Royal Marines have carried out raids on beaches in North Queensland as part of an exercise.

According to a news release from the Royal Navy, Bravo Company of 40 Commando landed from helicopter carrier HMAS Canberra – flagship of the Royal Australian Navy – alongside troops of the 2nd Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment, in the Cowley Beach Training Area.

undefined

“The commandos attached to the Australian light amphibious infantry to form a ‘pre-landing force’ designed to secure beaches and beachheads to clear the way for larger amphibious forces to land ashore.

The green berets and A Company of the 2nd Battalion carried out patrols before Chinooks and landing craft brought in waves of troops, armoured vehicles and artillery to shore for the main thrust inland, all with Australian Tiger attack helicopters in support overhead.

It marks the commandos’ return to Australia’s eastern coast to continue their work started in 2019, when they also attached to the 2nd Battalion.”

undefined

Talisman Sabre has been scaled back this year because of Covid-19 guidelines, with a maximum of 2,000 troops from outside Australia taking part in the exercises around the Shoalwater Bay Training Area and Townsville – around 150 miles south of where the marines have been training so far.

You can read more here.

Tom Dunlop
Tom Dunlop
Tom has spent the last 13 years working in the defence industry, specifically military and commercial shipbuilding. His work has taken him around Europe and the Far East, he is currently based in Scotland.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

44 COMMENTS

      • Why did the Aussies buy Abrams? Such a heavy, gas guzzler – and where is the tank threat coming from?

        • Heavy? An M1A1 is sightly lighter (63 tonnes) than a Challenger 2 without add-on armour (64 tonnes without add-on armour or 75 tonnes with additional armour). Gas guzzler? Yes, the Challenger 2 has a longer range but it trades fuel economy for speed with the M1A1 outpacing the UK MBT both on and off road.

          Interoperability with the US, Australia’s primary security ally, makes the Abrams the logical choice for the ADF. The M1A1s benefits of a shared logistics train for spares and ammunition, training, TTPs etc cannot be provided by any European platform. Challenger 2 is an orphan platform with its rifled barrel, built in limited numbers and out of production and as a result was never a contender for the ADF.

          As for a potential tank threat to Australia. you could ask the same question of the UK. Given Australia and the UK are both island nations, Challenger 2s would not see action on home soil, except in the extremely unlikely case of a peer adversary state mounting an amphibious invasion.

          So you could argue that in practice, there is no tank threat to the UK and therefore by extension no logical case for the UK to maintain MBTs (as some indeed have argued recently). In reality the main purpose of UK heavy armour is in an expeditionary role.

          Given the size of the land mass Australia has to defend (equivalent to western Europe or the continental USA), the ADF arguably has a more justifiable case for fielding MBTs.  

          Australia is not the only nation in the region to recognise the threat and invest in MBTs with Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore fielding MBTs (Singapore has a larger fleet of MBTs than Australia).

          China has over 9,000 MBTs of which around 1,100 are the modern type 99 or 99A (equivalent to Leopard or Abrams). Coupled with their rapidly growing fleet of blue water amphibious ships they have the range and capability to reach Australian coastlines.

          Hence the ADFs recent announcement to replace the M1A1s with the latest M1A2 Sep3 versions for a total of 122 armoured vehicles based on the Abrams chassis: 75 M1A2 SEPv3 Abrams Main Battle Tanks; 29 M1150 Assault Breacher Vehicles; 18 M1074 Joint Assault Bridges; 6 additional M88A2 Hercules Combat Recovery Vehicles.

          Together with the Boxer CRVs which are now entering ADF service and soon to be announced Land 400 IFV platform (Hanwha Redback or Rheinmetall Lynx), the ADF is taking the threat of heavy armour in the region seriously and will ultimately have one of the most capable and well-equipped mechanised forces to play a part in countering that threat wherever it may appear in the Indo Pacific region.

          Hope that helps to put things into perspective. 

  3. I take it when they deploy on an exercise like this , they take all equipment with them including firearms etc . Does the RAF fly them out or do they charter a civilian aircraft.

      • It would be interesting to know how they found the street rifles , do the RMs not use another rifle as standard issue as well as the SA80.

          • The Aussies use a lot of US kit so I wonder if they will adopt the 6.8mm rifles the Americans choose?

          • Umm have to say out of all the things the Navy could be spending their money on it wouldn’t be my priority. Sceptical about whether it’s even a superior weapon in either effective range or accuracy to the SA80.

          • Well it’s rubbish for 8% left handed. It’s bad for close quarters and boarding as u can’t swap shoulders to go round off hand corners. I think because of terror wars a lot have been hammered and this is way of making them last few years by replacing say 8000 of them. I like a bull pup but every country that used them except Australia is moving away from them.

          • I’m left handed served in the infantry and had no problem if you need to transfer shoulders u use the EBS sight on the top this was solved a decade ago and bullpup rifles have never been so popular the tavor is used by loads of country’s the excuse to use the c7 (which isn’t a better rifle by any measure) was made because apparently they use frangable ammunition on ship boarding duties and there was a chance it wouldn’t cycle as reliable also one of the new 6.8mm rifles in trials with the USA is bulpup

          • I know it is, I own a bull pup however it’s a fact that usa pulls most weight in small arms choice in nato and most of their military have very poor view of them rightly or wrongly. The only issue I found is they tend to have poor triggers mechanisms. New Zealand, France and China have all either fully or partially gone away from them. The bull pup entry of the 6.8mm is brave but the guy in charge is ex British officer so should be good gun but think he will have hard time convincing them. The American military started bad mouthing them after the war with the original EM2 entry. They then forced all nato to change calibres and then again. Bit of a farce. EM2 by all accounts was cutting edge.

      • I wonder if the Brits and Aussies are hoping that the GD 6.8mm bullpup wins the US Army’s next gen battle rifle(s) competition?I personally think not since the US military has never carried a bullpup rifle before and even countries that have bullpups for their conventional forces, their SF troops are ditching them for M4 type weapons.

    • Talk about wishfull thinking, wait until QE arrives in Oz. Perhaps in hindsite you should have saved up your dollars, and gone for the full monty.

      • Mate, a QE Class carrier is just too expensive and too much ship for the RAN, and anyway the RAN isn’t planning to get back into the carrier business.

        Not every navy can have everything, but as part of a future coalition operation in our part of the world, the RAN will contribute well enough.

    • Back in the 1950/60’s the RN’s LPH’s revolutionised amphibious warfare. Now, after the sale (without replacement) of HMS Ocean to Brazil in 2018, the RN/RM can only regard with jealously the RAN’s two LHD’s.

      • Unfortunately for the RN that is the case, on the other side of the coin, and fortunately for the RAN it’s the opposite, the two Canberra class LHDs have given the RAN a massive increase in amphibious capabilities, and ably assisted by HMAS Choules, who by the way, is planned to replaced by two ships:

        https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/pacific-2019/2019/10/pacific-2019-navantia-australia-unveils-joint-support-ship-design/

        Maybe those Royal Marines won’t want to go home and stay here in Oz instead!

        Cheers,

        • Whatever you do don’t let them see the video on youtube of the guy trying to catch a Huntsman spider on the ceiling in his house.

          • Mate, the general rule here in Oz that most of us follow is:

            “Don’t screw with the wildlife and it won’t screw with you!”

            As for Huntsman, they’re harmless, they are good at catching other annoying insect pests in your home.

            Where they do scare the crap out of you is when they get in your car, hide behind the sun visor, you drive into the sun, reach up to fold it down and end up with a Huntsman in your lap whilst driving, lots of fun, not! Ha ha!!

            https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=V2jGK5niQEA

            Cheers,

          • A mate of mine from Newcastle Aus told me sensible people keep a huntsman like a pet cos it preys on the really dangerous stuff that you don’t want to fuck around with

          • Mate, one of the ‘fun’ uses for a Huntsman is when you have overseas visitors staying at your home.

            There is the usual inevitable scream from one of them when they come face to face with a resident Huntsman for the first time, much anxiety, etc.

            The usual response is “oh, it’s only a Huntsman, they won’t hurt you, just leave it alone”, lots of fun to watch!!

  6. God, if there’s one type of ship that I wish the RN could have it would be the Aussie Canberra class. The RN escort numbers look like they are going in the right direction, our carriers are good, and the future of the Royal Marines looks stable with Albion and Bulwark remaining in the fleet until the 2030s and 6 Multi Role Support Ships. Yet there is one thing missing a versitile flat top. Canberra type ships could operate in three military roles and a humanitarian role. The military roles would be Amphibious assault with a combined air group and landing craft able to land over the beach an Army Armoured Battle Group of 1,000 men plus MBTs. Able to operate as an escort carrier for large military reinforcement convoys from the US to Europe, you don’t want a fleet carrier doing that job. Operate as a Anti Submarine Group Flagship operating with 2-3 ASW frigates in a Anti Submarine Group. This is where the idea of buying the conatainerised Thales CAPTAS 4 towed array comes in, they could be used on the T31/32 to make them into ASW frigates when needed. The cost of a Canberra/Juan Carlos seems to be from £400 million to £750 million. If we could get them built for say £500 million then I really would suggest 3-4 of these ships for the fleet. Build the Royal Marines around the MRSS/LSS and build the Armys Strike Brigades around the LHD. If we could get 4 of these ships then two could be deployed with a Strike brigade, one could be used in the ASW role and one in home waters for refit repair training of army units etc. You also need to keep in mind that about 38% of the investment will come back to the treasury in the form of tax if built in the UK. Then just think of the amount of work created if built in the NE or Liverpool.

    I know wishful thinking, and yes it is, but when I think of how much money government wastes on failed IT projects or stupid things like garden bridges etc then this is not such a bad idea. It gives the Army a heavy lift ability that they could plan forces and equipment for, it give the over the beach lift ability for a second Falklands situation, it makes a armoured battlegroup available in both the Northern and Southern Hemisphere at a moments notice and gives the RN the ability to form a ASW hunter killer group in the GIUK GAP or practise convoy escort from the US to Europe. It also leaves the carriers to operate as they should as Strike Groups.

    Sometimes I ask myself if the RN, Australian Navy, Canadian Navy and New Zealand Navy could operate as a single Navy and combine their blue water fleets into one.

    • There was more of a case for me to having several smaller and multi role carriers in the RN than two large sitting ducks. Ocean is missed. The Wasp Class provide an example with every one offering a “mix” of capability. We are never going to replay “D” Day, and even a Falkands scale landing is beyond UK capability now. Still, big is beautiful to some eh?

    • A joint RN, RAN, RCN & RNZN fleet? Never going to happen, or should it, despite the very close historical and cultural relationships, four sovereign nations with different views and priorities.

      Sure we’ll continue to be coalition partners, but the RAN & RNZN have a primary focus that is different to the RN & RCN.

      Speaking for Australia, our primary military alliance is with the US and will continue to be, and that’s not likely to change anytime soon, if ever.

  7. The way the worlds is changing, in my opinion its time for Australia to update to modern defence technology as the Dragon starts to breathe fire in the near regions.A laying of sonar buoys to record activity around ifs coast, monitoring submarine activity and surface ships that may encroach into its waters.1

  8. I welcome the heightened pace of military exercises on the part of allied Western forces in the Indo-Pacific, but I wonder if we actually have a clear strategic vision on the kind of war we are are planning and willing to fight with China, should it come to that. Is it about preventing, for example, an invasion of Taiwan or the Philippines or retaking anyone of those two countries should they be overwhelmed by an initial onslaught of Mainland Chinese forces? As in so many recent Western interventions in the Middle East and in Afghanistan, we tend to suffer from too much ambiguity about the actual goals of any potential military intervention and end up with less then satisfactory outcomes and a lot of wasted lives and money.

    • Like France in ww2, most of those countries in the first island chain will have to wait for the world to return.
      We will be back.
      I would hope that they have some type of planning in regards to operating an insurgency behind the lines

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here