Australian Army Discussions and Updates

[old faithful]

With the PNG Dept Brigade Commander appointed, it wouldn't surprise me if we see a combined , regional brigade type structure with a Bn made up from PNG, Fiji, and other regional allies sometime in the future, just a guess though.

Why this first-of-its-kind Australian defence posting is a 'big deal'

In Australia's largest garrison city a foreign defence official will become second-in-command of a combat brigade in a historic appointment.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Bob53]

There has been some discussion here on SHORAD defence against the type of drones seen in Ukraine and now Israel.

A bit of detail here on Skyranger paired with Boxer and the Ahead Ammunition.

https://www.rheinmetall.com/Rheinmetall%20Group/brochure-download/Weapon-Ammmunition/B038e0823-Oerlikon-Ahead-Air-Burst-ammunition.pdf

Rheinmetall

With the Oerlikon Skyranger® family Rheinmetall offers self-propelled air defence systems to protect mobile vital assets such as mechanized forces or convoys.

www.rheinmetall.com

 

[Redlands18]

Delivery of another 37 Black Hawk helicopters to Australian shores to be sped up by the United States - ABC News
Following a request from Australia the delivery of the remaining 37 UH-60M will be sped up. No time frame has been given though.

 

[old faithful]

Little birdy tells me 4 RAR will be re raised as an Amphib Bn, and based in Darwin.I have nothing to back this up,LOL!
It makes no sense really, would have been easier to re role 7RAR.....but anyway, thats what the birdie whistled.....I wouldnt expect it anytime soon.

 

[Maranoa]

4RAR was earmarked to be reraised in Darwin as an Pre Landing Team under the previous Army Objective Force 2028 order of battle. But it was not listed in the Government's graphic released on September 28th by the Defence Minister. Hopefully your info is correct.

 

[ADMk2]

Little birdy tells me 4 RAR will be re raised as an Amphib Bn, and based in Darwin.I have nothing to back this up,LOL!
It makes no sense really, would have been easier to re role 7RAR.....but anyway, thats what the birdie whistled.....I wouldnt expect it anytime soon.

We will see. But I’d be terribly surprised were that to be so. Why would they bother folding 7RAR into 5RAR were that about the be the case?

 

[old faithful]

We will see. But I’d be terribly surprised were that to be so. Why would they bother folding 7RAR into 5RAR were that about the be the case?

I would be just as surprised as you, for the same reasons. Birdie said that both 5 and 7 were "hollow" atm.

 

[ADMk2]

I would be just as surprised as you, for the same reasons. Birdie said that both 5 and 7 were "hollow" atm.

They are, but that is no secret. They both have been for years, it’s one reason why they are being linked back up.

I’d suggest more like 2RAR gets “officially“ moved from 3 Brigade to 1 brigade on the Orbat so there are a notional ‘2’ battalions there is a more likely scenario, but either way it won’t matter.

Army won’t be expanding with the current mob in charge. On the contrary, it’s rapidly going backwards...

 

[buffy9]

They are, but that is no secret. They both have been for years, it’s one reason why they are being linked back up.

I’d suggest more like 2RAR gets “officially“ moved from 3 Brigade to 1 brigade on the Orbat so there are a notional ‘2’ battalions there is a more likely scenario, but either way it won’t matter.

Army won’t be expanding with the current mob in charge. On the contrary, it’s rapidly going backwards...

'Ripping the heart out of defence': Former army chief blasts Albanese government over military decisions

A former army chief blasts the Albanese government's approach to defence, warning Australia's military is now less capable and ready for potential threats than when Labor first came to office.

www.abc.net.au

Case in point, it would seem. I try not to be cynical and was somewhat hopeful it would continue to develop Defence, just in a different way, though I do worry about how Defence will look *if* and when funding actually increases at any point.

On 2RAR, I'm not sure moving them around necessarily helps anyone - it only falsely inflates the size of 1st Brigade while they will still be required to work with the LHDs while placing them farther away geographically.

 

[Bob53]

Interesting that Leahy is saying this out loud. His mates still in the service cannot be as candid. This not just some disgruntled ex bloke sprouting off. From what I gather he is highly respected.

 

[ADMk2]

Interesting that Leahy is saying this out loud. His mates still in the service cannot be as candid. This not just some disgruntled ex bloke sprouting off. From what I gather he is highly respected.

The simple facts are that when the ALP entered powered Army had 3 combat brigades each structured as:

1 Brigade:
5RAR - Bushmaster / Light
7 RAR - Mechanised.
1 Armd Regt - 2x ASLAV, 1x Tank Sqn.
8/12 Regt RAA
Enablers.

3 Brigade:
1RAR - Bushmaster / Light.
2RAR (PLF)
3RAR - Mechanised.
2nd CAV Rgt - 2x ASLAV, 1x Tank Sqn.
4 Rgt RAA
Enablers.

7 Brigade
6RAR - Mechanised.
8/9 RAR - Bushmaster / Light.
2/14 LHR - 2x ASLAV / Boxer, 1x Tank Sqn.
1 Regt RAA.
Enablers

Since the ALP took over Army has lost from it’s Orbat:
1x Inf battalion
2x ASLAV Sqn’s.
2x Tank Sqns.

In exchange by 2027, Army will gain - 1x operational HIMARS battery and no official sign of Army re-raising any other units.

 

[Volkodav]

The simple facts are that when the ALP entered powered Army had 3 combat brigades each structured as:

1 Brigade:
5RAR - Bushmaster / Light
7 RAR - Mechanised.
1 Armd Regt - 2x ASLAV, 1x Tank Sqn.
8/12 Regt RAA
Enablers.

3 Brigade:
1RAR - Bushmaster / Light.
2RAR (PLF)
3RAR - Mechanised.
2nd CAV Rgt - 2x ASLAV, 1x Tank Sqn.
4 Rgt RAA
Enablers.

7 Brigade
6RAR - Mechanised.
8/9 RAR - Bushmaster / Light.
2/14 LHR - 2x ASLAV / Boxer, 1x Tank Sqn.
1 Regt RAA.
Enablers

Since the ALP took over Army has lost from it’s Orbat:
1x Inf battalion
2x ASLAV Sqn’s.
2x Tank Sqns.

In exchange by 2027, Army will gain - 1x operational HIMARS battery and no official sign of Army re-raising any other units.

That's a bit disengenuous, you were the one saying a day ago that 5 and 7 RAR were hollow.

Besides aren't the tanks being concentrated now? Besides, I thought there were only two tank sqns due to an insufficient number of tanks and it has been the case for well over a decade.

 

[old faithful]

Hollow units should be bought up to strength, not disbanded. We had 59 MBTs, I think its 14 per sqn. So enough to put together a Regt of sorts, its soon to be 75 MBTs.
Army went through this in the 80,s and 90,s under Keating.
Hollow units to the point where 1RAR had to take nearly a company from 2/4 RAR to deploy to Somalia, and both 1 and 2/4 were ODF units at the time.
3 RAR at one stage operated with 2 Rifle Companies, A and B, both close to strength, Charlie Company became Hagar Platoon, and Support Company was under strength. 5/7 , 6 and 8/9 RAR were just as bad.

When it got to the critical stage, they recruited as fast as they could, running IET courses in the Battalions as well at the INF centre, the result was a revolving door of discharges and recruitment, that is still on going today.

Now you have Sgts and WO2's still in their 20s, and at the other end of the scale, some olds and bolds that wont quit.

This Defence review will damage Army really badly, it will be difficult to repair it.

 

[ADMk2]

That's a bit disengenuous, you were the one saying a day ago that 5 and 7 RAR were hollow.

Besides aren't the tanks being concentrated now? Besides, I thought there were only two tank sqns due to an insufficient number of tanks and it has been the case for well over a decade.

1 battalion does not a brigade make… Arguably 2 doesn’t either, but it’s much easier to add rifle companies to an existing organisation than it is to raise an RAR battalion from scratch. Or bring an entire reserve battalion up to SERCAT 7 levels… It is however vastly cheaper to strip the Army of battalions and squadrons than it is to support a larger standing army and here we are…

For the record in addition to my earlier mention of Army’s cuts and yet another reason why Leahy has blasted this “plan” is the ‘4th’ combat brigade Army was raising in Adelaide (9th Brigade) is also gone with the 10/28th Battalion, Royal South Australian Regiment being stripped of it’s frontline kit and being consigned back to 2nd Division in a “security response“ role…

All the other choc units are going back to 8th Brigade, the Combat engineers never even got to see their armoured engineering vehicles and the local arty? Well they of course have missed out on their SP guns... What that gibberish in the “DSR” about “artillery guns not providing the range or lethality required” was actually referring to - aka the expansive cuts Army was about to receive, in the name known as a “focussed force”…

As to tanks. there are presently 3 tank squadrons in Army issued to 1 Armoured, 2 Cav and 2/14 LHR. Each of which is an ACR equipped with ASLAV and M1A1, and has been that way for that decade that you speak of. This was the result of Plan Beersheba. The tanks were moved from a consolidated structure in 1 Armoured Regt, to 3 independent squadrons in the 3 ACR’s, to give each brigade similar capability and combined arms experience to support force generation activities.

The ‘insufficient’ tanks issue was created because the squadrons were dispersed between the brigades. They needed about another 6 or so tanks per brigade to support the availability of the 14 that were supposed to be operational. In one regiment they could swap cars between squadrons as needed to generate a battlegroup. When dispersed among the brigades, they couldn’t. That is what lead to the increased number of tanks being sought for the new M1A2SEPv3 Abrams purchase. That situation will end in 2024 thanks to the current Government.

The M1A2SEPv3 will now only be issued to 2 CAV Regt in Townsville. Boxer will still go to 2/14LHR as well as 2 CAV but there is no ACR for 1 Brigade any longer, so no A vehicles of any kind in the entire 1st Brigade…

1 Armoured Regt is no longer an Armoured Regiment from 2024 onwards, it is a technology and innovation trials and development unit whatever that means (less than 50 pers in the “Regiment” in total however) and will be stripped of most if not all of it’s armour.

So in short -

Adelaide - loses the entire 9th Brigade and all equipment therein. “Gains“ the HIMARS Regiment it was already getting under existing planning anyway, but the current Government now takes credit for what the previous Government had already approved, and no-one seems to be questioning this for some weird reason.

Darwin - 1 Brigade loses it’s entire ACR but gains part of 7RAR into a consolidated battalion previously and once again known as 5/7RAR. In equipment terms it loses Abrams, Boxer, M113, IFV, SP guns, armoured engineering vehicles and all the CSS. Gains whatever boats emerge from the littoral manoeuvre project. Darwin loses 1 Aviation Regt in it’s entirety without any replacement.

Brisbane - Loses it’s tank squadron, loses M113, IFV, SP guns, armoured engineering and related CSS, but at least keeps it’s Boxers and both battalions. Gains whatever boats emerge from the littoral manoeuvre project and the HQ for 16 Brigade and some Apaches and Blackhawks at Oakey.

Townsville - loses 16Avn Brigade but gains 1 Aviation Regt. Keeps it’s battalions and ACR. Gets all the tanks, but no extra squadrons or regiments to be raised to operate them. Gets all the armoured engineering but no extra squadrons or regiments to operate them. Gets all the IFV’s but only enough are approved to issue to 3RAR. 1RAR will remain Bushmaster / Light leading to what can only be described as a tremendously unbalanced Brigade. Arguably Brisbane is better balanced, although even so it will maintain far less combat capability. Also gains boats from littoral manoeuvre project. Most of the former 9th brigade ARA Cadre from Adelaide is being moved to Townsville.

So that’s the 2023 re-org in a nutshell. Every major part of Army has endured cuts. Our land combat capability has been diminished by about 2/3rds and yet we’re told our strategic situation is rapidly descending into the toilet…

 

[OldTex]

Brisbane - Loses it’s tank squadron, loses M113, IFV, SP guns, armoured engineering and related CSS, but at least keeps it’s Boxers and both battalions. Gains whatever boats emerge from the littoral manoeuvre project and the HQ for 16 Brigade and some Apaches and Blackhawks at Oakey.

HQ 16 Avn Bde has always been in Brisbane and the helicopters were always in Oakey, but in the AAvn Training Centre. The question will be whether additional helicopters will be based at Oakey (or possibly Rockhampton or Amberley) specifically for 7 Bde. It will depend on how much spin the GoTD can put on it.

 

[Anthony_B_78]

Since the ALP took over Army has lost from it’s Orbat:
1x Inf battalion
2x ASLAV Sqn’s.
2x Tank Sqns.

In exchange by 2027, Army will gain - 1x operational HIMARS battery and no official sign of Army re-raising any other units.

First, the changes have not taken effect as yet.

Second, we don't know what is happening with those cavalry and tank squadrons; that is the big unknown.

 

[Wombat000]

When effects on Army in the DSR are/were being determined, how much input did Army actually have?

My point is,
did Govt politicians just dream up the solutions, independent of Army advice?
Smith & Houston are the authors, but how much did they dream up by themselves?
- IE: Did Army have influence on answering how to best meet the strategic mission statements required by Army, then reviewed and outcomed by the DSR? Or, just how much of this is actually and conveniently to be blamed on political ideology and dogma?

If within the ‘ADF bunker’ greater esteemed military minds in answer to this have concluded that Army’s role has ‘refined*” and hence the strategic weight being placed on sea and air domain capability, has Army recommendations or preferences been considered in this outcome?
Gen. Leahy (I have great respect for him and his advocacy ) is I believe no longer in the inner circle, tho no doubt I suspect he retains his contacts, so his opinion may not be so relevant to the ‘bigger picture’ or shared by current generation of ADF leadership.

* by ‘refined’ im implying reorg into what I interpret as land force doctrinal specialties = Light, Motorised, Heavy Brigades, and the greater emphasis on long range fires and amphibious operations.

 

[OldTex]

Gen. Leahy (I have great respect for him and his advocacy ) is I believe no longer in the inner circle, tho no doubt I suspect he retains his contacts, so his opinion may not be so relevant to the ‘bigger picture’ or shared by current generation of ADF leadership.

While Houston and Smith supposedly are still part of the 'inner circle' and have their fingers on the pulse and are attuned to the thinking of the current ADF leadership???? Smith and Houston were chosen to conduct the review because they would produce the result that the Govt wanted IOT justify their cuts and 'captain's choices', nothing more.

 

[Wombat000]

That’s an incredibly pessimistic appraisal.

I assume then they sat in a box and ignored all service advice, simply to write what the govt already pre-decided?
or did they just ignore army advice?

on a basic level,
i imagine if Army was to deploy to jungles of Asia, then a cadre of light infantry brigade of SMEs might be a good nucleus to generate that capability?
if one needed rapidly mobile capability, they might draw upon a cadre of motorised SMEs, perhaps a motorised Brigade?
if one needed heavy capability, likewise you might seek to expand upon a heavy brigade as the nucleus of that capability.

if Army was to be deployed amphibiously, would they/could they draw upon those doctrinal SMEs relevant to the mission?
- so how is that bad?

I have no doubt where there’s smoke there’s probably a flame, but perhaps it’s not as definitively the negative inferno so eagerly blamed?

 

[OldTex]

i imagine if Army was to deploy to jungles of Asia, then a cadre of light infantry brigade of SMEs might be a good nucleus to generate that capability?
if one needed rapidly mobile capability, they might draw upon a cadre of motorised SMEs, perhaps a motorised Brigade?
if one needed heavy capability, likewise you might seek to expand upon a heavy brigade as the nucleus of that capability.

if Army was to be deployed amphibiously, would they/could they draw upon those doctrinal SMEs relevant to the mission?
- so how is that bad?

If the Army had to conduct one or more of these 'deployments' then it needs sufficient existing forces to effect that deployment. The use of SMEs is to generate follow-on and replacement forces. Generating force elements takes time to provide the basic level of skills needed. It is then a process of developing those skills to higher levels through further training and exercises. It is still a case of crawl, walk, run before those elements can be deployed. Then there is the training needed to work effectively with the other services to produce a joint capability (needed especially for amphibious deployments, but also for even light through to mechanised deployments).