Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ADF Re-organisation

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ADF Re-organisation

    I've been going over the books lately, and Australia's Armed forces seem *really* badly organised. The way i see it, we should use the increasing manpower of the forces to re-structure and streamline our land forces, and diversify and expand the capabilities of the Air Froce and Navy.
    I figure the Army should simplify itself into a Central Force (The heavier reserve group) with say one Mechanised Brigade (With IFVs, SP artillery and air defense, as the RAA has none of these things) and one or two reserve infantry brogades, a Mobile Force (Quick Reaction) with the commando (Airborne) Regiment, a Light Brigade and an armoured cavalry regiment, and the NorthForce with a Light Brigade, plus some extra armoured and support units.
    The SAS and regular commando regiments could be under a unified SF Group, and the Commandos could take over some of the SAS jobs like pilot rescue and LRRP, etc. This way the SAS could be free to perform it's more taxing roles like CT work and infiltration and hostage rescue, since they have pretty limited resources riht now. Also, we need some attack helicopters, and more Amphibious warfare ships.
    Anyway, I was just wondering if anyone thought this was a good idea.

  • #2
    As I have served in a completely defensive army I can tell that amphibious warfare ships and attack helicopters are not needed but I don't know about Australia, what kind of armed forces do you have what are they intended for.

    Comment


    • #3
      It's basically still stuck in this defensive mentality, because our people have this moronic notion that somehow one of our neighbours is going to invade us. (It's moronic because they'll never be able to seize and occupy 6 Million sq. KM)
      It's only now that we've realised that we need a mobile army to be able to react to things like civil wars and minor conflicts within the SE Asian region, and major conflicts in other parts of the world.
      The only direct threat to Australia is terrorism, which is insignificant militarily, and the SAS has that covered. But there are real threats to our allies like Thailand and Indonesia, and we need to be able to lend a hand.

      Comment


      • #4
        Fast hitting and mobile army with easily transportable vechiles is ideal if you have alot of ground to cover like allies who need help in a crisis. We have only defensive units and tactics.Finnish defenses are centered on area defense with strategic importance, should someone try invade us they would have to put up with frustrating guerrilla warfare much like americans are expiriencing in Iraq but much better coordinated and equipped.
        What kind of forces you want also depends on what kind of landscape you are fighting in, as far as I know Australia has desert in the outback as its called and forests in the coast.

        Comment


        • #5
          Yeah that's about it terrain wise, but it's insanely unlikely that the Australian Army would be fighting on Australian soil.
          It's far more likely that they'd be deployed to other parts of the world, and as such need a mix of light and heavy forces trained in all terrains for future operations in East Timor, Iraq and possibly Korea, Taiwan, Africa etc.

          Comment


          • #6
            First of all, you should examine your own army's vision

            The Australian Army - Fundamentals of Land Warfare

            Comment


            • #7
              Thanks, but the Army's goals aren't what i'm talking about.
              I'm merely making a suggestion on how the Army could best set itself up to protect Australia's interests in the future. And right now it's only really set up to defend Australia against a direct attack that isn't coming. As we take a more active role in the region, we will need to be able show ourselves to be a credible force in the region, capable of protecting it's allies, as well as supporting the cause of freedom and democracy etc. across the world in peacekeeping missions.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by -{SpoonmaN}-
                Thanks, but the Army's goals aren't what i'm talking about.
                I'm merely making a suggestion on how the Army could best set itself up to protect Australia's interests in the future. And right now it's only really set up to defend Australia against a direct attack that isn't coming. As we take a more active role in the region, we will need to be able show ourselves to be a credible force in the region, capable of protecting it's allies, as well as supporting the cause of freedom and democracy etc. across the world in peacekeeping missions.
                Excuse me? What do you think the Australian Army is planning for? A football game?

                The doctrine which I gave you details the kind of forces the Australian Army thinks it will need to fullfill the mission it see itself requiring to meet. Unless you understand where and how the Army is thinking, you cannot critisize what they're doing.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I disagree, since this whole thing has been me criticising the way people think. I did poitn out that I get really, really annoyed when people talk like Australia's gonna get invaded any day now didn't I?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by -{SpoonmaN}-
                    I disagree, since this whole thing has been me criticising the way people think. I did poitn out that I get really, really annoyed when people talk like Australia's gonna get invaded any day now didn't I?
                    Let me get this straight. You want to change Australian Defence Policies without knowing what those Policies actually are? You're damned lazy, aren't you?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Yeah, I am. And the link dosen't work. That ain't my fault.
                      You do realise this whole thing is a suggestion right? I am aware that the Army is re-organising, and I'm just trying to suggest how I think they should go about it. I don't claim to make the policy, I just want to see what other people think of my idea.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Then, at the very least, you should request the info from the Australian Army. You have a right to this information. You should examine it before making comments.

                        As for your suggestion, it is amateurish and things the Australian Army is already doing to which you have absolutely no idea how or why they're doing the things they're doing.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Are even aware of the gramatical errors you're making?

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X