They didn't bid
They didn't bid
I'm guessing that they already knew that as the Defender line was finishing off due to not meeting EU emissions regs that the contract wasn't worth pursuing for such a small market. Add in consideration for how much effort was needed to meet the 6x6 footprint and a lack of in-house recent relevant exp. (the JRA Landrovers were bastardised Australian developed landrovers - 50% Australian content including things like falcon brake boosters and MC, isuzu diesels etc,...)
The JRA structure had long gone, the Tenix acquisition of JRA didn't retain the old expertise etc etc......
IMO the mechanical and engineering gods were against them and they recognised it internally
as a sidebar, I was seconded to JRA for the Perentie Proj
http://www.unsealed4x4.com.au/issue...KA)&utm_campaign=Unsealed+4X4+034+-+Send+2#71
From memory, the Isuzu engines came from Japan?. Was some issue at the time about whether this violated Japan's prohibition of defence material exports.
Last edited:
seconded? From Defence or Landrover UK ?
nope, another federal department. I was asked to identify why their teams weren't performing even though all individually capable.
spent 4 weeks at Dry Creek watching, observing, then team leader retraining. I think it was probably the first time a private company paid for a public servant to be on site and assist with program issues
Was Phil Lawrence or Geoff McPherson Army project director at the time?
I never dealt with ADF, I dealt with JRA direct.
We also profiled their teams used for the Bushmaster submission and worked on structuring the teams who built the Kuwaiti "police cars"
It was basically a Unimog based version of the Bushmaster conceptI'm going back to the late eighties/ early nineties. Jack Heaven was the general manager at Moorebank at the time.I never dealt with ADF, I dealt with JRA direct.
We also profiled their teams used for the Bushmaster submission and worked on structuring the teams who built the Kuwaiti "police cars"
A question as to the way forward with the Tiger ARH while it remains in service with the ADF.
I ask this question as a lot has been said about the future of the ARH Tiger;its past, and also options for its replacement. All are important conversations but one that seems to be missing is what to do with the Tiger while it is still in service.
I feel it is an important question and one that gets missed with the emotions of blame and finger pointing attributed to this unsuccessful program.
The defence white paper has called for it's early retirement and we know there are important lessons to be learnt but what of today?
For all it's attributes and limitations the ARH tiger is Army's only in house armed attack helicopter option.
Today ,tomorrow next week,next month,next year and probably some years after, its option A.
So what do we do with the ARH Tiger.
Some speculative options
1 Disband 1st Aviation Regt and sell/dispose of the Tiger ASAP
2 Keep the Tiger and treat it as a training capability only as we transition to a new
system
3 Sell /Dispose of Tiger and transform 1st Aviation Regt to a helicopter transport
Squadron
4 Keep ARH Tiger as is and continue to train and build on the existing capabilities for the platform while we transition to it's eventual replacement.
Any other ideas would be much appreciated but please keep it a mature conversation without history lessons and slagging the current helicopter however much your tempted.
Regards S
I ask this question as a lot has been said about the future of the ARH Tiger;its past, and also options for its replacement. All are important conversations but one that seems to be missing is what to do with the Tiger while it is still in service.
I feel it is an important question and one that gets missed with the emotions of blame and finger pointing attributed to this unsuccessful program.
The defence white paper has called for it's early retirement and we know there are important lessons to be learnt but what of today?
For all it's attributes and limitations the ARH tiger is Army's only in house armed attack helicopter option.
Today ,tomorrow next week,next month,next year and probably some years after, its option A.
So what do we do with the ARH Tiger.
Some speculative options
1 Disband 1st Aviation Regt and sell/dispose of the Tiger ASAP
2 Keep the Tiger and treat it as a training capability only as we transition to a new
system
3 Sell /Dispose of Tiger and transform 1st Aviation Regt to a helicopter transport
Squadron
4 Keep ARH Tiger as is and continue to train and build on the existing capabilities for the platform while we transition to it's eventual replacement.
Any other ideas would be much appreciated but please keep it a mature conversation without history lessons and slagging the current helicopter however much your tempted.
Regards S
t68
Well-Known Member
Option 4 funds havnt been released yet for the replacement, but the funds are in place for training. Better to keep collective training until a firm decision has been made.
The discussion is moot to a degree because it is option 4. Tiger will be operated until it's replacement is chosen and phased out over time. Minor upgrades to it will improve capability until it is due to be replaced and I'm happy that is all the planned additional expenditure will result in.
the road runner
Active Member
Was on the M4 highway today and what did i see hooning down the road..??
Two Extenda MK2 spec ops vehicles pushing 80 km an hour ...the drivers had black motor bike helmets on .. Thought that was weird ..
Have these just been delivered to 2nd Commando ? Or have they been in service for a while.. I know they were on order..
Two Extenda MK2 spec ops vehicles pushing 80 km an hour ...the drivers had black motor bike helmets on .. Thought that was weird ..
Have these just been delivered to 2nd Commando ? Or have they been in service for a while.. I know they were on order..
some were delivered yonks ago. east and west
if they were wearing full face you've kind of answered your own question
Thanks T68 and ADMK2.
No one wants to throw good money after bad but are in favour of 4 myself at this stage.I do wonder if even for today if there is a place for any type of future Armed reconnaissance helicopter at all. Manned rotary flying close to the battlefront with todays technology and weapons systems may need to be handed to unmanned platforms.
Just a thought
Regards S
why is it a rumour? their rotation model is based on 4 - I spent about 4 years (recently) dealing with them on specific projects
Technically it hasn't been acknowledged from what I recall, But it is a unit that every one knows exists.
the 4th's existence isn't exactly privileged information - its what the 4 do in detail that is
ah, Cheers.
If I remember correctly an article I read years ago postulated that the 4th was primarily for African operations? But who knows. Could be a unit for a particular region or a unit with highly specialized set of skills used globally.