iscover
Australians love to dig holes. It’s in our blood to carve out the earth in search of iron ore, to take the hard yakka road of transforming our natural environment or to just dig in and defend the underdog in a fight.
Unfortunately, the nation also has a historical preference for returning items to the soil and burying retired defence equipment.
Australia’s fleet of retired MRH-90 Taipan transport helicopters, withdrawn from service in July last year and replaced with UH‑60M Black Hawk helicopters, were allegedly scrapped for parts in Townsville before being buried somewhere in Queensland late last year.
A global search was undertaken by MRH-90 Taipan contractor NATO Helicopter Industries to find potential buyers and a December 2023 request from Ukraine for the aircraft were both unsuccessful.
There were plenty of airframes in the red dirt before the Taipan, with the Royal Australian Air Force’s General Dynamics F-111C long-range strike aircraft also receiving the shovel treatment after being retired in 2010.
More than 20 F-111 aircraft fuselages were reportedly buried at Swanbank landfill in Ipswich, Queensland, during November 2011. At the time, it was determined that the fuselage bonding used asbestos, there would be large material recovery costs and hazard prevention equipment requirements were significant (although wings, stabilizers and tails were scrapped).
It’s not just our own equipment, Defence has previously confirmed that two Russian-built Mil Mi-24 Hind attack helicopters, seized during the Sandline Affair during the late 1990s, were stored at RAAF Tindal Base for years before being buried at Darwin’s Shoal Bay Waste Management Facility in 2016. Makes you wonder if they could have been sent to Ukraine as a military assistance parts package in the last five years.
We need to ask the question of whether this kind of disposal method is in the interests of our national future military preparedness. I’d argue we need to drop that shovel and not make those same mistakes again.
Further to this argument, it’s worth considering that we will now have to think critically about any and all ways that the Australian Defence Force can use and save military equipment to meet the coming period of “global uncertainty”.
“In this time of global uncertainty, Australians have chosen optimism and determination,” re-elected Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said following election result over last weekend.
“Australians have chosen to face global challenges the Australian way – looking after each other while building for the future.”
The Australian Defence Force is quickly entering a crucial transition phase across multiple platforms, including M1A1 Abrams main battle tanks to new Abrams M1A2 SEPv3 MBTS as well as Tiger attack helicopters being replaced by new AH-64 Apache attack helicopter.
Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles, speaking in 2024, confirmed that the 49 retired Abrams MBTs will be gifted to Ukraine under a military assistance package.
Australian Defence Force leadership have already laid out a three-stage plan to complete the upcoming retirement of the Eurocopter Tiger armed reconnaissance helicopter fleet. The two-seater Tiger attack helicopters were originally introduced into service with the ADF in 2004 and are expected to be withdrawn from service in 2027–28.
Chief of Army Lieutenant General Simon Stuart confirmed there is a three-stage plan to ensure smooth transition of the Tiger into the AH-64 Apache attack helicopter.
“First, we need that capability operating out to 2027, one for the capability and two for the transition plan onto the AH-64 Echo,” he said during a Senate estimates meeting held in 6 November last year.
“Second … there are issues and pressures in the fleet for spare parts, very similar to the underperformance of the Taipan system.
“Thirdly … we are looking at stabilisation programs to ensure that we can keep that fleet operational until its withdrawal from service. It’s a balance of relative risk.”
With that in mind, let’s look at some other options
Airfield decoys: military vehicles and equipment such as the now-unavailable Taipan helicopters and F-111 strike aircraft would have better served as stationary decoys on remote airfields in northern Australia. Historically, decoys provide a false target for enemy munitions, additional confusion for enemy targeting and as a strategic problem to consider.
Military targets: ageing military equipment has also been used internationally as targets for current and developing defence technology. What better way to test your effectiveness than on a retired military target.
Industry training: newly evolving waves of drone technology now provide the opportunity to use retired military equipment for the training of artificial intelligence platforms such as photo-capture surveillance or loitering munition unmanned aerial systems.
Explosive conversion: military equipment, such as light civilian aircraft and World War II armoured vehicles, are already being modified in Ukraine to carry high explosives and drive by simplified controls or coordinates. These kinds of “moving bombs” have been proven to provide trench-busting ability, long-range strike ability over borders and attack into an enemy country’s industrial centres.
Missile sponges: retired aircraft, in particular, have the potential to be used as unmanned “missile sponges” launched as a first wave to soak up an adversary’s initial attack of guided weapons.
Boneyard storage: the obvious solution already has a case study with storage similar to the commercial airline companies during the COVID-19 pandemic. It would be possible to create long-term storage of military equipment in several isolated areas of the country, then during one of those “global uncertainty” moments we can decide to roll them out at a later day.
Robert Dougherty
Want to see more stories from trusted news sources?
Make Defence Connect a preferred news source on Google.
Click here to add Defence Connect as a preferred news source.
