Australian M1A1 Abrams technology

[Whiskyjack]

Everyone chill, I've just been busy...

Okay, 1 Armoured Regt is to be issued 41 tanks for it's 2x Sabre Squadrons. Our tank Squadrons are equipped with 18 tanks per Sqn, with 4x troops of 4 tanks, 1x for the OC and 1x for the 2IC. The other 5x tanks are issued to CO, Regt 2IC, RSM, Exec officer and Ops officer etc.

The other 18 WILL be issued to the School of Armour and the RAEME School (for mechanics etc to learn how to fix them).

Just as an observation, with 3RAR going Mech that will give the army 2 battalions of 3 inf companies each (assuming the mech battalions follow the same structure as the new infantry structure).

Two tank sqns allows for a reinforced mech battalion to deploy, e.g. mech battalion and 1 tank sqn. However for flexability if 1 Regt had 3 x 14 tank sqns it would allow for three battalion groups to deploy each with 1 tank sqn and 2 infantry coys (plus a cav sqn?). Using the 1 Regt HQ.

Just an opinion

 

[Waylander]

We changed from 3 tanks per platoon to 4 and from four platoons per company to three not long ago. Two tanks are for the boss and his XO.
This system steals one maneuver element but increases the ability of the platoon to support and cover itself while on the run.

 

[cherry]

Okay, 1 Armoured Regt is to be issued 41 tanks for it's 2x Sabre Squadrons. Our tank Squadrons are equipped with 18 tanks per Sqn, with 4x troops of 4 tanks, 1x for the OC and 1x for the 2IC. The other 5x tanks are issued to CO, Regt 2IC, RSM, Exec officer and Ops officer etc.

The other 18 WILL be issued to the School of Armour and the RAEME School (for mechanics etc to learn how to fix them).

Thanks again AD. That all makes a bit more sense. Hopefully over time, with the increased operational momentum our forces are facing, the ADF and more importantly the Government, will realise that more Abrams are needed. Any goss on when the DCP will be announced? Might be on the opening day of the Defence & Industry conference next month?

 

[blueorchid]

Allocation of tanks for the 1st Armoured Regiment

When the purchase of the 59 M1A1 AIM(D) tanks for Australia was originaly anounced the break up was to be 14 each for the two sabre sqn's and a 12 tank "training" sqn with an all up total of 45 tanks for the 1st Amour reg. with the remaining tanks for training etc.
But according to Aussie Digger the orginal two sqn's plus 1 "training" sqn have been re-organised.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Just as an observation, with 3RAR going Mech that will give the army 2 battalions of 3 inf companies each (assuming the mech battalions follow the same structure as the new infantry structure).

Two tank sqns allows for a reinforced mech battalion to deploy, e.g. mech battalion and 1 tank sqn. However for flexability if 1 Regt had 3 x 14 tank sqns it would allow for three battalion groups to deploy each with 1 tank sqn and 2 infantry coys (plus a cav sqn?). Using the 1 Regt HQ.

Just an opinion

6RAR is the battalion that has been given the job of trialling the new structure and we may see it deploy to Afghanistan in July with this new structure in the infantry Coy group that is to deploy.

The environment in Afghanistan is certainly conducive to the employment of heavy weapons given the long range fire fights and fights against fortified positions that are typically encountered in that AO. I'd bet we''ll see the use of these MS teams and the MS section at Coy level in the Ghan as an operational trial at least, even if all the "new" weapon systems are not yet present.

With the Mech battalions however the level of support required is significant. Armoured vehicles need a lot of track etc to operate. Operating greater numbers of more small formations rather than small numbers of larger formations allows you a greater operational "footprint" but imposes additional strains on supporting assets for your armoured vehicles. Extensive modelling and trials would need to be done to see if it's worth it...

Realistically if they are going to raise another Mech battalion, they should be raising an additional tank Sqn. The 2x currently planned tank Sqns are designed to support each current maneuvre element (5/7RAR and 2nd Cav Regt).

By stripping 2 Cav Regt of it's Sqn, it loses a significant level of combat capability. For a robust mechanised brigade, each battalion and the Cav Regt should have a supporting tank sqn and a supporting artillery battery, plus each maneuvre element should have it's own organic in-direct and direct fire support assets.

By this I mean the inf battalions should have mechanised mortar systems, Ca Regt should have motorised mortar systems and both should have good anti-armour/anti-bunker/anti-personnel direct fire weapons (which they will get if the new battalion structure is delivered as promised).

Given the mobility of the mech brigade the supporting mortars and artillery should be self-propelled vehicles and be of sufficiently long range to cover a large area (for mortars this may mean a switch to 120mm calibre).

My opinion anyway...

 

[abramsteve]

Just a quick question. Can a C-17 lift an Abrams? Or are they only going to be deployed overseas via naval transport?

 

[davidcandy]

CARGO SYSTEMS

The design of the cargo compartment allows the C-17 to carry a wide range of vehicles, palleted cargo, paratroops, air-drop loads and aeromedical evacuees. The cargo compartment has a sufficiently large cross-section to transport large wheeled and tracked vehicles, tanks, helicopters (such as the AH-64 Apache), artillery, and weapons such as the Patriot Missile System. Three Bradley armoured vehicles comprise one deployment load on the C-17. The US Army M1A1 main battle tank can be carried with other vehicles.

The maximum payload is 170,900lb (77,519kg) with 18 pallet positions, including four on the ramp. Airdrop capabilities include: single load of up to 60,000lb (27,216kg), sequential loads of up to 110,000lb (49,895kg), Container Delivery System (CDS) airdrop up to 40 containers, 2,350lb (1,066kg) each; up to 102 paratroops. The aircraft is equipped for LAPES (Low Altitude Parachute Extraction System) drops. For Medevac, the C-17 can transport up to 36 litter and 54 ambulatory patients and attendants.

From
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/c17/

 

[Aussie Digger]

Just a quick question. Can a C-17 lift an Abrams? Or are they only going to be deployed overseas via naval transport?

A C-17 CAN lift an Abrams, but it can't transport it very far. It's a VERY inefficient way of transporting heavy armour and with a maximum fleet of 4 I can't see how any significant tactical advantage could be gained by using our C-17's to lift heavy armour. Perhaps for short hops into a landlocked Country or something but that would be it.

We would not deploy heavy armour to the middle east, africa or north asia via C-17.

That'll be the role of the planned "fast sealift" ship...

 

[Whiskyjack]

6RAR is the battalion that has been given the job of trialling the new structure and we may see it deploy to Afghanistan in July with this new structure in the infantry Coy group that is to deploy.

The environment in Afghanistan is certainly conducive to the employment of heavy weapons given the long range fire fights and fights against fortified positions that are typically encountered in that AO. I'd bet we''ll see the use of these MS teams and the MS section at Coy level in the Ghan as an operational trial at least, even if all the "new" weapon systems are not yet present.

With the Mech battalions however the level of support required is significant. Armoured vehicles need a lot of track etc to operate. Operating greater numbers of more small formations rather than small numbers of larger formations allows you a greater operational "footprint" but imposes additional strains on supporting assets for your armoured vehicles. Extensive modelling and trials would need to be done to see if it's worth it...

Realistically if they are going to raise another Mech battalion, they should be raising an additional tank Sqn. The 2x currently planned tank Sqns are designed to support each current maneuvre element (5/7RAR and 2nd Cav Regt).

By stripping 2 Cav Regt of it's Sqn, it loses a significant level of combat capability. For a robust mechanised brigade, each battalion and the Cav Regt should have a supporting tank sqn and a supporting artillery battery, plus each maneuvre element should have it's own organic in-direct and direct fire support assets.

By this I mean the inf battalions should have mechanised mortar systems, Ca Regt should have motorised mortar systems and both should have good anti-armour/anti-bunker/anti-personnel direct fire weapons (which they will get if the new battalion structure is delivered as promised).

Given the mobility of the mech brigade the supporting mortars and artillery should be self-propelled vehicles and be of sufficiently long range to cover a large area (for mortars this may mean a switch to 120mm calibre).

My opinion anyway...

I thought that the tank regt was supposed to provide one of the 9 HQs for deployment, if its two sqns are tasked to two battalions, would that not leave rather empty? Or have various infantry and cav formations but none of its own tank sqns?

if this is unclear let me know and I will attempt to clarify.

 

[Aussie Digger]

I thought that the tank regt was supposed to provide one of the 9 HQs for deployment, if its two sqns are tasked to two battalions, would that not leave rather empty? Or have various infantry and cav formations but none of its own tank sqns?

if this is unclear let me know and I will attempt to clarify.

For exercises 1 Brigade splits up into battlegroups ("Battlegroup Tiger" is the most common) the type and construct of which depends on the task at hand. Sometimes it's armour heavy, sometimes it's infantry heavy and sometimes it's Cavalry heavy. 1 Armed HQ would deploy as a taskforce command if an armour heavy deployment were to occur.

Similarly 5 Avn and 1 Avn Regt's ALSO provide HQ's for deployment, although in practice it's hard to imagine helo's OR armour providing the lead force for a deployment, but infantry or Cavalry not...

The Al Muthana tasgroup for instance is considered "Cavalry heavy" due to 2x Cav Sqns and 1x Inf Coy making up the the majority of the forces deployed. As such HQ 2 Cav Regt provides the command element for the whole taskgroup.

On larger scale deployments a particular Brigade HQ will command the various elements. Such is the case in Timor at present with HQ 3 Brigade running the show.

On "massive" deployments, ie: larger than Brigade level (as Interfet was originally) the DJFHQ from Gallipoli Barracks Enoggera will command and will be run by a Major General.

Hope this is what you were referring to?

 

[Whiskyjack]

For exercises 1 Brigade splits up into battlegroups ("Battlegroup Tiger" is the most common) the type and construct of which depends on the task at hand. Sometimes it's armour heavy, sometimes it's infantry heavy and sometimes it's Cavalry heavy. 1 Armed HQ would deploy as a taskforce command if an armour heavy deployment were to occur.

Similarly 5 Avn and 1 Avn Regt's ALSO provide HQ's for deployment, although in practice it's hard to imagine helo's OR armour providing the lead force for a deployment, but infantry or Cavalry not...

The Al Muthana tasgroup for instance is considered "Cavalry heavy" due to 2x Cav Sqns and 1x Inf Coy making up the the majority of the forces deployed. As such HQ 2 Cav Regt provides the command element for the whole taskgroup.

On larger scale deployments a particular Brigade HQ will command the various elements. Such is the case in Timor at present with HQ 3 Brigade running the show.

On "massive" deployments, ie: larger than Brigade level (as Interfet was originally) the DJFHQ from Gallipoli Barracks Enoggera will command and will be run by a Major General.

Hope this is what you were referring to?

It was indeed, thanks for that.

 

[oskarm]

Our tank Squadrons are equipped with 18 tanks per Sqn, with 4x troops of 4 tanks, 1x for the OC and 1x for the 2IC.

I understand that main role for tanks in Australian Army is supporting infantry and the Squadrons would be attached to mechanized battalions in combat. Are the Squadrons split to troops and attached to infantry coys or they are working all together as a full Squadron or it depends on situation?

As far as I know, only Canadians have similar organization of Tank Squadrons (+1 tank in Squadron HQ), and Brits, but their troops are only 3 tanks strong. And the question to Aussie Digger or other tankers is: isn't it difficult to command 4 troop squadron? Most armies uses only 3 troops Squadrons.

 

[Aussie Digger]

I understand that main role for tanks in Australian Army is supporting infantry and the Squadrons would be attached to mechanized battalions in combat. Are the Squadrons split to troops and attached to infantry coys or they are working all together as a full Squadron or it depends on situation?

As far as I know, only Canadians have similar organization of Tank Squadrons (+1 tank in Squadron HQ), and Brits, but their troops are only 3 tanks strong. And the question to Aussie Digger or other tankers is: isn't it difficult to command 4 troop squadron? Most armies uses only 3 troops Squadrons.

It depends very much on the threat level. Army's experience on operations, even in Vietnam is forming "battle groups" to tackle a particular threat. "Battle Group Tiger" is formed on major exercises in Australia and usually generates 1 or 2 infantry company's attached to a Squadron of MBT's.

The size of the formation depends on whether they want it to be "armour" heavy or "infantry" heavy.

IN relation to whether 4 troops are more difficult to command than 3, I have no idea. Our Armoured units APART from the tank unit have 3 troops per Squadron, however we only operate 1 Tank Regiment, whereas we have numerous "other" Armoured Regiments, so this may explain the increased number of troops per squadron.

With the increased command and control capabilities inherent within the Abrams (Blue Force Tracker etc), it shouldn't be too difficult. Now if they'd only spring for a 3rd Squadron and some armoured bridgelayers...

 

[MARKMILES77]

Aussie Digger, I am under the impression 1 Armoured Regiment has THREE Squadrons of tanks A, B and C Squadrons.
All of the information I have seen on the HNA refers to six Cavalry Squadrons and three tank Squadrons being available to form Battle Groups.

I have a copy of "Ironsides" in front of me which has a "Year in Review" section for each of the RAAC units in 2005.
For 1 Armoured Regiment here are a couple of exerts.

"During Talisman Sabre the Regiment formed Battlegroup Leopard. RHQ, A Squadron and Operations Support Squadron were joined by elements of 8/12 MdM REGT, 1 CER and 1 RAR while a B Squadron Troop Group worked with 2RAR as OPFOR.

B Squadron has conducted (live fire excercise) Beersheba at Mt Bundey and in Townsville this year. They provided the RMC cadets an excellent opportunity to experience combined arms operations in close country and urban terrain.

the most significant non-operational deployment was C Squadron's Excercise Gold Eagle exchange with B Company's 1st Tank Battalion, USMC."

Unless one of the Squadrons has been disbanded in the last few months there must be three.






There are 41 M1A1s going to 1 AR in Darwin. This seems like a strange number unless this will be the Regimental structure.

1 tank for REG CO
1 tank for REG 2IC
Each Squadron would have 13 tanks.
1 for Squadron CO and either three troops of four tanks or four troops of three tanks. It is not unknown for the Squadron 2IC in some Army's tank Squadrons to not be allocated a tank but to travel in Command vehicles.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Aussie Digger, I am under the impression 1 Armoured Regiment has THREE Squadrons of tanks A, B and C Squadrons.
All of the information I have seen on the HNA refers to six Cavalry Squadrons and three tank Squadrons being available to form Battle Groups.

I have a copy of "Ironsides" in front of me which has a "Year in Review" section for each of the RAAC units in 2005.
For 1 Armoured Regiment here are a couple of exerts.

"During Talisman Sabre the Regiment formed Battlegroup Leopard. RHQ, A Squadron and Operations Support Squadron were joined by elements of 8/12 MdM REGT, 1 CER and 1 RAR while a B Squadron Troop Group worked with 2RAR as OPFOR.

B Squadron has conducted (live fire excercise) Beersheba at Mt Bundey and in Townsville this year. They provided the RMC cadets an excellent opportunity to experience combined arms operations in close country and urban terrain.

the most significant non-operational deployment was C Squadron's Excercise Gold Eagle exchange with B Company's 1st Tank Battalion, USMC."

Unless one of the Squadrons has been disbanded in the last few months there must be three.

There are 41 M1A1s going to 1 AR in Darwin. This seems like a strange number unless this will be the Regimental structure.

1 tank for REG CO
1 tank for REG 2IC
Each Squadron would have 13 tanks.
1 for Squadron CO and either three troops of four tanks or four troops of three tanks. It is not unknown for the Squadron 2IC in some Army's tank Squadrons to not be allocated a tank but to travel in Command vehicles.

C Squadron WAS a Chocco Squadron equipped. It was being disbanned, but under HNA they must have decided to retain it as a regular squadron. I was not aware of that.

I guess it has been replaced by a full time C Squadron and the manning complement of tanks reduced, now that the Regiment only has 41 operational tanks.

The 13x tank per Squadron now makes sense...

I also just found this unde the HNA site:

http://www.defence.gov.au/army/HNA/docs/Impacts_by_Unit.pdf

Which lists ALL the changes unit by unit, that HNA will make. Of course it's slightly out of date already with Howard's increased announced recently, but it's probably still accurate at present...

 

[MARKMILES77]

Personally, I would have five tank Squadrons in 1AR.
A, B and C Squadrons would remain as they are.
D and E Squadrons would be permanently attached to 3 and 7 Brigades respectively, to provide a heavy direct fire support capability for these Brigades.
This would also provide an additional (away from Darwin) posting for tank crews!

 

[FutureTank]

We changed from 3 tanks per platoon to 4 and from four platoons per company to three not long ago. Two tanks are for the boss and his XO.
This system steals one maneuver element but increases the ability of the platoon to support and cover itself while on the run.

Yes, but Bundeswehr armoured trops are but a shaddow of their former Cold War self!

 

[Aussie Digger]

Personally, I would have five tank Squadrons in 1AR.
A, B and C Squadrons would remain as they are.
D and E Squadrons would be permanently attached to 3 and 7 Brigades respectively, to provide a heavy direct fire support capability for these Brigades.
This would also provide an additional (away from Darwin) posting for tank crews!

With the same amount of tanks as now, or with additional tanks and recovery vehicles, low-loaders and fuel trucks ordered?

I am in favour of the additional vehicles, but not spreading the capability we have now any thinner than it already is. Concentration of force is STILL a vital tactic on the battlefield and allows significant efficiencies in training...

 

[MARKMILES77]

With additional M1s, M88s etc.
Small extra buy of around 30 M1s should do it!

I still have doubts in my mind whether all tanks should be concentrated in a single Regiment when they will never deploy that way. I am unconvinced by arguments that it makes training better/easier. Surely it would be better to train the way you are likely to deploy!
This issue was raised, I think, in the Australian Army Journal this year. The author proposed (prior to knowing the Army was being expanded) that instead of seperate tank and mechanised infantry battalions , that 1 Brigade have composite units. His proposal was for two units, each of which had two tank companies and two mechanised infantry companies. He also proposed that each Cavalry regiment have a permanently attached, Bushmaster mounted, Infantry company. Potentially, you could have three Cavalry Regiments, each composed of two ASLAV and one Bushmaster Company.
Overseas Tank/Armoured units do have mixed Regiments. I think the British 1RTR has, as part of it's OOB, one Recon Squadron and a CBR Squadron.
The Canadians, I think, also have mixed units. For example the Strathconians have one wheeled Recon Squadron, two tank Squadrons and an M113 mounted Anti-tank Company. I think they are also planning to incorporate a anti-air element as well!!

 

[FutureTank]

Personally, I would have five tank Squadrons in 1AR.
A, B and C Squadrons would remain as they are.
D and E Squadrons would be permanently attached to 3 and 7 Brigades respectively, to provide a heavy direct fire support capability for these Brigades.
This would also provide an additional (away from Darwin) posting for tank crews!

more tanks mean more crews and more support staff on a limited recruitment intake.