Will the new Chief of Army reinstate 1st Armoured Regiment to its combat role?

Will the new CA reinstate 1 Armd Regt to its combat role in memory of the tank crewmen whose lives were lost or were wounded during combat in Vietnam?  If not, why not?  

Three battle honours and a Unit Citation for Gallantry were awarded to 1 Armd Regt.  Yet, after 75 years’ service as a tank regiment, the unit has been made a non-combatant, essentially removing it from the Order of Battle.  Heritage and traditions have just been tossed on the scrap heap. 

Why?  To save money in the defence budget.  Making 1 Armd Regt an experimentation unit, was simply the cheapest option.  

But … is this good enough?  Can the Chief of Army honestly say that 1 Armd Regt’s former heritage was of no value in the long term … and that it was not worth preserving? 

Tanks have been retained as part of the 2nd Cavalry Regiment.  So, the capability has not been discarded, it’s just that the RAAC’s oldest unit has been removed from its role.  How can this happen? 

The only unit in the Army with the right to carry a Standard, is made a non-combatant … with no consultation what-so-ever!  All RAAC stakeholders, including the Representative Honorary Colonel, 1 Armd Regt Hon Col, and the then Head of Corps, urged that the decision be reconsidered.  Their pleas were rebuffed.  Why?

The former Chief of Army had no experience during his career of the desperate need for close fire support that can arise during battle.  To his mind, tanks represented only an opportunity for cost savings.  He has absolutely no understanding of the extent of training embodied in an armoured regiment. It was of no concern to him that 3 Brigade in Townsville, is forced to go without a tank squadron, a cavalry squadron, and a battle-group headquarters. 

What to do about it?

The new Chief of Army can simply reinstate 1 Armd Regt to its combat role.  This would involve the unit’s regiment headquarters relocating to Townsville and assuming command of the tanks presently with 2 Cav Regt.  This would mean that 3 Brigade would have a new battle-group headquarters; one which would greatly add to the Brigade’s manoeuvre capability.  

What challenges will arise?  

Army simply cannot afford to take this course.  Why not?  Splitting 2 Cav Regt’s present (incompatible) dual role unit, will simply involve the relocation to Townsville of 1 Armd Regt’s regimental headquarters. A negligible cost overall.  The experimentation unit can simply be renamed and continue on as normal.

What – Chief of Army could not agree to preserve 1 Armd Regt’s heritage, whilst also facilitating a much enhanced 3 Brigade in Townsville?

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

.

.

ChatGPT image

.

.


.


.