There still is a Support Company with a DFSW platoon in the current orbat. The only real change to support company with the introduction of the 2012 orbat was that the assault pioneer platoon disappeared.
I know times have changed, but the support coy in 3RAR, in the 90, s, was Recon pl which included snipers, sig pl, dfsw pl(heavy weapons/bellies), mortar pl and pioneer pl. Each pl was absolutly nessasery imo, and in reality dfsw could even be split and form 2 pls, Anti armor, and SFMG pl.
When I 1st joined Dfsw, we leaned more towards dfsw, as a parra bn, we needed as much internal fire support as possible, and as a light infantry bn, if we came up against armour, real armour we would have been f@#ked anyway, and anti armour pl with a handful of 84, s wouldnt have done much to save us.
At one stage we did still have the 106 RR, s on short wheel based rovers, and deployed in pairs could have done suicide missions to kill the odd tank, but remembering that they workin pairs, shoot and scoot was the only option for us.....hence the suicide mission tag.
I personally believe that anti armour is best left to Armoured corps and the RAAF.oooh, and I suppose Aviation......if the tigers ever become deployable....so, I guess my point is dfsw should concentrate on sfmg/40mm, and I firmly believe that pioneers are a nessecity in an infantry bn, leave the engineers for bigger, higher priority jobs. Pioneers can build nearly anything a bn requires, and destroy most things pretty well also.
When I 1st joined Dfsw, we leaned more towards dfsw, as a parra bn, we needed as much internal fire support as possible, and as a light infantry bn, if we came up against armour, real armour we would have been f@#ked anyway, and anti armour pl with a handful of 84, s wouldnt have done much to save us.
At one stage we did still have the 106 RR, s on short wheel based rovers, and deployed in pairs could have done suicide missions to kill the odd tank, but remembering that they workin pairs, shoot and scoot was the only option for us.....hence the suicide mission tag.
I personally believe that anti armour is best left to Armoured corps and the RAAF.oooh, and I suppose Aviation......if the tigers ever become deployable....so, I guess my point is dfsw should concentrate on sfmg/40mm, and I firmly believe that pioneers are a nessecity in an infantry bn, leave the engineers for bigger, higher priority jobs. Pioneers can build nearly anything a bn requires, and destroy most things pretty well also.
What was the reasoning behind this?
Was it due to deployments all being as battlegroups so the role was replaced by Engineers?
Regards,
Massive
I don't know exactly, but I imagine it was a number of things. Firstly was the need to free up manning to redirect to the MSS. Secondly was, as you say, an understanding that the engineers could take on a lot of the burden. Lastly was the fact that a nascant assault pioneer capability was retained in the new structure anyway.
Theoretically, each rifle platoon in the current 2012 orbat contains a single assault pioneer-qualified fire team. Also, again theoretically, each battalion still has an assault pioneer platoon commander and assault pioneer platoon sergeant sitting in support company with no soldiers. Normally that assault pioneer fire team in the platoon simply acts as a normal fire team, but can do some extra tasks in direct support of the platoon like light urban breaching. If needed, however, the fire teams from the rifle platoons can be dragged out and put under the command of the assault pioneer platoon commander/platoon sergeant, with a full strength assault pioneer platoon magically formed.
While this plan briefs well, it isn't very practical. Trying to keep an assault pioneer qualified fire team per platoon, with all the other appropriate skills needed, is almost impossible outside of preparing for a known deployment. In addition, that extra LT and SGT are invariably dragged into somewhere else, and not actually used as a spare platoon HQ just in case it is needed.
Assault pioneers for the infantry are sort of like the cavalry scouts for the ACRs - everyone agrees they are needed, but there just aren't enough soldiers to man everything all the time, and there are higher priorities for that manpower.
Thanks Raven.
Makes sense.
I guess it is practical in the sense that you do at least retain the basic skills & structure in the battalion so that when you are working up for a deployment you could potentially form the Assault Pioneer platoon in this phase.
Thanks again,
Massive
Apkws
"BAE Systems is being awarded a contract for the procurement of Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System II in support of the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force, and governments of Iraq, Lebanon, Netherlands, Jordan, and Australia under the Foreign Military Sales program"
First i have heard of this since ground testing in aus. I assume these are for tiger...also Romeos?
"BAE Systems is being awarded a contract for the procurement of Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System II in support of the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force, and governments of Iraq, Lebanon, Netherlands, Jordan, and Australia under the Foreign Military Sales program"
First i have heard of this since ground testing in aus. I assume these are for tiger...also Romeos?
The opposite probably makes more sense. Specific pioneer, DFS, ATGW, recon and mortar platoons that look after the training and certification of those capabilities, including ensuring the assigned soldiers maintain their infantry skills, but are broken down into sections or even bricks, as required operationally, to support individual companies, platoons or even sections.
Within the raise, train, sustain cycle the platoons would be formed and their members certified in their specific roles in the raise year. The platoons would initially gain proficiency during the training year supporting the battalion as a whole before the individual sections and bricks begin working closely with specific companies, platoons and sections. Thus by the sustain year the capability should flexible enough to form full platoons to support the Btn as well as individual teams experienced at working with small units and sub units as required.
Conditional on sufficient manpower being available the same could be done with Cavalry Scouts / Assault Troops. Instead of a section in in Cav Trp there would be a Trp at Sqn level or even a Sqn at Regt level that is responsible for developing and maintaining the capability as well as providing sub units to support the line Trps.
Nick underscore
Member
APKWS II was trialed (I believe) on the Aus Tigers some time in 2014 by BAE, with high degree of success.
Not surprised if this programme converts to an FMS contract at a later date
Nick underscore
Member
Latest DTR. Some interesting tidbits regarding Aust Army. First I have seen of the Hawkei with the RWS mated. Also an example of the 120mm RT Mortar.
News also relating to Rafael expanding their footprint in Aust - Iron Dome, Spike-LR and Trophy systems as possible contenders for the new required capabilities mentioned in the recent DWP
October DTR
News also relating to Rafael expanding their footprint in Aust - Iron Dome, Spike-LR and Trophy systems as possible contenders for the new required capabilities mentioned in the recent DWP
October DTR
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
Australia, Indonesia to jointly develop an armoured vehicle | IHS Jane's 360
I've no idea of whether any working system will emerge from this cooperation. The important thing is that it signifies a productive working relationship between two countries with a history of mutual distrust.
I've no idea of whether any working system will emerge from this cooperation. The important thing is that it signifies a productive working relationship between two countries with a history of mutual distrust.
Trackmaster
Member
Could it be that Thales are stamping their ownership on IP after certain folks charged off on their own, developing a new "version " of the Bushie?
MARKMILES77
Active Member
Versions of it are already driving around Indonesia.
If you search on Youtube under "Pindad Bushmaster" or "Pindad Sanca" you will find videos have already been posted.
Seems to have the windows from the Hawkei, so much higher ballistic protection on the glass areas than Australian Bushmasters and has a triangular structure (Standoff armour?) in front of the engine bay.
When did assault pioneers role change to the description you provided Raven?
Traditionally, pioneers are the RAR,s own version of combat engineers, roles that assault pioneers usually did were. Clearing landing zones, building defences , breaching obstacles, constructing obstacles,blowing stuff up, laying and clearing mine fields and drinking very hard!
40 deg south
Well-Known Member
Initial production run of Hawkei light protected vehicles handed over to Australian DoD | IHS Jane's 360
Looks like things are moving along nicely.
Looking like a smart move as who knows when we would have seen the JLTV entering service had we continued down that path. Anecdotally the Hawkei has done really well in trials too, proven very mobile and durable (I should add that was from a Thales bloke so...)
Noticed on Facebook yesterday that the 6 new M88A2 Hercules arrived on the 6th Dec, I had forgotten they were coming 
they should be in service by early 2017
<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FTheAustralianArmy%2Fposts%2F10154492174726195&width=500" width="500" height="683" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true"></iframe>
Cheers
they should be in service by early 2017<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FTheAustralianArmy%2Fposts%2F10154492174726195&width=500" width="500" height="683" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true"></iframe>
Cheers
Interesting article on the role of armour in the ADF:
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/close-combat-counterterrorism-armour-saves-lives/
https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/close-combat-counterterrorism-armour-saves-lives/
The move to introduce HIMARS will address a potential weakness of the army wrt massed fires. Be interesting to see the extent of the capability - hoping for a single regiment of 4 batteries but let's see. The recent experience in the Ukraine highlights the importance of this:
» Russia’s New Generation WarfareThe Potomac Foundation
Will also be interested to see the extent of reactive armour/active defence for the CRV and IFV.
Regards,
Massive
» Russia’s New Generation WarfareThe Potomac Foundation
Will also be interested to see the extent of reactive armour/active defence for the CRV and IFV.
Regards,
Massive
Expect an RFT for Phase 3 in 2018, with Second Pass Approval/source selection around 2021. Phase 2 goes up for Second Pass in March/April 2018 according to current planning.