Sorry to take so long in replying gents
Thanks very much for your productive feedback, it is both warranted and appreciated.
As a means to clarify ‘The System’, I thought I’d have a crack at explaining the functionality of it (although this in itself might become bigger than what I might have intended! I don’t want to lose forum members interest, before it startes
In response to Old Wombat’s valid question
“Are you going for the typical school-boy unlimited budget or are you being adults & trying to make affordable choices? (I prefer the school boy attitude in this type of game.)”
I’m also leaning towards a weapons/equipment/platform procurement process based on what Old Wombat denotes as –
“Selecting weapons according to unverified reputation, actual results and/or expected performance.”
I’m sorry mate, but I’m going to have to also be boring and say I’m focusing on an adult perspective! I understand that the ADF’s Budget is finite, so I’ll be striving for affordable choices!
So here we go….
Ok the basic Order of Battle of the Australian Defence Forces (ADF) in ‘The System’ is a follows:
-Army
- Navy
- Air Force
(Note: each of these ‘Branches’ have a ‘Reserve’ component of their respective Branches – i.e Army Reserve. Navy Reserve and Air Force Reserve! These Reserve components will be more active than the traditional ‘real-world’ Reserve/Militia organisations, with ‘Reserves’ gaining and maintaining their skills and proficiencies through a rotational process with their ‘Regular’ sister Corps. For example ‘The System’ will be built around a system of rotational process, where by in this example an Infantry Bn would –
1/ train,
2/ active (aka deploy operationally)
3/ re-fit and rest
It is during this ‘re-fit and rest’ period, that the ‘Reserve’ sister unit would itself become active, step up and deploy in its place, affording the ‘Reserve’ units operational experience, and retaining its competency and effectiveness as a real fighting component of the ADF.)
(Note 2: As a side note, I originally considered a fourth Branch of the ADF, which we termed ‘The Services.’ Whereas the Army, Navy and Air Force are obviously self-explanatory, the ‘The Services’ was meant to be the logistic/administration arm of each ADF ‘Branch’ (Army, Navy, Air Force).
‘National Service’ is the nucleus of the ADF. (I don’t particularly want to get into politics, morals and ethics shit-fight about the ‘fore’s and against’ National Service / Conscription. My mate and I have our reasons and practical experiences that denotes this decision. Let me just say that the draining longevity of Vietnam War, along with 12-years of war in Afghanistan and Iraq exemplify our thoughts and reasons for this philosophy…but I digress…) Because then, as now, my mate and I saw/see National Service is something that every fit and able Australian citizen should be part of, and participate (whether in uni or not – going to university is not an escape !!), we have also realised that because of ‘Military Fitness Standard, many an Australian citizen is excluded/exempted from military service! When my mate and I joined the army, we did it as a group. Ironically some of this group were rejected by the army on the grounds of Asthma, eye sight and flat feet! The army never took into consideration that not were these mates of mine, keen as mustard, intelligent, highly motivated, were born with natural intuitive, super fit and probably most likely to make a career out of the army; the army rejected them. My mate and I also fully appreciate that this enthusiasm, intellect, self-motivation also applies to many citizen’s that have disabilities. So it come to pass that my mate and I said that not all men and woman are born to stick a bayonet into someone’s stomach, or carry 40-50kg of weapons and gear over a 20km march. But many of these citizens, with physical attributes not of their own making or choice are still more than capable and willing to apply their ability and skills into the defence of the nation. Remember the saying - “the pen is mightier than the sword”
The other side and reason for the ‘Service’, is somewhat substantiated by the fact that the ADF as a whole has become so much of a profitable business/industry; that so many areas and positions of the ADF have become conveniently outsourced, that in reality it has had somewhat of a nightmare effect to the actual functionality of the ADF. (I apologise to any forum members who are contractors to the ADF, as it’s as much to do with politics and money-driven lobbyists as anything else!). Like it or loth it, contracting is a very expensive and limited process when it comes to defence and warfighting!
So it was in ‘The Service’ that the likes of cooks, mechanics, doctors, nurses, butchers and candle stick makers, whether they were flatfooted, didn’t have 20/20 vision, suffered from Asthma or were paraplegic, they could still serve an important part in their country’s defence, as well as receiving exceptional first class training, which would potentially put you in good stead in your civilian career, etc……
‘The System’ also envisages a ‘Coast Guard’ organisation, whose primary role will be that of … I hate this term…’Board Control’ and SAR. This will immediately free up the ADF from the likes of these taskes, allowing its principle role being that of warfighting, Peacekeeping and Aid to the Civil Power in times of crisis (this analogy is supported by 'real-world' ADF, who’s been bleed in its use by our politician's for 'boarder control', for its not just bleed the Navy budget, worn-out many of our patrol boats, frigates and RAAF P-3 Orion's. This political ideological driven process has had a damaging effect on ADF personal moral, retention and recruiting!).
So let’s get into the nuts and guts of ‘The System’
The following are the given years allocated to the ADF for weapons/equipment/platform Procurement Cycles’
A Branch Procurement Cycle occurs every 5-years!
Each Branch of the ADF is allocated a given year in which it is afforded Defence Budget funds to purchase ‘big-ticket’ items – be it MBT, Frigates or Strike-Fighters, for example!
Here are the five year ‘Branch Procurement Cycles’:
1901 Navy
1902 Army
1903 Air Force
1904 Army Reserve
1905 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1906 Navy
1907 Army
1908 Air Force
1909 Army Reserve
1910 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1911 Navy
1912 Army
1913 Air Force
1914 Army Reserve
1915 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1916 Navy
1917 Army
1918 Air Force
1919 Army Reserve
1920 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1921 Navy
1922 Army
1923 Air Force
1924 Army Reserve
1925 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1926 Navy
1927 Army
1928 Air Force
1929 Army Reserve
1930 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1931 Navy
1932 Army
1933 Air Force
1934 Army Reserve
1935 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1936 Navy
1937 Army
1938 Air Force
1939 Army Reserve
1940 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1941 Navy
1942 Army
1943 Air Force
1944 Army Reserve
1945 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1946 Navy
1947 Army
1948 Air Force
1949 Army Reserve
1950 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1951 Navy
1952 Army
1953 Air Force
1954 Army Reserve
1955 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1956 Navy
1957 Army
1958 Air Force
1959 Army Reserve
1960 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1961 Navy
1962 Army
1963 Air Force
1964 Army Reserve
1965 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1966 Navy
1967 Army
1968 Air Force
1969 Army Reserve
1970 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1971 Navy
1972 Army
1973 Air Force
1974 Army Reserve
1975 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1976 Navy
1977 Army
1978 Air Force
1979 Army Reserve
1980 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1981 Navy
1982 Army
1983 Air Force
1984 Army Reserve
1985 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1986 Navy
1987 Army
1988 Air Force
1989 Army Reserve
1990 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1991 Navy
1992 Army
1993 Air Force
1994 Army Reserve
1995 Navy/Air Force Reserve
1996 Navy
1997 Army
1998 Air Force
1999 Army Reserve
2000 Navy/Air Force Reserve
2001 Navy
2002 Army
2003 Air Force
2004 Army Reserve
2005 Navy/Air Force Reserve
2006 Navy
2007 Army
2008 Air Force
2009 Army Reserve
2010 Navy/Air Force Reserve
2011 Navy
2012 Army
2013 Air Force
2014 Army Reserve
2015 Navy/Air Force Reserve
2016 Navy
As I alluded to, the Defence Budget is finite. These Branch Procurement Cycle’s doesn’t mean that every five years the Army, Navy and Air Force is not going to be able to buy a new MBT, Destroyer or Strike Fighter, each time it’s their turn at the bite of the apple.
Each ‘major’ weapons/equipment/platform procurement will be expected to have an operational effective life of at least 15 years! I think this is a fair guide, which isn’t very different to ‘real world standards and expectations’!
The exception to this of course is that the Australian Government makes a declaration of war – i.e. WWI & WWII, by which the nation’s economy is geared to ‘Total War.’ The second exception would naturally be a large jump in potential adversary’s technological / capability, which could render a given ‘major’ weapons/equipment/platform in ADF service ‘block obsolescence’ – i.e Brewster Buffalo fighter, not just a pathetic purchase in the first place, as a cheaper alternative to a real fighter by the Australian Government of the day. It was completely and utterly out matched by the Japanese Zero fighter.
On the other hand, I’m also pushing for ‘realist’ perspective of weapons/equipment/platform procurement! Defence is probably the worst of the lot, next to politicians, to be trusting with a fist full of cash. The ADF in my opinion/experience is addicted to ‘bling’ items of weapons/equipment/platforms – “Looking at that!....... It’s great!..... they have them, so should we!”
But in so so many of these ADF wet-dreams, not is the weapon/equipment/platform so expensive in procurement costs, it’s capability usually excessively exceeds the capability needed or true wants of the ADF. It's more times than not too expensive to maintain and train effectively on/with, it more often than not negates its purchase and fielding - a perfect example of this was the Australian Army’s wet-dream over the potential purchasing of the West German Pz2000 155mm SPH. Yes by all intent and purposes a great piece of kit. But the fact that not many bridges in Australia would support its weight, let alone the RAN’s ability to deploy it; not to mention its capability far exceeded that what was needed by the Australian Army three-fold.
Then there’s the issue of the ADF as a whole history of purchasing weapons/equipment, which haven't even left the drawing board; and yet we commit copious amounts of precious Defence funds to its procurement, that we again and again end up with an operational shortfall, which either has to be compensated for at an added cost – General Dynamics F-111C / McDonnell Douglas F-4E, 'Project Waler', Lockheed Martin F-35 / Boeing F/A-18E/F/G, Boeing E-7 Wedgetail AEW, Eurocopter Tiger, Eurocopter MRH-90 etc…………
Then there’s the inherent ADF/Australian Government indecisiveness on joint/indigenous weapons/equipment/platform acquisition…great for Australian industry, technology, engineering and most important in my view, specific to our ADF needs, wants and environment - Sentinel Cruiser tank, Hawker P.1081 fighter, Heavy Landing Ship LSM 11, DDL, Leader Dynamics Series T2 MK5 5.56mm assault rifle, CAC CA-31, Avon powered Mirage III………sadly all equated to nothing in the end.
So it is with this in mind, that I would like the forum to focus on realistic capabilities to match realistic operational scenarios, for the selected weapon/equipment/platform to be able to remain in operational service for a perceived 15 years. Oh and another thing, so as to avoid ridiculous corporate spin, long and drawn out lead time (ie. F-111, Collins Class Subs, F-35 JSF, Tiger attack helicopter etc…… the ‘Branch Procurement Cycle’ has only one year either side of it for the weapon/equipment/platform's to be eligible for procurement – i.e if the given Branch Procurement Cycle is say 1976, then the Navy can only procure a destroyer that has physically been built and test at least one year before (1975) or one year past (1977). This will ensure that a procurement – technically due to its operational need is not delivered 10 years later – e.g F-111, Collins Class Sub’s and F-35 JSF!!
Oh and finally at this point and time, we are of the expectation that at least a minimum of 50% of these weapons/equipment/platforms are either built or license-built in Australia. This stipulation, along with the '5 year Procurement Cycles' will afford a flourishing and productive heavy technological industry of world class standards!
Sorry gents more to follow……..
M.A.D