Australian Army Discussions and Updates

[vonnoobie]

Maybe so, but I did state 'for consideration'. I think in next 7-10yrs Aust will acquire this capability. I would have thought x1 battery - perm parked up north - would cover the entire continent.. Add in future upgrade to AWD's and that should cover most of the spectrum of loonies/threats

Your numbers are off. Just in the last week, U.S. congress approved the Lockheed contract on Lot 7 & 8 @ $528m USD. That's two batteries, as I understand.

Yes, I do agree the capability is expensive.


Cheers for response. You think as part of WP, Army will get more Bushmaster's?


Shame.

Would HURAAM system work with Bushmaster and/or JTLV? I must say, it ain't pretty..

Your right, Im off on the costing apologies.

As to the actual missile, I thought the THAAD's aim was to intercept the missile when it is reentering the atmosphere? If that is the case then simply having a single battery up north wont cut it as they would only be in position to defend locations such as Darwin, To make it of any use you would need a battery at each vital point which means most of our cities.

Darwin - US Marine base and our forward most base for which we could conduct operations from. - Prime target
Perth - Main naval base for the Indian ocean, regular US ship visits including aircraft carriers. - Prime target
Sydney - Another main naval base including our largest berth, key training and command facilities. - Prime target
Adelaide - Growing shipbuilding capability that would sustain most of the RAN. - Prime target
Melbourne - Large manufacturing base that supports all facets of the ADF while also being largest container port in Australia. - Prime target

You will need at least 5 batteries for any THAAD purchase to be of use, They are an area defence weapon only being able to intercept targets within there AO.

That is a lot of money to go into an asset that only has one use, Most other assets have duel use.

 

[t68]

Originally Posted by Nick underscore

You think as part of WP, Army will get more Bushmaster's?

I believe under an additional 49 Bushmaster vehicles were bought as a well extra 122 Mercedes-Benz G-Wagon vehicles. but have no idea if these have been delivered as yet.

As far as I am aware both Bushmaster and Hawkei PMV-L are to be built at Bendigo

I got an line on the bushies production it was expected that the line would close in 2012/13, but on 8 July 2013 Ministers approved for LAND 121 , the re-design and upgrade of 49 Bushmaster vehicles at Thales’ Bendigo plant for use as general maintenance vehicles for the medium and heavy vehicle fleet, at a cost of $20.7 million.

It was also interesting to find out that the additional order for 256 Bushmasters back in 2008 for $382.6 million came at the expense the light/lightweight and medium and heavy vehicles under LAND 121 Phase 3 and by an ANAO report has “already created significant challenges in acquiring the required capability” Raven may have more input on how this will affect Defence.

 

[Nick underscore]

Your right, Im off on the costing apologies.

..You will need at least 5 batteries for any THAAD purchase to be of use, They are an area defence weapon only being able to intercept targets within there AO.

That is a lot of money to go into an asset that only has one use, Most other assets have duel use.

The U.S only plans to have x7 operational THAAD batt's.

x3 forward deployed (Guam, S.K & Diego) and x3 on the U.S. continent as a rotation force. The 7th is designated as a “global response force.”.. So not sure we need x5..

Looking forward over the next 10-15yrs, Darwin IMV, is the only target (land-based launch) and for obvious reasons, once the U.S. Marine deployment steps up in personnel numbers (+2k) - Unless of course we become involved in a conflict with a major power (China, Russia etc), which is highly doubtful, even on this level.

 

[Nick underscore]

I got an line on the bushies production it was expected that the line would close in 2012/13, but on 8 July 2013 Ministers approved for LAND 121 , the re-design and upgrade of 49 Bushmaster vehicles at Thales’ Bendigo plant for use as general maintenance vehicles for the medium and heavy vehicle fleet, at a cost of $20.7 million.

It was also interesting to find out that the additional order for 256 Bushmasters back in 2008 for $382.6 million came at the expense the light/lightweight and medium and heavy vehicles under LAND 121 Phase 3 and by an ANAO report has “already created significant challenges in acquiring the required capability” Raven may have more input on how this will affect Defence.

Cheers t68.

I was scanning the ANAO releases looking for the breakdown on numbers across the variants. The numbers must increase further, as they're looking at increasing the number of EW types (+24), along with some 'repair' types (which I'm unclear in detail).

 

[t68]

Cheers t68.

I was scanning the ANAO releases looking for the breakdown on numbers across the variants. The numbers must increase further, as they're looking at increasing the number of EW types (+24), along with some 'repair' types (which I'm unclear in detail).

http://www.anao.gov.au/~/media/Files/Audit Reports/2014 2015/Report 52/AuditReport_2014-2015_52.pdf

page 47 gives a run down

Recovery vehicles are still conceptual at time of release, command post is modular meaning it should be able to placed any vehicle of required capacity, I imagine that is what you are referring to in in EW as I did not see any particular reference to it ( that's not to say its not there I just might have missed it)

But Hawkie has electronic warfare capabilities is this what you were referring to?

 

[Nick underscore]

http://www.anao.gov.au/~/media/Files/Audit Reports/2014 2015/Report 52/AuditReport_2014-2015_52.pdf

page 47 gives a run down

Recovery vehicles are still conceptual at time of release, command post is modular meaning it should be able to placed any vehicle of required capacity, I imagine that is what you are referring to in in EW as I did not see any particular reference to it ( that's not to say its not there I just might have missed it )

Actually I wasn't very clear in my previous post - I meant for the Bushmaster variants, not Land 121 ph3B. Cheers though.

Found your ref on pg83 regarding the x49 Bushmaster's re-designed for mdm/hvy vehicle fleet use

 

[Raven22]

I got an line on the bushies production it was expected that the line would close in 2012/13, but on 8 July 2013 Ministers approved for LAND 121 , the re-design and upgrade of 49 Bushmaster vehicles at Thales’ Bendigo plant for use as general maintenance vehicles for the medium and heavy vehicle fleet, at a cost of $20.7 million.

It was also interesting to find out that the additional order for 256 Bushmasters back in 2008 for $382.6 million came at the expense the light/lightweight and medium and heavy vehicles under LAND 121 Phase 3 and by an ANAO report has “already created significant challenges in acquiring the required capability” Raven may have more input on how this will affect Defence.

Trucks don't excite me, so I have no idea about anything to do with LAND 121. The last couple of purchases of Bushmaster were purely to keep the Bendigo line alive though, so it wouldn't surprise me if other programs suffered because of it.

Even when they stop making Bushmasters, the line will stay busy doing upgrades. All the Bushmasters are being digitised, so that is a huge amount of work putting in the new battlefield management system, radios and radio stacks, aerials, bigger alternator, re-arranging the seating arrangements in some variants etc. They are all receiving a protection upgrade as well, based on lessons learned from Afghan. There's a few other upgrades happening as well, like a power management system for all vehicles and an APU for some (because the new digitised variants chew through battery power incredibly quickly).

There's enough pork there to keep Bendigo from whinging for a while. By then Hawkei will be the name of the game, and when that is finished the Bushie will probably need replacement.

 

[t68]

Trucks don't excite me, so I have no idea about anything to do with LAND 121. The last couple of purchases of Bushmaster were purely to keep the Bendigo line alive though, so it wouldn't surprise me if other programs suffered because of it.

Even when they stop making Bushmasters, the line will stay busy doing upgrades. All the Bushmasters are being digitised, so that is a huge amount of work putting in the new battlefield management system, radios and radio stacks, aerials, bigger alternator, re-arranging the seating arrangements in some variants etc. They are all receiving a protection upgrade as well, based on lessons learned from Afghan. There's a few other upgrades happening as well, like a power management system for all vehicles and an APU for some (because the new digitised variants chew through battery power incredibly quickly).

There's enough pork there to keep Bendigo from whinging for a while. By then Hawkei will be the name of the game, and when that is finished the Bushie will probably need replacement.

Cheers thanks for that,

I guess I lean to it a bit more being ex RACT but have no any direct links with Defence since the demise of DAS Distribution(government transport) under Howard back in the 90's

with all these new vehicles flowing thru with automatic and air-con seems a far cry from when I first joined and the old International F1 General Service fleet and on one occasion being so hot we had to take the cowling off to cool the fuel lines to stop the fuel from evaporating

 

[vonnoobie]

The U.S only plans to have x7 operational THAAD batt's.

x3 forward deployed (Guam, S.K & Diego) and x3 on the U.S. continent as a rotation force. The 7th is designated as a “global response force.”.. So not sure we need x5..

You are comparing it on a population basis which while having a part to play does not tell the full story. Australia and the US are similar in size, So require multiple batteries (if we ever get them, thats a big If) to protect our respective holdings. You shouldnt assume Darwin would be the sole target, It may be the closest to any attack but it is far from the most valuable so there is no way you can say that it would be the only target. You hit Darwin you take a few thousand marines, a hand full of patrol boats and maybe a visiting warship out, You hit Perth or Sydney and you could conceivable take out half our navy in either strike and a sizeable support network that maintains them while hitting melbourne would cause the single biggest hit to international trade with it being our largest container port.

That all aside you dont also take into account the US has a layered defence, Aegis, THAAD, Patriots.

It all comes down to you either do it right or dont do it at all.

 

[Raven22]

It's all moot anyway - we're not getting any form of land based ballistic defence. The cost (which obviously extends far beyond the cost of the launchers) would be far too great. The only way I could see it being feasible would be if we let the yanks base some of their own here (if for some reason they wanted to) but even that would be fraught with political peril.

Even if things drastically changed, and Australia did aquire something like THAAD, it would make far more sense for it to be operated by the RAAF than the army. The RAAF have a far better ability to operate and sustain high technology systems, they have sensors and command centres that enable them to monitor the airspace around Australia while the army has none, and they have the infrastructure and personnel to operate from fixed bases (whereas the army doesn't - they deploy into the field to fight and aren't tied to infrastructure).

IMO such a highly technical and specialist capability is better operated by the specialist personnel of the RAAF than the the generalists in the Army.

 

[vonnoobie]

It's all moot anyway - we're not getting any form of land based ballistic defence. The cost (which obviously extends far beyond the cost of the launchers) would be far too great. The only way I could see it being feasible would be if we let the yanks base some of their own here (if for some reason they wanted to) but even that would be fraught with political peril.

Even if things drastically changed, and Australia did aquire something like THAAD, it would make far more sense for it to be operated by the RAAF than the army. The RAAF have a far better ability to operate and sustain high technology systems, they have sensors and command centres that enable them to monitor the airspace around Australia while the army has none, and they have the infrastructure and personnel to operate from fixed bases (whereas the army doesn't - they deploy into the field to fight and aren't tied to infrastructure).

IMO such a highly technical and specialist capability is better operated by the specialist personnel of the RAAF than the the generalists in the Army.

Like +1

 

[roodini5]

Heart issue, ADF recruiting advice needed.

Hello all. Never posted anywhere before, hope I'm doing this right. If unrelated to what you are all talking about, sorry. Please direct me to where these questions are answered! Hoping to return home to Australia in the next couple of years, I'm 40, want to join army and discovered I have a bicuspid aortic valve, and being considered for valve replacement. Am I totally shot for recruitment? What about reserves? Any advice would be appreciated.Thanks

 

[t68]

Hello all. Never posted anywhere before, hope I'm doing this right. If unrelated to what you are all talking about, sorry. Please direct me to where these questions are answered! Hoping to return home to Australia in the next couple of years, I'm 40, want to join army and discovered I have a bicuspid aortic valve, and being considered for valve replacement. Am I totally shot for recruitment? What about reserves? Any advice would be appreciated.Thanks

I would imagine that it would be the same medical standards for both ARA/GRES as they expect a lot out of them now.

 

[ADMk2]

Hello all. Never posted anywhere before, hope I'm doing this right. If unrelated to what you are all talking about, sorry. Please direct me to where these questions are answered! Hoping to return home to Australia in the next couple of years, I'm 40, want to join army and discovered I have a bicuspid aortic valve, and being considered for valve replacement. Am I totally shot for recruitment? What about reserves? Any advice would be appreciated.Thanks

I'm no Doctor, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say unfortunately I think you'll be struggling with that sort of condition...

My advice, get your health sorted, get fit, move back to Australia and then enquire via Find jobs in the Navy, Army and Air Force - Defence Jobs Australia

Best of luck.

 

[Stampede]

Cheers thanks for that,

I guess I lean to it a bit more being ex RACT but have no any direct links with Defence since the demise of DAS Distribution(government transport) under Howard back in the 90's

with all these new vehicles flowing thru with automatic and air-con seems a far cry from when I first joined and the old International F1 General Service fleet and on one occasion being so hot we had to take the cowling off to cool the fuel lines to stop the fuel from evaporating

T68
Spent a couple of years in a reserve units transport platoon in the mid 80's.
If I recall the Mk3 internationals did have air condictioning in that they had sliding door windows and a roof hatch on the passenger side.!!!!!!
Recal there was a trick used by some about using a tac plate to regulate fuel air mix on the carb on hot days to keep things going. Alot of multi tasking in the drivers cab to keep old trucks moving. They looked and sounded like real trucks and remember some happy days moving diggers and stuff from A to B while the army transitioned to what was then the new unimog's.
Regards S

 

[meatshield]

Can anyone tell me what the army does with the old artillery pieces now we have the M777. Do we give them away or do we keep them in storage?

 

[ADMk2]

Can anyone tell me what the army does with the old artillery pieces now we have the M777. Do we give them away or do we keep them in storage?

All disposals of military equipment are conducted by the Australian Military Sales office.

Disposals are managed in accordance with the range of legislative, policy and treaty obligations that we are a party too.

With US equipment (such as M198's) they are also subject to ITARS regulations and disposals have to be managed in co-operation with the US.

As such they are most likely in storage whilst that process is undertaken and as a strategic 'back up' for some period of time as defined by DoD requirements.

 

[meatshield]

So we could drag them out if the need arises. Nice to know.

Thanks

 

[vonnoobie]

Can anyone tell me what the army does with the old artillery pieces now we have the M777. Do we give them away or do we keep them in storage?

I dont think they will be in any rush to offload them, Keeping them as reservist artillery/training allows more deployment options for the M777's should the need arise.

 

[roodini5]

I would imagine that it would be the same medical standards for both ARA/GRES as they expect a lot out of them now.

Thanks. It does seem that way from the defence jobs website.