The fate of the Royal Australian Armoured Corps

How did we end up here … 1st Armoured Regiment stripped of its tanks and made into an experimentation unit; 2nd Cavalry Regiment made into a dual-role unit with roles which are totally incompatible (intelligence gathering and close fire support for infantry)? How did Townsville’s supposed armoured brigade, 3 Brigade, end up short a battlegroup headquarters, a cavalry squadron and a tank squadron? 

There’s no doubt that the RAAC has had a number done on it.  

Not only that, there’s nothing anyone can do.  Well … more correctly, there’s nothing that anyone is prepared to do.  

Would anything be gained, for example, by the RAAC Representative Honorary Colonel or Head of Corps, threatening to resign?  

It would all be nugatory effort; something simply symbolic.  Another officer would be appointed, one very likely to have been chosen on the basis that he or she would accept things as they are.  

It’s interesting.  Everyone proclaims how important unit heritage and esprit-de-corps is; but, at the end of the day, it all means nothing (other than for some of us with operational service, who hold it very dear indeed).  I’m sorry if I’ve generalised too much here.

The annual RAAC Corps Conference stands for nothing, as those involved have no executive authority; they can only advise.  The Chief of Army, of course, can chose to ignore that advice.  

BUT … just because that’s what happened with the previous CA, doesn’t mean that the new CA won’t chose a different path. 

Is it possible that she will see her responsibilities differently?

Could this be the saving of the RAAC?  

Instead of 1st Armoured Regiment, a unit with 75 years operational heritage being left on the scrap heap as a non-combatant, it’s combat role (as a tank regiment) could be reinstated and it could be relocated to join 3 Armoured Brigade in Townsville (where it rightly belongs).   

This would see the 2nd Cavalry Regiment reinstated to a reconnaissance role (rather than incompatible dual roles, as at present).  The final piece of the puzzle would see 2/14 LHR (QMI) continue as an ARA unit in Brisbane.

This is the ideal solution – but what if the CA decides otherwise (as she has every right to do)?   How does the RAAC rise above the injustice of it all?  

Is the only answer to not give up and just keep on trying – or is the RAAC made of different stuff?  

We could take the view that, eventually, persistence will win through (or so we would hope).  

But is this what safeguarding unit heritage really means, or is there more to it?  

The heritage that 1 Armd Regt built up over 75 years is precious; yet it can be lost in the blink of an eye.  How do you safeguard something as ethereal as a unit’s heritage?

If the truth be known – you can’t!

Writing letters doesn’t make a difference; no matter how well received they are and how much attention they get.  

The ‘Brits’ were able to make a difference when a merger (to save money) between the Parachute Regiment and Royal Marines was proposed.  That took an effort on a national scale, however – one far beyond the scope available in terms of 1 Armd Regt.   

We’re left in the hands of those who seek to ‘do the right thing’.   

Sadly, there’ll never be enough of us. 

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

.

.

ChatGPT image

.

.


.


.