The new more open and consultative Australian Defence Force has confessed that it really wasn’t properly outfitting the diggers for much of the time they were fighting in Afghanistan.

What is it about simulation that makes for a great conversation about outcomes but lacks application? The business case for using simulation, modelling and experimentation early on in the planning and development of requirements is a relatively easy one to make. As Major General John Caligari, Head of Capability Systems, has pointed out previously, in simulation you can fail early, fast and cheaply with test points that can be repeated over and over again. This message is seeping through the organisation but it’s a slow burn.

Bringing together this edition of ADM has once again turned my focus onto weapons and Force Protection. Our features this month take a closer look at two weapons programs in particular: light weight automatic grenade launchers under Land 40 and 81mm mortars under Land 136. And I have concerns about both of them for similar reasons. Both are ostensibly off-the-shelf solutions but the process has been carefully questioned as the program offices conduct market research and examine various contracting models.

By the end of the year most troops will be out of Afghanistan and longrunning missions in East Timor and the Solomons will have been long over, taking Australia back to an era when Australia’s only foreign adventures were small, worthy and not very risky peacekeeping operations of which most people had never heard.

It has cost Australia 39 lives and billions in national treasure for more than a decade in Afghanistan and it now looks like costing the better part of $50 million to get out.

With the news that the Australian/US Defence Trade Treaty has finally come together, there is hope that the process for technology transfers between the two nations will become much easier.

With the news that Australia will be pulling out the vast majority of its assets from Afghanistan by the end of the year, questions about what will happen to the capabilities built during this experience are being asked. Will joint terminal attack controllers (JTACs) remain? What assets are we bringing home or leaving there? What about the future of short term contracts that have become so very useful, such as the Heron RPA?

Turning back the boats was once a great strategy for dealing with suspected irregular entry vessels (SIEVs) but is the way ahead should the Coalition form government later this year?

In the grey skies over Avalon, the US Air Force's finest did their thing, showing just what Australia won't ever fly and can't afford anyway. The F-22 Raptor certainly put on a show, its twin afterburners roaring with pure power, its travelling roadshow team delivering a breathless commentary in a manner which would not be out of place at a rodeo or a NASCAR race.

The last decade has been described as the 9/11 or national security decade, with Australia’s security posture defined by events which started that morning, New York time, on September 11, 2001.

As I’ve mentioned before in past editorials, it’s easy for people to focus on the capabilities that the Navy and Air Force offer. It’s pretty hard to miss a ship in port or an aircraft on the tarmac. But Army is gearing up for their own platforms of choice to be replaced: vehicles.

The Avalon Airshow edition always makes me somewhat nostalgic. Back in the heady days of 2007, Avalon was the first major defence event I attended as an ADM staff writer. Looking back at past Avalon editions of ADM, the headlines and themes have changed a great deal in only a few short years. Dragging out my 2005 Avalon edition I saw Tenix winning work for the EWSP suite on the C-130Hs, the Orions were to retire between 2013-2015 and Boeing was making sure that Defence knew about the Super Hornet just in case.

There was something for most everyone when Defence Minister Stephen Smith and Defence Materiel Minister Jason Clare stood up in Perth in mid-December last year to present a progress report on the review of air combat capability.

One of the more intriguing contributions to the national security debate occurred in late October when Army chief Lieutenant General David Morrison ventured into the lecture hall to address the Canberra University’s National Security Institute.

In continuing with my editorial practice for the year of commenting on how our themes relate to the upcoming White Paper, I find myself in two minds. On the one hand, the Top 40 Defence Contractors and Top 20 SMEs survey demonstrates the width and breadth that Australian industry has to offer. The minimum cut off for turnover has increased yet again, there are both new and old entrants making an appearance and the number of locally-owned SMEs seems to be on the rise.

At what point does indecision become a decision in itself? This question can be asked of both of our themes this month; Network Centric Warfare (NCW) and the Future Submarine. The 2009 NCW Roadmap had some fantastic goals it wanted to achieve. The 2009 NCW Roadmap updates the 2007 roadmap.