Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/INTERFET logistics

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article promoted by Parsecboy (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 13:20, 30 December 2019 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

INTERFET logistics

[edit]

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (talk)

INTERFET logistics (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox

Nick-D asked for this article a couple of years ago, but its taken me this long to get it done. The Australian intervention in East Timor in 1999-2000 is an interesting case of a multinational coalition not lead by a great power. The politics of the operation, the diplomacy involved in assembling the coalition, and of course the operations are all fascinating subjects, but my interest as always is in the logistics. The official history of the intervention in East Timor has yet to appear, and I'm not expecting a great deal on logistics, as the Vietnam volumes are very poor in this regard. (The US volume on logistics in Vietnam has also failed to appear.) So this article represents my best effort. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 07:39, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by PM

[edit]

I just did the GAN, and raised a few things there which have been addressed. What remains is to identify what some of the other logistic inputs (or lack thereof) were. What about in terms of number of casualties (battle and non-battle), and the ammunition usage/wastage. Might the RAR book Duty First have something useful on battle casualties? Or articles in medical journals or Army publications on other casualties? Is there anything that can be said about salvage and construction materials? They are the only questions I have. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:59, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by AustralianRupert

[edit]

Support: G'day, Hawkeye, thanks for this article. Hopefully this article will help correct the notion that "log just happens". I have a few minor comments/suggestions: AustralianRupert (talk) 09:04, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review! Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:29, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by CPA-5

[edit]

Claim my seat here. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 15:54, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • carried 9,500 tonnes of cargo and transported No convert here?
    Added a conversion. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:38, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Portugal had established a settlement on Timor in 1561, and in East Timor in 1633 This is a little bit not clear. The Portuguese arrived in 1961 on the island itself but they arrived in the eastern part in 1633, right?
    No, the Portuguese probably reached Timor in 1511, and definitely in 1515. [2] Their first settlement in East Timor was in 1633.
  • Also, pipe the Netherlands (in the next sentence) and Portugal to the Kingdom of Portugal and the Dutch Republic.
    I don't see the benefit of that. They are considered to be the same countries, and the narrative quickly moves into the 19th and 20th centuries. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:38, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • proposed that East Timor become a United Nations (UN) trusteeship Unlink the UN because of common term.
    It is not on the MOS:OVERLINK list. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:38, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The rest will follow. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 19:59, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's anything from me. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 10:27, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Nick-D

[edit]

I had high hopes for any article you chose to write on this topic, but this effort really knocked it out of the park (or hit it for six if you'd prefer!). I have the following comments:

  • "significant numbers of civilian storemen" - can a non-gendered term be used here? (presumably at least some were women?)
    Deleted "storemen". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:10, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "10th Force Support Battalion (IFET)" - what is IFET an acronym for?
    Interim Force East Timor. Changed to "INTERFET". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:10, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "To compensate for the delay in bringing Kanimbla and Manoora into service" - this appears before the sentence where the ships are linked and the problem with them explained
    Shifted it around. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:10, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The first priority was water" - I recall reading (but can't remember where, sorry) that the lack of deployable water purification facilities was a real dilemma during the early days of INTERFET as a surprisingly large proportion of airlift capacity was tied up in flying water in.
    I'll have another look though the sources. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:10, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and two McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornets were kept on standby in case air defence or close air support missions were required." - as a suggestion ahead of FAC, and at the risk of scope creep, a little bit more could be said about the forces held on standby in northern Australia. These included a detachment of F-111s which were kept bombed up (with concrete bombs, from memory) at RAAF Base Tindal and a number of Leopard tanks which were held at high readiness to move.
    Will do. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:10, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article says both that "The heliport was found abandoned, but not burnt or seriously damaged" and "The heliport was in poor condition, and was located on low ground susceptible to flooding" which seems contradictory.
    Deleted "in poor condition". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:10, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The link to ATCO doesn't seem right given it's to an article on a Canadian company.
    That's the right company. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:10, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "produced a report that was highly critical of the performance of Treloar and Mueller" - do the sources note any particular deficiencies?
    No, they don't. I will have another look. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:10, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nick-D (talk) 07:16, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support My A-class level comments are now addressed. This article really is excellent work. Nick-D (talk) 09:38, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image review - pass

[edit]

Overall a fine mix of well placed and captioned images. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:57, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/INTERFET_logistics&oldid=933187384"