Australian Army Discussions and Updates

[AGRA]

Glad to see the SMH is up to date, if i'm not mistaken, that "order" disappeared in favour of a US IMV.

They could have checked their fax in-tray and discovered this press statement from Thales Australia:

8 August 2007

Bushmaster Export Potential

The Thales (Australia) designed and manufactured Bushmaster Protected Mobility Vehicle has been proven operationally with both Australian and Dutch forces and maintains great export opportunity for Australia.

Thales is actively marketing the vehicle in several countries including the United States. To date, over 450 Bushmasters in total have been ordered by the Australian and Dutch armed forces.

For the US market, Thales is teamed with a local partner (OSHKOSH Truck Corporation) to provide the expert local presence, critical to any success in this market.

The Thales Bushmaster vehicle offer for the US MRAP Phase 1 Program was not selected due to an evolving requirement, not due to a lack of marketing or lobbying effort.

Thales has achieved significant defence sales in the US notably through Thales Communications Inc. with the JTRS handheld radios used by US special forces in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as successful joint ventures such as Thales Raytheon Systems. Thales maintains sixteen primary US locations and employs nearly 3,000 people in 11 states. In 2006 Thales North America’s revenues exceeded USD $ 1 billion.

Thales and OSHKOSH remain confident of future potential sales of Bushmaster under ongoing Phases of MRAP in the US.

Achieving export success in new markets is greatly assisted by the ongoing support, encouragement and commitment of our Government and Offices like the Export Advocate within the Defence Material Organisation. The vehicle would not be the success it is today without the support and ongoing commitment of Government and the ADF.

Ends

Press contacts

David Rawlins
Thales Australia
Tel: +61 2 9562 2547
+61 (0)437 965 705
[email protected]

Markus Leutert
Thales Corporate Media Relations
Tel: +33 1 57 77 86 26
[email protected]

 

[Navor86]

Moin,
does anybody know how the current Aussie Cav Regt are organised. Ive got an Orbat of 2005,which says 3 Sabre Sqn each with 26 ASLAV:
But does anybody know how many ASLAV PC are in each Sqn and whether 7 or 8 Cav Scouts are per PC?

Concerning the Bushmaster I heard Rumours that with the buy of the add 250 IMV there will not only be the now forming 8/9 RAR be equipped but also there will be per active Duty Cav Rgt one Bushmaster Company as a 4 Sabre Sqn be raised. And after some time the 8/9 should be delinked.
Any intel on this??
Greetings Navor

 

[AGRA]

Moin, does anybody know how the current Aussie Cav Regt are organised. Ive got an Orbat of 2005,which says 3 Sabre Sqn each with 26 ASLAV:

Each armd cav sqn has a SHQ (sqn HQ) with some ASLAVs and nine sections each of two ASLAV-25 and one ASLAV-PC with a dismount cav scout team. The strength of which is below seven.

Concerning the Bushmaster I heard Rumours that with the buy of the add 250 IMV there will not only be the now forming 8/9 RAR be equipped but also there will be per active Duty Cav Rgt one Bushmaster Company as a 4 Sabre Sqn be raised. And after some time the 8/9 should be delinked.

The govt. had endorsed Army to reform 8/9 RAR if certain recruiting targets were meet after the delinking of 5/7 RAR into 5 RAR and 7 RAR. Last month that threshold was crossed so 8/9 RAR will start to be raised. There was some internal debate as to raise it as a light or motorised battalion. The additional IMV order confirms it will be motorised. The next debate is where to base this battalion, with some push for it to be at RAAF Amberley. The recent move to build a new army reserve depot in SE Qld might indicate this argument has been lost as it will clear garrison space from Enoggera for 8/9. As for delinking of 8/9 into two battalions there is no govt. commitment to expand the Army further and even if considered would be a long way off.

The “Bushmaster Sqn” for armd cav regts is probably someone being confused about the re-equipment of the independent B Sqn, 3/4 Cav Regt with IMV in place of their M113A1. Also a number of IMVs are being allocated to the two armd cav regts for their CSS Sqns [Combat Services Support] which has capabilities like the field kitchen, repair workshop, etc. Across army they are having their Landrovers and Unimogs replaced by Bushmasters.

 

[battlensign]

The govt. had endorsed Army to reform 8/9 RAR if certain recruiting targets were meet after the delinking of 5/7 RAR into 5 RAR and 7 RAR. Last month that threshold was crossed so 8/9 RAR will start to be raised. There was some internal debate as to raise it as a light or motorised battalion. The additional IMV order confirms it will be motorised. The next debate is where to base this battalion, with some push for it to be at RAAF Amberley. The recent move to build a new army reserve depot in SE Qld might indicate this argument has been lost as it will clear garrison space from Enoggera for 8/9. As for delinking of 8/9 into two battalions there is no govt. commitment to expand the Army further and even if considered would be a long way off.

The “Bushmaster Sqn” for armd cav regts is probably someone being confused about the re-equipment of the independent B Sqn, 3/4 Cav Regt with IMV in place of their M113A1. Also a number of IMVs are being allocated to the two armd cav regts for their CSS Sqns [Combat Services Support] which has capabilities like the field kitchen, repair workshop, etc. Across army they are having their Landrovers and Unimogs replaced by Bushmasters.

Actually, the then, Captain Damien Patterson wrote an intriguing article about the restructure of the Australian Army for the "Australian Army Journal" (Volume 3, Issue Number 2) entitiled "Army Force Structure: What has gone wrong?". In it he noted the need for ensuring the proper joint training of formations that were likely to deploy together (or dare he suggest that those integral units become part of a standing formation structure)

Essentially this paper was a larger assessment of systemic issues associated with the current Army Structure. Among many issues addressed, Capt Patterson called for the restructure of the Army into combined arms units that were capable of rotation by reorganising the assets of the Armoured, Mechanised and Reconnaissence units to form an "Army of Twos" . Additionally, an idea was discussed at length about the amalgumation of reserve brigades to provide fully manned units and release more officers for other duties (amoung all areas of commands, Captain Damien seems to have believed that we try to man too many formation headquaters and that we keep support units too far up the structure for the small operational units of our Army - i.e. at corps level/divisional level instead of Brigade or Battlegroup level). However, integral to these discussions were assessments of the ideals structures for Cavalry.

On page 183 of the Journal Capt Patterson argued that since it was now standard practice for the infantry to be combined with Cavalry Units (SECDET and AMTG units were offered as evidence for this) that incorporation of Infantry into the Scout Cavalry was a sound principle. The Capt argued that such a policy would be physically manifested in the 3rd Squadron of each Cav. Regiment being converted to a Mounted Infantry Company (mounted in ASLAV's - Arm. Corps Crew and Infantry Dismounts). The Irony here is that, for example, the 2/14th Light Horse would be a Mounted Infantry Unit again.....or a Light Horse Regiment, if you will. lol

I don't profess to know much about the "green" side of things......(Navy Blue is more my style ), however, this sounded like a really good idea. With no IFV's appropriate to the scenarios involved, the Goverment has 3 times called upon the ASLAV units (Scouts) to combine with infantry for specified tasks of high importance (East Timor, SECDET, AMTG/Battlegroup West). Perhaps 3 full Cavalry Squadrons with Infantry Dismounts are a good idea?

Brett.

 

[AGRA]

While I'm a big supporter of a combined arms corps and breaking down the ridiculous barriers between infantry, cavalry and so on Patterson's journal article is not the basis of the Army's order of battle. Also it’s somewhat dated.

When reequipped with ASLAV (Gen 1) 2nd Cav Regt didn’t have enough to fully equip all three armd cav sqns. However Phase 3 of the ASLAV order purchased another 150 vehicles (Gen 2) on top of the first 100 providing enough for two full regiments. So C Sqn, 2 Cav Regt was brought up to strength in the last few years along with A, B, C Sqns 2/14 LH.

Each of these squadrons has their own integral infantry – they are called cavalry scouts – with as many as 60 per squadron (though personnel fluctuations will keep these numbers down). Plus the crews of the ASLAV-25s themselves are trained to dismount and fight on foot if that will provide a better effect.

Because the M113AS4 upgrade hasn’t delivered a vehicle yet when Army deployed to Iraq the mechanised infantry company was given ASLAVs in place of their obsolete M113A1. At first the crews for these vehicles (mostly ASALV-PCs) were provided by 2 Cav Regt and 2/14 LH but latter infantry M113 crew were retrained on ASLAV. This is an expedient solution that will be solved by either an interim buy of IFVs, the M113AS4 ever being accepted into service or – at the worst – Land 400 Phase 1 which will deliver IFVs circa 2015.

If you want a good Army Journal article on the state of play in the armd cav can I suggest Lt.Col. Roger Nobles piece:

“Australian Light-armoured Vehicles (ASLAV) as Mounted Cavalry: Vanguard for a Hardened Army”

A 2003 Marine Corps document on lessons learnt from Operation Iraqi Freedom states that the mounted light-armoured regiment (LAR) has the potential to be ‘the most lethal [and] versatile force on the battlefield’. Unfortunately, the Australian Army has yet to reach a similar level of comprehension about the value of its own Australian light-armoured vehicle (ASLAV) as mounted cavalry.

http://www.army.gov.au/lwsc/AbstractsOnline/AAJournal/2004_W/AAJ_Winter_2004_05.pdf

 

[battlensign]

Thanks for that AGRA.

Sorry if I made it sound like the Captain's article was the current state of play......it was actually more of a thought-provoking piece on what "could be done" rather than what IS being done.

I note that your article is actually OLDER than mine though, so I think we are both going to be dealing with sources that provide limited discussion on things such as the HNA initiative and the 2006 army expansion plan....

But given my limited knowledge of the Cavalry world I will definately be spending some time getting to grips with the article you suggested by LTCOL Nobel (who I remember being an AMTG commander at one point).

 

[AGRA]

Sorry if I made it sound like the Captain's article was the current state of play......it was actually more of a thought-provoking piece on what "could be done" rather than what IS being done.

Nothing to be sorry about. The spark for this was the rumoured suggestion, quite unfounded, that the armd cav regts are receiving a fourth Bushmaster squadron from the latest vehicle order.

I note that your article is actually OLDER than mine though, so I think we are both going to be dealing with sources that provide limited discussion on things such as the HNA initiative and the 2006 army expansion plan....

There is a big difference between the then CO of an armd cav regt writing about his unit’s role and performance and a ‘suggestive’ piece about future organisation. But this isn’t my only source on armd cav regts. I’ve spent quite a bit of time working with 2/14 LHR (QMI) through 2004-2005 when they were built up to a full ARA armd cav regt. So I have reasonable familiarity with their capability.

HNA and the ELF will not fundamentally change the structure of the two armd cav regts, beyond providing more protection in the form of Bushmaster IMVs in place of selected Landrover 4x4 and 6x6 vehicles for CSS elements. Hopefully if we have a rapid acquisition of a new CFV/IFV Gen 3 ASLAV to replace the clapped out Gen 2 ASLAVs in the MEAO some more vehicles will be available to reequip B Sqn, 3/4 Cav Regt as a seventh armd cav sqn.

The only significant future change to the armd cav sqns is from new, larger vehicles able to combine the roles of ASLAV-25 and ASLAV-PC, ie have enough room for a big gun, its ammo and a dismount section and their gear, which may see the armd cav section reduced from three vehicles to two.

 

[Jezza]

Being that the Aussie Leopard tanks are nearly 30 years old..
And you couldnt sell them as the market is flooded with
later generation Tanks,
What is being down with them other than the usual museams etc.

Could they be deployed and left behind in Afganistan or Iraq
(just to use up ordanance that the M1 wouldnt use)

Any thoughts????

 

[Tasman]

Army denies weapons faults

The following appeared in today's Australian and similar reports appeared in last nights Channel Seven TV news:

Mark Dodd | August 28, 2007
ARMY chief Lieutenant-General Peter Leahy has refuted charges of widespread problems involving the Steyr assault rifle saying incidents of breakdowns were normal given the number of weapons in use.

It follows reports obtained under Freedom of Information by the Seven Nework of persistent stoppages and jamming of the Steyr rifle by troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.

More than 75,000 Steyr 5.56mm assault rifles are on issue to the Australian Defence Force and reported breakdowns fell within a "normal operational range," said General Leahy.

The breakdowns occurred over two years in 2005 and 2006 and in one internal report an unidentified ADF armourer cites a total of 25 Steyrs as being in an "unsatisfactory" condition out of a total of 136 examined.

Additional claims by Seven that the elite Special Air Service (SAS) had recommended its troops stop using high powered pistols and machine guns because of reliability concerns was wrong, he said.

"I would like to reassure everyone, particularly the mums and dads of our deployed forces, that there are no systemic issues involved with weapons and ammunition on issue to Australian troops on operations in the Middl East.

"Defence regrets the sensationalist claims made by Channel Seven that Australian Defence Force personnel lack high quality weapons and equipment.

"Channel Seven's so called investigative report is based on entirely selective and exaggerated use of information gained from a Freedom of Information request," he said.

The Steyr rifle, which features widespread use of heavy duty plastics was first issued to the army in 1989.

During the 30-minute news conference at defence headquarters, images were shown of Australian special forces on operation in Afghanistan.

But the special forces do not use the Steyr rifle preferring the more versatile US made M-4 weapon system, a derivative of the old Vietnam-era M-16.

The weapon problems claims come despite record defence spending and the Howard Government's commitment to provide troops with the best equipment money can buy.

Prime Minister John Howard has denied there are systemic weaknesses or faults with the weapons issued to Australian troops serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"It's contrary to what I've been told, not only be the generals but by the blokes on the ground. And they tell you if there's something wrong - I can assure you of that."

But Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd said there should be an audit of the weapons being used by the ADF.

"Mr Howard, if he was serious about this, would conduct an immediate audit, like tomorrow, of the adequacy and effectiveness of all weaponry currently being used by our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan," Mr Rudd told Channel 7.

Australian Defence Association executive director Neil James said he was not unduly concerned that faults had been discovered in military weapons.

"When you fight wars in hot, dry, dusty deserts then obviously your kit wears out quicker than if you store it in armouries back home in Australia," Mr James said.

"When I was visiting Iran and Iraq in April, I didn't get one single complaint about the weapons."

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22320805-601,00.html

These sort of reports and denials from higher levels in Defence keep recurring.

Are there any members with contacts within the ADF who can vouch for the accuracy of either Channel Seven's report or the Army's subsequent denial?

Tas

 

[Waylander]

You can use the old Leos as hard targets or make a riff out of them.

With the price of good quaility steel being high one can also recicle them.

For example I saw on TV that some of the 105mm guns of our old Leos are reciylced and become razorblades.

 

[AGRA]

Being that the Aussie Leopard tanks are nearly 30 years old..

All Leopard AS1s are out of service in the Army now. They are in the hands of the DMO for disposal in whatever turns out to be the best way.

 

[AGRA]

Are there any members with contacts within the ADF who can vouch for the accuracy of either Channel Seven's report or the Army's subsequent denial?

Like all these things the answer is complex. Complexity does not go down way in most media.

The Steyr AUG/F88 is a perfectly good weapon but getting old. They were built 15 years ago and are due for a Life Of Type Extension (LOTE) in 2010. This doesn't mean they don't work.

Some of the examples given by SEVEN and others are crazy - like a weapon stored in 70 degree heat that's glue unbonded. Not much of more sophistication than your average boomberang can survive being stored in 70 degree heat for extended periods of time...

The short answer is this is all total bull text deleted.

 

[Tasman]

The short answer is this is all total bull text deleted.

That is certainly the impression that Lieutenant-General Peter Leahy has given.

I thought that recent photos of SAS and other personnel who are regulary shown carrying pistols conflicts with the Channel Seven report that SAS personnel had been told to stop carrying them.

Tas

 

[AGRA]

The "high powered pistols"... What a joke... its the 9mm Browning which dating back to 1930 has an official name of "Browning Hi Power"... Another old weapon, this time built in Canada in the 1950s/60s... SOCOMD-A have replaced them with H&K USPs.

 

[icelord]

Any news on the Project Redfins plans to replace the M4 with a new weapon, SCAR comes to mind as alternative. But hey, they just got new Boats and Cars without mentioning it.

 

[Tasman]

Conssequences of Dutch pullout from Afghanistan

The Australian today carried a story that the Defence Minister has warned that Australia may have to pull its troops out of Afghanistan if the Dutch withdraw their forces.

Dennis Shanahan | August 31, 2007
BRENDAN Nelson has warned Dutch MPs that a decision to remove their troops from southern Afghanistan could lead to the withdrawal of Australia's military personnel based alongside the Dutch in Oruzgan province.

The Defence Minister met 12 Dutch parliamentarians in the Afghanistan capital of Kabul this week after meeting President Hamid Karzai and Australian commanders.

The Dutch parliament is considering withdrawing the country's troops from Oruzgan province following a series of combat deaths and rising public concern in The Netherlands about the wisdom of the fight against theTaliban.

The Australian engineers and special forces - part of a 970-strong Australian contingent in Afghanistan - have had increased contact with Taliban fighters in recent weeks, with small arms fire being directed at police checkpoints being built by Australian soldiers to protect local Afghani police.

The checkpoints are being used to control traffic around the Oruzgan town of Tarin Kowt and to monitor movements by Taliban insurgents.

Apart from the small arms fire near the Camp Holland base at Tarin Kowt, Australian soldiers on patrol have made contact more frequently with Taliban fighters in the nearby mountains and hills.

Two weeks ago, Australian forces had a decisive victory against local Taliban forces with a US air strike killing 18 Taliban leaders, including one of their most senior commanders in Afghanistan.

The Dutch forces provide vital helicopter air cover for the Australian troops working and patrolling around Tarin Kowt, and Australian commanders fear they would not be able to operate without it.

The Dutch parliamentary committee members met Dr Nelson and the Chief of Defence Forces, Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston, at Kabul Airport.

Dr Nelson told The Australian that the Dutch MPs were informed that Australia was against any decision to reduce the Dutch presence in the region.

"We are not in a position to increase our numbers in Afghanistan and we won't and can't take the lead position in Tarin Kowt," the minister told the MPs. "There are Australian soldiers who owe their lives to the Dutch Apache helicopters and they play a critical role.

"The consequences of a Dutch withdrawal, if we can't find another partner, is that we would be far too exposed to continue."

The Dutch have 2200 troops at the Camp Holland base at Tarin Kowt and have suffered the deaths of six soldiers, including one on the day the parliamentary delegation was visiting Kabul to assess the situation in Afghanistan.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22337294-31477,00.html

The report highlights concerns by Australian commanders that the loss of the Dutch Apache helos would be a particular worry. The Australian Tigers won't be ready to deploy for some time yet. I imagine that on request the US would provide helos, either an American unit or Apache or Hueycobra helos leased to Australia as an interim measure, but the total number of Dutch soldiers that would have to be replaced would put a huge strain on the army and may not even be possible given our other commitments.

Pulling out of Afghanistan seems unlikely to me given that, unlike the Iraq deployment, the commitment has bipartisan support from both major political parties. I think the quandary facing the Australian government demonstrates the need for the current army expansion program and IMO also shows the need for a much larger force of Tiger ARH's.

Tas

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

The Australian today carried a story that the Defence Minister has warned that Australia may have to pull its troops out of Iraq if the Dutch withdraw their forces.

Did you mean afghanistan tassie or iraq?????

The Australian today carried a story that the Defence Minister has warned that Australia may have to pull its troops out of Iraq if the Dutch withdraw their forces.



http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22337294-31477,00.html

The report highlights concerns by Australian commanders that the loss of the Dutch Apache helos would be a particular worry. The Australian Tigers won't be ready to deploy for some time yet. I imagine that on request the US would provide helos, either an American unit or Apache or Hueycobra helos leased to Australia as an interim measure, but the total number of Dutch soldiers that would have to be replaced would put a huge strain on the army and may not even be possible given our other commitments.

Pulling out of Afghanistan seems unlikely to me given that, unlike the Iraq deployment, the commitment has bipartisan support from both major political parties. I think the quandary facing the Australian government demonstrates the need for the current army expansion program and IMO also shows the need for a much larger force of Tiger ARH's.

Tas

Depending onthe timeframe for any dutch withdrawl Australia's geo-strategic posture may have changed significantly by then. September 15 is shaping up to be a watershed moment for policy in Iraq when general pertaus gives his report on the troop "surge" to congress. If things go the way i think they will, there will be a plan for a phased withdrawl from iraq after that date. Now if Mr Rudd becomes the next PM you may very well see a withdrawl of Australian forces from iraq. If the money and personell commitments were shifted fully from iraq to Afghanistan the ADF could feasibly take up the lions share of the dutch presence. We could feasibly deploy 2000+ personell without Iraq. As far as the HELO's are concerned, i'm sure the yanks could lend us a unit of AH 64D's if it meant keeping us in afghanistan, hell they would do it to help us out anyway.

 

[Tasman]

Did you mean afghanistan tassie or iraq?????

Thanks Ozzy - I've made the correction. It should have read Afghanistan!

I agree that we could probably take up the slack if we were out of Iraq but the ALP is committed to completing the present deployment plus one more rotation IIRC. As far as the helos are concerned I agree that the Americans would probably provide them to encourage us to stay. Long term I still thing we need a lot more ARH's than the 22 on order. Leasing some Apaches or Hueycobras pending us getting sufficient Tigers operational is an option I would like to see explored. I'm not sure where we would get the pilots though!

Personally I think Nelson is bluffing to try and put pressure on the Dutch.

Tas

 

[barra]

Personally I think Nelson is bluffing to try and put pressure on the Dutch.

Tas

Yes Tas, I suspect he is. Question for you guys, do you think the ADF could do more? What about the deployment of one of these combined arms teams that Army is always talking about. Built around an infantry battalion with supporting artillery, armour and helos. Its about time the infantry were given the chance to show their stuff. Thoughts anyone??

Hooroo

 

[Tasman]

Yes Tas, I suspect he is. Question for you guys, do you think the ADF could do more? What about the deployment of one of these combined arms teams that Army is always talking about. Built around an infantry battalion with supporting artillery, armour and helos. Its about time the infantry were given the chance to show their stuff. Thoughts anyone??

Hooroo

When we have 8 fully worked up battalions, operational Tiger ARH's, along with the yet to be ordered SPGs, etc, etc... I think we will be in a position to provide such a force. Right at this moment I think we would really struggle, particularly with the army spread so thinly in so many operational areas.

Operational deployments by RAAF fighter aircraft have been fairly limited since the end of the Korean War and as well as our infantry battalions I think the air combat force should also be given more chances to 'show its stuff'. I support our various commitments as part of coalition forces but I would love to see Australia able to put together a self sufficient task force, made up of a combined arms team built around a mechanised infantry battalion and with the RAAF contributing to its air support.

Australia's special forces have much to offer but we need a strong and experienced infantry base from which these forces can recruit. Deploying our infantry at battalion strength would build up Australia's pool of experienced soldiers.

Tas