# Combat Service Support to undergo major transformation



## Gunner (30 Jun 2005)

Combat Service Support to undergo major transformation

by Paul Mooney


OTTAWA (DND) - Combat Service Support (CSS) is about to undergo its own transformation, moving support trades into line with the transformation underway across the Army.


Army Support Restructure (ASR) is designed to better generate service support, both for Task Forces designated for missions abroad and for support in Canada (support in garrison, training, etc.). Col Steve Tighe is the Director Land Service Support and will oversee the process.


Expect to train and deploy on operations


"We have all seen the way the Army is transforming to meet Canada's needs at home and overseas," Col Tighe said recently. "As CSS soldiers, we have to transform our structures and way of doing business to support the Army. This will mean accepting changes in organizations, ways of training, and ways of providing support in garrison. The most important point is that now a member of the service support trades on Army bases will be "CSS Soldiers" no matter what uniform he or she wears. They will be expected to be able to train and deploy on operations."


The Close Support and General Support Service Battalions will merge, forming three instead of the current six, battalions.. These "force generation" Service Battalions will have six companies each, including two Forward Support Groups (FSGs), the company plus-size organizations that will deploy with Task Forces. The three Service Battalions will be based at the Army's major force generation centres-the garrisons at Valcartier, Petawawa and Edmonton.


LCol Ken Moore serves as Director Land Service Support 5 for CSS Concept Development. "ASR will leave us better organized to support deployed and domestic operations as well as training activities," LCol Moore said. "In the past, logistic support was based on the assumption that combat arms units or brigades would go on missions very much as they were structured in Canada. But, as you are aware, in the last decade that has not been the case. That system is not suited to the Army's current approach to building Task Forces under the Managed Readiness Plan."


New system will improve morale


The new system will consolidate logistics expertise, rather than drawing support personnel for deployments in ones or twos from across Canada, the Army will be able to task formed units to train with the units of the Task Forces and deploy. The new system will result in both better service for Task Forces and improved morale amongst the CSS soldiers; FSGs will be coherent teams who have worked and trained together and have supported their Task Force throughout the training regimen. 


The Army will also:


 ·        Establish a CSS Battle School in each Area.


 ·        Create a CSS training cadre at Canadian Manoeuvre Training
Centre (CMTC).


 ·        Develop a structure to provide CSS Observer/Controllers for CMTC.


 ·        Establish six Equipment Fielding Coordination Centres that will
manage vehicles and other material assets under the regime of Whole Fleet Management. 


 ·        Study CSS troop strength required to provide sustainable support for both deployments and support at home - including for the distressed trades - and make appropriate recommendations to the commander.


 ·        Establish cells in each Area to ensure that there are opportunities for Army CSS Reservists to serve on deployments and to better integrate Reserve/Regular Force CSS training where possible.


LCol Moore said the proposed changes were developed after extensive consultation across the Army, including discussions with the Areas and with Land Force Reserve Restructure.


"We are always looking at how Reservists can contribute to force generation," he said. "We will constantly look at ways to optimize the number of Army Reservists who will serve with the FSGs."


Greater predictability for soldiers and their families


LCol Moore noted that the new approach would bring CSS soldiers into the Managed Readiness System, creating greater predictability for them and for their families. An FSG tasked to move into the High Readiness Cycle will detach from the Service Battalion and join a Task Force, train with it at CMTC and deploy if the Task Force draws an overseas or domestic mission. Following a deployment, the returning troops may not remain with an FSG, but may go into one of the other four companies of the service battalion (or elsewhere within the ASG) until they are again tasked for the High Readiness phase of the Managed Readiness System. The FSG will be reconstituted from the CSS soldiers in the ASG who have completed the reconstitution phase.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (30 Jun 2005)

A word of caution with this one...  This is an Army initiative developed before the current CDS-directed transformation effort.  Will it fit with the new force structure?  We'll see...


----------



## Gunner (30 Jun 2005)

> Will it fit with the new force structure?  We'll see...



You aren't implying that things aren't sychronized at the national level are you?


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (30 Jun 2005)

Who me?  I'd never say anything like that...!


----------



## mudtrucker (17 Jul 2005)

Yes, an Army initiative, but first scoped out and briefed to the then-CLS, LGen Hillier, who gave the original go ahead.  You want to bet that the same transformation initiatives that were started under LGen Jeffrey, Hillier and then LGen Caron were based on the same Commander's Intent and desired End-state.  

The CF transformation is intended to focus on force generation and force employment, domestically and internationally.  Hence the change to an operationally focussed force emplyment command structure - (Canada Command and Expeditionary Command).  We will organize and train in the way that we are employed (whether we like it or not, that's reality). And of course at the same time getting rid of the parochial stove-pipes that fight for money for the wrong (e.g. non-operational) reasons.

At the Army Field Force level, we may very well not see any major changes, apart from who we report to (e.g. in 2 CMBG, we currently report to LFCA, and will soon report to something like Joint Task Force Central Area (or words to that effect, although you get the idea).

But from what is being discussed in Ottawa, I expect that it will be a period of turmoil and re-organization at 101 Col By (collectively, anyway), as the CF is dragged into a Joint Force Structure, with some or even all of the ECs whining and whinging.  But let's be honest - we need to generate and employ forces at the Joint level because it's how we do it overseas, and the sooner we get on with it, the better.

Interesting to see what happens to the three ECs (Army, Navy and Air Force).

Glad I am not a staff weenie in Ottawa these days.

Mudtrucker


----------



## Roy Harding (17 Jul 2005)

Mudtrucker said:
			
		

> Glad I am not a staff weenie in Ottawa these days.
> 
> Mudtrucker



Mudtrucker:

Be careful - as you are well aware, there's no telling WHERE you'll end up next posting!!!


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (18 Jul 2005)

Mudtrucker said:
			
		

> Yes, an Army initiative, but first scoped out and briefed to the then-CLS, LGen Hillier, who gave the original go ahead.   You want to bet that the same transformation initiatives that were started under LGen Jeffrey, Hillier and then LGen Caron were based on the same Commander's Intent and desired End-state.



Right and that was then and this is now.  I have it from an excellent source (unimpeachable in this case) that the entire force structure was up for grabs when the CDS gave his direction to his Action Teams.  Remember that most of the teams haven't reported yet and that CANADACOM and CEFCOM are just the tip of the iceberg.  It may be that all is well and that the current plan meets the new intent; I'm quite skeptical, particularly when we factor such (IMHO) ill-advised measures as Whole Fleet Management into the equation.


----------



## mudtrucker (18 Jul 2005)

Retired CC:  I hear you.  My only saving grace is that I am posted out of Ottawa and back to 2 CMBG upon my return from overseas, so I can hopefully avoid being a staff weenie for a while yet.

Teddy Ruxpin: Understood and concur. The entire force structure is up for debate and change.  And that's not a bad thing. And it may come to pass that the CF looks so fundamentally different at the end of this process that none of us can make a face like it.  And that's okay to. Not everything that comes out of Ottawa is good (like you said, whole fleet management is a good example, although financial and op tempo realities played a major part in this decision).  But clearly the EC-based structure that we have now is not working and so in this instance, a radical re-build, based on similar tenets as those that underpinned ASR, may be the solution.

Not that I am holding my breath on this, and you are right that CANADACOM and CEFCOM are just the start point.  We'll just have to see where this goes and ride the wave.

Mudtrucker


----------



## Mountie (21 Dec 2005)

Can anyone go into some detail as to how the Forward Support Groups will be organized?  I watched a segment on Army News on the topic and all that was said was it was an consolidation of the infantry battalion's admin company and service battalion elements.  But I'm curious what the organization really is.  Does the service battalion just beef up each platoon with additional assets??

Would the CF benefit from moving towards the US Army's Forward Support Battalion structure?  Or are they already thinking along these lines?
A forward support company for each maneouvre unit and then the traditional transport, supply, and maintenance companies.  This keeps all the combat service support elements under one headquarters and eliminates the need for trained combat arms soldiers to fill service support trades within their administration companies, headquarters squadrons, etc.  Why have a trained infantryman driving a HLVW in the battalion's transport platoon.  The US battalions also have a Role 2 medical company within the same battalion.

Here is a possible organization for a Canadian Forward Service Battalion:

-Battalion Headquarters 
-4 x Forward Support Companies (each supporting an infantry battalion or armoured regiment)
-Transport Company
-Supply Company
-Maintenance Company

The artillery and engineer regiments usually deploy with a battery/squadron supporting an infantry battalion or armoured regiment and will be supported by their forward support company.  During brigade-level operations where they operate independently they receive support directly from the transport, supply and maintenance companies.  

Each forward support company would have its own company headquarters with an operations section, a quartermaster platoon, a transport platoon, a maintenance platoon and an attached forward medical platoon from the Field Ambulance to provide a UMS and armoured ambulances.  The combat unit would maintain its orderly room section and a new logistics section which would be a smaller version of the brigade G4 section and would be a direct link between the combat unit and the forward support company.  The logistics section would work directly with the company operations section and the orderly room section would attach itself to the company as well.


----------



## TN2IC (25 Dec 2005)

FSG? Heck...I have been in a few of those.... Well, bud above me....you got it right on the money. Just Supply and Transport usally are one Company now. They figured if the goods have to be sent out by us MSE Ops.. just bring out the Sup Techs too, since they know what is going where with how much.  ;D


----------



## Mountie (28 Dec 2005)

Here's another option for a new CSS organization.  

The US Army Stryker Brigade Combat Teams have with drawn all the CSS platoons from their infantry battalions.  The Brigade Support Battalion does not have Forward Support Companies like the Legacy Brigade's do.  The Stryker BCT's BSB is organized as follows:

-Battalion Headquarters
-Distribution Company (Supply & Transport)
   - Supply Platoon
   - Transport Platoon
   - Fuel & Water Platoon 
-Brigade Support Company (Maintenance)
   - Maintenance Control Section
   - Wheeled Vehicle Repair Platoon
   - Maintenance Support Platoon (weapons, grounds support equipment, missile & electric)
   - 5 x Combat Repair Team (3 x infantry battalion, 1 x recce squadron (battalion), 1 x artillery battalion) each of 20 personnel
-Forward Support Medical Company
   - Treatment Platoon
   - Ambulance Platoon
-Combat Service Support Company (attached to battalion during prolonged operations)
   - Transport Platoon
   - Maintenance Platoon
   - Field Feeding Platoon (5 x 10-member sections attached to battalions)

The Stryker BCT uses 'through-put distribution' to push all supplies forward from the brigade rear area all the way to the combat vehicles in the forward units with the brigade transport assets of the distribution company.  There is no echelon of transport and supply.  The maintenance CRT's and the field feeding teams operate in direct support of their respective battalions.  The distribution company attaches a section of 3-5 10-ton trucks with trailers and 1-2 2,500-gallon fuel tankers with trailers to each battalion when required.  I have a few long articles on this CSS concept but they are far too long to post on here.

A similar concept could be used for the CMBG Service Battalions.  However, a service battalion would need to be larger then the American counter-part.  Stryker BCT's are designed as a rapid reaction force and are only carry supplies for a few days.  They are reinforced with additional CSS units for prolonged operations.  Canadian units almost always deploy for 6-month rotations.  That said, eliminate the CSS elements of the combat arms units, except for a logistics section at battalion headquaters and consolidate everything in the Service Battalion similar to the Stryker BCT.
- Battalion Headquaters
- Administration Company
   - Finance Platoon 
   - Postal Platoon
- Supply Company
   - Combat Stores Platoon
   - General & Technical Stores Platoon
   - Repair Parts Supply Platoon
   - Laudry, Bath & Decontamination Platoon
   - Food Service Platoon (5 x Sections)
- Transport Company
   - Movement Control Platoon
   - 4 x Transport Platoon
- Maintenance Company
   - Maintenance Control Section
   - Main Repair Group
      - Vehicle Platoon
      - Artisan Platoon
      - Recovery Platoon
   - Forward Repair Group
      - 4 x Forward Maintenance Platoon

From this large service battalion Task Force Forward Support Groups could be easily formed.
-FSG Headquarters (with a command section and Forward Logistics Operations Centre)
- Resource Management Platoon
   - Orderly Room (from task force's infantry battalion/armoured regiment)
   - Fincance Section
   - Postal Section
- Supply Platoon (a section from each of the platoons in the supply company & an HQ)
- Transport Platoon (with a movement control detachment attached)
- Maintenance Platoon (forward maintenance platoon with a maintenance control detachment, a vehicle section and a artisan section attached)


----------



## ArmyRick (28 Dec 2005)

This will be intersting to see how this pans out.

On a similar note, I was never very keen seeing guys in a battalion go to something like TPT PL or MAINT PL or RQMS for like 10 years and then basically lose all their infantry skills.


----------



## Mountie (7 Jan 2006)

Another option for CSS Transformation is going the USMC way.  They have very large service companies in their combat battalions that provide Role 1 (Intergal Support) and Role 2 (Close Support).  

A USMC Armoured Recon Battalion with LAVs (Bison generation) has a headquarters & services company as follows:
-*Battalion Headquarters * = 17 officer & 44 enlisted ranks
(BHQ includes the S1 section of 2 officers & 23 enlisted ranks which in Canadian battalions would be a separate entity in the Admin Company)
-*Service Company Headquarters * = 2 officers & 3 enlisted ranks
-*Communications Platoon * = 2 officers & 30 enlisted ranks (includes Bn HQ & Co HQ radio operators)
-*Supply Platoon * = 1 officer & 46 enlisted ranks (including 21 cooks)
-*Transport Platoon * = 1 officer & 114 enlisted ranks (includes the LAV crewmen and soft-skinned vehicle drivers for Bn HQ, a small vehicle repair section, and a small ambulance section)
-*Maintenance Platoon * = 2 officers & 65 enlisted ranks
-*Medical Platoon * = 2 officers & 65 enlisted ranks (includes company medical teams)
-*Chaplain Section * = 1 officer & 1 enlisted rank

This totals  28 officers & 368 enlisted ranks for a total of 394 other ranks.  Quite a large service company for one battalion.  But considering that, according to the Army Transformation site on the CF website, a Canadian Task Force is to consist of an HQ of 90 other ranks (including an ASCC & CIMIC) and a Forward Support Group of 287 other ranks this isn't far off.  394 marines or 377 Canadians.  And the USMC battalion has 4 combined arms LAV Recon companies each of three platoons of LAV-25s and a support weapons platoon with LAV-AT, LAV-Mortar and LAV-Engineer vehicles.  This is similar to the typical Canadian Task Force with 2-3 infantry companies, an armoured reccee squadron, a composite engineer squadron, a mortar/artillery battery, etc.

So each Task Force could be permanently organized with its own service company and the service battalion reduced to providing only specialist functions in general support of the entire CMBG.


----------



## D-n-A (7 Jan 2006)

Gunner said:
			
		

> ·        Establish a CSS Battle School in each Area.




I heard a rumor about this awhile ago, good to see its gonna become a reality. Anyways,  anyone have any info this Battle School(ie whats going to be taught on it, etc)? I assume/hope they include training on Convoy Protection, Ambush Drills, etc


----------



## McG (8 Jan 2006)

Mountie,
The problem with all of your proposals is that they define a CSS package that fits a brigade.  ASR has (rightly or wrongly) removed the Svc Bns from the Bdes and put them under control of the areas.  These much larger battalions are responsible to force generate the CSS elements of international deployments, but they also have a major domestic roll to play in day-to-day operations.  They support not just the regular force briagdes, but also the reserve brigades and other Land Forces needs within an LF Area.


----------



## McG (8 Jan 2006)

BTW: What does LFAA have to fill the roll of the old GS Bn?


----------



## Fdtrucker (8 Jan 2006)

Seeing how LFAA did not have a Reg Force Svc/GS Bn within the area they will be continued to get their support from Gagetown and the other Bases in the Area.


----------



## Gunner (9 Jan 2006)

MikeL said:
			
		

> I heard a rumor about this awhile ago, good to see its gonna become a reality. Anyways,  anyone have any info this Battle School(ie whats going to be taught on it, etc)? I assume/hope they include training on Convoy Protection, Ambush Drills, etc



I believe the focus is on the coordination of trades training.  You may wish to PM Teddy Ruxpin who will have more detail.


----------

