Australian Army Discussions and Updates

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
ESSM is an international Consortium.

Manufacturing has been spread across the international body deliberately, nobody, not even the US fully produces the entire missile, although Raytheon US is responsible for the final product integration and delivery.
I think that is a problem for Australia and the US as well, because the of big blue wobbly bits that exist either side of the US and having to transport various parts from geographically different regions for assembly. That's all well and good in peace time, however in wartime that most likely will not be the most practical of solutions. If the RAN and the USN PACFLT cannot resupply with ESSM, because of overly extended supply lines due to consortium manufacturing protocols, they're going to be in deep shit with empty ESSM VLS cells and nothing to reload with. Yes you can build war stocks, but nobody knows how quickly those war stocks will be exhausted. IIRC, during WW2 the learnings were that war stocks were exhausted quicker than pre-war planning had allowed for. And we haven't had a proper peer on peer war since WW2.
 

CB90

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I think that is a problem for Australia and the US as well, because the of big blue wobbly bits that exist either side of the US and having to transport various parts from geographically different regions for assembly. That's all well and good in peace time, however in wartime that most likely will not be the most practical of solutions. If the RAN and the USN PACFLT cannot resupply with ESSM, because of overly extended supply lines due to consortium manufacturing protocols, they're going to be in deep shit with empty ESSM VLS cells and nothing to reload with. Yes you can build war stocks, but nobody knows how quickly those war stocks will be exhausted. IIRC, during WW2 the learnings were that war stocks were exhausted quicker than pre-war planning had allowed for. And we haven't had a proper peer on peer war since WW2.
Raytheon US owns the design, so I have little doubt that if the crap hit the fan, they could figure something out with alternate sources. Unfortunately, that would take time.

The bigger issues honestly is simply just basic factory throughout. Most missile manufacturers simply aren’t tooled up to make enough to replace wartime use - they scale their production to put a system in full service over many years and limited to replenishing planned test/training firing only. So inventory has to be stockpiled for that expected wartime use, even if estimating is hard. Expecting factories to simply ramp up production of a war kicks off on short notice is not going to be realistic.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Raytheon US owns the design, so I have little doubt that if the crap hit the fan, they could figure something out with alternate sources. Unfortunately, that would take time.

The bigger issues honestly is simply just basic factory throughout. Most missile manufacturers simply aren’t tooled up to make enough to replace wartime use - they scale their production to put a system in full service over many years and limited to replenishing planned test/training firing only. So inventory has to be stockpiled for that expected wartime use, even if estimating is hard. Expecting factories to simply ramp up production of a war kicks off on short notice is not going to be realistic.
Yep I understand that and that was what happened in WW2, but the US was able to ramp up quicker than the UK because the US went straight into production line manufacture whereas the UK was basically still doing piecework type manufacturing where everything was hand built. That even went on to some degree after WW2, and that affected production rates and maintenance.

However back then the US had a tremendous industrial capacity, but unfortunately it doesn't have anywhere like the same capacity these days. Times have changed and a lot of the design and manufacturing processes are digital so that can be transferred easily, plus some parts can be 3D printed. Unless its shipbuilding in Canada and they don't do electronic plans and drawings. They still do paper ones. A Kiwi company sent wiring diagrams for the ANZAC frigates to the Canadians for the frigate upgrades and the Kiwi drawings were all electronic having gone electronic years ago. The Canadians wouldn't accept them, saying that they had to be on paper because they don't use electronic drawings at all. Kiwi company shakes its heads in disbelief.
 

swerve

Super Moderator
Yep I understand that and that was what happened in WW2, but the US was able to ramp up quicker than the UK because the US went straight into production line manufacture whereas the UK was basically still doing piecework type manufacturing where everything was hand built. ...
I recall reading of one of the biggest British car manufacturers getting involved in military production during WW2, & telling the military producer it was making stuff for that it had a problem with tolerances. The customer misunderstood, thinking the mass-producer of civvie stuff was unused to the precision of arms manufacturers. Exactly the opposite way round: the car maker was accustomed to everything slotting together on the assembly line & was being driven crazy by parts that didn't. There was no provision for filing to fit in their process.

I think British aircraft & AFV makers were all working on more or less craft principles pre-war. Their production volumes were low & they'd never had to think in terms of mass production.
 

Bradbad

New Member
Seeing as though you are so interested in ‘facts’ phase 2 was a part of LAND 17. That was indeed a project to acquire a self-propelled howitzer for the Australian Army. That project was cancelled however in favour of an additional purchase of M777A2 lightweight towed guns, by the then Labor Government,

Project LAND 8116 - Mobile Protected Fires, has since been re-raised by the current Government under the new Defence ‘smart buyer’ procurement policies, as a sole-source selection.

G-6 was never shortlisted for Australia. Bid yes, but not short-listed. PZH-2000 and K9 were. Add to which it hasn’t been in production for many years as I understand it and has no integration with our BMS, C2 systems nor our new artillery ammunition supply (Assegai)...

It is so far away from being a realistic prospect for Australia it is laughable.
Glad this irony is not lost you lot..

G-6 was never shortlisted for Australia. Bid yes, but not short-listed. PZH-2000 and K9 were. Add to which it hasn’t been in production for many years as I understand it and has no integration with our BMS, C2 systems nor our new artillery ammunition supply (Assegai)...
 

Bradbad

New Member
Probably many many times in WW2 I would imagine. There would have been plenty of times that P.O.Ws or surrendering Japanese troops were shot. I am not excusing the murders, particularly the “blooding” of green troops, but this whole reaction stinks.
When the Iranian General was killed in Iraq recently, the driver was “murdered”. When an F18 hits a target with a 2000lb bomb, civvies inevitably are killed.
The SAS put them selves in dangerous patrols to capture persons of interest, then a week later that same person is caught again, and again. The innocent victims of these crimes may well have been known targets to the patrols. Bit like how the Brit SAS took annual leave in Northern Ireland to “sort things out”.
The biggest crime is social media and trial by the media.
Reckon this is a pedantic, slap on wrist styled hunt, which cannot bring anything but shame. Once again making the West seem duplicitous, hypocrites like Trump and his Electoral College win making a mockery of democracies. The right thing to do but wrong to enforce.
 

Bradbad

New Member
IIRC the Spike ER or LR missile is going to being license built in Australia. Since the manufacturing capability is being set up for that, then it may be feasible to use that facility to license build the ESSM Blk 2.
If any missile like that should be license-built in Australia it should be the Ingwe missile and Mokopa missiles from South Africa 's Denel Dynamics
Mokopa | Denel Dynamics

Yeah just buy South African cheaper and better..
 

Bradbad

New Member
Yes I think the Block I ESSM was tested with NASAMS years ago, so it would seem like a no-brainer to integrate the active Block II version. Strikes me as a more sensible weapon for the job than AMRAAM, which is a bit of an awkward fit in the SAM role.
For an advanced BVRAAM we should look at Denel's Marlin (100km range) missile, a new iteration of the V -Darter developed in partnership with Brazil...... an Mkhonto GBL will have this add on as well.
 

Bradbad

New Member
Found this article about the upgrade plans for the K9 SPH to unmanned. Still a fair way off but how closely exactly will the AS9 be to the K9. is it an exact version or will the AS9 have Aussie modifications?

The next upgrade, to what’s been dubbed the K9A2, will include an unmanned turret with a fully-automatic ammunition loading and handling system, which will increase the rate of fire and reduce the number of crew needed onboard, he added.- by 2040

Hell the world and his oyster could be delivered by then. whereas the G _6 Rhino of SPH of which only 150 ever built would currently obliterate the K9 and pZH 2000 till about 2030. The K9 with its auto loading side kick which will double its weight , length and cost is just not feasible and laughable. THis from a country supposedly an ally , yet maligned by institutions and countries it helped save countless lives. with its IP. Mainly through its MRAP technology is sickening.
1985 crew 5 vs 2020 crew 3
range 1985 55 km vs 2020 76km
vehicle range 700km -K 9 500km
vehicle speed top 90km/h - K-9 70km/h
2030?
2040??????????"??"??":
 
Last edited:

alexsa

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Good day and welcome to the Forum

I note you attraction to South African kit and agree they have produced some interesting gear. However, you need to justify your claims as to why the gear is better. In respect of the G6 you need to explain how it would 'obliterate' the K9 rather than just being flippant and demeaning.

The folk responding to you have experience in this area. Can you please justify how you are qualified to make the claims you make.

If you are not qualified you need to moderate your remarks.

A response is expected.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Mokopa | Denel Dynamics

Yeah just buy South African cheaper and better..
3 warning points issued for 6 months, for failure to provide a source that proves the Mokopa missile is cheaper and better.

One, let me provide some facts, links to more data and guidance, for your consideration. And before I continue, let me start with my apologies for the long correction to follow.

Two, please take the time to read the Forum Rules, which are enforced for forum hygiene.

Three, @Bradbad, the long ranged Mokopa anti-tank missile is NOT cheaper, and is NOT better, for Australia, when you factor in total cost of ownership, platform integration and range safety costs — to be explained in 6 sub-points below:
1. Denel Dynamics itself acknowledges that Mokopa is not a cheap missile, when compared to the Ingwe (as Mokopa was originally developed to be fired from about 10km away from the Rooivalk helicopter). But this long range needs to be supported by other UAV sensors (to complete the targeting cycle). Without a proper CONOPS supported by ISR, it’s not effective to deploy weapons with over 10km range from the launch platform.​

(i) In some cases, South African kit is not cheaper, simply because Denel Dynamics does not have the local production volume to enable it to fully compete in the international arms market.​
(ii) The Australian Army is a sophisticated buyer and they witness first-hand the live-firing of Spike missiles in Shoalwater Bay Training Area in Queensland, Australia.​
(iii) With 5,000 missiles fired, the Spike family of anti-tank and anti-structure missiles come at different price points and have slight differences in not only sighting system used, range, but also in the generation of seeker head technology used (depending buyer specification in ten product lines).​
2. The Spike family of missiles are in use by 26 different countries — deployed in helicopters, in boats, in IFVs, in APCs, in heli-mobile light strike vehicles, and dismounted infantry — it is a market leader — including NLOS (25km surface to surface range, with anti-ship capability), ER 2 (10km surface to surface range, with anti-ship capability), LR II (5.5km range) and SR (1.8km range).​

3. Please make an effort to be clear, which member of the Spike family of missiles you are looking at (relative to the Mokopa). The most demanding of which is found in the Spike NLOS and the most expensive. This 25km ranged Spike NLOS system is in use in Azerbaijan, Israel and South Korea — and in Korea, they deployed close to the NLL, as an alternative to traditional artillery (to deliver precise battlefield effects), for counter battery purposes to defend remote South Korean islands near the NLL against North Korean artillery.​
(i) In certain mission sets, like SEAD, the Spike NLOS is better than the Mokopa, as it enables passive target engagement (with no laser emission, radar signals or GPS-dependence).​
(ii) The US Army procured a limited number of Spike NLOS missiles for its AH-64Es, after successful tests in Israel and at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona. In 2019, 6 multidomain operations-relevant shots were fired in these NLOS tests, including one where a AH-64E hid behind 1,600 feet of craggy mountain and took take aim at a target representing a Russian Pantsir medium-range, surface-to-air missile system on the opposite slope.​

4. The 9.6kg Spike SR, with an effective range of 50-1500 meters, is surprisingly affordable — when the costs of night sights is factored in. The Spike SR is designed to be superior in meeting specific user operational needs. In the case of the Singapore Army’s infantry battalions, the Spike SR is used to replace the 84mm RR (as a company support weapon), which is a different mission from the ATGM platoon (equipped with the Spike LR II). Singapore’s DSTA reviewed the Spike SR’s safety design and introduced a two-layer flight termination system as an added safety precaution. Having the ability to conduct local live-firing of the SPIKE SR without sending troops and equipment overseas achieve significant cost avoidance in terms of logistics and operating costs.​

5. When ground launched, the top attack capable SPIKE LR II has a range of 5.5 km, giving Singapore’s ATGM platoons (which are heliport-able in the Mark 2, Light Strike Vehicles), the ability to kill enemy armour at ranges that these 7SIB ATGM platoons cannot see on the ground. When air launched, the SPIKE LR II enables Singapore’s Apaches the ability to attack targets 10km away from the helicopter. When attacking moving or fleeting targets at such ranges, the targeting info at the FEBA is not from the helicopter but provided via SATCOM from another ISR platform like the IAI Heron 1 UAV; with IAI/ELTA's EL/K-1891 Ku-band network, and an integrated EW system installed, Singapore’s upgraded AH-64Ds can take NLOS missile shots from really far away.​

6. Numerous IFV types (including Singapore’s Hunter IFV) are armed with twin SPIKE LR II missile launchers, that includes missiles in 2 warhead configurations:​
(i) a Tandem HEAT warhead configuration, enhancing the armor penetration capability of the SPIKE missile by more than 30%; and​
(ii) a multipurpose blast warhead, which includes controlled fusing (by the gunner) for control of the desired effect.​
 
Last edited:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Hell the world and his oyster could be delivered by then.

whereas the G _6 Rhino of SPH of which only 150 ever built would currently obliterate the K9 and pZH 2000 till about 2030...

The K9 with its auto loading side kick which will double its weight , length and cost is just not feasible and laughable.

This from a country supposedly an ally, yet maligned by institutions and countries it helped save countless lives with its IP, mainly through its MRAP technology is sickening.
3 more warning points, for poor behaviour. Let me share 4 points below, to help you rethink your current mode of engagement.

One, I agree that South Africa developed innovative TTPs, along with interesting artillery concepts during the Rhodesian Bush War (1965–1979); and the South African Border War (1966–1989), from which the modern MRAP concept took root. When deployed in 1978, the Buffel (Afrikaans for Buffalo) was really innovative for its time; and by Operation Moduler in Aug 1987, the G5’s superior range was used with great effect in battle.

Two, it does not mean the forum’s senior members have to approve of your unsolicited thrash talking about Korean weapon designs, like the K-9A1 (and the K10 AARV) when trying to illogically compare it to G-6, which is mounted on a chassis made by Alvis OMC (part of BAE). The G6 is in service with the South African Army (43 – GV6 Rhino) and exported to the UAE (78 – G6 M1A3) and Oman (24). The volume of responsive fire that can be delivered by the K-9A1 and K10 as a system, can’t be matched by the G-6. Hanwha has delivered an estimated 1,300 of these tracked systems since 1999.

Project LAND 8116 - Mobile Protected Fires, has since been re-raised by the current Government under the new Defence ‘smart buyer’ procurement policies, as a sole-source selection.

G-6 was never shortlisted for Australia. Bid yes, but not short-listed. PZH-2000 and K9 were.

It is so far away from being a realistic prospect for Australia it is laughable.
(a) As ADMk2 said, it is understandable why the G-6 was never shortlisted for Australia. South Africa’s G-5 (1981) and G-6 (1987) 155mm artillery guns were innovative when developed; but these are no longer as competitive, as China’s Norinco, Korea’s Hanwha or France’s Nexter Caesar 155mm offerings, that eat Denel’s lunch, in the ultra light towed howitzer, tracked SPH, and wheeled SPH, market segments. While Denel have known niches in howitzers and specialised 155mm ammo (through their JV Rheinmetall Denel Munition), they are no longer seen as cutting edge, when we examine what is available in the market.​
(i) For Australia, Rheinmetall’s 155mm Assegai rounds that comprises of insensitive munitions, conventional HE rounds, smoke/obscurant, illumination, infrared/illumination and other projectiles —meets their needs. In ballistic terms, all members of the Assegai family are identical. This assures that they are all able to attain their full range of around 40km. Standard Assegai rounds feature a conventional boat tail assembly. To boost their range, the customer can replace this assembly with a base bleed module, even under field conditions. With a barrel length of 39 calibres, an Assegai BB projectile attains a range of over 30 kilometres. Fired from a 52-calibre barrel, the range can exceed 40 kilometres.​
(ii) In the low end 155mm ammo segment, India’s OFB has emerged as a low cost supplier, winning an order of 50,000 artillery shells from UAE. In the high end 155mm ammo segment:​
  • the M982 Excalibur (with a CEP of 3.8m, at any range, that costs an incredible US$68k per round); or
  • the cheaper M1156 Precision Guidance Kit (with a CEP of 10 m) by Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems (formerly known as Orbital ATK); or
  • the Bundeswehr’s DM702 (also known as the SMArt®155 sensor-fuse munition),
— all these can be fired from any 155mm gun, and winning most of the orders by value. Even the Indians placed an order of 1,200 M982 Excalibur precision-guided artillery shells from the US. In Dec 2018, the US Army placed a $70.7 million order for Increment Ib projectiles; and in 2020 a $85.7 million order.​
(iii) The late Gerald Bull’s sale of 30,000 artillery shells, and plans for the GC-45 howitzer to Armscor of Pretoria, South Africa made the country famous. Bull’s designs used in the G5 assured South Africa’s place as a leader in specialised 155mm ammo types, like the extended range full bore rounds, or base bleed rounds (HE- ER-BB projectiles) but there are now too many me-too suppliers in this market. Today, it is Rheinmetall Denel Munition (RDM), produces ammo for South Africa — and RDM is 51% owned by Rheinmetall.​
(iv) In 2018, the Americans were able to double the range of a modified M777 by adding a supercharged propellant and the XM1113 rocket-assisted projectile, which takes a 155mm round and extends its range to 60 km by providing rocket-assist capability. In Mar 2020 at Yuma, the US Army fired — from a 155mm/58-caliber gun — an Excalibur extended-range guided artillery shell and an XM1113 using supercharged propellant. The near-term objective on the American ERCA program is to deliver 6 batteries of the ERCA towed howitzer in FY2023.
(iv) Concurrently, the Dutch and Americans are developing a ramjet-powered artillery round, called the XM1155 Extended-Range Artillery Projectile (ERAP). The Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research (known by the Dutch acronym, TNO), is responsible for developing the ramjet engine. Raytheon will then integrate the TNO ramjet into the rest of the projectile. ERAP will have a range greater than 100km. Likewise, Norway’s Nammo is also working on something similar.​
(b) If you go to trade shows, Denel is promoting the dated G6 155 mm/45 calibre gun (the most common type of G-6) and not the longer range version. The G-6 in very limited numbers, has been further developed to a 155mm/52-calibre gun for South Africa.​
(i) When talking about max range, fan boys tend to talk about ordinance fired from a special G6-52 extended range gun (25 litre chamber) but G6 155mm marketing is concentrated on the 23 litre chamber, which meets the NATO Joint Ballistic Memorandum of Understanding (JBMoU).​
(ii) The UAE deployed Denel G5 155 mm/45 calibre towed gun-howitzers to Yemen; but these were too heavy for some missions. The G5 weighs about 14 tonnes, while Norinco’s AH4 weighs 4.5 tonnes. Unlike the South African gun, the AH4 can be underslung by UAE’s CH-47Fs. Norinco has incorporated base bleed and rocket assistance into their 155mm shells.The UAE has also taken delivery of Norinco GP6 laser-guided 155 mm projectile, which the Chinese company says has a range of 6 km to 25 km (with a first round hit probability of at least 90%), before adding base bleed to replace the boat tail.​
(iii) If we are looking at production run wheeled platforms, Japan’s Type 19 Wheeled SPH (based on a MAN HX77 military truck in 8x8 configuration) or Israel’s Elbit Soltam ATMOS 2000 (6x6 truck configuration) are both 155 mm/52-calibre guns that are automated and relatively trouble free. The Type 19 and ATMOS is under production for Japan and the Philippines, respectively. The commercially successful Nexter Caesar is sold in both 6x6 and 8x8 configuration, with:​
  • the Danish Army acquiring 19 units of 8x8 of Caesar self propelled howitzers; and
  • the Czech Republic in negotiations to acquire 52 units of Caesar 8x8 self-propelled howitzers.
It is disingenuous to talk about how great the G-6 is when there are far more modern and trouble free designs that require less maintenance in the market.​
(iv) The G-6 is a wheeled platform, whereas the Australian Land 8116 requirements is for a tracked 155mm/52-caliber weapon. The AS9 SPH is intended to meet the requirements of JBMoU.​

Three, in Sep 2020, it was reported that the Request for Tender will be released to preferred supplier Hanwha Defence Australia (HDA) to build and maintain 30 self-propelled howitzers and 15 armoured ammunition resupply vehicles, and their supporting systems.

Four, for Land 8116, Hanwha has developed the Huntsman Family of Vehicles, comprising the K9 SPH and the K10 Armoured Ammunition Resupply Vehicle (AARV) to deliver a complete mission system. These will be designated as the AS9 SPH and the AS10 AARV respectively for the Australian market. The Huntsman AS9 155mm/52 calibre SPH is a 50 tonne platform that uses 155mm munitions under JBMoU. It has a crew of 4 or 5, with an ammunition capacity of up to 48 rounds and it’s modular charge systems.
 
Last edited:

Boagrius

Well-Known Member
My thoughts as well. Pair it up with 30mm programmable airbursting AHEAD style ammunition and perhaps successor-to-stinger and you have a very compelling VSHORAD platform, possibly with handy C-RAM and C-UAV capabilities to boot.
 

Stampede

Well-Known Member
On an unrelated note, I saw this elsewhere and thought it might pique the interest of Army.
Could be fitted to a Lynx (if selected for L400 Ph3) or Boxer chassis to provide a handy mobile VSHORAD capability to maneuver forces.
1200 RPM appears high for a single barrel.
If correct, as a unit with coupled with VSHORAD it would appear a very useful system.
I wonder if it would have appeal as a naval system on small to medium vessels.


Regards S
 

aussienscale

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
1200 RPM appears high for a single barrel.
If correct, as a unit with coupled with VSHORAD it would appear a very useful system.
I wonder if it would have appeal as a naval system on small to medium vessels.


Regards S
The Oerlikon Skyranger system has been around for some time, and yes it pumps out at a pretty fair rate of knots ! The Boxer modules have been of much interest, just my thoughts, but figure there are several reasons Boxer won !



Cheers
 

Boagrius

Well-Known Member
Yep, IIRC the base 35mm Millenium gun does ~1000 RPM, so 1200 for the 30mm sounds plausible. The advantages being same calibre as Boxer/Lynx, more stored kills for C-RAM and UAV/loitering munition swarms, plus the MANPADS, which we should be looking at for infantry too IMO.
 
Last edited:
Top