MINCS(L) AMP048.36 – Army Mortar System Project

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: MINCS(L) AMP048.36 – Army Mortar System Project
BLUIE006 5/31/2009 8:30:06 AM

Army's mortars will also be replaced with a new and more capable system, and the Government will equip our soldiers with new direct-fire anti-armour as well as automatic grenade launcher systems. Any chance this will include a Self propelled mortar system and the XM395 PGMM ?

Quote Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2

Barracuda Mortars 6/1/2009 9:30:16 PM

I would not know about the ammo, but they would just whack the mortars in an APCM variant or a modified bushmaster.

Wouldn't they?

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust 6/2/2009 2:18:02 AM

I would not know about the ammo, but they would just whack the mortars in an APCM variant or a modified bushmaster.

Wouldn't they?

potential engineering issues.

eg a 105mm mortar can generate 15 tonnes of felt recoil. that tends to bugger up suspension and structural integrity if not designed in from the outset.

Quote Reply

Barracuda GF 6/3/2009 2:52:14 AM

We do have the APC - M now or will the new modified Tenix APC not be right for that?

I had always thought with the Bushmaster we were getting Mortar variants, I do vaguely remember a briefing about it and doing TEWT's with them.

You are right about the kick and the need for engineering.

I remember the old furphy in the 80s about the SASR putting a smoke dispenser off a Leopard on the front of a 110 and blowing it off the front axles ... goes with the boys wanting to fire 81 mortars without posts, tripods aiming by hand

Quote Reply

Volkodav 6/3/2009 9:03:50 AM

A turreted mortar such as NEMO or a recoiling mortar such as the SOLTAM CARDOM or Dragonfire would do the job.

Quote Reply

Aussie Diggermark 2 6/3/2009 11:52:04 AM

Army's mortars will also be replaced with a new and more capable system, and the Government will equip our soldiers with new direct-fire anti-armour as well as automatic grenade launcher systems.

Any chance this will include a Self propelled mortar system and the XM395 PGMM ?

I would rate that about as likely as RAAF operating the F-22.

Quote Reply

Aussie Diggermark 2 6/3/2009 11:55:07 AM

We do have the APC - M now or will the new modified Tenix APC not be right for that?

I had always thought with the Bushmaster we were getting Mortar variants, I do vaguely remember a briefing about it and doing TEWT's with them.

You are right about the kick and the need for engineering.

We are, but like the Bushmaster direct fire weapons variant, the vehicle will not actually be armed with a mortar or a direct fire weapon, but rather will simply carry around the existing crew served weapon systems, ie: the Bushmaster mortar carrier will carry a mortar section plus the F2 81mm mortar tubes the battalions are already using. It won't be integrated into the chassis as such, just as the Javelin and Carl Gustav direct fire weapons won't be mounted on the Bushmaster, though AGL's might, someday...

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust 6/3/2009 7:13:18 PM

You are right about the kick and the need for engineering.

and welcome to the problem with the upgunned Nary's.....

Quote Reply

doggtag mortar mounted on a Bushmaster 4x4 not really that far-fetched... 6/3/2009 11:09:15 PM

I wouldn't rate the chance of this not happening as so low as some here have suggested.

I've seen this one recently, recalling its mention back in IDEX 2007.

It's the Agrab 120mm mortar system, and its base vehicle is the BAE RG31 (4x4 MRAP to any US folks).

Looks rather impressive and quite capable.

From Army-Guide.Com's entry we can get some decent photos of the system,

and there's also a Jane's entry here.

Those of you receiving a subscription to Defense Technology International ( via AviationWeek.com/dti )

will recognize it from the May 2009 edition, page 20

(should be accessible with an online account, either under Archives or Previous Editions or something like that in there).

If there's still concerns a Bushie 4x4 can't handle the big 120, why not use the 6-wheeler?

Judging by the sheer bulk of armor I've seen bolted onto other 6x6 frames (MRAP types not wholly dissimilar to a Bushmaster 6x6), a cut-down pick-up truck version should easily handle the girth, recoil, and magazine(s) of any number of the modern advanced 120mm mortars.

Shucks, if there's that MOBAT system that can handle a 105mm howitzer from the back of a 4x4,

( link here from Army-Guide.Com, and link here from Jane's ) it should be doable to develop something similar suitable for the Bushmaster chassis.

If 120 sounds too scary for a 4x4, consider then that 81mm systems are getting smarter, too, even if they don't have the punch of a 120mm shell (but remember: precision on point targets means we don't necessarily need as large a warhead, either).

We could always work with Patria, who seem good with turreted mortars, to develop a semi-scale NEMO or AMOS in 81mm...

Then again, the NEMO brochure there (see page 4 of that pdf) depicts the system mounted on the aft half of a Viking-type articulated APC/weapons carrier.

If its hull, not really known as a brute of a vehicle (it floats & swims, doesn't it?), can handle a full-up NEMO 120 (even if maybe only a couple dozen rounds?), is such a caliber on a 4x4 really that impossible to envision?

Either or, pursuing a truck-mounted 120mm mortar (greater yield than 105 howitzer)

or a truck-mounted 105mm howitzer (greater range than 120 mortar),

the strides in the PGK program are looking quite promising as well

(should be easy to create 120mm mortar rounds with a suitable fuze well, if the US PGMM is deemed too expensive to purchase in large quantities: Excalibur GPS artillery shells currently cost Uncle Sam upwards of $100K per round, so I doubt PGMMs will cost anything less than $75K apiece, being conservative).

Then again, if people still think wheeled chassis can't handle such recoil, there's always those stretched M113 chassis Australia has decided on.

Quote Reply

BLUIE006 6/14/2009 10:34:57 AM

Developments in mobile mortar & precision mortar platforms certainly require some attention - IMHO.

If a self propelled turreted system is out of the question? And modifying existing vehicles provides too greater engineering challenge then trailer mounted options should be investigated. 120mm mortar combined with PGMM provides a relatively simple, low-cost, precision-indirect fire weapon.

They would provide organic precision (1m accuracy) weapons to deployed infantry and motorized forces that are dependably available and immediately responsive, able to neutralize time urgent protected targets. They would also be Air deployable and have a small political footprint.

US have a cost goal of $15K per round for the M395 PGMM (h**p://www.dtic.mil/ndia/ammo/cilli.pdf). This provides a reasonable ?bang for buck? and should this prove unattainable there are alternative PGMM?s being developed all around the world.

Something like the towed Dragon-fire II or conventional 120mm with the M326 & M1101trailer (or alternative) could easily be integrated into the Bushmaster package; and with the M395 provide a battle ready solution to precision indirect fire.

Lack of previous training with 120mm mortar could prove a minor huddle for Australia; however, it is likely the troops on the ground would be keen to quickly to acquire these skills, given the ?one-shot defeat? potential of these systems.

Quote Reply

Aussie Diggermark 2 6/14/2009 10:45:01 AM

A trailer mounted mortar system, might be a possibility, though I heard that the USMC trailer mounted 120mm wasn't proving such a great success.

Army models itself quite closely on the USMC, so if they don't like something or are having trouble with it, I would suggest it might be a deathknell as far as we're concerned...

Quote Reply

1 2