1st Armoured Regiment: Will it ever be a tank regiment again?

Will Lieutenant General Susan Coyle, the first woman to be Chief of Army, be the saviour of the Royal Australian Armoured Corps (RAAC)?

One can have some sympathy for General Coyle.  How long will the tag ‘first female CA’ be part of her profile?  How long after her appointment in July 2026, will it be before she’s accepted in her own right?  

In an ideal world, it would happen immediately.  She’s no doubt had many ground breaking moments in her career to date (and maybe she’ll go on to achieve another by becoming Chief of the Defence Force).

Will she be the one to implement the recommendations of the RAAC Representative Honorary Colonel and the RAAC Corps Conference to make 3 Brigade a full armoured brigade with 1st Armoured Regiment (tank) and 2nd Cavalry Regiment (recon) as separate units, plus 3rd Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment (mechanised infantry).  

This is certainly what authorities on Australia’s current strategic situation, would like to see: “As of May 2026, Australia faces its most challenging strategic circumstances since WWII, driven by intense regional power competition and a deteriorating security environment”. 

The former CA stripped the tanks from 1 Armd Regt and made it a non-combatant experimentation unit; while also making 2 Cav Regt a dual-role unit, with incompatible close fire support for infantry and intelligence-gathering roles.

Will the new Chief return 3 Brigade to its armoured brigade role; one it was designated to hold by the 2023 Defence Strategic Review? While nominally an armoured brigade – the only RAAC unit now on its ORBAT is a dual-role cavalry regiment – the Brigade, therefore, is short a battlegroup headquarters, as well as both a tank squadron and a cavalry squadron.  

General Coyle is clever enough to realise the folly of her predecessor’s actions … the question is, what will she do/can she do?  

Fortunately, the period since the demise of 1 Armd Regt has been relatively short. Somewhat surprisingly, the experimentation unit’s first CO gave an undertaking to maintain crew skills (including gunnery). This would never have been feasible in practice, however. A unit can have only one master.

So, will 1 Armd Regt become a tank regiment again?  If the strategic analysts have their way, ink wouldn’t dry on posting orders.  Real-life problems like the number of married quarters in Townsville, might be set-aside if the priority to reform 3 Brigade was strong enough.  (Who knows whether housing availability was one of the covert factors which influenced the original decision to make 1 Armd Regt an experimentation unit?)  

Of course, quick action taken now, could save countless dollars in retraining and re-establishing 1 Armd Regt.  As much as it might be the preferred ‘military’ option, however, will the defence bureaucracy support it (or will it go into the pool of ‘good ideas which can’t be afforded’?)

But, honestly, how is it possible that the former CA (or anyone in their right mind) could remove a tank regiment from the ORBAT at a time when the strategic situation is the most challenging since WWII.  Then again, how could the Department of Defence possibly give such a proposal the ‘green’ light (as they did)?  

While the last question (above) must remain, the choices made by the former CA are very clear.  He wanted an experimentation unit that could ‘hit the ground running’.  To achieve this, he designated 1 Armd Regt as the unit to be stripped of its tanks and given a new non-combatant role (not even an RAAC role).  

This highlights a failure in the management of our national defence policy.  The CA was pursuing his own agenda, one which created a new unit which he was personally committed to raising.  

There have to be safeguards, however.  An individual, whether it be the CA, or anyone else, can’t just do ‘as even HE might want’.   National security must take priority. 

How is the defence of our Nation, actually managed? Are the necessary checks and balances in place to prevent such a thing happening again?  

Or can another CA simply decide that he/she wants, say, a new EW Signals unit … even though the resources needed to create it, would harm Australia’s defence posture overall?

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

.

.

FILE PHOTO: An Australian Army Abrams M1A2 SEPv3 main battle tank during a live-fire serial as part of a qualification course for Royal Australian Armoured Corps soldiers at Puckapunyal Military Area, Victoria. Photo by Corporal Jacob Joseph.

.

.


.


.