ADF General discussion thread

[MrConservative]

the only times I've seen her in action she was like a screaming banshee....
she will end up as front rower at some point in time.

the other candidate is kelly o'dwyer, but i suspect that age is "agin" her and she'll need to do a backbench role for a few years

Cash I have of course only read about her. So the banshee stuff will need to go - but she is probably using that as a tactic - to get noticed from the pack. Is she as Thatcherite as she seems in words and photos?

I dont know of O'Dwyer but thanks for the heads up about her. Another one to watch.

 

[t68]

theres no way in hades that I am going to render my verdict in public on someone for DefMin while I'm still employed

dunno how you keep it all bottled up GF, id be screaming blue bloody murder if I only knew some of the stuff that keeps you awake at night.

 

[gf0012-aust]

dunno how you keep it all bottled up GF, id be screaming blue bloody murder if I only knew some of the stuff that keeps you awake at night.

kevin andrews is the replacement defmin

 

[phreeky]

kevin andrews is the replacement defmin

He seems like a great big twit to me, but fingers crossed he has some attributes that the department are in need of. His hardcore alignment of policies with his religious beliefs probably will be of little concern for the ADF.

 

[Trackmaster]

He seems like a great big twit to me, but fingers crossed he has some attributes that the department are in need of. His hardcore alignment of policies with his religious beliefs probably will be of little concern for the ADF.

My view...this means the Prime Ministers Office is now absolutely calling the shots on Defence.
Administratively, he'll be interesting to watch. He appears to be very pedantic.
But as to an interest or knowledge of defence...an unknown quantity.

 

[Volkodav]

My view...this means the Prime Ministers Office is now absolutely calling the shots on Defence.
Administratively, he'll be interesting to watch. He appears to be very pedantic.
But as to an interest or knowledge of defence...an unknown quantity.

It all comes down to what his brief is, what he has been told he needs to do. i.e. sell ASC to BAE and bugger Australian shipbuilding for ever. Maybe kill off certain expensive projects and or capabilities, or push through particular thought bubbles that sound good but wont hit the budget for a decade.

His top priority will be getting the white paper out to replace the wishy, washy fluff produced by Smith. Depending how much independence Johnston had and how far he strayed from party lines there may be a major rewrite required. I suspect a big part of Johnston's anti ASC bias was actually driven by his parochial desire to move the majority of submarine and surface ship sustainment and upgrade work to WA.

The inconvenient truth was the West has been the source of most maintenance issues with the Collins class (in fact the only docking that was ever stuffed up in Adelaide was actually project managed by WA with personnel flown over to do the work), Collins crank shaft, Farncombs generators, etc. No matter how many talented staff were seconded there it was still the same core management, project teams, workers and contactors. The issue is in WA all the best people (and many mediocre ones as well) were snapped up by mining and other high paying industries, with government owned ASC paying well below market rates. The mining construction boom may be over but resources industry still needs the same sort of people marine sustainment does. I won't bother ranting about Austal or BAE WA.

Potentially the biggest gain for defence is the change in minister may roll back the ridiculous, expensive and destructive pork barreling where Johnston was hiring consultants to invent excuses to justify his moving of work and jobs to the west.

 

[hairyman]

Kevin Andrews, another solicitor no doubt. Dont the coalition have any ex defence people in their ranks? Obviously not I suppose, otherwise they would have done better with the defence personnel pay.

 

[t68]

Kevin Andrews, another solicitor no doubt. Dont the coalition have any ex defence people in their ranks? Obviously not I suppose, otherwise they would have done better with the defence personnel pay.

Well I can honestly say that it's the only thing I agree with Seantor Lambie, will be interesting to see how much thenext politicians pay increase will be and if Abbott apposes it

 

[Raven22]

Kevin Andrews, another solicitor no doubt. Dont the coalition have any ex defence people in their ranks? Obviously not I suppose, otherwise they would have done better with the defence personnel pay.

The Assistant Minister for Defence, Stuart Robert, is an ex Army Officer. His portfolio responsibilities include pay and conditions of defence personnel.

 

[hairyman]

Give that job to Jacquie Lambie. She would probably swap the pay rates of privates and generals.

 

[Raven22]

Give that job to Jacquie Lambie. She would probably swap the pay rates of privates and generals.

This is someone who got kicked out of the Army as a private. You've got to try really hard not to be good enough to be a private.

I would prefer the Greens to be in charge of defence instead of Jacquie Lambie. At least the Greens would be predictable.

 

[t68]

This is someone who got kicked out of the Army as a private. You've got to try really hard not to be good enough to be a private.

I would prefer the Greens to be in charge of defence instead of Jacquie Lambie. At least the Greens would be predictable.

I thought she got out as a CPL RAOC from memory

Judgeing by her comments I think she was only there for a good time not a longtime

 

[Raven22]

Turns out you were right. She transferred to the MPs, which back then had a minimum rank of CPL.

 

[gf0012-aust]

she must have been in when they had the red caps doing convention centre guard duty during the industry conferences

some of them were pretty woeful

 

[Volkodav]

she must have been in when they had the red caps doing convention centre guard duty during the industry conferences

some of them were pretty woeful

The only ones who were consistently dumber were roaches whoops RAOC, I was on butts duty with a bunch of them during a shooting comp years ago their combined ignorance, lack of comprehension and intellect was alarming. This was early 90s but I would have thought being able to write your name or tie your own boot laces would have been a prerequisite for even the lowliest job in the army.

Edit: I should add they used to improve the gene pool by laterally transferring in injured NCOs from other corps who would do the paper work and provide direction to the directionless drones.

 

[Goknub]

More broadly, the Army was the poor third cousin during the Defence of Australia years so it only made sense that it has struggled the most in the post-Cold War era. The RAAF has been in the lead for a while and has hit procurement gold with FMS buys. The RAN has also been in a good place and has plenty cash being thrown at it but the desire to produce ships locally will continue to be a millstone round its neck.
Every conflict we have been involved in has been overseas and an Army that can't get to the fight has no purpose. Realistically, only the US has had the logistics to sustain an invasion of Australia.

Plan Beersheba is really just getting it to the starting line, non-standardised Brigades have been the greatest drag on selling a coherent message to the policy makers. The procurement of C17s and LHDs has made the Army politically useful and saved it from being little more than a token force for use on ANZAC Day.

PS- This is heading in a "ADF General" direction.

We probably need to move this to the Australian Army thread but it is definitely worth discussing. To me it is clear that the army has been under funded, under equipped and under supported for decades, in part because they have always been able to step up and get the job done. In recent years the support side has improved out of sight, C-17, LHD etc. but there are still glaring shortages and holes that exist simply because of lack of funding, which is stupid when you consider how little money would be required to transform the order of battle and level of capability, less money infact than has been wasted through mismanagement and the selection (against advice of professionals) of inappropriate, inadequate or just plain incorrect equipment.

I think this is a more appropriate place for this. Admins, please adjust as you see fit.

 

[Goknub]

The greatest change, and certainly for the better, has been the effort put into creating a joint "purple" ADF. Prior to this there was no real desire to focus on anything other than single service combat power. The need for amphbious and broader joint logistical support has always been known but has been the first thing to be cut during the dry times.

The dollars are now with Joint assets which is brilliant, especially for the Army. There has been little need to build an army capable of more than small scale light infantry deployments when the only way it would see action is if Australia was invaded. Considering that we have the Americans as allies and the Chinese keen to maintain us as a reliable source of raw materials, we are in the unique position of possibly even having two superpowers on our side in a fight.

The ADF needs to have long-range logistical assets as its highest priority. The RAAF now has ample capacity, now the RAN should be the focus. The LHDs are a start but need much more additional support.

I'll leave a link to good recent read, the comparison of the amphibious operations in the South West Pacific with the other theatres is quite compelling. http://library.uoregon.edu/ec/e-asia/read/boose.pdf

 

[t68]

we are in the unique position of possibly even having two superpowers on our side in a fight.

That's if thing don't sour in the future as can be seen with the sanctions on Russia at the moment, Also pre WWII Japan was getting a majority of her oil imports from the US and that dried up which is tantamount to economic warfare and we saw the end result of that, push the bear to hard in the future and it might bite the hand that feeds it.

Also China is providing a lot of soft power options through out the Pacfic region mostly with no strings attached. There's a lot of raw material in the Pacfic rim

 

[Raven22]

The dollars are now with Joint assets which is brilliant, especially for the Army. There has been little need to build an army capable of more than small scale light infantry deployments when the only way it would see action is if Australia was invaded.

The ADF needs to have long-range logistical assets as its highest priority. The RAAF now has ample capacity, now the RAN should be the focus. The LHDs are a start but need much more additional support.

I don't get the logic here. Australia needs long-range logistical assets as its highest priority, yet we don't need an Army capable of more than small scale light infantry deployments. What are those long-range logistical assets deploying and sustaining then? If the only way the Army is going to see combat is if Australia is invaded, why are we investing in the ability to deploy far offshore? This doesn't make sense.

 

[Volkodav]

I don't get the logic here. Australia needs long-range logistical assets as its highest priority, yet we don't need an Army capable of more than small scale light infantry deployments. What are those long-range logistical assets deploying and sustaining then? If the only way the Army is going to see combat is if Australia is invaded, why are we investing in the ability to deploy far offshore? This doesn't make sense.

Agreed, I actually made the comment earlier in reference to a third, stretched LHD, that it would be a pointless acquisition unless we increased the size and capability of the army. I still find it ridiculous that the army, while better equipped than it was, is still lacking so many key capabilities, has others that are clearly under strength and others rely on equipment that is worn out, obsolescent (or obsolete) and should have been replaced years ago. There are even some areas that are actually worse off than they were in the 80s or 90s compared to other militaries and sadly, even to its self. This all comes down to funding and political decisions.

The current US Heavy Brigade, I believe, has two tank and two armoured infantry battalions plus support elements, while the previous armoured brigade ORBAT included two tank and one armoured infantry battalions and a mechanized brigade had one tank and two armoured infantry battalions. An armoured division was built around two armoured and one mechanised brigades, while a mechanised division had a single armoured and two mechanised brigades. We currently lack the means to lack the means to form any of these but with a comparatively small investment could develop something of similar capability as it relates to equipment and training on that equipment rather than a substantial increase in numbers. It could be done by beefing up the proposed ACRs with extra tanks instead of wheeled cavalry vehicles and ensuring sufficient AIFVs to lift both infantry battalions in each brigade. The reconnaissance function would be shrunk to a squadron per brigade or a concentrated in a regiment supporting all the brigades. Also this ORBAT would be duplicated in the reserves who would also train continually with their regular equivalents and perhaps even be predominantly colocated with them.