The ANZACs in T2k

[Legbreaker]

Well ladies and gentlemen, I've FINALLY got my grubby hands on the book I've been searching for over the last few years so an Australian & New Zealand sourcebook may just be happening.
As mentioned elsewhere, I'll be including a little information on the areas the ANZAC forces are deployed (Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Korea and Cypress prior to pulling out later in the war), but really only touching on the opposition - Indonesia for example has a MASSIVE military and would take me years to sort through.

So, anyone who's already worked up something for those units and areas, I'd love to hear from. I intend to incorporate what I can and alter only what doesn't fit the overall picture or come close to real capabilities.

4161

[Green Monkey]

I have no firsthand experience at all to contribute but I am really looking forward to reading what you come up with.

I will look in my library at home and see whether I can find anything useful that you might not have and message if I find anything. I guess its forward looking publications about military affairs published in the 1980s??

[Legbreaker]

Actually anything anyone else has already written up would be good.
I'm drawing as much as I can from the relevant PAMs (see image above for one example), filling out units with new recruits and equipping them with whatever I judge Australia would have been capable of producing (not a lot), purchasing (even less with war looming elsewhere) or pulled out of stores (older L1A1 rifles, M60 machineguns, etc and perhaps a few Brens and the odd SMLE for rear echelon units). Then I'll run the war forward a bit and apply loses of personnel and equipment.
Any work others have done already I want to have a good hard look at and see if it can be used either in full or part. The future of T2K in my mind is a collaborative effort.
[/2am raving]

[Legbreaker]

Also, happy to look at any artwork or photos anyone's willing to contribute.

[mcchordsage]

I can send a copy of a study on the NZSAS Squadron in the 60s (Borneo and Vietnam) if you'd like.

[Olefin]

There are two mentions of the ANZAC forces between my East Africa Sourcebook (details what happened to forces assigned to Sri Lanka as part of UN contingent that didnt get pulled out) and also Raellus in his Korean Sourcebook. Otherwise its pretty sparse - its too bad Challenge folded when it did - there was supposed to be an article about an adventure in Australia but have no idea if anyone ever saw it

[Legbreaker]

Anything anyone's got is welcome, whether that be from the already published books and magazines, or their own work.
Anything canon will be dealt with accordingly, and anything else assessed on it's merits and included if possible/logical.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

@Olefin, in regards to the adventure you're talking about, as far as I know, it was never seen by anyone outside the GDW office (and obviously whoever the author shared it with).
I made some inquiries a long, long time ago about the fate of that last issue and if I remember right, it never got to the printers (let alone onto the shop shelves) and ownership of the articles reverted back to the original authors.

I even tried to track down the author of that Australian adventure but without any success. As far as I remember from the very limited description in Challenge #77, it's quite likely it would have had only minor details on Aussie military capabilities.

@Legbreaker, as always mate, anything I might know or have is yours for the taking. I still have some publications & books about the Australian armed forces of the 1980s - early 1990s although I suspect much of the material they cover is now available online.
I don't have any of the training or organizational pams but I do have a couple of the "Navy Today" PR books from the early 80s as well as "Australia's Armed Forces of the Eighties". I know you probably have all the land forces stuff covered but for navy and air force I might have something you can use.

[Legbreaker]

I know you probably have all the land forces stuff covered but for navy and air force I might have something you can use.

Given the very limited naval and air assets in the rest of the world, I'll probably minimise Australian capability in those areas also. We already know Australian SAS used a French sub to get to Poland (scenario "What's Polish for G'day"), so it's likely there's no Australian assets capable of making the journey, and Australia's usual first contribution to any military action (Korea in this case) is usually air power. Against Soviet pilots and aircraft it doesn't seem likely many are left.
However, if you (or anyone else) has any suggestions in those areas, lets hear them.

[RN7]

Given the very limited naval and air assets in the rest of the world, I'll probably minimise Australian capability in those areas also. We already know Australian SAS used a French sub to get to Poland (scenario "What's Polish for G'day"), so it's likely there's no Australian assets capable of making the journey, and Australia's usual first contribution to any military action (Korea in this case) is usually air power. Against Soviet pilots and aircraft it doesn't seem likely many are left.
However, if you (or anyone else) has any suggestions in those areas, lets hear them.

I would say air assets would be an area that Australian could upgrade in T2K, and fairly quickly as well. They use mainly American equipment and America would have ramped up aircraft production leading up to Twilight. Australia is wealthy enough and is close enough of ally to have been able to buy new build or reconditioned fast jets, transports and helicopters. Maybe some from the UK and France as well.

BTW if you want some information about Australian forces at this time I can give you what I have. I've just come back to Europe from the States this morning and I'm really jet lagged, but I will have a look later in the week.

[Rainbow Six]

At one point in time (maybe around 15 – 20 years ago) someone (I don’t know who) had a write up for an ANZAC (plus attached Pacific Islanders iirc) unit in Germany. The premise was they’d gathered together assorted Aussie / NZ / Fijian personnel that had been in theatre (UN peacekeepers, training teams, personnel on exchange postings, Australian Federal Police, I think even a couple of Defence Attaches, etc) and consolidated them into one Company sized unit. Obviously it was non canon.

I don’t know if said site still exists and my google fu (admittedly restricted by being at work) isn’t coming up with anything – maybe someone else remembers it or has a link to it?

[Legbreaker]

I would say air assets would be an area that Australian could upgrade in T2K, and fairly quickly as well. They use mainly American equipment and America would have ramped up aircraft production leading up to Twilight. Australia is wealthy enough and is close enough of ally to have been able to buy new build or reconditioned fast jets, transports and helicopters. Maybe some from the UK and France as well.
Lol! :D
You really don't understand Australian government procurement procedures do you? Usually if the military wants something, it spends a good decade being argued about by the politicians and then MAYBE there's an order put in for delivery sometime in the following decade. By the time we actually get our hands on it, it's already a generation old!
Take our tanks for example, used M1s from the 1980 we received only a few years ago (albeit fully reconditioned and upgraded).
Also, Australia really isn't that wealthy, certainly not enough to be splashing loads of cash around. And then there's the small issue of WWIII being well under way by the time the need for additional planes is recognised - supply just wouldn't be there.
BTW if you want some information about Australian forces at this time I can give you what I have. I've just come back to Europe from the States this morning and I'm really jet lagged, but I will have a look later in the week.
Anything you've got is appreciated. Note there's no huge rush, right now I'm just gathering information which I expect will take me a few months to sort through and reorganise into something coherent.
At one point in time (maybe around 15 – 20 years ago) someone (I don’t know who) had a write up for an ANZAC (plus attached Pacific Islanders iirc) unit in Germany. The premise was they’d gathered together assorted Aussie / NZ / Fijian personnel that had been in theatre (UN peacekeepers, training teams, personnel on exchange postings, Australian Federal Police, I think even a couple of Defence Attaches, etc) and consolidated them into one Company sized unit. Obviously it was non canon.
I remember seeing that myself. Struck me as a bit unbelievable and their ham-fisted homebrew method of including Australians and New Zealanders in the European war.
I may actually have a hard copy of that site floating about somewhere...

[RN7]

Lol! :D
You really don't understand Australian government procurement procedures do you? Usually if the military wants something, it spends a good decade being argued about by the politicians and then MAYBE there's an order put in for delivery sometime in the following decade. By the time we actually get our hands on it, it's already a generation old!
Take our tanks for example, used M1s from the 1980 we received only a few years ago (albeit fully reconditioned and upgraded).
Also, Australia really isn't that wealthy, certainly not enough to be splashing loads of cash around. And then there's the small issue of WWIII being well under way by the time the need for additional planes is recognised - supply just wouldn't be there...

But in wartime they probably think like that, and especially with Indonesia just to the north becoming expansionist. Where is South Irian?

Nearly everything Australia used at that time (and now) is American and they train with the Americans, I don't think there would be to much problem getting American aircraft. Not F-15's but certainly F-18's, some F-111's and a lot of helicopters and some C-130's and P-3s.

[Raellus]

Something that is easy to forget when talking about expanding an air force (in general) is the time it takes to train pilots and ground crew. Learning to fly and/or service an advanced jet attack-fighter takes many man hours, with time in the classroom, simulators, gliders or prop-planes, and jet trainers.

So, Australia might be able to get a hold of more F-18s and whatnot, but it's also going to need qualified pilots to fly them, and technicians to service the greater numbers of aircraft (one would also need more radar operators, in-flight refuelers, etc.) and those factors are going limit the size and speed of AF expansion.

Similar strictures apply to the expansion of a navy as well.

[Raellus]

I included a reformed ANZUK Brigade in my Korean Peninsula Sourcebook. I researched likely units to include in the OOB, but my sources were rather limited and I wasn't particularly satisfied with what I came up with.

Legbreaker, IF you end up working up a more accurate Australian OOB for your planned sourcebook, I would be happy to include a revised ANZUK Brigade OOB in an updated version of the KPSB. You would of course receive a credit in said version for your trouble. Let me know.

[Legbreaker]

Legbreaker, IF you end up working up a more accurate Australian OOB for your planned sourcebook, I would be happy to include a revised ANZUK Brigade OOB in an updated version of the KPSB. You would of course receive a credit in said version for your trouble. Let me know.
I was hoping you'd say that! :P
My plan is to send probably the 3rd Brigade (1st Div) perhaps with elements from the 6th Combat Support Brigade, 16th Aviation Brigade, and SpecOps Command to support them to Korea initially. When hostilities with Indonesia kick off, the 3rd would be pulled out and replaced with the 9th Brigade (a reserve formation from 2nd Div).

My reasoning is the regular army units are mainly trained for tropical warfare while the 9th comes from colder climates and so should be more adaptable to Korean conditions (after a good 6 months build up back in Australia). Also, I really like the idea of M113's with 76mm guns facing the Koreans. :D
They would likely be part of a combined Division along with Canadians, New Zealanders and perhaps British units (the Canadians and British both sharing the same 76mm ammo amongst others).

It's the 1990's organisation of the 3/9th SAMR (the unit with the above mentioned recon APCs) that's held everything up - they lost their armour in 2005 and now ride softskin Landrovers and the like with a corresponding massive reorganisation of their structure and role.

The majority of the remaining units would be deployed either against Indonesia or assigned internal civil defence duties.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Australia_Land_Forces_2018.png#/media/File:Australia_Land_Forces_2018.png

[Olefin]

I would definitely do the same for the Australian unit that is in my East Africa Sourcebook - they were supposed to be from units sent there on peacekeeping duty that basically got stranded in Ceylon when the war blew up into a general war. Based that on an entry in one of the canon vehicle sourcebooks. I had to take my best guess at how big the units would have been

[Raellus]

I was hoping you'd say that! :P
My plan is to send probably the 3rd Brigade (1st Div) perhaps with elements from the 6th Combat Support Brigade, 16th Aviation Brigade, and SpecOps Command to support them to Korea initially. When hostilities with Indonesia kick off, the 3rd would be pulled out and replaced with the 9th Brigade (a reserve formation from 2nd Div).

My reasoning is the regular army units are mainly trained for tropical warfare while the 9th comes from colder climates and so should be more adaptable to Korean conditions (after a good 6 months build up back in Australia). Also, I really like the idea of M113's with 76mm guns facing the Koreans. :D
They would likely be part of a combined Division along with Canadians, New Zealanders and perhaps British units (the Canadians and British both sharing the same 76mm ammo amongst others).

Cool. So you're looking at a division, instead of a brigade? I'm open to that. I like your idea of including a Canadian unit in the OOB. Any idea which one? What do the Canadians on the board think about that?

And I'm happy to include more vehicles. I'll have to add an entry on 76mm gun equipped M113s to the KPSB equipment tables and AFV list.

[Legbreaker]

No, just a Brigade to Korea which combined with New Zealanders (probably an artillery unit as in Vietnam, plus perhaps the bulk of their 26 Scorpions - also 76mm guns), and either British and/or Canadians would make up a composite Division.

In the early stages of the Korean campaign the Australians might be involved towards/at the front. When the regular professional soldiers are withdrawn for service against Indonesia and replaced with the part time reservists, I'm thinking they might be put into a more defensive role. This is due to their generally older equipment and relatively limited training and experience (which is actually still pretty high compared to most full time armies around the world).

Reservists units are also usually extremely adaptable due to most of it's personnel having civilian careers covering a multitude of areas Mechanics, builders, architects, engineers, paramedics, police, firefighters, farmers, truck and train drivers - all these and more were present in just my first under strength reservist platoon. It would be almost criminal for a commander not to take advantage of those skill sets by only using these units on the front line.

Anyway, please send me the bits you've got on Australians plus any working notes you may have to explain why you picked those units, sizes, etc. I'd like to wrap my head around your (and Olefin's) logic before I start making any alterations.

[Raellus]

Here's what I've got. I didn't keep notes. I confess that I leaned on Wikipedia quite a bit during my research. I also used some Osprey books on the British Army. I looked for/picked units that had a history in earlier IRL iterations of the ANZUK Brigade. Rainbow 6 suggested including an ANZUK Brigade and pointed me in the right direction, research-wise. But the available sources aren't great, and there were several areas where sources were conflicted regarding OOBs.

As far as my rationale for Aussie and Kiwi selections, I picked units that were relatively mobile- not in terms of motorization, but in terms of a relatively short logistical train, i.e. light infantry mostly. I figured they'd be slated for quick relative reaction type ops, without depriving their respective mother countries of the availability and services elsewhere of particularly elite (parachute units/SOF) or hard-hitting (armor) units.

And of course, Gurkhas- I had to include a Gurkha unit. I've had a fascination with Gurkhas ever since my dad shared stories from the [RL] Korean War (of which he was a veteran) and WWII (secondhand tales).

28th ANZUK Brigade (c.1997 OOB)
• Brigade HQ and Signal Squadron (multi national but primarily Australia)
• 1st Battalion, Worcestershire and Sherwood Foresters (UK)
• 1st Bn, 2nd King Edward VII's Own Gurkha Rifles (the Sirmoor Rifles) (UK)
• 1st Infantry Battalion, Royal Australia Regiment (Australia)
• 1st Battalion, Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment (New Zealand)
• 1 x Regiment, Royal Australian Artillery (L119 Field Gun)
• 1 x Field Engineer Regiment, Royal Australian Engineers
• 1 x Reconnaissance Squadron (Australia) (M113)
• Medical / Logistics (multi national but primarily Australia / NZ)

For character creation, these were my suggestions:

Australian Characters: Are likely from the 1st Battalion, Royal Australia Regiment, 28th ANZUK brigade. This is a light infantry unit. Australian personnel are often called "Aussies" by their fellow allies. For Australian military characters, use United Kingdom (Great Britain) basic training and appropriate United States Army career paths (Infantry, Armor, Artillery, Combat Engineer, Medical, and Logistics/Support- Officer and Enlisted- careers are available).

New Zealand Characters: Are likely from 1st Battalion, Royal New Zealand Regiment, 28th ANZUK brigade. This is a light infantry unit. New Zealand personnel are often called "Kiwis" by their fellow allies. For New Zealand military characters, use United Kingdom (Great Britain) basic training and United States Army Enlisted Infantry or Officer infantry career paths; medical careers are also available.

British Characters: Are likely from the 1st Battalion, Worcestershire and Sherwood Foresters, 28th ANZUK Brigade. This is a light infantry unit. For British military characters, use United Kingdom (Great Britain) basic training and United States Army Enlisted Infantry or Officer infantry career paths.

Gurkha Characters: Gurkhas are Nepalese soldiers serving the British crown, a legacy of the British Empire. The Gurkhas have long been considered among the world's elite light infantry. 1st Battalion, Royal Gurkha Rifles (formerly 2nd King Edward VII's Own Gurkha Rifles [a.k.a. the Sirmoor Rifles]). The Gurkha's signature piece of equipment is the legendary Kukri fighting knife. For a Gurkha character, use United Kingdom (Great Britain) basic training, and the U.S. Ranger Enlisted or Officer career with the following revisions: remove the Parachute skill points and substitute equal points to Armed Martial Arts (Kukri fighting). Gurkha characters start with a Kukri fighting knife as part of the their personal equipment.

If you haven't picked up a copy of the KPSB yet (sounds like you haven't), it's only $2.99 on DriveThruRPG. ;)

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/233671/T2000-v1-Korean-Peninsula-Sourcebook?src=fp_u5

-

[Legbreaker]

And why wouldn't you? :p

4162

[StainlessSteelCynic]

In the 2.2 BYB it says that Australia fought a short war against Indonesia when Indonesia tried to invade Papua New Guinea and the Indon' campaign collapsed due to logistical problems as much as from combat. But in the process the majority of Australian and Indonesian modern aircraft and naval vessels where either destroyed or damaged.
Now I think we can be safe in assuming that that applies to combat capable aircraft and vessels so my thoughts run towards those vessels and aircraft that would not have been used on the frontline or in the case of some, quite sparingly.

I think for some aircraft/ships it will be a case of indvidual Referee choice. For example, in T2k 2nd/2.2, the war starts in 1996. By this time in the real world, the F/A-18 was already a decade in RAAF service.
Our former frontline fighter, the Mirage III was disposed of by then, with 50 examples sold and delivered to Pakistan in 1990. The deliveries were completed by late 1990 or very early 1991 from what I recall. If you're playing a 1st Ed. timeline, we would still have those aircraft in Australia (some of them were still being used by the Aircraft Research and Development Unit but most were in storage awaiting disposal). They would be available for re-entering RAAF service quite quickly as the flight & maintenance personnel were still in the air force at that time along with a very large spares list.

You'd have to really fudge it to have the Mirage III available for RAAF use in a 2nd Ed. timeline and the handful of Canberra bombers that were still in Australia (in museums or private hands) would all need major work to be combat worthy again so no replacements for the fighters or strike aircraft...
However, the following aircraft that we had at that time and probably would not have been committed to combat (given how short the war with Indonesia is implied to be), could be used for CAS and light attack: -
CA-25 Winjeel (originally a primary trainer, 14 used in the FAC role until 1995)
PAC CT/4B Airtrainer (primary trainer, at least 40 examples were still flying in the late 1990s)
MB.326 (jet trainer, by the mid-1990s there were still 60+ in service)
Pilatus PC-9 (lead-in trainer, 59 in service with 4 being used for FAC from 1995 on)

[Legbreaker]

All good thoughts there. I was going to basically eliminate most of the air power form the equation just to pull the region roughly into line with the rest of the planet. Even a couple of working F-111's or F/A-18s could really be a game changer in the early 2000s, so it's probably best to ground them in one way or another. Lack of parts as well as battle losses initially in Korea then against Indonesia is probably the best way to go I'm thinking.

With regard to naval assets, the frigates and subs are really the "biggest" assets the country had at the time, with the subs plagued with problems and about half (from memory) unseaworthy. Guessing they'd be patched up as well as possible and sent into action anyway though, with one or two perhaps lost due to mechanical problems rather than enemy action.

The frigates however generally worked pretty well I understand, so losing a few of them will probably have to be due to battle damage. Chances are high that with the lack of US assets, they'd be forced to provide protection and support to the troop transports, etc. Pretty easy for the Indonesians to work out where they are then and send a few explosive laden speed boats at them, or divers with limpet mines (they'd take some significant losses in the process though!).

I'd like to eliminate all heavy lift capacity and strand the 9th Brigade in Korea, perhaps troops in Indonesia, Timor, etc as well.

Actually, if somebody wants to come up why the Indo-Australian war happened and how, I'm all ears. What was the cause? Who shot first? What units would the Indonesians have throw at it?

I'm thinking of extrapolating from the RL East Timor situation, making the Indonesians a lot more aggressive and generally hostile to the idea of losing the area. Throw a few commando raids at Australian mainland naval bases to ensure Australia would act and bam, you've got a war.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Regarding the Collins class subs, they were never the problem the media made them out to be. A lot of the problems at the time were either teething troubles due to the class being the first modern subs built in Australia by a company that had never built submarines before or just dumb/stupid design decision because there were some idiots in charge and they really did seem to have very little idea on how to build a sub.

Some of the criticism was journalistic stupidity. If I was feeling kind, I would have called it ignorance but some of the news reports were beyond ignorant. For example, one newspaper article I read complained that everything about the design was too complicated. They claimed it was too complicated a procedure to even fire torpedoes. The Collins class required three (or it might have been more, I can't recall) crew to co-ordinate to fire a torpedo (and I am paraphrasing but the following is essentially the exact message), a task that can be done with the push of one button on the Playstation or Xbox.

Yes. You read it correctly, the journo writing the article decided that firing a torpedo/missile in a video game was the correct comparison to make when examining how such a weapon is fired in the real world. No mention of chains of custody, no mention of the basic security feature of having such weapons under the control of a team and not a single individual.
So yeah, I would not pay too much attention to the claims from the media that the Collins class were bad. One newspaper suggested they be canned and we buy boats from elsewhere.

The biggest problem they actually had was that the RAN could not raise the required number of submariners to man all six boats. At best they could man three. Aussie sailors at the time just did not want to serve in submarines.

It's interesting to note that when HMASubmarine Waller, during RIMPAC 2000, acting as an enemy vessel, was reported to have successfully engaged two US nuclear subs and then coming almost within attack range of a US carrier, a lot of media criticism of the class was dropped.

In regards to Indonesia and their invasion of Papua New Guinea.
Quick and dirty idea but based on some real world bits & pieces. However for a quick idea there's a bit of reading involved - sorry 'bout that.

Indonesia was an authoritarian dictatorship plaqued by corruption, collusion, sycophancy and nepotism until the resignation of President Suharto in 1998.
Suharto has been called the most corrupt leader of modern times, according to Transparency International, he reportedly embezzled US$15-35 bilion in the three decades of his rule.
When some of the politicians that owed loyalty to him came under criticism from some well known Indonesian magazines, Suharto had the magazine publishers closed down.

All the problems of the real world Indonesia can feed directly into any game world history regardless of what edition of Twilight is used.

Indonesia was heading for serious financial trouble and they got it during the 1997 Asian economic crisis - part of the reason for Suharto's resignation. However, during any T2k timeline, the economic crisis would not happen... other things happening in the world kind of stopped it :D
However, Indonesia was looking forward to the sort of crisis that Argentina was suffering when the Argies decided to invade the Falklands.
Keep in mind that the 1990s was also the period where East Timor was agitating for it's freedom from Indonesia and we know what the Indo's did there.

They had already invaded and taken control of part of Papua (known since the invasion in 1962 as Irian Jaya but now known as West Papua AKA Western New Guinea).
It was believed in the 1970s and 1980s by a number of people in the Australian government and military that Indonesia had designs on other lands outside it's borders. It's claimed that they wanted to get the rest of Papua New Guinea and they also apparently wanted Malaysia, Borneo & Singapore and parts of the Philippines.
They also made a number of statements that Australia rightly belonged to Asia and all the Europeans should go back to Europe and let the rightful owners have the land (and they were not talking about the Aboriginal peoples).

Personal anecdote:
My mother has some friends who sailed a yacht around that part of the world in the late 1980s. When they were ashore in some part of Indonesia, thieves stole their yacht and then when they reported it, the Indon police arrested them for selling their boat to pirates. Fortunately they were saved from the hassle by friends back home and the Australian embassy.
However, while under the "tender" ministrations of the Indon police, one of them claims he saw a signboard outside a police or military compound with a map of Greater Indonesia.
The map allegedly covered all of Papua New Guinea, Timor, Malaysia, Borneo and the top of Australia.

So... territorially expansionist, in financial trouble, having problems controlling the civilian populace. What the people need is a good distraction.
Hmm...
Let's liberate the rest of Papua New Guinea and gain some more "living room". The world's having a bit of a problem at the moment so the UN is too distracted to care and those white devil Australians won't do anything about it because they're too busy being good little capitalist running dogs and besides, this is a purely Asian affair, nothing at all to do with those transplanted Europeans who've stolen Asian land.

[Olefin]

Reference to Australian troops in canon

F4: Cougar of the Canadian detachment, United Nations Peacekeeping Forces, Ceylon; 1996.

Canadian forces were sent to Ceylon in 1993 following the Tamil Insurrection of 1991 as part of a United Nations peacekeeping
force. Four companies of Canadian armored infantry joined troops from Greece, Finland, Australia, Sweden, and Italy on that island
in enforcing the shaky truce decreed by a United Nation's resolution of February 1993.

[Legbreaker]

Yes, Ceylon, not Cypress. My mistake.
My thoughts are the Australians would only amount to about a company (assigned to security of the medical teams, etc - roughly the same as the commitment to Ruwanda) which would stay when Korea kicked off, but withdrawn the moment it looked like there would be a shooting war with Indonesia. The Canadians would probably have already left though and the Greeks & Italians would be nothing but a memory. Finland and Sweden probably wouldn't have contributed more than a few dozen people (perhaps a medical team or something like that) and they'd be gone as soon as the security teams started making noise about leaving.

It's just possible these particular Canadians were the only ones who actually made it to Korea too - never made it all the way back to Canada perhaps. Four companies makes a reinforced battalion (would have to have a HQ plus admin/support elements as well, unless one of those companies were actually the HQ Coy...).

Hmm, thinking of using them plus a battalion of NZ troops, plus the Gurka's to form a Brigade, perhaps under NZ leadership (seems like they're the only nationality with the necessary officers, etc available for the job).

A third Brigade, mainly made up of British troops could round out the Division which would probably be under British command. This last brigade may be under strength right from the beginning, or keep the Gurkas with them and leave the Canadian/NZ brigade weaker. As the Korean front appears to be an extension of the 1950's war, it's highly likely to be a UN operation I think, so that final brigade could also be rounded out with the contributions of smaller nations (might even see companies from places like Samoa, South Africa, Philippines, even France might have a presence.

Just my rambling thoughts. Feel free to pull it apart.

[Rockwolf66]

I have a source on Indonesian Military equipment. Alas the source is politically biased and openly anti-American.

http://worldmilitaryintel.blogspot.com/2013/05/blog-post_2016.html

[Legbreaker]

I have a source on Indonesian Military equipment

Useful nonetheless.
Anyone got any info on their numbers and organisation in the 90's?
I don't want to go into great depth on them, but I do need to figure out what the Australians would have likely been up against and how effective they'd have been.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Don't forget that until 1999, the Indonesian National Police were administered/commanded by the military. They also had an over-abundance of militias
https://fas.org/irp/world/indonesia/militia.htm

No matter what I tried, I could not find any form of OrBat for Indonesia in the 1990s :mad: so hopefully you can drag something worthwhile out of the following links.

Global Security has a table of Indonesian army vehicles and aircraft in 5 year periods starting at 1990. Indonesia was severely lacking in modern equipment (compared to Australia) until the 2000s.
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/indonesia/adri-equipment.htm

This page "may" be useful, mostly because you can run a comparison between Australian and Indonesia by year (I saved the link on year 1995). Also be prepared for a hell of a lot of reading when you open up the definitions link.
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Australia/Indonesia/Military#1995

This document is dated 2002 but uses info gathered during the 1990s, it's the only doc I've found that has some info about the makeup of Indonesian land forces in the 1990s.
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/2002/MR1599.pdf

Neil Baumgardner's now defunct OrBat website for T2k has some info on Australia (no Indonesia however) but some of the links are dead. The info is typically from the late 1990s so might prove useful: -
https://web.archive.org/web/20091019005428/http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/9059/
But specifically this page: - https://web.archive.org/web/20090803173358/http://geocities.com/Pentagon/9059/ADF.html

Further reading:
Indonesian military districts/commands
https://fas.org/irp/world/indonesia/adri.htm
World Factbook - Indonesia 1990
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_World_Factbook_(1990)/Indonesia
Indonesian armed forces at military wiki
http://military.wikia.com/wiki/Indonesian_National_Armed_Forces
US Army foreign military studies report 1995
https://fas.org/irp/world/indonesia/indo-fmso.htm
Australian parliament - research paper: Indonesian Armed Forces
https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp9899/99rp23
The Indonesian Military in the Mid-1990s: Political Maneuvering or Structural Change?
https://ecommons.cornell.edu/bitstream/handle/1813/54116/INDO_63_0_1106951638_91_106.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y from this page: https://ecommons.cornell.edu/handle/1813/54116

[Jason Weiser]

I do have a nuclear target list for Australia..I can refine it a bit, as Google Earth and Nukemap have made it possible to do some really advanced blast mapping.

[Legbreaker]

Throw it my way. Accepting all submissions at the moment. :)

[RN7]

Right Legbreaker here is some information about equipment levels for Australian forces at the start of the Twilight War in 1996/1997. I haven't included any organisation such as brigades/regiments/battalions/squadrons etc as I figured you already have that information.


Australian Army

Manpower: 30,300 (with 29,200 in Reserves)
Available Manpower: 2,152,000 males aged between 18 and 32 (* in mid-1990's)

Tanks
Leopard 1A3 MBT: 92
Armoured Vehicles
ASLAV Type I (25mm cannon) AIFV: 64
ASLAV Type II APC: 63 (* production ongoing)
M113 MRV (76mm gun) AIFV: 53
M113A1/AS3/AS4 APC: 725 (* 205 held in storage)
Artillery
M198 155mm Towed Howitzer: 36
BL 5.5 inch (140mm) Towed Gun: (* 34 guns retired in 1984 but some likely held in storage)
L118 (Hamel) 105mm Towed Gun: 111
M2A2 105mm Towed Howitzer: 142 (* most held in storage)
Model 56 (L5) 105mm Pack Howitzer: (* 20 guns retired in 1992 but some likely held in storage)
Air Defence
Rapier SAM Launcher: 20
RBS-70 Portable SAM Launcher: 19
Engineer Vehicle
BPz-2 ARV: 6
BRPz-1 Biber AVLB: 5
Infantry Support Weapons
L16 81mm Mortar: 294
MILAN Anti-Tank Missile Launcher: 12
M-40A1 106mm Recoilless Rifle: 68
Carl Gustav 84mm Recoilless Rifle: 597
Aircraft
GAF N-22B Nomad Light STOL Aircraft: 13
PC-6 Light STOL Aircraft: 14
UH-1H Bushranger (armed) Helicopter: 6
UH-1H Helicopter: (* as many as 40 still operational or held in reserve)
S-70 Helicopter: 39
AS-350 Squirrel Light Helicopter: 18
OH-58 Light Helicopter: 44 (* probably more held in reserve)
Marine Craft
LCM-8 Landing Craft: 16
LARC-5 Amphibious Cargo Vehicle: 85
Ordinance:
MILAN Anti-Tank Missile: 120 delivered
M712 Copperhead Guided Shell: 100 delivered
Rapier-1 SAM Missile: 570 delivered
RBS-70 SAM Missile: 100 delivered


Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF)

Manpower: 22,100 (with 1,500 in Reserves)

The RAAF was a better trained and equipped air force than all of its neighbours in South-East Asia, and was supported by the US who gave it access to first class American aircraft and ordinance. In the early 1990's the RAAF bought F-111G (FB-111A) strike bombers which gave it a near strategic strike capability with a range of at least 4,000 nm with drop tanks. The F-111G could strike anywhere in Papua New Guinea and the Indonesian archipelago from the Northern Territory, and theoretically as far north as the south coast of China. The F/A-18 was also superior to any fighter used by Asian air forces at this time with the exception of Japan.

The RAAF had a large number of air bases located across Australia of which 13 (Richmond, Williamstown (NSW), Darwin, Tindal (NT), Amberley, Scherger, Townsville (QLD), Edinburgh, Woomera (SA), East Sale (VIC), and Curtin, Pearce, Learmonth (WA)) had asphalt runways with a length of at least 2,000 metres. This allowed transports in the C-5 Galaxy and Boeing 747 Freighter class and also US strategic bombers to safely take off and land from them. There were also 35 civilian airports with runways over 2,000 metres including some in remote locations in the Northern Territory and Western Australia. RAAF Tindal Base in the Northern Territory was the main operational base for air missions north of the Australian mainland, being located outside of the cyclone zone and easy to defend.

Combat Aircraft
F-111G Strike Bomber: 15
F-111C Strike Bomber: 18 (* held in storage or retired)
RF-111C Recon: 4
F/A-18A/B Hornet Fighter/Attack: 75 (* 13 held in storage)
A-4K Skyhawk 2 Fighter/Attack: 6 (* leased from New Zealand)
MB-326H Light Attack: 16
Support Aircraft
PC-3C Orion Marine Patrol: 20
Boeing 707 Tanker: 4
C-130E Hercules Transport: 12
C-130H Hercules Transport: 12
Boeing 707 Transport: 2
DHC-4 Transport: 23
BAC-III VIP Transport: 2
BAE 748 VIP Transport: 2
Dassault Falcon-900 VIP Transport: 4
GAF N-22B Nomad Light STOL Aircraft: 2
Training Aircraft
MB-326H Advanced Trainer: 60
BAE 748 T2 Trainer: 8
PC-9 Trainer: 67
CT-4/4A Trainer: 48 (* some held in storage)
Helicopter
CH-47C Transport Helicopter: 12 (* all held in storage)
Air Ordinance
AGM-84A Harpoon AS Missile: (* used by F/A-18, F-111G and P-3C Orion)
AGM-142A Popeye-1 AS Missile: 51 on order (* for F-111G)
AIM-7M Sparrow BVRAA Missile: 300 delivered
AIM-9L Sidewinder SRAA Missile: 450 delivered
ASRAAM BVRAA Missile: 400 on order
BLU-109 2,000 Ib Hardened Penetrator Bomb (* used by F-111G)
GBU-10 Paveway II 2,000 Ib Laser Guided Bomb: 100 delivered (* used by F-111G)
GBU-12 Paveway II 500 Ib Laser Guided Bomb: 100 delivered
GBU-15 Paveway 2,000 Ib Laser Guided Bomb: 100 delivered (* used by F-111G)
Mark 82 500 Ib General Purpose Bomb
Mark 83 1,000 Ib General Purpose Bomb
Mark 84 2,000 Ib General Purpose Bomb (* used by F-111G)
R-550 Magic-1 SRAA Missile: 550 delivered (* held in storage or retired)


Royal Australian Navy (RAN)

Manpower: 15,700 (with 26,000 in Reserves)

Naval Bases
Fleet Base East: Sydney, NSW
Fleet Base West: Garden Island, WA
HMAS Albatross: Nowra, NSW (* Naval air station)
HMAS Cairns: Cairns, QLD
HMAS Coonawarra: Darwin, NT

The RAN had grown closer to the US since the Second World War, and particularly since the British withdrawal East of Aden in the 1970's. The US had also largely replaced Britain as Australia's principle arms supplier including ships and naval weapons before the Twilight War. The last RAN aircraft carrier HMAS Melbourne was retired in 1982 and Australia had planned to buy the British HMS Invincible to replace it, but the outbreak of the Falklands War led to Britain retaining all of its carriers. The RAN retained an interest in carrier aviation and leased a number of New Zealand A-4K Skyhawk to train RAN pilots in jet aircraft in the 1990's, but nothing ever came of it before the start of the Twilight War.

The RAN has a number of other small bases and communication and training establishments in the Sydney area, Canberra and Melbourne. The former small RAN bases in Adelaide, Brisbane and Hobart that closed in the early 1990's are likely to be still active in T2K. The RAN would also have access to New Zealand naval bases, Papua New Guinea naval facilities at Port Moresby, Milne Bay, Manus Island and Los Negros Island, and the British naval base at Hong Kong and facilities on the British island territory of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. The Australian refugee and illegal immigrant detention centres at Christmas Island in the Indian Ocean and Nauru in the Pacific Ocean might also be relevant to the RAN.

Submarine
Collins Class Submarine: 1 (* 2 more under construction, 3 more planned)
Oberon Class Submarine: 5 (* 1 held in reserve)
Principle Surface Combatants
Adams Class Destroyer: 3
ANZAC Class Frigate: 2 (* 1 more under construction, 5 more planned)
Leander Class Frigate: 2 (* 2 held in reserve)
Perry Class Frigate: 6
Patrol and Coastal Combatants
Attack Class Patrol Boat: 2 (* 2 held in reserve)
Fremantle Class Patrol Boat: 15
Mine Warfare
Bay Class Mine Hunter: 2
Huon Class Mine Hunter: (* 6 under construction)
Bandicoot Class Minesweeper Auxiliary: 2
Brolga Class Minesweeper Auxiliary: 2
Amphibious
Kanimbla Class LST: 2
Tobruk Class LSH: 1
Balikpapan Class LCT: 8
Support Ships
Success Class AOR: 1
Westralia Class Tanker: 1
Protector Class Support Vessel: 1
Leeuwin Class Survey Vessel: (* 2 under construction)
Other Miscellaneous Vessel: 7
Fleet Air Arm
BAE-748 Trainer: 2
SH-60B ASW Helicopter: 16
Sea King Mk 50 ASW Helicopter: 8 (* held in reserve)
OH-58 Light Helicopter: 3
AS-350B Light Helicopter: 6
Naval Ordinance
AGM-84A Harpoon AS Missile: 229 (* some used by RAAF F/A-18, F-111G and P-3C Orion)
RIM-7P Sea Sparrow SR SAM: 32 delivered
RIM-66B Standard-1 MR SAM Missile: 540 delivered
Mark 46 ASW Torpedo: 200 delivered
Mark 46 Mod-5 NEARTIP ASW Torpedo: 100 delivered
Mark 48 ASW Torpedo: 100
Mark 48 Mod-4 ASW Torpedo: 20 delivered
Mark 54 ASW Torpedo: (* used on RAN surface ships and helicopters)
MU90 ASW Torpedo: (*used on RAN surface ships and helicopters)


Bureau of Customs

Patrol and Coastal Combatants
Bay Class Patrol Boat: (* 8 planned)
Patrol Boat: 6
Aircraft
GAF N-22B Searchmaster Marine Patrol: 10


Foreign Forces in Australia
US personnel (270 USAF and 450 US Navy) at NW Cape, Pine Gap and Nurrungar
New Zealand personnel (RNZAF training)

[Rainbow Six]

A third Brigade, mainly made up of British troops could round out the Division which would probably be under British command. This last brigade may be under strength right from the beginning, or keep the Gurkas with them and leave the Canadian/NZ brigade weaker. As the Korean front appears to be an extension of the 1950's war, it's highly likely to be a UN operation I think, so that final brigade could also be rounded out with the contributions of smaller nations (might even see companies from places like Samoa, South Africa, Philippines, even France might have a presence.

Just my rambling thoughts. Feel free to pull it apart.

A full British Brigade that's canon compliant is theoretically possible. Parking the Worcestershire and Sherwood Foresters to one side, the other Regular Infantry Battalions that are not included in the canon orbat per the NATO Vehicle Guide (V1) and the Survivor's Guide to the United Kingdom are all Guards Battalions.

• 2nd Battalion, Grenadier Guards
• 1st Battalion, Coldstream Guards
• 1st Battalion, Scots Guards
• 2nd Battalion, Scots Guards
• 1st Battalion, Irish Guards

(That's based on the pre 1991 orbat - 2/Grenadiers and 2/Scots were both placed into suspended animation at the end of the Cold War)

I suppose you could use any of them. The canon orbat for the British Army is a mess that bears only the faintest resemblance to late 80's real life planning. Putting a couple of Guards Battalions into Korea, while not particularly realistic imho, isn't going to make it any worse than it already is.

The alternative would be to use the Territorial Army (the British equivalent of the Army Reserve / National Guard for those unfamiliar with the term). GDW completely ignored the TA (I refer to my comment above) so you'd have a free hand in which units to allocate (IRL all TA Infantry Battalions were assigned to either Home Defence or BAOR reinforcement roles - the 2nd UK Division should have been 1 x Regular Brigade and 2 x TA Brigades - but I think there could maybe be a case for a couple of Battalions being retasked to other operations, e.g. Korea).

[Legbreaker]

Thanks. All very useful input.

Just had a thought a moment ago that I'll probably need to include some basic information on the leadership, so with that in mind I'd love the Australian and New Zealander ex and currently serving soldiers, seamen and airmen to give me a few names of the officers they served under which might have come to prominence during the period.
For myself my old battalion commander and RSM spring to mind as people of importance, as well as the father of my company clerk - he was a recently retired DSM in 94 who could have been drawn back in.

[Targan]

I look forward to seeing what you come up with in the way of an ANZAC sourcebook for T2K, Leg. It might go some way to restoring my love for the game (which unfortunately has been largely gone for some time now).

[Olefin]

What I had for the Ceylon peacekeeping force was the following in the East African Sourcebook

A Company, 6th Battalion, The Royal Australian Regiment – Malindi
• Manpower: 105 men
• Vehicles: four Land Rovers, five Jeeps

Australia had sent troops to Ceylon in 1993 as part of the peace keeping mission there. By 1995 they had been reduced to two infantry companies who were then cut off there with the outbreak of hostilities. During the next four years they fought rebels and Italian and Greek soldiers who were there as part of the mission. Finally in 1999 the surviving troops left on several commandeered sailing dhows and tried to make it to friendly forces. After a long and arduous voyage they were spotted by a patrol craft and were brought to Mombasa.

The survivors were regrouped as a single company and were re-armed using captured Tanzanian small arms, machine guns and mortars. Now under British Army command, they have been tasked with supporting local Kenyan Police in Malindi and the area surrounding the city as well as the garrisoning of the San Marco Equatorial Range, which is an orbital launch platform previously used by Italy and is one of the few operational satellite communications stations still left in the world.

[Legbreaker]

What I had for the Ceylon peacekeeping force was the following in the East African Sourcebook

A Company, 6th Battalion, The Royal Australian Regiment – Malindi

A Coy (along with B and C Coy) at that time were a reservist unit mostly made up of uni students on their gap year. There's absolutely no way they'd have been deployed. Only D Coy were regular troops.
Absolutely the wrong unit to send.

[Rockwolf66]

I have to wonder what the Australian Special operations were up to?

That and would Australians form Civilian defense units?

I know that Mad Max is fiction but what would the Marauders be like? I know that you have had some issues with Bikies. Here in the US we hear about their homemade submachineguns and them stealing a half dozen LAW rockets.

[Legbreaker]

Well we know there's a small group of SAS in Poland. Why though, we have absolutely no idea.

No, there would be no paramilitary type units at all. Local army reserve units would fill that role. Those people who tried forming their own CDL type groups would be treated as marauders.

Bikies aren't really as big an issue as the media portrays them. 20 or so years ago a handful of M72's were taken and found their way into the hands of criminals, but that was due to somebody already in the military having sticky fingers. As for the home made firearms, I'm sure there's more of them made just in Florida than in the whole of Australia. Police here have be caught out photoshopping pictures of seized firearms - duplicating rifles, etc in the picture, calling magazines, bayonets, even empty magazine pouches and pistol holsters firearms!

[Jason Weiser]

The target list I cooked up a while ago, use as appropriate.

[Legbreaker]

Thanks. Just had a quick look so far but already saw some questionable targeting such as Richmond - it's C-130's and not much else. I lived and worked in and around it for a few years, it's just not worth nuking.
Meanwhile Williamtown at Newcastle where the majority of the F/A-18s were actually based (along with HQ and training) isn't on the list.
That said, by the time nukes were used, I'm fairly certain all Australia's combat air assets would have already been deployed.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Thanks. Just had a quick look so far but already saw some questionable targeting such as Richmond - it's C-130's and not much else. I lived and worked in and around it for a few years, it's just not worth nuking.
Meanwhile Williamtown at Newcastle where the majority of the F/A-18s were actually based (along with HQ and training) isn't on the list.
That said, by the time nukes were used, I'm fairly certain all Australia's combat air assets would have already been deployed.

Definitely, those Hercs probably wouldn't all be at Richmond either, they would have been deployed northwards to assist with the operations in Papua New Guinea. Not all of them, but probably at least half of them would be away from base making Richmond even less attractive as a nuke target.

As for Williamtown, the majority of the Hornets would have been deployed to the various dispersal bases around the top end of Australia probably well in advance of any attack against Williamtown.

But as mentioned by Leg, the majority of Australian airpower would have already been damaged or destroyed beforehand. I'm inclined to believe that use of nuclear weapons against Australia would be more to deny base facilities (e.g. ports) to UK/US forces in the Indo-Pacific region. With that in mind, use against Australian military facilties would be limited to those bases that directly supported UK/US military operations.

As a potential (and very small) boost to the remaining military aircraft, it's possible the RAN (or even the RAAF) might take control of the half-dozen or so Grumman S-2 Trackers that were still in Australia. They had been retired in the mid 1980s and a small number were still in storage and awaiting disposal by the early 1990s. At that time there were still people in Australia with experience flying and servicing these aircraft (either still in RAN service, retired from the RAN or transferred to the RAAF).
But we are talking about three maybe four at most and they would probably be used as light bombers simply because there would be no ASW stores left for them to use (and more importantly, very few/no RAN vessels capable of supporting them in the ASW role).

A side note on those A-4 Skyhawks mentioned as being leased from New Zealand. They were used as OpFor for air force training as well as for land based air defence training.
Some of them were actually A-4G models that had been in service with the RAN fleet air arm and then sold to New Zealand (who upgraded them to A-4K standard).
In the early 2000s, the majority of the New Zealand Skyhawks were sold to a US company who also used them as aggressor aircraft.

[Olefin]

A Coy (along with B and C Coy) at that time were a reservist unit mostly made up of uni students on their gap year. There's absolutely no way they'd have been deployed. Only D Coy were regular troops.
Absolutely the wrong unit to send.

Perfect that is exactly the information that I need - definitely want to make the unit realistic - so could easily switch the units - basically it would be an amalgamation of the two companies that remained into one single company - so what would have been the most likely units?

I picked the 6th Battalion, The Royal Australian Regiment at random but obviously I had the wrong battalion - so what would have been the better battalion to have drawn those companies from originally?

[Legbreaker]

1 and 2/4 RAR, perhaps 3 if you want a parachute battalion. 5/7 RAR for a Mechanised Battalion.
The rest all have at least elements of reservists in them and should probably be treated more as training units rather than operational.
I'd probably leave 1 RAR out of it though as IRL they were the most heavily deployed unit at the time.

[Ewan]

I'm really looking forward to purchasing the sourcebook when it comes out.

In the GDW Bangkok sourcebook it mentions on page 18 that "Merchants affiliated with a triad or the yakuza will take US and Australian dollars ($1=A$2)".

It also mentions on page 31 that "Although severely disrupted by the war, trade has begun to return to Southeast Asia, and Thialand has several exports which it sends to its neighbours in Burma, Laos, and Vietnam as well as to ports farther afield in Indonesia, Singapore, Malaya, and (increasingly) western Australia."

[RN7]

In the 1990's Indonesia bought a lot of surplus East German equipment from the German government, primarily ships and aircraft. In Twilight 2000 this would not have happened so I didn't include any former East German equipment that Indonesia had at this time,

Indonesia Army

Manpower: 215,000 (with 800,000 Reserves)
Available Manpower: 24,283,000 males aged between 18-32) (* in mid-1990's)

The Indonesian Army had a confusing organisation. KOSTRAD was the regular army, and the KODAM forces were territorial forces that included reserves. Most operational army units are controlled through the KODAMS. These territorial units account for the bulk of the army’s personnel. The territorial system deploys army units at every level of the civilian government structure: Korem (Garrison Command), Kodim (District Command), Koramil (Subdistrict Command), and non-commissioned officers resident in the country’s villages. The territorial system is the least professional element of the army and had the lowest priority for equipment, manpower and training.

The army’s best combat units were the Strategic Reserve (KOSTRAD). KOSTRAD had about 30,000 personnel in two divisions and an airborne brigade, and was the largest operational command in the armed forces. However it had minimal organic logistics capability and its units obtained most of their logistical support from the territorial military regional commands in whose geographic area they were deployed, which limiting its ability to deploy independently for long periods to remote areas.

The Special Forces Command (KOPASSUS) has three special warfare groups and an elite counterterrorism unit (Unit 81). The KOPASSUS has a strength of about 10,000 personnel and is divided into three groups, consisting of two para-commando units, one intelligence unit, eight counter-terrorist units, and one training unit. The units have rapid reaction capability and often deployed to hotspots, generally in teams of 50 men or fewer. Traditionally KOPASSUS had links with the Australian and British SAS regiments and the US Army Special Forces.

Recruits train for 3 months with their local KODAM training regiment. Specialists and technicians attend centralized corps schools. NCO candidates undergo 5 months of promotion training at their Kodam training regiment. Officer recruits selected for the Military Academy (Akmil) first undertake basic training as soldiers. The academic component of officer training is increasingly stressed, and many officers leave Akmil with an undergraduate degree. Officers are also recruited from university and other vocational graduates who undertake a 20 week course at Akmil. An additional source of officer recruitment is from the ranks, with one year of training at officer cadet schools. During the 1990s, the army benefited from training links and exercises with the Singapore, Australian, British and US armies. Many of those training opportunities were lost when the United States and Australia ended many training programs in the wake of the East Timor violence in 1998.

Organisation
Strategic Reserve (KOSTRAD)
2 infantry division HQ
3 infantry brigade (9 battalion)
3 airborne brigade (9 battalion)
2 field artillery regiment (6 battalion)
1 air defence regiment (2 battalion)
2 engineer regiment

Military Area Command (KODAM)
10 military area commands (provisional (KOREM) and district (KORIM))
65 infantry battalion (including 4 airborne)
8 cavalry battalion
8 field artillery battalion
8 air defence battalion
8 engineer battalion
1 aviation squadron
1 helicopter squadron
Special Forces Group (KOPASSUS)
3 special forces groups

KOPASSUS Organisation
Group 1 (combat) : Serang, West Java
Group 2 (combat): Kartasura, Central Java
Group 3 (intelligence and covert operations): Jakarta, Java
Unit 81 (counterterrorism): Jakarta, Java
Training Centre: Batijajar, West Java

Equipment
Light Tank
AMX-13 (105mm gun): 125
PT-76 (76.2mm gun): 30
Armoured Vehicles
AMX-VCI APC: 200
BTR-40 APC: 140
BTR-50 APC: 25
Commando Ranger APC: 20
Commando Scout (20mm cannon) scout car: 28
Ferret scout car: 45
Saladin (76mm gun) armoured car: 60
Saracen APC: 45
V-150 Commando APC: 240
Artillery
AMX Mk 61 Self Propelled 105mm Gun: 50
M-101A1 105mm Towed Howitzer: 170
M-30 122mm Towed Howitzer: 20
M-48 76.2mm Towed Mountain Gun: 95
M-56 105mm Towed Howitzer: 10
Air Defence
Bofors L/70 40mm AA Gun: 90
Rapier SAM Launcher: 21
RBS-70 Portable SAM Launcher: 42
Rh-202 20mm AA Gun: 125
S-60 57mm AA Gun: 200
Infantry Support Weapons
M20A1B1 89mm Recoilless Rifle: 90
M29 81mm Mortar: 800
M-40A1 106mm Recoilless Rifle: 45
MO-120-RT 120mm Mortar: 75
SS-11 Anti-Tank Missile Launcher: 40
Aircraft
Bell 205 Helicopter: 12
Bell-412 Helicopter: 10
BO 105C Helicopter: 13
BN-2 Islander Communications Aircraft: 1
C-47 Dakota Transport: 2
C-212 STOL Transport: 4
Cessna 310 Light STOL: 2
DHC-5 VIP Transport: 3
Gulfstream 695 Commander Communications Aircraft: 1
Hughes 300C Light Helicopter: 10
Rockwell Commander 680FL STOL Transport: 2
Marine Craft
LST: 1
LCU: 20
Naval Transports: 14
Ordinance
Rapier SAM Missile: 300 delivered
RBS-70 SAM Missiles: 150 delivered
SS-11 Anti-Tank Missile: 500 delivered

Infantry Weapons
9mm Beretta M12 Sub-Machine Gun
5.56mm FN-FNC Assault Rifle
5.56mm M16A1 Assault Rifle
7.62mm Beretta BM59 Assault Rifle
7.62mm vz/52/57 Assault Rifle
5.56mm Minimi Light Machine Gun
7.62mm FN MAG General-Purpose Machine Gun
7.62mm M60 General-Purpose Machine Gun
12.7mm DShK Heavy Machine Gun
0.50in Browning M2HB Heavy Machine Gun
M18 57mm Recoilless Rifle
M79 40mm Grenade Launcher
M203 40mm Grenade Launch


Indonesian Air Force

Manpower: 25,000

The Indonesian air force included two operations commands (Koops I and II, administering air bases and operational units in western and eastern areas of the archipelago, respectively), and the special forces (ground defense), education and maintenance commands. Koops 1 and II directs the air force's various roles and supports the army and navy. Since the 1980s the air force has gradually moved more of its combat forces to forward locations outside Java, and in particular to three locations.

1) Pekanbaru Air Base in Sumatra’s Riau Province, supporting operations in Aceh and over the adjacent Malacca Strait
2) Supadio Air Base at Pontianak in West Kalimantan provides aircover for the important offshore Natuna gas field
3) Hasanuddin Air Base at Makassar in South Sulawesi supports a major KOSTRAD presence and serves as the main air force presence in the country’s eastern provinces

Organisation
2 fighter/ground attack squadrons (A-4E/H, F-16A/B)
1 fighter squadron (F-5E/F)
2 COIN squadron (Hawk Mk.53 and OV-10F)
1 marine patrol squadron
1 tanker flight
4 transport squadron
3 helicopter squadron
4 training squadron
5 airfield defence battalions

Equipment
F-16A/B Fighter/Attack: 12
A-4E/H Attack: 28
F-5E/F Fighter: 14
Hawk Mk.53 COIN: 24
OV-10F COIN: 12
Boeing 737-200 marine patrol: 3
C-130H-MP marine patrol: 2
KC-130B tanker: 2
C-47 Dakota transport: 9
C-130B transport: 9
C-130H transport: 3
C-130H-30 transport: 7
F-27-400M transport: 7
C-212 STOL transport: 10
Boeing 707 passenger transport: 1
F-28-1000 passenger transport: 1
Cessna 401/402 light transport: 7
Skyvan survey: 1
Sikorsky H-34 transport helicopter: 12
SA330 Puma transport helicopter: 13
UH-1B helicopter: 2
Alouette III light helicopter: 3
Bo-105 light helicopter: 12
Bell 206 light helicopter: 2
Trainer aircraft: 80
Air Ordinance
AGM-65 Maverick AS Missile: 50 delivered
AIM-9J Sidewinder SRAA Missile: 100 delivered
AIM-9P Sidewinder SRAA Missile: 75 delivered
Mark 82 500 Ib General Purpose Bomb
Mark 83 1,000 Ib General Purpose Bomb


Indonesian Navy

Manpower: 42,000 (including 1,000 naval air arm and 12,000 Marines)

The Indonesian Navy was a large force that was necessary as Indonesia is a collection of islands. Training standards and equipment were below Western standards and especially the Australians, but were improving. Indonesia bought some submarines from West Germany and surplus missile frigates from the Netherlands in the 1990's. The navy played a central role in defending the Indonesian archipelago. In peacetime, the navy polices Indonesian waters to counter maritime poaching, smuggling, and piracy, and supports the army internal security operations. The navy performs most coast guard functions, but the Department of Transport's Sea Communications Agency includes a Maritime Security Agency that operates some search and rescue and harbor patrol craft. In wartime the navy, acting in conjunction with the air force, is expected to interdict invading forces as far as possible from Indonesian territory and mount defensive operations.

The Navy is organised into two operational commands and three functional commands. The operational commands are regionally oriented, with the defense responsibility for national waters divided between Eastern Fleet and the Western Fleet. The Eastern Fleet is headquartered in Surabaya in East Java, with other bases at Manado in the Celebes and Ambon in the Moluccas. The Western Fleet is headquartered in Jakarta, with other bases in Sabang in Sumatra and Tanjung Pinang on Riau Island. The three functional commands are the Naval Training Command, including a naval academy located at Surabaya, Military Sealift Command, and the Marine Corps. Each fleet includes main naval bases, support naval bases, naval observer posts, and two operational components: a combat command and a maritime security command. The maritime security commands oversee maritime law enforcement

Submarines
Cakra Class (Type 209/1300) submarine: 2
Principle Surface Combatants
Van Speijk Class Missile Frigate: 6
Ashanti Class Frigate: 3
Claud Jones Class Frigate
Fatahillah Class Frigate: 3
Hajar Dewantara Class Frigate: 1
Patrol and Coastal Combatants
Mandau Class Fast Attack Missile Craft: 4
Attack Class Patrol Craft: 8
Bima Samundera Class Patrol Craft: 5
Singa Class Torpedo Craft: 2
Tongkak Class Patrol Craft: 3
Yug Kraljevica Class Patrol Craft: 3
Mine Warfare
Pulau Rengat Class Minehunter: 2
Amphibious
Teluk Semangka Class LST (200 troops, 17 tanks): 6
Teluk Amboina Class LST (200 troops, 16 tanks): 1
Teluk Langsa Class LST (200 troops, 16 tanks): 7
LCU: 4
LCM: 20
LCVP: 20
Support Ships
Surong Class AOR: 1
Other Ships: 17
Naval Aviation
N22B Searchmaster Marine Patrol: 12
N22 SL Searchmaster Marine Patrol: 6
HU-16B Albatross Flying Boat: 4
C-212 Aviocar Transport: 4
Aero Commander 100 Training: 6
PA-38 Tomahawk Training: 6
AS 332L Super Puma Transport Helicopter: 9
Bo-105C Light Helicopter: 4
HAS.1 Wasp ASW Helicopter: 9
Alouette-III Light Helicopter: 2
Naval Ordinance
AGM-84 Harpoon AS Missile: 32 delivered
MM-38 Exocet AS Missile: 60 delivered
Mistral Portable SAM Missile: 120 delivered
Sea Cat SAM Missile: 110 delivered
SS-N-2 AS Missile: 25 delivered

The Indonesian Marine Corps (KORMAR) had a strength of 12,000 personnel and were organised into 2 infantry brigades of 6 battalions and 1 combat support regiment with tank, reconnaissance, artillery, air defence and landing craft battalions. The 1st Marine Corp Group included the 1st, 3rd and 5th Battalions and the Combat Support Regiment and is based in Surabaya to cover Indonesia’s eastern region. The Independent Marine Corps Brigade with the 2nd, 4th and 6th Battalions is based in Jakarta to cover the central region. Indonesia plans to eventually double the size of the Marine Corps, which has led to friction with the army over funding, resources and influence. The army wants the Marine Corps to move out of Jakarta to curtail its security role in the Indonesian capital. There have been plans to move the Independent Marine Brigade from Jakarta to Surabaya, and the 1st Marine Corps Group headquarters from Surabaya to Makassar (Sulawesi). But it has been delayed for years due to inter-service rivalry between the army and navy.

Equipment
PT-76 (76.2mm gun) Light Tank: 80
AMX-10 PAC-90 (90mm gun) armoured car: 10
BRDM-1 Scout Car: 20
AMX-10P APC: 25
BTR-50P APC: 75
LG-1 105mm Towed Howitzer: 20
M-30 122mm Towed Howitzer: 40
BM-14 140mm Multiple Rocket Launcher: 24
Bofors L/70 40mm AA Gun: 40

Paramilitary

The Indonesian national police force (INP) numbered 180,000 in the mid-1990's and was expanding in size. The INP is controlled from Jakarta headquarters and each province has a subordinate headquarters in major urban areas (Polwil) and at district (Polres) and sub-district (Polres) levels. The INP is organized along functional lines, with divisions responsible for intelligence and security, criminal investigations, routine patrol work, traffic and community liaison. The INP also controls the paramilitary Mobile Brigade (Brimob) which has around 15,000 personnel. Brimob units are routinely accused of human-rights abuses and serve in a gendarmerie role. The INP also controls the counter insurgency GEGANA unit. The INP also has its own air wing of 11 light aircraft and 13 helicopters (10 Bo-105 and 3 Bell 206), and a marine unit with 25 small patrol craft.

Other para-military forces include 1.5 million strong KAMRA (People's Security) that was an unarmed part-time police auxiliary. The Customs Police, Marine Security Agency and Transport Ministry also controlled a marine force of 85 small patrol craft and 28 LCU.

[Jason Weiser]

Thanks. Just had a quick look so far but already saw some questionable targeting such as Richmond - it's C-130's and not much else. I lived and worked in and around it for a few years, it's just not worth nuking.
Meanwhile Williamtown at Newcastle where the majority of the F/A-18s were actually based (along with HQ and training) isn't on the list.
That said, by the time nukes were used, I'm fairly certain all Australia's combat air assets would have already been deployed.

I would take the military targeting with a grain of salt, as for the political and economic base, I think it's pretty dead on. I had to pick weapons with the RANGE to reach Australia from the Soviet Union, or just grab random sub based weapons and assume they got past the RAN to launch a missile or two. I am assuming no Soviet aircraft launched on Australia due again, to the distances involved, that and they were probably being used to flatten targets in Japan and China.

[Legbreaker]

Yes, the economics aren't too bad. I'll be looking at likely missiles and number of warheads and adding subtracting from there I think. My guess is ABMs rather than sub launched missiles - it's a long way to send a sub which might be better utilised elsewhere.
Australian strikes though are most likely an afterthought. Australia wasn't directly involved in any of the major fronts (besides a presence in Korea which is arguably a UN conflict), and the country is on the other side of the globe to just about everywhere too. Not exactly convenient for your warships to drop in for repairs, and very unlikely for there to be any exports of significance due to lack of fuel, limited production capacity, and Australia's own internal needs.

[dylan]

Russians at Cam Ranh Bay? (including bombers) Would northern Australia be a target for them?

In our real timeline, Russian bombers (Bears) operated out of Biak airport in Indonesian Papua last year.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Russians at Cam Ranh Bay? (including bombers) Would northern Australia be a target for them?

In our real timeline, Russian bombers (Bears) operated out of Biak airport in Indonesian Papua last year.

I think they would be more involved with the Soviet effort against China. If any air or naval assets survived that conflict, they might be a potential problem for Australia but they would still have to survive the journey from Vietnam to any target in Australia. For example, it's about 3600km (2237 miles) from Cam Ranh Bay to Darwin (in the Northern Territory).

[Legbreaker]

And that's 3,600km through potentially hostile airspace, just to hit a target in a country which isn't even technically at war with the USSR.

[RN7]

Russians at Cam Ranh Bay? (including bombers) Would northern Australia be a target for them?

In our real timeline, Russian bombers (Bears) operated out of Biak airport in Indonesian Papua last year.

The Tu-22M Backfire has the range to hit Northern Australia from Vietnam, but the RAAF could also hit them back with a F-111G strike in this period.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

The Tu-22M Backfire has the range to hit Northern Australia from Vietnam, but the RAAF could also hit them back with a F-111G strike in this period.
And this is also the same time period where the RAAF was finally in possession of inflight refuelling tankers.

At the time, the B707 aircraft we had were not fitted with the tail boom refuelling probe that would be required by the F-111's because it was felt that the FA-18's needed the range increase allowed by inflight refuelling more than the F-111's did.
By way of comparison, the RAAF FA-18A with a 4000lb weapons load and 6000lbs of external fuel had a strike range of approximately 1020km while the RAAF F-111A/C with the same 4000lb load and no external fuel had a strike range of 2040km.
Info taken from here: - http://ausairpower.net/raaf-707.html

While the tail boom probe was not part of the modification, it was studied as part of the options for inflight refuelling. It's always possible that we could get technical/engineering help from the UK & USA if an urgent requirement for inflight refuelling of the F-111's was found and the modification to the B707's could be carried out in Australia.

[RN7]

And this is also the same time period where the RAAF was finally in possession of inflight refuelling tankers.

At the time, the B707 aircraft we had were not fitted with the tail boom refuelling probe that would be required by the F-111's because it was felt that the FA-18's needed the range increase allowed by inflight refuelling more than the F-111's did.
By way of comparison, the RAAF FA-18A with a 4000lb weapons load and 6000lbs of external fuel had a strike range of approximately 1020km while the RAAF F-111A/C with the same 4000lb load and no external fuel had a strike range of 2040km.
Info taken from here: - http://ausairpower.net/raaf-707.html

While the tail boom probe was not part of the modification, it was studied as part of the options for inflight refuelling. It's always possible that we could get technical/engineering help from the UK & USA if an urgent requirement for inflight refuelling of the F-111's was found and the modification to the B707's could be carried out in Australia.


Australia bought 4 air refuelling systems from Israel between 1991-1992 for the modification of 4 Boeing-707 transport aircraft to tanker/transport aircraft. 15 F-111G (FB-111A) were also bought from America second hand in 1993-1994 to replace the shorter ranged F-111C.

[Legbreaker]

A useful document I came across a few years ago which will go a long way towards figuring out what the spark was that ignited the Indonesia/Australia conflict.
4164

[Olefin]

FYI have some info for you on font sizes from the old GDW publications - check your messages

[Legbreaker]

Anyone got any thoughts on giving Australian and New Zealand an "On the Beach" sort of vibe?
The first half of the movie, rather than the inevitable death towards the end.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0053137/
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0219224/

[Olefin]

I dont see it being quite like "On the Beach" - the war wasnt that bad - even the first half before the "everyone dies" second half

[Legbreaker]

I don't think so either, just looking about for ideas as without the war directly impacting the Australian mainland, it's hard to figure out what impact it would have had on a day to day basis. I'm thinking of pulling ideas and elements from there and similar stories such as Testament, Outbreak, and Panic In The Year Zero!
One idea I'm toying with is hitting the major urban areas with some sort of plague or bioweapon and adding in famine due to lack of fuel to shift grain and other produce to where it's needed most. Quarantine areas get set up, but due to the sprawling nature of Australian cities and limited manpower to patrol them, they're about as effective as flyscreen windows in a submarine.

[Olefin]

"Panic In The Year Zero" - always loved that movie

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I think the way society is portrayed in the first Mad Max movie would be suitable for those areas still under government control but I also think that The Rover is even better for that aspect.

[Legbreaker]

I see those two fitting the more remote areas actually.

[rcaf_777]

The target list I cooked up a while ago, use as appropriate.

Curious what the justification for Australia being nuked? Is this a case of it twilight so everything was was nuked?

Australia during twilight dose not have the capability to operate beyond his island independently, it dose not have troops in Europe. While is it might supporting China with material it dose not have large numbers of troops outside of the country.

Guessing the oil refineries where added cause? The US might use them?

that dose not make sense to me, maybe its just me

[Legbreaker]

The oil refineries Australia does have aren't actually suited to processing the oil we have, and are located far from the oil fields anyway. The bulk of the crude processed in Australia is shipped in from elsewhere, while the oil produced mostly ends up in Asia.
https://www.aip.com.au/resources/australian-crude-production-and-refining

The refineries really can't be the reason for any nukes.

[rcaf_777]

The oil refineries Australia does have aren't actually suited to processing the oil we have, and are located far from the oil fields anyway. The bulk of the crude processed in Australia is shipped in from elsewhere, while the oil produced mostly ends up in Asia.
https://www.aip.com.au/resources/australian-crude-production-and-refining

The refineries really can't be the reason for any nukes.

That what I thought too, I found this tool that shows Australia Crude Oil Consumption by Year. (https://www.indexmundi.com/energy/?country=au&graph=consumption&product=oil) in 1998 Australia consumed 852,000 Barrels of oil, while producing 862,0000 Barrels. Which in theory is just enough to cover consumption is a very small surplus.

I also don't think that the Soviets have enough missiles left in Asia with the range to hit Australian targets. Best option is a Ballistic Sub Launched Missiles and then I would only have one sub attacking ports that the US could use.

[Olefin]

I would think that the only nuke targets that the Soviets might - and this is a big might - go after would be their intelligence gathering and satellite tracking stations - other than that I really dont see them nuking Australia - on the other hand the Indonesian oil fields or refineries might be a real target

[Legbreaker]

I would think that the only nuke targets that the Soviets might - and this is a big might - go after would be their intelligence gathering and satellite tracking stations - other than that I really don't see them nuking Australia - on the other hand the Indonesian oil fields or refineries might be a real target

Even those targets are problematic really with facilities WIDELY dispersed and only staffed with perhaps a few hundred people. Conventional warheads or covert action may be more suitable.

Not sure about Indonesian targets. Doubtful they could be considered neutral and given the ANZUS treaty (yes, even without New Zealand) the US would technically be at war with Indonesia, even if they weren't able to actually send any soldiers or equipment. It's possible the US or even the UK nuked Indonesia, but I really can't see the advantage in doing that - Nato don't have any significant opponents anywhere near the area to potentially use the oil.

The whole region is proving somewhat difficult to depopulate and destroy. Fairly sure though that I'll send something like the Spanish Flu through and add in a few natural disasters to damage infrastructure. Most of Australia is prone to bushfires and/or flooding, both of which are difficult enough to handle in peace time, while parts of Indonesia are volcanically active.

[Legbreaker]

At one point in time (maybe around 15 – 20 years ago) someone (I don’t know who) had a write up for an ANZAC (plus attached Pacific Islanders iirc) unit in Germany. The premise was they’d gathered together assorted Aussie / NZ / Fijian personnel that had been in theatre (UN peacekeepers, training teams, personnel on exchange postings, Australian Federal Police, I think even a couple of Defence Attaches, etc) and consolidated them into one Company sized unit. Obviously it was non canon.

I don’t know if said site still exists and my google fu (admittedly restricted by being at work) isn’t coming up with anything – maybe someone else remembers it or has a link to it?
Found it.
I'd saved the page back in 2009. Don't think I'll be using any of it - most of what's there is preposterous.

4166

[Legbreaker]

I don't suppose anyone wants to map out the locations of all the Australian army reserve barracks as they were around the mid 90's?
Regular army barracks and some reserve unit HQ's are easy - the scattered platoons and companies on the other hand.... :(

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Off the top of my head and remember that this is what I recall from the 1990s so cross-checking is probably needed :o : -

Western Australia

16 Battalion, RWAR, Infantry
HQ, Support/admin/etc. & B Coy - Irwin Barracks, Karrakatta, Perth
A Coy - Geraldton
C Coy - Kalgoorlie, (my last unit) was in transition from understrength Company to overstrength Reconnaissance Platoon. This would have been complete by the mid-90s
Support Coy included 81mm mortars and 7.62mm SFMG

11/28 Battalion, RWAR, Infantry
Now if memory serves me correctly, Targan was 11/28 so he would be the one to ask because I"m working from second-hand info.
HQ, Support/admin/etc. & B Coy (I'm uncertain of this) - Irwin Barracks, Karakatta, Perth
A Coy: -
1st Platoon - Bunbury
2nd Platoon - Albany
3rd Platoon - Katanning
I think HQ A Coy was in Bunbury but again, I am not certain
C Coy: -
I don't know but a platoon sized unit was based in Rockingham and I think this might have been the core of C Coy.
D Coy: - Irwin Barracks
I am not certain of the setup with 11/28 because at that time, some Reserve Infantry units were being strengthened with one Regular Army company

10 Light Horse, Armoured Recce
HQ, support/etc. and A Squadron - Irwin Barracks
A Vehicles included: - M113 LRV, M548 TLC, M113 Fitter's Vehicle, M577 ACV (no 76mm MRV from what I recall)

Other Reserve units in Perth at that time included, (note that I have no idea of strength, organization etc. etc.)
7 Field Battery, Medium Arty, at Irwin Barracks (I think they've been neutered and carry 81mm now)
? Field Ambulance (don't recall designation), was formerly at the Artillery Barracks in Fremantle but then moved to Irwin Barracks sometime in late-80s or early-90s.

Regional Forces Surveillance Units
These are infantry recce units equipped in a manner similar to SASR recce units with vehicles suitable to the task e.g. Far North Queensland Regiment has a number of boats on strength along with their wheeled vehicles

Pilbarra Regiment
HQ and other elements - Karratha (main garrison)
Three Squadrons although I don't know where two of them were based. One was based in Mt Newman, one was most likely in Karratha.

North-West Mobile Force AKA NORFORCE
Main AOR was Northern Territory but but also the very top end of Western Australia (within the Kimberly region)
HQ etc. etc. in Darwin, Northern Territory
Kimberly Squadron, I believe was based in Broome with detachments in Kununurra or Derby (or both for all I remember!)
The other Squadrons were all based in NT

EDIT: There was also an RACT unit at Karrakatta and I believe another logistics unit of some description although that unit may have been Regs. Palmer Barracks in South Guildford, Perth, WA was a logistics base but I believe it was Regs rather than Reserves although I don't know for certain.

And in the 1980s 'till the early 1990s, 1/15 RNSWL Armoured Reconnaissance Regiment had all units based at Lancer Barracks in Parramatta, Sydney. This was my first ARes unit. After they lost their buckets and got wheeled recce vehicles, they established one Squadron somewhere else in Sydney. 1/15 still had 76mm MRVs on strength as well as a RAEME detachment. They also had a fully working Centurion as part of the museum (although it would have been somewhat impotent without ammo for the main gun)

[pmulcahy11b]

Curious what the justification for Australia being nuked? Is this a case of it twilight so everything was was nuked?


The old, easy excuse -- denial of use to the enemy.

[Legbreaker]

The old, easy excuse -- denial of use to the enemy.

That's about the only reason really that would apply, and even that's problematic given the vast distances involved. I'll likely nuke a couple of locations, but they'll be more of an afterthought than primary, or even secondary target in the greater, global scheme.
Darwin, Perth and Townsville might get attacked mostly due to their ability to support operations against Indonesia (which I'm thinking would be an "ally" of the USSR more by a case of "enemy of my enemy" than anything else).

[Legbreaker]

Off the top of my head and remember that this is what I recall from the 1990s so cross-checking is probably needed :o

I've got an application in with the ADF media unit for assistance on OOBs, etc. Hoping they'll be able to do most of the work for me. :p

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I've got an application in with the ADF media unit for assistance on OOBs, etc. Hoping they'll be able to do most of the work for me. :p

Nice! Hopefully they'll have a bit of detail to them.
Way back when I first joined, we did a lesson on the composition of the armoured recce regiment and the pams we were given were super detailed. Not just how many buckets, radios or GS trailers should be on strength but even the number of magazines to be issued per rifle.

[Legbreaker]

Yeah, got a source on PAMs now too. There's a Library in Melbourne that's got just about EVERYTHING! They've been bending over backwards to help out. :D
I'm actually getting swamped in detail at the moment. Far more than's actually necessary!

[dude_uk]

RN7 popped up the figures for 1996/1997. For the sake of completion I'll put up those for 1989. Give a rough idea of the Cold war mindset.

Australia

Total Armed forces
Active: 69600

Reserve: 27580 (Increasing)
Army: 25000
Navy: 12220
Air: 1360

Army (31300)

7 Military Districts

Command Troops
1 Air Defence Regiment
1 Engineer Regiment (Construction)
1 Aviation Regiment
1 SAS Regiment (3 Sqns)

1 Inf Division
1 Mech Brigade
(1 Armd, 1 Mech, 1 Para)
2 Inf Brigade ( 2 Inf Bn)
1 Recce Regiment
1 APC Regiment
4 Arty Regiment
(1 Med, 3 Fd (1 Reserve)
1 Engr Reg
1 AVN 93 Hel, 1 ac sqn)
(2 avn as hel transferring from Air force)

Army Reserves
2 Div HQ
7 Brg HQ
3 Recce reg
3 APC Sqn
17 Inf Bn
1 Cdo
6 Arty Reg (1 Med, 5 Fd)
3 Field Artillery Battery
4 Engineer Regiment ( 2 Field, 2 construction)
3 Regional Surveillance units

Army Equipment
MBT: 103 Lepard 1A3 (42 Centurion in store)
AIFV: 40 M113 with 76mm
APC: 725 M113
Towed Artillery: 105mm 142 M2A2/L5
18 Hamel 15500
35 M-198
Mortars: 81mm:284
ATGW: 10 Milan
RCL:
84MM: 574 Carl Gustav
106mm 73 M-40
SAM: 19 Rapier
19 RBS-70
Aircraft:
14 PC-6 Turbo-Porter
22 GAP N-22B Missionmaster
Helicoper:
14 S-70 (Army/Air force Crew)
47 OH-58 Kiowa
47 206B
Marine:
16 LCM
85 LARC-5 AMPH Craft


Before you go handing out the in storage Lee-Enfields. Bear in mind that Australia obtained for the license to manufacture the Streyer AUG. So if production was ramped up, you should be able to equip any new forces before the nuclear strikes.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Just some small things with the list you posted, the 47 OH-58 Kiowas and 47 Bell 206B are referencing the same helo. They were the 206B civilian models modified for military use and retained the civilian designation.
We never had the OH-58 version.

And yes, we definitely had the licence for the AUG in the 1980s, late 80s but still the 80s. If I can actually remember back that far, I think the first versions were being mass issued in early1989, they were definitely on show in 1988 as I saw a few of them when I participated in Army Tattoo 88 in Western Australia.
My last unit got them in 1991 I think, might have been 1992 but I was carrying one for a couple of years.

I was in an Army Reserve infantry unit so we were further down the food chain when it came to distribution of the new rifles but even still, they rifle was accepted for service in 1988 and most infantry units had been fully converted to the F88 Austeyr by 1992. Less than five years so that gives some idea of how quickly we could have got serious production going (however keep in mind we're not talking hundreds of thousands of rifles, I think we requested about 90,000 in total).

[Legbreaker]

I was in an Army Reserve infantry unit so we were further down the food chain when it came to distribution of the new rifles but even still, they rifle was accepted for service in 1988 and most infantry units had been fully converted to the F88 Austeyr by 1992. Less than five years so that gives some idea of how quickly we could have got serious production going (however keep in mind we're not talking hundreds of thousands of rifles, I think we requested about 90,000 in total).

41 RNSWR didn't get them until 93 - late 93 at that.
Did get the M16s and M203s 1RAR handed in though around 92.

[Targan]

16 Battalion, RWAR, Infantry
HQ, Support/admin/etc. & B Coy - Irwin Barracks, Karrakatta, Perth
A Coy - Geraldton
C Coy - Kalgoorlie, (my last unit) was in transition from understrength Company to overstrength Reconnaissance Platoon. This would have been complete by the mid-90s
Support Coy included 81mm mortars and 7.62mm SFMG

11/28 Battalion, RWAR, Infantry
Now if memory serves me correctly, Targan was 11/28 so he would be the one to ask because I"m working from second-hand info.
HQ, Support/admin/etc. & B Coy (I'm uncertain of this) - Irwin Barracks, Karakatta, Perth
A Coy: -
1st Platoon - Bunbury
2nd Platoon - Albany
3rd Platoon - Katanning
I think HQ A Coy was in Bunbury but again, I am not certain
C Coy: -
I don't know but a platoon sized unit was based in Rockingham and I think this might have been the core of C Coy.
D Coy: - Irwin Barracks
I am not certain of the setup with 11/28 because at that time, some Reserve Infantry units were being strengthened with one Regular Army company

10 Light Horse, Armoured Recce
HQ, support/etc. and A Squadron - Irwin Barracks
A Vehicles included: - M113 LRV, M548 TLC, M113 Fitter's Vehicle, M577 ACV (no 76mm MRV from what I recall)

Other Reserve units in Perth at that time included, (note that I have no idea of strength, organization etc. etc.)
7 Field Battery, Medium Arty, at Irwin Barracks (I think they've been neutered and carry 81mm now)
? Field Ambulance (don't recall designation), was formerly at the Artillery Barracks in Fremantle but then moved to Irwin Barracks sometime in late-80s or early-90s.

This all looks correct to me as far as I remember. I'm pretty sure 11/28 Battalion didn't have a regular company attached in the early to mid-90s. We didn't even get Steyrs until '93 IIRC.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

This all looks correct to me as far as I remember. I'm pretty sure 11/28 Battalion didn't have a regular company attached in the early to mid-90s. We didn't even get Steyrs until '93 IIRC.
Yeah, checking with a friend who joined 16 sometime in the early 90s, I am out of synch by quite a few years. From his recollection the plan to integrate ARes and Reg formations started sometime in the mid 90s so it would have taken a good few years before it was in place, like probably the late 90s or early 2000s.
That's the problem with relying on memory! :o

[Legbreaker]

I don't suppose we have any oil refining engineers in the forum membership do we? :confused:

[StainlessSteelCynic]

No I'm not but, what info are you after?

[Legbreaker]

The ability for Australian and New Zealand refineries to switch to light sweet oil (as produced in WA and currently shipped to Asian markets) rather than the heavier crude imports they've been using for the previous 50+ years. What sort of efficiency loss would there be, production delays during changeover, etc.
My own research seems to indicate there's only one refinery in the country in the 1990s that had the ability to quickly switch from one feed stock type to another (up to three times in a day apparently). The others don't seem to have that ability built in.
Knowing what problems and delays there may be is critical to deciding on what's going on throughout the country and may perhaps explain why Australia apparently avoided being nuked.

On another vaguely related topic, I just found this website a moment ago. http://australiansteam.com
Quote "This site provides an up-to-date listing of all surviving Australian steam locomotives, including their location and status. More than 600 locomotives are detailed, indexed by their state of origin and first user."
Going to be loads of fun trawling through there and figuring out which ones may be pressed back into service when diesel runs short. :)

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Okay so just to get this straight in my own head, do you mean processing already refined sweet light oil or being able to process sour/heavy crude into sweet light?
In "theory", any refinery that is processing sour and/or heavy oils could convert some of that output to sweet light oils but it requires some expansive and obviously expensive infrastructure.
There's a brief explanation of the processes involved on the following page: -
https://www.afpm.org/The-Refinery-Process/#process

How many refineries in Australia have these facilities? Not many but I'm not certain for sure as I only know of two that would have been operating in the 1980s-90s period (the Shell refinery at Clyde NSW and the BP refinery in Kwinana WA). It's not like we have dozens of crude refineries though and they tend to be found in/near major cities.
I don't know if you are aware of the following site but it could be useful for you (and anyone looking to see where oil facilities are)
https://www.refinerymaps.com/

[Legbreaker]

Okay so just to get this straight in my own head, do you mean processing already refined sweet light oil or being able to process sour/heavy crude into sweet light?

Crude that's been refined, is not longer refereed to as sweet, light, etc. It's referred to as the components it's been split into (kerosene, diesel, etc).
I need to know what efficiency loss there would be in using sweet crude as the feedstock for a refinery designed for heavy, thicker crude. What problems may arise which could potentially damage the equipment and restrict output.
Given we're told elsewhere that Australia wasn't nuked, I need to find a logical way of creating a serious fuel shortage for Australia and New Zealand. Part of the answer will be sabotage, but that can't account for all of it. A lot I'll need to attribute to engineering, supply and transportation limitations.

[Legbreaker]

I've spent the last hour or so looking at maps of the border region and noted there's really only two border crossing points - the main point on the north coast on the Vanimo - Jayapura highway at Wutung, and another VERY secondary point about 75km north of the southern coastline and the small town of Botar.
As can be seen in the two photos, the southern route is FAR from suitable as an invasion route, and the northern one, well...it's got more than it's fair share of problems too. Clearly water-borne transport is going to be the preferred method of supplying troops where possible, but that's very vulnerable to sea and air attack.
The border itself is extremely porous, but that's largely offset by the total lack of other roads beyond these two. Some river traffic is possible, BUT the majority of the rivers in the region flow more north-south rather than the needed east-west - their usefulness is most likely restricted to local transportation of patrols and smaller units/supplies, and totally unsuited to carrying the logistical needs of the invasion forces (or the defenders for that matter too).
So, given the terrain is so damn hostile to a large, land based force, what causes Indonesia to risk absolutely everything on what appears to be a "bridge too far" scenario?
So far my thoughts are NBC attacks on more western areas of the country forcing them to find uncontaminated areas to move into, the discovery of badly needed minerals in the border regions, and perhaps even political stupidity.

Northern route
4173

Southern route
Yes, it really is THAT bad!
4174

[StainlessSteelCynic]

As we know, aside from nationalistic ambition where they had once decided that all of Borneo and PNG should be Indonesian you don't just launch an invasion without some sort of payoff.
There's plenty of mineral wealth in PNG and that would be an obvious temptation for Indonesia but the root cause still remains to be answered - what causes them to "need" whatever it is that can be found in PNG?

Is the need more ephemeral, a quick distraction for whatever problems they're having at home (and it provides an easy reason to conscript the "trouble-makers" and have them shipped off to the war)?
Is it something less materialistic, the need for more land for their own overpopulated islands for example?

Could it be the spectre of starvation? They can barely produce enough food for themselves (except for rice and even then, they were still importing rice until 2012 - they needed to grow at least 76 million tons of unhusked rice to enable them to cut back on rice imports). In 2012 they still needed to import 1.6 million tons of soyabeans, 2.3 million tons of sugar and 200,000 tons of beef.

Problems for agriculture include unpredictable weather (in particularl, heavy rains) and conversion of large amounts of land from ag use to industrial use.
All this has been going on for decades and includes millions of tonnes of material wastage due to corruption, inefficiency and neglect. Combine that with the rapid halt of much needed imports, it could be enough for a desperate government to try and grab some primary industry from PNG or to even try "pulling a Falklands" trick to distract the population from bigger problems.

Indonesia has relied heavily on imports from various Asian, North American and European countries, China being a big supplier. With what's happening between the Soviet Union and China, imports are going to dry up pretty damned quick.
Although this page is relevant for the current period, I think we could assume that Indonesia was building to this level of demand for a few decades before the late 2000s. It gives a good look at just what the Indos were wanting from other nations.
http://www.worldsrichestcountries.com/top_indonesia_imports.html


As for the crude oil bit, yeah, just shows how little I know about it haha :D

[Legbreaker]

Yeah, all that's basically the way I'm thinking too, but given the poor nature of the only two roads, and the ease in which those roads, plus the sea routes could be interdicted (as little as a couple of men with a machinegun could cause everything to grind to a sudden halt, particularly along that southern land route) there's got to be a REALLY SOLID reason for them to risk it.
Part of it could be Australia's involvement in Korea giving them the impression they'd really only have the PNG defence forces to deal with - roughly a total strength of just 2,500 people spread across all areas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papua_New_Guinea_Defence_Force
Some Indonesian units will undoubtedly be sent to Australia's mainland for low level insurgency and sabotage (prime targets including oil refineries) which based on Australian military exercises in the 80's and 90's could tie up in excess of a brigade just in hunting them down (perhaps three times that many, or even more, providing security at expected targets).
That may just give the Indonesian offensive some small chance of success, or at least enough that they think it's worth trying...
As for the crude oil bit, yeah, just shows how little I know about it haha :D
Don't worry, a week ago I didn't know all that much either! This has been a VERY steep learning curve!

[Targan]

How many refineries in Australia have these facilities? Not many but I'm not certain for sure as I only know of two that would have been operating in the 1980s-90s period (the Shell refinery at Clyde NSW and the BP refinery in Kwinana WA).

And with Garden Island (home of the biggest naval base on the western side of the continent, and a submarine base) in line of sight across the water from the Kwinana refinery, that whole area is a great big juicy target. If it wasn't nuked in the Twilight War someone would have tried to wreck it some other way.

[Legbreaker]

And with Garden Island (home of the biggest naval base on the western side of the continent, and a submarine base) in line of sight across the water from the Kwinana refinery, that whole area is a great big juicy target. If it wasn't nuked in the Twilight War someone would have tried to wreck it some other way.

That one throwaway line in "What's Polish for G'day" is really screwing things up for me at the moment. Without nukes, just how do you damage a refinery to the point where it's production is seriously degraded for a period of at least a few years?
The answer I think (and somebody PLEASE give me more options!) is sabotage and commando attacks.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

But it's a bloody long way just to do a one-off demo job.

I'm inclined to think that a more expansive campaign of sabotage would be planned (and maybe they even have the ability to pull it off). I wouldn't be at all surprised given Indonesia's history of communism if they didn't recieve some encouragement and maybe even assistance from the Soviets. Particularly given that Garden Island and Fremantle harbour were significant for the US Navy at the time (and not simply for R&R, was also a major resupply point for food & fuel and even low level maintenance from what I understand). Plus we had Harry Holt running full bore along the same coast.


Personal anecdote.
Living in Perth during the 1980s, we could always tell a US carrier group was going to be visiting soon - we'd see the C-2 Greyhounds flying into Perth airport.

Another personal anecdote.
Way back when we were doing the LLOps training up north, during one of the Spiderman Exercises, one of the Pilbara Regt patrols picked up someone wandering around in the bush near the exercise area.
Apparently he claimed he was a tourist and was very lost. Turns out he was Indonesian. Turns out there was no record of him entering Australia by the normal accepted means.
Turns out about a week earlier, an unidentified low flying aircraft had been picked up by air traffic control as being in Australian airspace without logging a flight plan.
Further investigation supposedly identified him as an Indon army officer...

Now some of this was related to a group of us from our training WO because he was actually being posted to the Pilbara Regt as his next assignment and he was in touch with them regularly. All I know for certain is that someone was picked up and identified as Indonesian. The claims that he was an Indon army officer could have been soldier's stories. However I heard about the unidentified low flying aircraft from a second source many months after the Ex. (but that still could have been soldier's stories, just in this case it got picked up by civvies).
Still, it's one of those things that make you go "Hmm".

[Legbreaker]

I'm thinking given Australia's generally multicultural population, it would be fairly easy for Indonesian soldiers/saboteurs to hide in plain sight just by wearing civilian clothing and keeping their weaponry well hidden. If even just one got hired by a refinery, they could do some serious damage over a period of time just by "accidentally" setting a valve the wrong way, or hitting a switch at the wrong time. Add in a few explosive charges here and there and well....
Even a more overt attack such as a raid on a critical facility (power distribution, generation, etc) could do a lot to cripple the country, or at least the local area, and unless those involved were caught in the act, again it wouldn't be that hard to blend in with the rest of the population, especially if they'd been living in the area for a few months or more.

I started re-reading a book from my collection last night which I probably should have picked up weeks ago - "Australians at War - Modern Military Towards 2000" published in 1989. https://biblio.co.uk/book/australians-war-modern-military-towards-2000/d/1032384970 The first chapter which was written by several retired senior Australian officers details a scenario in which raiders keep Australian forces occupied over in WA, while a landing takes place in far north Queensland. The opponent isn't named, but it's fairly clear who they were talking about....
The scenario (both parts) would work very nicely in tying up a large number of Australian troops and ships. A very nice diversion while the main Indonesian force moves into PNG.

[Raellus]

That one throwaway line in "What's Polish for G'day" is really screwing things up for me at the moment. Without nukes, just how do you damage a refinery to the point where it's production is seriously degraded for a period of at least a few years?
The answer I think (and somebody PLEASE give me more options!) is sabotage and commando attacks.

IIRC, Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising starts with someone sabotaging an oil refinery. As a result, it basically self-destructs. I imagine that repairing the damage would take at least a year or two. It's been a while since I read that part (I skipped it on subsequent readings) so I might not be remembering it accurately.

Leg, are you trying to avoid nuking Australia? That Garden Island/Kwinana refinery site that Targan mentioned would definitely be on the Soviet's list. Also, the prologue to Mad Max 2 (the Road Warrior, in the U.S.) strongly implies the use of nuclear weapons on oil refineries in Australia.

IMO, you can't really have a true T2K setting without at least a bit of nuke damage.

[Olefin]

I dont see every country as being nuked - you can have a lot of damage just from a country coming apart at the seams - for proof look at the rolling ball of fun that is today's Somalia for instance

just rioting and panic from the expectation of being nuked could be more than enough to really screw things up - and add in some fun things like major forest fires/crop failure/sabotage attacks and you could really not be in a good place very quickly

however there are definitely targets for nukes in Australia even if all you did was go after the US tracking stations that are in the country

[Legbreaker]

Leg, are you trying to avoid nuking Australia?

Yes, because of that line in "What's Polish for G'day" where an Australian SAS trooper mentions Australia is a member of the "Organisation of Non-irradiated Nations."
However, they do indicate France is also a member of that unofficial group, and it's my belief they would almost certainly have received at least a handful of nukes to ports near their borders. In that light it's just possible a small warhead or two may have been dropped on remote Australian targets, but certainly not on the major cities. Still, I want to do as much damage as possible using conventional means before applying nukes (if any).

[Raellus]

However, they do indicate France is also a member of that unofficial group, and it's my belief they would almost certainly have received at least a handful of nukes to ports near their borders. In that light it's just possible a small warhead or two may have been dropped on remote Australian targets, but certainly not on the major cities. Still, I want to do as much damage as possible using conventional means before applying nukes (if any).

Roger that.

I hesitate to bring this up, but is that "G'Day…" article part of the official T2K canon? If it is, then I think a compliant/compatible sourcebook should try to align as closely as possible. But if not, or you don't care about compliance/compatibility, then your hands aren't tied. Do whatever you think is best for your sourcebook.

Sabotage- especially that which would start fires- could definitely wreck a refinery for a good long time. No fuel, modern civilization starts grinding to a halt.

[Legbreaker]

Hmm, I think I might have an idea on why Indonesia moves into PNG - nuclear fallout from the Pakistan/India war impacting the western reaches of Indonesia sometime in mid to late 1998...
With a little tweaking (probably due to the effect of the nukes themselves) the monsoon winds could just about carry radiation that far and leave both Thailand to the north, and Australia to the south largely untouched. Prevailing winds don't lend themselves naturally to it, but there have been some cyclones and other large storms which have bucked the general trend.

[Legbreaker]

I hesitate to bring this up, but is that "G'Day…" article part of the official T2K canon?

Yes, absolutely. It's one of the scenarios from Twilight Encounters. It's certainly carrying more weight than any Challenge article I'd think.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

As we know, the Twilight War is part of the backstory for the 2300AD setting. In 2300, Australia is a major player, in part because the nation did not suffer as much destruction as others during the Twilight War.
The point I'm trying to make with this is that it appears that canon very much subscribes to the idea that Australia was damaged but not "bombed back to the stone age" and was able to get back on its feet faster than many other nations and hence become a significant force in the galaxy.

So Australia probably does not get heavily nuked because the idea runs counter to what 2300AD canon has established. Now whether you want to include 2300 into the thought process or not is personal choice and most of us probably don't bother (simply because it takes place another 300 years down the track!)
But given that Twilight: 2000 was developed directly from it, 2300 canon played a big part in the development of Australia's situation in the T2k setting so for us to stick within GDW's ideas, some way needs to be found to knock down the country, but not something that is a TKO like heavy nuke strikes.

Edit: I was of the understanding that those Challenge articles were also considered canon material. I think this has been checked on by someone here, it was certainly discussed here some time ago and if I recall it was generally considered that they are part of canon.

[Legbreaker]

Edit: I was of the understanding that those Challenge articles were also considered canon material.

I believe they are too and was just using that to reinforce the idea the "G'day" scenario is vital information which can't be just casually cast aside and ignored.

Australia is an interesting situation I think - you can't just throw a few nukes at the place and say "job done". The dismantling of it's capabilities needs to be a more piecemeal thing, lots of nibbles from lots of different directions to achieve the desired effect. Figuring out what those elements could be is proving somewhat challenging.

The list so far includes widespread bushfires, abnormal weather (possibly due to the effects of nukes elsewhere), cessation of international trade, sabotage and raiding on vital infrastructure, fuel shortages, disease, famine, and of course war in Korea and Indonesia / PNG. Once I've sufficiently devastated the country, I can begin building up the picture as it would be in 2000.

As always, more ideas are welcome, as are any comments on why certain things may not work as intended, or not to the extent desired.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Loss of electricity is going to be a massive impact but considering that we still had many coal-fired power stations and plenty of coal mines that doesn't appear to be a problem.
So we have to interrupt the transport of coal to the stations. The easiest way would be an automobile fuel crisis... ah look at that, right back to were we started!

Like you said, it's tricky. With so much of our infrastructure spread out over a massive continent, what happens in one part of the country often has no impact what-so-ever on other parts of the country. For example, disruptions to the electricity supply in Victoria won't make any impact on electricity for South Aus because our power grids aren't shared by multiple states like in Europe or North America.
But... disruption of electricity to those cities that have fuel refineries, that would be an impact on the rest of the nation. Hmm, coming full circle here...

Many years ago, a mate of mine worked for the State Energy Commission of Western Australia (SECWA was a government body that was later split into two corporations, one controls electricity, the other LPG).
Anyway, in the early 1990s he mentioned one time that the Perth electricity grid relied on four major transformers to distribute power. If one of them broke down the other three would handle things, if two broke down, there would be minor disruptions and some inconvenience to the public. If three went offline, major sections of the city would have to suffer rolling blackouts as they tried to share the power around and electricity would have to be sent from rural power stations via country power lines (which are mostly low capacity lines).

The kicker was that those transformers were made in Europe (France I think) and took approximately one year to build and transport to Australia. They are heavy duty and apparently consist of a lot of solid-state components so they aren't prone to breakdowns.
However, military sabotage would take them offline and probably quite easily.
With that in mind, when my battalion was doing LLOps, part of our training involved protection of power stations and transformers.

A successful sabotage campaign targetting the electrical system in those cities with fuel refineries along with hitting the refineries would be exceedingly difficult to cope with. No electricity and the average city dweller is screwed but no electricity for the refineries means no fuel. No fuel, no transport. No transport, no coal for the power stations, no food deliveries, no resupply for the military etc. etc. etc.
Throw in some bushfires and limited fuel for the fire service, some sabotage of the isolated sections of the railway network to disrupt other goods & services and we have a pretty good start to a Twilight-friendly scenario for a stuffed up Australia

[Legbreaker]

Fuel I think is the key here. Without fuel the trains don't run. Sure, there's a handful of steam locomotives still in running order, but we're talking a few dozen in total across the entire country, they're really not going to make any impact.
So, no fuel, no trains means no coal being transported even short distances to the electrical generation plants. Whoops, there goes electric trains and most of the public transportation networks in the cities.
No fuel getting out to the farms (which aren't exactly within walking distance of the cities)? Well, how's that harvest going then? What about planting for the following season? Yeah, that's a famine for you right there....
No fuel for aircraft, well fires aren't spotted as quickly, and without electricity, communications, especially via landline isn't happening so even when they are spotted, they can't be reported.
Realistically the only areas that would still have electricity are those with alternate generation capability - Tasmania relies almost entirely on hydro, so unless EMP or other actions renders that inoperable, the lights should stay on. Shame there's not a lot of heavy industry on the island state to take advantage of that, and there's no oil refinery either. Of course with the nearest oil fields in Bass Strait, and the pipelines all heading north it's sort of a moot point anyway. Oh well, that's Tasmanian's walking everywhere, but at least the street lights are still on....

[Olefin]

FYI part of what happens to Australia - and for that matter France - depends on what timeline you are using

V2 indicates that France got hit with several nukes that took out ports and refineries (and actually makes it surprising that they didnt join the war given that - but thats another discussion) and basically says Australia comes out damaged from the war but not nuked heavily

FYI per Marc Miller the Challenge articles may or may not be canon (depended on the author)- he told Raellus and I when we were writing to take them into account and if we wanted to include them we could or we could chose not to - however anything officially released - which includes by the way stuff like City of Angels - has to be seen as canon

he did say if we do include anything from the articles into an official release then it would make that article canon for sure

Also a factor for the G'Day encounter is how bad communications are in Twilight 2000 - maybe the group in Twilight Encounters is telling the truth as far as they know and Australia got hit after they left - keep in mind the Texas module where veterans from Europe dont find out the Mexicans are in Texas until they get home

[Raellus]

Remember what Saddam's sabotaging of the Kuwaiti oil fields and refineries did to the regional environment? Smoke/particulates, crude oil in the water. It was an environmental disaster. If your refinery sabotage involves fires, make sure to factor their knock-on effects when T2K'ing Australia.

P.S. IMHO, v2.0 is trash (timeline-wise).

[Legbreaker]

Also a factor for the G'Day encounter is how bad communications are in Twilight 2000 - maybe the group in Twilight Encounters is telling the truth as far as they know and Australia got hit after they left - keep in mind the Texas module where veterans from Europe dont find out the Mexicans are in Texas until they get home

That is certainly a consideration. It may well be that the troopers words lacked context, or they themselves simply didn't know the true state of the country - the SAS are based in the west and the other side of the country is several time zones away after all....
Nevertheless, my intention is to do as much damage as I can conventionally before applying any nukes. Hopefully none will be needed to finish the job so it can remain consistent with "G'day", but use of a few warheads certainly won't break canon either. To my mind though, nuking Australia is the lazy way out. Conventional methods make more logical sense, and should make for a better background story.
Remember what Saddam's sabotaging of the Kuwaiti oil fields and refineries did to the regional environment? Smoke/particulates, crude oil in the water. It was an environmental disaster. If your refinery sabotage involves fires, make sure to factor their knock-on effects when T2K'ing Australia..

Indeed, although distances in Australia generally make smoke clouds a minor issue - they've usually dissipated to just a smell in the air and a few additional asthma attacks before reaching anywhere of note. It's the knock-on effects over the following weeks and months that will be a problem - bridges and railways fire damaged, displaced people, lack of food after the crops were burnt, etc.

Once I'm done Australia's going to be a basket case, BUT there'll still be loads of opportunities for PCs to participate in rebuilding. Plenty of factories, mines, etc still in decent condition for example, they just need power, fuel, raw materials, manpower and security. My vision is Australia should be well on the way to recovery by about 2010, and in a position to assist it's neighbours within a few years after that.

[RN7]

That is certainly a consideration. It may well be that the troopers words lacked context, or they themselves simply didn't know the true state of the country - the SAS are based in the west and the other side of the country is several time zones away after all....
Nevertheless, my intention is to do as much damage as I can conventionally before applying any nukes. Hopefully none will be needed to finish the job so it can remain consistent with "G'day", but use of a few warheads certainly won't break canon either. To my mind though, nuking Australia is the lazy way out. Conventional methods make more logical sense, and should make for a better background story.

Without targeting Australia with nuclear armed missiles it would actually be fairly difficult to do much damage to Australia's infrastructure and military capabilities.

Other than landing hit teams of Spetsnaz commandos or their Indonesian equivalents who realistically are not going to do to much before they are found and wiped out, it would be very hard to attack and do that much damage to Australia with bombers, conventional cruise missiles etc because of the geography of the country and its distance from potential enemies.

[Legbreaker]

Without targeting Australia with nuclear armed missiles it would actually be fairly difficult to do much damage to Australia's infrastructure and military capabilities.
Not at all actually.
I'll be putting roughly a brigade in Korea where they may just get nuked, and if not there's still a huge number of Soviet/North Korean units to contend with.
Meanwhile, you've got the MASSIVE (by comparison) Indonesian army attacking into PNG with only Australian and perhaps New Zealand troops to stop them (the PNG military is a joke).
Then add in a lack of fuel to transport or evacuate troops, plus the inability of the military to supply those troops and many may die simply because they can't find enough to eat and drink! Outback Australia is NOT a place you want to be stranded in.

Other than landing hit teams of Spetsnaz commandos or their Indonesian equivalents who realistically are not going to do to much before they are found and wiped out...
Any attack on Australia itself will be simply a diversion and will tie up a huge amount of troops in attempting to secure vital facilities. Also, given the multicultural nature of the population, it's extremely easy for Indonesians, or any nationality for that matter, to simply get lost in the crowd. Most, if not all Indonesians sent to Australia will be in civilian clothing and unless actively engaged in a raid, will have hidden their weapons away. The occasional over reaction of security forces will also contribute to the overall destruction (targeting citizens simply due to ethnicity for example usually has serious unintended consequences).
Active, uniformed Indonesian troops will be very few and far between on the Australian mainland precisely because they'd be easily targeted and quickly wiped out.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

In general, Australia is heavily reliant on road transport. Rail and maritime transport are important but do not reach the number of places that road transport does and in many cases it's because it is not cost effective for anyone to do so.
You don't have to damage the infrastructure to cause major disruptions, you only need to damage the transport industries and in particular, road transport.

Disruption of truck fuel supplies means many hundreds of rural towns will be without basic commodities and within a short time, without enough food. The residents will probably move to the cities for aid for (what they think is) the short term which will just add more strain on the limited ability of transport industries to deliver needed items.
People get hungry, they start to grumble, when their kids get hungry, people get angry. One more problem for the government to try and fix. Interuption of electricity or fuel for a long enough time in Australia, will have a domino effect in a short period of time and because the distances are so vast with such a relatively small population, transport of aid, police, security forces etc. etc. in a timely manner becomes almost impossible.

I believe this is the path that Legbreaker is taking (correct me if I'm wrong Leg).

[Legbreaker]

I believe this is the path that Legbreaker is taking (correct me if I'm wrong Leg).
That's pretty much it, yes.
Without petroleum fuels, nothing, NOTHING moves in Australia. People WILL die. Riots, especially in the cities will break out within a week or two.
Not only are the cities and towns reliant on road transport for most of their supplies, the areas those supplies are grown and produced can, and often are, hundreds, even thousands of kilometres away. Even those towns in more rural areas will have food supply problems as in many areas the farms are essentially a monoculture. They may have an absolute flood of wheat for example, but next to nothing else.

[Raellus]

Without petroleum fuels, nothing, NOTHING moves in Australia. People WILL die. Riots, especially in the cities will break out within a week or two.Not only are the cities and towns reliant on road transport for most of their supplies, the areas those supplies are grown and produced can, and often are, hundreds, even thousands of kilometres away. Even those towns in more rural areas will have food supply problems as in many areas the farms are essentially a monoculture. They may have an absolute flood of wheat for example, but next to nothing else.

I think this is generally true of most parts of the First World. I think a lot of modern folks who are privileged enough to live in the First World either don't realize this, or choose to pretend that modern life is not absolutely dependent on fossil fuels and electricity. IMHO, this a very Pollyanna-ish worldview. I am glad that you are not one of those folks.

In the U.S., only 2% of the population is comprised of farm and ranch families. No fuel = no food, and 90+% of any First World nation's population is totally screwed. The destruction of much of the world's fuel and fuel production capabilities during the Twilight War would lead to a massive die off in Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

[RN7]

Not at all actually.
I'll be putting roughly a brigade in Korea where they may just get nuked, and if not there's still a huge number of Soviet/North Korean units to contend with.
Meanwhile, you've got the MASSIVE (by comparison) Indonesian army attacking into PNG with only Australian and perhaps New Zealand troops to stop them (the PNG military is a joke).

Does the US not use nuclear weapons on the massive numbers of Soviet and North Koreans in Korea too? And is Australia nuked or just left intact?

Then add in a lack of fuel to transport or evacuate troops, plus the inability of the military to supply those troops and many may die simply because they can't find enough to eat and drink! Outback Australia is NOT a place you want to be stranded in.

Would the Australian government not introduce emergency measures in wartime after at least a year of global warfare, and would Indonesia be immune to fuel and transport shortages?

Is it Australian or Indonesian troops you are you are talking about in the outback?

Any attack on Australia itself will be simply a diversion and will tie up a huge amount of troops in attempting to secure vital facilities.)

Attack by who? Indonesia or the Soviet Union?

What vital facilities? Oil refineries, pipelines, airports, power stations, arms factories? You don't need tens of thousands of troops to secure these facilities.

Also, given the multicultural nature of the population, it's extremely easy for Indonesians, or any nationality for that matter, to simply get lost in the crowd. Most, if not all Indonesians sent to Australia will be in civilian clothing and unless actively engaged in a raid, will have hidden their weapons away. The occasional over reaction of security forces will also contribute to the overall destruction (targeting citizens simply due to ethnicity for example usually has serious unintended consequences).
Active, uniformed Indonesian troops will be very few and far between on the Australian mainland precisely because they'd be easily targeted and quickly wiped out.

You know Legreaker Australia is hard place to get to by sea, and what about the RAN and possibly other allied ships patrolling the region. I think you are doing your country a disservice by suggesting that the Australian intelligence and policing services and military would not be aware of large numbers of Indonesian entering Australia and not being able to deal with Indonesian fifth columnists running about causing mayhem and then just melting into the general population.

Are Asian-Australians not patriotic to Australia or are they just there to get revenge on Whitey when the times comes? And the government would not mention Indonesian terrorists in news broadcasts and media because of PC policies and other non-Indonesia Australians would not be suspicious if not downright hostile to them?

Also although Australia's big cities are multi-cultured most vital facilities are not located downtown. They are on the outskirts of them or in remoter areas. Australian cities like American cities gets less multi-cultured the further you travel from the downtown core. In the suburbs, smaller towns and rural areas a bunch of creepy Indonesians acting suspiciously are going to stand out like a sore thumb. Also would Australian soldiers not be aware of the security threat or have their hands tied by PC BS when they are aware of an imminent threat from a potentially hostile group in the area.

Also if Australia is not nuked than you have a functional RAAF well armed by the Americans and you also have functional Australian oil infrastructure to fuel it. The RAAF can strike any part of Indonesia and could and destroy or severely disable most of Indonesia's oil refining and electricity production capacity in 24 to 48 hours.

[Legbreaker]

Does the US not use nuclear weapons on the massive numbers of Soviet and North Koreans in Korea too? And is Australia nuked or just left intact?
Perhaps they do, perhaps they don't. Korea's more Raellus' thing.
I'm still only in the early stages of this project though really and haven't done much in that area beyond assigning perhaps a brigade or so of Australians plus New Zealanders and maybe other nationalities - this was discussed earlier in this thread.
Would the Australian government not introduce emergency measures in wartime after at least a year of global warfare, and would Indonesia be immune to fuel and transport shortages?
Of course the government would, but by late 1997 they'll be essentially powerless to do anything all that meaningful over a wide area.
As for Indonesia don't worry, I'll be screwing them up nicely as well. After all, I need to create a reason for them to attack into PNG...
Indonesia actually has a small advantage over Australia - they're somewhat less dependent on food distribution and technology. Most islands are almost self sufficient as it is, so a lack of fuel for transport should hurt them too much. That said, they're also on the verge of overpopulation so any event that upsets the status quo is going to hurt them quite badly if they can't get outside help. At this point (and there's plenty more thought to be put into it) I'm thinking radiation from Pakistan/India coupled with volcanic activity, disease, storms, and so forth will decimate at least the western parts of the country forcing the government to look eastward.
Is it Australian or Indonesian troops you are you are talking about in the outback?
A bit of both really. Indonesian presence will be fairly light though and be more a diversion to keep Australian units occupied and away from PNG.

Attack by who? Indonesia or the Soviet Union?
Besides the possibility the USSR sent some advisers to Indonesia, I can't imagine why they'd pay much attention to the region. MIGHT find a handful of individuals on the Australian mainland, but they're also more likely to stand out in a crowd than Indonesians.

What vital facilities? Oil refineries, pipelines, airports, power stations, arms factories? You don't need tens of thousands of troops to secure these facilities.
No, you don't, not if you know where the enemy are and where they intend to attack next.
Also bear in mind the enemy actions will be designed to create the greatest amount of chaos possible. Not all the troops will be needed to guard facilities, many will be assigned to keep the hordes of civilians in check when the food runs out, etc.

You know Legbreaker Australia is hard place to get to by sea, and what about the RAN and possibly other allied ships patrolling the region. I think you are doing your country a disservice by suggesting that the Australian intelligence and policing services and military would not be aware of large numbers of Indonesian entering Australia and not being able to deal with Indonesian fifth columnists running about causing mayhem and then just melting into the general population.
The ocean is a BIG place and we've only got a limited number of ships and planes. With troops in Korea, some of those will likely be assigned there as well.
I'm not talking about large numbers either. It really doesn't take that many people with explosives to damage, even destroy something like a refinery. As I think I mentioned previously, all it may take is one person pressing the wrong button at the right time to cause damage. Of course they're probably only going to be able to do it once, maybe twice before others figure out there's sabotage being carried out by one of the workers....

Are Asian-Australians not patriotic to Australia or are they just there to get revenge on Whitey when the times comes? And the government would not mention Indonesian terrorists in news broadcasts and media because of PC policies and other non-Indonesia Australians would not be suspicious if not downright hostile to them?
Some are, some aren't. The actual saboteurs and raiders I envisage being Indonesian soldiers who've infiltrated the country in the months before hostilities kick off. As there's quite a significant percentage of people who've immigrated from south east asia over the last few decades, it will be fairly simple for them to blend in provided they're not walking around with rifles over their shoulders....
There may also be some who've been in the country all their lives who for one reason or another join with the Indonesians, but I really can't see them as being a sizeable number and probably best handled by GM's who want to include a traitor or two in their game.
Censorship will certainly be in effect, but I don't think it's going to matter that much. I don't intend to have the hostilities kick off until late 97, perhaps early 98. By that time I can't imagine much electronic media will be left undamaged due to EMP and ASAT attacks.

Also although Australia's big cities are multi-cultured most vital facilities are not located downtown. They are on the outskirts of them or in remoter areas. Australian cities like American cities gets less multi-cultured the further you travel from the downtown core. In the suburbs, smaller towns and rural areas a bunch of creepy Indonesians acting suspiciously are going to stand out like a sore thumb. Also would Australian soldiers not be aware of the security threat or have their hands tied by PC BS when they are aware of an imminent threat from a potentially hostile group in the area.
I've spent a number of years living and working in several Australian cities and am intimately familiar with Sydney's industry and demographics in particular. There are areas you don't go into if you're white, even in the outskirts. Even in the more European areas it's still not uncommon to see Asians, Africans, and just about every other ethnicity as well. The presence of a non-white face isn't out of place at all until you head out of the cities completely.
I intend to open the war with a brigade already committed in Korea, and an Indonesian build up in West Papua to cause most of the remaining regular troops to be deployed there. The actual shooting would commence with a bunch of near simultaneous attacks on refineries, power generation, communications and whatever else seems to make sense. Initial response will be police only - the military won't be called upon for days or even weeks.
Even when the military is called upon, with a brigade in Korea, and about the same in PNG, there's not much left at home. Reserve units generally run at around 10-25% strength - an infantry "battalion" might be able to scrape together a company plus support elements, but they're also spread over hundreds of kilometres. It will take time for more recruits to be enlisted, trained and equipped, and all while the attacks continue, and the governments trying to support forces in Korea and PNG.

Also if Australia is not nuked than you have a functional RAAF well armed by the Americans and you also have functional Australian oil infrastructure to fuel it. The RAAF can strike any part of Indonesia and could and destroy or severely disable most of Indonesia's oil refining and electricity production capacity in 24 to 48 hours.
No.
RAAF by that point will be quite damaged from action in Korea and oil supplies from overseas will have ceased. Yes, there will be attacks made on Indonesian facilities, but the RAAF's strength by that point won't be enough to stop them cold.
Both sides need to still have some capacity for offensive action to fit with canon. Eventually though, perhaps in just 6 months or so, everything will grind to a halt from logistical reasons (just like is said in canon). Troops on both sides will suffer badly when they can't be supplied and potentially more deaths will result from starvation and disease than actual combat!

Anyway, it's still early days with this project and everything's still subject to change. I'm sure during the process I'll find things that make no sense anymore and add, remove, and adjust things.
I can promise I won't publish until I'm 100% CERTAIN it all makes sense and I'm convinced I've done as much background work as I possibly can to make it as believable as it possibly can be.

[Raellus]

Does the US not use nuclear weapons on the massive numbers of Soviet and North Koreans in Korea too? And is Australia nuked or just left intact?

The whole thing only costs $2.99, but I'll give you the answer from my Korean Peninsula Sourcebook for free.

"As Soviet and Allied units clashed in North Korea, the Stavka, responding to the perceived existential threat posed by NATO forces crossing the Soviet frontier in the west, roused the dozing genie of nuclear warfare, unleashing it once again on mankind, first, haltingly in Europe, then, on a massive scale in East Asia. Of all belligerents, China was hit hardest; much of the PLA was vaporized in the first week of the atomic barrage. Under heavy nuclear and conventional attacks, the Northern Chinese Front disintegrated. The headquarters of the Chinese 28th Army was obliterated by a tactical nuclear strike, and the remains of U.S. 2nd ID found themselves on their own, cut off from the rest of 8th Army.

"On 10/21, 'Tropic Lightning' was hit by no less than six tactical nuclear weapons; it was subsequently overrun and annihilated by Soviet mechanized forces- only 1,000 survivors from the 25th ID made it back to Allied lines."

[The above two paragraphs are based on specific v1.0 canonical references. The next two were approved by Marc Miller.]

"Through September and October, U.S. 8th Army countered Soviet tactical nuclear strikes with several of its own, buying some breathing room and inflicting heavy casualties- the Soviet 12th MRD, caught in a bottleneck at a river crossing, was annihilated by a well-placed Lance battlefield nuclear missile.

"In an attempt to end the campaign in one fell swoop, or at least prevent a timely Allied counteroffensive, Stavka authorized the destruction of several strategic targets in the Republic of Korea: Seoul, the capital city, Incheon, a major port close to the Allied main line of resistance, and Kunsan, another west coast port and home to a major USAF airbase (and the only nuclear weapons storage site in the ROK), were all slated for destruction. On November 4th, a single SS-17 Spanker ICBM launched from southern Siberia released four MIRVs high over the Korean Peninsula. 500 kiloton warheads detonated over Seoul, Incheon and Kunsan, wreaking havoc and killing, in total, hundreds of thousands of civilians. Fortunately, the fourth warhead (also targeting Seoul) failed to detonate.

"To impede the arrival of additional reinforcements from the U.S.A. by way of Japan, the east coast ROK port cities of Busan and Ulsan were also targeted for destruction. In the early dawn hours of November 8th, the Echo II class SSGN, K34, surfaced in the Sea of Japan and launched two nuclear-tipped P-1000 Vulkan cruise missiles, one each at Busan and Ulsan. Several minutes later, the 350 kiloton warhead aboard the first P-1000 detonated over Busan, wrecking the port and badly damaging the eastern half of the city. The missile targeting Ulsan suffered a critical engine failure soon after launch and crashed into the sea well short of the Korean coast (the warhead did not explode). A JDF P-3 Orion, on routine ASW patrol over the Sea of Japan, spotted the smoky missile launch signatures on the western horizon and closed at speed to investigate. K34 had difficulty retracting one of its missile launch tubes, delaying its escape. It was attempting to submerge just as the JDF P-3 arrived overhead. The P-3 dropped two Mk. 46 homing torpedoes, both of which tracked and hit the crash-diving K34, sinking it along with all hands.

"The United States responded to the strategic nuclear attacks on South Korea by obliterating the Soviet Union's Pacific port of Vladivostok with a Trident SLBM. As the year wore on, use of nuclear weapons by both superpowers expanded. U.S. military bases in Japan and the Philippines were destroyed; U.S.8th Army was becoming increasingly isolated."

Bergesen, Alf R.
The Korean Peninsula: A Twilight 2000 Series Sourcebook
2nd Edition
Far Future Enterprises, 2018
Watermarked PDF

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/233671/T2000-v1-Korean-Peninsula-Sourcebook?src=fp_u5

[RN7]

The whole thing only costs $2.99, but I'll give you the answer from my Korean Peninsula Sourcebook for free.

"As Soviet and Allied units clashed in North Korea, the Stavka, responding to the perceived existential threat posed by NATO forces crossing the Soviet frontier in the west, roused the dozing genie of nuclear warfare, unleashing it once again on mankind, first, haltingly in Europe, then, on a massive scale in East Asia. Of all belligerents, China was hit hardest; much of the PLA was vaporized in the first week of the atomic barrage. Under heavy nuclear and conventional attacks, the Northern Chinese Front disintegrated. The headquarters of the Chinese 28th Army was obliterated by a tactical nuclear strike, and the remains of U.S. 2nd ID found themselves on their own, cut off from the rest of 8th Army.

"On 10/21, 'Tropic Lightning' was hit by no less than six tactical nuclear weapons; it was subsequently overrun and annihilated by Soviet mechanized forces- only 1,000 survivors from the 25th ID made it back to Allied lines."

[The above two paragraphs are based on specific v1.0 canonical references. The next two were approved by Marc Miller.]

"Through September and October, U.S. 8th Army countered Soviet tactical nuclear strikes with several of its own, buying some breathing room and inflicting heavy casualties- the Soviet 12th MRD, caught in a bottleneck at a river crossing, was annihilated by a well-placed Lance battlefield nuclear missile.

"In an attempt to end the campaign in one fell swoop, or at least prevent a timely Allied counteroffensive, Stavka authorized the destruction of several strategic targets in the Republic of Korea: Seoul, the capital city, Incheon, a major port close to the Allied main line of resistance, and Kunsan, another west coast port and home to a major USAF airbase (and the only nuclear weapons storage site in the ROK), were all slated for destruction. On November 4th, a single SS-17 Spanker ICBM launched from southern Siberia released four MIRVs high over the Korean Peninsula. 500 kiloton warheads detonated over Seoul, Incheon and Kunsan, wreaking havoc and killing, in total, hundreds of thousands of civilians. Fortunately, the fourth warhead (also targeting Seoul) failed to detonate.

"To impede the arrival of additional reinforcements from the U.S.A. by way of Japan, the east coast ROK port cities of Busan and Ulsan were also targeted for destruction. In the early dawn hours of November 8th, the Echo II class SSGN, K34, surfaced in the Sea of Japan and launched two nuclear-tipped P-1000 Vulkan cruise missiles, one each at Busan and Ulsan. Several minutes later, the 350 kiloton warhead aboard the first P-1000 detonated over Busan, wrecking the port and badly damaging the eastern half of the city. The missile targeting Ulsan suffered a critical engine failure soon after launch and crashed into the sea well short of the Korean coast (the warhead did not explode). A JDF P-3 Orion, on routine ASW patrol over the Sea of Japan, spotted the smoky missile launch signatures on the western horizon and closed at speed to investigate. K34 had difficulty retracting one of its missile launch tubes, delaying its escape. It was attempting to submerge just as the JDF P-3 arrived overhead. The P-3 dropped two Mk. 46 homing torpedoes, both of which tracked and hit the crash-diving K34, sinking it along with all hands.

"The United States responded to the strategic nuclear attacks on South Korea by obliterating the Soviet Union's Pacific port of Vladivostok with a Trident SLBM. As the year wore on, use of nuclear weapons by both superpowers expanded. U.S. military bases in Japan and the Philippines were destroyed; U.S.8th Army was becoming increasingly isolated."

Bergesen, Alf R.
The Korean Peninsula: A Twilight 2000 Series Sourcebook
2nd Edition
Far Future Enterprises, 2018
Watermarked PDF

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/233671/T2000-v1-Korean-Peninsula-Sourcebook?src=fp_u5


Yes Raellus I bought your sourcebook last year. A good read!!

And thanks for confirming that the US retaliated with nuclear weapons in kind against the Soviets in Korea and the Soviet Far East.

[Legbreaker]

How can I NOT include this?
Halfway through the book now, and I want to shoot them!
Nothing short of treason.
https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2013/10/war-unions-fought-australia/?fbclid=IwAR1vvDa-Kh_vq4hH9YvO75NeLgfBQ7SeZZQsFkqFj6O1qDK7Zv9Fe9TpTe Y

[StainlessSteelCynic]

How can I NOT include this?
Halfway through the book now, and I want to shoot them!
Nothing short of treason.
https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2013/10/war-unions-fought-australia/?fbclid=IwAR1vvDa-Kh_vq4hH9YvO75NeLgfBQ7SeZZQsFkqFj6O1qDK7Zv9Fe9TpTe Y

The scum & vermin who worked the docks pulled the same shit during the Vietnam War. My father (who served there) told me how some Australian units had to locate tools, jerrycans, jacks, towing cables and so on (even bulbs from headlights sometimes) in country at times, because the dock worker scum in Australia had stolen all those items before loading the vehicles onto the ships for transport to Vietnam.
Now, with the unpopularity of the Vietnam War, you could, I suppose, argue that it was a political protest rather than the blatant theft and corruption that it really was.
However, during WW2 when the country itself lived in fear of a Japanese invasion? When there's recorded incidents where their theft caused the death of Allied personal?
That was nothing less than undermining the Allied war effort. Those bastards should have been arrested and tried for treason. Personally, I believe they should have been conscripted because as much as I would have liked to shoot them, it's too damned quick and they didn't deserve a quick, clean end.

Although they're supposed to be under more scrutiny now, the scum still pull the same shit even today albeit at a lesser level. One of my co-workers said some family members moved to Broome for work and had their car transported by ship. When it arrived, the windscreen wipers, the petrol cap and some other items were missing - they weren't missing when they delivered the car to the wharf for loading. This happened some time in the mid-2000s.

Now in terms of what you're proposing Leg, it's an interesting twist and an effective way to tighten the screws on Australia. Particularly as it could very well lead to street fights between wharfie scum and people with relatives serving in the military. With the history of wharfies using violence, intimidation and other criminal means (I'm looking directly at you Painters & Dockers Union) I could easily see it becoming a serious police problem that could even possibly escalate to armed clashes.

Can you tell I have no love for Australian dock workers? :D

[Legbreaker]

What a fun document to fill in......
4181

[Legbreaker]

One positive about WWIII breaking out in late 1996 - no gun buy back scheme for Australia in 1997!
Semi-automatics, etc will still be quite widespread throughout the country unlike the real world situation where even gel blasters and (in some cases) paint ball guns are illegal.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

One positive about WWIII breaking out in late 1996 - no gun buy back scheme for Australia in 1997!
Semi-automatics, etc will still be quite widespread throughout the country unlike the real world situation where even gel blasters and (in some cases) paint ball guns are illegal.
Just a few notes about that. In Western Australia, semi-autos were restricted from the early 1990s. Specifically any semi-autos that fired centrefire ammo were no longer allowed for civilian possession. From memory we're talking before 1994 (it was during the time Carmen Lawrence was Premier of WA).
Farmers, roo shooters etc. etc. could argue for the need for such semi-autos but they would've been a tiny portion of the West Aussie firearms community.
Any military styled firearms (such as the .22LR M16 lookalikes, AR-15s, HK94s and so on) were not available for civvy ownership for decades before. I don't know specifically when that came about but I knew about it in the mid-1980s but WA had essentially banned them from civvy ownership for some time before the gun buyback.

Paintball guns were illegal in Western Australia until sometime in the mid-to-late 1990s. Some politicians were convinced they could be converted into "real" guns while other politicians claimed that letting people use paintball guns would teach them how to use "real" guns. It took years of public lobbying before they were finally accepted for club sports and then finally private ownership (which requires a firearms licence, it's a Category E "firearm")

But anyway... while the WA rulings against semi-auto centrefires came into place in the early 1990s, I think you could argue that the circumstances leading up to it might have been overshadowed by the world stumbling along the path that would lead to WWIII. However there were far fewer of them in WA compared to what could be found in the Eastern States.

However...
That didn't mean there weren't any "interesting" firearms to be found in WA.
The WA police confiscated a fully working .303 Bren Gun from a farmer some time in the 1970s or earlier. It was inherited from a relative who had apparently acquired it during WW2.
I saw a Pakistani made G3 that was owned by some dodgy associate of a friend. Another friend who was in the ARes told me about his unit digging up a crate of AKMs when on exercise in the top end of WA during the 1980s.
A former manager of mine who had been ARes told me of going shooting on a farm owned by the QM of his unit. This QM had a thing for the .50 and had apparently assembled a complete weapon from parts he'd pilfered over the years and enjoyed shooting it on his property.
One of my former associates used to go hunting with an M1 Carbine during the 1990s.

So yeah, there's a few things to consider or disregard as you need. :D

[Legbreaker]

The other thing about WA is that it's big. REALLY BIG!
Unless actually in a city or larger town, there's a very good chance you could get away with owning and using prohibited firearms if you were relatively careful about it.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

And as long as you're not being a dickhead with your firearms, there's plenty of people in the WA countryside who wouldn't bother checking if your restricted category firearm is licenced or not. In some areas it's pretty much "don't ask, don't tell" if you behave yourself.

[Targan]

WA Police crackdown on firearm theft sees gun owners charged with failing to secure weapons (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-01-03/gun-storage-warning-after-firearms-found-under-mattresses/10683316)

A week ago.

[Legbreaker]

If you're going to have something you shouldn't have, it's easy enough to conceal - two safes, one for the police with the stuff you're allowed, and the second tucked away out of sight with everything else.
NEVER leave anything laying about unsecured.

[Olefin]

If you're going to have something you shouldn't have, it's easy enough to conceal - two safes, one for the police with the stuff you're allowed, and the second tucked away out of sight with everything else.
NEVER leave anything laying about unsecured.

Been there have the tshirt - or more properly my grandfather was the one with the tshirt and with several weapons that he wasnt supposed to have that were safely hidden away from any prying eyes and continue to remain being that way after he died.

[Legbreaker]

A few more instances like this and we're getting close to the level of damage needed....
https://www.pilbaranews.com.au/?business%2Fmining%2Ffire-rips-through-plant-at-rio-tintos-cape-lambert-port-facility-in-pilbara-ng-b881070465z&fbclid=IwAR0Bc3b5gKQ4AIC9siL8YisBjBAgzLIlAMY_xQ5dk QNdUYxMgygrD2UfLjU

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Hmm, an example of synchronicity perhaps?

Today I was reading some newspaper archives from the 1940s & 1950s regarding the HMAS Sydney II (1930s light cruiser) and Sydney III (1940s light aircraft carrier).
Sydney III was the victim of sabotage on at least two occasions and I think a third as well (although I'm trying to find more details).

One act was during servicing at Garden Island (ironically Fleet Base East, which is in the city of... Sydney) in which the cables to a surface to air radar were cut. It was believed to be an attempt to delay Sydney getting back to the Korean War (the sabotage didn't delay her by even a modest amount).
At the time (and during WW2) civilian dockworkers were employed in large numbers to maintain and service naval vessels. You all know the "warm & fuzzy" feelings I have for Australian dock workers but it could have easily been a member of the RAN. Regardless of military or civilian background, the investigation pointed out that it was someone with legitimate access to the naval docks and believed it was someone with knowedge of radar systems.

The other act was during sea trails in England in 1948 after Sydney III had been completed to Australia requirements. Four large bolts were found in a crankcase. The bolts caused all the cogs in the crank housing to shear off their teeth. The subsequent investigation concluded that it was a deliberate act as the bolts could not have come loose from within the crankcase.

So... what we have is two examples of sabotage on a naval vessel during the Cold War period when security against Communism was quite high and in one instance during a period of war against Communist foes when I'm assuming security would have been even higher.
Basically I'm throwing this up here to illustrate how sabotage of the kind Leg is talking about can be effectively carried out (in the case of Sydney III the sabotage wasn't effective enough to prevent her rapid return to service but the fact that it was able to be done at all is the important point here).

[Legbreaker]

With the much different racial mix in Australia now, it's even easier for potential hostiles to get themselves into sensitive positions and wreak havoc. In some places, the number of people who's families came from SE Asia exceeds those from the rest of the world. Given Australia is fighting Indonesia in T2K....
Saboteurs don't need to be members of an enemy military either as history has already shown. In WWII, the Communists in Australia still actively worked against Australia and the US through sabotage, theft and simply refusing to work or "go slow" campaigns, even though the USSR were allies. There is evidence that they preferred to lose to the Japanese if it would trigger a workers revolution!
As we've seen in recent years there's still a strong, if small, communist/socialist movement in the country. It would only take a few of them in key positions to cause similar havoc as occurred in the 40's.

[Olefin]

Question - one thing that has been discussed on the Facebook board is the possibility of any conflict in Papua New Guinea having logistics issues as to ammo

However Australia was producing small arms ammo and gunpowder and explosives and should be able to continue supporting their forces to some extent. There is the Mulwala Explosives Factory in New South Wales that made explosives and powder as well as munitions manufacturing factories and explosives factories at Maribyrnong (which closed in 1989 in our timeline due to restructuring), Footscray (which was closed in 1994), and Benalla, Victoria.

With those resources how long could Australia supply itself and possibly NZ given the worldwide cutoff of shipping that happened starting in late 1997 to early 1998 during the war?

[Legbreaker]

Short answer - Not very long at all.
Longer answer - there will be major shortages after only a few months as international trade dries up. Given a few years and the re-establishment of some trade, as well as internal adjustments to industrial production, and Australia could well be on a path to self sufficiency in most regards compared to the rest of the world. It's those middle few years (upwards of a decade) which will REALLY HURT.

I don't know too much as yet about the New Zealand position, but given it's lower population and generally less industrialised economy, my guess is that although they're likely able to feed the people, they're not going to be able to support any troops outside their immediate borders.

I'm currently reading through a number of Australian government and army reports from the 1990s detailing the problems for the military should military logistic support not be available during extended operations (they mean more than about 6-8 weeks) and formations of even just a single brigade in size. The forecast at the time was bleak to say the least. Budget cuts over preceding decades had left the logistic units a mere shell, barely able to meet peacetime requirements. Also didn't help that the Australian military has since federation in 1901 been very much focused on the combat arms (primarily infantry) with logistics left up to initially the British, and later the US.

In more modern times it was expected civilian workers and equipment would be utilised at both the Australian end right up to just behind the actual fighting. As I've mentioned previously in this thread, this didn't work very well especially during WWII due to industrial action and outright sabotage by unions. In East Timor, 1999, the expected facilities and workers in Dili simply didn't exist so logistics units throughout not just the army, but the entire ADF were stripped of personnel and equipment just to get the supply ships unloaded.

It's almost as if politicians and senior military officers had completely ignored the most basic rules of warfare for over a century!

[StainlessSteelCynic]

It's almost as if politicians and senior military officers had completely ignored the most basic rules of warfare for over a century!

Yeah :mad: It always brings to mind the saying "Amateurs talk strategy & tactics, professionals talk logistics". We've had plenty of politicians talk strategy & tactics however I don't believe a single one of them understood the simplest thing about logistics.
Which is a big part of the reason why I believe the Abrams was not the best choice of tank for Australia - it guzzles fuel like a man in the desert drinks water. To be clearer, the Abrams suited the strategy of the time but chosing it required that we ignore the logistics aspect - something the politicians (and the political animals in the military hierarchy) found quite easy to achieve! :p

[Olefin]

Well the ammo and explosives factories should keep them supplied with more than one clip per man- you can carry a hell of a lot of bullets and grenades and mortar shells on relatively small ships. However that doesnt keep them supplied with such non-essentials (sarcasm intended) as boots, medicine, uniforms, tents, food, etc.

So they would have stuff to shoot - but they might be going around pretty badly clothed and fed after a while.

Sorry Leg and Stainless - but Australia makes a lot of nitric acid and has lead available in abundance. Thus they can make smokeless powder easily and also lead for bullets. The soldiers would need to collect brass for reloads but that should be relatively easy. So bullets wont be a problem.

However once the transport network starts to break down getting those bullets to the North so they can be shipped to Papua would be the real issue - but making the bullets themselves and getting powder for them wont be a real problem for quite a while.

[Legbreaker]

As I've mentioned here and elsewhere, it's not so much the production of ammo in Australia, but getting it to the troops in PNG. It's not as simple either as throwing it on a small boat or two either - there's a shooting war going on, and those little boats will find themselves in a LOT of trouble very quickly if everything doesn't go absolutely right...

I'm not going to say too much more on this except this will be a factor in the book and possibly a huge adventure hook.

[Olefin]

Oh I agree with you that it will be a pain in the butt to get it there - and it would make a great adventure hook for sure. And its not just getting over the ocean between Australia and PNG. There is the little issue of getting it from where the factories are to where the harbors are in the north.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I don't see significant problems with producing ammunition simply because we do have significant amounts of primary resources and the industry to exploit them. Even producing such items as boots, clothes, food etc. etc. wouldn't be too much of a problem.
We have enough industries (and the skills) in place to produce many of the items needed to supply the military but there will always be one factor that will cause problems - transport.

Again the problem of logistics.
Without the vessels or vehicles to move it, it doesn't matter how much ammo we can make. This wouldn't be insurmountable within Australia but as soon as it comes to supplying any force outside Australia we have to use either ships or aircraft. We might even have enough surviving ships/aircraft in good working order but if there aren't problems with obtaining enough fuel for them, there's still the problem of protecting them while they make their deliveries.

It's always going to be a problem for logistics to solve, not a problem of whether we can produce the needed supplies.

[Legbreaker]

Yes, transportation is the BIG killer here. Both the RAAF and RAN aren't exactly huge and if Indonesia managed to take out even just half of the aircraft and ships, it wouldn't matter how many cargo ships and planes were available - without escorts they're as good as dead.

Got my hands on some early 1990's Strategic Reviews today. Skimming through them one thing is obvious - defence planners were expecting to be able to lean VERY heavily on the US in the area of warships, aircraft and logistic support in the event Australia or PNG was directly threatened. Given T2K has the US already completely tied up elsewhere, the situation for Australia, New Zealand and the small Pacific island nations looks bleak. Very, very bleak.

My big concern now is ensuring Indonesia isn't able to simply roll right over the top of the defenders in PNG, but I've already got a few ideas to hamstring their offensive, some of which tie into the very reasons they're attacking in the first place!

[Legbreaker]

....and the logistical situation for Australia in T2k just got a lot worse.
During the 1990's the RAN had just two, woefully inadequate minesweepers which weren't even capable of handling rough seas. The first of their replacements was made by Italy and didn't launch until AFTER Italy declared war on NATO, therefore it seems fairly certain it was pressed into Italian service rather than delivered half way around the world. The second vessel of the class (and IRL four more after it) were to be built in Australia, but it didn't even hit the water until mid 98 and wasn't commissioned until early 2000. Even with accelerated production it's very unlikely it would have been completed at all, at least not as a mine hunter....

Why is this important? Well, a 1986 report identified the vulnerability of Australian ports and shipping to mines. With just two inadequate vessels to cover five identified ports in the north alone (not to mention another eight major and uncounted numbers of minor ports in the south), well, I think you can all see the problem...

[Legbreaker]

With those resources how long could Australia supply itself and possibly NZ given the worldwide cutoff of shipping that happened starting in late 1997 to early 1998 during the war?

Found a sort of answer in the 1986 review of Australia's defence capabilities.
In any prolonged conflict our access to overseas supplies would be affected. Australia could survive at an adequate, if reduced, standard of living because basic requirements for community survival, such as food and fuel, could be supplied from local sources with the introduction of appropriate measures for conservation and rationing. But the United States and its European allies would give first priority to their own military needs. We could not assume that they would give any priority to our military requirements, except in so far as this made a direct contribution to their effort against the Soviet Union. The only military supplies of which Australia could be assured would be those in which we were self-reliant or those we had been able to stockpile before the start of conflict.

[Olefin]

Are you looking at possible involvement by the Solomon Islands in what is goin on in the PNG during the war or possibly having parts of it try to break off - for instance there was an uprising on Bougainville that started in 1988 and claimed 20,000 lives until it was resolved in 1997.

They are a major part of the mining economy for Papua - you could see that revolt getting out of hand if the Soviets assisted them.

And you have what Indonesia is doing in West Papua as well - possibly a major uprising there is what screws over their logistics

[Olefin]

Keep in mind that there would be four very unique ships that would definitely be used with oil running low in T2K in Australia - i.e. the four coal fired freighters that were built to take bauxite from Weipa to Gladstone and did so for over 25 years starting in the 1980's for Australia - the River Boyne, the River Embley and their two sisters Fitzroy River and Endeavour River.

They were 60,000 ton ships and went on trips as far as Indonesia

Even if one of them survived it would help with logistics with how low fuel oil would be in Australia.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

And those four ships were built in the very early 80s so it's not as though they're some decrepit WW2 veterans that sat in reserve for decades. They were still operating into the 2000s.
River Embly was scrapped in 2012 and River Boyne followed in 2014.
I believe the other two went to Singapore sometime between 2012 and 2015 to await disposal.

I'm inclined to believe the Australian government would use these four, if they were still usable, for cargo runs around the Australian coast. I don't think they would be willing to risk losing them for resupply of overseas forces unless they could provide them with sufficient protection - they're just too valuable for helping re-establish transport within Australia.

Edit:
DOH!
Meant to add the following information for River Embly & River Boyne - taken from https://flotilla-australia.com/3anl.htm : -
Specs - 51,035 gross tons, 76293 dwt. Lb: 255 x 35.4 metres. 16 knots. Single screw, turbine powered, twin boiler design using coal as fuel, fully automatic with UMS certificate. Speed 16 knots. Crew 38.

[Legbreaker]

Meant to add the following information for River Embly & River Boyne - taken from https://flotilla-australia.com/3anl.htm : -
Specs - 51,035 gross tons, 76293 dwt. Lb: 255 x 35.4 metres. 16 knots. Single screw, turbine powered, twin boiler design using coal as fuel, fully automatic with UMS certificate. Speed 16 knots. Crew 38.

I had a look at that earlier today in an effort to find some information on range and fuel consumption. No luck but did see reference to them not having enough range to be useful for more than relatively short runs (whatever that's supposed to mean exactly). We do know at least one reached Singapore, but that was a one way trip and they could have refuelled along the way.
It's quite probable they routinely refuelled in Newcastle, but that doesn't mean it had the range to make it all the way to Weipa and back on one load - there's four coal export ports between each end of that run, and possibly additional refuelling points as well (although I'm doubtful).

That's a good point about their value as local freighters. Add to that their vulnerability to even small surface raiders if travelling without an escort, and...

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Long-winded reply follows (written at the same time as I searched the net for the answers).
Quick answer about fuel load and range - scroll to the bottom.

I haven't found enough hard data yet to confirm or deny this but it was said on one site that the two "Rivers" were also employed taking iron ore from West Australian ports serving the iron ore industry (which means mostly north-west WA) to Newcastle. That's a fair distance to travel without many coal loading ports inbetween if you travel through the Bight.
I think it would be easier to go via the top end and hit the coal ports in Qld but what the hell do I know about maritime trade!

Just found a PDF of an investigation into an incident where the patrol boat HMAS Fremantle and MV River Embly had a bit of a blue in 1997. The last page has a little more info on the Embly but still nothing indicating what sort of range she had. The PDF indicates that the Embly was a regular in Queensland waters but that's no surprise if she was carrying ore from Weipa to Gladstone.
https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/1508366/mair112_001.pdf

The distance between Weipa and Gladstone is pretty short in terms of maritime travel, however...
The coal bunker for both ships appears to be substantial... but then how much coal would she burn in a day? In the picture on the following two links, the coal bunker is said to be the large grey structure behind the bridge.
http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=1183929
https://www.issystems.com.au/products2/iba/11-all/193-casestudy-ss-river-embley-controls-re-engineering.html

While the coal bunker looks quite large, I'm inclined to think that if it's true that the "Rivers" travelled between WA ports and Newcastle, the trip via Qld would be better suited for refuelling purposes.
The distance from WA to Newcastle is in my poor estimation, longer via the top end but much calmer sailing than through the Southern Ocean.
Fascinating... but none of which doesn't get me any closer to figuring the range Embly would have :rolleyes:

Note that MV Fitzroy River was originally named TNT Capricornia and MV Endeavour River was originally named TNT Carpentaria. Both ships were built in Italy (whereas the two "Rivers" were built in Japan)
I've just found an archived newspaper report from 1991 that mentions Capricornia being robbed by pirates two days out from Singapore (the ship was unloaded and heading to Singapore to be put into drydock)
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/122389227?searchTerm=TNT%20CAPRICORNIA&searchLimits=
And a second report that actually mentions that Capricornia was "... 350 miles south of Singapore, or 24 hours travelling time..."
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/122389071?searchTerm=TNT%20CAPRICORNIA&searchLimits=exactPhrase|||anyWords|||notWords|||r equestHandler|||dateFrom=1981-01-01|||dateTo=2001-12-31|||sortby
But but but... then there's this post on a forum devoted to ships stating that the "TNTs" had auxillary diesel engines.
https://www.shipsnostalgia.com/showthread.php?t=3193

I'm starting to think that this is a job for the Jane's Maritime yearbooks :(

EUREKA!
Found something in the newspaper archives about the capacity of the "Rivers" with the implication that the "TNTs" are similar.
3000 tonnes (note the use of metric tonnes) of coal for 4500 nautical miles.
Plus it mentions that coal has only two-thirds the heating capacity of oil so three times as much coal in weight is needed for the same power output.
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/130826633?searchTerm=%22River%20Boyne%22&searchLimits=dateFrom=1981-01-01|||dateTo=2001-12-31

[Olefin]

Have a feeling they would be getting armed by 2000 for sure - maybe even earlier - heck look at the what they did to the Constitution replica - those movie cannons got replaced by 50 cals - could easily see the Australians adding some nice weaponry to defend themselves so you would get this kind of scenario

"hey its just a freighter she is easy pickings!" - and then find out the hard way that she has been modified and can defend herself very well thank you

Frankly I dont see any ship of any kind by 1999 or so going anywhere on the high seas without at least some 50 cal's added for self defense

I will see what I can find on range and what it was on coal alone (I know they also had auxiliary engines as well that ran on diesel to supplement if needed the coal fired ones for longer trips)

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Amusingly, we posted answers at the same time, my post just above yours has some info on the coal capacity and range of the Boyne and Embly.

Have a feeling they would be getting armed by 2000 for sure - maybe even earlier - heck look at the what they did to the Constitution replica - those movie cannons got replaced by 50 cals - could easily see the Australians adding some nice weaponry to defend themselves so you would get this kind of scenario

"hey its just a freighter she is easy pickings!" - and then find out the hard way that she has been modified and can defend herself very well thank you

Frankly I dont see any ship of any kind by 1999 or so going anywhere on the high seas without at least some 50 cal's added for self defense

I will see what I can find on range and what it was on coal alone (I know they also had auxiliary engines as well that ran on diesel to supplement if needed the coal fired ones for longer trips)

[Olefin]

Long-winded reply follows (written at the same time as I searched the net for the answers).
Quick answer about fuel load and range - scroll to the bottom.

I haven't found enough hard data yet to confirm or deny this but it was said on one site that the two "Rivers" were also employed taking iron ore from West Australian ports serving the iron ore industry (which means mostly north-west WA) to Newcastle. That's a fair distance to travel without many coal loading ports inbetween if you travel through the Bight.
I think it would be easier to go via the top end and hit the coal ports in Qld but what the hell do I know about maritime trade!

Just found a PDF of an investigation into an incident where the patrol boat HMAS Fremantle and MV River Embly had a bit of a blue in 1997. The last page has a little more info on the Embly but still nothing indicating what sort of range she had. The PDF indicates that the Embly was a regular in Queensland waters but that's no surprise if she was carrying ore from Weipa to Gladstone.
https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/1508366/mair112_001.pdf

The distance between Weipa and Gladstone is pretty short in terms of maritime travel, however...
The coal bunker for both ships appears to be substantial... but then how much coal would she burn in a day? In the picture on the following two links, the coal bunker is said to be the large grey structure behind the bridge.
http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=1183929
https://www.issystems.com.au/products2/iba/11-all/193-casestudy-ss-river-embley-controls-re-engineering.html

While the coal bunker looks quite large, I'm inclined to think that if it's true that the "Rivers" travelled between WA ports and Newcastle, the trip via Qld would be better suited for refuelling purposes.
The distance from WA to Newcastle is in my poor estimation, longer via the top end but much calmer sailing than through the Southern Ocean.
Fascinating... but none of which doesn't get me any closer to figuring the range Embly would have :rolleyes:

Note that MV Fitzroy River was originally named TNT Capricornia and MV Endeavour River was originally named TNT Carpentaria. Both ships were built in Italy (whereas the two "Rivers" were built in Japan)
I've just found an archived newspaper report from 1991 that mentions Capricornia being robbed by pirates two days out from Singapore (the ship was unloaded and heading to Singapore to be put into drydock)
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/122389227?searchTerm=TNT%20CAPRICORNIA&searchLimits=
And a second report that actually mentions that Capricornia was "... 350 miles south of Singapore, or 24 hours travelling time..."
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/122389071?searchTerm=TNT%20CAPRICORNIA&searchLimits=exactPhrase|||anyWords|||notWords|||r equestHandler|||dateFrom=1981-01-01|||dateTo=2001-12-31|||sortby
But but but... then there's this post on a forum devoted to ships stating that the "TNTs" had auxillary diesel engines.
https://www.shipsnostalgia.com/showthread.php?t=3193

I'm starting to think that this is a job for the Jane's Maritime yearbooks :(

EUREKA!
Found something in the newspaper archives about the capacity of the "Rivers" with the implication that the "TNTs" are similar.
3000 tonnes (note the use of metric tonnes) of coal for 4500 nautical miles.
Plus it mentions that coal has only two-thirds the heating capacity of oil so three times as much coal in weight is needed for the same power output.
https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/130826633?searchTerm=%22River%20Boyne%22&searchLimits=dateFrom=1981-01-01|||dateTo=2001-12-31

and then I see this post - very nice indeed!!! Not only lots of info about range but even suggestions for a very nice T2K scenario (i.e. the robbed by pirates that actually happened in real life)

This is one reason I love this site - you can find all kinds of fascinating information here

[Targan]

Plenty of coal in Australia. East and West coasts.

[Raellus]

This little beaut might come in handy. It's scheduled for a June 18th release.

https://ospreypublishing.com/store/military-history/upcoming-books/preorder-2-months/the-australian-army-at-war-1976-2016

And in a geographically-related vein, out 30 May:

https://ospreypublishing.com/store/military-history/upcoming-books/preorder-next-month/australian-bushrangers-1788-1880

Come to think of it, the latter may be inspirational re Aussie marauders (maybe even better- and it pains me to say this- than the Mad Max films).

-

[Legbreaker]

Question for the New Zealanders. How likely, or possible is it that the Maori might rebel, or seek independence, etc?
Assume almost all international trade has ceased, and 90% of the military (including a significant number of conscripts and/or volunteers) are out of the country, with little chance of a speedy return.

[Targan]

Question for the New Zealanders. How likely, or possible is it that the Maori might rebel, or seek independence, etc?

It's a game setting so anything's possible, but I don't think it's likely. The Maori have political clout, they have land, they were full citizens of the British Empire from the moment the Treaty of Waitangi was signed. New Zealanders tend to pull together during difficult times, rather than try to tear the country apart.


They'd no doubt insist on being heard, but as a group I doubt the Maori would want to secede. The Maori bikie gangs are pretty scary though. In areas where government control started to weaken, they'd probably flex their muscles a bit.

[Legbreaker]

The Maori bikie gangs are pretty scary though. In areas where government control started to weaken, they'd probably flex their muscles a bit.

How would they cope or adjust with a lack of fuel for their bikes?

[Olefin]

FYI found some information on the Indonesian Air Force that you could use for the backstory on the Indonesian Australian conflict

In 1995/1996 they had the following aircraft:

Two squadrons of A-4E Skyhawks, one squadron of F-5E Tiger II, one squadron of F-16 and one squadron of OV-10F Bronco's. In addition they had five transport squadrons that were equipped with C-130 Hercules, CASANC-212 Aviocar, CN-235 and F-27's. They also had three Boeing 737's that were used for surveillance/transport. There were also assorted other aircraft that were in transport, helicopter and training units including 15 Hawks, 15 T-34C armed trainers and 36 AS 202 primary trainers

Will see if I can find more details for you but you could see a few surviving aircraft possibly here and there - especially the older aircraft that were easier to maintain

[Legbreaker]

Found a useful site about a week ago.
http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-6168.html
It's not perfect, but it's about the best I've found to date.
It's actually got most of the countries of the world in there, except it would seem close allies of the US and it's all from the early 1990's. http://www.country-data.com

[Olefin]

I recommend The Statesman's Yearbook - they have them for every year - you can get older copies online, on google books or they are for sale - lots of info on there about every country including their military - very useful books

Example is the 1993-1994 book on google books -

https://books.google.com/books?id=447JDQAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=the+statesman%27s+yearbook+1995&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwilnainz9jhAhXKtlkKHSn9D184ChDoAQhGMAY#v =onepage&q&f=false

[lordroel]

I recommend The Statesman's Yearbook - they have them for every year - you can get older copies online, on google books or they are for sale - lots of info on there about every country including their military - very useful books

Example is the 1993-1994 book on google books -

https://books.google.com/books?id=447JDQAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=the+statesman%27s+yearbook+1995&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwilnainz9jhAhXKtlkKHSn9D184ChDoAQhGMAY#v =onepage&q&f=false

Is there also for 1982 as i would like to know due to my ongoing Falklands timeline as i would like to know what Argentina and the UK had if that is in the book.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I recommend The Statesman's Yearbook - they have them for every year - you can get older copies online, on google books or they are for sale - lots of info on there about every country including their military - very useful books

Example is the 1993-1994 book on google books -

https://books.google.com/books?id=447JDQAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=the+statesman%27s+yearbook+1995&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwilnainz9jhAhXKtlkKHSn9D184ChDoAQhGMAY#v =onepage&q&f=false
Those yearbooks are a great resource. Nice find Olefin, I'd never heard of them before and sadly, in my little part of Australia, lack of knowledge of certain books is far too common. So thanks muchly for letting us know about them.

EDIT: I've just discovered that some of them are available on the internet archive, mostly from the very late 19th century and early 20th century but there are two from the later part of the 20th century.

The one for 1988-89 can be found here https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.100945/page/n11

And this one for 1970-71 https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.126738/page/n3

And another EDIT: If you want to join the site, you can download or read online some of the Year-books, including 1980-81 and 1981-82 versions
https://newbooksinpolitics.com/political/the-statesman-s-year-book-1980-1981/

[Olefin]

Thank you - glad to have been of help

FYI this is the link for the 1995-1996 book - which is about as close as you get to the real timeline start - keep in mind of course the military's it will show are after the drawdown after the Cold War had ended - the link takes you right to Mexico FYI

https://books.google.com/books?id=YKXPDQAAQBAJ&pg=PA944&lpg=PA944&dq=list+of+all+mexican+air+force+planes+1995&source=bl&ots=1C8kwN3Tpw&sig=5p0xsA_4cK8sXO4GOkcBXGW0mvw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiy5aqx0P_VAhWl5oMKHQL_CQQ4ChDoAQglMAA#v =onepage&q=list%20of%20all%20mexican%20air%20force%20planes %201995&f=false

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Leg, did you ever look at the Aus. Bureau of Statistics for info? I ask because I have only just found their downloads page for their yearbooks of the state of the nation.
While the docs give overviews, projects and stats such as total number of personnel, they don't go into any finer detail so they may not be that helpful?

This is the page for the 1990 yearbook
https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/1301.01990?OpenDocument

And the specific pdf for the section on Defence
https://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/free.nsf/0/EA1A5CACAA16D17BCA25739C0008D1E6/$File/13010_1990_chapter4.pdf

I found it wasn't to much mucking about to get the various years by using "year book Australia 1990" in the search box (or whatever other year you wanted to check) so for example, here's the downloads page for 1995
https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/DetailsPage/1301.01995?OpenDocument

[Legbreaker]

I can't recall if I went there, but I do have most of that information I believe.
Second source is always good though!

Found a couple of useful items recently. Problem is they've opened a bit of a Pandora's box!

4230

4231

[Olefin]

Given that the war breaks out before the reduction of the Australian Army would the 8th/9th Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment still be around? If so would you have them be the battalion based in Papua New Guinea when the war breaks out there - if I remember right didnt they have the task of training their armed forces?

[cawest]

Given that the war breaks out before the reduction of the Australian Army would the 8th/9th Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment still be around? If so would you have them be the battalion based in Papua New Guinea when the war breaks out there - if I remember right didnt they have the task of training their armed forces?

also what about local made armored "cars" to support the fighting in the local area. I do not think they can make there own tanks, but rebuilding old ones might be do able.

RL they started building the ASLAV in 95 but the design was from 92. maybe Bushmaster protected mobility vehicle?

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Well we actually do have some minor experience building tanks - in WW2. The Sentinel medium tank was designed and built in Australia when it looked like our supply of armoured vehicles from Great Britain was in jeopardy. It was a good vehicle comparing favourably with contemporary British & American designs (although with a poor turret layout for the crew) but rendered unnecessary by the availability of mass supply of tanks from the USA.
Plus there was local manufacture of Australian variants of the Universal Carrier as well as a local design, the Dingo armoured car and some armoured truck modifications.

Another item that sparked some interest with the T2k alternate timeline of Merc: 2000, an Australian company acquired the rights to the Shorland armoured car. This was in 1996 so not particularly useful for T2k timelines.
Plus we designed and implemented an upgrade for the M113 vehicles in service (to AS4 standard).

So all in all, we have the industry and the technical skills to build armoured vehicles including tanks but there is no "national need" for us to build certain vehicles e.g. tanks.
Obviously for T2k everything depends on the timeline being used but I would expect that (considering we had a Land Rover production facility in Australia for several decades supplying vehicles to the military), we would probably look at some sort of armoured car variant of the Landie at the very least. I don't think national need would extend to tanks but it's not beyond the realms of possibility.

EDIT: meant to also mention that the ASLAV design is based on the Canadian LAV design which in turn was based on the Swiss MOWAG Piranha vehicle. The Piranha in 4x4, 6x6 and 8x8 configurations has been available since the 1970s so if you tweaked the details, we could have acquired some sort of ASLAV in the 1980s.

[RN7]

Another item that sparked some interest with the T2k alternate timeline of Merc: 2000, an Australian company acquired the rights to the Shorland armoured car. This was in 1996 so not particularly useful for T2k timelines.

Doesn't the Twilight War not start in 1996?

[StainlessSteelCynic]

As I recall it, Shorts sold the rights to the Shorland because they didn't see a market any longer for the vehicle in Europe (peace dividend etc. etc.) I imagine that in a T2k world, they would not sell the rights - tensions rising before '96, talk of war and so on, I tend to think they would not even be looking to sell.

[Legbreaker]

Yes, late in 96. I'd imagine the previous owners of the rights would be loathe to give them up though with a possible conflict about to kick off. There were plenty of warning signs leading up to Germany stepping over the border.


..again...

[Legbreaker]

Given that the war breaks out before the reduction of the Australian Army would the 8th/9th Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment still be around? If so would you have them be the battalion based in Papua New Guinea when the war breaks out there - if I remember right didn't they have the task of training their armed forces?

There will be three Divisions in the year 2000 (as there was up until the early 90's), with units delinked as the military is brought up to strength. Therefore 8/9 RAR won't exist as such, but 8 RAR and 9 RAR will.

Note that the PNG military is a joke consisting of a total of approximately 1,000 personnel covering air, land and naval responsibilities. Most training beyond the most basic is carried out in Australia. IRL there are about thirty Australian instructors and observers in PNG. However in September 2018 it was revealed that plans were being made "for short-term troop deployments" to PNG although there were no further details at the time although the implication was it would be little more than Company strength.

[Legbreaker]

https://youtu.be/ppIRy9Aj5WM
Conditions haven't changed much since then. Helicopters and a few more rough air strips make travel a little easier, but as fuel and spare parts run out (as happens in the rest of the T2K world)...

[Raellus]

Just thumbed through my copy of Osprey's Men-at-Arms series, Australian Army At War, 1976-2016 and my first impression is quite favorable. Its text covers various peace-keeping deployments and Australia's contributions to the ongoing 'War on Terror'.

From a photo caption, I learned that an under-barrel grenade launcher for the F88 wasn't procured until the early 2000s, so Digger grenadiers deployed to East Timor were equipped with M79 GLs.

Anyway, if you have any interest in the modern Australian army, I recommend that you pick up a copy straightaway.

-

[Legbreaker]

Written with the help of the defence media unit I'm guessing?
My research to date has shown the Australian military was in a shocking state through the 70's and 80's and IRL only started to turn around in the mid 90's.

The M203 was in service but only in regular army infantry units prior to the introduction of the F88. As the regular units received the new rifle, they handed the M16/M203's over to reserve units, and the regs pulled M79's out of storage.
Personally, having used both, I prefer the 203 to carry, but the 79 to fire. I could drop a grenade through a small window at 300+ metres with the 79, but be lucky to hit the same grid square with the 203.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

There were some Reserve units with M203s but they weren't Infantry.
10th Light Horse in Western Australia had 203s before the introduction of the F88, I don't know when they took them on strength but I saw them myself during the 80s and early 90s.
It was a source of annoyance because those of us in Infantry units in WA couldn't get them for love nor money but 10 little ponies had 'em!**





** To be fair, 10LH was not a large unit, they were a single Armoured Recce Squadron and typically understrength. So it's not like they had dozens of them, I'd take a rough guess that they probably never had more than about a dozen 203s in total.
Still... they had them, we didn't - of course we were envious!

As for 203 versus 79, my accuracy was "okay" with the 203, I could generally get rounds on target but I was never as quick with it as I was with the 79.

[Legbreaker]

There were some Reserve units with M203s but they weren't Infantry.


Well, I was in one of those infantry reserve units with M203's. I think they were 1RAR's (could have been 2) and we got all their M16's and M203's when they converted to the F88.
A couple of years later and we got the F88 but kept the M16's and 203's. Don't know what happened much after that as I went Reg about 3 months later.

[Legbreaker]

I've decided I'm going to drop some nukes on Indonesia around October-November 1997. As the fourth largest oil producer on the planet, and located on a very important shipping route, it just makes sense to deny those resources from the "enemy".
Don't think I'll state who actually did it though - just leave it up in the air. There's a case to be made for either side actually. The US could do it in order to help out the Anzac forces slow the Indonesian advance, and given I've decided Indonesia has also turned communist again in the T2K universe...
On the other hand, the Soviets could have done is as traditionally much of Indonesian oil and mineral exports has gone to the US. It's not like the Soviets will be able to take advantage of the resources themselves either given there's a LOT of hostile ground and forces in between the two areas.

Sound reasonable?

[Olefin]

Given the fact that the Soviets attacked refineries throughout France, South and Central America and Africa and the US hit ones supporting the Soviets then it would make sense that at least some of the big refineries would be hit if not all of them

The question with the nukes would be are they purely going after oil refineries - ie. oil denial - or are they supporting Australia and going after naval bases and air bases as well

[Legbreaker]

Indonesia doesn't have a lot of refining capacity - they export crude for the most part, with a sizeable percentage going to the US for refining.

As for the rest, I don't want to go into too much detail. Indonesia and it's immediate neighbours really deserves their own book! Essentially I'm still looking for reasons for the Indos to invade PNG and how to prevent them simply rolling over the defenders (which they outnumber about 10 to 1).

[Olefin]

well then a perfect target would be the export terminals - in the East Africa book the Soviets destroyed the Nigerian oil terminals to prevent them exporting oil - similar thing could happen to Indonesia

as to why they go to war - the Indonesians arent looking for total war - they think the Australians will just roll over and allow Papua to be taken - and they find out its not that simple - and they dont have the ability to project enough power to make the 10 to 1 advantage really mean anything - especially since they are dealing with the after effects of the nuke attacks on them - and you could easily have the other half of New Guinea rise against the Indonesians as well -that would keep them very busy indeed and prevent them bringing their full power to bear

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Well, I was in one of those infantry reserve units with M203's. I think they were 1RAR's (could have been 2) and we got all their M16's and M203's when they converted to the F88.
A couple of years later and we got the F88 but kept the M16's and 203's. Don't know what happened much after that as I went Reg about 3 months later.
Sorry, I probably wasn't clear enough. Specifically, there were some non-Infantry Reserve units that had the M16/M203 before the F88 was in service.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

well then a perfect target would be the export terminals - in the East Africa book the Soviets destroyed the Nigerian oil terminals to prevent them exporting oil - similar thing could happen to Indonesia

as to why they go to war - the Indonesians arent looking for total war - they think the Australians will just roll over and allow Papua to be taken - and they find out its not that simple - and they dont have the ability to project enough power to make the 10 to 1 advantage really mean anything - especially since they are dealing with the after effects of the nuke attacks on them - and you could easily have the other half of New Guinea rise against the Indonesians as well -that would keep them very busy indeed and prevent them bringing their full power to bear
It's worth remembering too that Indonesia is a nation of islands, they need airports and seaports (they have been particularly reliant on seaports for most of their foreign trade throughout history). For any military action they'll need those ports, so putting them out of action would be important to restrict their ability to fight. That is to say, I don't think you need to have the oil terminals as the sole reason to drop some bombs on them (even a few nukes).

[Legbreaker]

The exactly location of the strikes I think I'll leave vague and just say they took out their production and transport capacity. A future Indonesian/SE Asia book, or individual GMs can go into more depth later if needed.

[Olefin]

One way to cause the Indonesians a lot of issues would be having Australian and perhaps US Special Forces assist the West Papuans in their guerrilla war against Indonesia - even to a full scale uprising - pretty hard to put your full war effort against Australia if your ports and base areas and transport network are under full scale guerrilla attack

"Why arent you attacking?" "Sir, the guerrillas just ambushed our fuel convoy and we have no fuel at all"

Or a variation on the movie The Patriot - having the Indonesian general look out the window of the officers club as the two ships bringing in his supplies get blown up by West Papuan guerrillas "helped" by Australian commandos

[Legbreaker]

Given the state of the PNG military forces in the 1990's, that little raiding party would probably have consisted of about 95% Australians.... :cool:

[StainlessSteelCynic]

There's also a good possibility that the British may send special operations troops to assist Australia in PNG considering that the south eastern region had been a British colonial possession since 1884 plus the fact that since 1975 PNG has been part of the (British) Commonwealth of Nations.

[Olefin]

Given the state of the PNG military forces in the 1990's, that little raiding party would probably have consisted of about 95% Australians.... :cool:

I wasnt talking about PNG military forces - I am talking about the West Papua guerrillas who have been fighting off and on against the Indonesians ever since they took the area over from the Dutch. Have a feeling the Australians would love to move that switch back to on as to them fighting against the Indonesians and making their use of the western end of New Guinea one that entails a hell of a lot of fighting guerrillas - and thus keeping them from concentrating against the Australians.

[Legbreaker]

There's also a good possibility that the British may send special operations troops to assist Australia in PNG considering that the south eastern region had been a British colonial possession since 1884 plus the fact that since 1975 PNG has been part of the (British) Commonwealth of Nations.

I'd like to think that, but they've already got their hands more than full elsewhere, and I don't intend to kick off hostilities until after the big players are committed in the main arenas.
One thing I've kept in mind through this whole process is the Indonesian leadership is acutely aware of of their limitations and their inability to stand up for even a moment against the US, or even UK. They won't be moving until they're sure the only opposition they'll face are from the local region.

[Legbreaker]

I wasnt talking about PNG military forces - I am talking about the West Papua guerrillas who have been fighting off and on against the Indonesians ever since they took the area over from the Dutch. Have a feeling the Australians would love to move that switch back to on as to them fighting against the Indonesians and making their use of the western end of New Guinea one that entails a hell of a lot of fighting guerrillas - and thus keeping them from concentrating against the Australians.

West Papuans are technically Indonesian and have been for about 50 years. I know what you're say though.
However I intend most of the fighting will be east of the border. The Anzac forces won't be in place in sufficient numbers early on to be anything more than speed bumps, and will never have the strength to push the Indonesian's back across a wide front. There simply won't be much of an opportunity for training any of the West Papuans although there will possible be an SAS presence from time to time. They however will be focused on conducting relatively short term missions of no more than about a month in length, and won't be in a position to do very much with the locals - in fact it's highly likely they'll be doing everything possible to avoid them!

[StainlessSteelCynic]

And logistics in that region will be excessively difficult. The only reasons there's even roads in some of those areas east of the border is because the mining companies working there, earning enough money to justify making & maintaining those roads.

In other areas there's nothing other than foot paths or animal trails.
Most items will have to go in by air transport or be carried in by porters and with a war in full swing, airspace is obviously going to be contested.

Ok Tedi is probably the most well known mining lease/company site in the area. It's approximately 10km from the border in some places but that's 10 kilometres of mountainous, jungle terrain. However there are other mining leases much closer to the border, one of the Ok Tedi leases is as close as 5 or 6 kilometres

Mind you, those mines are probably part of the reason why Indonesia wants to add the place to it's empire - copper, nickel, silver & gold are the big money makers but there's also cobalt, platinum, iron, chromium, molybdenum and rare earth elements. Because of the volcanic nature of some regions, there's also likely to be decent deposits of gemstones such as diamonds (the islands of New Britain, New Ireland and Bougainville are known to have deposits of diamonds although they've been deliberately left unexploited to allow for revenue in the future).

This map has some of the major minesites shown
https://www.niuminco.com.au/index.html
https://www.niuminco.com.au/images/map-png.jpg

This link however gives a much better overview of the mining situation. It shows not just minesites but also exploration leases and the map itself has a good representation of the mountainous nature of the land.
http://portal.mra.gov.pg/Map/

[Legbreaker]

Indeed you are correct. I've included Indonesia building roads in West Papua during the build up to their offensive for just that reason, with their cover story being they're simply improving civilian infrastructure prior to moving a few hundred thousand citizens from the overpopulated areas to the west.
Of course they can't actually cross the border during this phase, and there's only so much you can do in the proceeding year, especially if you're trying to conceal the fact all the major routes lead towards PNG...
By itself it's not enough to trigger a military response, or even a diplomatic one, but it is sufficient to alert defence planners to the increased probability of conflict and therefore improve Anzac preparedness by drawing in personnel from low priority offshore missions and boost overall manpower (basically begin to flesh out the three Australian Divisions from their peacetime levels of absolutely abysmal).

[Legbreaker]

Reading through the Australian Army Training Information Bulletin - The Infantry Division, 1975 and came across something that would never even be considered today.

Air defence from Division level down was considered "optional"! :eek:

The best that could be expected by lower commanders if the Div CO chose not to take dedicated AA, was their subunits organic GPMGs. Even an entertainment unit had a higher priority!

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Yeah... :(
I remember in the 70's-80's that the attitude towards air defence seemed to be "that's the job of the air force". The feeling towards that idea was most colourfully expressed by one of my training sergeants when he said something along the lines of "if the air force can't stop them, we're fucked".

Then only about a decade later we were deploying Army air defence units on RAN ships to bolster their air defence (I think it may have been for East Timor but I can't remember, it could just have easily been the Persian Gulf) - because even the RAN wasn't given sufficient air defence!
And all that shows once again, that there are some circumstances were you cannot expect the Air Force to be providing air defence.

It's a holdover from WW2 I think - too many politicians believing that Australian defence policy consisted of expecting the enemy to attack Australia over hundreds of miles of sea and not thinking that Australian military forces could/would be deployed to regions beyond RAAF control.

[Raellus]

Out of curiosity, I hit up Wikipedia and, apparently, Australia was a one-time user of the FIM-43 Redeye MANPAD. I guess it's better than nothing. :confused:

NOTE: I checked the entries for the Stinger and Blowpipe first. No dice.

[Legbreaker]

Definitely the gulf. I can remember seeing video of holes being drilled into the navy's nice clean deck to bolt the mounts down. :D

[Legbreaker]

Out of curiosity, I hit up Wikipedia and, apparently, Australia was a one-time user of the FIM-43 Redeye MANPAD. I guess it's better than nothing. :confused:

Yes, had the Redeye from 1973 to 1987, Rapier from 1979 to 2005, and RBS-70 from 1987 to now (this was the weapon mounted on the navy's ships). The AIM-120 SLAMRAAM is due to be introduced next year.
Up until 1973 they were still equipped with the WWII 40mm Bofors.

[RN7]

The US supplied Australia with 260 FIM-43C Redeye SAM's between 1969 and 1970.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Yeah, it took about two years or so to get Army Air Defence trained, qualified and organized for the missile and then, from memory, they kept them based in South Australia. They were rarely part of deployed forces on field exercises for "reasons"...


As an aside but still on air defence, during the 1950s or 1960s the RAAF had the British Bloodhound SAM for protection of air bases. I don't know what mark they were but I think they decommissioned them in the 1970s.


EDIT: by way of explanation, when I said "reasons", I'm using it to imply that the head shed had some mysterious reason for not deploying the Air Defence units and that they never bothered to tell or explain that to anyone.

[Raellus]

I know that the Brits used tripod-mounted M2HB .50 caliber HMGs for impromptu air defense during the Falklands campaign. In a T2K scenario, especially a v1.0 continuation, it stands to reason that the Australians would supplement their Redeyes, Rapiers, RBF-70s, and Bofors guns with same.

I haven't checked my memory, but IIRC, Indonesian air power (both fixed wing and rotary) was not something to be particularly feared c.1996 (IRL), so it probably wouldn't give the RAAF and Australian army AAD forces too much trouble. I can't imagine that there are many- if any- airfields in western Papua that could accommodate modern jet fighter-bombers. Even if so, keeping said airfields supplied with fuel, parts, and advanced weaponry would be difficult to say the least.

[Legbreaker]

No 40mm bofors left in Australia in T2K - out of service nearly 30 years with most either scrapped, or deactivated (welded up and parts removed) and turned into memorials in parks and outside RSL (Returned Services League) clubs. There's a very good chance the old Redeye's would have been destroyed, although I can't find any details of their disposal (another question I have to ask of the relevant people I suppose).
The Indonesians don't really have a problem with airfields as the front is right on their doorstep. The Anzac forces have a bit further to go, but it's still well within range of the available aircraft with most probably based in either Darwin, Port Moresby, or RAAF Base Curtin at Derby.
Neither side has enough air power to gain air superiority (Australia's defence has always relied on the idea of a more powerful ally coming to their aid - initially Great Britain, and then the US from WWII onwards). It won't take long before both sides are either shot out of the sky, or simply unable to replace/repair aircraft with parts and replacements being sent to either Europe, Korea or the Middle East.

[RN7]

Might be of some use about the Bofors.

http://www.defence.gov.au/UXO/_Master/docs/Types/Projectile40mmBoforsRev01.pdf

[Legbreaker]

Yeah, they were a nice bit of kit in their day, but there's no way Australia has any in service in T2K. They were already obsolete and ineffective in the late 60's and even more so by 2000.

[RN7]

Yeah, they were a nice bit of kit in their day, but there's no way Australia has any in service in T2K. They were already obsolete and ineffective in the late 60's and even more so by 2000.

But the RAN were still using them up to 2007 and they were the main armament on the Freemantle Class patrol boats

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I think there's some confusion here based on army and navy usage.
The Australian Army stopped using the Bofors decades before the RAN so I'm thinking maybe there's some crossed lines here, Legbreaker is probably thinking in terms of purely Army air defence.
With the Twilight War, the RAN is unlikely to give up their Bofors just so the Army can have some air defence!

[Legbreaker]

Correct, the RAN was using them, but with GREATLY updated targeting and control systems, on patrol boats as their main, direct fire weapon. Absolutely NOT available to the army.

[Olefin]

Keep in mind too that Australia might have tried to make a quick buck during the Soviet-Chinese part of the war - i.e. the Chinese are screaming for any anti-air weapons they can get and Australia decides to sell a significant part off to them of what they have in exchange for currency - and then ends up short on those weapons when they need them in 1998

[Legbreaker]

Not likely. Australia's barely got enough to equip even a peacetime army with AA weaponry, and no suitable industry to quickly make more.

[Olefin]

Its been done before as to countries selling equipment that they later turned out they needed. All comes down to who was in power and how confident they were that they wouldnt get dragged in.

Examples abound - US shipments to Britain pre-Pearl Harbor, Italian shipments to Spain of equipment they needed when they jumped into WWII, etc..

Wouldnt be the first time for sure that something like that stung them in the butt - i.e. hey lets ship oil to the Nazi's after all they arent shooting at us - which the Soviets did right up to the morning the Germans invaded - in this case the Australians might have thought we can use the money to buy newer equipment and then uh oh maybe we shouldnt have done that

[Olefin]

So the question is:

What happened to the Redeye's - were they scrapped, sold, stored? If stored were they still in useable condition?

Did the army dismount the RBS-70 and the Bofors from the ships once they were either damaged or out of fuel and use them in the anti-air role?

[StainlessSteelCynic]

The RBS-70s were only a supplement for the RAN ships for a specific task, once the deployment was over, they were removed from the ships and resumed their army defence role.

As for the Bofors, being a naval version, the RAN would probably want to hold onto them for as long as possible. Adding to the difficulty of the Army obtaining them would be the need to construct a land-mount for them. They were never supplied with the trailer-mount that land-based versions were. If the Army wanted to use them in the land defence role, they would have to build new mounts plus also build AA sights & fire control for them.

All in all, I'd say that the Army would consider it too much trouble for too little return.

[Legbreaker]

All in all, I'd say that the Army would consider it too much trouble for too little return.

And that's assuming the RAN would be willing to give any up in the first place - highly unlikely given they're also gearing up for potential war at the same time.
It's also worth noting currently Australia only has 30 of the RBS-70 launcher/sight units. This is after a second purchase was made in 2003-05 in order to replace the older Rapiers. Hardly enough to meet current needs, and certainly not enough to consider selling and leaving the army essentially defenceless.
So, subtracting a couple of units for training and replacement purposes, you're left with about a dozen RBS-70 and the same number of Rapiers to protect three Divisions. (Yes, I'm keeping 3rd Div in the book even though IRL they were disbanded in 1991 and barely a shell for the previous few decades).

Now a question for those who were in the ARes during the 90's. How much additional training do you think your unit(s) would have required to be combat effective?
What was your units IRL strength like at the time as a percentage of fully manned?
Was there sufficient "talent" within the unit to be promoted into the necessary NCO and Officer positions if the unit had received enough new recruits (with IET completed) to bring it up to strength?

[StainlessSteelCynic]

<snip>

Now a question for those who were in the ARes during the 90's. How much additional training do you think your unit(s) would have required to be combat effective?
What was your units IRL strength like at the time as a percentage of fully manned?
Was there sufficient "talent" within the unit to be promoted into the necessary NCO and Officer positions if the unit had received enough new recruits (with IET completed) to bring it up to strength?

This is the hard part... it's got a lot to do with where the unit was located and obviously anything I say is limited by my own personal experience.

Many country depots in Western Australia tended to have less personnel but more effectives than city units, (for those outside Australia - "effectives" was lingo for those Reservists who attended all the needed parades, training etc. etc. and were deemed qualified in their role). Country units also tended to have more personnel qualified for higher rank (but obviously they couldn't be promoted to higher rank as there were limited positions in small units).
If it came to bringing them up to strength I would hazard a guess that they had plenty of talent for promotion among the senior soldiers (some of them already qualified in a number of cases).
The overall impression was that country depot personnel were more dedicated, more prepared to go out of their way to fulfil their obligations and so on, more interested in taking the training seriously.

City units tended to have far greater access to personnel but a greater percentage of ineffectives (or marginally effectives) but when you're talking say 20% of 300 troops, it wasn't seen as so much of a problem, whereas 20% of 120 at a country depot was a big issue.
This is probably my own perception, but it seemed to me that the highest percentage of ineffectives seemed to come from the University Regiments. To be fair, I only met a handful of Uni Regt officers but I was generally left underwhelmed by their abilities. Marginally effective soldiers and marginally effective officers at best, complete wastes of oxygen at worst. Some of them seemed to treat the Reserves as a side hobby.

I would think that simply by virtue of having a greater recruiting pool within the cities, that city depots would be able to meet their needs for NCOs & officers and, obviously, would also be far more likely to be able to build up to full strength.

By way of example, my last unit was initially an Infantry Company (C Coy, 16 RWAR) that was probably 2/3 full when I transferred in 1988. In 1990 we probably could have filled out to full strength without much trouble.
By 1992 there had been a severe drop in numbers and we were an overstrength Platoon (we would have mustered one full Platoon and a second that was about 2/3 strength). At that time IRL the government was trying to cut costs and had decreed that any Reserve units below a certain strength would be cut.

My unit survived by being redesignated as the Battalion's reconnaissance platoon. We got help with training from SASR who had been using the depot for decades as a base during their desert, demo & car commander training courses. We also had training from the WA based RFSUs so overall we were getting assistance from the local experts in the trade!
Some of our officers & senior NCOs got unofficial criticism from officers in battalion HQ for our "overly" friendly relationship with SAS.

From memory, the main unit (HQ etc. etc. + B Coy located in Perth) had more personnel on the books than needed but seemed to muster about 75% of required strength. A handful of those who did attend were still ineffective in one way or another (e.g. not attended annual Ex, marginal passes on rifle quals and so on).
A Coy on the other hand, another country depot was much like C Coy, understrength but of the personnel on the books, most of them were effectives. No surprise to some, but the country depots still tended to have better shooting scores during annual qualification.

Annual training was usually well attended and there was a decent range of training courses available for those that wanted them. I qualified for SFMG, others from my unit qualified for medic, mortar, sigs and so on.

Reservist Corp of Trucks was typically well manned but I would rate many of their personnel as marginally effective. They could drive fine but many had no damned idea of recovery techniques and it was not uncommon for, surprise surprise, the Reservist Infantry unit being transported to be the ones who knew how to recover the vehicles. A number of Transport personnel appeared to treat their time in service as a place to socialize and it was said by non-Transport personnel that the only reason you joined Transport was to "learn to drive trucks or to pick up a fuck".

The Reservist field artillery unit that used to be in WA was apparently pretty damned good although I have no idea of their percentage of effectives. The medical unit that was here was pretty good too, I knew a few people in it although I cannot recall the unit designation. They had a reasonable number of qualified doctors, nurses and dentists on strength and a good number of personnel who were at least medic trained. Again I don't have any idea of their number of effectives but there were always some of the Reserve medical units (to complement the Reg units) on every major Ex I went on.

For a complete change of pace, my first unit, 1/15 RNSWL an Armoured Reconnaissance Regiment based in Sydney using M113s, had plenty of personnel on the books and most of them attended but aside from vehicle crews, support, admin etc. etc. there was insufficient training for some roles. Specifically, while I was qualified as Assault Trooper, there were a number of specialist training requirements for that role that were never met.
Assault Troopers were "meant" to be trained in shallow water diving, minor demo (not anywhere near as much as Assault Pioneers but enough to clear tracks for the vehicles at the least) and even para-drop.
Too pricey for the government so although those qualifications were on the books, they were never offered in training. However we did get plenty of range time with machineguns as we had plenty on strength and it was expected that the Assault Troop buckets would mount a few at the rear hatch.

Unfortunately not a lot of specific info for you :(

[Legbreaker]

No, that's pretty much the sort of thing I'm after. You've given me more than I was expecting actually.
Totally agree with you re the country depots and especially the uni regiments. To be "promoted" to corporal after just six months as a reservist, just because it was a stepping stone to commission never sat right with me, especially after being around a few on various courses. Quite a number of oxygen thieves looking to subsidise their university fees...

[Legbreaker]

Here's another one open to the gallery.
Which units would you reconstitute to bring 3rd Division up to strength? As at their disbanding in 1991 they had just two badly understrength infantry battalions and a smattering of support units...
I'm thinking of looking back to WWII for inspiration.

[Olefin]

You always have new recruits that could be trained and incorporated to fill out the understrength infantry battalions and build up more - what is the training cycle in Australia to go from inducted recruit to fully trained infantryman?

[Legbreaker]

What is the training cycle in Australia to go from inducted recruit to fully trained infantryman?

At the time it was about six months training before they hit their Battalion (11 weeks recruit training including basic infantry skills, three more months Initial Employment Training at the infantry centre). Corners can be cut in wartime to almost halve that, but that's really pushing it.
Note that's minimum level for an infantryman too. I've been on both sides of the training both as trainee (of course) and DS. You really get an appreciation of how much more they need to learn when you're on the other side looking in.

[Olefin]

At the time it was about six months training before they hit their Battalion (11 weeks recruit training including basic infantry skills, three more months Initial Employment Training at the infantry centre). Corners can be cut in wartime to almost halve that, but that's really pushing it.
Note that's minimum level for an infantryman too. I've been on both sides of the training both as trainee (of course) and DS. You really get an appreciation of how much more they need to learn when you're on the other side looking in.

I would say then they would start by bringing both the old battalions back on line with a cadre of experienced NCO's and officers, probably from other units, and staff them with recruits to start with - which means six months minimum to get those two battalions back up to strength. Same with whatever support units the division used to have.

Question would be - did Australia have artillery in storage to be able to equip them with artillery support or would they have mortars only?

[Legbreaker]

Question would be - did Australia have artillery in storage to be able to equip them with artillery support or would they have mortars only?

Not much I think. Might be a few 105's and 155's from the disbandment of 3rd Div, but not much more. Plenty of mortars available though, especially since they're relatively easy to make. IRL many of the Artillery units had their guns taken off them around 2005 (I think) and replaced with 81mm mortars. Still can't work out why this was considered a good idea.....

Fortunately I'm really only going to need to properly equip two of the three Divisions with proper artillery, as the 3rd will be assigned to security and anti insurgency tasks within the Australian borders.

Of course while I'm considering all this, the other nations also need mobilising, but besides New Zealand (which MIGHT muster a Brigade plus perhaps a couple of additional light infantry Battalions), the island nations (Tonga, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands, Samoa, etc) probably won't be contributing much of significance - a few company's of light infantry and the like at a guess, mostly used for rear area security/civil defence tasks at home.

I also need to consider what's happening with Indonesia's other neighbours to the north - Malaysia, Brunei, etc. Thinking I'll just have them bolster their defences but have most of their attention focused on Vietnam/China/Korea. Indonesia has less to gain (and more to lose) in attacking them they they do with going east into PNG.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

In regards to artillery, I believe at that time, the Regular Army was equipped with the L118 105mm and the M198 155mm. The Reserve Army artillery units were equipped, if I remember, with the BL 5.5in gun.
There may have been some 25 pounder field guns still in war stores but I believe most, if not all. of them were disposed of by the 1980s (except for use as memorials and so on).

[Legbreaker]

In regards to artillery, I believe at that time, the Regular Army was equipped with the L118 105mm and the M198 155mm. The Reserve Army artillery units were equipped, if I remember, with the BL 5.5in gun.
There may have been some 25 pounder field guns still in war stores but I believe most, if not all. of them were disposed of by the 1980s (except for use as memorials and so on).
Most of the reserve units I am familiar with had the 105 Hamel or L5 pack howitzer. The 5.5 inch went out of service in 1983.
From memory one of the reserve artillery units of 3 Div had the 155mm M198.

There has been no self propelled artillery (except mortars) in Australian service since the Yeramba SP 25-pounder went out of service in 1957. It was also the only SP artillery Australia has ever had.

[dylan]

There is no way NZ could muster a full brigade in the 1990s.

The poor state of the Army in responding to Bosnia and to Timor is illustration enough.

This actually resulted in what some people call the "army coup" in NZ whereby the army mounted a covert operation to shaft the other services and recover its lead service privileges. One result was the scrapping of the air combat force. Another was the acquisition of "gold plated" LAVs all fitted with 25mm chain guns in a revolving turret.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Most of the reserve units I am familiar with had the 105 Hamel or L5 pack howitzer. The 5.5 inch went out of service in 1983.
From memory one of the reserve artillery units of 3 Div had the 155mm M198.

There has been no self propelled artillery (except mortars) in Australian service since the Yeramba SP 25-pounder went out of service in 1957. It was also the only SP artillery Australia has ever had.
Ack! I completely forgot about the L5 - shows how good (bad) my memory is.
The Reserve arty unit in WA in the 1980s was I believe 7th Field Battery and I have vague memories of them having medium guns and not the L5 (and they certainly weren't lucky enough to have the L118 Hamel (WA units were always a poor cousin anyway but the L118 would have been too new to let the Reservist here have them!).
But I'm certain they did not have any 155mm (they would have been kept for the Regs). They were definitely a medium arty unit and not light arty.

Doesn't matter much for a mid-90s timeline as they would have been converting to mortars anyway... but it does lend itself to some extra (albeit obsolescent) arty being in warstores.

[Legbreaker]

There is no way NZ could muster a full brigade in the 1990s.

Yes, totally agree IRL, however I'm giving them about 12 months warning that hostilities are coming to beef up their strength. Equipment will likely be in short supply, and those units which stay within NZ borders will likely be armed with civilian rifles and the like, but manpower is possible - they did have about 150,000 people in uniform and armed in 1942 when the total population was significantly lower than today.
I'm talking of raising an army of perhaps 10,000, or approximately double what it is today, plus a small increase to naval and air personnel of perhaps 10-20% IRL numbers. Any greater increase to the navy and air force probably wouldn't be justified as there probably wouldn't be the ships and planes to equip them.


Doesn't matter much for a mid-90s timeline as they would have been converting to mortars anyway... but it does lend itself to some extra (albeit obsolescent) arty being in warstores.

From what I've read to date, the reserve artillery didn't loose their guns until around 2005 give or take. Have you some information that some switched earlier?

[StainlessSteelCynic]

<snip>

From what I've read to date, the reserve artillery didn't loose their guns until around 2005 give or take. Have you some information that some switched earlier?
No, just working from my (increasingly poor) memory and I never had that much info on units outside my direct experience e.g. the arty. I'm probably misremembering things and screwing up the timings. For instance, sometime in 1992 or 93, we were told that in the near future Support Coy would be losing their mortars and refitting as SFMG. The mortars would be going to Reserve arty units who would be losing their big guns to the Regs.
That was the talk but it was not mentioned officially at that time.
I'm obviously putting 2 and 2 together and getting about seven & a half as the answer! :D :rolleyes:

[CDAT]

No, just working from my (increasingly poor) memory and I never had that much info on units outside my direct experience e.g. the arty. I'm probably misremembering things and screwing up the timings. For instance, sometime in 1992 or 93, we were told that in the near future Support Coy would be losing their mortars and refitting as SFMG. The mortars would be going to Reserve arty units who would be losing their big guns to the Regs.
That was the talk but it was not mentioned officially at that time.
I'm obviously putting 2 and 2 together and getting about seven & a half as the answer! :D :rolleyes:

It could also be a case of how governments work. I am guessing they all do things more or less the same. For example the US Military adopted the M9 Pistol (to replace the M1911) in 1985, and officially replacement was completed in Oct 1986. However when I joined the Army in 1993 we still had the M1911, seven years after it was replaced.

On a side note I have to take double takes here a lot, every time I see WA (Western Australia I am guessing) my first thought is Washington where I live.:)

[StainlessSteelCynic]

It could also be a case of how governments work. I am guessing they all do things more or less the same. For example the US Military adopted the M9 Pistol (to replace the M1911) in 1985, and officially replacement was completed in Oct 1986. However when I joined the Army in 1993 we still had the M1911, seven years after it was replaced.

On a side note I have to take double takes here a lot, every time I see WA (Western Australia I am guessing) my first thought is Washington where I live.:)
Hehehe. :D
Yes, WA is Western Australia. In regards to how governments work, yes indeed. When the Australian Army got its Disruptive Pattern Camouflage Uniform (DPCU) to replace the old Jungle Green uniform, there were some cases where Reservist support units in WA ( :p ) were issued the new cams before Reservist Infantry units... I wasn't alone in thinking that the Infantry units might have needed them more than a support unit. :confused:

[Legbreaker]

In need of a little input at the moment. Given the ANZUS treaty requires the US to assist Australia should another party attack (as Indonesia does in PNG as described briefly in the BYB), what response could be expected in say, 1998?

My initial thoughts are perhaps a missile cruiser (the USS Mobile Bay springs to mind given it was involved with East Timor in 1999) could be dispatched, and/or a battalion of infantry (as usually occurs during joint training exercises). If it's the latter, is there an independent US unit which may be sent?

Of course the treaty doesn't really require much more than the military equivalent of "thoughts and prayers" either especially since Australia itself wasn't directly attacked by conventional forces (I will however have numerous units of saboteurs/guerrillas operating throughout the country).

It is interesting to note that the US invoked the treaty after 9/11 (first time in it's 50 odd year history). This is why Australia was subsequently involved in Iraq and Afghanistan (and is still in the latter country nearly two decades later).

[StainlessSteelCynic]

On a tangent, at one time when the Philippines was talking about all US bases out of their country, one of the potential replacement USN home ports was in Indonesia.
Now that would make for some "interesting" diplomacy in the T2k Indo-Australia conflict.

But anyway, onto your question. Maybe some USMC infantry from the base in Japan? I think it's on Okinawa. Assuming they weren't in Korea or dealing with Russia.

[CDAT]

In need of a little input at the moment. Given the ANZUS treaty requires the US to assist Australia should another party attack (as Indonesia does in PNG as described briefly in the BYB), what response could be expected in say, 1998?

My initial thoughts are perhaps a missile cruiser (the USS Mobile Bay springs to mind given it was involved with East Timor in 1999) could be dispatched, and/or a battalion of infantry (as usually occurs during joint training exercises). If it's the latter, is there an independent US unit which may be sent?

Of course the treaty doesn't really require much more than the military equivalent of "thoughts and prayers" either especially since Australia itself wasn't directly attacked by conventional forces (I will however have numerous units of saboteurs/guerrillas operating throughout the country).

It is interesting to note that the US invoked the treaty after 9/11 (first time in it's 50 odd year history). This is why Australia was subsequently involved in Iraq and Afghanistan (and is still in the latter country nearly two decades later).

Real world it would likely have been the USMC if (BIG IF) they had a unit afloat near there, but if a unit needed to be sent most likely the 82nd Airborne or 75th Rangers.

[Legbreaker]

Real world it would likely have been the USMC if (BIG IF) they had a unit afloat near there, but if a unit needed to be sent most likely the 82nd Airborne or 75th Rangers.

They're all otherwise occupied in 1998 T2k though.
I don't want a full US Division, or even a Brigade as they'd drastically change the balance and make it more a US show. Australia will have a TOTAL of 3 short Divisions, one of which is assigned to mainland defence, about a Brigade of the second assigned to Korea, leaving perhaps 5 Brigades total for PNG.

Meanwhile, Indonesia has about 20 Divisions worth of units. About half of them are internal security, but that still leaves the defenders outnumbered upwards of 10 to 1 (although more likely about 8 to 1 once I include New Zealand and units from the Pacific Island nations).

[Raellus]

My thoughts are that, with three very active fronts (Europe, Korea, Iran), the U.S. wouldn't be in a position to send much of anything to Australia, other than what happens to be there at the time (probably a few ships/aircraft/troops in transit to other theatres, and that only on a very temporary basis.

There's just nothing left to send, by '98, and that's straight from the canon.

I think your "thoughts and prayers" comment is right on the money. To put it in T2K terms, though, it'd be "Good luck. You're on your own." ;)

One thought that just occurred to me is that a few hundred/couple thousand U.S. military personnel could be in Australia on leave (common enough during the Vietnam War) when the Indonesians attack. With no safe way to return to their posts (likely in Korea), they're stuck there and formed into an Ad Hoc "American Legion" under Aussie command. This could be a fun way to incorporate American PCs from any of the U.S. Army, USMC, USN, USAF or even USCG units in the Korean canon (which the KPSB follows closely) into an Australia-based campaign.

-

[cawest]

ANZAC might get a something along the lines of a few Team Yankees, or a Battalion Task Force on the ground. now it could get a few subs, surface ships or aircraft that were moved out of Pearl, Philippines, diego Garcia, or johnston atoll


now that is a thought what would be at johnston atoll in this time line?:D

[Legbreaker]

Bear in mind I'm not kicking hostilities off in PNG until it's clear the major world players are tied up elsewhere. Just doesn't make much sense for a 2nd rate military power to attack if there's 1st rate armies available to spank them for it.

My thoughts are one, maybe two ships (could be a support vessel, LST or the like instead of a "proper" warship), or a small unit of number of units. The question really is which ones might be available for more than just a brief visit on the way to somewhere else.

Note it doesn't even have to be a combat unit - medical team, engineers, intelligence, etc would all be suitable in my mind. Could even be civilians, or a unit made up of people found somewhat less than suitable for military draft but still very keen to help out in some way.

So lets hear some ideas, wilder the better! :D

One point I need to stress is PNG has an absolutely ABYSMAL transportation network. There's very limited roads, of which only a tiny percentage is sealed. No railroads at all, except for some short narrow gauge dating from pre WWI which have been neglected for 80 years. They were originally built by the Germans (back when it was still one of their colonies) to service a handful of old mines. Most bulk transport is by small boat along the coastline and up the rivers, and some air transport to very primitive bush airstrips. https://youtu.be/sy_HNd6N4IE

[Olefin]

I could easily see an ad hoc American unit being formed from stranded sailors, airmen, etc. that get stuck in Australia do to various reasons

Heck even just the men and woman manning places like Pine Gap could give you at least a small force to help the Australians out. Add in things like US Marine Corps Marine Security Guard detachments that are in various Asian nations being evacuated to Australia after the war starts from places like Indonesia, Malaysia, etc.. and you have the beginnings of a couple of companies at least - maybe even more.

The Company C Headquarters is located in Bangkok, Thailand and is responsible for 18 detachments located in the Far East, Asia and Australia. You could at the least see the HQ being relocated to Australia in 1997 after the nukes fly, perhaps earlier with embassies being evacuated out of hot spots

Especially if you add in a stranded USN ship or even nuclear sub and its crew being turned into infantry.

[Legbreaker]

The more I look at it, the more I think logistics is the key in PNG rather than another company or two of infantry. Yes, fighting troops are important, but they're useless without supporting units. Stranded US crewmembers might be better utilised running supplies along the coast in commandeered civilian craft rather than handed a rifle and sent to the front line. Their skill set would lend themselves more to that I think.
This opens up a whole new range of possible RP opportunities - US crew on a supply mission gets into trouble in some way and finds themselves behind enemy lines. Or, why not have them shipwrecked somewhere in the Indonesian controlled area and have to get themselves to friendly, Australian lines.

[swaghauler]

GOOGLE the US ARMY'S USAV Major General Robert Smalls with its 13-foot draft, more than 10K kilometer range, and its 6000-ton displacement.

Then GOOGLE USMC "gator fleet."

[StainlessSteelCynic]

GOOGLE the US ARMY'S USAV Major General Robert Smalls with its 13-foot draft, more than 10K kilometer range, and its 6000-ton displacement.

Then GOOGLE USMC "gator fleet."
This brings up an interesting potential situation. The ship is part of the General Frank S. Besson class and they started building them in 1987. There's only eight of them in service and I would argue that a major reason for that is because the collapse of the Soviet Union removed the need for a larger fleet.
So the potential situation is that without the "peace" from the end of the Cold War, more of the class could have been constructed.
Meaning that as a sourcebook/module writer or GM, you could expand the fleet and add a few of these ships where you needed them.

In a similar "what if", the Philippines Navy had two logistics support vessels built in the early 90s based on the Besson class with the most significant differences being a helicopter pad at the rear of the ship, a roof over part of the main deck and the ability to carry two LCVPs.
So for game purposes, it's not too far fetched to have the US Army also put that variant into service to compliment the Besson class. A helo/LCVP capable version would allow for certain operations that the conventional class wouldn't i.e. small team insertion by air/LCVP, wider range of SAR abilities and so on. There's no hangar but with the relatively calm oceans in the PNG area, transporting a helo on the pad wouldn't be so problematic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Frank_S._Besson-class_logistics_support_vessel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacolod_City-class_logistics_support_vessel

[Legbreaker]

...the relatively calm oceans in the PNG area...

Hehe.
It's funny seeing people driving up to Darwin with surfboards on the roof to take advantage of the legendary huge surf up there!
Even funnier seeing their faces when they arrive and lay eyes on the MASSIVE 6 inch waves! :D

[Olefin]

Examples of how you could get US military personnel to Australia

US Marine detachment sent to help guard the Pine Gap facility - could easily see the US sending a couple of platoons given the importance of that facility and could have the US reinforce their embassy detachment in Canberra as well - or have detachments from other countries evacuated along with embassy personnel to Canberra

US logistics troops sent to Australia to assist shipments to South Korea and China from Australia - possibly with the US establishing depots for materials being transshipped there from the US

US military members of the Pine Gap facility (mostly communication/intelligence/signals personnel)

USN personnel from ships damaged by Soviet attacks that made port in Australia and that were never re-assigned or marooned by lack of fuel

USAF personnel supporting long range transport and cargo operations that were stranded in Australia due to lack of fuel

None of which would require a unit of any size to actually be located there either pre or post 1998

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Hehe.
It's funny seeing people driving up to Darwin with surfboards on the roof to take advantage of the legendary huge surf up there!
Even funnier seeing their faces when they arrive and lay eyes on the MASSIVE 6 inch waves! :D
:) Hahaha
Oh yes indeed! There's a reason the beaches on either the east coast or the west coast are rated as the best surfing spots in Australia. I recall a statement about surfing in the Northern Territory with it's "one or two months a year if you're lucky, waist high at best, waves and please keep an eye out for the saltwater crocodiles who are one of the stealthiest predators in the world", as being "unpleasant". :rolleyes:

There's a reason why people have used small, open boats (like the 12ft dinghy) to nip back and forth between Far North Queensland and PNG and it's not simply because it's a (relatively) short distance.

[pmulcahy11b]

I have a blurb on the Australian Battle Rifles page, under the versions of the FN-FAL they had, about the "Brisbane Black Window," a good sniper who is merely a civilian Australian who has mad skills with her rifle. Anyone want to add this into the official record?

[Legbreaker]

I have a blurb on the Australian Battle Rifles page, under the versions of the FN-FAL they had, about the "Brisbane Black Window," a good sniper who is merely a civilian Australian who has mad skills with her rifle. Anyone want to add this into the official record?

See, that's exactly the sort of thing I want to include in the book! :D
Although I'm not sure she'd like being called a "window"... :rolleyes:

[Olefin]

Examples of how you could get US military personnel to Australia

US Marine detachment sent to help guard the Pine Gap facility - could easily see the US sending a couple of platoons given the importance of that facility and could have the US reinforce their embassy detachment in Canberra as well - or have detachments from other countries evacuated along with embassy personnel to Canberra

US logistics troops sent to Australia to assist shipments to South Korea and China from Australia - possibly with the US establishing depots for materials being transshipped there from the US

US military members of the Pine Gap facility (mostly communication/intelligence/signals personnel)

USN personnel from ships damaged by Soviet attacks that made port in Australia and that were never re-assigned or marooned by lack of fuel

USAF personnel supporting long range transport and cargo operations that were stranded in Australia due to lack of fuel

None of which would require a unit of any size to actually be located there either pre or post 1998

FYI one very possible source for US characters could be USAR personnel that were originally deployed to support port operations in Australia to support US operations in the Gulf and Korea and then were cut off in Australia after the reduction in fuel supplies cut them off

they could be elements of a Transportation Terminal Battalion deployed to Australia in 1996-97 along with a couple of transportation companies to help with port operations - which would be a perfect addition for the sourcebook

[swaghauler]

This brings up an interesting potential situation. The ship is part of the General Frank S. Besson class and they started building them in 1987. There's only eight of them in service and I would argue that a major reason for that is because the collapse of the Soviet Union removed the need for a larger fleet.
So the potential situation is that without the "peace" from the end of the Cold War, more of the class could have been constructed.
Meaning that as a sourcebook/module writer or GM, you could expand the fleet and add a few of these ships where you needed them.

In a similar "what if", the Philippines Navy had two logistics support vessels built in the early 90s based on the Besson class with the most significant differences being a helicopter pad at the rear of the ship, a roof over part of the main deck and the ability to carry two LCVPs.
So for game purposes, it's not too far fetched to have the US Army also put that variant into service to compliment the Besson class. A helo/LCVP capable version would allow for certain operations that the conventional class wouldn't i.e. small team insertion by air/LCVP, wider range of SAR abilities and so on. There's no hangar but with the relatively calm oceans in the PNG area, transporting a helo on the pad wouldn't be so problematic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Frank_S._Besson-class_logistics_support_vessel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacolod_City-class_logistics_support_vessel

Don't forget the Cyclone PCs! They were being used in the Philippines as well as the Gulf of Mexico for anti-piracy, drug enforcement, and general patrol. The Philippines was actually given USS Cyclone as a patrol ship.

This is something that is OFTEN overlooked when the LCS class ships are discussed. They were intentionally give "shoal-drafts" specifically for operating in this region because they replaced the OHP class Frigates (also having a shallow draft) that were also used in the shallow waters of the Asian Basin and the Persian Gulf where the much deeper drafted Burkes and Ticos could get into trouble trying to sail there.

[Legbreaker]

Some good stuff in here some of which can be translated into T2K and the Anzac book. https://youtu.be/rdaVTtuz3YM
It's followed by this one covering the post cold war period which I'm about to start watching now. https://youtu.be/VYI02dhyer8

[Legbreaker]

https://youtu.be/VYI02dhyer8[/url]

Ex Chief of Army. Very good, thought provoking presentation with the odd bit of humour thrown in. Has some interesting thoughts on China's recent expansion into the South China Sea and the US response.
Starts off with the question, why do we refer to the current time as the "post cold war period and what's a better name for it?"

[Legbreaker]

I have a blurb on the Australian Battle Rifles page, under the versions of the FN-FAL they had, about the "Brisbane Black Widow," a good sniper who is merely a civilian Australian who has mad skills with her rifle. Anyone want to add this into the official record?

How do you feeling about tweaking that entry from "The infamous "Brisbane Black Widow" a civilian female sniper that proved to be extremely deadly to invading Indonesian Forces, used a scoped version of this weapon. Large numbers of L-1A1-F1s (and standard L-1A1s as well as L-2A1s) were quickly handed out to Australian civilians shortly before the Indonesian invasion.”
To "The infamous "Brisbane Black Widow" a female sniper recently recruited into the reserve forces who proved to be extremely deadly to infiltrating Indonesian Forces, used a scoped version of this weapon. Large numbers of L-1A1-F1s (and standard L-1A1s as well as L-2A1s) were quickly handed out to freshly raised and expanded Australian reserve units shortly before the Indonesian attacks.”

Post the Port Arthur massacre in April 1996 it's extremely unlikely civilians would have been handed semi-autos, let alone actual military weapons without formal training and induction into the reserves.

Note that the main thrust of the Indonesians was into PNG while those units sent to the Australian mainland were mainly tasked with sabotage and intelligence gathering, only coming together as larger units (platoon and above) for rare targets of opportunity requiring greater numbers and with little likelihood of effective opposition/rapid reinforcement.
I intend to have perhaps a battalion or two total spread through the countryside, operating with civilian sympathisers to tie up almost the entirety of the freshly re-raised 3rd Division (1st Div will be in PNG with elements of 2nd spread between PNG and Korea).

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Given certain conditions it's also possible that the government might raise Home Guard type units, give them the bare minimum training needed and issue them with the older military gear (with preference being given to recruiting people with firearms, security, etc. etc. skills.)
So in the Brisbane Black Widow scenario, she wouldn't have to be an Army Reservist, she could be a Home Guard member. I'm thinking that for the Home Guard scenario, the Reservist units are committed to patrolling rural areas looking for Indonesian infiltrators while the Home Guard provide security for important locations in the towns and cities.

[Legbreaker]

I'm thinking that for the Home Guard scenario, the Reservist units are committed to patrolling rural areas looking for Indonesian infiltrators while the Home Guard provide security for important locations in the towns and cities.

Historically that's what the Militia were tasked with during both world wars. As you know, the Militia's official name was the Citizens Military Force (CMF), and renamed in 1980 to become the Australia Army Reserve (ARes). It's these "home guard" duties I'm assigning the 3rd Division to. IRL 3 DIV was disbanded completely in 1991 after decades of being pared back to barely the shadow of a skeleton.
Realistically, there's too many legislative changes required to allow for a separate home guard organisation, especially when simply re-raising 3rd Division and a bunch of old Battalions will do the job.

Interesting note - at Federation (1901) there were something like 100 battalions authorised throughout the country, which at the time had a population of approximately 3.7 million. Most units of course barely managed a few dozen members. In 1996 with a population 6 times as high (slightly over 18 million) we had around 25 battalions (+/- a few partial units), and had trouble keeping just the half dozen or so Regular Army units at close to full strength.

[Legbreaker]

I'd like to hear some opinions on what the Philippines, Singapore, and other neighbours of Indonesia would do in reaction to their invasion of PNG?
Would they care? Would they have their own problems to deal with? Would they take a side and send troops and/or supplies?
Also, and rather importantly, why would they act/not act in that way?
No right or wrong answers, just looking for ideas.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Considering the claims in the past that Indonesia wanted to grab great chunks of territory from those nations as part of the "Greater Indonesian Empire", my first reaction is that they would probably politically condemn Indonesian attacks on PNG.
Whether they would have the resources or the political desire to assist PNG resist the Indonesian invasion is another matter entirely - I'd have to read the books again to see what level of activity they were at regards the T2k situation before I was confident in saying whether or not they had the resources and/or desire to assist PNG.

Given that in the early to mid 1960s, Indonesia had tried to invade Malaya and North Borneo to oppose the union of those two protectorates (along with Sarawak) into the new nation of Malaysia, there's plenty of bad blood between Indonesia and her near neighbours (and in any of the T2k timelines it's still within living memory of senior military & governmental personnel).
But this is where the old ties between British Commonwealth nations, former SEATO nations and the ANZUS nations would likely come into play perhaps?

If the T2k wider conflict was not happening, I could very well see those countries opposing Indonesia with political, financial, trade and even military action. With the T2k war happening... again, I'd have to read up on whatever history is listed for those nations before I could really form any opinion on what they would be capable of doing and more importantly, whether it would be worth them taking those particular actions.
Having said that I can well imagine Singapore and Malaysia being particularly antsy about Indonesian actions in PNG because for them, it's literally "You're next".
Another factor would be Brunei, they supply a lot of oil and natural gas, it would surely be a tempting addition for Indonesia (but even if it's not, that fear would probably still exist). They have the wealth to finance support for PNG but I can't say whether they would do it unless they felt that Indonesia's invasion of PNG was part of a larger action to expand Indonesian control over the region.

That's about all I can think of at the moment.

[Lurken]

The Philippines could get involved. Depending on how aggressive things could be. They still have technically a claim over the Sabah-region in northern Borneo, currently held by Malaysia. Also claimed by Indonesia.

But I think that the Philippines might send token aid to Australia, due to their historic alliances via the USA.

Depending on situation, they could march into Sabah, especially if Malaysia collapses either due to internal stress or Indonesian activities.

[Legbreaker]

The front page from one of the three newspapers here in Tasmania yesterday.
Very Twilight:2000 and almost exactly what I've envisaged would happen in T2K.
4300

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Hey Leg, seems like real-life is writing the lead-in for you! :D

[Legbreaker]

Nah, the Tasmanian government came to me for advice on what to do!
They'd heard about how much research and thought I'd put into the book and thought "Why reinvent the wheel?" ;)

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Nah, the Tasmanian government came to me for advice on what to do!
They'd heard about how much research and thought I'd put into the book and thought "Why reinvent the wheel?" ;)
:) If I didn't know you better I might think that you were joking ;)

:D