IOTL the Australian involvement in Vietnam was mainly an army show; 3 inf batns, with armour, aviation and SAS in support. The Navy slotted in a destroyer much of the time and the RAAF had a sqn of 8 Canberras.
WI instead of expanding the army the govt decided to put more RAAF and RAN assets as our commitment? The RAAF could have put 16 Canberras plus a sqn or more of the new Mirages into combat. The RAN could have kept 2 or 3 ships on the gunline, and as mentioned in other threads, sent the carrier Melbourne over for a visit or two. As for the army, their commitment could have been kept much smaller than 3 btns+, but perhaps could have been armour heavy with 2 Centurion sqns instead of 1, Saladin/Saracen armoured cars as well as APCs.
Such an approach may have meant that conscription was not adopted, and Australia took a more capital-technological intensive approach to it's armed forces, instead of just recruiting a bunch of riflemen in emergencies. Without a bunch of national servicemen, let alone regulars, dying on the ground Australian support for the war may not have waned when it did. Also Australia may have ended the war with a very high tech military and the widespread belief that this was the only way to go.
WI instead of expanding the army the govt decided to put more RAAF and RAN assets as our commitment? The RAAF could have put 16 Canberras plus a sqn or more of the new Mirages into combat. The RAN could have kept 2 or 3 ships on the gunline, and as mentioned in other threads, sent the carrier Melbourne over for a visit or two. As for the army, their commitment could have been kept much smaller than 3 btns+, but perhaps could have been armour heavy with 2 Centurion sqns instead of 1, Saladin/Saracen armoured cars as well as APCs.
Such an approach may have meant that conscription was not adopted, and Australia took a more capital-technological intensive approach to it's armed forces, instead of just recruiting a bunch of riflemen in emergencies. Without a bunch of national servicemen, let alone regulars, dying on the ground Australian support for the war may not have waned when it did. Also Australia may have ended the war with a very high tech military and the widespread belief that this was the only way to go.