• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Australia turns down surplus Dutch PzH2000 howitzers (from Janes Defence Weekly)

Ex-Dragoon

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1
Points
430
Australia turns down surplus Dutch PzH2000 howitzers

Julian Kerr JDW Correspondent
  Sydney
The Australian Defence Force ( ADF) has declined a Dutch offer of 18 Kraus-Maffei Wegmann PzH2000 155 mm self-propelled howitzers (SPHs) to meet a major part of the ADF’s Land 17 artillery replacement programme.

The Royal Netherlands Army has declared 18 of the 57 PzH2000s it has on order as surplus to requirements. The guns, offered to Australia at what is understood to be an advantageous price, have yet to be built.

Brigadier Stephen Dunn, Director-General Land Development, told an industry briefing that a compelling case for purchasing the PzH2000s had not been established. This was largely due to the absence of accurate in-service support costs.

An open Request for Tender (RfT) for no less than 18 52-cal 155 mm protected SPHs to replace the ADF’s 36 M198 towed howitzers will be released no later than the last quarter of 2007, said Brig Dunn. Contenders include the PzH2000, the Samsun Techwin K9 Thunderer, Denel’s G6-52 and the Bofors FH-77-BW Archer.

Raytheon’s Advanced Field Artillery Tactical Data System (AFATDS) has now been mandated as the required digital Battlefield Management System – Fires (BMS-F) for Land 17. It will be procured by the government via the US Foreign Military Sales (FMS) programme.

The Land 17 requirement for up to four batteries (35 platforms) of lightweight towed 155 mm howitzers has specified a maximum gun weight of 5,040 kg to allow transportation by a ballistically protected Boeing CH-47 heavy-lift helicopter. This is understood to leave the BAE Systems M777A2 ultra lightweight howitzer, weighing 3,745 kg, as the only contender. The M777A2 features hardware and software upgrades enabling it to fire the XM922 Excalibur extended-range precision unitary munition.

In a related development, Australia has requested the purchase of an unknown quantity of Excalibur projectiles from the US for its existing M198 155 mm towed howitzers. The breeches on at least 18 M198s are being modified to enable them to fire the Excalibur rounds. This is understood to be a precaution against the possible deployment of M198s to support Australian troops in Afghanistan should the current artillery support provided by Dutch-manned PzH2000s be withdrawn.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

© 2007 Jane's Information Group

Comment: With the CF getting back into the tracked game so to speak, would this not be a good opportunity for us?
 

GAP

Army.ca Legend
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
20
Points
380
If they are not able to be lifted by the CH-47 for Australia, why would they be any more transportable by us?
 

Ex-Dragoon

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1
Points
430
Leopard 2 cannot be lifted by Chinook as well but we are getting them...
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,238
Points
1,140
The M198 is CH-47 liftable -- and jumpable too. Its the principle US Arty piece for the 82nd Abn.  I think the Aussies issue -- was if the Dutch pull the PzH2000, the Aussies want arty -- and there only current system is the M198.

They are looking at the M777 - that we got already -- it is hook moveable, (I am guessing by the wording of the document the 198 is a tough go for the MH-47 in the higher altitudes)
 

Gunnerlove

Full Member
Reaction score
0
Points
160
At sea level the Hook will move a M198 and some ready ammo plus the crew, with stores including the coffee maker. In the hot and high they need two to do the same job.

Swapping M777 for M198 does little to change things as the guns weight savings is equal to only +\- 40 rounds (20 min sustained fire). The gun was designed for the marines who need to stuff everything into assault ships and on landing craft where space and weight are so much more important than durability. It is an Expeditionary Howitzer, not a gun intended to keep up with a mechanized fighting force. 

The Aussies are restructuring their artillery and do not want to jump the gun and become the parents of a costly orphan fleet, like Canada. That would be dumb.

Happy Canada day and pass the FRP, I am down another quart.
 

Old Sweat

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
99
Points
480
The Aussies are restructuring their artillery and do not want to jump the gun and become the parents of a costly orphan fleet, like Canada. That would be dumb.

Gunnerlove,

I am a little slow this morning. Could please you explain the above statement using little words?

Sweatie
 

Cdn Blackshirt

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
36
Points
530
For Canada, I'd think HIMARS would be a better complimentary acquisition to go with the existing M777's than the Dutch PzH2000's.


Matthew.  :salute:
 

Ex-Dragoon

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1
Points
430
Cdn Blackshirt said:
For Canada, I'd think HIMARS would be a better complimentary acquisition to go with the existing M777's than the Dutch PzH2000's.


Matthew.   :salute:

Why?
 

Benny

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
110
By 'restructuring' what I assume is meant is 'gutting'. The last I heard on it was that ARES Arty units were going to lose their guns and become mortar only units. Given what the army did to the ARES armoured units, this is very believable. I'm not surprised at us turning down the dutch either, given our army's apparrant abhorrance of armour of any kind.
 

Ex-Dragoon

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1
Points
430
Cdn Blackshirt said:
Ease of deployment and range of munitions delivery.


Matthew.   :salute:

Works for me but would HIMARs be complimentary with the Leopard 2s?

This is for the artillery types out there what would you prefer a gun system or a missile system? What would serve our needs better....
 

ironduke57

Sr. Member
Reaction score
2
Points
230
One positive aspect of a possible PzH2000 purchase for you would be the part commonality between it and your Leo2´s.

Regards,
ironduke57
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
7,157
Points
1,090
Benny said:
By 'restructuring' what I assume is meant is 'gutting'. The last I heard on it was that ARES Arty units were going to lose their guns and become mortar only units. Given what the army did to the ARES armoured units, this is very believable. I'm not surprised at us turning down the dutch either, given our army's apparrant abhorrance of armour of any kind.

There is no intent or desire to re-role the Canadian Reserve Artillery regiments to mortars.

I'm not sure what's happening in Australia, though...

 

Benny

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
110
dapaterson said:
There is no intent or desire to re-role the Canadian Reserve Artillery regiments to mortars.

I'm not sure what's happening in Australia, though...
Good to hear. Seems you guys are actually increasing your capability unlike us. It's a laughable situation here. The majority of our armoured units do not have armour, and soon the majority of our artillery units may not have artillery.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
7,157
Points
1,090
Benny said:
Good to hear. Seems you guys are actually increasing your capability unlike us. It's a laughable situation here. The majority of our armoured units do not have armour, and soon the majority of our artillery units may not have artillery.
We're maintaining what we have in the Reserve Force; I'm not sure that we can say we're increasing capability.  Our Reserve Armoured units are now essentially performing light mounted recce, training on a platform with limited armour, converting to other platforms prior to deployment.  They are also augmenting Regular Armoured units in recce and sabre squadrons, but does require additional training.

 

Benny

Jr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
110
dapaterson said:
We're maintaining what we have in the Reserve Force; I'm not sure that we can say we're increasing capability. 

I meant your Armour as a whole. We buy less of any new gear than we had previously. (ie less new Abrams than retired Leo 1s). Canada seems to be actually increasing its equipment portfolio on the whole, and all the better for it.
 

geo

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
0
Points
410
The Dutch are just trying to shed some of their committment to purchase Pzh2000.... same as they went looking to take some Leo2s off their hands.
 

ArmyRick

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
350
Points
880
Since we got the Leo 2s, I don't think our government going to jump out and get us PzH2000.
 
Top