View Single Post
  #38  
Old 03-26-2016, 04:07 PM
RN7 RN7 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mpipes View Post
You are fundamentally missing the point. When a nation has to churn out an army, generally it rises to the occasion and does so.
And what will Australia be arming its army with? Boomerangs!

I think you have missed the point. Australia will have to introduce conscription to raise an army of the size you are proposing. And as difficult as it would be for Australia to raise, train, staff, officer and support and army of that size, the main issue is not raising the manpower but arming it.

Australia has one small arms factory and two munitions factories (one for bullets and one for munitions). This is enough for sustaining the current regular army and maybe equipping another division, but it is way to limited to arm an army of 10 or more divisions. And that is just bullets and rifles, what about machine guns, grenades, mortars, anti-tank weapons etc .

Also what about armoured vehicles and artillery. Australia has two factories that build light armoured vehicles at a very low production level. It could maybe build some trucks and jeeps/Landrovers as well, but no mass production of armoured vehicles and certainly no artillery or tanks or heavy munitions.


Quote:
Originally Posted by mpipes View Post
Australia's war plans had troops deploying for a Pacific war involving China or the USSR in 1990. That is simply reality (I know cause I was in on some of the transportation plans for USAF C-141s). You can find unclassified info if you look hard enough, but I can tell you that a 10 division contribution from ANZAC was not an unrealistic expectation. The UK mobilization plans were actually larger than what was listed in the game as were Germany's. Germany expected to have well over 20 divisions at the six month point and I do know that the UK was expected to double the size of the army as well. Remember, for all of NATO, everyone discharged/retired within the previous seven years was being recalled to active duty. That generally gives you a 50%increase in the size of your military right there....fully trained too.
Just where did you get your figures from? According to you Australia had plans to raise 10 divisions (with New Zealand). Yet Germany which has about four times the population and a vastly larger heavy industrial and engineering base was expected to only have just over 20 divisions. On the basis of your figures Germany should be knocking out 40 divisions.

Incidentally in T2K the German Army has more than 20 divisions after German Reunification in 1996

12 West German (6x Armour, 4x Mechanised, 1x Airborne, 1x Mountain). 6 East German (2x Armour, 4x Mechanised). After mobilisation add another 1 mechanised division in 1996. Another 2 mechanised division and 1 infantry division in 1997, and 6 infantry divisions by 2000 plus possibly 2 Austrian mountain divisions. And there would be other independent regiments and battalions as well

In T2K the UK did practically double the size of its army including independent brigades and regiments, and its still smaller than your ANZAC army.

Also what about Australian logistics. Could you tell me how Australia could transport and supply multiple divisions overseas with its current logistical resources?

Last edited by RN7; 03-26-2016 at 04:21 PM.
Reply With Quote