Australian Defence Force

News and discussion threads on defence in other parts of the world.
SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by SW1 »

Tempest414 wrote: 11 Dec 2021, 11:57
SW1 wrote: 11 Dec 2021, 10:54 Interesting at the cost shock when according to Hansard merlin was costed as follows and people on here always shout for more

“The acquisition cost of the RAF operated Merlin Mk 3 is around £19 million and for the RN operated Merlin Mk 1 is around £39 million.

The large price differential is due to the inclusion of the sophisticated anti-submarine mission avionics, which are an integral part of the weapons system in the Merlin Mkl.

The total operating cost per hour is approximately £34,000 for the Merlin Mk 3 and is approximately £42,000 for the Merlin Mk 1”


Personally if the MoD makes an appropriate choice on its new medium helicopter there is a market out there for sales.
As we all know the cost per hour is reached in different way by different operators the UK's cost per hour is always at the top end as very thing including the air crews boots are costed in however Australia is not the only unhappy customer of NH-90 Belgium , Holland , France have all been unhappy about supply and cost
Yes so suddenly having numbers put out to justify decisions particularly decisions on scrapping things is always questionable.

NH90 has always been a case of too many cooks and overly complex systems much like merlin coupled with the perennial problem of a lack of willingness to invest in supply and logistics. It’s a cautionary tell when tilt rotor champions rear there head.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Lord Jim »

This sort of problem will continue to exist until the european defence industry gets its act together. the problem is that at present each country want to have both the capability to meet its defence needs in house where possible and this has major political ramification that take priority over defence capability with job creation and maintenance a prime example.

Europe can produce world class defence platform, but they come with inbuilt complications that increase their cost to buy and to maintain. The UK probably comes off worse in this situation, with inconsistency of orders making it very difficult for its indigenous industries to keep going, and in some areas like AFVs until recently foregoing their manufacture entirely with the exception of mine protected vehicles needed under UORs from Iraq and Afghanistan. Were it not for Rheinmetall and GD the UK would be looking to struggle to even maintain its existing AFV fleets let alone manufacture new ones.

Australia has now put in place a pretty balanced and effective procurement plan for its Armed Forces, and has become very proficient in negotiating and conducting competitions to ensure that the equipment purchased is the best for both the Armed Forces and the Country's industry, even becoming an exporter in certain cases. Replacing the Taipans with a combinations of modern variants of the Blackhawk and Chinook will both meet the need of the Armed Forces and improve the efficiency of the supply and support train.

This issue of whether to buy American or European will really come to the fore when it is time to decide which SSN the RAN is to operate. Whilst both the UK and US can provide very effective boats, the availability of spares and the cost to operate them may prove the main difference. Given the stop, start history of the UK's Astute programme compared to the, until recently, delivery of the Virginia class to the USN on time and on budget, the level of confidence the RAN will have with each supplier could be critical. However if the Hunter class programme delivers as required, and with the level of technological transfer and manufacturing support provided meets the targets set, the UK's position could be improved. All of the above is going to prove as important is not more than the cost per unit, as the boat procured will be in service for decades past theor delivery date.

I hope this makes sense, I have posted on the fly here and might have got my thought twisted.

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

[10 Squadron] Air Force’s ISREW specialists
https://www.australiandefence.com.au/ne ... pecialists

The article doesn't explicitly state it, but these are SIGINT aircraft that remain in service. The P8 has picked up the other more conventional P3 MPA type missions.

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by seaspear »

The Morrison government has signed an agreement committing to the Huntsman AS9 artillery this is in addition to a commitment to the purchase of Assegai ammunition
https://militaryleak.com/2020/10/09/ass ... mmunition/
https://militaryleak.com/2021/12/13/han ... howitzers/
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news ... -artillery

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

Big units.

Image

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by R686 »

Mercator wrote: 14 Dec 2021, 11:08 Big units.

Image


Gee makes the M113 look like a matchbox toy

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Lord Jim »

Would be nice to see an equivalent form the British Army having a turreted Ajax next to an FV432 and a Scimitar.

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

Australia launches first of 12 Arafura-class OPVs
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... lass-opvs/

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by R686 »

Mercator wrote: 17 Dec 2021, 23:09 Australia launches first of 12 Arafura-class OPVs
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... lass-opvs/

Good to style the metal bashing is going along nicely; but can’t say the same for the gun

The Defence Department has quietly cancelled a contract for the gun to be fitted to the navy’s new fleet of patrol boat
https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/de ... 214-p59hcy

Will be interesting to see what that do

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

I never liked that gun in the first place. I think it was the default in the design (I could be wrong about that – it was a while ago). I always thought we should have put more thought into it and had something more versatile. Even 76 mm is possible. Now, perhaps, we can do better.

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by seaspear »

Would the BAE 57mm mk110 be a contender
https://www.baesystems.com/en/product/5 ... gun-system

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by R686 »

Mercator wrote: 18 Dec 2021, 05:54 I never liked that gun in the first place. I think it was the default in the design (I could be wrong about that – it was a while ago). I always thought we should have put more thought into it and had something more versatile. Even 76 mm is possible. Now, perhaps, we can do better.

Ha I see the auto correct was doing it’s thing in my last post, must have been because of the heat today

But anyway think a 76mm might be going a bit overboard considering there role, unless they start venturing far from home.

A bit of reminiscing of what could have been with the Joint Patrol Vessel that was put up by Transfield in the 1990’ always thought we need a two tied patrol vessel one that could do the job of a mini hunter class and another to do the constabulary role of the current Armidale’s leaving the Hunters & Hobarts for the longer ranged stuff

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by R686 »

seaspear wrote: 18 Dec 2021, 07:16 Would the BAE 57mm mk110 be a contender
https://www.baesystems.com/en/product/5 ... gun-system

I think everything is up for consideration as long as it’s plug and play with the Saab 9LV' CMS

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by seaspear »

This is an interesting article on printed titanium ballistic protection likely years off of course
https://news.defence.gov.au/technology/ ... ction-here

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Lord Jim »

Australian R&D does have a history of developing novel ideas, and good ones at that.

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

Barebones. But has potential.

Image

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

It replaces a 'constabulary' patrol boat design that had an aluminium hull that lasted 15 years, was armed with a 25 mm gun and could only launch handheld UAVs. So anything over and above any of that is obviously a win. People complain about the lack of an aircraft hangar, but frankly the fact that it has any aviation capabilities for tasks that still remain constabulary level, not naval, is still a huge win. To have tried for any more capability would have probably lowered the numbers available. (The budget was still patrol boat replacement levels, nothing fancier). As it is, they may still struggle with only 12. It's a very big task monitoring illegal immigration and fishing to the north, and if any start slipping through, Navy will get a righteous kick up the arse because it is a big political issue. There isn't any money, really, to start trying to up gun these vessels too much.

And I don't think it's a coincidence that the Navy steered well clear of corvette territory, either. Not while an expensive frigate program is still in gestation. No distractions.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Lord Jim »

The RAN has probably covered themselves by buying as many boats as could be afforded buy the available budget by keeping the spec low. IF it is found twelve is not enough to effectively patrol the north they can argue the need for more boats rather then start a blame game.

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by seaspear »

The Arafura class although not having a hangar has been selected to host at least one flight-capable drone, Im not sure of the storage of these drones in this class or even the capability of the drone selected
https://www.autoevolution.com/news/heli ... 58217.html

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

I think the idea is that they come in a shipping container. That's fine, I reckon. Gets the job done and they can always change their mind later with minimal overheads.

And you're absolutely right Jim. No one can accuse them of gold plating the design, so if 12 is not enough, they can easily make their case. I think the idea is that the replacement hydrographic and mine warfare ships will also follow the same design (with lots of shipping containers). So they will be producing them for a good decade yet. Plenty of time for more, or even a better design, if need be.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Lord Jim »

If the RAN is looking to replace their Mine Warfare vessels with a vessel similar to the Arafura, I wonder if that might be another export opportunity for the UK given the RN will have a set of Mine Warfare unmanned platforms operational in the very near future, or is Australia also developing its own?

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

I don't know the details of the mine warfare project offhand. I'll check it out over the next few days and let you know. That said, there are some major players in mine warfare amongst local Australian subsidiaries. Thales in particular, but other smaller outfits as well. I imagine it is still an open competition, but there will be strong local competitors.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Lord Jim »

Exchanging ideas between the RN and RAN would benefit both I think. Having one of the T-31s visiting Australian at come point in the future with a "Tool box" on board would be useful as well.

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »



Utilising the geography and the assets to the fullest.

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

These users liked the author Mercator for the post (total 2):
Lord Jimwargame_insomniac

Post Reply