Australian Army Discussions and Updates

[Abraham Gubler]

The whole point was - there is enough infantry recon for the ten battlegroups. Pure armoured units don't need it, and when battlegrouped the recon platoons are allocated as required the same as anything else.

Just to help some of the understanding of the new structure attached is a year old version of the new Multi Role Manoeuvre Brigade order of battle.

It‘s combat sub-units will include:

3 Armd Cav Sqn (or 2 Cav ‘ISR’ Sqn and 1 Cav ‘Lift’ Sqn)
1 M1 Tank Sqn
1 Mech ‘Fires Control’ Bty
2 ‘Fires Control’ Bty
9 Inf Coy
2 M777 155mm Tp
1 SPG 155mm Tp
3 Cbt Engr Tp
2 Mech Cbt Engr Tp
2 Inf Recce/Sniper Pltn
2 Javelin DFSW Pltn
2 81mm Mortar Pltn

 

[Waylander]

What is the nature of the light infantry recce platoons about which you talk?
Are they pure light infantry or are they motorized in any way?

For example we also have a very light recce platoon in every armor unit made mobile on Mercedes G classes. Served us well because they were able to infiltrate into the target area without waking the whole enemy battlegroup. Sometimes much better than the attached light recce cav on Luchs.

This light platoon also provided the perimeter defense for the bn command post. IMO having such a versatile small and light unit at hand has it's advantages even for Cavalry and Armoured forces.

 

[ADMk2]

What is the nature of the light infantry recce platoons about which you talk?
Are they pure light infantry or are they motorized in any way?

Yep, they are in infantry battalions own recce asset. A platoon strength formation that reports directly to Battalion HQ.

Generally light infantry only, though I believe some units have cut down Landrover RSV's (recon surveillance vehicles) allocated to them (like those in the attached photo) to support mounted operations.

Our Army Reserve light Cavalry units use them as well, though all Australian Army Landrovers are about to be replaced by G Wagens, so this info is about to become obsolete. I imagine that there will be a recce version of the G Wagen introduced into service at some point.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

This light platoon also provided the perimeter defense for the bn command post. IMO having such a versatile small and light unit at hand has it's advantages even for Cavalry and Armoured forces.

The RAAC units do not need RAInf recce pltns to provide them with such capability. They have multiple cav scout patrols and plentiful supplies of light vehicles. Also they have the support of the six ARES light cav sqns which are at full establishment are made up of 45 Landrover RSVs.

 

[Raven22]

What is the nature of the light infantry recce platoons about which you talk?
Are they pure light infantry or are they motorized in any way?

For example we also have a very light recce platoon in every armor unit made mobile on Mercedes G classes. Served us well because they were able to infiltrate into the target area without waking the whole enemy battlegroup. Sometimes much better than the attached light recce cav on Luchs.

This light platoon also provided the perimeter defense for the bn command post. IMO having such a versatile small and light unit at hand has it's advantages even for Cavalry and Armoured forces.

The recce platoons (in Plan Beersheba anyway) are pure light inf, with 4-5 five man recce patrols and six sniper pairs. They have no integral transport at all, except perhaps a couple of ATVs.

There is no need for these dudes to provide perimeter defence to a command post. For one, there are plenty of other capabilities to provide this (a troop of reserves used to provide this capability to 1 Armd Regt in wartime, under Plan Beersheba even this won't be needed). Perhaps more to the point, using RAInf recce platoons to guard a unit HQ is about the biggest waste of resources you can imagine, and would be a huge insult to those soldiers. The soldiers in recon platoon are generally regarded as the best infantry soldiers outside of special forces. There are far better things for them to do than man a gun piquet.

 

[Waylander]

Thanks for the explanations.
With all the recce capabilities of the Cav units it looks indeed as if these recce platoons are somewhat useless as soon as one wanders away from pure light infantry tasks and mounts motorized/mechanized operations.

 

[Volkodav]

Thanks for the explanations.
With all the recce capabilities of the Cav units it looks indeed as if these recce platoons are somewhat useless as soon as one wanders away from pure light infantry tasks and mounts motorized/mechanized operations.

But the whole idea of this is that the Infantry can specialise in being Light Infantry and work with the RAAC within their Brigade when they need to serve in the Mech role.

This provides flexibility within each of our Brigades to deploy the appropriate capability for a given operation, be it a Light Infantry Battle Group or if the situation required an Armoured Battle Group.

 

[Waylander]

But if I understand it correctly the role of the light recce platoons is void as soon as the infantry bn slips into the mech role with cav units taking over for lifting and scouting, no?

So as soon as a mech battlegroup is formed the infantry in it's mech role has enough mounted and dismounted recce capability available in form of the cav scouts.

So IMHO pooling these light recce assets makes sense in that a battle group gets the recce assets (cav or light) attached which are matching it's current role. Otherwise one of your normally important assets gets rendered fairly ineffective while trying to keep up with the rest of the mechanized battle group.

The same applies to the snipers. Real snipers are not really that effective when put into a highly mobile mech force and may be much more effective when being pooled in an extra (admin) unit. Only then can one make sure that these important and highly skilled assets (light recce and snipers) are effectively used.

 

[Volkodav]

But if I understand it correctly the role of the light recce platoons is void as soon as the infantry bn slips into the mech role with cav units taking over for lifting and scouting, no?

So as soon as a mech battlegroup is formed the infantry in it's mech role has enough mounted and dismounted recce capability available in form of the cav scouts.

So IMHO pooling these light recce assets makes sense in that a battle group gets the recce assets (cav or light) attached which are matching it's current role. Otherwise one of your normally important assets gets rendered fairly ineffective while trying to keep up with the rest of the mechanized battle group.

The same applies to the snipers. Real snipers are not really that effective when put into a highly mobile mech force and may be much more effective when being pooled in an extra (admin) unit. Only then can one make sure that these important and highly skilled assets (light recce and snipers) are effectively used.

Interesting comment on the snipers. I read an article some time ago about how the USMC successfully used dismounts, including snipers, in conjunction with their AAV7 in Iraq in built up areas. The general gist was that the armour drew fire away from the dismounts while also providing greater situational awareness and effective direct fire support. The dismounts engaged and destroyed enemy infantry who were attacking the tracks. The snipers inparticular proved very effective in taking out opposing tank hunters and weapon crews.

In the Australian context though the idea is the infantry will train and be able to deploy as Light Inf, with supporting light elements, i.e. the M-777, but also, when deployed with their CAV counterparts, will be able to serve as Mech / Armoured Inf.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Interesting comment on the snipers. I read an article some time ago about how the USMC successfully used dismounts, including snipers, in conjunction with their AAV7 in Iraq in built up areas. The general gist was that the armour drew fire away from the dismounts while also providing greater situational awareness and effective direct fire support. The dismounts engaged and destroyed enemy infantry who were attacking the tracks. The snipers inparticular proved very effective in taking out opposing tank hunters and weapon crews.

Snipers and armour can mix well in COIN. The Brits rolled with a couple of Warriors as mobile sniper platforms and the Israelis built a special sniper apperture in the rear door of their Merkava tanks for similar.

But in the context of mobile mechanised force warfare the sniper does not have much impact. Unless of course you replace their rifle with a laser target locater and connect them up with a long range anti tank system like SFM or a NLOS missile. Then they can be very lethal.

 

[ADMk2]

But if I understand it correctly the role of the light recce platoons is void as soon as the infantry bn slips into the mech role with cav units taking over for lifting and scouting, no?

So as soon as a mech battlegroup is formed the infantry in it's mech role has enough mounted and dismounted recce capability available in form of the cav scouts.

So IMHO pooling these light recce assets makes sense in that a battle group gets the recce assets (cav or light) attached which are matching it's current role. Otherwise one of your normally important assets gets rendered fairly ineffective while trying to keep up with the rest of the mechanized battle group.

The same applies to the snipers. Real snipers are not really that effective when put into a highly mobile mech force and may be much more effective when being pooled in an extra (admin) unit. Only then can one make sure that these important and highly skilled assets (light recce and snipers) are effectively used.

It depends on the nature of the mission, which is the point of the new battlegroup formation that Plan Beersheeba is attempting to move to.

All of our deployments from Vietnam onwards have featured lesser and greater levels of mobile and mechanised forces and yet all have had a strong (and at times essential) requirement for recon and sniper type troops.

If we are assuming a mechanised/armoured brigade v mechanised/armoured brigade type state on state warfare, perhaps there's not such a big role, but the Australian Army isn't planning for such warfare, hasn't got the force structure for it anyway and it's unlikely we'd get involved in a conflict like that by choice even if we did have it.

Instead we'll likely commit battlegroup sized formations and contribute where and when we can with a range of other capabilities. Light infantry type snipers and recon troops will have a strong role to play in coming years.

 

[Volkodav]

Snipers and armour can mix well in COIN. The Brits rolled with a couple of Warriors as mobile sniper platforms and the Israelis built a special sniper apperture in the rear door of their Merkava tanks for similar.

But in the context of mobile mechanised force warfare the sniper does not have much impact. Unless of course you replace their rifle with a laser target locater and connect them up with a long range anti tank system like SFM or a NLOS missile. Then they can be very lethal.

Sneaky, nasty and not a bad idea. If the locator was light enough it could be general issue to sniper teams, LI Rec patrols and Cavalry Scouts.

I like the sound of Beersheba, optimising the numbers we have to cover the widest range of capabilities.

There probably could be some overlap between snipers, LI rec and Cavalry Scouts, same core skills in field craft, cam/concealment, OPs etc before specialising down the track. The ability to migrate from one speciality to another could also be beneficial.

Another thought, has anyone considered the possibility of merging some of the roles of the RAACs Light Cav with those of the RACMP? Specifically the route recon, traffic control and assisting the civilian authorities etc. that the LH has traditionally performed from its inception. Imagine imbedding a MP Platoon in each LH Sqn, it would flesh out the capability of the MPs providing them with greater presence while also allowing the LH to fill their traditional roles with greater certainty and authority.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Sneaky, nasty and not a bad idea. If the locator was light enough it could be general issue to sniper teams, LI Rec patrols and Cavalry Scouts.

Your bog standard digital target locater is a hand held. The Simrad LP10 only weighs in at 2.7kg with batteries. But to get the most out of such “assault breaker” (old US terminology) or “strike-recce complex” (Soviet terminology) or “non line of sight” (NLOS: current US terminology) systems you really need to integrate the target acquisition capability with the shooter. Which is why there is an advance force joint fires troop in the HQ battery of the artillery regiment. If we had a mortar fired SFM like the Merlin round or a NLOS missile in the DFSW pltn then giving digital target locaters to the recce pltn could enable them to integrate and provide NLOS targeting. A 20-40km range engagement system would be wasted with FLOT OPs for targetting.

Another thought, has anyone considered the possibility of merging some of the roles of the RAACs Light Cav with those of the RACMP? Specifically the route recon, traffic control and assisting the civilian authorities etc. that the LH has traditionally performed from its inception. Imagine imbedding a MP Platoon in each LH Sqn, it would flesh out the capability of the MPs providing them with greater presence while also allowing the LH to fill their traditional roles with greater certainty and authority.

Add to that the MP’s MWD capability and you have a really effective way to bring its search and track capability to the front line. Plus MP CML capability for engaging the human terrain of the battlefield. But despite that it’s the policing function of the MPs that seems to get in the way of stronger MP-manoeuvre integration. The MPs want to be aloof so they can arrest everyone and everyone doesn’t want to have anything to do with them. Maybe what we need is a Provost Corps which has these MP functions (traffic/routes, MWDs, CML) but without the policing. Might also provide a PVT level entry into the corps and MP status being something separate that is earned at CPL level?

 

[Volkodav]

Your bog standard digital target locater is a hand held. The Simrad LP10 only weighs in at 2.7kg with batteries. But to get the most out of such “assault breaker” (old US terminology) or “strike-recce complex” (Soviet terminology) or “non line of sight” (NLOS: current US terminology) systems you really need to integrate the target acquisition capability with the shooter. Which is why there is an advance force joint fires troop in the HQ battery of the artillery regiment. If we had a mortar fired SFM like the Merlin round or a NLOS missile in the DFSW pltn then giving digital target locaters to the recce pltn could enable them to integrate and provide NLOS targeting. A 20-40km range engagement system would be wasted with FLOT OPs for targetting.



Add to that the MP’s MWD capability and you have a really effective way to bring its search and track capability to the front line. Plus MP CML capability for engaging the human terrain of the battlefield. But despite that it’s the policing function of the MPs that seems to get in the way of stronger MP-manoeuvre integration. The MPs want to be aloof so they can arrest everyone and everyone doesn’t want to have anything to do with them. Maybe what we need is a Provost Corps which has these MP functions (traffic/routes, MWDs, CML) but without the policing. Might also provide a PVT level entry into the corps and MP status being something separate that is earned at CPL level?

The other alternative would be to push those capabilities into the LH side of RAAC, maybe add a reg Sqn to each brigade to cover it off.

In days of old the Dragoons used used to fill many policing role and our own mounted units were used for a variety of policing and security roles during the Great Shearers Strike of 1891. Maybe all the important combat and combat support related stuff the RACMP currently own could be handed off to real soldiers allowing them to concentrate on their oxygen theivery.

What I was actually trying to do was think of a way to make the MPs more useful and increase their effectiveness in their critical, non policing, capabilities.

 

[ADMk2]

Another thought, has anyone considered the possibility of merging some of the roles of the RAACs Light Cav with those of the RACMP? Specifically the route recon, traffic control and assisting the civilian authorities etc. that the LH has traditionally performed from its inception. Imagine imbedding a MP Platoon in each LH Sqn, it would flesh out the capability of the MPs providing them with greater presence while also allowing the LH to fill their traditional roles with greater certainty and authority.

Plus imagine all the extra parking tickets they could hand out at the LH lines if they were that much closer too!

I think stressing the MP's beyond their important job of putting low-viz signs a foot off the ground in blackout conditions out bush (and the inevitable explosion when convoys go the wrong way because people can't see the signs) would really be too much for the RACMP...

 

[Waylander]

@Volkodav
I fully understand the important role light recce and sniper forces can play. And because of this I support the idea if pooling these assets. Attach them when needed so they don't sit idle when the current infantrie's role doesn't fit and can be used to their full potential.

The infantry bns get their Cav, Arty or Helicopter assets attached according to their missions so why not other stuff like light recce, snipers or mortars.

IMO it's much easier to attach all the needed assets to a pure core battalion of light infantry than having several special capabilities in it from the start but which may or may not be usefull for the next operation.

For a relatively small army which nevertheless wants to cover a wide variety of possible operations such a mix and match system with as many "pure" units as possible is IMO a good thing.

 

[Massive]

Just to help some of the understanding of the new structure attached is a year old version of the new Multi Role Manoeuvre Brigade order of battle.

It‘s combat sub-units will include:

3 Armd Cav Sqn (or 2 Cav ‘ISR’ Sqn and 1 Cav ‘Lift’ Sqn)
1 M1 Tank Sqn
1 Mech ‘Fires Control’ Bty
2 ‘Fires Control’ Bty
9 Inf Coy
2 M777 155mm Tp
1 SPG 155mm Tp
3 Cbt Engr Tp
2 Mech Cbt Engr Tp
2 Inf Recce/Sniper Pltn
2 Javelin DFSW Pltn
2 81mm Mortar Pltn

Hi Abe,

Thanks for this.

I've been trying to find out myself but have been unable to do so.

Why 9 inf coy?

Regards,

Massive

 

[Kirkzzy]

and would be a huge insult to those soldiers. The soldiers in recon platoon are generally regarded as the best infantry soldiers outside of special forces. There are far better things for them to do than man a gun piquet.

I was reading "SAS Sniper" and the main guy was really pissed with some of the missions he got. Before he got into the SAS he was in 3RAR as a sniper although when he got to Timor they just sent them on useless missions that needed a lot of effort put into them. (It was a waste of time)

 

[Raven22]

@Volkodav
IMO it's much easier to attach all the needed assets to a pure core battalion of light infantry than having several special capabilities in it from the start but which may or may not be usefull for the next operation.

For a relatively small army which nevertheless wants to cover a wide variety of possible operations such a mix and match system with as many "pure" units as possible is IMO a good thing.

I disagree. The whole point of Plan Beersheba is to have all the components in the combined arms team within the same formation to enable collective training. Taking recon/mortars etc out of the battalion completely goes against this.

The reason why some capabilities are not in the brigade is because they need extra time and resources to maintain the capability. It is not that hard for an infantry battalion to maintain a recce or mortar capability. It is just another support company capability like anti-tank, DFSW, sigs, assault pioneer etc. The only reason that snipers in particular whinge that they need their own unit is because that unit COs often have other more important priorities, and don't necessarily do everything possible to to maximise the sniper capability. That is just part of normal raise, train and sustain priorities. As it is, with things like the annual sniper concentration, the capability is being maintained. Giving them their own unit may make the snipers better, but it will reduce the capabilities of the infantry battalions as a collective organisation.

I was reading "SAS Sniper" and the main guy was really pissed with some of the missions he got. Before he got into the SAS he was in 3RAR as a sniper although when he got to Timor they just sent them on useless missions that needed a lot of effort put into them. (It was a waste of time)

That's war. 99% of the time you are doing boring missions of which you are never quite sure the purpose. That other 1%, however...

 

[ADMk2]

Hi Abe,

Thanks for this.

I've been trying to find out myself but have been unable to do so.

Why 9 inf coy?

Regards,

Massive

6x rifle companies, 3x support companies (mortars, DFSW, anti-tank, recon etc).