The ANZACs in T2k

[Olefin]

At the time it was about six months training before they hit their Battalion (11 weeks recruit training including basic infantry skills, three more months Initial Employment Training at the infantry centre). Corners can be cut in wartime to almost halve that, but that's really pushing it.
Note that's minimum level for an infantryman too. I've been on both sides of the training both as trainee (of course) and DS. You really get an appreciation of how much more they need to learn when you're on the other side looking in.

I would say then they would start by bringing both the old battalions back on line with a cadre of experienced NCO's and officers, probably from other units, and staff them with recruits to start with - which means six months minimum to get those two battalions back up to strength. Same with whatever support units the division used to have.

Question would be - did Australia have artillery in storage to be able to equip them with artillery support or would they have mortars only

[Legbreaker]

Question would be - did Australia have artillery in storage to be able to equip them with artillery support or would they have mortars only

Not much I think. Might be a few 105's and 155's from the disbandment of 3rd Div, but not much more. Plenty of mortars available though, especially since they're relatively easy to make. IRL many of the Artillery units had their guns taken off them around 2005 (I think) and replaced with 81mm mortars. Still can't work out why this was considered a good idea.....

Fortunately I'm really only going to need to properly equip two of the three Divisions with proper artillery, as the 3rd will be assigned to security and anti insurgency tasks within the Australian borders.

Of course while I'm considering all this, the other nations also need mobilising, but besides New Zealand (which MIGHT muster a Brigade plus perhaps a couple of additional light infantry Battalions), the island nations (Tonga, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands, Samoa, etc) probably won't be contributing much of significance - a few company's of light infantry and the like at a guess, mostly used for rear area security/civil defence tasks at home.

I also need to consider what's happening with Indonesia's other neighbours to the north - Malaysia, Brunei, etc. Thinking I'll just have them bolster their defences but have most of their attention focused on Vietnam/China/Korea. Indonesia has less to gain (and more to lose) in attacking them they they do with going east into PNG.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

In regards to artillery, I believe at that time, the Regular Army was equipped with the L118 105mm and the M198 155mm. The Reserve Army artillery units were equipped, if I remember, with the BL 5.5in gun.
There may have been some 25 pounder field guns still in war stores but I believe most, if not all. of them were disposed of by the 1980s (except for use as memorials and so on).

[Legbreaker]

In regards to artillery, I believe at that time, the Regular Army was equipped with the L118 105mm and the M198 155mm. The Reserve Army artillery units were equipped, if I remember, with the BL 5.5in gun.
There may have been some 25 pounder field guns still in war stores but I believe most, if not all. of them were disposed of by the 1980s (except for use as memorials and so on).

Most of the reserve units I am familiar with had the 105 Hamel or L5 pack howitzer. The 5.5 inch went out of service in 1983.
From memory one of the reserve artillery units of 3 Div had the 155mm M198.

There has been no self propelled artillery (except mortars) in Australian service since the Yeramba SP 25-pounder went out of service in 1957. It was also the only SP artillery Australia has ever had.

[dylan]

There is no way NZ could muster a full brigade in the 1990s.

The poor state of the Army in responding to Bosnia and to Timor is illustration enough.

This actually resulted in what some people call the "army coup" in NZ whereby the army mounted a covert operation to shaft the other services and recover its lead service privileges. One result was the scrapping of the air combat force. Another was the acquisition of "gold plated" LAVs all fitted with 25mm chain guns in a revolving turret.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Most of the reserve units I am familiar with had the 105 Hamel or L5 pack howitzer. The 5.5 inch went out of service in 1983.
From memory one of the reserve artillery units of 3 Div had the 155mm M198.

There has been no self propelled artillery (except mortars) in Australian service since the Yeramba SP 25-pounder went out of service in 1957. It was also the only SP artillery Australia has ever had.

Ack! I completely forgot about the L5 - shows how good (bad) my memory is.
The Reserve arty unit in WA in the 1980s was I believe 7th Field Battery and I have vague memories of them having medium guns and not the L5 (and they certainly weren't lucky enough to have the L118 Hamel (WA units were always a poor cousin anyway but the L118 would have been too new to let the Reservist here have them!).
But I'm certain they did not have any 155mm (they would have been kept for the Regs). They were definitely a medium arty unit and not light arty.

Doesn't matter much for a mid-90s timeline as they would have been converting to mortars anyway... but it does lend itself to some extra (albeit obsolescent) arty being in warstores.

[Legbreaker]

There is no way NZ could muster a full brigade in the 1990s.

Yes, totally agree IRL, however I'm giving them about 12 months warning that hostilities are coming to beef up their strength. Equipment will likely be in short supply, and those units which stay within NZ borders will likely be armed with civilian rifles and the like, but manpower is possible - they did have about 150,000 people in uniform and armed in 1942 when the total population was significantly lower than today.
I'm talking of raising an army of perhaps 10,000, or approximately double what it is today, plus a small increase to naval and air personnel of perhaps 10-20% IRL numbers. Any greater increase to the navy and air force probably wouldn't be justified as there probably wouldn't be the ships and planes to equip them.

Doesn't matter much for a mid-90s timeline as they would have been converting to mortars anyway... but it does lend itself to some extra (albeit obsolescent) arty being in warstores.

From what I've read to date, the reserve artillery didn't loose their guns until around 2005 give or take. Have you some information that some switched earlier

[StainlessSteelCynic]

<snip>

From what I've read to date, the reserve artillery didn't loose their guns until around 2005 give or take. Have you some information that some switched earlier

No, just working from my (increasingly poor) memory and I never had that much info on units outside my direct experience e.g. the arty. I'm probably misremembering things and screwing up the timings. For instance, sometime in 1992 or 93, we were told that in the near future Support Coy would be losing their mortars and refitting as SFMG. The mortars would be going to Reserve arty units who would be losing their big guns to the Regs.
That was the talk but it was not mentioned officially at that time.
I'm obviously putting 2 and 2 together and getting about seven & a half as the answer!

[CDAT]

No, just working from my (increasingly poor) memory and I never had that much info on units outside my direct experience e.g. the arty. I'm probably misremembering things and screwing up the timings. For instance, sometime in 1992 or 93, we were told that in the near future Support Coy would be losing their mortars and refitting as SFMG. The mortars would be going to Reserve arty units who would be losing their big guns to the Regs.
That was the talk but it was not mentioned officially at that time.
I'm obviously putting 2 and 2 together and getting about seven & a half as the answer!

It could also be a case of how governments work. I am guessing they all do things more or less the same. For example the US Military adopted the M9 Pistol (to replace the M1911) in 1985, and officially replacement was completed in Oct 1986. However when I joined the Army in 1993 we still had the M1911, seven years after it was replaced.

On a side note I have to take double takes here a lot, every time I see WA (Western Australia I am guessing) my first thought is Washington where I live.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

It could also be a case of how governments work. I am guessing they all do things more or less the same. For example the US Military adopted the M9 Pistol (to replace the M1911) in 1985, and officially replacement was completed in Oct 1986. However when I joined the Army in 1993 we still had the M1911, seven years after it was replaced.

On a side note I have to take double takes here a lot, every time I see WA (Western Australia I am guessing) my first thought is Washington where I live.

Hehehe.
Yes, WA is Western Australia. In regards to how governments work, yes indeed. When the Australian Army got its Disruptive Pattern Camouflage Uniform (DPCU) to replace the old Jungle Green uniform, there were some cases where Reservist support units in WA ( ) were issued the new cams before Reservist Infantry units... I wasn't alone in thinking that the Infantry units might have needed them more than a support unit.

[Legbreaker]

In need of a little input at the moment. Given the ANZUS treaty requires the US to assist Australia should another party attack (as Indonesia does in PNG as described briefly in the BYB), what response could be expected in say, 1998

My initial thoughts are perhaps a missile cruiser (the USS Mobile Bay springs to mind given it was involved with East Timor in 1999) could be dispatched, and/or a battalion of infantry (as usually occurs during joint training exercises). If it's the latter, is there an independent US unit which may be sent

Of course the treaty doesn't really require much more than the military equivalent of "thoughts and prayers" either especially since Australia itself wasn't directly attacked by conventional forces (I will however have numerous units of saboteurs/guerrillas operating throughout the country).

It is interesting to note that the US invoked the treaty after 9/11 (first time in it's 50 odd year history). This is why Australia was subsequently involved in Iraq and Afghanistan (and is still in the latter country nearly two decades later).

[StainlessSteelCynic]

On a tangent, at one time when the Philippines was talking about all US bases out of their country, one of the potential replacement USN home ports was in Indonesia.
Now that would make for some "interesting" diplomacy in the T2k Indo-Australia conflict.

But anyway, onto your question. Maybe some USMC infantry from the base in Japan I think it's on Okinawa. Assuming they weren't in Korea or dealing with Russia.

[CDAT]

In need of a little input at the moment. Given the ANZUS treaty requires the US to assist Australia should another party attack (as Indonesia does in PNG as described briefly in the BYB), what response could be expected in say, 1998

My initial thoughts are perhaps a missile cruiser (the USS Mobile Bay springs to mind given it was involved with East Timor in 1999) could be dispatched, and/or a battalion of infantry (as usually occurs during joint training exercises). If it's the latter, is there an independent US unit which may be sent

Of course the treaty doesn't really require much more than the military equivalent of "thoughts and prayers" either especially since Australia itself wasn't directly attacked by conventional forces (I will however have numerous units of saboteurs/guerrillas operating throughout the country).

It is interesting to note that the US invoked the treaty after 9/11 (first time in it's 50 odd year history). This is why Australia was subsequently involved in Iraq and Afghanistan (and is still in the latter country nearly two decades later).

Real world it would likely have been the USMC if (BIG IF) they had a unit afloat near there, but if a unit needed to be sent most likely the 82nd Airborne or 75th Rangers.

[Legbreaker]

Real world it would likely have been the USMC if (BIG IF) they had a unit afloat near there, but if a unit needed to be sent most likely the 82nd Airborne or 75th Rangers.

They're all otherwise occupied in 1998 T2k though.
I don't want a full US Division, or even a Brigade as they'd drastically change the balance and make it more a US show. Australia will have a TOTAL of 3 short Divisions, one of which is assigned to mainland defence, about a Brigade of the second assigned to Korea, leaving perhaps 5 Brigades total for PNG.

Meanwhile, Indonesia has about 20 Divisions worth of units. About half of them are internal security, but that still leaves the defenders outnumbered upwards of 10 to 1 (although more likely about 8 to 1 once I include New Zealand and units from the Pacific Island nations).

[Raellus]

My thoughts are that, with three very active fronts (Europe, Korea, Iran), the U.S. wouldn't be in a position to send much of anything to Australia, other than what happens to be there at the time (probably a few ships/aircraft/troops in transit to other theatres, and that only on a very temporary basis.

There's just nothing left to send, by '98, and that's straight from the canon.

I think your "thoughts and prayers" comment is right on the money. To put it in T2K terms, though, it'd be "Good luck. You're on your own."

One thought that just occurred to me is that a few hundred/couple thousand U.S. military personnel could be in Australia on leave (common enough during the Vietnam War) when the Indonesians attack. With no safe way to return to their posts (likely in Korea), they're stuck there and formed into an Ad Hoc "American Legion" under Aussie command. This could be a fun way to incorporate American PCs from any of the U.S. Army, USMC, USN, USAF or even USCG units in the Korean canon (which the KPSB follows closely) into an Australia-based campaign.

-