Australian Army Discussions and Updates

kiwipatriot69 said:

In a related matter, what do posters here especially aussie ones make of North Koreas recent threats to nuke austraila for condemning their policies and supporting Trump? Is it in the realm of possibilty they could develop an ICBM capable within his first term even?

Click to expand...

North Korea is a long, long, long, long way from having the capability to hit Australia with a nuclear warhead.

The Kiwis are a far bigger threat to Australia than North Korea.

Raven22 said:

North Korea is a long, long, long, long way from having the capability to hit Australia with a nuclear warhead.

The Kiwis are a far bigger threat to Australia than North Korea.

Click to expand...

Yeah, must be a million of us on the gold coast alone by now, now if only if territorys were decided over a game of rugby, we would stand a good chance Most of my family live in Queensland.

Anyone who believes North Korea for one have the ability, or would choose to target Australia over SK, US or Japan needs to be shot.

I sniff an alterior motive for investing in these capabilities, perhaps for another unnamed potential future eneny in the region?

Our government has recently given the okay for us to develop our version of the Norwegian NASAMS system firing US Aim 9X and AMRAAM rockets with the help of Raytheon Australia. Hawkii to be the vehicle to carry the system. Also some mention of ESSM rockets.

Does anyone have any idea of the range of these rockets when fired from the ground?

Lest we forget

Redlands18 said:

Lest we forget

Click to expand...

They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old;

hairyman said:

Our government has recently given the okay for us to develop our version of the Norwegian NASAMS system firing US Aim 9X and AMRAAM rockets with the help of Raytheon Australia. Hawkii to be the vehicle to carry the system. Also some mention of ESSM rockets.

Does anyone have any idea of the range of these rockets when fired from the ground?

Click to expand...

AIM-9X covers the short ranged firings, up to about 12k, AMRAAM up to about 25k's and AMRAAM-ER up to about 50k's.

All of these are fitted with boost systems to overcome their lack of speed and altitiude at firing, but their ranges aren't exactly analogous to their air-launched cousins.

Regardless, these will provide an enormous increase in capability over our legacy capability.

Raven22 said:

North Korea is a long, long, long, long way from having the capability to hit Australia with a nuclear warhead.

The Kiwis are a far bigger threat to Australia than North Korea.

Click to expand...

Yes, but that is only in the Cricket and Rugby.

The one thing that is missing in our assessment of the NK bluster is what China would do if NK ever did launch a missile. I suspect there would be very painful and abrupt action against NK as such an act will reflect on China and would be detrimental to China's interests.

The nuclear fallout id imagine from a Nk strike on South Korea would be considerable. It would of course be devastating to China too once it drifted.

ADMk2 said:

AIM-9X covers the short ranged firings, up to about 12k, AMRAAM up to about 25k's and AMRAAM-ER up to about 50k's.

All of these are fitted with boost systems to overcome their lack of speed and altitiude at firing, but their ranges aren't exactly analogous to their air-launched cousins.

Regardless, these will provide an enormous increase in capability over our legacy capability.

Click to expand...

Interesting article on the proposed Norwegian Army mobile system using NASAMS elements plus some "variations". Apologies if this is not linked properly.
https://www.tu.no/artikler/for-fors...aeren-selv-beskytte-seg-mot-luftangrep/376156

alexsa said:

Yes, but that is only in the Cricket and Rugby.

The one thing that is missing in our assessment of the NK bluster is what China would do if NK ever did launch a missile. I suspect there would be very painful and abrupt action against NK as such an act will reflect on China and would be detrimental to China's interests.

Click to expand...

For China, NK has been a healthy buffer between itself and South Korea over the decades. The current situation for the west is fluid and seemingly dangerously unpredictable. For China its existing relationship with NK is a challenge without easy answers.For China's large economy engaged so closely with the west commercially it may just well be truly time to reassess the benefits of the NK buffer and try to bring NK into line.How that pans out for such a paranoid NK leader with a not an insignificant conventional Army is hard to say and frighting to contemplate.
Keeping it in the Australian Army thread this ANZAC day our troops have been to this part of the world once before so a second commitment to this region would warrant serious justification.
Getting China on side for a collective and unified approach to bring some sense to NK is needed quickly. Limit all sources of military supply of materiel,technology and training is needed ASAP backed up with serious cyber infiltration. Sabre rattling has a place but I'm not sure if it will work with NK leadership
Loose cannons are hard to predict.

Regards S

kiwipatriot69 said:

The nuclear fallout id imagine from a Nk strike on South Korea would be considerable. It would of course be devastating to China too once it drifted.

Click to expand...

The usual wind direction varies with the time of year.

swerve said:

The usual wind direction varies with the time of year.

Click to expand...

But anytime soon and it should be dust-storm season for South Korea. So if I understand correctly if the DPRK detonated an above-ground nucelar device within its borders, but close to the DMZ, those winds would put most of RoK downwind from the fallout.

ADMk2 said:

I have no doubt whatsoever that it will be

Click to expand...

I think it is a given.

Would be very surprised if we ended up buying any unguided rockets.

Regards,

Massive

alexsa said:

The one thing that is missing in our assessment of the NK bluster is what China would do if NK ever did launch a missile. I suspect there would be very painful and abrupt action against NK as such an act will reflect on China and would be detrimental to China's interests.

Click to expand...

I suspect that buried deep in the bowels of the divisions currently massed on the border, that they have their own version of a Nest HVA snatch team quietly updating their operating picture of all things N-NorK

Raven22 said:

They only consist of a two small batteries at the moment - there's a lot of room for growth. When all the new capabilities are delivered I don't know if they will keep the integrated batteries they have now or go back to specialist batteries, but the endstate size of 16 ALR is still less than the size of an infantry battalion.

Click to expand...

Be interesting to see if the go to a three battery structure to reflect Beersheba - NASAMS and whatever MANPAD capability is eventually acquired.


Regards,

Massive

Massive said:

Be interesting to see if the go to a three battery structure to reflect Beersheba - NASAMS and whatever MANPAD capability is eventually acquired.


Regards,

Massive

Click to expand...

I don't think there is a MANPAD capability coming. NASAMS is replacing the RBS70. Project Air 6500 will consider a longer range SAM capability. The three battery structure is ideal but much would depend on the whole of life cost.

BigM60 said:

I don't think there is a MANPAD capability coming. NASAMS is replacing the RBS70. Project Air 6500 will consider a longer range SAM capability. The three battery structure is ideal but much would depend on the whole of life cost.

Click to expand...

Integrated Investment Program:

5.27

The ADF’s current ground-based air-defence capability consists of
the short-range RBS-70 air-defence system, which has limited utility against modern threats The future ground-based air-defence system will replace the RBS-70 with a short-range man-portable surface-to-air system by the early 2020s, and will later be supplemented by a medium-range surface-to-air missile system in the mid to late 2020s, providing a layered air-defence against a broad range of capable air threats These systems will be matched with command and control and fire control systems with high levels of integration to act as the inner layers of the upgraded integrated air and missile defence system

ADMk2 said:

The ADF’s current ground-based air-defence capability consists of
the short-range RBS-70 air-defence system, which has limited utility against modern threats The future ground-based air-defence system will replace the RBS-70 with a short-range man-portable surface-to-air system by the early 2020s...

Click to expand...

There's a certain question of, with what...

RBS-70, well, we've already got it. Big update circa 2011 (not sure if launcher only or also missile upgrades), still seems to be selling well. Question of the additional training costs of laser-beam riding vs passive IR guidance. Also, problem of rather bulky launch system.

Stinger doesn't seem to have been seriously updated in the last decade and a half. That said, could probably relative cheap compared to RBS-70 and Starstreak due to the yanks having large stocks of 'em.

Mistral. Last big update to the missile seems to be circa 2000ish. What I can find per range on the 'net put it slightly inferior to Stinger, Starstreak and RBS-70.

Starstreak... Well, laser beam-riding like RBS-70, and we could no doubt uhm and ahh all day about the relative merits of it's high-speed tungsten darts vs the RBS-70's lower velocity conventional missile with proxy-fuse. Also in service with relatively few nations (5 vs RBS-70's 20, Stinger's 32 and Mistral's 28), raising issues about long-term support.

So, I actually wouldn't be half surprised if any MANPADS capability is met by keeping RBS-70 round...

ADMk2 said:

Integrated Investment Program:

5.27

The ADF’s current ground-based air-defence capability consists of
the short-range RBS-70 air-defence system, which has limited utility against modern threats The future ground-based air-defence system will replace the RBS-70 with a short-range man-portable surface-to-air system by the early 2020s, and will later be supplemented by a medium-range surface-to-air missile system in the mid to late 2020s, providing a layered air-defence against a broad range of capable air threats These systems will be matched with command and control and fire control systems with high levels of integration to act as the inner layers of the upgraded integrated air and missile defence system

Click to expand...

I have read that statement. What's your interpretation of the Defence Minister's media release? She appears to believe that NASAMS is replacing our existing 30 year old short range system. Sorry, I believe Land 19 Phase 7B is done.