with other countires the work done on Scramjets has lead to qutie a expertise amongst Australian researchers.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I'm curious - what is it that Australian Defence manufacturers could make that will generate good export potential?

By good I mean a substantial and visible 'flagship' product which is indisputably Australian and World quality.

The problem with these kinds of questions is that they invariably can't be answered in public.

eg my own company is associated with acoustic and ballistic warfare technologies. At the submarine warfare level the technology is sold to "nn" amount of countries and depending on the status of that countries relationship with australia, they are sold an appropriately massaged product. None of the specific detail of that is in the public domain as the tech is at a classified level and the company is privately owned (and for obvious reasons as far as the technology owners are concerned)

we make our clients sign non disclosures as well.

there are a number of UK companies and US companies I know of that operate in an identical fashion. I've never seen any of their product in any janes or monch publications - and yet they've been selling and trading in these technologies successfully for a number of years.

 

[gf0012-aust]

If an all-Aussie company could get hold of BAE Australia's Autonomous Systems section and fund it, then I'm certain Australian UAV/UCAV technology could become a world beater.

From the reports we get here, the section is very highly regarded and seen as key to BAE's future UCAV plans and largely centre of an intergartion process with similar sections in the UK and US. Interesting to note that most of BAE's previously-classified UAV tech demonstrators (Herti, Corax) all had heavy Australian input and of course were tested out there.

A significant volume (ie extremely high) percentage of current US UAV communications compression software is australian. I don't have exact numbers, but it's absolutely taken over the comms market for US/NATO managed UAV's.

The tech was originally developed by two DSTO e-systems scientists who then left the Govt and established their own company.

 

[FutureTank]

Australian UAV/UCAV technology .

Would UAV be a quantity product as well as a quality one?

There are not a lot of current projects with quantities attached

 

[Grand Danois]

Wouldn't HFSWR be something the Aussies could take far, given their own requirements as per geography?

 

[gf0012-aust]

Wouldn't HFSWR be something the Aussies could take far, given their own requirements as per geography?

we already have strong relationships in place with those countries that can afford it and are "geographically sympathetic" to the technology.

HFSWR is very similar in complexity to OTHR. Very few nations can afford or have the requirement for either (and there is a strong relationship between both)

 

[Grand Danois]

we already have strong relationships in place with those countries that can afford it and are "geographically sympathetic" to the technology.

HFSWR is very similar in complexity to OTHR. Very few nations can afford or have the requirement for either (and there is a strong relationship between both)

I take it you are commenting on it as a business case?