Australian Forces Equipment

[noovie]

There's an interesting article in the Sydney Morning Herald
about Aussie equipment

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...equipment-claim/2006/01/06/1136387608516.html

Army rejects faulty equipment claim

The army has rejected claims its troops are being forced to use sub-standard gear and says it will always encourage soldiers to report faulty equipment.

A report written by a serving officer has found soldiers are using second rate equipment because they are discouraged from making complaints.

The report examined the army's Report on Defective or Unsatisfactory Materiel (RODUM) system.

That system is a computer-based program that collates complaints about army issued equipment.

The RODUM report was leaked amid claims senior command failed to act on its recommendations.

But army chief, Lieutenant General Peter Leahy, said Australian forces were issued with some of the best equipment anywhere.

"Our soldiers deployed on operations have some of the best equipment in the world," General Leahy told reporters.

"I've hardly ever had anybody say our equipment isn't any good.

"We're issuing our soldiers with equipment that makes them the envy of other coalition forces.

"We do have complaints and we listen to those complaints."

Concerns about equipment problems would never be ignored, he said.

"That's just absolutely wrong. They're not sitting on a desk. I listen to the complaints, I call them forward through my staff so that I can understand them," General Leahy said.

"I have the three most senior warrant officers in the Australian army sitting on an army equipment committee.

"We make sure that we have the best equipment. I don't see how people can imagine we'd do something other than that as a nation and as an army."

A former corporal, Dane Simmonds, was so worried about equipment standards that he set up a website to discuss the faults and aired his concerns on the ABC's 7.30 Report this week.

Equipment problems raised by the former soldier included goggles issued for troops in Iraq which he described as no more than ski goggles.

Mr Simmons eventually shut down the website after the Defence Department told him it breached public comment regulations.

General Leahy said soldiers should use the system available to make complaints.

"I am disappointed that they chose a less than official manner to do that because they must know that all commanders in the army are concerned for their safety, and they just need to let us know what their concerns are and we'll act on them," he said.


So how does the equipment stand up to Coalition gear?

 

[gf0012-aust]

So how does the equipment stand up to Coalition gear?

there's a few of us in here who've had some dealings with DMO - so this comes as no surprise.

on the issue of kit (no pun intended) every bloke I know who was deployed into various theatres topped up their issue with their own gear.

that ranged from webbing, to goggles, to merlins to basics such as camping gear...

Big W does a roaring trade in townsville.

 

[Aussie Digger]

A lot of our basic gear stands up very well. In other areas (mainly expensive) large platforms leave a lot to be desired.

As to the Army's RODUM system. It's a joke. You can report on kit as much as you like through this system. The same old answer comes back, "DMO have assessed the complaints and have found the item meets Army's requirements"...

Our kit HAS improved in recent years, but it still leaves a lot to be desired...

 

[shrub]

in my oppinion ur all just a bunch of bloody wingers, the kit we get issueed is some of the best available, most countrys dont get equipment this good

just look at america , there walkin around inthe desert with jungle cam body armour and webbing tht stands out like dog testes on the background and do u hear them complaining, NO!

Admin: Text deleted. These comments are unacceptable - read the rules and remember them before posting

 

[Aussie Digger]

in my oppinion ur all just a bunch of bloody wingers, the kit we get issueed is some of the best available, most countrys dont get equipment this good

just look at america , there walkin around inthe desert with jungle cam body armour and webbing tht stands out like dog testes on the background and do u hear them complaining, NO!

Admin: Text deleted. These comments are unacceptable - read the rules and remember them before posting

Ever been in the ADF shrub? Our Auscam's are simply wonderful. They chose NOT to go with the ripstop material they were initially designed to be made of, because of cost. Worn the boots? Absolute rubbish. Walk into a disposals store pick up a set of Danner's and you have a boot far superior to the rubbish DMO fobs off.

So you think it's acceptable for us to have bad kit, just because others do as well?

How's this for an idea. DMO tests some cold/wet weather gear because our current Japarra's suck and provide virtually no protection whatsoever. They test some goretex gear, some non-goretex gear and other varieties of "goretex like" material. DMO chooses the "goretex like" material and designs the gear from that. The guy responsible at DMO then quits DMO and joins the company (at a higher level of pay) selected to provide this gear.

This company then sues ADF for "stealing" it's product, which is little more than stolen and "re-badged" goretex, which of course, doesn't work as well as the more expensive "proper" goretex. ADF settles out of court (and pays out roughly double the cost of the initial acquisition to this company) and gets well and truly reamed about it's defence acquisition processes AGAIN.

Meanwhile they continue to issue this sh*te to the troops, who complain continually through the Army's reporting (RODUM) system, only to be told the whole time there's nothing wrong with the kit and that they're nothing but a bunch of WHINGERS. Now of course the problems have been made public, DMO and ADF can't cover them up any longer and is forced to re-do the entire project AND get through a Ministerial ordered review of it's practices, on top of the massive payout they were ordered to pay.

Kind of seems where there may be smoke, there may be fire doesn't it? Particularly if you've had to use the rubbish issued by DMO/DAO.

 

[old faithful]

re-bad kit. yep our basic grunts kit has only slightly improved from vietnam era kit. in some cases, its actually gotten worse. I can remember the Y sole boots,they were pretty good really,and i know,i have walked thousands of km,s with them. i went out and got a pair of danners from our dpri store, they are over rated, feet get too hot in them, and soles are too soft. nice weekenders thogh,and they look good. the trial cams were fantastic,still got 2 sets,issued in 1986,and they are still in better nick than the "bali rolex" versions i was issued in about 89, i think. boy were we dissapointed in the rubbish they issued us with then. material in those first ones was rubbish,thank god they fixed that. better than greens,withexposed buttons. the webbing, what can you say about our crazy clark,k-mart webbing...the old modified bren pouches are still better...in 2006....rations improved under mr Beazly...(co-incedince???),and thats who is responsible for the majority of our junk. Trial versions of everything was great, issue standards were very very dissapointing. the contracts were signed under the labour party for boots,cams,rations webbing and load bearing equip.binding contracts. on another note, it was rumoured when project parentie (110 landrovers) that the RSL had some influence in the buying decision,the RSL strongly protesting the purchase of Japanese made vehicles such as Toyota.Any body else heard about that one?

 

[gf0012-aust]

on another note, it was rumoured when project parentie (110 landrovers) that the RSL had some influence in the buying decision,the RSL strongly protesting the purchase of Japanese made vehicles such as Toyota.Any body else heard about that one?

I wasn't involved with the start of Project Perentie, but was involved with the latter stages to modify them to 6x6 for the IMV and SAS trucks. At that stage I was subbed to JRA as they were doing the mods as well as working on Taipan. My job was to try and work out efficiencies for both the SAS mods and Taipan.

Because of that association I did have some direct contact with the DMO team and army test drivers. All of them were universal in stating that the Toyotas missed out due to performance issues on the test tracks.

Procurement evaluations are made on an acceptance matrix - which includes issues of interoperability with major allies. Toyotas have never been popular with various NATO related/associated militaries. We did buy a few, but they were mainly for either NORFORCE as it made support easier for them with local dealers and due to operational reasons - or they were drip fed to go to some isolated commands in FNQ as well.

I have heard of RSL mumblings, but they have kind of blurred over as a cross between a minority complaint or an urban legend.

 

[Aussie Digger]

re-bad kit. yep our basic grunts kit has only slightly improved from vietnam era kit. in some cases, its actually gotten worse. I can remember the Y sole boots,they were pretty good really,and i know,i have walked thousands of km,s with them. i went out and got a pair of danners from our dpri store, they are over rated, feet get too hot in them, and soles are too soft. nice weekenders thogh,and they look good. the trial cams were fantastic,still got 2 sets,issued in 1986,and they are still in better nick than the "bali rolex" versions i was issued in about 89, i think. boy were we dissapointed in the rubbish they issued us with then. material in those first ones was rubbish,thank god they fixed that. better than greens,withexposed buttons. the webbing, what can you say about our crazy clark,k-mart webbing...the old modified bren pouches are still better...in 2006....rations improved under mr Beazly...(co-incedince???),and thats who is responsible for the majority of our junk. Trial versions of everything was great, issue standards were very very dissapointing. the contracts were signed under the labour party for boots,cams,rations webbing and load bearing equip.binding contracts. on another note, it was rumoured when project parentie (110 landrovers) that the RSL had some influence in the buying decision,the RSL strongly protesting the purchase of Japanese made vehicles such as Toyota.Any body else heard about that one?

I remember the last pair of ADF issue boots I wore. Those horrible olive green coloured things. They were absolute SH*T. Go out bush for 2 weeks and all the green crap pealed off the front of your boots near the toe and you're boots looked terrible.

After I left the ADF, I joined the Queensland Police. They issued "redback" boots, which I found to be atrocious. I went and bought a pair of Magnum Hi-Tecs on recommendation from a friend of mine in SERT (QPS SWAT team). They were absolutely fantastic boots. It's a shame the Magnum's made today aren't the same. They were very light weight, very hardy and had very grippy soles, which for my mainly urban work as a "copper" suited me right down to the ground.

The only complaint I had was they wore out after about 3 years. I then bought Danner Arcadia's which have served me just as well. They are a fair bit heavier (and more expensive), and do certainly keep your feet warm, but not overly so. They fit perfectly do "look" gucci, which is not really important, but is a nice bonus and seem that they will last a VERY long time, given they also have a replaceable sole.

Both boot types are far superior to anything Army ever gave me.

I know what you mean about the webbing. Atrocious. My "Queuey" was a prick and we had to BUY extra "minimi" pouches and a better harness (if we wanted one). A lot of guys near the end of my service, were starting to wear privately acquired chest webbing, for the increasingly mounted ops we were conducting, as Army didn't seem interested in them.

I had a little chest mag holder that used to attach to my webbing harness, when performing recon duties. This held an extra 6 Steyr mags. I also used a Brit style "H" harness, rather than that canvas POS that Army issued and a "double" belt comforter. I've still got my webbing around here somewhere. I should dig it out and take a photo of it and post it into the gallery. Might do that one day...

 

[old faithful]

ha ha! i know what you mean about the green things! (boots) the old dunlop Y soles were the best of a bad bunch, i bought a pair of yank boots,but found them too narrow for my thong seasoned feet! the danners were my pride and joy after forking out $300 odd bucks for em, and they wernt too hot unless you were doing a forced march,which unfortunatly in 3RAR is.or was an occupational hazard! Thanks for the RSL info GF, i always suspected that it was an urban myth. by the way A.D, how is QLD cops, im in the NT and considering the NT police as a career change at the moment.

 

[old faithful]

by the way, i had a para rigger mate of mine copy a set of south african chest webbing for me in auscam canvas,i may have been the first to do so,not that that matters, but when you compare the quality of theS.A stuff to our crap, you feel a bit ripped off. The best pouch closing device i have seen is from the swiss army. kinda like a the male side of a press stud, pushed down on a re-enforced nylon button hole,total silence,quick and idiot proof.

 

[Aussie Digger]

I might PM you mate and webs at the same time and ask for "early" permission for you. I'd rather not talk too much about police stuff on a public website...

 

[shrub]

I remember the last pair of ADF issue boots I wore. Those horrible olive green coloured things. They were absolute SH*T. Go out bush for 2 weeks and all the green crap pealed off the front of your boots near the toe and you're boots looked terrible.

After I left the ADF, I joined the Queensland Police. They issued "redback" boots, which I found to be atrocious. I went and bought a pair of Magnum Hi-Tecs on recommendation from a friend of mine in SERT (QPS SWAT team). They were absolutely fantastic boots. It's a shame the Magnum's made today aren't the same. They were very light weight, very hardy and had very grippy soles, which for my mainly urban work as a "copper" suited me right down to the ground.

The only complaint I had was they wore out after about 3 years. I then bought Danner Arcadia's which have served me just as well. They are a fair bit heavier (and more expensive), and do certainly keep your feet warm, but not overly so. They fit perfectly do "look" gucci, which is not really important, but is a nice bonus and seem that they will last a VERY long time, given they also have a replaceable sole.

Both boot types are far superior to anything Army ever gave me.

I know what you mean about the webbing. Atrocious. My "Queuey" was a prick and we had to BUY extra "minimi" pouches and a better harness (if we wanted one). A lot of guys near the end of my service, were starting to wear privately acquired chest webbing, for the increasingly mounted ops we were conducting, as Army didn't seem interested in them.

I had a little chest mag holder that used to attach to my webbing harness, when performing recon duties. This held an extra 6 Steyr mags. I also used a Brit style "H" harness, rather than that canvas POS that Army issued and a "double" belt comforter. I've still got my webbing around here somewhere. I should dig it out and take a photo of it and post it into the gallery. Might do that one day...

although i may not agree with u on most of these complaints i would have to agree with u on the boots, my mate took a pair of them out for 1 weekend, came back and they were practically falling of his feet they were so tattered and worn out, although im proud to say my pair r still in pretty good nick considering wat theyve been through

 

[Snayke]

So our diggers are using less than adequate equipment?

 

[buschy]

think for a second, one day your doing a training op with the 129 sig squadron, 2300hrs and you've been crawling through the bush on ya belly for the last 2km's when you find the enemey strongpoint you are mean to be recce'ing. you reach down your side to your minimi pouch slung on your hip to extecate your bifold containing your pen and notebook to take down notes on whatever intel it is youve been sent to find. you undo the alice and RRRRRRRRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIPPPPPPPPPPP!!!!!!!!!!BANG!!BANG!!BANG!!. thats the sound of a completely useless velcro tab that seems to be purely desighned to give away your locstat to the enemy doing just that and subsequently getting your entire platoon wiped out.

 

[buschy]

in my oppinion ur all just a bunch of bloody wingers, the kit we get issueed is some of the best available, most countrys dont get equipment this good

just look at america , there walkin around inthe desert with jungle cam body armour and webbing tht stands out like dog testes on the background and do u hear them complaining, NO!

Admin: Text deleted. These comments are unacceptable - read the rules and remember them before posting

i agther the point of this post is to point out that other countries have worse so why bother getting better

i would like to ask you, shrub why is it that we as australians should have our diggers settle for substandard equipment purely because other countries have worse, thats total and utter bull s**t. ya dont know what your on about

 

[rossfrb_1]

ouch!

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/the-official-line-defence-a-shambles/2006/07/05/1151778968509.html
(page 1 of 2)
"Australian troops are being sent on overseas missions without proper clothing and equipment, one of the nation's most senior defence officials has admitted.

In a candid briefing last month, the official stated that the equipping of soldiers had been plagued by "stuff-ups".

Stephen Gumley, the head of the Defence Materiel Organisation, declared that front-line troops had "missed out" on gear. His organisation, the body responsible for equipping them, had engaged in "inappropriate behaviours".

He said: "We are going to let the troops down if we don't improve the reliability, quality and safety of our equipment."

The comments, made in a briefing to defence industry suppliers on June 23, could prove severely embarrassing for the Defence Minister, Brendan Nelson, and military brass, who just last month dismissed claims of inadequate provision of clothing and protective gear to soldiers.

A recording of Dr Gumley's briefing has been obtained in which he tells industry suppliers: "Frankly, I did not do a good enough job in this area (clothing and equipment) so we failed in that and I am going to fix it.

"What has happened has been a big wake-up call for me. Like someone has chucked a big cold bucket of water over my face."

Dr Gumley speaks of Dr Nelson being overwhelmed when he took over the defence portfolio.

"Let's talk about our minister. My boss got very confused when he got in this portfolio by all the stuff that hit him," Dr Gumley said, before quickly adding that Dr Nelson's "huge intellect" had helped him "get on top of his portfolio in record time".

Among a litany of extraordinary revelations, Dr Gumley reveals that a still-secret inquiry ordered by Dr Nelson into the combat clothing department has found "systematic problems with management in procurement".

The organisation had "stuffed-up in clothing" because of a failure to ensure up-to-date technical specifications "across hundreds of our pieces of equipment".

A quarter of the combat support and clothing department's staff had been shifted out after an internal investigation, resulting in huge "corporate knowledge loss".

The army was inefficiently managing its equipment and clothing budget, placing stresses on the materiel organisation and suppliers who "have to produce all this stuff in rapid urgent time".

The system which troops used to complain about gear and clothing was flawed because troops did not get feedback about their complaints and complaints were dealt with in batches rather than individually.

Dr Gumley was "very worried" about sole source contracts, in which only one company was able to supply troop gear.

"Please, do not think I am throwing bullets here. I am accepting responsibility. I am accepting [responsibility] for some of the stuff-ups that have gone on. But there are a few [stuff-ups] on the other side as well," he said.

"If we get our act together, there should be good business for everyone. If we keep going down this vortex, which has seemed to happen over the last 10 to 12 months, it makes us very hard to supply the troops on time."

Dr Gumley said investigations had revealed that defence suppliers had falsified test results, employed Asian-based manufacturers despite promising to use Australian subcontractors, and lied about their ability to meet deadlines, meaning troops on operational deployments "missed out" on equipment.

When asked why his organisation had not taken appropriate action against companies responsible for denying troops gear, Dr Gumley replied: "I don't know".

He said supplier contracts had dried up - despite the huge demand for gear - because political and media scrutiny on the organisation meant his staff could no longer bend the rules.

"You bash people enough, what do they do? The become risk averse, don't they?"

Dr Gumley promised to address internal failings. He said reforms would be applied to all projects and that minor project suppliers would be encouraged to sign "ethical" contracts......"


Wow, seems like some of those claims be true after all.
Minister Nelson has had quite a bit to deal with after stepping into his new portfolio. Certainly hasn't been an easy introduction. It will be interesting to see if he thrives on it or burns out. Was exMin Hill seen as burnt out when he left, anyone?

cheers
rb

 

[rossfrb_1]

story with legs

two addenda
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19699794-31477,00.html
"
Nelson to air review on shoddy combat gear

Mark Dodd July 06, 2006

DEFENCE Minister Brendan Nelson will release "within weeks" a report into the procedures used to buy clothing and equipment for Australian soldiers following scathing criticism of current practices by a senior Defence Department official.

Commissioned in February, the Clothing Procurement Review has been completed and its findings are being studied by Dr Nelson. The report examines the multi-million-dollar process of buying military clothing by the Defence Materiel Organisation.
During a meeting with representatives of companies supplying defence force clothing last month, DMO chief Steve Gumley blasted the shoddy procurement practices now in use.
As reported in The Australian earlier this year, the safety of Australian troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan has been compromised by poor equipment. Defective combat clothing included jackets that glow in the dark and body armour with a tendency to crack.
"Defence has acknowledged there have been difficulties in the timely supply of some items of clothing and personal combat equipment to troops training in Australia," DMO said yesterday.
"These shortcomings have to be overcome by the joint efforts of DMO and industry."
The statement said ADF troops serving overseas had received "the best combat equipment available".
Opposition spokesman for defence procurement Mark Bishop said the Howard Government's handling of the issue had been "outrageous".
Mr Bishop accused Dr Nelson of ignoring complaints and overseeing an inadequate tendering process involving repeated conflicts of interest.
"Some of the people who were directly employed by the DMO and were involved in awarding tendering contracts to particular companies then left the DMO and ended up employed by those same companies," Mr Bishop said yesterday.
He called on Dr Nelson to make full public disclosures on the inquiry into Defence's combat clothing section, saying the DMO was responsible for a budget of $6 billion a year."



and

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19702120-31477,00.html
"

Troops happy with equipment: PM

July 06, 2006

PRIME Minister John Howard was not aware of any serious problems with Australian troops' equipment, he said today.

Defence Minister Brendan Nelson has received a report of a review of the body that manages the weapons, armour and other equipment used by the Australian Defence Force.
While the report has not been released, Defence Materiel Organisation chief Dr Stephen Gumley told an industry briefing there had been systemic problems in his agency.
A litany of auditor-general reports and media interviews with serving soldiers have also pointed to serious flaws in equipment.
Mr Howard said he had not been advised of any problems.
"It's not the reaction that I have received when I visited troops in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere," Mr Howard told ABC Radio.
"The reaction I've always received, not just from commanding officers but from men and women from all ranks, is that the equipment they have is of a high order.
"If there is a problem then it is going to be revealed when Dr Nelson gets the results of the investigation that he's called for."
Mr Howard said he was unaware of Dr Gumley's concerns.
"If Mr Gumley has a problem then I would expect Mr Gumley to communicate it to the defence minister and communicate it to me and communicate it to the members of the national security committee of cabinet before communicating it to anyone else," he said.
Mr Howard said he believed Australian troops were entitled to the best equipment."



I wonder how long Dr Stephen Gumley stays chief of the DMO?
To be fair, he was taped by someone in the audience (without his knowledge?).

I wonder how this will play out?

Wonder if DefMin Nelson will be sending ExDefMin Hill an xmas card this year?



rb

 

[rossfrb_1]

spelling mistake

two addenums
{snip}

rb

brainfart

singlular - addendum, two or more - addenda

subsequently remembered that there is the edit function and corrected.

 

[old faithful]

jackets that glow in the dark???

is someone suggesting that jackets have been manufactured useing luminous material!:el i seriously doubt it unless it is deliberate sabotage! sounds more like the jackets have NOT been treated for infrared as is normaly the case with DPCU,s.The treatment provides some limited camo when viewed through active night vision,without this treatment,it would appear to glow when viewed through an IR scope/bino,s. This treatment can be damaged through ironing the uniform also!

 

[Cootamundra]

I wonder how long Dr Stephen Gumley stays chief of the DMO? To be fair, he was taped by someone in the audience (without his knowledge?).I wonder how this will play out? Wonder if DefMin Nelson will be sending ExDefMin Hill an xmas card this year?rb

IMHO Gumley has been alright, DMO was shite before he got there and the Kinnard review went through, they have improved (alright not enough) but they have improved. Key is that we needed to get the Project Management improvements (training and certification) done, we also needed to get the focus back onto schedule. The DMO and our defence procurement has suffered from a case of either being way to risk averse to wanting to do way too much. The customers requirements always need to be assessed and realistic solutions need to be put forward. Australianisation of all defence projects is dangerous and as much as possible we need to buy MOTS with 'some' customisation NOT 'total' customisation.....anyway as I said I think Guumley has been alright, the org is the problem along with many of the people/process. Change takes time