Education and Training \u2013 giving our soldiers the means to transform equipment into capability.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\nTo borrow Aristotle\u2019s axiom, the \u2018holistic value\u2019 of these SCS sub-systems \u2018is greater than the sum of their individual parts.\u2019 However, these systems are, at once, interdependent and in competition with each other. Enhancing one invariably compromises another. Achieving an optimal \u2019sum\u2019 is as much a science as it is an art.<\/p>\n
By example, let\u2019s say Army decides to increase the survivability of soldiers by issuing them a heavier, larger and more robust ballistic plate system. By enhancing soldier survivability, Army has prejudiced their mobility and sustainability. This trade off may have additional implications for the soldier\u2019s lethality and situational awareness as factors such as fatigue and resupply come into consideration.<\/p>\n
Second, Army equips its soldiers according to their \u2018Tier\u2019, of which there are three. Broadly speaking, Tier 1 Combatants perform niche tasks, such as combat diving or military free fall parachuting. Tier 2 Combatants fight either on foot in the dismounted role or while mounted in Armoured Fighting Vehicles (AFVs). Tier 3 combatants provide general support to combined arms teams. This tiering approach has nothing to do with a soldier\u2019s status; rather, it allows Army to tailor combat equipment to the specific needs of its combatants.<\/p>\n
How does this manifest? Tier 2 Dismounted combatants are now issued, will be issued or are testing tailored load carriage equipment, weaponry, target acquisition ancillaries, night fighting equipment, signature reduction devices, surveillance devices, clothing, boots and small vehicles. This kit will make them more lethal, survivable, mobile, sustainable and situationally aware than ever. Tier 2 Mounted and Tier 3 Combatants are increasingly issued or evaluating combat equipment specifically designed to best enable them to perform their various, and often unique, roles and tasks.<\/p>\n
Army is also working closely with industry to deliver a new large assault pack that will likely fit 95% of Army\u2019s female combatants. How does this compare to the large field pack issued since around 1994? According to Defence Science and Technology Group anthropometric data, the legacy pack fits none of Army\u2019s females. Tier 2 Combatant marksman, commanders, infantry, combat engineers, joint fire teams and AFV crews will be provisioned with the Enhanced F88 rifle of varying lengths, bipods, day sights, night sights, thermal sights and target acquisition ancillaries. Why? Because the EF88 configuration optimised for combat shooting by Tier 2 Dismounts may not fit in an AFV gun rack\u2014nor be required by Tier 2 Mounted soldiers due to the nature of their role as operators of armoured vehicles in a combined arms team. All of these variations have been deliberately tailored to meet the requirements of combatants performing specific roles and functions.<\/p>\n
The third pillar is that the realities of the commercial environment impact how Army modernises its core capability. Technological maturity, commercial reliability, manufacturing capacity, affordability and world-wide demand shape what Army can realistically achieve in a suitable timeframe.<\/p>\n
A perennial, and often vexing, modernisation necessity is the quest for constant improvement and the avoidance of obsolescence. The rate of technology advancement means that cutting-edge capabilities delivered today invariably lose their technical advantage as soon as tomorrow dawns. This is the world we live in. As individuals, we confront the same reality when the personal fixed-contract smart phone we acquire is outsmarted by the latest device.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s unrealistic to expect Army to be able to update most capabilities as quickly as many of us progress to the latest smart phone. However, what Army must do is constantly seek ways and means to either improve or replace current capabilities. Doing so mitigates the inexorable loss in capability advantage over time.<\/p>\n
To address this existential issue, Army has built, \u2018adaptive acquisition\u2019 features into many of its soldier modernisation initiatives. This is the fourth logic pillar underpinning Army\u2019s continuous modernisation of its cardinal capability. This approach ensures that the leading load carriage equipment, weapons, ancillaries, radios and human performance initiatives Army delivers in 2015 are not obsolete in 2025.<\/p>\n
Army is constantly seeking to enhance the equipping, or modernisation, of its central capability, the soldier. In recent times, it has crafted a simple, deliberate, tailored and balanced, approach for modernising this principal capability. It’s working with other services and groups within Defence, as well as industry, to realise this modernisation effect on an enduring basis.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The locus of the Australian Army\u2019s combat capability is the soldier\u2014male or female, combat or combat support. While it would be fair to say that large-scale equipment platforms such as ships, submarines and aircraft are …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":425,"featured_media":23028,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mi_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[44,488],"class_list":["post-23025","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-general","tag-australian-defence-force","tag-australian-army"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n
Explaining how Army modernises its principal capability: the soldier | The Strategist<\/title>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n