Military Superiority: What does Force Protection mean? | ADM Jul 2010

The protection of Australian forces in Afghanistan received a major boost in the 2010-2011 budget, but it would be wrong to assume that the majority of the $1.1 billion package represents new funding for Defence.

Julian Kerr | Sydney

As pointed out in the Australian Strategic Policy Institute’s (ASPI’s) admirable Defence Budget Brief, of $224 million in so-called new funding, $172 million will be met within the Defence 2009 White Paper commitment by reducing Defence funding by $86 million in both 2017-18 and 2018-2019.

Consequently, actual new money from the government for the force protection package amounts to only $51.7 million, leaving nearly $912 million to be met from within Defence’s existing capital program.

Irrespective of how their costs will be borne, the 48 initiatives flowing from the force protection review requested in July 2009 by Defence Minister John Faulkner provide a stark assessment of the dangers faced by Australian troops in Afghanistan, albeit confirming the increasing lethality and sophistication of such threats.

Understandably, a number of the initiatives are classified and, as pointed out to ADM by Lieutenant-Colonel Ashley Colmer, Deputy Director Joint Future Concepts in the Vice Chief of Defence Force’s Group, not all are acquisition-related.

“We’re looking at some of our tactics, techniques and procedures as well as some of the ways in which we collect and disseminate information, and of course that’s very sensitive in terms of how we maintain our advantage over the Tailiban,” he said.

The largest single allocation, of nearly $394 million, is for protection against indirect fire.

Some $87 million of this will be used for hardening ADF facilities at Camp Holland on the outskirts of Tarin Kowt and, presumably, at other smaller forward operating bases.

The balance of $305 million will be used to acquire a C-RAM (Counter Rocket, Artillery and Mortar) system to provide advance warning of rocket and mortar attacks.

Unlike some UK and US C-RAM systems deployed in Afghanistan, the system will sense and warn, but will not incorporate any hard kill capability.

C-RAM was originally incorporated in Land 19 Phase 7 as an element of a replacement ground-based air defence system (GBADS), with initial operating capability not anticipated until 2018 at the earliest.

The 2009-2013 Defence Capability Plan said only that GBADS would be considered by government “after 2013,” and accelerated acquisition of the C-RAM capability was not believed to have been an Army priority.

C-RAM details
Although no details of the proposed system have been disclosed, it is understood it will comprise a truck-mounted Saab Giraffe agile multi-beam 3D radar coupled with the US-produced SRCTec lightweight counter-mortar radar (LCMR) and audible threat warning equipment.

The associated command and control equipment may prove to be the same modified Lockheed Martin LEAPP (Land Environment Air Picture Provision) system as utilised in a UK automatic sense and warn system deployed in Iraq that also utilises the Saab and SRCTec radars.

The Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO) and Saab are understood to have signed a Deed of Arrangement in April for the lease of a Giraffe radar to provide a C-RAM capability at Camp Holland by the end of the year.

A contract is expected to be signed between the two parties by August for the acquisition of three Giraffe radars that will enter service after the 15-month lease on the initial Giraffe unit is completed.

Sophisticated software integrated with the signal and data processing element of the Giraffe system detects the firing point of rockets, artillery and mortars more than 20 kilometres away and over a 360 degree horizon, as well as predicting and warning of the time and location of the rounds’ impact.

The SRCTec AN/TPQ-48 (v) 3 LCMR automatically detects and locates mortar firing positions by detecting and tracking in-flight mortar shells and backtracking them to their point of origin.

The radar utilises an electronically-scanned antenna to provide continuous 360 degree surveillance and generates incoming round warnings and weapon location reports.

With the system able to be assembled by a two-man crew and transportable in two containers that each weigh less than 68 kg, SRCTec units will have a minimal effect on logistics at isolated patrol bases such as those in the Chora and Mirabad valleys.

Some mystery remains, however, over the $305 million allocated to the C-RAM capability – a figure apparently refined from an initial costing of nearer $400 million.

With each Giraffe system worth approximately $12 million and each LCMR unit costing about $1.2 million, multiple orders together with associated command and control elements, spares, training and other operating costs would appear to leave a sizable balance.

ISR The $740 million destined for enhanced intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) includes two electronic countermeasure initiatives, nine intelligence-related capabilities, and the acquisition of two RQ-7B Shadow 200 tactical unmanned air vehicle (TUAV) systems, although the latter has yet to be announced.

A possible Foreign Military Sale of the Shadow systems was notified to the US Congress in May by the US Defence Security Cooperation Agency which said it would “improve Australia’s capability to support ongoing ground operations in Afghanistan.”

The purchase will comprise two Shadow 200 systems, each of which includes four air vehicles plus a maintenance spare, four ground control stations, spares, training and logistical support for an estimated cost of US$218 million.

Defence said in May that a business case for JP129 Phase 2, seeking such a TUAV to support land forces, would be presented to government in the second half of this year.

ADM understands that Defence hopes to receive the capability sometime next year, although this will be subject to availability and contractual arrangements.

The original contract for JP129 Phase 2 was cancelled in August 2008 after prime contractor Boeing Australia encountered integration difficulties with the Israel Aerospace Industries I-View 250 UAV.

The operational gap in Afghanistan left by this cancellation has been partially filled by Defence’s lease of Insitu Scan Eagle mini-UAVs from Boeing and, more recently, the lease of a Heron high altitude, medium endurance UAV from the Canadian company MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates.

Defence is looking to extend this lease arrangement on the Heron for another 12-24 months.

The increasing sophistication of Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) – and their size and lethality – has resulted in $271 million being allocated to enhance the protection levels of Bushmaster infantry mobility vehicles, and of ASLAVs (Australian Light Armoured Vehicles) under Project Land 112 Phase 4.

Baseline ADF Bushmasters do not have the same level of blast and ballistic protection as those used by the Dutch army in Afghanistan, and ADF vehicles on operational deployment there are known to have received some field upgrades.

A number have also been equipped with Self-Protection Adaptive Roller Kits (SPARK), a modular mine roller system fitted to the front of the Bushmasters which is intended to detonate pressure-sensitive IEDs as far away from the vehicle as possible.

The same lethality concerns have seen Land 112 Phase 4 brought forward by two years to improve the blast and fragmentation protection of 113 of the ADF’s 250 ASLAVs at a cost of $303 million.

The work will also see improvements to the 8x8 vehicle’s suspension, driveline and engine.

Although the prime contractor is Canadian company Armatec, pre-modification and refurbishment work, suspension and drivetrain upgrades, installation of upgrade kits, and manufacturing of mine blast belly plates, will be carried out as a sub-contractor by General Dynamics Land Systems-Australia.

First deliveries of the upgraded vehicles are expected by April 2012, although a Ministerial spokesman told ADM it was hoped this could be significantly expedited.

Soldier support
Enhancements to personal equipment under the Force Protection Package include improved body armour, more capable nightfighting equipment, more firepower via a classified Special Operations weapon system, improved logistics support, and remote viewing terminals.

According to LTCOL Copler, the terminals will be issued down to patrol level on a mission-required basis to provide access to imagery from Australian and coalition UAVs.

Issues with body armour have recently received publicity, with Defence acknowledging that the 11 kilogram Modular Combat Body Armour System (MCBAS) developed for mounted operations in Iraq is less suited to conditions in Afghanistan, where foot patrols of up to 20 kilometres can involve wide variations in terrain.

Head of Army, Lieutenant General Ken Gillespie, said in May that the first batch of the new, five kg Tiered Body Armour System (TBAS) was likely to be issued early in 2011 to key elements of the next troop rotation to Afghanistan.

Instead of being worn under other equipment, TBAS is intended to provide the basic load-carrying function, with smaller or larger ballistic plates and new-style ammunition pouches designed for more rapid access fitted according to mission requirements.

Chief of the Defence Force, Air Chief Marshal Angus Houston, has pointed out that a balance is necessary between more mobility with less protection, and the high level of protection available while in a mounted or static role.

“If you’re going to be hit by an armour-piercing round, the body armour to have on is MCBAS - it’s as simple as that,” he commented.

Australian Special Forces in Afghanistan have been equipped for some time with scalable Eagle Marine body armour, also purchased by the US Marine Corps as a lighter and less bulky alternative to its standard Interceptor body armour and modular tactical vest.

An additional 1,000 sets of the Eagle Marine body armour were ordered by the ADF last October for members of the Five Operational Mentor and Liaison Teams training Afghan troops, to give them greater agility on foot.

Enough Eagle Armour sets had been received by May, according to Air Chief Marshal Houston, to meet nearly all the current requirements of the Mentoring Task Force.