|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 15, 2021 17:12:15 GMT 12
Posted on HeliOps Frontline |
|
|
|
Post by kiwined on Jan 15, 2021 17:40:47 GMT 12
Buying 29 of them. I would say MRH will be on its way out next
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 15, 2021 17:44:23 GMT 12
Do you think NZDF will show any interest in purchasing them if they're cheap?
|
|
|
|
Post by mcmaster on Jan 15, 2021 21:38:15 GMT 12
Do you think NZDF will show any interest in purchasing them if they're cheap? Compelling idea! Some armed recon for Canterbury? |
|
|
|
Post by noooby on Jan 16, 2021 16:27:07 GMT 12
Do you think NZDF will show any interest in purchasing them if they're cheap? Compelling idea! Some armed recon for Canterbury? They should buy them. Look at NZ with the Seasprite and the NH90 compared to Aussie. The Tigers would be a great addition to the RNZAF and would fill a gaping hole in Close Air Support. |
|
|
|
Post by typerated on Jan 16, 2021 17:05:38 GMT 12
Compelling idea! Some armed recon for Canterbury? They should buy them. Look at NZ with the Seasprite and the NH90 compared to Aussie. The Tigers would be a great addition to the RNZAF and would fill a gaping hole in Close Air Support. Not another one of those wish list threads. Please. No much chance the RNZAF would want the Tigers - Nor should they - the Aussies are dumping them for a reason. Bang for buck they do not deliver! Would the RNZAF want the MRH-90s if they got flicked is a very different question! |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jan 17, 2021 6:42:56 GMT 12
I was not asking about the Tigers. I was asking about the MRH-90's which Ned suggested may be disposed of.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mustang51 on Jan 17, 2021 20:44:01 GMT 12
About bloody time. We should have purchased them in the first place. And why 29.....that is a 'bean counters' figure if I have ever heard one. I could just see France rushing to our support in the Pacific to support the Tigers during a conflict situation.....NOT ! Same applies to the MRH-90. What a stupid idea that was as well. Now we are buying diesel/electric retrofitted French nuclear subs. Will we ever learn about buying junk from the French. That too shall end in compromise disaster. Guessing the only 'real' reason Australia did not purchase the best proven conventional subs in the world from others was " We couldn't buy submarines from Germany or hell forbid Japan could we...". That submarine programme will end in disaster with only one delivered by 2034 and four by 2040 by which time the world will be a far, far different place.
|
|
|
|
Post by delticman on Jan 17, 2021 20:58:05 GMT 12
About bloody time. We should have purchased them in the first place. And why 29.....that is a 'bean counters' figure if I have ever heard one. I could just see France rushing to our support in the Pacific to support the Tigers during a conflict situation.....NOT ! Same applies to the MRH-90. What a stupid idea that was as well. Now we are buying diesel/electric retrofitted French nuclear subs. Will we ever learn about buying junk from the French. That too shall end in compromise disaster. Guessing the only 'real' reason Australia did not purchase the best proven conventional subs in the world from others was " We couldn't buy submarines from Germany or hell forbid Japan could we...". That submarine programme will end in disaster with only one delivered by 2034 and four by 2040 by which time the world will be a far, far different place. While you are at it, tell us about the new Bass Strait cargo ferries that Toll bought from the Chinese. What are their submarines like or even their aircraft carriers. Oh well when World War One breaks out again in 2014, we in New Zealand will be ready. |
|
|
|
Post by ZacYates on Jan 17, 2021 22:00:29 GMT 12
And why 29.....that is a 'bean counters' figure if I have ever heard one. I've seen it mentioned that the number means 24 active machines plus five spares for the battalion...but I figure someone was connecting dots as I also read there are currently 29 Tigers. Plus the Minister of Defence's statement mentions no numbers. |
|
|
|
Post by Mustang51 on Jan 18, 2021 6:53:35 GMT 12
Dont get me started on that one delticman
|
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Jan 18, 2021 14:13:53 GMT 12
About bloody time. We should have purchased them in the first place. And why 29.....that is a 'bean counters' figure if I have ever heard one. I could just see France rushing to our support in the Pacific to support the Tigers during a conflict situation.....NOT ! Same applies to the MRH-90. What a stupid idea that was as well. Now we are buying diesel/electric retrofitted French nuclear subs. Will we ever learn about buying junk from the French. That too shall end in compromise disaster. Guessing the only 'real' reason Australia did not purchase the best proven conventional subs in the world from others was " We couldn't buy submarines from Germany or hell forbid Japan could we...". That submarine programme will end in disaster with only one delivered by 2034 and four by 2040 by which time the world will be a far, far different place. Actually 29 is 12 machines for each of the units and 5 for the training school, that was in the RFT. 12 machines should give you 6-8 serviceable every day going on my experience with helicopters. So not a decision the "bean counters" would have made.... Apache was bid initially and didn't meet the requirements for reasons that have not been widely communicated ADF procurement seems to moved away from actual competitions against requirements to the services seeing a platform they like and then building case to get it . That has plusses and minus's.. I struggle to see what an Apache will offer in a great conflicts the ADF is structuring itself for, it seems more like a platform counterinsurgency ops's like Afghan and iraq which we are supposed to shying away from (of course no one can predict the future but we didn't need ARH or Blackhawk/MRH in either of those conflicts) . I think more unmanned systems and Cyber is where any additional money should go. In a great power conflict Army will be the bit player with the RAAF and RAN taking on major roles. As for French junk, whilst I'm not a fan of the Tiger or MRH, some of their issues are the ADF's own making it seems to me, e.g. specifying non standard (for the the platform) systems, adding things like e Hellfire later etc. Other countries don't seem to have had close to the number issues we have. And that piece of French junk, the Mirage, turned out OK and KC-30 is clearly the best tanker in the world...As for the Subs, well building Submarines is far more complicated than going to space and Australia eventually managed that with Collins. IMHO the way Collins has turned out I think Australia could have done better with evolved Collins rather than a non nuke barracuda. .. I guess time will tell. |
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Jan 18, 2021 14:20:44 GMT 12
About bloody time. We should have purchased them in the first place. And why 29.....that is a 'bean counters' figure if I have ever heard one. I could just see France rushing to our support in the Pacific to support the Tigers during a conflict situation.....NOT ! Same applies to the MRH-90. What a stupid idea that was as well. Now we are buying diesel/electric retrofitted French nuclear subs. Will we ever learn about buying junk from the French. That too shall end in compromise disaster. Guessing the only 'real' reason Australia did not purchase the best proven conventional subs in the world from others was " We couldn't buy submarines from Germany or hell forbid Japan could we...". That submarine programme will end in disaster with only one delivered by 2034 and four by 2040 by which time the world will be a far, far different place. Actually 29 is 12 machines for each of the units and 5 for the training school, that was in the RFT IIRC (hence the issue Airbus had trying to find 5 more machines.. ). 12 machines should give you 6-8 serviceable every day going on my experience with helicopters. So not a decision the "bean counters" would have made unless you include engineers as bean counters .... And Apache was bid initially for Air 87 and didn't meet the requirements for reasons that have not been widely communicated (I've heard Cost, Aussie Industry involvement, and the D was judged developmentally immature whereas Eurocopter convinced defence it's requested changes to the standard Tiger weren't overly complex , this obviously turned out to be incorrect). ADF procurement seems to moved away from actual competitions against requirements to the services seeing a platform they like and then building case to get it . That has plusses and minus's.. I struggle to see what an Apache will offer in a great conflicts the ADF is structuring itself for, it seems more like a platform counterinsurgency ops's like Afghan and iraq which we are supposed to shying away from (of course no one can predict the future but we didn't need ARH or Blackhawk/MRH in either of those conflicts) . I think more unmanned systems and Cyber is where any additional money should go. In a great power conflict Army will be the bit player with the RAAF and RAN taking on major roles. As for French junk, whilst I'm not a fan of the Tiger or MRH, some of their issues are the ADF's own making it seems to me, e.g. specifying non standard (for the the platform) systems, adding things like e Hellfire later etc. Other countries don't seem to have had close to the number issues we have. And that piece of French junk, the Mirage, turned out OK and KC-30 is clearly the best tanker in the world...As for the Subs, well building Submarines is far more complicated than going to space and Australia eventually managed that with Collins. IMHO the way Collins has turned out I think Australia could have done better with evolved Collins rather than a non nuke barracuda. .. I guess time will tell. |
|
|
|
Post by kiwined on Jan 18, 2021 14:32:14 GMT 12
Defence Minister Linda Reynolds has revealed the successful contender to replace the Australian Army’s beleaguered Tiger Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter capability, beginning in 2025.
The Australian Army’s armed reconnaissance capability will be strengthened following the selection of the Boeing Apache Guardian to replace Army’s Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter (ARH) from 2025.
Minister for Defence Linda Reynolds said the AH-64E Apache Guardian is equipped with improved sensors, communications suites, attack capabilities and improved survivability.
“This new ARH capability will strengthen Australia’s armed reconnaissance force to better shape our strategic environment and deter actions against our national interest. Defence considered a number of helicopters against key criteria of proven ability, maturity and an off-the-shelf operating system,” Minister Reynolds said.
Lessons learnt from issues with the ARH Tiger and other rotary wing projects had informed the strategy to seek a proven, mature ARH replacement capability.
Minister Reynolds added, “The Apache Guardian is the most lethal, most survivable and lowest risk option, meeting all of Defence’s capability, through-life support, security, and certification requirements.
“By pursuing a proven and low-risk system offered by the Apache, Defence will avoid the ongoing cost and schedule risk typically associated with developmental platforms,” Minister Reynolds said.
PROMOTED CONTENT
Minister Reynolds also detailed the potential for Australian industry engagement and support of the new ARH fleet, stating, “The project will deliver on the government’s vision to maximise Australian industry involvement in defence capability. There are potential opportunities for Australian industry in logistic support, warehousing services, training development, engineering services, and maintenance, repair and overhaul.
“Maximising these opportunities for Australian businesses will enable the future growth of our local rotary wing industry and will present opportunities for Australian industry involvement in the aircraft’s global supply chain.”
Detailed transition planning will be conducted to ensure effective management of the skilled workforce, across Defence and industry, as Defence transitions the Tiger to the Apache.
The AH-64E Apache stands as the world’s most advanced multi-role combat helicopter and represents the backbone of the US Army attack helicopter fleet, as well as a growing number of international defence forces.
A Boeing Defence Australia spokesperson told Defence Connect, "Boeing appreciates the Commonwealth of Australia’s confidence in selecting the AH-64E Apache’s proven, reliable and value-for-money capability.
"The AH-64E Apache provides Australia with a low-risk, fully-integrated, battle-proven capability which is interoperable with Australia’s key allies. It is supported by an active production line and a US Army modernisation plan through the late 2040s, thereby ensuring the platform remains the leading attack reconnaissance capability through 2050 and beyond.
"Boeing will continue to expand its industry capability and supply chain in Australia. At the same time, we remain committed to delivering a sovereign in-service support infrastructure as evidenced by our proven history with the CH-47 Chinook, F/A-18 Super Hornet, EA-18 Growler and P-8A Poseidon platforms," the spokesperson added.
The US Army Apache fleet has accumulated more than 4.5 million flight hours. With more than 2,400 Apaches delivered to customers around the world, Boeing is committed to the continuous modernisation of the program to ensure that AH-64 capabilities outpace adversaries to maintain battlefield dominance today and for decades to come.
The Australian Army is planning to replace the current fleet of EC665 Tiger ARH from the mid-2020s, as identified in the 2016 Defence White Paper:
“The government will replace the 22 Tiger armed reconnaissance helicopters with a new armed reconnaissance capability from the mid-2020s.”
LAND 4503’s program of delivery aims to support the Australian Army and is designed to contribute to the creation of the modernisation and development of a ‘networked and hardened’ Army.
The acquisition is broken down into three delivery stages, beginning with projected IOC in 2026 and FOC in 2028, including:
Up to 24 aircraft would be based at one primary location and another five are intended at a training location. The aircraft fleet may also be co-located in one primary location; however, this is yet to be determined;
IOC for LAND 4503 is based on a squadron of up to 12 aircraft. This organisation would be capable of generating a deployable troop of four aircraft, continued force generation of four aircraft, and an initial build-up training element of four aircraft. IOC will be supported by trained personnel and support systems; and
FOC for LAND 4503 is based on a regiment of up to 24 aircraft. This organisation would be capable of generating multiple concurrent deployed forces of up to squadron size. FOC will also be supported by a mature training system of up to five aircraft, with trained personnel and support systems.
The government has brought the LAND 4503 Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter Replacement program forward and aims to acquire a proven and mature, off-the-shelf manned armed helicopter to deliver armed reconnaissance effects in the close and deep contested battlespace in support of the Australian Defence Force.
|
|
|
|
Post by ZacYates on Jan 19, 2021 8:44:20 GMT 12
Thanks for clarifying, Calum and Ned. It’s nice to see a breakdown of the numbers.
|
|
|
|
Post by mcmaster on Apr 8, 2021 10:35:16 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by nuuumannn on May 13, 2022 12:15:54 GMT 12
|
|
