Capability Development Group
The role of the Capability Development Group is to develop and gain Government approval for future defence capabilities. The Group has a close relationship with the Defence Materiel Organisation and oversees the implementation of a number of the Defence Procurement Review recommendations.
The Capability Development Group consists of:
- Capability Systems Division, which manages the development of future capability options to assist government decision making on investment in major capital equipment for the ADF.
- Capability, Investment and Resources Division, which provides independent analysis and review of capability issues including the overall balance of investment in capability (current and future), the future structure of the ADF, major investment proposals, preparedness and priorities.
- Capability and Plans Branch, which seeks to ensure that current and future capabilities align with the Government's strategic priorities. The branch oversees issues relating to capability guidance, preparedness management, ordnance war reserves, mobilisation and network centric warfare implementation.
- Directorate of Trials, which supports Capability Development Group staff in defining the test and evaluation concepts that will inform capability development, acceptance and utilisation decisions. The directorate also coordinates joint test and evaluation policy and conducts Defence trials that cross Service, Defence and international boundaries.
- Australian Defence Simulation Office, which develops and oversees the implementation of Defence simulation policy and the Defence Simulation Plan providing guidance on and sponsorship of simulation projects to enhance capabilities, save resources and reduce risk across the Defence organisation.
- Office of Interoperability, which oversees the ability of the ADF to operate with key allies and within coalition forces. The office is also responsive to the Chief of Joint Operations for interoperability issues with an operations perspective, and to the Strategy Group for policy issues that might affect Australian and coalition allies.
Resources
The Group's total spend for 2005–06 was $67.6m, consisting of $3.0m capital budget, $64.4m operating budget, including military salaries expenditure of $15.9m (of which $30.4m was managed on behalf of the portfolio), and $0.2m depreciation expense.
As at 30 June 2006, the Capability Development Group had 151 military personnel and 123 Australian Public Service staff1.
Key Achievements for 2005–06
The following significant projects progressed for Government decision included:
- the acquisition of four C-17 Heavy Airlift aircraft and associated support equipment. (AIR 8000 Phase 3);
- an additional 34 MRH-90 helicopters to replace the current Blackhawk and Sea King helicopter fleets (AIR 9000 Phase 4);
- the upgrade of the Anzac-class frigate anti-ship missile defence system (SEA 1448 Phase 2B);
- the acquisition of the AEGIS weapon systems for the Air Warfare Destroyer (SEA 4000 Phase 3.1);
- the acquisition of the Joint Air to Surface Stand-off Missile for the F/A-18 (AIR 5418 Phase 1); and
- first pass approval for the Amphibious Ships project, and the provision of funding to conduct further design, technical and through-life support studies (JP 2048 Phase 4A/4B).
Other initiatives and activities in support of capability development included the:
- public release of the Defence Capability Plan 2006–16;
- public release of the second version of the Defence Capability Development Manual;
- reinvigoration of the Capability Development Advisory Forum, a CEO-level forum for Defence and defence industry;
- public release of the Network Centric Warfare Roadmap;
- update of the Defence Capability Strategy;
- management of a number of major Defence trials to assist in reducing risk of Defence Capability Plan projects, for example, experimental scram-jet (hypersonic) engines; and
- implementation of a Network Centric Warfare Compliance Assessment Process to support capability integration.
- The military and civilian personnel numbers are based on headcount not full-time equivalent/average funded strength. [ back ]
