|
| |
|
| |
Caterers want to serve
WITH all the deployments happening within the ADF and, in particular, the Army, I can’t fathom why AACC personnel are not deploying as a part of their parent unit.
AACC personnel can do all the hard yards when it comes to training for the “real thing” but when it comes to stepping off at the airport we get left behind once again. If AACC personnel are good enough to do all the training and feeding of unit personnel in Australia, why aren’t we good enough to be rewarded for our efforts?
Surely, the powers-that-be must be able to have some sort of say during the lead-up negotiations for a deployment about the standard of messing that our diggers will have?
Dutch rations are provided in Afghanistan and American in Iraq; in asking those who have returned from these areas about their standard of rationing I haven’t heard many good comments.
What is the incentive for a young digger in the AACC to stay in our corps?
We do heaps of work and hours in Australia making sure that personnel are fed to the best standard that is possible with the equipment (that’s another story) and rations at hand. We pride ourselves on our standards, for we know that if we fail people will go hungry or a unit will have its posted strength decimated through illness, a fact that is often overlooked in other corps.
Why shouldn’t an AACC digger be disappointed after he/she has done another farewell buffet for units going to Iraq or Afghanistan, working another 12- to 15-hour day to make sure the end product is as excellent as it usually is? Seeing people’s families looking at their loved ones with a sense of pride, knowing that they are about to do what they enlisted for; why should our corps’ members be denied this chance?
When a young AACC member comes to me and says, “Sir, I want to corps transfer”, how can I look at this person truthfully and say “why?”
Soon, there won’t be a catering corps to worry about because all those that are in now will be either transferred so they’re not called “pogues” any more or discharged due to lack of job satisfaction and opportunities. Then everyone will have to endure contractors full time and not just overseas or in part here.
Hopefully, those in control of this situation realise this before it’s too late.
WO2 Ian Polanski
8/12 Mdm Regt
Robertson Barracks
Maj Marc Rhodes, SO2 Ops AHQ, responds:
I WOULD like to reinforce the importance of the AACC to Army. The corps provides a valuable service to Army, is essential for Army to function effectively and should be proud of its history of supporting the Australian Army.
AACC personnel are deployed on a number of operations, including with OBG(W) and Secdet in Iraq, RTF in Afghanistan and our forces in Timor-Leste. Some of the catering detachments are quite small and operate in a supervisory capacity while others, such as with Secdet, are integrated into organisations.
The HQJOC Personnel Directorate is responsible for providing personnel (and welfare) input to HQJOC planning for ADF operations. Most importantly, they create the operational manning document, the manning construct for the operation.
When planning for operations there are a number of factors that restrict the number and types of personnel that can be deployed. Examples include physical accommodation and services available in-theatre, concurrent operations and the requirement to comply with preparedness directives. These factors can have a direct impact on supporting services, particularly where these services, such as catering, can be provided by other deployed elements or using arrangements with other forces. The crux of the operational planning is to ensure that support to deployed forces is provided in the most efficient manner.
HQJOC also ensures that all commanders of returning contingents are consulted on return to Australia to identify issues relating to the operational effectiveness of the force in-theatre. This is done to ensure that the right number and type of personnel are deployed to get the job done. This is undertaken against the manning pressures detailed previously.
I would highlight that, while a number of corps are experiencing high operational tempo, there are a number of corps and trades, such as AACC, who are not. Unfortunately the pressure on operational manning results from a range of factors beyond the control of Army and will effect the number of available positions.
There are still a reasonable number of positions for AACC personnel on operational deployments and I urge you to consult your chain of command regarding the filling of these positions. Given Army’s current operational tempo, I am confident that AACC soldiers have a good opportunity to deploy. |
| |
Call to fit in
another BFA age bracket
I HAVE just read DI(A) Pers 148-2 as amended on August 8, 2006, Basic Fitness Assessment.
It appears to have forgotten a group of serving members, that is Reserve personnel aged 56 to 60. The current table is broken into five-year brackets from 25 to 51-plus, which suits the ARA as its CRA is 55. If we over-55s are expected to maintain our BFA standard, how about another bracket from 56-60?
As it is, the time for the walk reaches its maximum time when you turn 46 and I, at 56, am expected to achieve the same level (I can at the moment but it gets harder each year).
It is interesting to note that as you progress to each bracket you are required to achieve less repetitions, or have longer to complete the activity, except for the walk, which as I say reaches maximum time allowed at age 46.
WO2 George Lewis
LWC
Steele Barracks
Maj Sue Kerr, DGPers-A, responds:
AS you correctly state, the standards for the BFA do not change once you reach 51 years of age and the walk standard does not change from 46 years of age; even though with the changes to both the ARA and Reserve Compulsory Retirement Age (CRA), there are personnel serving beyond the age of 55.
When the decision was made to increase CRA, consideration was given to changing the physical standards to include a category for members over 55. It was decided, however, that there would not be any amendment to the physical standards as a result of increases to CRA.
The physical standards for the 51-plus age group was assessed to be the minimum standard of fitness required to enable personnel to remain deployable. This was the same rationale for the decision not to increase the time available for members to complete the BFA walk.
It should be noted that for members with a permanent medical restriction and who are unable to complete all components of the BFA, there is the option of undertaking an alternate assessment as outlined in DI(A) Pers 148-2.
The increase to CRA was designed to acknowledge the valuable contribution that members over 55 offer Army. These members, are however, still required to maintain a minimum level of fitness. |
| |
Oil is a peak concern
 |
|
Fuel on tap: Pte Mark Johnson, 9 Petroleum Pl, 10FSB, operates a fuel manifold during Exercise Talisman Saber 07.
Photo by Cpl Michael Davis |
|
ABOUT two years ago I read a book entitled Beyond Oil: The view from Hubberts Peak.
It talks about oil depletion, or peak oil, which I have been following quite closely since then. Peak oil is the term used to describe the global peaking and then decline of oil production.
With global demand still increasing about 2 per cent a year, and the depletion rate expected to be about 2.5-3 per cent a year after the peak, this will see the price of fuel increase significantly and will likely result in an economic recession/depression that could last for decades. While it is uncertain when the peak will occur, based on a significant amount of research that I have completed, I believe it will occur between now and the end of the decade.
The Army is obviously reliant upon oil to fuel its growing fleet of trucks, tanks, helicopters, generators etc. I don’t have any figures to support this, but I imagine that our consumption of fuel is increasing as we bring on new capabilities.
While the Liquid Fuels Emergency Act will ensure the Army and ADF is a top priority for fuel, public opinion will no doubt demand that this fuel be used sparingly, in the event of a liquid fuels crisis.
Is the Army aware of peak oil and has it started planning for it?
Maj Cameron Leckie
136 Sig Sqn
Gallipoli Barracks
Lt-Col Nick Floyd, A/DSIE-A, Future Land Warfare AHQ, responds:
WE recognise that the peaking and eventual decline of global oil production will have severe consequences for Army as well as the wider community.
We are engaging across Defence in this regard, and are factoring such aspects as fuel consumption in our considerations.
While peak oil individually constitutes a significant threat, Army recognises that a similar level of risk management will be required for other energy issues, such as a disruption to our electricity supply or natural gas reserves. As such we are addressing all of these issues under the broader theme of energy security. Within this context, it is important to recognise the existence of Australia’s energy dependency and vulnerability.
Dependency describes the reliance of a given socio-economic sector on a particular energy source(s) to sustain that sector.
The more energy sources a sector has, the less dependent it is on a particular source; whereas dependency will diminish as efficiencies or other reductions in consumption occur. In contrast, vulnerability of an economic sector’s energy source(s) relates to volatility, interdiction or slowing of supply – through market forces, diplomatic/military action by suppliers or third agencies, and sabotage as well as natural events.
Securing Australia’s energy encompasses the problem area of securing not only sources, but also lines of supply, from the point of origin to the final consumer. We must also consider energy not only as a consumable within sectors of the national economy (including Defence and Defence-related industry), but also energy as a commodity for export, as part of the national economy.
Both aspects of energy security are central in Australia’s national interests, and ultimately a vital consideration in national and military strategy.
Staff from Future Land Warfare (FLW) Branch of AHQ are actively engaged in energy security working groups, nationally and internationally, collaborating with a range of public and private sector stakeholders.
Ongoing collaboration with organisations such as the Kokoda Foundation and the Australian Strategic Policy Institute has allowed us to expand our knowledge of energy security, and also to provide information and facilitate understanding regarding the range of energy security concerns facing the Army, Defence and the nation.
Most recently, FLW-A staff attended a presentation on peak oil by the co-author of the US Department of Energy-commissioned “Hirsch Report”.
FLW-A staff are collaborating with Strategic Policy Division to identify the implications of energy security issues for Defence.
This work will ensure Army is prepared to contribute to a whole of Government effort through advice, liaison, and preventive and, where required, decisive action.
|
| |
Issue over boots
I REFER to Sgt Damian Griffin’s story “Long road home” (Army, June 29), about the efforts to find Vietnam War MIAs Pte Peter Gillson and LCpl Richard Parker.
The bottom of the third column says “... another set of boots were found – these were Australian-issue GP boots”
The second pair of boots recovered turned out to be those of Pte Gillson but, in fact, neither of the pairs of boots recovered in Nui Gang Toi were of Australian issue. This was one factor in the recovery that delayed preliminary identification of the remains.
Further, I believe that GP boots had not been introduced to service as early as November 1965.
Otherwise, a good story – well done.
David Thomas
Operation Aussies Home
Salt Ash, NSW
|
|
