Aussie Bushfires.

t68

Well-Known Member
The PM has just announced a major increase in ADF support including
HMAS Adelaide
3000 reserves called out on compulsory full time service for the duration(thats approx 1/5 of total ADF reserves)
3 more Chinooks
1 C-17
2 C-130s
3 C-27s
Major General Elwood to take command of ADF
4 more large Water Tankers leased including 2 DC-10s

this is taken from a News conference, so no link available at this time.

It’s good that the ADF can support logisticaly with water tankers fuel tanker communications and drop in food supplies ( the young ones would like to a rat pack of two) but the ADF have only really got a small cadre of staff trained to fight fires but the majority are not trained to fight fire or have the equipment that could survive the onslaught of a bushfire I’m not really sure what calling up 3000 reservists are going to do.
 

Beam

Member
It’s good that the ADF can support logisticaly with water tankers fuel tanker communications and drop in food supplies ( the young ones would like to a rat pack of two) but the ADF have only really got a small cadre of staff trained to fight fires but the majority are not trained to fight fire or have the equipment that could survive the onslaught of a bushfire I’m not really sure what calling up 3000 reservists are going to do.

According to the press conference the reserves aren't for firefighting but rather to assist in the post-fires recovery. They will mostly be looking to call up reserves with particular skilsets like tradies etc.
However they will be embedding more people in the forward command posts to better ascertain what is needed. Previously they only had liaison officers at each state HQ and one complaint was apparently the information being received was not quite adequate.
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
The US has more leeway for action during such crisis. Their Constitution, Federal State relationship is the opposite to Australia’s.
In the US States are given the “specific” powers and everything else is Federal so for natural disaster operations the Feds move in early without the worry of bruising state egos.
Somewhat OT, but I just wanted to correct something. Under the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution, the US (federal) gov't has specific powers granted by the Constitution, with any power not listed is left to the states or the people. This is opposite to how you describe it.

In a natural disaster in the US, the governing executive official of an area can made a declaration of a state of emergency, which opens up certain powers and funding streams, while also potentially permitting waivers or on the fly changes to what would otherwise be SOP. Depending on the actual or anticipated scope or scale of a disaster, the governing official of an area might petition the next higher level executive official of gov't to make a declaration, since the higher level might have access to more resources, funding, and/or responding agencies and personnel. By way of example, in some areas the chain of command might go from a municipal leader like a mayor of first selectmen, then county executive or manager , then state governor, and finally POTUS. It can also happen that a higher level executive could make the decision to declare a state of emergency without a request to do so if they felt it would be needed to mobilize sufficient resources to respond. I would need to really do some research to see if there were any examples of national disaster declarations made which IMO were not actually national in either scope or response requirements.
 

Takao

The Bunker Group
It’s good that the ADF can support logisticaly with water tankers fuel tanker communications and drop in food supplies ( the young ones would like to a rat pack of two) but the ADF have only really got a small cadre of staff trained to fight fires but the majority are not trained to fight fire or have the equipment that could survive the onslaught of a bushfire I’m not really sure what calling up 3000 reservists are going to do.
It won't be front line firefighting; it'll be logistics, comms, some engineering support, general duties 'stuff' and supporting evac centres. All the behind-the-scenes stuff. Frankly, there isn't a huge difference between a fight and a fire - just replace RAInf and RAAC with RFS. In no way do we want to be on the front line (damn, my cam's aren't even fire-resistant!) but we can do all that 'stuff' that a Fire Brigade / SES just can't do (ie, everything beyond intimate support / 1st line).

The reason for reserves is likely due to two factors - the proximity (the reserves are already in NSW and Vic as opposed to most of the ARA) and balancing the ARA demands between readiness, existing commitments, additional HADR and the fires.

It actually offers an interesting example of Reserves for the ADF. To say that we have under-invested in this area doesn't begin to describe our woeful financial, intellectual and strategic failure. Ignoring the issues not having reserves and what that means for mobilisation and the ability to actually do our primary job, the potential to aid in circumstances like this doves neatly into the purposes of the Reserves. I used ARA above - because the other two don't have them anymore (and the hierarchy within the ARes is too interested in themselves to actually change to meet modern needs).

Why, for instance, are the Air Mobility Group aircraft being flown by RAAF personnel? The men and women within AMG face one hell of a work-load already - for tasks with no tactical issues within Australia the level of training needed goes right down - why not use RAAFR people? We lose pilots every year, have them in the RAAFA and scattered around Australia (like they naturally will) and hey presto - the AMG aircraft can fly while the AMG people get some rest. The same can be said for Choules or Adelaide and the RANR.

Obviously this needs fleshing out. The skill sets are technical and would need close management, as well as likely issues integrating "maintenance of skills" training with the normal training and battle rhythm that the regular unit needs/does. There is a cost that will have to come at the expense of something (noting that normally my first question when faced with "we need XXX piece of kit" is 'what are you giving up?'). There is also a clearing out of senior ARes hierarchy and the need to build new ARes/RAAFR/RAN hierarchy which will come at a personnel cost as well as a financial cost. But.... we might be able to build some actual mobilisation for our real job as well more flexible response options for HADR within Australia (and possibly the region).
 

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Somewhat OT, but I just wanted to correct something. Under the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution, the US (federal) gov't has specific powers granted by the Constitution, with any power not listed is left to the states or the people. This is opposite to how you describe it.
Mea Culpa.
My American history course from 1963 has let me down or rather my recall has got dust on it.
Note to self - In future check before gushing forth.
 

At lakes

Well-Known Member
to quote an ad from TV "Ma the rains are ere" its is starting to rain my area of Victoria,East Gippsland. Very light at present but the Met Office said we should get 10 to 15mm today and a wee bit more tomorrow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: t68

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
Mea Culpa.
My American history course from 1963 has let me down or rather my recall has got dust on it.
Note to self - In future check before gushing forth.
No worries. Your knowledge and understanding of US history (from a course in 1963) would likely exceed that of many current and former US students from the last 30 years...
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
I am a bit perplexed by this report in the paper as regards the prioritisation of evacuees the film footage above shows that it was possible to transport young children onto Choules via watercraft but were evacuees given that info surely the most vulnerable would have been put on Choules first or is this just the reporting of the event?
https://www.theage.com.au/national/...ouraged-children-under-5-20200104-p53otm.html
I think that is nothing more than a bit of sensationalism by the Paper, there was a age limit for the Sycamore due having to be boarded by Rope Ladder.
Yep, must've been Sycamore. This item has video of refugees boarding Choules earlier today, using the steel beach in the welldock.

Clearly shows a very young Toddler being lifted into the Landing Craft from the Choules. Perhaps the Father may of been a bit confused by the information given, highly understandable under the circumstances
 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
NSW Deputy Fire Commissioner telling a journalist in single sylable words that "we have already got more fire fighting aircraft than we can safely have in the air simultaneously" and "the ADF has been providing helicopter support since October" may provide a clue. Premier Berejiklian (sp?) and others behind him were looking a bit fed up with stupid questions, but they're fair enough coming from the usual utterly Defence ignorant press.

(ABC News24 rolling coverage today)

oldsig
Well there is always a problem that lay people don't understand the full situation. But how was Choules going to evacuate 5,000 people warfside? She can't handle that mission by a long shot. Its still better than nothing, but Choules can't support that many ashore or on board, as is designed to solve problems 1/10th the size.

Which IMO strengthens the argument we need bigger assets not less. It also highlights our role in the region, there is no-one else to call, if we can't handle it, no one can.

Sycamore is a good 1000 tons larger the the new patrol ships. But they can bring air assets in, they can provide communications and support.

People get panicy when there is an evacuation and there isn't enough space and the ship sails off. People are getting shirty, because things seemly aren't going smoothly. Media loves situations like that. Its a national crisis. Big bushfires have always been, and this is big and all over the country. The world is watching. We don't want this to turn into a New Orleans type of situation.
 

htbrst

Active Member
It’s been announced today the RNZAF are to set to deploy three NH90’s to Adelaide for transport tasks, as well as extra firefighters and Army Combat Engineers that will start to arrive via RAAF C-17s from Wednesday

The first NZDF firefighters were deployed to Australia back in November.


New Zealand Defence Force sends support to Australia

Deployment is expect to last until late January at this stage.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #53
Article in today's ANI newsletter on the RAN EVAC of refugees out of Mallacoota. It has a link to RAN imagery as well.

Navy rescue at Mallacoota – The Australian Naval Institute

It’s been announced today the RNZAF are to set to deploy three NH90’s to Adelaide for transport tasks, as well as extra firefighters and Army Combat Engineers that will start to arrive via RAAF C-17s from Wednesday

The first NZDF firefighters were deployed to Australia back in November.


New Zealand Defence Force sends support to Australia

Deployment is expect to last until late January at this stage.
I wouldn't be surprised if this deployment lasts a lot longer. It's a long time to the end of this fire season, and the poor buggers need every bit of help, succour and aroha they can get. Kia kaha Australia.
 

pussertas

Active Member
WW2 US Army DWKS

When HMAS Choules undertook the evacuation of Merribmila I noticed several DWKS being used to transport personnel from the shore to the ship. Externally they look to be in a good state of repair.

AFAIK these were last manufactured during WW2.

Has anyone further information on the numbers surviving or where the ADF can obtain replacements?

Wickipeader advises that during WW2 the Australian Army purchased 562 of these vehicles
 

Takao

The Bunker Group
WW2 US Army DWKS

When HMAS Choules undertook the evacuation of Merribmila I noticed several DWKS being used to transport personnel from the shore to the ship. Externally they look to be in a good state of repair.

AFAIK these were last manufactured during WW2.

Has anyone further information on the numbers surviving or where the ADF can obtain replacements?

Wickipeader advises that during WW2 the Australian Army purchased 562 of these vehicles
Not DWKS - LARC-V's. The 'V' because they can lift 5 tons; there isn't a IV, III or other.

LARC-V - Wikipedia

Operated by 10 FSB, they are due for replacement under LAND 8710 along with the LCM-8's. They are probably too old to be in use now, but they offer a unique capability to the Australian Antarctic Service that has seen us keep them. There is some debate over how the LARC-V should be replaced - like-for-like or to meet a capability.
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
It’s been announced today the RNZAF are to set to deploy three NH90’s to Adelaide for transport tasks, as well as extra firefighters and Army Combat Engineers that will start to arrive via RAAF C-17s from Wednesday

The first NZDF firefighters were deployed to Australia back in November.


New Zealand Defence Force sends support to Australia

Deployment is expect to last until late January at this stage.
You an now add Singapore who are providing 2 Chinnoks
 

pussertas

Active Member
Not DWKS - LARC-V's. The 'V' because they can lift 5 tons; there isn't a IV, III or other.

LARC-V - Wikipedia

Operated by 10 FSB, they are due for replacement under LAND 8710 along with the LCM-8's. They are probably too old to be in use now, but they offer a unique capability to the Australian Antarctic Service that has seen us keep them. There is some debate over how the LARC-V should be replaced - like-for-like or to meet a capability.
Many thanks, Takao. Was unaware that these vehicles existed.

regards,
pussertas
 

t68

Well-Known Member
Not DWKS - LARC-V's. The 'V' because they can lift 5 tons; there isn't a IV, III or other.

LARC-V - Wikipedia

Operated by 10 FSB, they are due for replacement under LAND 8710 along with the LCM-8's. They are probably too old to be in use now, but they offer a unique capability to the Australian Antarctic Service that has seen us keep them. There is some debate over how the LARC-V should be replaced - like-for-like or to meet a capability.

They are a handy piece of kit and as you say rightly they are getting long in the tooth, but there’s really nothing to replace them with, the nearest capability would be the Bronco ATV

Bronco All Terrain Tracked Carrier - Wikipedia
 

Takao

The Bunker Group
They are a handy piece of kit and as you say rightly they are getting long in the tooth, but there’s really nothing to replace them with, the nearest capability would be the Bronco ATV

Bronco All Terrain Tracked Carrier - Wikipedia
Well, like-for-like there is the proposed LARC-VI, but that is still on paper with a question over its viability. And the Bronco can't carry stuff.

If you are after effect, then you are looking at a wheeled vehicle or hovercraft. Either can do the 15 km either side of the high tide line role.
 
Top