Australian Army to increase by 2,600

[Whiskyjack]

You are right here about ex 3RAR blokes not liking it! And you are wrong about never using the capability too! A Coy 3RAR deployed by parachute during a politicly sensitive time in 1986. The group was deployed to the cocos island group (Keeling Isl) as a show of force to to Indonesia who claimed that if the wanted (souvrenty) there was nothing Australia could do about it. Having said this, the para capability would be better served by 3RAR becoming a sister to 4RAR in the Commando role. It would just be a case of retaining the suitable members of the Bn who are suitable(and willing) to meet spec war requirments,thus giving Aust a spec war brigade. Keep 1 and 2RAR as light bns. Split 5 and 7 as mech. Turn 6,8 and 9 to Marines. This would be a good mix for me. Spec war deployments have been frequent,and anoyher Commando Bn would allow a better rotation in the middle east,Afghan and Pacific,whilst retaining a solid CT pressence in Aust. # marine bns would allow a rotation at sea. And the mech brigade,light Inf brigade would allow deployments at short notice in our region and a heavy punch if required. What d,ya think mate?

I have a question. Where will the LHDs be based, will they both be based on the East Coast or will one be on the West Coast?

The reason I ask is that if they were split between the coasts would that not have an implication on where the light battalions were based? Would one or two not have to moved west.

 

[old faithful]

I am only guessing,but i feel that the LHd,s would be based on the east coast,with one active at any time. Deployments to the west coast would be regular,and frequent. Deploying troops from any of our Battalions to the ships is not a difficult exercise,in the 80,s both 6 and 8/9 regularly trainded for deployments on Toobruk and the old Jervis Bay. If i remember correctly,6RAR deployed to California to train alongside the U.S marines aboard Toobruk. Also.AD mentioned that the RAAF would be streatched to supply a Bn para group,i dont agree. We have done Bn group deployments by air many times.With 36 sqn having 12xC130H and 37 Sqn operateing 12xC130J-30,s we have more than enough to deploy,and re-sup a Bn Airboune grp,incudeing Aty,Engineers etc.Remember that one of 3RAR,s main roles is to secure a point of entry for a larger force.I think,although in recent conflicts,that that capability has not been required,we should maintain it.

 

[Whiskyjack]

I am only guessing,but i feel that the LHd,s would be based on the east coast,with one active at any time. Deployments to the west coast would be regular,and frequent. Deploying troops from any of our Battalions to the ships is not a difficult exercise,in the 80,s both 6 and 8/9 regularly trainded for deployments on Toobruk and the old Jervis Bay. If i remember correctly,6RAR deployed to California to train alongside the U.S marines aboard Toobruk. Also.AD mentioned that the RAAF would be streatched to supply a Bn para group,i dont agree. We have done Bn group deployments by air many times.With 36 sqn having 12xC130H and 37 Sqn operateing 12xC130J-30,s we have more than enough to deploy,and re-sup a Bn Airboune grp,incudeing Aty,Engineers etc.Remember that one of 3RAR,s main roles is to secure a point of entry for a larger force.I think,although in recent conflicts,that that capability has not been required,we should maintain it.

With regard to Para capability, if you have 4 RAR Cmdo, plus 1 Cmdo Reserve, do you need 3 RAR? In my mind a battalion level para insertion is highly unlikely as it would mean a greater risk level, which would mean a greater potential casualty risk as well.

Would a more likely scenario be a cot from 4 RAR securing an airfield while follow-on forces from a light battalion were brought in.

If the situation was serious enough it would be escalated to an LHD and go in over the beach in conjunction with a cmdo element being used in the para role.

I do like the idea of a second full time cmdo battalion, just not sure how likely given funding and personnel restraints.

 

[old faithful]

I agree with what you are getting at...to a point. The SASR have a pressence in Afgahistan,Iraq,East Timor god knows where else...4RAR are in a similar situation. We still must preserve TAG east and West at home. Another reg Cmdo bn would allow spec war deployments,easing pressure on these units.Australias spec warfare efforts are more effective on multi national deployments than most units.They are held in high regard world wide,as are most of our efforts in military deployments.If we must deploy fighting units,then special forces we send will have a bigger impact to the end result than a lone inf battalian,simply because it has a force multipling effect for our allies. Thats why i feel another unit raised would be more benificial,so we can maintain a strong pressence at home,whilst other units are deployed off shore.

 

[Whiskyjack]

I agree with what you are getting at...to a point. The SASR have a pressence in Afgahistan,Iraq,East Timor god knows where else...4RAR are in a similar situation. We still must preserve TAG east and West at home. Another reg Cmdo bn would allow spec war deployments,easing pressure on these units.Australias spec warfare efforts are more effective on multi national deployments than most units.They are held in high regard world wide,as are most of our efforts in military deployments.If we must deploy fighting units,then special forces we send will have a bigger impact to the end result than a lone inf battalian,simply because it has a force multipling effect for our allies. Thats why i feel another unit raised would be more benificial,so we can maintain a strong pressence at home,whilst other units are deployed off shore.

Looking at it that way I have to agree.

Closer to home Cmdo forces would enter and secure, then high tail it back to base so they do not become tied down with foot slogging duties!

The issue being at what point does your force become unbalanced with not enough grunts.

 

[old faithful]

if we can maintain 1 and 2RAR as light inf in townsville,5 and 7RAR as mech units in Darwin and possibly SA,6,8 and 9RAR as INF bns or maybe just 6 and8/9rar,then the balance would be ok,provided that the reserves could fully man 12 bns of grunts.I think there are around 21 reserve inf units on paper,but the maning would be quite low.12 fully manned reserve infantry battalions would be good. 1,2,6 and 8/9 should all and probably will be trained for deployments on board the LHD,s and im sure that the MECH units will also train regularly with these ships.

 

[Whiskyjack]

if we can maintain 1 and 2RAR as light inf in townsville,5 and 7RAR as mech units in Darwin and possibly SA,6,8 and 9RAR as INF bns or maybe just 6 and8/9rar,then the balance would be ok,provided that the reserves could fully man 12 bns of grunts.I think there are around 21 reserve inf units on paper,but the maning would be quite low.12 fully manned reserve infantry battalions would be good. 1,2,6 and 8/9 should all and probably will be trained for deployments on board the LHD,s and im sure that the MECH units will also train regularly with these ships.

Completely agree. The one thing I would have to add is a 3rd cav regiment. It would allow for the light brigades to each have 1 Cav regiment each with the Mech brigade also having 1.

It also gives the light brigades 3 battalion/regiment level HQs to base deployments on.

 

[old faithful]

One point that i completely forgot is that Cav units used have one squdron(company)of assult troopers(vegeies).I dont know if they still maintain this,but that would definatly be a big plus to all the brigades.I know that 2CAV vegies used to do the Infantry recon course at the jungle training school at Tully in FNQld,and were good hands.

 

[Whiskyjack]

One point that i completely forgot is that Cav units used have one squdron(company)of assult troopers(vegeies).I dont know if they still maintain this,but that would definatly be a big plus to all the brigades.I know that 2CAV vegies used to do the Infantry recon course at the jungle training school at Tully in FNQld,and were good hands.

If I am not mistaken, the two regular Cav regiments are equipped with LAVs.

**Warning this is where I may begin to depart from reality**

I would have two LAV equipped Regiments with the light brigades and equip a third in the Mech brigade in a similar manner to a US Army Armoured Cav squadron (which I think is the same as a battalion/regiment in the Australian Army). This would make it a heavier formation and also allow for more M1s to factored into the structure. Once the M113s are replaced with something heavier it would make for a true 'heavy' brigade.

 

[old faithful]

depending on which vehicle is selected to replace the M113,s,a further LAV unit will not be necessary. If the new vehicle is along the lines of bradley or warrier,there will be no need for Lavs,but if they go for a motorised veh like bushmaster,then Lavs will be a must!

 

[Aussie Digger]

I am only guessing,but i feel that the LHd,s would be based on the east coast,with one active at any time. Deployments to the west coast would be regular,and frequent. Deploying troops from any of our Battalions to the ships is not a difficult exercise,in the 80,s both 6 and 8/9 regularly trainded for deployments on Toobruk and the old Jervis Bay. If i remember correctly,6RAR deployed to California to train alongside the U.S marines aboard Toobruk. Also.AD mentioned that the RAAF would be streatched to supply a Bn para group,i dont agree. We have done Bn group deployments by air many times.With 36 sqn having 12xC130H and 37 Sqn operateing 12xC130J-30,s we have more than enough to deploy,and re-sup a Bn Airboune grp,incudeing Aty,Engineers etc.Remember that one of 3RAR,s main roles is to secure a point of entry for a larger force.I think,although in recent conflicts,that that capability has not been required,we should maintain it.

I know 3RAR have done Btn level deployments on exercise but I think in any serious wartime scenario there'd be so many concurrent airlift tasks for RAAF that we wouldn't have the fleet available for a Btn strength para insertion. Certainly there was no spare airlift capacity for a Btn strength para insertion when Timor happened, if it had been required...

I think this reality has finally forced Government to direct Army to give up the Btn parachute capability. Our mech and light infantry forces are far more heavily used than the para capability has. Indeed 3RAR has had many operational deployments in the last 6 years (most recently to provide the latest SECDET in Iraq along with 2/14LHR) and the para capability hasn't been required, though it places enormous strain on 3RAR and RAAF to maintain it...

Yes 2 Cav and 2/14LHR maintain "recon scouts" or Veggies as they are known. They are organised into sections within the individual vehicle troops though rather than into an actual company formation...

In relation to the ASLAV units, I don't think another one is needed (remember Army is striving for an "Army of Two's" which is a BIG enhancement over what we had 5 years ago), though I do think 3 Brigade would be well served by adding an ASLAV based recon squadron to the Bushmaster IMV Squadron that will be maintained within B Sqn 3/4 Cav Regt. The name of this unit could then revert to 3/4 Cav Regiment (and they could then truly shrug off their hated nickname: "Three quarter Cav").

As to the additional Commando Battalion idea. I think it worthwhile (though it'd be hideously expensive equipping and maintaining 2 of them). The only concern I have is the infantry base which special forces predominantly draw upon for their troops. It's arguably not big enough to support the special forces we already have (hence the need for the "special forces direct entry scheme"). I would at least want the additional infantry battalions to be fully up and running and the legacy battalions "filled out" prior to the additional Cmdo Battalion being created...

 

[Whiskyjack]

I know 3RAR have done Btn level deployments on exercise but I think in any serious wartime scenario there'd be so many concurrent airlift tasks for RAAF that we wouldn't have the fleet available for a Btn strength para insertion. Certainly there was no spare airlift capacity for a Btn strength para insertion when Timor happened, if it had been required...

Strictly speaking with the introduction of the C-17s, and the C-130Hs potentially being downsized and focused towards Spec Ops, the tactical airlift will be less than now IMO.

Given the C-17s strategic value (not to mention $$ value) I can't see it being used in a threat environment without an extremley good reason, and in the para role it does not carry that many more troops.

However with the introduction of the NH90, a potential order for more CH-47s and the LDHs the ability to carry out an inland assualt of 200km (give or take) from the LHDs does provide an extra element that the ADF doesn't really have at the moment.

That's just my opinion though

 

[old faithful]

I know 3RAR have done Btn level deployments on exercise but I think in any serious wartime scenario there'd be so many concurrent airlift tasks for RAAF that we wouldn't have the fleet available for a Btn strength para insertion. Certainly there was no spare airlift capacity for a Btn strength para insertion when Timor happened, if it had been required...

I think this reality has finally forced Government to direct Army to give up the Btn parachute capability. Our mech and light infantry forces are far more heavily used than the para capability has. Indeed 3RAR has had many operational deployments in the last 6 years (most recently to provide the latest SECDET in Iraq along with 2/14LHR) and the para capability hasn't been required, though it places enormous strain on 3RAR and RAAF to maintain it...

Yes 2 Cav and 2/14LHR maintain "recon scouts" or Veggies as they are known. They are organised into sections within the individual vehicle troops though rather than into an actual company formation...

In relation to the ASLAV units, I don't think another one is needed (remember Army is striving for an "Army of Two's" which is a BIG enhancement over what we had 5 years ago), though I do think 3 Brigade would be well served by adding an ASLAV based recon squadron to the Bushmaster IMV Squadron that will be maintained within B Sqn 3/4 Cav Regt. The name of this unit could then revert to 3/4 Cav Regiment (and they could then truly shrug off their hated nickname: "Three quarter Cav").

As to the additional Commando Battalion idea. I think it worthwhile (though it'd be hideously expensive equipping and maintaining 2 of them). The only concern I have is the infantry base which special forces predominantly draw upon for their troops. It's arguably not big enough to support the special forces we already have (hence the need for the "special forces direct entry scheme"). I would at least want the additional infantry battalions to be fully up and running and the legacy battalions "filled out" prior to the additional Cmdo Battalion being created...

It takes 12 C130H to deploy a BN group by parachute, however,im not suggesting that 3RAR maintain the para role,I would like to see them progress to another Commando unit.With the expearience they have at short notice deployments that they have,and already well versed in the airbourne/assault shock infantry tactics,they would be in an ideal position to do so,allowing TAG east and west to be maintained whilst large parts of SASR and 4RAR are deployed to Afghanistan/iraq/ET etc. This would allow Australia to maintain a long term rotation of a considerable size. (C130H carrys 64 paras) 9 hercs for personel,and 3 for heavy drop. Bear in mind,i am working on POE situation. That leaves 12 C130J-30,s and chartered aircraft to follow up...

 

[Aussie Digger]

Strictly speaking with the introduction of the C-17s, and the C-130Hs potentially being downsized and focused towards Spec Ops, the tactical airlift will be less than now IMO.

Given the C-17s strategic value (not to mention $$ value) I can't see it being used in a threat environment without an extremley good reason, and in the para role it does not carry that many more troops.

However with the introduction of the NH90, a potential order for more CH-47s and the LDHs the ability to carry out an inland assualt of 200km (give or take) from the LHDs does provide an extra element that the ADF doesn't really have at the moment.

That's just my opinion though

Actually I can't speak from experience, but the RAF rates each of it's C-17's as worth 6x C-130J's in terms of payload and range. From that POV even if the C-130H fleet were entirely removed from service, our airlift capability is still being significantly enhanced.

A number of decisions remain to be made, but I think it's a deadset certainty that additional C-130J's or perhaps A400M's will be bought to replace the C-130H's (ADF is VERY disinterested in upgrades these days from all reports), meaning that our airlift will be greater than it ever has been.

The ADF would use the C-17 if necessary, but with 4RAR (Cmdo) to maintain only a "company" level Parachute insertion capability instead of 3RAR, I agree it's unlikely to be relevant, unless of course we need to do a company level parachute insertion at extended ranges from Australia...

You are quite correct that ADF possess only limited Amphib capabilities at present, though Manoora and Kanimbla can each carry 4x Blackhawks (and MRH-90's in due course) plus with the new watercraft, meaning we do have SOME capability...

 

[Whiskyjack]

Actually I can't speak from experience, but the RAF rates each of it's C-17's as worth 6x C-130J's in terms of payload and range. From that POV even if the C-130H fleet were entirely removed from service, our airlift capability is still being significantly enhanced.

A number of decisions remain to be made, but I think it's a deadset certainty that additional C-130J's or perhaps A400M's will be bought to replace the C-130H's (ADF is VERY disinterested in upgrades these days from all reports), meaning that our airlift will be greater than it ever has been.

Don't get me wrong as a strategic airlifter the C-17 gives the RAAF a great capability. What I was trying to say is that it can only lift a certain amount of troops at one time.

Unless the current C-130Js are retired early I can't see the A400 selected as it would give 3 types of airlifters.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Don't get me wrong as a strategic airlifter the C-17 gives the RAAF a great capability. What I was trying to say is that it can only lift a certain amount of troops at one time.

Unless the current C-130Js are retired early I can't see the A400 selected as it would give 3 types of airlifters.

Don't know if the ADF is overly concerned by that. They will in fact be operating 4 types airlifters for a considerable time anyway as you have overlooked the Caribou and whatever platform will replace that.

The C-130J's have nearly 10 years in RAAF service now and by the time the A400M's could be in-service they'd have nearly 20 years operational service. They might decide to "retire" the "J's" early and consolidate on an A400M / C-17 and "Caribou replacement" fleet.

Only time will tell I suppose but ADF has announced recently that it is still interested in A400M, though that could possibly be to stop LM rubbing it's hands with glee too early...

 

[Whiskyjack]

Don't know if the ADF is overly concerned by that. They will in fact be operating 4 types airlifters for a considerable time anyway as you have overlooked the Caribou and whatever platform will replace that.

The C-130J's have nearly 10 years in RAAF service now and by the time the A400M's could be in-service they'd have nearly 20 years operational service. They might decide to "retire" the "J's" early and consolidate on an A400M / C-17 and "Caribou replacement" fleet.

Only time will tell I suppose but ADF has announced recently that it is still interested in A400M, though that could possibly be to stop LM rubbing it's hands with glee too early...

Hell the way things are going, use the Js to replace the Caribou, and buy 12-16 A400Ms. Wishful thinking, but the army isn't going to get any lighter.

 

[RubiconNZ]

Lift

Hell the way things are going, use the Js to replace the Caribou, and buy 12-16 A400Ms. Wishful thinking, but the army isn't going to get any lighter.

That'd be cool if they got another 12 Chinooks to cover the Tactical lift, just give them inflight refueling and they would be sweet, 18 Chinooks, 12 C130's, 12 A400ms and 4 C17s.

I would prefer a total of 4 C17s, 18 C130J's, and 14 Spartans and 12 Chinooks, its late and forget its designation. The commonality would be a bit better perhaps,

Perhaps if the extra 6 C130Js were the K version, that would be good as they still have some transport capability and would greatly boost refuelling ability of the airforce when couple with 5 A330's.

 

[Whiskyjack]

That'd be cool if they got another 12 Chinooks to cover the Tactical lift, just give them inflight refueling and they would be sweet, 18 Chinooks, 12 C130's, 12 A400ms and 4 C17s.

I would prefer a total of 4 C17s, 18 C130J's, and 14 Spartans and 12 Chinooks, its late and forget its designation. The commonality would be a bit better perhaps,

Perhaps if the extra 6 C130Js were the K version, that would be good as they still have some transport capability and would greatly boost refuelling ability of the airforce when couple with 5 A330's.

Actually, ignore $$ for a second, I would seriously look at the Osprey, combined with 4-6 tanker versions of the C-130. This would give the Army a tactical assault lift that the distances that Australia and the Pacific have. Could also be used off the LHDs, and of course Spec Ops.

However I would wait until the Osprey has completed its initial combat deployment to Iraq/Afghanistan next year, and see what, is anything, comes out of operational experience.

$$ would be the main issue, I believe that you would not get much change, if any, out of US$100m for an Osprey. Hell I wish NZ had 8-10 of them, if the they prove themselves in operations.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Actually, ignore $$ for a second, I would seriously look at the Osprey, combined with 4-6 tanker versions of the C-130. This would give the Army a tactical assault lift that the distances that Australia and the Pacific have. Could also be used off the LHDs, and of course Spec Ops.

However I would wait until the Osprey has completed its initial combat deployment to Iraq/Afghanistan next year, and see what, is anything, comes out of operational experience.

$$ would be the main issue, I believe that you would not get much change, if any, out of US$100m for an Osprey. Hell I wish NZ had 8-10 of them, if the they prove themselves in operations.

I'd rather have Chinooks and C-130J's than Osprey's I think. Osprey's look like a nice idea but their range and performance is nothing special, compared to a C-130J and their lift capacity is nothing special compared to a CH-47D, let alone CH-47F OR a C-130J for that matter...

A few (6x) KC-130J-30 tankers, the existing 46x MRH-90's and 12-18 CH-47D/F's and 12-14 C-27J Spartans all fitted with permanent external A2A refuelling probes would suit ADF better, IMHO...