Land Force: Land 40 Ph.2 - Progress? | ADM Mar 2011

Gregor Ferguson | Sydney

In the eight months since ADM last reported on project Land 40 Ph.2 nothing seems to have happened – astonishingly, considering the ADF is heavily engaged in Afghanistan and its casualty count is growing.

It’s not at all clear what’s happening with a crucial part of Defence’s Project Land 40 Ph.2 – Direct Fire Support Weapon. Tenders to supply a 40mm Light Weight Automatic Grenade Launcher (LWAGL), along with a Fire Control System (FCS) and ammunition, closed in October 2007; live firing trials were held in early 2008 and a source selection was due in June 2009, to be followed by an initial contract for 60 weapons with an option for a further 90 and deliveries commencing in 2010.

The estimated budget for this phase of Land 40 was $150-200 million. Pending introduction of the new system the Special Operations Task Group in Afghanistan is equipped as an interim measure with GD’s older Mk19 AGL, while the broader Army appears to lack this capability altogether. Separately, Phase 2 also seeks to acquire a new generation hand-held direct fire support weapon, and deliveries are now under way of 437 M3 Carl Gustav 84mm anti-tank rifles ordered in November 2009. Final deliveries of the ‘Charlie Gs’ and their associated 437 BAE Systems AN/PAS-13C(V) Thermal Weapon Sight should be completed next month.

As for the LWAGL, nothing. Neither of the two shortlisted contenders has commented on the project or its current status. As reported in ADM’s July 2010 edition it seems to be an open secret that the winning bidder was Melbourne-based Point Trading which offered the Heckler & Koch (HK) Grenade Machine Gun with a Norwegian-made Vinghogs FCS and a thermal weapon site supplied by BAE Systems in the US.

The other shortlisted contender, Brisbane-based Nioa Defence, is the agent for US firm General Dynamics and offered GD’s Mk47 lightweight Automatic Grenade Launcher (AGL), dubbed the Striker 40, along with a fully compliant FCS and the only air burst 40mm ammunition that’s actually qualified and in service. This weapon also passed the field trials, ADM understands, so is technically compliant with the ADF’s requirements. The Army acquired a small fleet of older Mk19 AGLs as an interim solution.

The Army had told contenders it was looking for a MOTS solution: a fully qualified LWAGL that is in active service, able to fire all natures of 40mm ammunition used by the US forces, and with a night vision and airburst capability. The RFT called for the gun, a FCS incorporating a day/night optical sight, a TWS and the ammunition. The airburst capability was desirable, rather than essential – the only fully qualified programmable 40mm airburst ammunition available is the Mk285 round manufactured by NAMMO in Norway and ADM understands the Mk47 is the only weapon qualified to fire it.

Both shortlisted weapons are used by Australia’s allies in Afghanistan – the Mk47 is used by the US Special Forces (as well as Israel and Sweden), while the GMG is used by Canada and NZ. Selecting a MOTS solution based on one or the other shouldn’t be difficult: while not exactly a commodity item, this shouldn’t be a developmental project and there shouldn’t be any significant integration or qualification issues. Yet, two years after the field trials it’s not clear that the DMO has even begun contract negotiations with Point Trading, nor when a contract might be signed or deliveries commence.

The waters were muddied somewhat at last year’s Land Warfare Conference in Brisbane when HK’s local subsidiary showed the NZ version of the GMG on its stand. This is the C-Model GMG equipped with the Vingmate FCS and AN/PAS-13C(V) Thermal Weapon Sight. This GMG configuration is already combat proven in Afghanistan: as well as the NZ Army it has been adopted by Canada which has ordered over 300 units and is being examined closely by the US and UK Armies.

A company source acknowledged that HK did not respond in its own right to the original RFT and is therefore not a player in the current contract (and Nioa didn’t even bother displaying the GD Mk47at LWC). But he told ADM that, if asked, the company has sufficient production capacity and buffer stock that it could deliver five systems within three months of receiving an order and the Army could declare Initial Operational Capability (IOC) within 12 months, fielding 30 weapons and a cadre of fully-trained crews.

The implications of HK’s presence at LWC aren’t clear. ADM understands Point Trading submitted the Land 40 Ph.2 tender response offering the E-Model variant of the GMG, along with a Vinghogs FCS; at the time Point Trading was the Australian agent for Vinghogs. Since the RFT, however, Vinghogs has terminated this arrangement and established a joint venture, VingTech Australia, with HK’s Australasian representative, Melbourne-based HK Systems Research and Development Pty Ltd.

It wasn’t possible to compare directly the Point Trading and HK 40mm gun offerings, so it’s not clear what differences may exist between them, nor how significant they might be. If Point Trading has modified either the gun (including the tripod) and the FCS in any way this might affect the OEM’s warranties for these items, along with any certification. And if it has configured the overall system in a different way this might require some level of integration work and re-qualification. And it’s not clear either whether a Technical Assistance Agreement (TAA) would be required for the technical data necessary to integrate the AN/PAS-13C(V) with the FCS or gun. Although this TWS is already in ADF service it is still an ITAR-controlled US product, so a separate TAA might be required for the Land 40 integration and this would compound the project’s delays and complexities.

Moral of the story

The situation at present seems to be this: the ADF has chosen a prime contractor offering a proven gun and FCS, but doesn’t appear able to get into contract. Defence confirmed that “contract negotiations with the preferred tenderer are ongoing” but refused to be drawn further on the issue.

While there’s no suggestion at this stage that the current Land 40 Ph.2 tender evaluation process might be terminated, the DMO is undoubtedly aware that it could acquire a fully compliant MOTS solution from two other players, if it chose. And ADM understands that Nioa has continued to revalidate its price for the Striker 40 system, though is unable to discuss the project at all. Similarly, Point Trading had also declined to talk to ADM about the project; both are bound by confidentiality agreements with the DMO.

Despite the fact the Army is heavily engaged in Afghanistan, the source selection originally promised for June 2009 is now some 18 months overdue. Even if a contract were signed today it could be another year before the Army is able to take a new 40mm gun into action. If this delay isn’t important, then perhaps the Army doesn’t really need the weapon. In that case the project should be cancelled with the savings going to support the Strategic Reform Program.

But if the weapon is needed, how can Defence justify these delays when at least two compliant MOTS solutions are available?