Talk:List of equipment of the Australian Army

message: I've heard that the newer units of the Army are getting M4's instead of the F-88's. Maybe someone who knows for certain could edit this in? Bongomanrae 04:33, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that only 4 RAR, the SASR and 1 Commando Regiment use the M4. The Army is still investing in the F-88 and it is being used by the units currently in Iraq. I don't believe that the Army intends to replace the weapon in the near future (though it is looked at ways to extend the F-88 rifles lives). --Nick Dowling 04:45, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Okay then. I heard this from an AF Officer but maybe I just misunderstood him. Bongomanrae 18:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Mmm can't remember specifically what I've heard about this though I know it isn't for general usage and might only be a try out or similar.  The army is still very set on the F88s (and why wouldn't they be!) and this can be seen in the upgrade of the training systems for them and the creation of a new one.  -- eps 16:18, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

text: No.  I do know that being chosen for specialised areas comes down to ability and purely if there is an opening.  -- eps 16:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: M4

message: Has the new Enchanced Combat Helmet gone Army/ADF-wide? Some links for someone to write up:
Rabintex and New helmet into service. I've just improved the grammar and presentation of Combat Uniform.- Htra0497 04:41, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Helmet

message: When it says the Remington 870, is there a particular model used, or does it vary?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.107.188.76 (talk) 08:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shotgun? 

message: :Image:AMTG.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 04:26, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:AMTG.jpg

message: Does anyone know details on the "Narys" being deployed with the SAS currently?
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24918566-662,00.html --Frmby988 (talk) 02:31, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That's about all that's known about the vehicles. There was a report a few weeks ago (in the Australian, I think) which was much more negative about the Narys than that story though - from memory, the story stated that it had proven impossible to fit them with 40mm grenade launchers and anti-tank guided missile launchers. Nick-D (talk) 07:40, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: New Armoured Vehicle

message: The Infatry Weapons bit is all out of date and wrong. The F88 is curently being upgraded.
http://www.thalesgroup.com/australia/Press-Room/Press-Release-search-all/Press-Release-search-result/Press-Release-Article.html?link=2d400a4e-4b69-552d-1710-483e650a403e:central&locale=EN-gb&Title=Thales+upgrades+Austeyr+rifle+to+meet+ADF+operational+needs&dis=1
--Frmby988 (talk) 03:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hmm... yes you would appear to be right, this will need to be amended. I actually hadn't really paid much attention to that section until you brought it up. Good pick up. Anyone feel up to making these changes? Anotherclown (talk) 05:56, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Future Equiptment

message: I think this should be under artillery weapons instead of infantry.
Not sure if infantry soldiers are trained on the mortar.Lokster (talk) 03:34, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact, traditionally mortars have been used by specialist platoons in Australian infantry battalions (and operated by specially trained infantrymen). Recently a number of Reserve artillery units have converted to mortars but this is more to do with cost cutting and the diminishing resources available to the part-time army than anything else. Anotherclown (talk) 09:54, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

text: As stated above, Mortars (the 81 and 60mm) are infantry weapons. Used by Mortar platoons within some of the RARs KarmaKangaroo (talk) 03:02, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: The F2 Mortar

message: Ok, I've seen images of an SAS patrol carring US— M14 EBR's though there is another image of VC winner Ben Roberts-Smith carring one (Cannot find on Google but is on my computer).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.184.77.37 (talk) 11:02, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  M14s 

message: There are a few pics floating round on the net of guys with Aussie flags on them using M82 or M107 Barrett rifles, would that count as a reasonable source for addition to the list?
182.239.251.88 (talk) 12:05, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  M107 or M82 Barrett 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on List of equipment of the Australian Army. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.army.gov.au/~/media/Army/Our%20work/Equipment%20and%20clothing/Vehicles/G%20wagon/G%20wagon%20booklet.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160825183833/http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2014/10/23/new-training-system-for-adf-helicopter-crews/ to http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2014/10/23/new-training-system-for-adf-helicopter-crews/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110602025703/http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/ClareSpeechtpl.cfm?CurrentId=11103 to http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/clarespeechtpl.cfm?CurrentId=11103
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150221004004/http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2015/02/19/minister-for-defence-land-400-phase-2-mounted-combat-reconnaissance-capability/ to http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2015/02/19/minister-for-defence-land-400-phase-2-mounted-combat-reconnaissance-capability/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20161020204550/http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2011smallarms/WednesdayInter12397Evenden.pdf to http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2011smallarms/WednesdayInter12397Evenden.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:36, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: In the main article, there is some talk about Unimog. There is nothing here. I think there should be some consistency.49.178.162.101 (talk) 15:50, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unimog 

message: The hyperlink 'Leopard' redirects to the page for Leopard (the animal) rather than Leopard (the tank series) while specifically talking about the Leopard tank. I believe this should be changed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.239.133.212 (talk) 09:14, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Leopard

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion