Australian Army Discussions and Updates

[ADMk2]

The Australian Government has awarded a $5.7 million contract to Electro Optic Systems Defence Systems to develop the R400 SLINGER counter uncrewed aerial systems capability, under the Advanced Strategic Capabilities Accelerator’s Mission Syracuse.
Govt Announcement
It seems the slinger comes in a variety of configurations and it is interesting that the Defence Dept seems to have selected the one with a 4 pod 70mm guided missile system, backed up by a machine gun, rather than the one with a 30 mm gun. Only 4 missiles but increased range and perhaps accuracy.
YouTube (at 1.44 min mark)

Where does it say that the 30mm gun is not being used? Also where does it say the 4x APKWS launcher is being used?
This is a $5.7m contract to develop Slinger, not an acquisition contract as some defence media have put out, perhaps in haste without actually reading the release properly…

Mission Syracuse’s role is to develop Counter-UAS systems for ADF use.

Project LAND 156’s job, is to procure and sustain Counter-UAS systems for ADF use.

There is a difference there…

This latest contract has been awarded to Electro Optic Systems (EOS) Defence Systems to develop the R400 SLINGER Counter Uncrewed Aerial Systems (CUAS) capability.

 

[justinterested]

Where does it say that the 30mm gun is not being used? Also where does it say the 4x APKWS launcher is being used?
This is a $5.7m contract to develop Slinger, not an acquisition contract as some defence media have put out, perhaps in haste without actually reading the release properly…

Mission Syracuse’s role is to develop Counter-UAS systems for ADF use.

Project LAND 156’s job, is to procure and sustain Counter-UAS systems for ADF use.

There is a difference there…

Yep, ok, fair point but the govt statement release specifically states - "Integrating an advanced laser-guided rocket and a machine gun" . You would think that if a 30mm gun was being considered it would mention it. I take your point that it is a contract to develop a system and this could perhaps evolve into something different. Lets hope with the new re-structuring of the defence dept that this development will happen efficiently so a purchase decision on an effective C-UAS can be made quickly.

 

[OldTex]

Yep, ok, fair point but the govt statement release specifically states - "Integrating an advanced laser-guided rocket and a machine gun" . You would think that if a 30mm gun was being considered it would mention it. I take your point that it is a contract to develop a system and this could perhaps evolve into something different. Lets hope with the new re-structuring of the defence dept that this development will happen efficiently so a purchase decision on an effective C-UAS can be made quickly.

Well looking at the EOS datasheet for the R400 Slinger it only mentions the M230LF 30x113mm cannon. There is no mention of a machine gun (M2 or MAG58 these are more the R400 version RWS) nor of any laser guided rockets. Admittedly the datasheet is 3 years old and needs to be updated appropriately. But PR might not see any difference between a machine gun and a belt-fed cannon like the M230LF so used the machine gun description in the press statement.

 

[ADMk2]

Yep, ok, fair point but the govt statement release specifically states - "Integrating an advanced laser-guided rocket and a machine gun" . You would think that if a 30mm gun was being considered it would mention it. I take your point that it is a contract to develop a system and this could perhaps evolve into something different. Lets hope with the new re-structuring of the defence dept that this development will happen efficiently so a purchase decision on an effective C-UAS can be made quickly.

People are assuming there is only to be one variant. No chance Army might want to mix and match effectors to the threat?

Perhaps operate the vehicles in pairs? One with the M230LF and one with APKWS and a “machine gun”?

There are lots of options and this press release doesn’t prove or disprove any of them.

It is a development contract afterall to develop a certain capability. Doesn’t even mean Army will even acquire this…

 

[Richo99]

I read on apdr that 100 Boxers have now been delivered to the UK army... makes me wonder about the seemingly very slow deliveries to the adf. How many have actually been delivered?

 

[Stampede]

I read on apdr that 100 Boxers have now been delivered to the UK army... makes me wonder about the seemingly very slow deliveries to the adf. How many have actually been delivered?

Good question
Very little to show for an order of 211 vehicles.

Is there a problem with this project?

Cheers S

 

[Backstab2007]

Good question
Very little to show for an order of 211 vehicles.

Is there a problem with this project?

Cheers S

The German Army Heavy Weapons Carrier is being built in the same facility as the Australian CRV .. so you can guess who has priority on workers, parts and tooling

 

[Stampede]

The German Army Heavy Weapons Carrier is being built in the same facility as the Australian CRV .. so you can guess who has priority on workers, parts and tooling

For what it’s worth, Wiki lists two of 2nd / 14th’s three Sqns having Boxers , the other still with ASLAV.
I’m assuming this Cavalry Regt will eventually have three complete Sqns of Boxer variants.

Assuming about two thirds of any vehicle compliment are for active units, that would be around 140 vehicles.
Too many for 2nd / 14th.
So who else gets Boxers.

Cheers S

 

[Backstab2007]

For what it’s worth, Wiki lists two of 2nd / 14th’s three Sqns having Boxers , the other still with ASLAV.
I’m assuming this Cavalry Regt will eventually have three complete Sqns of Boxer variants.

Assuming about two thirds of any vehicle compliment are for active units, that would be around 140 vehicles.
Too many for 2nd / 14th.
So who else gets Boxers.

Cheers S

2 CAV will get a Sqn .. also , don’t forget the School of Armour

 

[Stampede]

2 CAV will get a Sqn .. also , don’t forget the School of Armour

2 CAV is a mystery
In fact the whole Brigades specialisation is a mystery.
Specialisation without depth = lack of true capability
I’m hoping this is just a transition phase and our three main Brigades round out and grow in time.

I think it’s more a budget driven thought bubble to pay for new capabilities for Army and those boat things Navy wants.

Finances I get and Army will pay tax for the greater ADF.

Back to 2 CAV
Is the cav / tank thing a long term structure or temporary as they grown the Brigade?

The heavy Brigade does not actually look that Heavy


Cheers S

 

[Backstab2007]

2 CAV is a mystery
In fact the whole Brigades specialisation is a mystery.
Specialisation without depth = lack of true capability
I’m hoping this is just a transition phase and our three main Brigades round out and grow in time.

I think it’s more a budget driven thought bubble to pay for new capabilities for Army and those boat things Navy wants.

Finances I get and Army will pay tax for the greater ADF.

Back to 2 CAV
Is the cav / tank thing a long term structure or temporary as they grown the Brigade?

The heavy Brigade does not actually look that Heavy


Cheers S

I think the original BOP was for 2 squadrons in 3 Armoured Cavalry Regiments.. been a while since I was in that space

 

[ADMk2]

2 CAV is a mystery
In fact the whole Brigades specialisation is a mystery.
Specialisation without depth = lack of true capability
I’m hoping this is just a transition phase and our three main Brigades round out and grow in time.

I think it’s more a budget driven thought bubble to pay for new capabilities for Army and those boat things Navy wants.

Finances I get and Army will pay tax for the greater ADF.

Back to 2 CAV
Is the cav / tank thing a long term structure or temporary as they grown the Brigade?

The heavy Brigade does not actually look that Heavy


Cheers S

Last I checked, 2/14LHR is getting 3 squadrons of Boxer CRV and 2 CAV is gaining 2x squadrons of Boxer CRV to add to it’s 2x squadrons of M1A2 SEPv3.

As for not looking very heavy, 3 brigade is miles away in “heaviness” from any other formation we have, or indeed that exists in the Southern hemisphere for that matter.

On current plans the brigade will mount:

3x infantry battalions (one of which focussed as a pre-landing littoral force).
1x Cav Regiment mounting 40x odd M1A2 SEPv3 MBT’s and 40x odd Boxer CRV’s.
1x mechanised infantry battalion mounted in 70-80x odd Redback IFV’s.
1x motorised battalion mounted in Bushmaster PMV-M.
1x artillery regiment with 3x batteries each equipped with 6x AS-9 Huntsman self-propelled guns and 3x AS-10 ammunition re-supply vehicles.
1x combat engineer regiment equipped with M1A2 based Breacher armoured engineering vehicles and M1A2 based armoured bridge-laying vehicles, among other protected engineering assets.

We’ve literally never had a formation as “heavy” as 3rd brigade is planned to be.

It’s short another 150x or so Redback IFV’s in various configurations, but even so it’s every bit as “heavy” as a US Army - Armoured Brigade Combat Team.

The extra Redback’s aside, I’m not sure how much “heavier” a formation could get in our Army…

 

[Stampede]

Last I checked, 2/14LHR is getting 3 squadrons of Boxer CRV and 2 CAV is gaining 2x squadrons of Boxer CRV to add to it’s 2x squadrons of M1A2 SEPv3.

As for not looking very heavy, 3 brigade is miles away in “heaviness” from any other formation we have, or indeed that exists in the Southern hemisphere for that matter.

On current plans the brigade will mount:

3x infantry battalions (one of which focussed as a pre-landing littoral force).
1x Cav Regiment mounting 40x odd M1A2 SEPv3 MBT’s and 40x odd Boxer CRV’s.
1x mechanised infantry battalion mounted in 70-80x odd Redback IFV’s.
1x motorised battalion mounted in Bushmaster PMV-M.
1x artillery regiment with 3x batteries each equipped with 6x AS-9 Huntsman self-propelled guns and 3x AS-10 ammunition re-supply vehicles.
1x combat engineer regiment equipped with M1A2 based Breacher armoured engineering vehicles and M1A2 based armoured bridge-laying vehicles, among other protected engineering assets.

We’ve literally never had a formation as “heavy” as 3rd brigade is planned to be.

It’s short another 150x or so Redback IFV’s in various configurations, but even so it’s every bit as “heavy” as a US Army - Armoured Brigade Combat Team.

The extra Redback’s aside, I’m not sure how much “heavier” a formation could get in our Army…

Thanks for the structure break down
It is what I envisaged and with a new range of capabilities it looks impressive on some levels.

This heavy brigade however is going to be some time in the making.

Once complete it is not bad for its size

But its size is not a 1990 era boast when we could claim to have the only heavy ( smiling at that claim ) heavy mechanised brigade in the region

Singapore / Malaysia , Indonesia all have this sort of kit now days .
Go further a field and look at the region big guys and our numbers are small time.

Now is that a good or bad thing

Well the ADF is airforce and Navy centric which is understandable as we are a whopping big island miles from most places.

That said, our Army has for 125 years deployed overseas for for good and bad reasons.

Deployabity even in small numbers requires a critical mass.

Be it lite / motorised or heavy what’s our realistic capacity.

So do we have an Army of ones’s , two’s, three’s or fours.

Is our intent the ability to deploy/ sustain a company / squadron sized force?

We could do those numbers!

Battalion sized force?

Hmmmmmm, maybe but questionable for heavy stuff!

Brigade sized force

Not without a big lead time

Just my take on the numbers

Add to this equation the rapid growth in cyber , AI and the unmanned realm which all require large numbers of personnel.

So yes with about 500 vehicles over the 30 plus tonne size we have quite a potent fleet

Let’s please make sure we utilise what we have.
Let’s be open that some platform numbers still need some modest growth.
MBT, IFV and SPG

Cheers S

 

[StevoJH]

An Army of ones, trying to do a little bit of everything, some of the time.

But not having enough of any one single capability to be able to sustain a deployment for any length of time. And not having enough equipment to be able to rapidly expand any capability except for light infantry.

 

[ADMk2]

Thanks for the structure break down
It is what I envisaged and with a new range of capabilities it looks impressive on some levels.

This heavy brigade however is going to be some time in the making.

Once complete it is not bad for its size

But its size is not a 1990 era boast when we could claim to have the only heavy ( smiling at that claim ) heavy mechanised brigade in the region

Singapore / Malaysia , Indonesia all have this sort of kit now days .
Go further a field and look at the region big guys and our numbers are small time.

Now is that a good or bad thing

Well the ADF is airforce and Navy centric which is understandable as we are a whopping big island miles from most places.

That said, our Army has for 125 years deployed overseas for for good and bad reasons.

Deployabity even in small numbers requires a critical mass.

Be it lite / motorised or heavy what’s our realistic capacity.

So do we have an Army of ones’s , two’s, three’s or fours.

Is our intent the ability to deploy/ sustain a company / squadron sized force?

We could do those numbers!

Battalion sized force?

Hmmmmmm, maybe but questionable for heavy stuff!

Brigade sized force

Not without a big lead time

Just my take on the numbers

Add to this equation the rapid growth in cyber , AI and the unmanned realm which all require large numbers of personnel.

So yes with about 500 vehicles over the 30 plus tonne size we have quite a potent fleet

Let’s please make sure we utilise what we have.
Let’s be open that some platform numbers still need some modest growth.
MBT, IFV and SPG

Cheers S

Read our strategic documents. It’s quite clear what our force is intended for. It is most definitely an Army of ones in almost everything except light infantry.

The one constant that never changes in our Army for “some” reason ( light infantry mafia throughout Army and cost…)

Not one of those countries will possess a comparable brigade to 3 Brigade once all the kit arrives, except in numbers only.

 

[Stampede]

Read our strategic documents. It’s quite clear what our force is intended for. It is most definitely an Army of ones in almost everything except light infantry.

The one constant that never changes in our Army for “some” reason ( light infantry mafia throughout Army and cost…)

Not one of those countries will possess a comparable brigade to 3 Brigade once all the kit arrives, except in numbers only.

Agree 3 Brigade will be impressive compared to what we had in the past once up to full strength.
What full strength looks like I’m still unsure.
The intended composition outlined still looks shy on numbers.
Anyway we’ll see what evolves in the years ahead.

Re strategic documents.
I often wonder if it’s the documents that dictate the equipment required and their numbers ;
or is it the other way around.
Id suggest it’s the later.

Army until recently has pretty much had the same kit for decades, yet many a word written about intended structures and intent.

I’m not too big on words.
You can change words very quickly

This may sound simplistic but just give me the equipment inventory and personnel numbers.
That’s a good guide as to the physical indicator of a nations capability.

Numbers matter.

What we know about Army is that when it deploys its inevitably for a significant period of time
Be it HADR, special forces of any other combination from heavy to lite.

Forces need rotation

Going forward Army MUST have good multiples of every capability.

Now we are truly getting a heavy capability that should be no different.

Why
Because if we don’t do it we are just playing let’s pretend

Army of fours

Surely we can afford four MBT and IFV Sqns.

Cheers S