With Russian armoured vehicles routinely obliterated in Ukraine, some commentators have challenged the survivability of Australia’s proposed new infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs) on the modern battlefield.
But the Army has hit back, saying new IFVs were comparable to the RAAF’s F-35 aircraft and Navy’s Future Frigates as essential components of the joint force.
Brigadier Ian Langford, acting Head of Land Capability in Army headquarters, told the ADM Congress the IFVs would replace Vietnam-era M-113 armoured personnel carriers, which entered service when the RAAF was operating Meteor fighters – first flight 1943 – and the Navy sailed HMAS Vampire, commissioned in 1959.
Later this year, the government will decide whether the new IFV will be the Korean Hanwha Redback or German Rheinmetall Lynx.
Initially Army sought 450 vehicles. Defence has now invited companies to submit bids for 300 vehicles, with options for additional batches of 50.
BRIG Langford said some commentators had suggested Australia would be spending billions on a capability at risk of defeat by lightly armed adversaries equipped with drones and modern guided weapons, as was occurring in Ukraine.
“The short answer is no,” he said.
BRIG Langford said it was important to see the lessons and insights from the conflict in Ukraine for what they really were.
Modern UAVs and the West’s best ATGMs were destroying Russian armour developed four decades ago and not equipped with advanced capabilities such as active protection systems (APS).
Neither did the Russians possess a modern integrated command, control communications system, vital for mobile forces to conduct effective air defence.
Further, Russian vehicles were poorly sustained and operated. It was little wonder many were falling to Ukrainian forces, he said.
“The ADF land force is not the Russian Army and it operates in a very different way, which leverages its strengths and offsets its weaknesses,” he said.
The ADM Congress, held in Canberra, is traditionally the first big defence event of the year, allowing the Defence Minister to outline the government’s defence agenda.
With a new government, what Defence industry would most like to know is whether Labor will sustain defence funding at levels adopted by the coalition, most recently in the March budget.
Unfortunately, Richard Marles, also deputy PM, was in India. Defence Industry Minister Pat Conroy was in Rwanda for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting.
That left Assistant Defence Minister Matt Thistlethwaite who outlined Labor’s vision, particularly for engagement with industry, allies and regional partners, though not how much money it will spend. That will come when Labor hands down its first budget on October 25.
Thistlethwaite said the government was acutely aware of the fastchanging strategic challenges in our region.
“This necessitates investment that strengthens Australia’s defence capability and regional cooperation with allies,” he said.
“Our defence plan is not only about our nation’s security – it’s about the region’s security as well. Our policies are also about nurturing our human capital, stimulating innovation and growing our national economic prosperity.”
Deputy Chief of Navy Rear Admiral Chris Smith said assured fuel supply was “the sort of thing that kept me up at night.”
“We need to be able to make sure that we address that and set ourselves for any shocks in that space. I think we are doing that,” he said.
“We do carry significant reserves with our tanker fleet and capacity to hold strategic reserves at our naval fuel stations.”
He said Australia also needed to be able to access offshore fuel reserves and much of what Navy did was to ensure sea lines of communications remained open to allow transport of fuel to Australia or where it was needed.
Then there’s access to guided weapons, all now manufactured overseas, mostly in the US.
Australia is now in the process of standing up a domestic guided missile industry.
RADM Smith said the AUKUS agreement with the US and UK was based on transfer of technology including missile technology.
“AUKUS will provide us opportunities to be able to move forward but we need to make those sovereign investments,” he said.
But will there be enough money? Even with Defence spending at a record high, there may not be, according Australian Strategic Policy Institute senior analyst Dr Marcus Hellyer.
The new government was confronting rising inflation, now way out of wack with assumptions in place when the funding line was developed for the 2016 Defence White Paper and 2020 Strategic Update.
Defence’s shopping list features new and expensive capabilities, such as ballistic missile defence.
Navy was doubling in tonnage and every single tonne was more complex than what it was replacing, driving acquisition and sustainment costs.
Defence had also under-estimated costs. The Future Frigate program had gone from $30 to $45 billion.
“One suspects there are other programs in there that will suffer major cost growth,” he said.