This is a discussion on Australian Army Discussions and Updates within the Army & Security Forces forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Shit my last post here was not supposed to be in this thread.
But some AUG gucci pictures as an ...
THE Australian army expects to know within six months the outcome of a $600 million contract to buy new heavy artillery, including, for the first time, 155mm self-propelled guns.
Dubbed Land-17, the project is on track and a formal call for tenders is expected shortly, Chief of Army Peter Leahy said yesterday. Potential contenders for 155mm howitzers to replace Vietnam era big guns include firms from Israel, Singapore and France. Lieutenant-General Leahy said the army would get a mix of towed and self-propelled artillery.
"We're trying to get some prices and have a look at some equipment to see what we're getting for our money," he said.
"My preference would be for the self-propelled and have more of that rather than towed artillery. I think towards the middle of this year we should get a pretty good decision."
Contenders include the Bofors Archer truck-mounted 155mm system with a towable version as an option. France's GIAT industries is keen to showcase its Caesar self-propelled weapons system. Other possible contenders include Israeli Soltam's truck-mounted Atmos 2000 and a 20-tonne tracked Rascal self-propelled gun.
Singapore is likely to attract interest with its air-portable, semi-mobile Pegasus howitzer system."
OK folks, who reckons they have an idea of what is likely to be purchased?
There has been some grumbling over the years that the Korean K9 might have a leg in. Ex DefMin Hill was apparently quite taken with them. Wonder what Nelson thinks?
Wasn't a Bofors Archer unit paraded around the traps last year or the year before(?).
It was the K-9 Thunder, but the mere fact it was tested here, means nothing. The RFT hasn't even been released yet. The Caesar was tested here 2 years ago and the RFI documents and the requirement for "crew protection whilst firing" ruled out the "gun on a truck" solutions...
The BIG problem with the K-9 is that a second armoured vehicle, the "K-10" is required to accompany it. For every artillery piece, you need to acquire ANOTHER armoured vehicle.
Seems a bit pricey for the "least" capable of the vehicles offered...
But maybe that's just me...
Yep, Artillery wants "The modernised offensive support system will be characterised by responsiveness, high tactical mobility, greater autonomy and survivability. ", and 'survivability' means armour plating
THE Australian army expects to know within six months the outcome of a $600 million contract to buy new heavy artillery, including, for the first time, 155mm self-propelled guns.
Dubbed Land-17, the project is on track and a formal call for tenders is expected shortly, Chief of Army Peter Leahy said yesterday. Potential contenders for 155mm howitzers to replace Vietnam era big guns include firms from Israel, Singapore and France. Lieutenant-General Leahy said the army would get a mix of towed and self-propelled artillery.
"We're trying to get some prices and have a look at some equipment to see what we're getting for our money," he said.
"My preference would be for the self-propelled and have more of that rather than towed artillery. I think towards the middle of this year we should get a pretty good decision."
Contenders include the Bofors Archer truck-mounted 155mm system with a towable version as an option. France's GIAT industries is keen to showcase its Caesar self-propelled weapons system. Other possible contenders include Israeli Soltam's truck-mounted Atmos 2000 and a 20-tonne tracked Rascal self-propelled gun.
Singapore is likely to attract interest with its air-portable, semi-mobile Pegasus howitzer system."
OK folks, who reckons they have an idea of what is likely to be purchased?
There has been some grumbling over the years that the Korean K9 might have a leg in. Ex DefMin Hill was apparently quite taken with them. Wonder what Nelson thinks?
Wasn't a Bofors Archer unit paraded around the traps last year or the year before(?).
rb
Once again the "wide spread" media displays it's complete ignorance of the "real" goings on in defence. If it read the tender details and actually understood them it means that Caesar and ATMOS 2000 are ruled out immediately from competition.
A further understanding of the Kinnaird rules, whilst not completely ruling out Archer and G6, certainly puts them firmly into the "outsiders" camp. The choice will most likely come down to PZH-2000 and K-9, with Archer the most likely "outsider" (this is purely based on my opinion however)...
It's a bit hard to suggest which will win, when the tender hasn't even been released yet (ie: no-one has actually bid yet), though if I were a betting man, I'd be putting my money on PZH-2000...
THE Australian army expects to know within six months the outcome of a $600 million contract to buy new heavy artillery, including, for the first time, 155mm self-propelled guns.
Dubbed Land-17, the project is on track and a formal call for tenders is expected shortly, Chief of Army Peter Leahy said yesterday. Potential contenders for 155mm howitzers to replace Vietnam era big guns include firms from Israel, Singapore and France. Lieutenant-General Leahy said the army would get a mix of towed and self-propelled artillery.
I was interested to see Lieutenant-General Leahy's comments that the army will get a mix of self propelled and towed artillery.
What are the benefits of each type? I can see some obvious benefits in SP artillery (mobility and protection for the gun crew) but what can the towed guns do better (presuming they are both of the same calibre)? Apologies if this has been addressed earlier and I have missed it.
I was interested to see Lieutenant-General Leahy's comments that the army will get a mix of self propelled and towed artillery.
What are the benefits of each type? I can see some obvious benefits in SP artillery (mobility and protection for the gun crew) but what can the towed guns do better (presuming they are both of the same calibre)? Apologies if this has been addressed earlier and I have missed it.
I'm pretty sure a towed gun can be "man handled" and lifted by a helicopter better than an SPG...
A further understanding of the Kinnaird rules, whilst not completely ruling out Archer and G6, certainly puts them firmly into the "outsiders" camp. The choice will most likely come down to PZH-2000 and K-9, with Archer the most likely "outsider" (this is purely based on my opinion however)...
It's a bit hard to suggest which will win, when the tender hasn't even been released yet (ie: no-one has actually bid yet), though if I were a betting man, I'd be putting my money on PZH-2000...
A $1 BILLION strategy to tackle the defence recruiting crisis has been approved by federal cabinet.
Prime Minister John Howard today will announce plans to boost the army, navy and air force by 6000 men and women.
A major component will be spending $306 million over 10 years on a military "gap year" scheme that will allow up to 1000 17 to 24-year-olds each year to spend a year in the services within two years of finishing year 12. They would be able to taste the military lifestyle and training, and would not have to stay if they don't like it.
What are your thoughts? Personally, I applaud the government for shortening the general entry application time and I'd also like to see how far they relax the medical criteria, particularly when it comes to eyesight and orthotics.
Australian army was nothing but a coast guard the previous before John howard got in.This government has spent over 100 billon dollars in defence for capabilities and with another 100billon still to go.It wan't matter what prime minister is in ,they will have to keep up the motion.For the next election.tThis country has got goods tanks,bushranger,tiger.NH-90 helos,new guns,new artillary,new saterlite equipement,upgrades right across the board,
and so on. Hell I'M grateful to live in this country.Thank ADF.
From what you and AD have said I get the impression that the K-9 is not 'flavour of the month' as far as members with good knowledge of modern armoured warfare requiements are concerned.
In Post 83 AD said:
Quote:
The BIG problem with the K-9 is that a second armoured vehicle, the "K-10" is required to accompany it. For every artillery piece, you need to acquire ANOTHER armoured vehicle.
Seems a bit pricey for the "least" capable of the vehicles offered...
Are there other issues as well that make this weapon a 'dooooog'?
