This is a discussion on Australian Army Discussions and Updates within the Army & Security Forces forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by Navor86
Even if this article is from 2007 I have a few Questions.
Currently the Aus Army ...
Even if this article is from 2007 I have a few Questions.
Currently the Aus Army has around 28k Soldiers and not 30k so are there plans to bring the Aus Army to 36k Soldiers as indirectly mentioned by the article
Those Expansions plans are they those anounced in iirc 06 with the creation of 8/9 and delinking of 5/7,or is this a step further with a further increase with yet to be announced Units?
You need an Army/Infantry specialist (not a defence generalist (navy oriented) person such as me), however, I wouldn't be supprised if there were a component of the Soldier 2012 program here (I think that was the name). It had been the case that battalions were only incorporating 3 fighting companies, but this was to be increased with the Manouvre Support Company (which if my math is any good would make 4 companies).
There may be more to it as well. But I understood that the first 1500 people announced in 2005/6 were to remove some of the 'hollowness' and then another 2600 or so were to come from new units announced in 06/07. I am not sure if there was anyone talking of 36K though. 34k maybe. Perhaps someone with more knowledge on the topic can be of further assistance?
You need an Army/Infantry specialist (not a defence generalist (navy oriented) person such as me), however, I wouldn't be supprised if there were a component of the Soldier 2012 program here (I think that was the name). It had been the case that battalions were only incorporating 3 fighting companies, but this was to be increased with the Manouvre Support Company (which if my math is any good would make 4 companies).
There may be more to it as well. But I understood that the first 1500 people announced in 2005/6 were to remove some of the 'hollowness' and then another 2600 or so were to come from new units announced in 06/07. I am not sure if there was anyone talking of 36K though. 34k maybe. Perhaps someone with more knowledge on the topic can be of further assistance?
Brett.
Infantry 2012 hasn't been finalised yet (1RAR is currently conducting the trial, 6RAR having been deployed on ops, so the task had to be taken off them).
The general idea however is to "reduce" a battalion to 3x permanent rifle companies, from the current nominal 4x rifle companies per battalion.
I say nominal because it's my experience that few if any battalions actually maintain 4x fully manned companies.
What the new structure will add, is a maneuvre support platoon per rifle company.
The "maneuvre support company" is currently known as support company and includes direct fire support weapons platoon, mortar platoon etc and is already extent within battalions.
As to overall numbers, I think any figure is nominal at best because battalions are in a fairly constant state of flux with the posting cycle, retention and recruiting efforts etc.
The "online battalion" in 3 brigade (ie: the battalion kept on high readiness within Army for "rapid" deployment, and it rotates, so no point asking "which one" it is at present) is likely the only battalion that actually goes close to meeting the "structure" of a battalion on paper...
An easier figure to manage would be to count operational battalions. At present Army should be able to provide 6 full time battalions, (1,2,3,4,5 and 6) with 2 still forming (7 and 8/9RAR) and without evidence to the contrary I'd expect they are mostly meeting the manning levels required of them, given the numbers of infantry recruited over the past few years.
The difficulty with this method is of course, that elements of a lot of them are on ops continuously at present...
Infantry 2012 hasn't been finalised yet (1RAR is currently conducting the trial, 6RAR having been deployed on ops, so the task had to be taken off them).
The general idea however is to "reduce" a battalion to 3x permanent rifle companies, from the current nominal 4x rifle companies per battalion.
I say nominal because it's my experience that few if any battalions actually maintain 4x fully manned companies.
What the new structure will add, is a maneuvre support platoon per rifle company.
The "maneuvre support company" is currently known as support company and includes direct fire support weapons platoon, mortar platoon etc and is already extent within battalions.
As to overall numbers, I think any figure is nominal at best because battalions are in a fairly constant state of flux with the posting cycle, retention and recruiting efforts etc.
The "online battalion" in 3 brigade (ie: the battalion kept on high readiness within Army for "rapid" deployment, and it rotates, so no point asking "which one" it is at present) is likely the only battalion that actually goes close to meeting the "structure" of a battalion on paper...
An easier figure to manage would be to count operational battalions. At present Army should be able to provide 6 full time battalions, (1,2,3,4,5 and 6) with 2 still forming (7 and 8/9RAR) and without evidence to the contrary I'd expect they are mostly meeting the manning levels required of them, given the numbers of infantry recruited over the past few years.
The difficulty with this method is of course, that elements of a lot of them are on ops continuously at present...
Thanks for that AD
1) Any chance of getting a 4th Company (all with the extra support platoons)? - I know, I am greedy! :p
2) What size is the Australian Army hoping for, in terms of regulars, now? 33/4K?
1) Any chance of getting a 4th Company (all with the extra support platoons)? - I know, I am greedy! :p
2) What size is the Australian Army hoping for, in terms of regulars, now? 33/4K?
Brett.
As to a 4th company? Sure. Why not. Every battalion in the Australian Army can and should have a 4th rifle company. So long as you can provide the funding and the staff for 21x odd battalions to maintain an extra rifle company, plus the elements necessary to support same? You know, Landrovers, Unimogs, Bushmasters, small arms, uniforms, radios, rations etc, plus administrative matters like, barracks, training facilities etc...
As to numbers, I've no idea. The mouthpieces (Joel Fitzgibbon, Brendan Nelson etc) care about that sort of detail, but given that no matter how many battalions exist, there was always around 5000 personnel involved in the old "Training Command" and around 10,000 in the old "Support Command" it puts into perspective the numbers at the "sharp end" of our (formerly) 26,000 odd strong regular force...
All up, Army is funded to something like 54,000 including part time and full time troops.
I think the Full-Time component of Army is intended to grow to comprise somewhere around 28,000, plus 15,000 in the "Training and Support commands" (whatever they are called these days) and the remainder are part time soldiers.
Don't quote me on the exact breakdown, but it's something like that. I'm pretty confident about the 54,000 number though.
So if I have understood you right,than the increase will be 2000 in the regular Force?
EDIT
I just checked wiki and its Numbers say that currenty the Army has around 40k(Reserve+Regular) So at what Point do tjey want to have thosee 54k Soldiers?
So currently there are 26k all in all active-15k Support which leads all in all to 11k active for Combat and this shall grow to 28kactive +15k support?
G'day,
Im a Recruit Instructor at 1RTB and i have say, the whole gap year program is a load of hot cock. The attatude from these kids is a lot different (shit)compared to the recruits that complete the 80 day program.
I say can this crap and spend the money on young people who want to make a career out of soldiering and stop wasting Training Commands time.
So if I have understood you right,than the increase will be 2000 in the regular Force?
EDIT
I just checked wiki and its Numbers say that currenty the Army has around 40k(Reserve+Regular) So at what Point do tjey want to have thosee 54k Soldiers?
So currently there are 26k all in all active-15k Support which leads all in all to 11k active for Combat and this shall grow to 28kactive +15k support?
Wiki ain't all that accurate. You or I could go there now and change the number to whatever we wanted.
Army for a long time was capped at about 50,000. Then the Howard Government authorised an increase for Hardening and Networking the Army program of about an extra 1500 positions.
Then the Howard Government authorised the Enhanced Land Force project which added an additional 2600 positions, bringing the authorised strength to around 54,000.
I expect this figure won't change much (unless perhaps negatively) over the next few years, as even if no changes occur, Army will take time to build this number of additional forces.
G'day Greenskin, welcome to the boards mate. What are your thoughts on Army's recruiting efforts at present?
Are the positions on the recruit courses being filled? Are the recruits still taking a long time from their initial applications to get to Kapooka?
G'day,
Im a Recruit Instructor at 1RTB and i have say, the whole gap year program is a load of hot cock. The attatude from these kids is a lot different (shit)compared to the recruits that complete the 80 day program.
I say can this crap and spend the money on young people who want to make a career out of soldiering and stop wasting Training Commands time.
Have seen the Gap year mob getting around at Willytown. Who would want to join up after being treated like a recruit for a year? Three months was bad enough.
I think its important that the Army and its personel treat the gap year recruits as well as is reasonable. If you want to interest young people in a career in the Army, having an poor attitude to them could possibly take away their motivation to continue.
Instead of resenting them for wasting you precious Army money, look at them as people who were motivated enough to serve at a time when interest in an Army career and defence is low, and the rewards for doing anything else is high.
What they need to do IMHO is only the basics and tease them with the "fun" stuff, I thought the gap year was deisgned as a fishing hook to catch more personnel? Correct me If im wrong though...
I hope that this Gap Year doesnt end like Conscription in Germany.
Here you have them for 9 Months and the Conscripts are integrated in every Unit with the result that you cant deploy a Unit as a whole becuase conscripts are not as trained as regulars or their conscription would end while deployed.
The problem lies with the education system, before military service. There should never be a shortage of technical recruits, every man or woman should graduate with these skills. The military should never be in the position of not recruiting required math and science skills.
The problem lies with the education system, before military service. There should never be a shortage of technical recruits, every man or woman should graduate with these skills. The military should never be in the position of not recruiting required math and science skills.
I am not so sure that is the case. My understanding is that the current market in Australia has been quite good, particularly for those with technicial and/or trade skills. As a result, the ADF has been competing with private industry for some of the same skills, where private industry can afford to pay high wages or salaries. Not unlike the competition the US DoD had in recruiting engineers and computer techs between 1995-2000.
Factor in the current recruitment process the ADF has (mis)managed by Manpower which can drag on apparently, and it can be difficult to gather and keep the interest of recruits with the desired skills. I expect if the economy was worse, and jobs more scarce, the ADF would not have such an issue. There would likely still be some problems given how the process seems to be conducted currently, but then there would also likely be a larger pool of applicants who would have greater incentive to endure the entire process.
-Cheers
________________
"I'm doing the same thing I do every night, Pinky..." comment from one lab mouse to another.
I am not so sure that is the case. My understanding is that the current market in Australia has been quite good, particularly for those with technicial and/or trade skills. As a result, the ADF has been competing with private industry for some of the same skills, where private industry can afford to pay high wages or salaries. Not unlike the competition the US DoD had in recruiting engineers and computer techs between 1995-2000.
Factor in the current recruitment process the ADF has (mis)managed by Manpower which can drag on apparently, and it can be difficult to gather and keep the interest of recruits with the desired skills. I expect if the economy was worse, and jobs more scarce, the ADF would not have such an issue. There would likely still be some problems given how the process seems to be conducted currently, but then there would also likely be a larger pool of applicants who would have greater incentive to endure the entire process.
-Cheers
Definately agree. It took 10 months from my initial application to the selection board. In the end I took a civilian job because after the board I applied for, interviewed for, and was given a job before any response. People are not going to wait around to get into the ADF if someone is offering them a definate job now. Especially if the recruiting process is going to take over a year (as in my case) with no feedback on the timeline of the process. Obviously my case is a bit extreem but when most civilian companies can easily do it all inside a few weeks to a month, the ADF will always struggle to pick up the people it needs unless it can start to compare.
