Dragonstriker
-
Posts
30 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Dragonstriker
-
-
It's for real.
Hanwha wins lucrative Army IFV contract - Australian Defence Magazine
The Redback is confirmed with Mk44, Boxer uses MK30-2, so the IFV and the CRV will use incompatible ammunition despite both being 30X173.
Is there a conversion for Mk44 to use rheinmetall links? Or a linkless feeder for MK30-2?
-
From my reading of the UNCLASS report, I think retention of M113AS4 is unlikely.
- Whilst the media reportage casts the L400-3 reduction as solely about cost, the report repeatedly references “optimising Army for littoral manoeuvre capability by sea, land and air.”
- The close combat capabilities to be provided by Army include a “single armoured combined-arms brigade, able to meet the most demanding land challenges in our region.”
- LAND8116-2 needs immediate cancellation because the range is inadequate.
- New IFV are required, but only sufficient for one mech battalion “in particular for littoral manoeuvre”.
- Need long-range fires stat. (HIMARS & moar HIMARS)
- Re-roling units is necessary.
- Fires, IFV and landing craft must be delivered simultaneously.
Aside from the Armoured Brigade, all the key vehicles to provide the refocused Army capability are wheeled; HIMARS, NASAMS on Hawkei, the land based ASM capability (NSM on Hawkei or the weird unmanned JLTV). It seems most likely protected mobility for non-mech infantry (and engineers and arty and so on) will be completely by Bushmaster and Hawkei and M113 will finally be allowed to retire.
-
Reports ahead of tomorrow’s public Strategic Defence Review release indicate that L400-3 will be cut to 129 for a single mech battalion. It seems likely that Hanwha will get the contract, to soften the blow of losing the second tranche of huntsman (30 AS9 + 10 AS10).
-
On 4/18/2023 at 5:53 AM, 2805662 said:
Fitting & removing the gun takes minutes. We used to do the same on ASLAVs when in the compound or in transit. Hardly a permanent state of affairs.
Is only the barrel removed, or the receiver/breech pulled too?
-
So the cause hasn’t been addressed, AJAX is still noisy and vibrating excessively.
-
1 hour ago, Sovngard said:
You're gonna tell me that the designers didn't even noticed the excessive barrel wear throughout its development despite the fact than more than 15 000 rounds have been fired ?
This is very easy to blame the joint company who designed the gun. One can say that a poorly maintained gun wear out more quickly.
Nobody said the designers didn’t notice.
It seems more likely that barrel wear was just insoluble in the design space and determined to be a necessary trade off.
Further, how can guns not in service be poorly maintained?
-
22 hours ago, SH_MM said:
If read on Twitter, that Australia supposedly demands that its next IFV has to be used in the country of origin (i.e. Germany has to buy the KF41 or South Korea has to buy the AS21), so it will be in these countries interests that the vehicle works correctly and is reliable. Is there any Australian source confirming that?
No.
-
It seems more likely, if the rumours that redback was Army’s preference are correct.
-
I’ll third the welcome and second the recommendation to check out the past design competitions.
Having said that, I’m going to chance my arm by saying the fundamental factor determining tank design is doctrine; i.e. what is your tank supposed to do and how is it intended to fight?
Another question regarding your scenario: is this a new design for 90s production for the “end of history” environment or is it a legacy Cold War platform tasked into that environment?
If the second and western, it would look almost exactly like Abrams or Leo 2.
If the first, you might well go for lighter overall, accepting say a 105mm L7 based gun and lighter base armour protection which theoretically could be up armoured… and it would look like an XM8.
There are better educated amateurs on this forum who can quantify the trade offs, not to mention professionals who work in relevant fields. These folks can give more specific responses than I can - I am, at best, a dilettante.
-
Sure, if you think that damage per sortie isn’t the best metric. (Hint: F-16 more sorties and fewer damaged A/C. Ditto F-15E.)
Again, how does the shit-tier A-10 compare to chad F-16 and F-15E on your chosen metrics of merit: K/D and logistics/sortie? -
Most damaged aircraft of GW1, according to that site. How many sorties did they fly to earn this dubious distinction?
How does that rate compare to F-16 or F-15E which aren’t forced to operate wholly within the trashfire envelope?
-
The most telling thing about the A-10 is that it’s not all that good at its sole function, CAS in a permissive environment.
Scrap ‘em now.
SMSgt Mac has a comprehensive series of posts about the A-10 and CAS myths here:
http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/2011/07/debunking-close-air-support-myths-part.html
In short, the A-10 mythology is all about keeping the USAF permanently relegated to a supporting force, while the real heroes in the Army get to call the shots, win the war and bask in the adulation of the citizenry. (My summary, not Mac’s)
The money quote of the whole series for me is:
QuoteA few days before the ground war commenced in February 1991. . . he [General Schwarzkopf] met with his subordinate commanders to discuss the land offensive. General Horner explained his Push CAS modus of flowing airplanes to the battlefield twenty-four hours a day (rather than keeping them idle while sitting alert). When General [Frederick] Franks ignored what Horner had said and demanded that VII Corps be allotted hundreds of CAS sorties per day (whether needed or not),the airman angrily disputed the allocation of air power in that manner and reiterated his Push CAS procedures. Horner believed it important for unity of command to let his anger show as he vehemently rejected Franks’s claim for so much unfocused air power. He remembered his outburst having no effect: “Everyone looked at me and said, ‘Well, he fell on his sword; isn’t that quaint.’” General [Walt] Boomer jumped in and requested as many dedicated sorties for his Marines, and General [Gary] Luck joined the “run on the bank” and demanded as many CAS flights for his XVIII Corps. The ground commanders argued for their sorties, but after a while Schwarzkopf called a halt to the debate, reminding all present, “You people don’t understand. It’s all my air, and I’ll use it any way I please.” “That ended the argument,” Horner recalled, “and we maintained centralized command.” The CINCCENT [commander in chief of Central Command] depended upon his JFACC to ensure that all the ground commanders received adequate air support.
From http://elementsofpower.blogspot.com/2011/07/cas-myths-sidebar-army-air-force-views.html
Mac knows wtf he’s talking about, and most importantly he backs it with sources.
What is the Army going to do in the IndoPacific theatre again?
-
First Sea Lord Sir Jackie Fisher also coined “OMG” as an acronym for the phrase “Oh, My God!”.
Truly a great man.
-
Quote
“We’ve gotten to the point where we’ve demonstrated that we have fixed those issues, and we’ve gotten a significant maturity level and performance demonstration within the system,” putting the system up against roughly 400 threats including single and dual-warheads, anti-tank guided missiles, rocket-propelled grenades and recoilless rifles, Neaves said.
This is a positive statement. IFDL may not be there yet, but “there” is at least visible from here.
-
There were problems with early production batches. As it turns out, the problems were due to ADI building to match the TDP. When consultants from Steyr were brought in all their “fixes” were to disregard the TDP specification and arbitrarily increase tolerances.
After that “advice” ADI figured things out on their own, for better or worse.
-
I did my uni industrial experience at Lithgow SAF in the late 90s, then ended up teaching alongside a woman I met there after she retrained as a technology teacher.
Glad to see that the place is still chugging along, even though someone played fast and loose with the madritsch IP.
-
It appears that fuel - defuel operations won’t be required during the service life of the submarines which suggests that there will not be the same degree of nuclear industry and manufacturing required to support the operation of the fleet as in the past.
Astute seems to be likely, based on similar dimensions to Attack, as the dry dock facilities at ASC CUF will fit Astute length boats.
Nuclear powerplants are consistent with Australian NPT obligations as we already operate OPAL.
-
USN Virginia class submarines will operate from Fleet Base West in Western Australia in the interim.
-
In a joint press conference this morning, AU PM Scott Morrison, UK PM Boris Johnson and US President Joe Biden announced the acquisition of SSN and domestic nuclear manufacturing capability to replace our 6 SSK. This will substitute the previously programmed 12 “shortfin barracuda” SS
NK (denuclearised barracuda SSN).This is a massive change for Australia.
So far the reports are all saying the same thing.
-
Doesn’t look very effective…
-
Yes, according to some in the thread.
Anyway, the whole article reeks of that ABC favourite activity, "briefing against" someone.
#defundtheirABC
-
But Iron Fist Decoupled Light is vapourware anyway, according to this thread.
Is this just "shaping the battlefield" for L400.3 so Redback isn't a "surprise winner"?
only being able to fire German-made ammunition
I mean the ABC gets this wrong in the second paragraph, right after "the ABC can reveal". Unless Benalla is in Germany.
After a competitive tender in 2016, NIOA was awarded an MMC contract in October 2017.
The MMC is established for long term sustainment purchases with the scope of work being:
- the provision of Munitions to the Commonwealth
- ...
50+ products are currently listed on the MMC including:
...
- 30mm Ammunition
and
-
10 hours ago, Kal said:
2 redbacks and 2 lynx in that video?
Yes. The pair of each not used for blast (& ballistic, I think) testing.
-
On 8/3/2021 at 5:36 AM, David Moyes said:
@Dragonstriker
Problems with Terrier, Typhoon, Type 45 etc... preceded the MRA4 and set the foundations.How many of the problems with typhoon were BAe responsible for though? Genuine question as I have no idea how much impact they had in a long running multinational program.
Land 400 Phase 3: Australian IFV
in Mechanized Warfare
Posted
Comments in ADM and The Australian imply that the cost of Lynx was very close to Redback and directly state that Redback was preferred on capabilities.
If CASG had any sense, which is an open question, redback would be delivered with mk44S. Minor cost differential now, for Super40 later, if needed.
The reason for selecting 30x173 over 35x228 was ammo capacity; super40 keeps that capacity with improved performance over 30mm if the threat requires it.
It won’t happen, because it would be too sensible, just as specifying Mk30-2/ABM as the cannon armament for L400-3 was too sensible.
Edit: mk44S it is. Good job by those who decided.