Invading Brisbane Australia

[HYPERION III]

Hi
I was on Google earth the other day looking at my home town of Brisbane and i dawned on me that Brisbane is a geographical fortress (of sorts).

It has only 1 small gap for a navy to get through as the rest is blocked by sandbars and islands.

There are mountains surrounding the other sides.

If you were in command of a moderately equiped invasion force of say, 2 or 3 battalions, 1 or 2 squadrons of fighters with some bombers and a small naval fleet.
How would you go about invading?

 

[Maverickjag]

If I were staging an invasion, I would stage it at night and I would send in my first battalion just south of the town to the north of Brisbane and have them march south to clear the area out of infantry that would be firing at the ships and at the same time, clearing a LZ for the other 2 battalions. Hopefully, this would all be kept quiet and I could land the other 2 battalions just north of Brisbane, if all had been kept quiet, I would then begin to launch my fighters and shortly thereafter, my bombers. I would use my fighters to keep enemy fighters from getting at my bombers and I would bomb any anti-aircraft platforms which were set up, or if the ships had any missiles capable of destroying the platforms I would have already destroyed them, while launching my planes. I would then begin bombing military barracks, infantry, airports, naval yard, etc. I would advance my infantry into the city and my navy into the bay and take it as intact as I could.

This plan isn't that great because the city is in a great position and it wouldn't be imposible to defend it from an invasion force this size, my plan can't succeed unless no-one knows about the attack until the ships are in the bay and the infantry is all landed which is extremely hard to pull of with all the tech we have now. Plus, if enemy troops were stationed on the island/punisula across the bay from Brisbane then they could blow my ships up as they came in. I just didn't think I had the troops to spare to land any there. Plus even if this plan would get this army into the city, there would be a lot of fighting in the streets and it is doubtful that tis would be enough to defeat enemy forces inside the city itself. Basically I'm shooting holes in my own plan but that usually makes me come up with a better one, so maybe I'll think up a better plan later, I'll post if I do.

 

[HYPERION III]

Ah, but as you sail south through the passage you encounter a sea swarming with sea mines.

I agree with your attack plan though, an infrantry with possible mechanized support from the north would be the best way.

 

[crazypole]

Basic idea could be as follows, assuming ability to land troops North of city without detection.

1. Initial strike by a force of fighters against the city. These would have two main objectives. First, with HARM/ALARM-type missiles to take out any radars, or anti-air systems, detected. This could hopefully mostly negate SAM fire except for hand-held systems, eg Stinger. Secondly, to target any troop concentrations or command posts, which have hopefully have been located through some method, eg triangulation of radio communication, though this could be hard as if the defending force has been there for a long time, then it is likely to have laid down cables for communication, as this is more secure than radio. But, on the positive side for the attackers, a force that has been there a long time could have got set in it's ways and not bother with moving its command post around regularly, so this could aid identification. Finally, the fighters are to attack any targets of opportunity that arise.
2. 1st battalion (of all the attacking forces this one must be mechanised or at least mobile, though it would be best if all troops were mechanised) moves into the assault from the North of the city, with intention of securing outskirts of city as "bridgehead" for rest of the assault. Simultaneously fighters go up to provide a continual CAP over the assault forces, these will remain in place for entire action, rotating the aircraft used as fuel levels run down. Naval assets do not need to come close to the city, but instead stand off and provide bombardment and fire support using gunnery, and also any available missile systems, eg cruise missiles. These could be used to mainly target the mid-to-Northern sections of the city to restrict enemy's possibilites with regards to movement within the city.
3. Having established the "bridgehead" the 1st battalion will carry the assault on if little/ no contact with the enemy has been made, so as to not lose momentum in the assault. In this case 2nd and 3rd battalions are used to cover the flanks of the assault. More likely, contact has been made; in this case, 1st battalion stops and becomes the assault force reserve. 2nd and 3rd battalion move in to continue the assault working side-by-side. The bomber force would be available to the ground troops as (hopefully) accurate close air support, the bombers should not have too much trouble as main SAM sites would have been negated, and CAP could hopefully hold off the enemy air capabilities.

Feel free to find the flaws in this idea, I doubt it would take too long to do.

 

[Maverickjag]

Ah, but as you sail south through the passage you encounter a sea swarming with sea mines.

I agree with your attack plan though, an infrantry with possible mechanized support from the north would be the best way.

yeah I thought there were too many problems with my plan, and yet the ships would really help in the assault of the city... What about the poor surfers how many of them will get blown up by the mines : Another thought, troops could be stationed on the island across from Brisbane and just blow the ships up before the got there.

I think it's safe to say that I would rather be defending than attacking. It's a nice defensive position which is why if Australia were attacked, Brisbane would be left alone until troops could be brought in by land to take it. Much easier that way...

 

[HYPERION III]

Crazypole, what would you do if your airforce failed, or was not that effective.

Im not sure if the range is correct but i can imagine AA missiles positioned on Mt Cootha or other surrounding mountains would have a nice clear shot over the city, the hills are also covered in dense bush.

I wish there was some kind of game where such a battle could be simulated.

 

[Maverickjag]

yeah, with me on the defensive side cause I'd rather be there than on the assault. I could hold it with probably half the army that would be sent. Wouldn't take that much to hold it, as long as the attack was sea based not land...

 

[crazypole]

Like I said, it didn't take very long to find the flaws, the last plan was made without any reference to GoogleEarth, as I was on a public pc, and did not wish to download the program. As an aside, I assume a similarly sized force in defence, which immediately makes the assaulting forces job harder. The only difference in force make-up, would be that whereas the assault forces have naval assets, the defenders would have less naval, but much greater AA capability.

Looking back at my previous post, I did put a lot of emphasis on the air assets available. The plan for an assault from the North, more or less along the flatter land by the coast, still seems to be the best possible... any naval assault would suffer to badly from even small forces postioned on the island around the bay, and from forces on the coast, which would have the added bonus of being in urban terrain as partial cover from bombardment. Also with a force as small as 3 battalions, and the probability of relatively high casualties in urban combat, I do not believe that I could spare any forces to try and clear out the defenders from the islands.

Assuming then that the initial strike by fighters to try and negate a large section of the surface-to-air capability failed, then obviously the idea of having the bombers fly as close air support would be likely to be almost suicidal. As an assumption I did make in forming the idea, I decided to not take into account any forces coming in from elsewhere, eg Morayfield,or anywhere further North. In this case, any available defensive air forces would have to use one of the three airports near Brisbane (Brisbane Intl, Brisbane Archerfield, Amberley), and these would be vulnerable to any fighters that could manage to stay over the city, as these could be attacked while still taking off.
Should there be any AA forces positioned on any of the surrounding mountains, especially the Northern ones, eg Kobble, Lawson, Glorious, then these would pose a considerable threat to any movement by my attacking air forces. If the AA fire becomes particularly intrusive, then it could become necessary to detach a force to try and clear the hills. This is likely to be difficult to do without a large force being sent, and I would be reluctant to split the already small forces available.
If AA fire manages to neutralise the bulk of my air power, then any required fire support would have to come from the naval fire.

So, what else is obviously flawed in my idea? But as a final point, isn't it commonly said that no plan survives contact with the enemy?

 

[HYPERION III]

I guess it would require alot of troops to take the city. Im glad i live in such a defensive position .

 

[crazypole]

In all honesty, with more or less equally sized forces with similar modern equipment, then just about every urban area is an easily defensible position. The defensive nature of your home town's geography would have been of much greater value in history, before the development of present-day military technology. In the past obstacles such as hills could play a much greater part than now, what with most modern troops no longer relying on marching to cover terrain, but instead use APC/MICV. Also in the past the lack of airborne forces (here I mean both air forces, and to a lesser extent airborne/ air mobile troops), meant that the higher ground could pose a much greater advantage than now.
But overall, yes your city is situated in a rather well-made defensive position, as long as the defense maintains control of the heights surrounding the city. If the assault controls those hills, then the opposite could occur, with the city being an easily surrounded pocket, which could be bombarded from above, and the asault could see what is going on throughout almost the whole city.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Actually any attacking force, would also have to deal with the Australian Army's 7th Brigade which is based on Brisbane's North West side at Gallipoli Barracks, Enoggera. This brigade comprises 3 motorised infantry battalions, an armoured Cavalry type Regiment (equipped with ASLAV vehicles) and an Artillery Regiment (comprised of 4x batteries, equipped with 105/155mm towed howizers), plus Combat support assets including an RISTA Regiment (Recon, Intel, surveillance Targetting acquisition) and Combat Engineers.

In addition the force would have to deal with the RAAF operates RAAF Amberley which is home to the RAAF's, F-111's and Caribou's. This base is located about 45mins West of Brisbane. Army's Oakey Air base, about 1.5 hrs West of Brisbane and operates the full range of Army helo's (including Tiger ARH's) and Air Forces Williamstown which operates 2x F/A-18 Squadrons and is located at Newcastle, 800 or so kays South of Brisbane.

These are simply the closest forces to Brisbane. Other forces that could respond within days if of an invasion of Brisbane, include: the Army's high readiness brigade (3 Brigade) located in Townsville, (about 1400k's north of Brisbane) and 4 RAR Commando (located in Sydney)...

In terms of an attack on Brisbane itself, logistically it would be extremely complex due to the distance of Brisbane from any neighbouring Country. Any invasion force then would need to be totally sea based.

This force would need to be able to defend themselves from intense F-111 and F/A-18 based maritime strikes (using Harpoon II ASM's and LGBs/JDAMs) initially followed by attacks from East coast of Australia based, Collins Class Submarines and FFG and ANZAC class frigate attacks from the RAN within days. This assumes the invasion force could achieve total surprise. Something that is very unlikely. If the ADF had any warning, such an invasion, would be a tough proposition for any attacking force indeed...

Interesting discussion topic though...

 

[HYPERION III]

But overall, yes your city is situated in a rather well-made defensive position, as long as the defense maintains control of the heights surrounding the city. If the assault controls those hills, then the opposite could occur, with the city being an easily surrounded pocket, which could be bombarded from above, and the asault could see what is going on throughout almost the whole city.

I dont even want to think of what would happen if the attacking force seized the hills.

 

[crazypole]

That there are so many forces within reach of Brisbane is not surprising, but without any information about forces, I just went with a very small basic defensive force. Also, to have a force as small and basic as just three infantry battalions attacking would obviously not be sufficient, as Ausse Digger pointed out. This is not due to the logisitical assets, which would have to be available to support the assaulting forces, but also in terms of forces needed to protect the theoretical beachhead and lines of supply to the attacking troops... and all this before discussing the necessary size of the attacking troops that would be needed. As far as a basic theoretical exercise, taking no account of outside intervenetion, world/diplomatic influences in the case of an invasion of Australia, and using completely fictionary forces, this was a nice idea for contemplation.
As a final note, thanks Aussie Digger... there's always one who starts to think in terms of practicality/reality. I bet you're the type to sit in films and point out all the unrealistic things, or continuity errors... come to think of it, that's what I often do.

 

[Brit]

I'd land my shallow-draft low-RCS longboat on the beach, run up the beach (about 100 yards later I'd be knackered and a slow ambling assault would ensue). Upon finding the local drinkery I'd conduct a close target reconnaissance paying particular attention to potentially hazardous women (you know the sort!). Then I'd conduct a frontal assault, using brute charm to capture suitable maidens (i.e. light enough to carry back to the boat). I'd be off, leaving a string of nine-month time bombs, potential future sleeper agents. It's a long term plan I know...

Actually, aside from the thought “why would anyone want to invade Australia?????”, you may have a pointtt about amphibious access. Mind you, China et al have quite large hovercraft now.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Thanks Crazy, I DO have an unfortunate, "nit-picking" habit...

 

[pepsi]

Aussie Digger, you mentioned any attack would have to be sea based for all the reasons you listed, and as a result it would have a lot to defend against, and i imagine there would be a lot of time for the defence force to prepare as any large naval force coming in would be pretty obvious

Does this mean it might be easier to invade somewhere else, like from the top of QLD and work from there, with air strikes at Brisbane and inserting troops via air and eventually i guess land, and navy after any defences to landing crafts and the like have been taken care of?

 

[Aussie Digger]

Well, Papua New Guinea is the closest landmass to Australia, so conceivably it would be the best place to launch an invasion of Australia from. (The Japanese thought this in WW2, at least). However it is 2500k's+ from PNG to Brisbane, in a straight line, so I doubt many airstrikes could be launched at Brisbane from there.

To get to Brisbane there the invasion force would have to move through intensely thick jungle in FNQ, fight through the Army's 3rd Brigade ( based in Townsville) and then advance the said 2500k's towards Brisbane... To put this in perspective, The US advanced 300k's in 8 days in Iraq in 2003 and this was one of the longest and quickest advances in history and was conducted over relatively simple flat terrain...

Australia, IMHO would be an extremely difficult place for anyone to invade, even if they were, theoretically capable of it...

 

[pepsi]

I suppose if you considered the invading force might have things like cruise missiles, and/or a stealth bomber like a B-2, then a lot of strikes against the cities defences and surrounding military infrastructure would be done via those, then i guess it would be easier to have an amphibious group kind of come in during all of that and move into position to land troops and stuff without as much opposition

 

[Aussie Digger]

I suppose if you considered the invading force might have things like cruise missiles, and/or a stealth bomber like a B-2, then a lot of strikes against the cities defences and surrounding military infrastructure would be done via those, then i guess it would be easier to have an amphibious group kind of come in during all of that and move into position to land troops and stuff without as much opposition

True, Australia is vulnerable to all sorts of attacks from Countries with long range strike capabilities. We have basically no significant ground based air defence capabilities, only a small (though reasonably capable) Air Force, and limited Naval Air defence capabilities.

A country possessing long range precision strike missiles could inflict quite a lot of damage to Australia and there's little we could do about it.

A land based invasion OTOH would still be a massive undertaking. There's no military force on Earth, that could destroy our land forces purely with stand off weapons, given the vast space we have to disperse our forces.

Even the USAF couldn't do it entirely to the Iraqi Army, and the Iraqi's had a MUCH smaller area to hide in, and relatively little available cover (compared to geographical conditions in Aust)...

I think the most credible defence of Australia operations, would be trying to defend against long range strikes on our domestic infrastructure. Given sufficient capabilities, strikes that could achieve significant financial loss/pain to Australia, would be more beneficial than the large scale invasion. Afterall WHY would anyone WANT to invade us? We'll sell anyone just about anything we have, and buy it back from them at twice the price...

What greater benefit could an invasion achieve?

 

[Brit]

If I invaded Australia, the first thing I'd do is ban exports of crap lager. sorry.