As I’ve mentioned before in past editorials, it’s easy for
people to focus on the capabilities that the Navy and Air Force offer. It’s
pretty hard to miss a ship in port or an aircraft on the tarmac. But Army is
gearing up for their own platforms of choice to be replaced: vehicles.
The variously troubled phases of Land 121 are beginning to
finally take shape after a saga of project delays, rescoping and rescheduling. G-wagons
are being delivered apace, negotiations for medium and medium/heavy vehicles
will hopefully be signed off this year and testing of the Hawkei continues.
There are some hills to be conquered, literally in the case of some of the
testing programs, but they are coming together.
The upgrade path for the Bushmasters and ASLAVs remains
unclear as does the usage of the newly upgraded M113 fleet. I hope that the Combined
Arms Fighting System (CAFS) framework will make the situation clearer for Army and
industry. As Brigadier Nagy Sorial, Director General CAFS (which includes the
Land 400 program) and Director General Land Vehicle Systems has said in the
past, the easiest part of Land 400 will probably be the vehicle. The hardest part
will be the change in behaviours to get the most of the capability.
Army is also increasingly utilising simulation, with
upgrades and expansion to live instrumented training (P28) and further
development of the WTSS capability (P38). Given the budgetary environment the
organisation is facing, the increasing use of simulation in such a people heavy
environment is not only logical but necessary.
This people heavy environment is making life harder for the
Army’s bottom line. Training days for Reservists have been cut in half this
year, and some areas have suffered more than this initial cut with subsequent cuts
worrying many Reserve members. The value of the Reserve Force, particularly for
Army, has always been a surge capacity. The lack of training opportunities for
this surge capacity is troubling when the organisation and government are
trying to paint a picture that the capability is just fine under the new arrangements.
Anecdotally, it’s not. Courses are not running, training opportunities are being
cancelled or delayed and morale has seen better days.
The new direction for Army seems to be the amphibious
operation opportunities presented by the Canberra-class LHDs. As Chief of Army Lieutenant
General David Morrison is so keen to point out, he sees them as ships that the
Army gets the Navy to operate essentially. His great delight in putting up an
LHD with ARMY 1 proudly emblazoned on the side is evident.
Lieutenant-Colonel Jon Hawkins, Joint Amphibious Capability
Implementation Team (JACIT), said the vessels, with their embarked battle
groups, would be able to conduct missions in Australia’s primary operating environment
and beyond.
“From humanitarian aid and non-combatant evacuation
operations to amphibious operations such as assaults and raids, the
Canberra-class LHDs represent an enormous leap in amphibious capability for the
ADF,” LTCOL Hawkins said.
The new LHDs will not change the role of amphibious
soldiers, but they will require significantly more soldiers as part of the
ship’s complement than is the case now. Army is still looking at the exact
details of how the Amphibious Task Group (ARG) and Amphibious Ready Element
(ARE) are coming together.
The ARE provides an immediate short notice amphibious
capability. The ARE is capable of conducting humanitarian assistance or
non-combatant evacuation operations at short notice. The ARE is based on one major
fleet amphibious unit with a Landing Force based upon a Combat Team, with an associated
headquarters element.
The ARE will soon commence its testing phase of the LHD as
part of the amphibious capability. It will undergo its Pre-Deployment Training
Program mid 2013 supported by HMAS Choules, which is due back in April. Army
expects to be ready to embark a fully certified ARE on HMAS Canberra by
December 2014.
The ARG is based on three major fleet amphibious units. This
includes two LHDs and a Landing Ship Dock (an amphibious support ship) and a Landing
Force based upon a Battle Group capable of an amphibious landing and assault.
The Battle Group may be comprised of infantry, armour (including tanks),
artillery, engineers, reconnaissance and mobility helicopters and other
vehicles selected for the required combat mission.
Under current plans, the LHDs will be a tri-service
capability with 62 Army personnel joining the 292 Navy and three Air Force personnel
to form the ships’ company. Army will dedicate a Battle Group made up of the 2nd
Battalion, the Royal Australian Regiment, and a cross section of combat and
enabling capabilities such as snipers, intelligence and logistic specialists.
This Battle Group will form the core of the ARE and the ARG.
These plans require time, effort and money. As always, it’s
easier to get two of the three sides of the triangle bedded down with one element
stubbornly out of balance. I can hope for a balanced LHD capability early on.
