The Australian Army’s effort to get new vehicles could run into trouble.
The Australian vehicle based on a variant that has saved numerous people from roadside bombs in Afghanistan may come in third in the competition. More, one of the main contenders which has components with less kinds of protection against threats, may win.
All of this makes you wonder if the Army has any real handle on their future vehicle needs. These are the same people that got the taxpayer to hand over money for scores of used American tanks that suck up fuel and spares at an alarming rate when on the march.
Also, do we have a handle on our “strategy” in Afghanistan? The troubled Tiger helicopter program is claimed by its cheerleaders to be good to go for combat in Operation: USELESS DIRT. However, that claim is only for daytime ops. Note; a Tiger variant used by the French has already seen a deployment there.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Apache, which can operate day or night and has become an effective COIN CAS aircraft has been doing this sort of work for sometime.
Off the shelf, and all that.
.
10 comments:
If the DMO selected Mann as the winner, and the Bushmaster third, they are up to their usual tricks.
Going on previous selections, Tigre,MH90 , Seasprite, etc then I go for Bushmaster.Would have to be correct.
How could a vehicle with standard off the shelf American made drivetrain be three times more expensive to service?
Me thinks some people at DMO have been going to lunch with Mann on a too regular basis.(Germans love our red wine)
There is a rumour that with the Tigre, similar goings on ocurred?
Re French Tigre to Afghanistan, they took three, and a "whole" AN124 of spares, which filled a warehouse.Many many maintenance staff!(One crashed)
Hey, you would think that if this machine has been around since 1995, it should be able to fly around Shoalwater in perfect sunshine. So can any helicopter. Rocky airport with all facilities near by, nice motels and restaurants.
Last time I looked , not much dust at Shoalwater!
DMO, 7,500 staff, 1.2 billion in overheads to do what?
I await the apolgists for DMO.
Sorry 2005, not 1995.
Eric, have no doubt that "the Army" knows exactly what it wants but its unlikely to get it. Why is anybody surprised about interference in Defence purchases? Where exactly have you been living? This kind of thing is old news...
It is the type of comments like those of "the other' anonymous (above) that enables defence procurement debacles to continue.
The "I know better than you do" card being played here is the retreat of bureaucratic sychophants.
Just plain gutless apathy!
"the other" anonymous speaking. I'm just reflecting the fact that Governments of all persuasions make military decisions for many reasons, getting the best capability is merely one of them, and arguably, not the most important, especially when you're an MP in a marginal seat. Its just life mate - there's very little we can do to change it, even if we do change the Government. You want to know why the F35 still has life in it? The reason is that the manufacturers have managed to spread the construction effort (and hence the jobs resulting from it) widely across the US. Here in OZ, our situation is similar. The three services rarely get what they want (I'm sure Army would have preferred Apache over the Tiger, but the Government was never going to spend that kind of money, so we might as well get over that one), every purchase is always going to be a compromise between competing priorities and we just have to make it work. That's why they pay us. Things have gotten better in the years since we first went to Timor though, believe me.
Again, are we really surprised by this? We have no right to be and confected outrage at this situation gets us nowhere either. Having said that, DMO has been a disaster from the beginning and it should go now.
"(I'm sure Army would have preferred Apache over the Tiger, but the Government was never going to spend that kind of money, so we might as well get over that one), every purchase is always going to be a compromise between competing priorities and we just have to make it work"
The Tiger costs over $100 million a copy.And it does not work, never will.
What is the cost of the Apache, could not be anywhere near being mature, however it actually works.
The journalist cheerleader for the Tiger lauds the now retired Head of DMO: '...Gumley was never a power player and he was widely disliked by the arms producers who reap huge profits from Australian contracts. He was a doer and he saved taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars...'. Really!!!
See http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/high-achiever-a-casualty-of-an-uncivil-war/story-e6frezz0-1226097209942
The problem I have with the Australian defence debate in multiple forums is that many seem brainwashed toward acquiring super-expensive highly complex kit operated by foreign military in lieu of maintaining at least some adequate and cost-effective capabilities to assure continual credible military preparedness.
Army Aviation opted to shed the Iroquois Bushranger gunship role in mid-2003, thus creating an 8 year helo close air support capability gap. The AAvn component of DMO also drove the flawed ADF Helicopter Strategic Master Plan which is shedding battlefield utility helo capabilities (Iroquois and Blackhawk).
The former RAAF Iroquois Bushranger gunship excelled as an intimate close air support platform in Vietnam during day and night operations. If upgraded to Huey II for $2million or less, podded 20mm cannon substituted for rocket launchers with some modular systems like FLIR and defensive suites added, it could have performed admirably in Afhanistan having hot and high performance superior to any attack helicopters in service.
The Bushranger was a very simple weapons system easily maintained and supported in field conditions with operating cost about 20 percent of Blackhawk; also very easily deployable by C-130. By comparison, supportability of Apache and Tiger in the field is enormously costly and perhaps very problematic in regional wet tropics environs like PNG.
I agree that DMO has been a disaster; but a more basic problem seems to be ADF leaders wanting up-market toys instead of retaining and optimising adequate proven capabilities.
There was budgetary opportunity over the past decade to develop much more credible ADF capacity through wiser progressive optimisation of much proven hardware in service (where cost-effective). But reckless defence spending on relatively unproven hardware has actually diminished ADF military potential. Continued defence capability planning toward a mythical Force 2030 structure is economically unrealistic and will likely further weaken Australia's military capacity.
Bushranger you are correct.
The Tigre was built and designed for the invasion of Europe by the former USSR.
Hardly what is needed for shooting up some people in the scrub.
The Huey 2, the upgraded Caribou etc would have provided adequate capability, re Afghanistan etc.
Imagine trying to service a Tigre or MH90 in the scrub?
Those responsible for the mess that is DMO deserve utter contempt.
Rigtho you lot, I'm calling BS on some of your claims.
RS::"The Tiger costs over $100 million a copy.And it does not work, never will."
Dude, you're going to have to prove that first claim. And while you're there, how about a cost comparison based upon AUD/USD conversion rates in 2002 when the decision was actually made (remember, the AUD was worth about 60% of the USD)
The second one - doesnt work eh? Seen them in action have you? (I have).
Atticus: "The Tigre was built and designed for the invasion of Europe by the former USSR.
Hardly what is needed for shooting up some people in the scrub."
And what exactly was the Apache designed and built for again? (Hint: ITS A TANK BUSTER) Check it out, its in all the books...
Dude?
Hardly correct language, cobber.
Cost, 2.3 billion for 22 aircraft. Fact.Fact.
The Apache actually works and is in service.Whether we need that capability I do not know. However from where Australia stands, how about the Battlehawk? Should suffice for shooting up the scrub. Huey2 , excellent.Serviced by the local Holden Dealer, or Cessna distributor.
The Tigre is not working.You tell me when IOC is due?They have been around since 2005.How long do you need?
It cannot take off with a full load in the heat in Darwin.
Complaints to Europcopter, result in the reply, Vy Do u not turn up ze wick?
France Sent 3 to Afgahnistan with 25 tons of spare parts to keep three in air. And they still lost one.
Also really makes sense when working with your major, and only friend in the region.
Rumour, and that is all it is, was the final decision was made after many lunches, nothing to do with the exchange rate.I know, I was there.
If you are involved you also know what went on. I am calling BS, mate
Post a Comment