Australian Army Land 400 Ph3 Competition.

GTX

GTX

All hail the God of Frustration!!!
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
15 April 2006
Messages
7,700
Reaction score
10,821
Website
beyondthesprues.com
This is the Australian Army approximately $10-15 billion project to replace the ageing M113 APCs, with an Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV) and APC. Up until yesterday, there were 4 contenders:

  1. Rheinmetall's Lynx KF41
  2. BAE Systems CV90 MkIV IFV
  3. Hanwha Defense Systems AS21 Redback
  4. General Dynamics Land Systems AJAX
As of yesterday there are now two after the Australian downselect to the Lynx KF41 and AS21.

Rheinmetall_s_Lynx_K41_IFV_officially_launched__t_Eurosatory_201_001.JPG
antiaircraft-artillery-as21_slide_img04.jpg


Timetable moving forward is here: http://www.defence.gov.au/casg/Multimedia/LAND_400_Indicative_Timeline-9-9182.pdf
 
Interesting choices. I would put my money on the Lynx over the Red Back.
 
Army likes German products though. It has no experience of Korean AFVs whereas it has experience of German ones.
 
It won't be decided on the basis of that. Moreover, if it was that simple, how would you explain apparent preference for Hanwha K9/K10 over Panzerhaubitze 2000 firstly for Land 17 and more recently for Land 8116?
 
Price. The Panzerhaubitz 2000 is simply too expensive for our needs. Artillery has often had to make do with old or cheap equipment. Look at the introduction of the M101 Howitzer to replace the new L5 which proved simply too fragile for continuous use in a real war (ie Vietnam). The M101 was a WWII design. A Korean MICV? A complete unknown compared to the German one. Preferences won't be the whole story but they provide a clue to the likely outcome.
 
Willing to make a bet? I believe the Hanwha AS21 will win on AIC, price and even technical capability plus a range of other factors...
 
GTX said:
Willing to make a bet? I believe the Hanwha AS21 will win on AIC, price and even technical capability plus a range of other factors...
Click to expand...

*SIGH* I wish. I am stony broke at the moment, mate. :(
 
www.defenceconnect.com.au

Rheinmetall unveils locally-built Lynx variant

The defence contractor has showcased a new combat support vehicle, designed and built inn Australia. Rheinmetall has unveiled the Lynx Combat Support Vehicle (CSV) at its Military Vehicle Centre of E
www.defenceconnect.com.au www.defenceconnect.com.au

adbr.com.au

Rheinmetall reveals Australian-designed Lynx Combat Support Vehicle | ADBR

Rheinmetall has announced it has designed and developed a new Combat Support Vehicle (CSV) at its Military Vehicle Centre of Excellence (MILVEHCOE) facility near Ipswich in Queensland. Based on the…
adbr.com.au adbr.com.au


1634507794723

1634580461617

Lynx-CSV-2-002.jpg


https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=4763320007025069
View: https://www.facebook.com/7NEWSBrisbane/videos/4763320007025069/
 
With the number of cancellations, stretching and cuts of major projects lately, along with the proposed future spending, it almost seems like defence cuts in disguise. We are cancelling this signed contract, cutting this planned buy, retiring this in service capability because we are going to do something in several years.
 
Army is getting worried about Land 400 Ph 3 and trying for public support:

www.abc.net.au

This troop carrier was obsolete 30 years ago. Army is fighting to keep its $20 billion dollar replacement project

When the Army's M113 personnel carriers were deployed to the streets of Somalia in the 90s they were already obsolete. Soldiers fear a $20 billion project to replace them could be on the federal government's chopping block.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au

This is just one article. Mind you I think the Govt needs to await the outcome of the Defence Strategic Review currently underway.
 
GTX said:
breakingdefense.com

Aussie Infantry Fighting Vehicle, Army's biggest-ever contract, faces government delays - Breaking Defense

The Ministry of Defense is not expected to make its recommendation to the government until the end of October, at the earliest, said one source familiar with the issue.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
Click to expand...
I for one support the governments Defence Strategic Review and hope that they put some serious light on the Land 400 Ph3 program. The fact of the matter is that these IFV’s are excessively large, heavy and expensive for what the Australian Army needs, let alone deploy and operate. Talking about deployment, these IFV's are going to require a new and expensive fleet of specialised trucks and trailers at yet another unspecified cost.

I also find it odd that the Australian government and ADF are unquestionably so welded-on to operating alongside the U.S. government/military in all manner of aspects, I find it unrealistic that manufacturing and deploying the likes of the Hanwha K9 SPH and either the Hanwha AS21 Redback or the Rheinmetall Lynx KF41 is a practical idea.
After all many peoples support and justification for the adoption of the U.S. M1 Abrams by the Australian Army has been because of it’s compatibility with the U.S. military.

This is yet another reason I understand the gist of the following article:


[Unfortunately, I haven't been able to read the whole of the article, as I’m not a subscriber]

Finally, if one thinks this IFV program is going to cost $18 billion AUD (some say $20 billion AUD), they've got rocks in their head.

Regards
Pioneer
 
Last edited:

Land 400 Phase 3 consideration​

25 NOVEMBER 2022

The Australian Government will consider the findings of the Defence Strategic Review before deciding on the tender for the LAND 400 Phase 3 Infantry Fighting Vehicle project.
The Review will make recommendations on priorities for investing in Australia’s defence capability and posture, to meet the nation’s security challenges over the next decade and beyond.
The Minister for Defence Industry, the Hon Pat Conroy MP, said it is responsible for the decision on a procurement worth between $18 billion and $27 billion to be informed by the findings of the Review.
“I would like to thank Hanwha Defense Australia, Rheinmetall Defence Australia and the many other companies involved in this tender process for their understanding and professionalism,” Minister Conroy said.
“The Government remains focused on Australia’s future defence capability. We don’t want to pre-empt the findings of the Review, which is especially critical given the rapidly changing strategic circumstances facing our nation.”
The final report from the Defence Strategic Review is due to be delivered to the Government early next year.
Click to expand...

A smart move IMHO.
 
Looks increasingly as if a punt is called for, keep buying Boxer and other priorities while kicking the can a bit on Land 400 to see how events like the Ukraine War and OMFV disrupt the IFV status quo.
 
Moose said:
Looks increasingly as if a punt is called for, keep buying Boxer and other priorities while kicking the can a bit on Land 400 to see how events like the Ukraine War and OMFV disrupt the IFV status quo.
Click to expand...
More to do with the need for more on the naval, air and missile (both strike and defence) fronts and not so much need on heavy armour front. Land 8116 and Land 907 Ph2/Land 8160 Ph1 might also be at risk.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom