School of Armour School of Armour PAPERS

154 Pages·2017·2.49 MB·English

SScchhooooll ooff AArrmmoouurr
PPAAPPEERRSS
ASLAV-S introduction to service Social changes and the Millennial Soldier
By SGT Adrian Spurr
By WO2 Richard Krieger
Digital Command and Control in the Armoured
Cavalry Regiment Australian Soldier Character
By WO2 Michael Crossley By CAPT Michael O’Brien (Chaplain)
Recovery in the Puckapunyal Military Area
Do we as Commanders’ provide a mentally healthy
SGT Mick Wynd
workplace
By WO2 Guy Musgrove
Training future leaders in a simulation age
SGT Scott Jones
The importance of mandated formed body PT for all
Physical preparation of soldiers in training and the ranks within a Training Establishment
influence of science
SGT Aaron Barnes
SGT Michael Kitcher
The impact of simulation on training within the RAAC Fluctuating balance of power within the Asia-Pacific
By WO2 Bill Doodie By SGT Nicholas Zerafa
Fifty Shades of Green
The Syrian Campaigns: A Comparison
CAPT Michael Bowers
By WO2 David Adams
Think We’re the Best? A Look Down Under Might
Change Your Mind
Not Just About Ticking Boxes: The Art of Tactics in
By LTC Terrence H. Buckeye (US Army).
a Digital Battlespace
By MAJ Alex Bearse
Benefits of Australia’s Involvement in the War in
Afghanistan
By SGT Gregory Moon Growing Tank and CRV Capability
By CAPT Tobias Pitt
Relationships between Logistics and Arms Corps
SGT Simon Clouting
ADF preparation for the close fight
Working as a United Nations Military Observer By CAPT Adam Moss
By MAJ Aaron Cimbaljevic
Commanding – the role resilience takes in
Instability in Sub-Saharan Africa
leadership training
By WO2 Martin O’Donnell
By MAJ Graham Sowiak
Mounted Reconnaissance in the Combat Bde
By LT Timmothy Green
Spring edition 2016
Leadership and the Individual
Volume 1, Number 1
By SGT Matthew Pippin
FFOORRGGEE
The SOARMD Papers is published by authority of the Commanding Officers of the School of Armour,
and sponsored by Commandant Combined Arms Training Centre
© Commonwealth of Australia 2016

This journal is copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of study, research, criticism or
review (as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968), and with standard source credit included, no part
may be reproduced by any process without written permission.

Contributors are urged to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in their articles; the
Editorial Advisory Board accepts no responsibility for errors of fact. Permission to reprint SOARMD
Papers articles will generally be given by the Editor after consultation with the author(s). Any
reproduced articles must bear an acknowledgment of source.

The views expressed in the SOARMD Papers are the contributors’ and not necessarily those of the
School of Armour, Australian Army or the Department of Defence. The Commonwealth of Australia will
not be legally responsible in contract, tort or otherwise for any statement made in this journal.

Editor: Major Benjamin Gray
School of Armour Papers 2016
Spring, Volume I, Number 1
CONTENTS

Service into of ASLAV-S…………………………………………………………………………..Page 3.
By SGT Adrian Spurr

Digital Command and Control in the Armoured Cavalry Regiment……………………….Page 6.
By WO2 Michael Crossley

Recovery in the Puckapunyal Military Area…………………………...……………………..Page 11.
SGT Mick Wynd

Training future leaders in a simulation age………………………………………………….Page 17.
SGT Scott Jones

Physical preparation of soldiers in training and influence of science………………….Page 22.
SGT Michael Kitcher

The impact of simulation on training within the RAAC……………………………..….….Page 30.
By WO2 Bill Doodie

Fifty Shades of Green………………………………………………………………………...….Page 37.
CAPT Michael Bowers

Think We’re the Best? A Look Down Under Might Change Your Mind…………...…….Page 43.
By LTC Terrence H. Buckeye (US Army)

Benefits of Australia’s Involvement in the War in Afghanistan……………………….….Page 56.
By SGT Gregory Moon

Relationships between Logistics and Arms Corps…………………………..………....….Page 59.
SGT Simon Clouting

Working an a United Nations Military Observer (UNMO………………………………..….Page 63.
By MAJ Aaron Cimbaljevic

Instability in Sub-Saharan Africa……………………………………………………………....Page 71.
By WO2 Martin O’Donnell

Formation Mounted Reconnaissance in the Combat Brigade……………………….......Page 78.
By LT Timmothy Green

Leadership and the Individual………………………………………………………………….Page 82.
By SGT Matthew Pippin

Social changes and the Millennial Soldier………………………………………………..….Page 85.
By WO2 Richard Krieger

Australian Soldier Character……………………………………………………………......….Page 91.
By CAPT Michael O’Brien (Chaplain)

Do we as Commanders’ provide a mentally healthy workplace………………………….Page 97.
By WO2 Guy Musgrove

Importance of mandated formed body PT within a training establishment…………..Page 102.
SGT Aaron Barnes

The fluctuating balance of power within the Asia-Pacific…………………………..…...Page 105.
By SGT Nicholas Zerafa

The Syrians Campaigns: A Comparison………………………………………………...….Page 113.
By WO2 David Adams

Not Just About Ticking Boxes: The Art of Tactics in a Digital Battlespace……….…Page 121.
By MAJ Alex Bearse

Growing Tank and CRV Capability……………………………………………………...……Page 131.
By CAPT Tobias Pitt

ADF preparation for the close fight…………………………………………………...……..Page 136.
By CAPT Adam Moss

Commanding – Looking after leaders: Role of resilience in leadership training……Page 143.
By MAJ Graham Sowiak

2
School of Armour Papers 2016
Spring, Volume I, Number 1

The introduction into service of the ASLAV-S
By SGT Adrian Spurr

Introduction

The purpose of this essay is to highlight the issues and considerations that
have arisen from the introduction into service of the ASLAV-S. It covers
aspects from training through to doctrine and the use of the platform in the
ACR and Units.

Mission

Primary mission to provide the reconnaissance commander with a
surveillance capability that has mobility, communications, protection and
endurance, in order to increase situational awarenss of the battle space.
Secondary mission to call, observe and adjust indirect fire onto enemy targets
and objectives.

Training

Training is conducted at the School of Armour, Communications and
Surveillance Wing. In order to obtain the qualifications as an MSSS operator a
soldier must be qualified on the vehicle and have done the Ground
Surveillance Radar Operators course, which is now conducted at the School
of Armour. The MSSS operator’s course is a three week course which covers
all aspects of the equipment attached to the ASLAV-S and it also covers the
licence code for the vehicle. The student is required to drive the vehicle for a
further 215minutes so they become proficient in the way the vehicle handles.

Vehicle allocation for the school of armour is 2 ASLAV-S which are utilised to
train the Operators and the train the trainers. With the school only having two
vehicles its limits the capability for the school, due to the TMP for D&S wing
changing, now drivers leaving the school come out with a restricted licence
ground guide only for the ASLAV-S. Another restriction is AMSTAR due to the
age and fragility; it’s becoming harder to get these items repaired. A way
around this is that the school no teaches the Ground Surveillance Radar and
the school has a further allocation of 4 Ground Surveillance Radar.

Course / Training Management Package

The current course is a 3 weeks for both the Operators and the Train-the-
Trainer. The operators course covers skill sets from deploying the MSSS in
the mounted to deploying the equipment in remote and dismounted mode.
Operators will complete a series of driving activities so they can become
qualified to drive the vehicle. The Train-the-Trainer course is also three weeks
and conduct the same training as the operator’s course but in the third week
3
School of Armour Papers 2016
Spring, Volume I, Number 1
conduct assessed instructor lessons ranging from equipment to procedure
lessons.

There has been discussion within units that consideration should be given in
the future to the of the Train-the-Trainer course being turned into a
surveillance commanders course with an instructional phase in it, so the
commander completes the course understanding how to deploy the
surveillance vehicle in the field and is able to instruct. For the course/TMP to
change there will have to be major changes in resource allocation for the
course to become a surveillance commander’s course. The course would
have to co-inside with a commanders course so the course could utilises that
course to report on and or utilise the MSSS to give the commanders course
detailed information of there patrolling area.

Doctrine

Current doctrine for the use of the surveillance vehicle in the ACR’s is still
being developed by the units.

Structure and Manning

Original the structure for the Surveillance Troop was 4 ASLAV-S and 2 Type 1
Gun Car with this structure the troop could break into patrols (2 ASLAV-S and
1 T1) which gives the commander options to cover more ground with the
optics and radar. With the current manning issues with the ACR’s/Units the
only unit operating from the original manning requirements is 2/14 QMI LHR
there Surveillance troop is running 4 ASLAV-S and 2 Type 1, with the ACR’s
manning shortages they have had to split the surveillance troops and implant
the vehicles into the line/sabre troops.

With the surveillance vehicles attached to the line troops (4 type 1, 1 type 2
and ASLAV-S) the issue’s that has been discovered are Gimbol issues
because the line troops expect the surveillance vehicle to traverse over the
same ground, with these vehicles travelling over the same terrain as the line
troops the vehicles are receiving knocks to the gimbol. Due to the gimbol
having sensitive components located inside, any knocks from falling branches
can damages these components.

Equipment

With equipment that is limited/old it takes week to months to get components
repaired/changed, i.e. the school had a catastrophic failure of the mast in
2014 which did damage to the Gimbol and Amstar, the left and right pods and
the Amstar which was fixed to the top of the Gimbol at the time along with
these components some of the cables where damage. It took twelve months
to get a replacement Amstar, and 6 months to get the cables replaced. With
the School of Armour now teaching the Ground Surveillance Radar in both
operator and advanced operator the school has been allocated a further 4
AMSTARS which takes the pressure of the 2 AMSTARS that are allocated to
the ASLAV-S vehicles.
4
School of Armour Papers 2016
Spring, Volume I, Number 1

Conclusion

The introduction of the surveillance vehicle to armoured corps has been some
what successful with 2/14, but with other ACR’s/units it’s still an on going
issue. Manning of the surveillance troop is hard because the corps is finding it
difficult to man a sabre troop. Some of the other issues is that the Radar for
the MSSS is old, outdated and spare parts/equipment for will be an issue in
the years to come. The radar is not due to replaced until 2019-2021 due to
this replacement parts for the aging AMSTAR will become a greater issue in
the next few years.

5
School of Armour Papers 2016
Spring, Volume I, Number 1

Digital Command and Control in the Armoured
Cavalry Regiment
By WO2 Michael Crossley

“War is the realm of uncertainty; three quarters of the factors on which
action in war is based are wrapped in a fog of greater or lesser
uncertainty. A sensitive and discriminating judgment is called for; a
skilled intelligence to scent out the truth.”
On War

Introduction

The introduction of Battle Management Systems (BMS) into the Australian
Army’s Armoured Cavalry Regiments (ACR) will revolutionise how these units
operate and how they link into joint Australian and Coalition capabilities. The
aim of this essay is to promote discussion as to how the Royal Australian
Armoured Corps (RAAC) and the Army will integrate these capabilities to
achieve victory on the battlefield. This essay will discuss the function of BMS,
the equipment currently in service across the Army, the training that will need
to be delivered and ultimately how RAAC crews will utilise these systems
within an ACR and the Multi-Role Combat Brigade (MCB). Additionally, in
each area I will discuss some basic concepts that can be quickly implemented
into the corps to deliver enhanced capability to the Australian Defence Force
(ADF).

Function of the Battle Management System

BMS are designed to speed up decision making and provide commanders
with increased situation awareness in order to defeat the enemy. These
systems are also designed to provide a tactical advantage to the soldier on
the ground so that they can make a quicker and better informed decision
based upon reliable and up to date information. From as far back as the
Defence White Paper of 1994 the Australian Government has called for the
ADF to take advantages of the revolution in information technology to allow
more efficient use of military capabilities and better coordination at all levels
(Ray, et al, 1994 p 37). Since this paper was published in 1994 the RAAC has
taken only small steps towards implementing this revolution in digital
technology and we now find ourselves lagging behind the rest of the ADF.
Land 200 and JP2072 are recent examples of projects designed to allow the
ADF and in particular the Army to achieve a higher level of connectivity and
interoperability. Both of these projects should have reached Final Operational
Capability but mid 2015 (CASG, et al, 2014) but we as a corps still don’t have
a workable BMS solution in our vehicles.

6
School of Armour Papers 2016
Spring, Volume I, Number 1
When we look at the connectivity currently across the Army we see a very
disturbing picture, and most of the time we don’t see one at all. The backbone
of any Battle Management System is the communications system. The
communications system within the Army’s senior fighting corps is haphazard
and underdeveloped to say the least. I will detail later in this essay the
equipment issues across the corps, but for the point of this section I will
regrettably highlight the fact that we can only achieve encrypted single
frequency communication across the corps and currently no compatible BMS
functionally between any of them. As the recent conflict in the Ukraine has
shown, there is a massive vulnerability to forces operating on a single
frequency within the electromagnetic spectrum. The ability of Russian forces
to detected, locate and targeted their enemy with simple and cost effective
technology has proven to be effective and lethal (Ryan, 2016).

One of the most potent and versatile capabilities within the Army is the
Australian Light Armoured Vehicle, now known as the Combat
Reconnaissance Vehicle (CRV). This vehicle is the eyes and ears of the ACR
and as such you would expect that this vehicle would have the high degree of
integration into the networked battlespace. Information should be spilling from
these platforms providing accurate information for follow up forces on enemy
disposition, route accessibility and the overall picture of the battlespace.

However, we discover that it is in fact this platform which is the Achilles heal
of the BMS capability in the ACR, as the CRV has no BMS fitted as standard.
It does however have a deployable system fitted but these are only available
on vehicles operating in the Middle East and as such crews don’t have the
ability to train or develop an understanding of the system in any detail before
they deploy on operations. This has resulted in the equipment being
underutilised and most of the time it provides nothing but a digital map for the
crew and a drain on the vehicles already stressed electrical system. Surely
this lack of capability should be more of a concern to the Australian
Government and the ADF.

The ADF will also need to maintain a high degree of interoperability
with the sophisticated capabilities which the United States deploys.

Defence white paper 2016

Current In-Service Equipment

The current list of BMS and communication systems across the Army is
diverse to say the least, and as a starting point it’s good to look across the
current communications equipment configuration within the RAAC. Currently
across the three platforms there are three different radios systems, each of
these radios provide the crew with the ability to communicate encrypted
between other vehicles, but this is where the similarities between systems
end. Because of this lack of interoperability more advanced features cannot
be utilised because they are not compatible across all platforms. This sees
some excellent equipment being used for nothing more than single VHF
7
School of Armour Papers 2016
Spring, Volume I, Number 1
frequency encrypted communication which leaves the entire network
vulnerable to detection and attack by an adversary.

So far we have only discussed the communication issues surrounding the
Armoured vehicle fleet and we have not looked at the ACR construct as a
whole, nor have we looked at the regimental headquarters limited ability to be
operate with a brigade or other battle group because of the reduced
interoperability. Across the ACR we cannot utilise frequency hopping, our
BMS terminals don’t talk to other platforms and there is no common picture
that we can operate off. Our support vehicles such as the Unimog and G-
wagon do have these systems fitted, but it is of little use because none of the
fighting fleet is fitted with the same equipment.

Various reasons have been cited for the lack of integration of these systems
into our A vehicle fleets and only recently have systems started to arrive for
the M113AS4 FOV (LAND 75 Phase 3.4, 2014, Table 1). This is a step in the
right direction, but because it is not implemented in all vehicles it then
introduces a number of other challenges with regards to the training liability of
a small corps such as ours and also having to support three different systems
across the fleet. This increases the already stretched logistic chain within the
units, as well as the additional issues is faced when we look at the
interoperability into coalition systems due to the various manufactures of the
different systems. This again results in a lack of capability, increased training
cost, complexity and increased logistic burden to the Army.

This is a complex and difficult problem to solve, but steps can be easily taken
now to provide enhance capability and to allow for an easier transition to more
complex systems in the future. The first step in the author’s opinion is to install
at least one common radio system for voice communication across the fleet of
CRV. This would allow all vehicles from M1A1, M113AS4 and CRV to operate
with a frequency hopping capability and allow enhanced voice communication
across the ACR and MCB. This system installation could simply be installed in
the hull of the CRV in the position where the High Frequency radio stack was
previously installed. While this would not address the BMS capability
component it would provide a massive increase to capability across the Army
and would also utilise all current authorised in service equipment without
having to procure any untested equipment.

Training to Win

The introduction of a BMS will revolutionise how the RAAC trains and fights
within the Army and ADF. Learning how to best apply these systems from the
newest driver up to the task force commander will require a significant
investment in training to fully understand and utilise these systems to their
potential. This capability won’t develop overnight and we need to look at how
we will train on these systems now so that we can have success in the future.

While it may be difficult now to completely introduce equipment into all of the
current fleets, we still need to integrate the processes of a BMS into our corps.
Putting the BMS capability down to all squadron headquarters will allow
8
School of Armour Papers 2016
Spring, Volume I, Number 1
commanders and staff the ability to learn and develop this capability. Even if
the vehicles at the troop level don’t have the systems fitted it will still test the
overall concept and the process of a BMS. It will allow all users in either
headquarters or fighting platforms on the ground an ability to develop a
greater understanding on what we do and what we don’t need in a future
capability.

The battlefield is a scene of constant chaos. The winner will be the one
who controls that chaos, both his own and the enemies

Napoleon
Fighting the Fight

The ability of the crew to detect and destroy the enemy will always be a key
component to victory on the battlefield. Crews need to look at how we are
going to integrate these systems into how we fight the fight. What interface
does the war fighter need, what information will help his decision making
process and then how do we trains these processes so that we are efficient in
battle. All too often when a new process or piece of equipment is introduced
into service; its introduction isn’t thought out effectively as its procurement.
Users aren’t able to see the benefit of the equipment or process and revert
back to their old ways because they don’t see it is worth the effort.

Current drills will need refining to meet the introduction of a BMS, and we
need to start thinking about this now, we need to develop a plan, test and
refine it. Once that is done we then need to sell it to the corps, we need to
make sure that the end user sees the benefit and wants to embrace it and
develop it further. This development can be done now, as it will be much
easier to develop and test these processes with a vehicle that we are familiar
with. Failure to do this will require crews to learn a completely new vehicle and
also learn a completely different way of commanding and controlling to what
we are currently doing.

Conclusion

The BMS and communication environments are constantly evolving and no
doubt by the time this essay is finished, plans will change, the goal posts will
move and the world will be a different place. Each time new capabilities are
introduced we need to make sure that as the Army’s senior fighting capability
we are able to take advantages of these innovations. Common
communication compatibility is the first step in achieving increased
interoperability within the corps. Training needs to be streamlined to make
better use of the limited training resources and logistics complexity needs to
be reduced. The introduction of a BMS to all Squadron headquarters in an
ACR will test and refine the procedures. Crews will see the benefit and want
to lead the development of these systems for the future. Instead of waiting for
a perfect solution to be handed to us maybe we should start to drive towards a
solution for ourselves.

9