Modelling > Scenarios
How to justify getting as much gear as possible into Australian service
Old Wombat:
Less selective (White Australia) immigration policies post-WW's 1 & 2 may well have worked to increase the population significantly enough to be able to cope with these larger military commitments. Although how you change Australia's racism of the period I don't know.
Another boost would be the adoption of the "value adding" industrial base of the country by implementing some of the recommendations of the above mentioned reports & by removing the blinkered "primary producer" mentality of Australian government & business leaders. This would add a need for more skilled & unskilled migrants to fill the factories & support industries. Although, for the purposes of international exports being profitable, the unions may have to take a bit of a hit.
:)
Guy
Volkodav:
Having Ghurkhas, East Africans and Indians coming to Australia and fighting to save our cities would help. Having Australian Aboriginals in large numbers in uniform being seen fighting would also have an effect. Probably would never change the views of the malingers, pogs and blue rince brigade but when you have enough grateful veterans and civilian survivors that will drown out the racists.
Volkodav:
Now to the nuts and bolts of this wiff. Australian Air National Guard flying CF100s, F-106 and EE Lightning. AEF has the RAR but each Btn is an Independent Armoured Battle Group with direct fire support (MBT) , AT (S Tank), rec , SPAA , SP mortar Platoons. Australian Light infantry (ALI), Australian Parachute Regiment (APR), Royal Australian Marines (RAM) ;).
Rickshaw:
--- Quote from: Volkodav on October 25, 2013, 10:33:45 PM ---Now to the nuts and bolts of this wiff. Australian Air National Guard flying CF100s, F-106 and EE Lightning. AEF has the RAR but each Btn is an Independent Armoured Battle Group with direct fire support (MBT) , AT (S Tank), rec , SPAA , SP mortar Platoons. Australian Light infantry (ALI), Australian Parachute Regiment (APR), Royal Australian Marines (RAM) ;).
--- End quote ---
Yikes! You do realise that you're going to run up against the Corps mafia if you attempt that? It's taken them a hundred years to address the internecine squabbling amongst the Corps and they still haven't really fixed it.
Then you have the problem of addressing the principle of dilution on the battlefield. In particular, Armour and Artillery won't play. Both know from experience that you must concentrate your armour and artillery for maximum effect. Diluting and "penny-packetism" as it is known is anathema to both. You have Armoured and Artillery Regiments for a reason.
"Infantry fights dispersed, Armour and Artillery do not" is an old maxim which dates back to before WWI.
Anyway, the standard tactical unit in most mechanised armies is the Brigade, not the Battalion. What you should perhaps be looking at is making Brigades all arms. If you're getting as much gear into Australian service, then obviously you must be getting a lot more manpower to operate it. Instead of one under-strength division as we've had for nearly all our post-war history, look at several full strength ones. That would give you more units to play with and more scope for making them all-arms. I'd look at trying to emulate the German model - downplay the importance of Corps and Battalion, increase the importance of Brigade or even Divisional allegiance. Keep each Brigade as it is - three Battalions, a battery of field artillery and associated support troops (including a tank destroyer unit as well). Make the Battalions mechanised, rather than "leg" infantry. Keep Armour separate and attach as necessary, rather than make them part of the Brigade permanently. Armour should be a Divisional asset, that allows the Divisional commander to concentrate his main striking force in one unit for use at the Schwerpunkt, as the Germans called it - the heavy point - the point of decision in the battle when required.
Thing is, that wasn't appreciated until after WWII and even then it took other armies decades to bring that sort of reform into their thinking. Before and during most of WWII, for Commonwealth Armies, Artillery was the main dominate force on the battlefield. It enabled infantry to take and retain their objectives, dominated the enemy, interdicted their main supply routes and prevented them from attacking or counter-attacking. Albert Pellazo's fantastic book on the British Army's use of Chemical Warfare in WWI has a beautiful passage which explains the British Army's tactical doctrine which lasted right up to the middle of WWII. If you want, I'll dig it out for you?
Volkodav:
Yes please that would be an interesting read. While I am playing here with the sole purpose of developing a back story to get gear I like, but was never really a suitable option into Australian service, I do have a great interest in what was really planned vs. what happened.
What I am doing here isn't the result of a well thought out holistic doctrine aimed to gain the best result for the defence of Australia for the money available, rather it is a reactionary poorly thought out political response to a frightened populous who perceive they are a long way from help and need to be protected from the invading hordes. This is where the self contained Infantry based Mech / Armoured Battle group comes from, individual battalions defending sectors, replacing their towed and motorised assets with Armoured alternatives. In fact thinking of it, rather than armoured infantry with the vehicles integrated as section level, it could be conventional infantry supported by an integral APC sqn. The idea is that instead of a top down reorganisation what has happened is a bottom up re-equipment driven by the refusal to start from scratch or disband any existing capability.
It is a very inefficient way to do things, but it is something you see in situations being driven by reactionary elements. The parliamentarian who was a platoon then company commander on the Brisbane line who saw his men and the civilians they were trying to protect die because he didn't have tanks. His colleague who saw his AT platoon overrun because they lacked mobility and who knew of mortar platoons that suffered the same fate. Together they push the line that each Rifle Battalion should have organic tank destroyers, SP mortars and field guns and armoured scouts without making the leap to making the entire btn mobile.
At the same time you have other elements who remember the legend of the Light Horse in the Middle East in WWI and saw the utility motor brigades in the defence of Australia. The units evolve into Cavalry Divisions consisting of Armoured Cavalry Regiments, Mounted Brigades (integrated mounted infantry, armour, engineers and artillery) and later aviation elements.
A lot of this would be reserve and national guard, I am not sure what I will put where but most personnel will be reserve, and most equipment in storage, with personnel being rotated through centralised depots for training.
None of this is what I believe should have happened but rather what could have been for the simple reason it lets me come up with some weird and wonderful wiffs.
Eventually I want to develop a clearly defined AEF, ADF and National Guard with regular and reserve elements, conscription and mobilisation plans. General thoughts are the National Guard would be placed on military districts with their training and equipment tailored to specific geographies. The ADF would have a more holistic structure based more on the concept of an independent defence of Australia and its region.
The AEF would be a flexible organisation providing Australian contributions to alliance and coalition operations and deployments, its deployed elements would be equipped and tailored to the deployment at hand. It would be manned by volunteers from the National Guard and ADF and would adapt and slot into the existing structures of our allies and partners. They would for instance use British equipment for their deployment to Korea and American when they fight in Vietnam. They would bring much of this gear back to Australia where it could end up in store or NG or ADF service replacing older gear.
Lots of work to go but it gives me flexibility to build my stash in a common but flexible wiff.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version