2805662
Contributing Members-
Posts
691 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
53
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Everything posted by 2805662
-
StuG III Thread (and also other German vehicles I guess)
2805662 replied to EnsignExpendable's topic in Mechanized Warfare
Not sure. I’ve heard that as well as “Lance 1.5” (wth?), so I’m waiting to see at this point. -
General artillery, SPGs, MLRS and long range ATGMs thread.
2805662 replied to LoooSeR's topic in Mechanized Warfare
Can’t help, sorry. Bit of a mystery. The RWS won’t be Kongsberg, though.- 1,911 replies
-
StuG III Thread (and also other German vehicles I guess)
2805662 replied to EnsignExpendable's topic in Mechanized Warfare
Likely not to be fitted to the 12 x Block 1 turrets. Only 30 x launchers being procured at the moment, to be rotated across the fleet. I’m putting my money on them first appearing on the Block 2 turrets (as opposed to the Lance 2.0 turrets). Slightly more oblique pic. -
StuG III Thread (and also other German vehicles I guess)
2805662 replied to EnsignExpendable's topic in Mechanized Warfare
Block 1 Boxer CRV w/Lance 1.0 turret: -
Ajax turret: https://twitter.com/lmuknews/status/1313826803463716865?s=21
- 1,043 replies
-
- challenger 2
- warrior
-
(and 2 more)
Tagged with:
-
StuG III Thread (and also other German vehicles I guess)
2805662 replied to EnsignExpendable's topic in Mechanized Warfare
What appears to be Wiesel 2-based UGVs arrive in Australia. -
KF41 Lynx on deck. I reckon the Boxer will be fitted with a turret in its immediate future.
-
StuG III Thread (and also other German vehicles I guess)
2805662 replied to EnsignExpendable's topic in Mechanized Warfare
Driver training for Australian Boxers. -
What about Centurions? Long Tan formed the justification for the deployment of a squadron of tanks into the Task Force AO. You’ve been to New Guinea recently? Deforestation has changed it a lot. Sure, there’s mountainous & jungle-covered terrain, but wherever there’s people & farms, there’s a lot of cleared areas with excellent fields of fire.
-
No arguments on the requirements. The specifics of the EOS T-2000 and your deductions may be correct; they also may be incorrect. My point is that you’re speaking in an authoritative manner about the specifics of a product. Unless you *know* what you’re saying is accurate, I’d caveat your assertions.
-
You’re speaking very confidently in absolutes. I’m not so sure of the accuracy of some of your claims.
-
I guess. Now that the PAV is dead, there ought to be funding for it.
-
120mm turret mortar variant is being sought.
-
They’re civilians now - there’s almost 100 years of combined mechanised infantry or cavalry experience in that pic.
-
Nah, I never said that! No appliqué on the turret, but that belly armour! Thickest I’ve ever seen!
-
These vehicles are not little! Not a surprise, sure, but vehicles from both OEMs are tall enough that they qualify for PPE “working at height” workplace safety legislation.
-
Here you go: http://gvsets.ndia-mich.org/documents/PM/2018/0945_Marcotte, Tommy_final presentation.pdf
-
My vehicles were fitted with (then) Diehl 513 track back in the day, replacing T130E1. Huge improvement.
-
Your first point is no longer correct. Here are some pics I took at AUSA 2019 of the CRT repair kit: Regarding your second point, Canadian “TLAVs” (M113) in Afghanistan seemed to find CRT robust & practical enough, as do multiple users of the BV210 & Warthog. ATDU trialled CRT in 2018 on Warrior and had overwhelmingly positive results. Some of you concerns & considerations re. CRT, whilst once potentially valid, appear to have been overtaken by developments and aren’t supported by evidence.
-
It’s unlikely that any conventional track could either, surely?
-
And that’s from 2016. Lots of progress since then.
-
Some related information on US trials of composite rubber track. Targeting 75% reduction on vibration.
-
The Protected Mobile Fires is more than just the 30+15: the next phase is a further buy of 30+15, plus an upgrade of the initial buy. Whispers from the Hanwha L400-3 offer is that the Geelong facility would also be fabricating hills of other Hanwha customers into the future. L400-2 is only delivering 211 drive modules, not the desired 225, due to the high cost of Boxer.
-
Yep. Will be interesting to see how they respond to the RFT.
-
Hanwha has received a restricted request for tender for the 30 x K9 & 15 x K10, not a contract. They have the tender period to detail, formalise, schedule, and price their offer. Nothing in Commonwealth Procurement Rules/Guidelines (can’t recall which are which, atm) obliges the Commonwealth to accept Hanwha’s offer and go into contract. It’s by no means a done deal.