Australian Army Discussions and Updates

Navor86

Member
Thanks fo the reply. Are those changes published in any open source material(like the mentioned lwd 3-3-7), or does this fall under the classified category?
 

Raven22

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
The basic structure certainly isn’t classified, although I’m not aware of anywhere it is published. I’m willing to bet that it appeared in the infantry magazine a few years ago, but I don’t think they have digital editions you can search. There was an article on the Cove about DFSW platoon last year which might have something about it (although from memory there was a lot in the article I disagreed with).
 

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I see the “Australian’s” Ben Packham has again bagged Defence.
This time it’s L400 Ph3. He has suggested that soldiers are at risk and the taxpayer will be burned because the acquisition process has not included a “reliability” trial.
He then likens it to the early Bushmaster experience where he stated that they only achieved on average 200 hrs between breakdowns.
This bloke really needs some serious “attitude adjustment” although I guess that remedy is no longer allowed in a new woke world.
 
Last edited:

Stampede

Well-Known Member
That website seems both out of date and wrong.

Under the old organisation, each infantry platoon did have its own manoeuvre support section, however they had nothing to do with DFSW platoon that was part of support company. They belonged to the platoon commander, although they could be grouped at company level to create a manoeuvre support platoon if the mission dictated.

Under the new organisation (which looks suspiciously similar to the old old organisation), the platoons have lost their manoeuvre support sections, with there being just one at company level again. DFSW platoon still exists unchanged as part of support company.
Is the Company DFSW Platoon, actually a platoon in size or more an enhanced section circa 1980's.

Just curious


Regards S
 

buffy9

Active Member
That website seems both out of date and wrong.

Under the old organisation, each infantry platoon did have its own manoeuvre support section, however they had nothing to do with DFSW platoon that was part of support company. They belonged to the platoon commander, although they could be grouped at company level to create a manoeuvre support platoon if the mission dictated.

Under the new organisation (which looks suspiciously similar to the old old organisation), the platoons have lost their manoeuvre support sections, with there being just one at company level again. DFSW platoon still exists unchanged as part of support company.
I do remember there being some consideration into replacing/evolving the DFSW platoon into a more specialised AARMD platoon, noting the change towards emphasing mobility and peer conflict.


...
 

oldsig127

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I see the “Australian’s” Ben Packham has again bagged Defence.
This time it’s L400 Ph3. He has suggested that soldiers are at risk and the taxpayer will be burned because the acquisition process has not included a “reliability” trial.
He then likens it to the early Bushmaster experience where he stated that they only achieved on average 200 hrs between breakdowns.
This bloke really needs some serious “attitude adjustment” although I guess that remedy is no longer allowed in a new woke world.
Like everyone else writing routinely for News aside from Greg Sheridan, he shows bugger all actual understanding of Defence matters and is principally there to push an ideological/business line. He could profitably read the recent DTR where both Hanwha and Rheinmettal are questioned on the subject and might not appear so flaming ignorant.

oldsig
 

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Like everyone else writing routinely for News aside from Greg Sheridan, he shows bugger all actual understanding of Defence matters and is principally there to push an ideological/business line. He could profitably read the recent DTR where both Hanwha and Rheinmettal are questioned on the subject and might not appear so flaming ignorant.

oldsig
I tuned out when I read ‘tank like’. Why because it has tracks? Why not write ‘bulldozer like‘ then? Lol
 

Bradbad

New Member
Well today is your lucky day, I have the answer to all your problems.... on this page.
Looking for a BVRAAM ie : not MR look no further than the Denel Marlin Missile BVRAAM Out to 100km.
As for APS or C_RAM : Try the Cheetah system from Denel / LEDS 150 from SAAB|DENEL

PS: To the previous guy about the Assegai round, as the name implies, is derived from the Zulu word for short stabbing spear. Circa Shaka Zulu from Rheinmetall Denel Munitions. Currently fires a 155mm 52 calibre round out to 76km from the G6-Rhino, well as of about 10 years ago. Imagine what a bit of funding Australian $ could do , one tender could make the company solvent again. Glad the irony was not lost on you!
 
Last edited:

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
Well today is your lucky day, I have the answer to all your problems.... on this page.
Looking for a BVRAAM ie : not MR look no further than the Denel Marlin Missile BVRAAM Out to 100km.
As for APS or C_RAM : Try the Cheetah system from Denel / LEDS 150 from SAAB|DENEL

PS: To the previous guy about the Assegai round, as the name implies, is derived from the Zulu word for short stabbing spear. Circa Shaka Zulu from Rheinmetall Denel Munitions. Currently fires a 155mm 52 calibre round out to 76km from the G6-Rhino, well as of about 10 years ago. Imagine what a bit of funding Australian $ could do , one tender could make the company solvent again. Glad the irony was not lost on you!
This needs to be posted in the RAAF thread and you need to provide a link to back up your claim to this being a superior AAM.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Well today is your lucky day, I have the answer to all your problems.... on this page.
Looking for a BVRAAM ie : not MR look no further than the Denel Marlin Missile BVRAAM Out to 100km.
As for APS or C_RAM : Try the Cheetah system from Denel / LEDS 150 from SAAB|DENEL

PS: To the previous guy about the Assegai round, as the name implies, is derived from the Zulu word for short stabbing spear. Circa Shaka Zulu from Rheinmetall Denel Munitions. Currently fires a 155mm 52 calibre round out to 76km from the G6-Rhino, well as of about 10 years ago. Imagine what a bit of funding Australian $ could do , one tender could make the company solvent again. Glad the irony was not lost on you!
YOU HAVE MADE SEVEN POSTS AND COLLECTED THREE WARNINGS, THIS BEING THE THIRD AND FINAL WARNING. I HAVEN'T QUITE DECIDED WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE SPAMMING ON BEHALF OF DENEL, BUT IF I SUSPECTED IT YOU WOULD BE GONE IN AN INSTANT.

YOU HAVE MADE CLAIMS IN THIS POST WITHOUT PROVIDING SUPPORTING EVIDENCE / SOURCES. YOU ARE A REPEAT OFFENDER FOR THIS. THEREFORE IF YOU DO THIS AGAIN AND THEIR IS NO SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT IN YOUR POSTING BEHAVIOUR YOU WILL BE SUBJECT TO A BAN AT THE MODERATORS PLEASURE. THIS IS NON NEGOTIABLE.

15 POINTS FOR 12 MONTHS ARE ADDED TO YOUR PENALTY FEE .
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Well today is your lucky day, I have the answer to all your problems.... on this page.
Looking for a BVRAAM ie : not MR look no further than the Denel Marlin Missile BVRAAM Out to 100km.
As for APS or C_RAM : Try the Cheetah system from Denel / LEDS 150 from SAAB|DENEL

PS: To the previous guy about the Assegai round, as the name implies, is derived from the Zulu word for short stabbing spear. Circa Shaka Zulu from Rheinmetall Denel Munitions. Currently fires a 155mm 52 calibre round out to 76km from the G6-Rhino, well as of about 10 years ago. Imagine what a bit of funding Australian $ could do , one tender could make the company solvent again. Glad the irony was not lost on you!
Australia should buy a tech demonstrator missile (the Marlin) that hasn’t even been bought by South Africa or been integrated with ANY aircraft at all, in the entire world and that they are currently seeking another country to actually fund it’s development? And all for a range of 100k? Yeah sure, why not? Afterall it’s only 60k short of the range of the existing AIM-120D we already operate that IS integrated on the fighter types we fly...

Lol. Is this a joke?
 

Goknub

Member
I'd be curious to know whether DTR reporting 6 dismounts for the KF-41 is just a typo or the actual number.
A key point of difference between that and its smaller KF31 sibling was the ability to carry 8. Perhaps the extra space is considered worth the reduction. I'd be surprised if this influenced the decision. Easy enough to order the Redback with 6 seats.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I agree with the Minister. Unless there has been Courts Martial, or a trial before a Court where individuals have been found guilty of committing illegal acts serious enough to warrant the revoking of Unit Citations then any revocation is wrong.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
I remember saying all this months ago, about how wrong this is . Only to be shouted down by members here, quite happy to along with the media out rage re- war crimes.
No body is guilty of anything yet.
I think that I was one of those, but since then I have rethought my position on it.

Justice has to be be done and seen to be done. Until charges have been preferred and heard before the appropriate legal authority, all accused are deemed innocent until proven guilty in the appropriate legal process. That's the fundamentals of the rule of law, both civilian and military. That is the reasoning behind why I changed my mind.

Now military personnel on here, both serving and veterans, should remember that before bursting into print and lambasting people.
 

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
One of the strangest things I’ve read about this unpleasant saga is that our military/govt. (I don’t know who authorised this) advertised in Afghanistan for witnesses to “war crimes”
Call me cynical but that would seem an open invitation to dissenters to take a shot at the “occupiers”.
No wonder the troops felt demoralised.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
One of the strangest things I’ve read about this unpleasant saga is that our military/govt. (I don’t know who authorised this) advertised in Afghanistan for witnesses to “war crimes”
Call me cynical but that would seem an open invitation to dissenters to take a shot at the “occupiers”.
No wonder the troops felt demoralised.
That's an open invitation for trouble. You will have people with their hands out expecting compensation in US dollars and how do you verify the validity of their claims. We had a situation where a NZ journo accused NZSAS and NZDF of going on a revenge mission after the Battle of Bagchak. It was vehemently denied by both NZSAS and NZDF, an enquiry was held and IIRC some of the journos witnesses were found to be geographically and / or temporally misplaced. I also think hands were out for compensation in US dollars.
 
Top