How long was 1 Armd Regt’s experimentation unit in the planning?

The Defence Connect headline on 26 September 2023 was “Rumours are swirling that the 7th Battalion Royal Australian Regiment (7RAR) and 1st Armoured Regiment (1ARMD) of the Australian Army will be moved from Adelaide or disbanded.”  

It was coupled with a note that “Australian Army Major General (Retd) Fergus ‘Gus’ McLachlan, AO, said it seemed likely the units would be disbanded”.

Two days later, the government’s response to the Defence Strategic Review was released. 

It included advice that: “The 1st Armoured Regiment will be re-roled as an experimental unit to deliver and integrate emerging technologies”.

Unit stakeholders, including former COs, were taken completely by surprise.  The RAAC hierarchy were equally shocked.  The then RAAC Representative Honorary Colonel asked the Chief of Army to reconsider. He refused.  As far as we know, no reasons given.

One has to ask how long the plan to strip the tanks from 1 Armd Regt had been in the making?  Although obviously not a spur-of-the-moment decision, it was one which Defence had to keep secret.

Making the senior unit of the Army a non-combatant was very likely to result in a backlash. This was the foundation unit of the Royal Australian Armoured Corps (RAAC); a unit which has served the Nation for 75 years.  It was the only unit in the Army entitled to carry a Standard, plus it had been awarded three battle-honours and Unit Citation for Gallantry for service in Vietnam.  

The unit’s Heritage now stands for nothing.  The Standard will have to be laid up, in accord with its consecrated status.  

Why was there not any discussion with the RAAC hierarchy?  Why didn’t RAAC leaders have the opportunity to plan ahead and make arrangements to safeguard 1 Armd Regt’s Heritage?  Why was there no public consultation (with anyone)?  The Hon Col of 2 Cav Regt at the time, was as surprised as everyone else.  He had no prior warning of what was to happen.  

Part of the reason was that, soon after the announcement about 1 Armd Regt’s new role, the 1 Armd Regt Association was  “… advised by several respected retired Armoured Corps Generals that the decision to re-role 1st Armoured Regiment, would surely be reviewed and that common sense would undoubtedly prevail. In the meantime, the Association and veterans of 1st Armoured Regiment, should try and remain calm rather than undertake a campaign of advocacy which could inflame a sensitive situation.” 

The Association went on to state that: “This guidance has proven to be in vain and indeed, the structural change recommendation made by the Chief of the Army, to the Vice-Chief of the Defence Force, is even more entrenched”.  

Exactly WHAT recommendation was made by the CA to the VCDF?  Even MORE entrenched than what?  1 Armd Regt is being stripped of its tanks and the CA wanted to take an even harder stand?  How is this possible?

One thing is obvious … the Chief of Army has little time for tanks.  This can be partly understood.  He graduated from RMC 20 years after tanks had been found to be indispensable to support infantry assaulting enemy fortified positions in Vietnam (and 81 years after they’d been found to be equally necessary in Balikpapan during WWII). 

Despite being an infantryman himself, his subsequent service has not expanded his awareness of the role that only tanks can provide, when close fire support is needed.

Lieutenant Colonel Bruce Cameron, MC, RAAC (Ret’d)

.

.

FILE PHOTO: Australian Army soldiers from the 1st Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment, conduct a trench clearance supported by Abrams main battle tanks from 2nd Cavalry Regiment, as part of Exercise Brolga Sprint at Townsville Field Training Area, Queensland. Photo by Private Jessica Gray.

.

.


.


.