Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Australia Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: A backwards SP wish-list anybody?
Aussiegunneragain    11/5/2008 7:19:36 AM
Given the news that the government's plans to run a big budget surplus has just gone tits-up with the global financial crisis (the current forecast surplus has just been slashed from $21billion to $5billion), it would seem an apt time to play a different game to the usual SP Oz board "what is your dream ADF". The new rules to the game are that you have to list the defence programs that you would cut and the order in which you will cut them. I wait for your contributions with anticipation.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6   NEXT
VGNTMH       11/16/2008 7:23:19 AM

I am surprised that no one has contributed to this discussion!

How about I start with this list:

(This list is not a list of what I would cancel, but a list of what projects I think would be at risk ...)

1) Self Propelled Guns, getting the lightweight, shorter ranged, and unprotected M-777s with Excalibur but no SPGs
2) Fewer and later F-35 JSFs, de risked and justified by the F/A-18F purchase
3) No replacement for cancelled I-View TUAVs
4) No direct replacement for Caribous, instead arguing that the MRHs would allow the CH-47s and the C-17s would allow the C-130Js to replace what the Caribous did
5) Cancelling the re raising of 8/9RAR, arguing that "at least we are getting a separate 7RAR"
6) Cancelling the third amphibious/RORO ship
7) Forgetting about a fourth AWD
8) Upgrading/ASMDing/CEFARing only some of the ANZACs, leaving the others basically as "patrol frigates"

 

 
Quote    Reply

hairy man       11/16/2008 5:50:46 PM
I have to agree with that list, although I think (6)is the least likely to be cancelled.  It will however probably be delayed.......
 
Quote    Reply

Gecko       11/16/2008 9:36:57 PM

I have to agree with that list, although I think (6)is the least likely to be cancelled.  It will however probably be delayed.......
If anything I think (6) is the second most likely as its role can be "poorly/politically" agued away when HMAS Sirrus and Sucess get replaced (Number one is the F-35 cut to 75 aircraft).
 
Great list! With most of the other programs a choice dosen't need to be made for some time, or can be delayed so I wouldn't expect the current government to make a descion when it can be differed to another term. The only exception to that is a 4th AWD. We may hear about it this term if SA isn't falling labours way closer to poll time.
 
If I had to make the choice now I would go 2, 6, 4, 5, with the reaminder all about equal.
 
I will also add:
 
A small cut in the P3-C replacement.
A reduction in Land 106 (say only half get the upgrades)
A delay or reduction in Land 121 if possible (however, if the ecomomy goes belly up anything thats makes alot of local jobs will be hard for any government to reduce so it may actually be brought forward)
 
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       11/17/2008 3:47:30 AM
JSF cut to 24-36 F-35C models to serve as a silver bullet strike fighter force, while retaining the SH's and replacing the remainder of the legacy bugs with 36-48 Gripen NG's.
 
Can all planed upgrades on the Blackhawks pending their replacement with MRH-90.
 
Cancel the ANZAC upgrade and bring forward its replacement which will incorporate evolved systems intended for the ANZAC's
 
Sell our upgraded FFG's to who ever the US will let us sell them to and replace them with an extra 1 or 2 AWD's
 
Can the logistics ship in favour a couple of Austal Cats.
 
Replace the land 17 SPG with a M777 mounted on a Copperhead 6x6.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunneragain       11/17/2008 4:24:20 AM
Thanks for getting this one up and running VG, I thought it was dead in the water.
 
Anyway, my approach to the current budgetary difficulties would be as follows. Note that I'm assuming that that the problems will last 2 to 3 years so this would obviously change if it was shorter or longer.
 
1. Cancel the M-113 upgrade. We should be getting proper IFVs to replace them anyway so we should soldier on with the un-upgraded versions for a few years
 
2. Delay:
a: The decision to purchase the extra AWD. We wouldn't be getting it till close to 2020 anyway so that doesn't matter.
b: The decision on the third sealift ship for the same reason.
c. The purchase of 26 of the 100 F-35's. The SH's can cover the gap and it would allow us to benefit from later blocks in the early 20's.
d. The replacement of the Hamel and the M-198. As an ex-gunner I hate to say this but these can soldier on for a while with new ammo and sighting systems so it isn't a priority.
e. The C-130H replacement. These are 30 years old but a cargo type that has had a decent overhaul can last a lot longer than that.
f. The Carabou replacement (after retiring the Bou's). We have enough airlift  for now and we can cope with rotary.
g. Any new ASW helecopter that is on the horizon. We have 16 Seahawks and 16 spots on our frigates, so they will do for the moment.
h. The Orion replacement. The P-3's will be ok to soldier on for another couple of years.
i. Any new Chinooks that we were planning on getting. We are getting heaps of NH-90's so they should hold the fort for now.
 
3. Keep
j. The Bushmaster purchase going. I hate saying this because I don't think the Bushie should ever have gotten off the ground but since we are hellbent on equipping our Army with them we may as well doing so during the tough times if we can, as the money spent will boost the local economy. They provide an export opportunity as well.
 
k. The CEAFAR fitout on the ANZAC's and associated accessories. It is too important a project to ditch and will also produce dividends for the local economy, perhaps even with exports.
l.The re-raising of 8/9 RAR. Global economic turmoil is if anything likely to increase the need for peace enforcement/keeping troops for low to medium level ops in our region, so we need the extra capability. Times of rising unemployment are also good times to be recruiting in.
 
4. Buy
m. Modern IFV's for 5 and 7 RAR as a priority. The idea of our troops having to get around in an RPG rich environment in the clapped out M-113's appalls me, yet it is quite possible that it could happen in our region in the next couple of years. We can at least afford to get some second hand refurbished Brad's or Warriors to protect them properly. We'd probably get some good ones too as a result of defence cuts elsewhere.
 
5. Retire
n. A regular ARA Cavalry regiment and put their ASLAV's into storage. As has been pointed out before on this board we don't need two force recon regiments so it would be a reasonable economy measure. We could then split the remaining regiment into independent squadrons between the ARA Brigades.
 
6. Lay up
o. Two Collins class subs. We can only keep three at sea anyway with the forth being used for training and as a surge capability when necessary.
 
I believe there are projects to update our air defence system and propellent manufacturing capability. I don't know enough about them to comment about whether or not they can be delayed.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

Raven22       11/17/2008 6:48:03 AM

They'd want to be quick if they want to 'cancel' 8/9RAR. 8/9RAR already has over 200 soldiers, and their own vehicles and equipment etc. By early next year there will be a deployable company group capability, with a full deployable battlegroup capability by 2011. In reality it's pretty much too late to stop it being re-raised - it would take a lot of political balls to lay the colours back up after only 6 months.

There's no point cancelling the M113 upgrade either. Theres already a couple of companys worth that have been delivered, with lots more coming through the production line. All the money has alredy been spent - cancelling now would just be throwing out the baby with the bath water.

 5. Retire

n. A regular ARA Cavalry regiment and put their ASLAV's into storage. As has been pointed out before on this board we don't need two force recon regiments so it would be a reasonable economy measure. We could then split the remaining regiment into independent squadrons between the ARA Brigades.

I know this is only because of your weird personal prejudice against wheeled AFVs, but why? Army wants a third ASLAV regiment in Townsville - for what possible reason would you disband one? The money has already been spend on all those ASLAVs and the training and equipment for 2.5 cavalry regiments. Disbanding them would save a pittance while taking away a significant slice of army combat power. It is silly.

 
Quote    Reply

DropBear       11/18/2008 12:07:32 AM
 
JSF cut to 24-36 F-35C models to serve as a silver bullet strike fighter force, while retaining the SH's and replacing the remainder of the legacy bugs with 36-48 Gripen NG's.
 
Not sure why getting a couple of dozen Naval JSF variants and a couple score Gripens would actually save any money.

Especially considering that the C-Model would cost more than the CTOL JSF and the capabilties of the Gripen are on par with our legacy Bugs anyway.
 
Curious.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       11/18/2008 5:30:07 AM
Not sure why getting a couple of dozen Naval JSF variants and a couple score Gripens would actually save any money.

Especially considering that the C-Model would cost more than the CTOL JSF and the capabilities of the Gripen are on par with our legacy Bugs anyway.
 
The C has greater range and payload than the A also a stronger structure which one would think would improve fatigue life.  It would also be purchased far later than the F-35A's, so long after the current financial situation has turned around. 
 
The Gripen NG is a generation ahead of the Legacy Bugs with its AESA radar and sensor fusion, it is also certified with a wide range of current generation US ordinance.  Its greatest advantage is its low purchase and through life costs which would be enhanced through its engine compatibility with the SH.
 
The SH will give us an edge regionally for a decade or so and will be ideal for conversion to various support and force multiplying roles after this.  The Gripen NG is significantly cheaper to buy, own and operate than either the SH or F-35 while remaining a highly capable combat platform in its own right, in particular when operated in conjunction with complimentary combat types (SH), AEW and tankers.  Operating SH's and Gripens together will give us a first rate air combat force through to 2020 at significantly lower cost than an all F-35 or mixed F-35, SH force.  The F-35C (or future enhanced model) would then be acquired around 2020 to take over the top tier strike fighter role from the SH allowing us to retain our edge.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       11/18/2008 6:10:09 AM
The Gripen NG is a generation ahead of the Legacy Bugs with its AESA radar and sensor fusion, it is also certified with a wide range of current generation US ordinance.  Its greatest advantage is its low purchase and through life costs which would be enhanced through its engine compatibility with the SH.
 
The SH will give us an edge regionally for a decade or so and will be ideal for conversion to various support and force multiplying roles after this.  The Gripen NG is significantly cheaper to buy, own and operate than either the SH or F-35 while remaining a highly capable combat platform in its own right

Swedish marketing is better than swedish functionality - how many repeat customers outside of sweden go back to swedish combat aircraft?
 
as for cheaper through life costs - one of the things that the swedes excel at is screwing the customer on the maint. - if you don't make money on the sale (and nobody really does) you get it on the roundabout.
 
I'd rather see 100 shornets than 100 gripens - and we all know how much I love the Shornet. :)


 
Quote    Reply

Volkodav       11/18/2008 6:29:35 AM
Swedish marketing is better than swedish functionality - how many repeat customers outside of sweden go back to swedish combat aircraft?
 
as for cheaper through life costs - one of the things that the swedes excel at is screwing the customer on the maint. - if you don't make money on the sale (and nobody really does) you get it on the roundabout.
 
I'd rather see 100 shornets than 100 gripens - and we all know how much I love the Shornet. :)
 
I agree to a degree however Hungarian Gripens have impressed on exercise with NATO in Italy.  I would never want to see it as our only combat type, but as a compliment to other leading edge types it would be ideal.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics