# Field/Garrison



## Long in the tooth (8 May 2002)

It‘s amazing the amount of effort and resources go into training and maintaining a battalion so that it at a state to be deployable.  As an officer you‘ll be shocked to learn that most Private infantry soldiers will only be in the battalion for two years - from the time they complete infantry training to the time most of them will release.  You will constantly be planning, conducting and assessing formal training for new soldiers.  Over one third of your soldiers time will be spent maintaining vehicles, which you will coordinate and inspect.  And for the remaining time?  The few problem troops you have will eat that up quickly, whether it‘s disciplinary or deciding who to recommend for courses.  Let‘s not even get started on summary investigations for missing kit......
So, aside from the fact that field time is terribly expensive (food, fuel, ammo and field pay), that‘s why you‘ll spend 2/3 of your time in Garrison.
Cheers.


----------



## Gung_Ho20 (8 May 2002)

I am so reluctant to join the reg force because of those reasons you have said. I did predepoyment training Roto with a reg force infantry batalion. So much bureaucracy and politics are involved when officers want to plan a good exercise. Nowadays if you want a realistic training you have to go to the US bases because they are much more focus on real training that you will encounter in the battlefield contrary to Canadian bases where the level of security is outrageous. Even planning a day in the range is hard because of all the paperwork and phonecalls that you have to make. Those are the reasons why i‘m sticking to the reserve right now, it‘s much easier to organize a training plan for a reserve unit than reg force because we are much smaller. We have to go through much less beaucracy than our reg force counterpart. And one last reason is that my unit trains once every 2 weeks and if you do the math we train as much or even more than the reg force during the year.


----------



## para (8 May 2002)

I‘ve done the math
and you are not even close.
Stick to things you know and don‘t make comment like that if you have no term of reference.


----------



## Doug VT (22 May 2002)

> *my unit trains once every 2 weeks and if you do the math we train as much or even more than the reg force during the year. *


I think what you meant to say was that the reg force(infantry) trainees more in a month than your unit does in a year, not including area directed exercises. Even a regular service battalion sees more field time and training than the typical reserve unit.  I can‘t believe that you even said that, why didn‘t you make it through the pre-deployment training phase??!!

The only reason that the Reserves training plans are easy to do is that there is not the level of experience and expertise available to setup and run a realistic training scenario(or the funding)  I found that in the reserves there was a lot more pretend and wasted exercises that could have been so much more.


----------



## ParaMoe (22 May 2002)

When I was in Cadets, long time ago, I went with the reserves on exersises and we had harder cadets than some reservists.  Next what do the reservists do on an exersise.  They do not march around for hours, attack somewhere, then march around again, then continue this cycle for a few days.
Reserve exersises are not ment to be hard like reg. force ones but rather appease the weekend soldiers into thinking that "wow this is good army training I‘m carrying a gun!!!!"
Don‘t tell me no, or that your unit is different because we all know that this is true.  Stop fooling yourself that your a soldier.  If you wanted to be one you‘d be in the reg. force,but life is easier in the Militia so that is why you stay.  
Yeah by the way what was the reason you did not make the cut to Bosnia?


----------



## Suffield (22 May 2002)

You still sound like your in cadets, grow up.


----------



## ParaMoe (22 May 2002)

Buds, I‘m not a Cadet any longer.  Were you ever in the military? If so for how long and what did you do?  You‘re WEAK little grow up comment does not seem to show much knowledge of military affairs other wise you‘d understand and back what I was saying.  :fifty:


----------



## Suffield (22 May 2002)

Well listen buck, I spent more time in the military than you‘ve got on this earth (unless you‘re a 35 year Corporal for life). I‘ve worn uniforms since the battledress, and retired almost every piece of equipment we have in inventory. I also know more than you where you‘re coming from. I also, in all those years learned an overbearing, arrogant, pompous attitude is not the way to go. If you must berate people to feel superior, start with the one in the mirror. The reserves are here to stay and good thing we can‘t meet our mandate without them. The majority have heart, try looking on the good side and put the unfounded bitterness away. Out.  :boring:


----------



## portcullisguy (23 May 2002)

I can (almost) understand ParaMoe‘s point of view, if I compare it to my full-time job at customs.  I make this comparison as I am quite green in the res and obviously not qualified to comment from a military point of view exclusively.

We hire students, give them 3 weeks training, and then put them on the front line to do our jobs while we go on vacation.  In a sense, supplementing our strength while on "operations", as reservists do.

Although I, like our union, am dead set against the exploitation of student inspectors to assist on our borders and airports in screening people coming to Canada, I think it would be universally unfair to dismiss them out of hand, as ParaMoe has of reservists.

Like the army, customs has used students and part-time/casual workers since almost the very beginning of modern customs operations (at least since WWII).

ParaMoe should think before opening his mouth (or typing)... reservists have been essential to maintaining the numbers needed.  Also ... no one goes into the army to make it rich.  People who have jobs already but wish to contribute to their military (besides paying taxes) should be welcomed into the reserves, as they ain‘t even considering the reg force.

I make $47,000/yr, am I going to quit and become a reg pte for $26,000/yr?  Obviously not.  The army will not pay my bills for me.

If I am a recent graduate without a plain goal or career plan, then maybe I should consider the reg‘s as they will feed, clothe, house and train me, give me a trade and some experience, and after a few years of dedicated service I can go join civvie street and make bigger bucks.


----------



## Doug VT (23 May 2002)

I think what Paramoe is trying to say is stop trying to compete.  Sure you‘re all proud of your units and you think that you‘re the sh*t but come-on, let‘s be realistic.  No need to call down other units of elements, that‘s just unprofessional.  Stupid individuals are another story.  Wake up and stop mouthing off about things you don‘t know or understand.  No need to name individuals, you know who you are...


----------



## M4 (23 May 2002)

Para, are you saying that reservists are not real soldiers? If you don‘t mind I will give you a lesson of history. In both WW, most of the battles( if not all of the battles) were fought by reservists. By the end of WW2 the ratio of reservists were 20 to1. All reg forces at that time were only used to train the reserve for war. Not long ago it was the reserve that look down at regs but not it is the contrary. The last battle honnor that Canada won was in Kapyong,Korea. At that time the 2nd battalion of PPCLI was only composed of reservists held off Communist forces who outnumbered the Canadians by as much as eight to one. They earned the President of US citation, the only unit to received it in Canada. If you don‘t believe what I say go read Esprit de Corps latest edition. I don‘t want to start a war, but whats get angry is that some people think that reserve are useless. Most of them are ex-reservists( Paramoe?).


----------



## rceme_rat (26 May 2002)

Nice to see the classic arguments being pulled out whenever the reg-reserve mud-slinging game is played.  In this case, it is the "reserve myth" -- that WWII was fought by a bunch of reservists. 

You might call the troops that went to WWII reservists, but most weren‘t.  They were new full-time soldiers recruited to transformed reserve units. You can keep the regimental names on the roll for the next time we mobilize if that is all you want to preserve.

 If today‘s reserve force could be posted to full-time employment, as part of battle-strength units, in a foreign country for a lengthy period (say, two years or so without leave home), it would be a far different force than currently exists.  And that is what WWI‘s "reserve force" was when it finally went into battle.

So let‘s talk about today‘s reserve force, not the mythical reserve of Canadian history (which some say serves to bolster our self-image as "peaceful farmers and merchants who can kick butt if we have to, although we really don‘t want to").

If what you want is a viable reserve force capable of providing competent individuals or sub-units to augment the peacetime- strength reg force when it is required to deploy at full strength, you need something more than this reliance on the reserve myth.  We barely meet this standard today, and the likelihood of continuing to meet it seems to be falling.

If you want a reserve force that can deploy full-strength units to combat tasks, on reasonable notice (e.g., to replace a reg force unit after its initial deployment), then you need a visionary new approach to the reserves -- and the commitment of a lot more money than our government is ever  likely to spend on defence.

In short, our reserve force now may be comprised of dedicated individuals, some of whom are notable in their abilities, but until it is given a serious re-org; the infusion of obscene amounts of cash; legislative support in the form of job protection; guaranteed training time, improved pay, pension and benefits; the introduction of mob spec trades; and training that recognizes the need for a front-end concentration course followed by skills-focused maintenance sessions and refresher courses, with annual exercises; then the reserves will remain a disorganized, ineffective force that falls far below its potential.  

That is the reality of today‘s reserves; it is also the shame of today‘s government.


----------



## portcullisguy (26 May 2002)

> Originally posted by rceme_rat:
> [qb]So let‘s talk about today‘s reserve force, not the mythical reserve of Canadian history (which some say serves to bolster our self-image as "peaceful farmers and merchants who can kick butt if we have to, although we really don‘t want to").[/qb]


It‘s a history that extends far back beyond WWII or even WWI.  In 1812, when this province had less than 75,000 souls living in it, there was only one regiment, the 41st, posted here, and one other in Lower Canada.  Altogether, less than 3,000 regulars to defend huge tracts of mainly unpopulated land from an invasion force at three different points along the border.  Three things helped keep Upper Canada in the empire: Brock, Tecumseh, and the militia.

Nearly 30 years earlier, during the War of Independence, Canadian militia units fought with distinction alongside British regulars against Continentals in Pennsylvania and New York, winning several battles while outnumbered.

The fact that Canada exists today at all is intrinsically linked to the existence of the militia.  Is it any wonder that this "myth" is still perpetuated to this day?  It may not be entirely correct in this age, but it is at least understandable, as it is a part of the Canadian psychology.

As to the other ills you mention regarding the reserves, many of them (such as underfunding, and civilian career continuity) could be said to be problems in the regular force as well.  How many reg inf pte‘s and cpl‘s get out of the forces after a couple years and get good paying jobs with skills like "machinegunner" or "I can use a mortar" on their resumes?  There isn‘t much call for that in the private sector.  The smart ones pick a trade... but if everyone is going to be an engineer or helicopter mechanic, who is going to shoot the guns when war time comes round?  How seriously does the CF prepare reg members for civilian jobs when it‘s time to pack their bags?


----------



## Jungle (26 May 2002)

When talking about the past, remember that a hundred years ago and back, the whole CDN Army was known as the Militia. As a matter of fact, we invented the "citizen soldier". But were the people who fought in WWI and WWII really reservists ? They were recruited in Res units that had been mobilized. Then they were sent to England and trained for 2 to 4 years before going into action... hardly a reservist anymore after training full time for a number of years... 
It is a fact that there are differences between Reg F and Res F soldiers... generally Reg F soldiers are proficient in more aspects of their trade. Accept it...
Portcullisguy, you don‘t seem to realise that the (Reg F) Infantry has one of the highest retention rates in the CF. The Air Force has the biggest retention problem.


----------



## Gunner (26 May 2002)

> you don‘t seem to realise that the (Reg F) Infantry has one of the highest retention rates in the CF.


Jungle, that‘s a pretty bold statement and I wish it was true.  

Reg F Infantry MOCs suffer from a higher release rate than reserve units...why do you think the PPCLI is short three company‘s?

I‘d be careful with how we dispell the myths of military history.  Anyone here about the PPCLI mutiny after WWI?  Anyone want to hazard a guess at how well the PPCLI performed during WWII?  You can break it down before or after their leadership was sacked in Sicily for incompetence.  How about Kapyong?  How many were actually "true Patricias" and how many were Reservists fighting under the wrong cap badge?

Whats the point?  Regulars and Reserves are different and both fulfill extremely important roles for the CF.  The Regulars need a good "kick in the butt" to realize the capablity of part time soldiering.  Too many Regulars drown their sorrow in their beer waiting for a government that will rapidly expand them into some semblance of an army.  The Reserves need a good "kick in the butt" to bring them into some type of semblance of a 21st century organization.  LCols commanding 50 people doesn‘t lend credibility. 

Synergy is the word of the future ... Don‘t denigrate either component that will destroy the synergy that could be created.


----------



## Jungle (27 May 2002)

With the retention thing, I was not comparing Reg F against Res F, I was comparing Reg F Infantry against the rest of the (Reg) CF. Again, I did not say the Infantry had a perfect record, but it is comparing well to other trades... And I am not putting down the Reservists !!! I simply said there are differences and everybody should accept it !!!


> How about Kapyong? How many were actually "true Patricias" and how many were Reservists fighting under the wrong cap badge?


Well, how many ??? I just dont think a reservist can still be called a reservist anymore after spending 2 to 4 years training full time then going into action... does that mean that the 11 months I spent in the Res F before I joined the Reg F labelled me forever as a Reservist ??? So I have been lying to myself the last 18 years ???
What the **** is SYNERGY ??? My guess is it‘s just another way of bringing us closer the "Corporation of National Defence"


----------



## Gunner (29 May 2002)

Jungle stated  





> does that mean that the 11 months I spent in the Res F before I joined the Reg F labelled me forever as a Reservist ???


Hey freaking Mo!     

Synergy...the total equals more than the sum of the parts.  For example infantry is an arm of destruction...add in armour and, with synergy, the power and capabilities of both increase.  Add in Arty and the power that is created by synergy is awesome!  Its a good word and not just for the bureaucrat in me.

The Reserves can provide an important capability for the CF...I am not sure if we know what the capability should be or for that matter how we are to organize and equip and FUND it properly.  All we are doing right now is pouring money into an extremely leaky boat.


----------



## Harry (29 May 2002)

SYNERGY:

If DND allowed the CF to train and prepare for itâ€™s ultimate roll instead of hiring the latest spin guru to reinvent the grunt wheel. We would not be in the predicament we are in.

With every new MANAGEMENT concept, a leadership model is either dropped or corporatized.

The days of leading troops have been morphed into the management of man/women resources.  Since â€™85 and the introduction of corporation style perfuntionarianism of our officer corp, we as an org have degraded to what we are today.

An over managed, under funded group of highly motivated, well-disciplined individuals who are lead by the dregs (for the most part) of the various FRPâ€™s and an over burgeoned officer corp.  

When an organization pays accolades to the individual with three to six years or so in who wants to take his commission.   Promotes him for initiative and potential and then sends that person off to go to school, what message are we sending?  Especially when as an example we pass over a troop with 12 years in, who knows his role inside and out, has the respect of his peers and support of his immediate supervisor(s), yet is passed over.  On an increasing basis, more of the latter are leaving and the org is discovering that the numbers of good NCMâ€™s and NCOâ€™s is waning.  The numbers speak for themselves.  Yet nothing is truly being done.  As an aside, some of those who bail, do revert to the Militia, and serve with distinction there.

UBIQUE


----------



## Jungle (29 May 2002)

Gunner, what you described is known as COOPERATION, and it‘s one of the things that wins wars... you can calculate it the way you want and call it what you like, cooperation has been around since the romans!!! Which brings me to this:
â€œWe trained very hard, but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form into teams we would be reorganized. I was to learn in this life that we tend to meet any situation by reorganizing. And a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization.â€ -Attributed to Petronius Arbiter, Roman hedonist, about 60 A.D. 
Funny how little things change in 2000 years! And this is exactly what this "synergy" thing does... Ask the troops to do a left flank, they‘ll be on their way before you‘re done asking ! Ask them to "confront the enemy posn from their starboard side while bringing a maximum of synergy" and they will look at you as if you had a hand growing on your forehead!!!
We don‘t care about this REMF talk, we want to talk the soldier‘s talk which is something we understand !!!


----------



## Gunner (30 May 2002)

Synergy is a result of Cooperation.  They are mutually exclusive.  Regs and Res need to cooperate with one another.  We don‘t do that right now and we have the Regs doing their thing and the Reserves doing there and never the two shall meet.


----------



## Zoomie (30 May 2002)

Man, quite the conversation going on here.  Who started this whole thing anyhow, and what was it about again.  Oh yeah, someone mentioned that he 
probably spent more time in the field with his ResF unit than an average RegF unit.  That was when the posts came pouring in.  Then we started to bash the Reservists, sure why not?  Well as an ex-reservist and now a "lifer" I must think back on my days as a part-time soldier.  To tell you the truth, the average trained Militia soldier (pte-cpl rank) can easily display/exhibit the same skill set in the field as his RegF breathren.  Albeit he may not have the Mattawa Plains memorized like the guys that have been there for the last 5 years of their lives, he can still soldier with the best of them.  I did some time with the regs as a reservist and had zero trouble keeping up with the learning curve.  
Quite frankly, the biggest hindrance to the ResF right now is not LCol‘s leading 50 men, but the negative attitudes that are inherent with ResF/RegF collaboration (SYNERGY?)
On a final note, how is it that a reservist is subjected to the same pre-deployment training as his RegF comrades, if the training is so drastically different, how come they (the reservists) don‘t have much longer pre-up periods?


----------



## MJP (31 May 2002)

> Reg F Infantry MOCs suffer from a higher release rate than reserve units...why do you think the PPCLI is short three company‘s?


Actually gunner, Reg F INF is only short about 7% of complete manning across the board.  Its true that the PPCLI are short of people but for the most part the RCR and Van Doos are good to go.  The combat arm thats actually hurting the most is artillery with a manning level of about 86 or 87%.  These numbers are 6 months old but I can‘t imagine it changing in any drastic number.


----------



## Gunner (31 May 2002)

MJP,

I can‘t speak of numbers within RCR and Vandoo but I question your number of 7% beneath manning across the board.  The PPCLI is short three companies in addition (this info is dated) they are also short of officers.  The army as a whole is short approximately 1700 soldiers (1700 out of 20000 is 8.5%).  The Artillery is mostly suffering from age.  Average age of a Bdr is around 32 and the average age of an Arty Capt is 35 (based on last year numbers).

Welcome aboard MJP!


----------



## MJP (1 Jun 2002)

gunner you are indeed correct Reg F inf officers status is yellow(below 10% manning).  I can‘t speak for the 2nd Bn or the 3rd, but the reason(or one of the main one‘s) 1st Bn went with 2 rifle coys vs 3 is the fact they are taking a independant coy of reservists over on roto 11.  My coy has roughly 145 ppl in it(not including some new guys coming in a few weeks).  I believe the other coy is in the same boat, which makes our coys pretty big.  We are short ppl, but I think we are in line with other trades.  

"Welcome aboard MJP!"
I‘m a long time lurker back to when there was this annoying Officer cadet that wanted to be infantry but was grossly overwieght.  Man he use to fill this forum with whining about this and that  Was quite funny!  Cheers!


----------



## Doug VT (4 Jun 2002)

If there is any justice in the system, he should be a civie by now.


----------



## ParaMoe (7 Jun 2002)

On a final note, how is it that a reservist is subjected to the same pre-deployment training as his RegF comrades, if the training is so drastically different, how come they (the reservists) don‘t have much longer pre-up periods?----Zombie

Well I can tell you this, when we were training for our "overseas deployment " to Afganistan, we had no reservists with us, all regualar force ready to go.  The call did not go out to the reserves, because they are a problem.  Yes we were slightly under-strength so we pulled a platoon out of our sister battlion to come with us.  The reason we did not take reserves because we were going to WAR.  Plain and simple.  A tour in Bosnia is not going to war (ask anyone who has been there since Roto 3).  The reserves can make to cut to head overseas to the Balklands because it‘s (dare I say) boring and quiet.  Afganistan is a war.  We cannot take troops who only have a six to eight week battle school course in the summer over some one who has had sixteen weeks of infantry training.
Now with this reserve slaggin‘ that is going on.  It‘s not really the individual soldiers that I‘m talking about but rather the units.  No one in their right mind will ‘bug out‘ a reserve unit to head out to war even if they have a warning order six months ahead of time.  Yes the regiments did well in the past in war, but they were classified as regular force then, but we are talking about now and now the reserves (as a unit) are not much to talk about. Sure there are little groups of keeners in the ranks, but as a whole not very effective.  :mg:  

"What manner of men are these who wear the maroon beret....)


----------



## Jungle (7 Jun 2002)

ParaMoe makes a point... Remember the deployments to Somalia, Rwanda, East Timor... no reservists. They turn to reservists when things quiet down and routine settles in. Now I am not bashing reservists, but the facts are there.


----------



## ArmyAl (8 Jun 2002)

Sure res inf might not cut the cake for a "real deployment", but how about the arty?
Res and Reg are the same and the drills are no different in peace and war, they are the only trade to fire live on every single ex (maybe other trades)
So to put a res bty into a reg regt in a "real deployment" is no prob, the difference would be more ammo and more picketing and lots of digging.


----------



## herbie (8 Jun 2002)

ArmyAl
There is a lot more to the artillery than " pull string, make big gun go boom ".  The reserves can effectivly fire their howitzers, but how much time do they spend on local defence i.e. MG‘s, C-7, clearing patrols, defence of recce, anti tank,  etc.  
Also the reserves and reg arty use different guns ( thats a rant for another day) 
Just as a res infantry or mechanic needs to do a serious pre-deployment training schedule, so does the res arty.
On another note, although the res and reg are not "equal" ( apples and oranges) many res served with distinction in Medac
cheers


----------



## ArmyAl (9 Jun 2002)

Herb
So the guns are different but not the drills.
Hmm how long did it take me to convert to the LG.... 2 weeks, how long did it take me to convert to the old L5.... 2 weeks and guess what how long did it take me to covert over to the 109... 2 weeks.
If you let them play with it they can do the job, I know I had a res Bomber as my 2i/c in bosnia, tells you how hard the drills are, its all the same except we are better at pushing brooms then the res. lol
As for local def and sorts, well not all of us are good at it, I just see the res in a better way then most, it‘s not their fault that the system is not working for them.
God help us if the bad res look good!
This is my opion.


----------



## Andyboy (10 Jun 2002)

Not to nitpick but there were reservists in Somalia. Two from my unit went, one in a rifle section in 2CDO and one in RQ.


----------



## Recce41 (10 Jun 2002)

Damn on all my tours, 60% were crap, 30% could pass but needed work, 5% pass, 5% good. If a Res comes , he should be a Cpl and thats a give me rank. We have Tprs with more leadership. Yes I was a Res but grew up in a Military Family. So I knew when to speak. With courses half the time for a Reg and 1/4 the time in how could anyone compare Reg/Res. I‘ve seen 5 yr Sgts, Damn we have 5yr Cpls with 2/3 tours.


----------



## Marauder (10 Jun 2002)

So you swear by the fact that reservists are undertrained and apparently too f*cking stupid to pick up skills quickly enough. Fair enough, that‘s your assessment.
And yet you don‘t seem to want to let reservists have more training and skills. 

"They would get the training, if most did‘t go home when it rained. Damn I been a Course WO for Res courses with 10 pers when 30 were to show. Why spend the money ? Stop crying and get on with it."

So we need the training, but you don‘t want to offer the $$$$ or time to get us up to the mythical, revered RegF Combat Standard.

Which ****ing side of the coin is it Sarn‘t???


----------



## ArmyAl (10 Jun 2002)

Well said.
I try to teach as much to a res. because alot of those people have heart, but that‘s the same for a reg.
If the money was there and all that goes with it then we would be a better family.
Someone please tell me what the standard is, if it‘s more bitching and sweeping and blah blah blah then tell me, if all you can say its more of, then take the time and give
the guys what they need to know.
The % thing goes both ways, I know of guys through the years that get "hurt" just to avoid a ex. and if we are so good then maybe we should put the word elite in front of regiment names like the
Royal Canadian Elite Horse Artillery!
I got my full salad bowl in ten, maybe those 5 year cpl are there for a reason.
The give me rank works both ways as well.

I‘m just a guy that sticks up for the little ones.


----------



## Zoomie (10 Jun 2002)

Reservist bashing aside, I find it very difficult to let one comment pass.  Something about a RegF trooper having more leadership smarts than some ResF MCpl‘s/Sgt???  Give me a break!  What kind of story are you spinning now!  Firstly, there is no conceivable way a fresh-out of battleschool (or Armour school) private/ trooper could have nearly as much leadership know-how and smarts as a CLC/6A qualified soldier.  Just not possible.  For close to almost a decade now, all training post-battle school is exactly the same for the Regs and Reserves.  **** , I had JTF corporals on my JLC in Petawawa, were they on an inferior leadership course, I think not.
I will be the first to admit Reservist weaknesses, but also the first to defend them to the hilt.  Sure they are underfunded and undertrained, but when compared to the status of most Army Reserves across NATO (read USA) they are in pretty good shape.  The states have no problem sending their reservists and guardsmen into battle (Gulf War) but they are in worst shape than us.  Just goes to show that maybe our reservists wouldn‘t just blow themselves up in a combat theatre.

Per Ardua Ad Astra
Swift and Bold (the correct motto)


----------



## Doug VT (11 Jun 2002)

I‘m sure that Recce41 wasn‘t referring to a trooper fresh out of battle school.  Yes, there are some checked out RegF troopers/privates that are obviously loaded with leadership potential.  Same goes for the reserves.  Both elements are cross sections of Canadian society.  However, the average reserve (new)MCpl has about 1/4 of the experience that the average 3 year trooper/private. 
Not all courses after battle school are exactly the same.  The CFJLC is not a difficult course, if you don‘t already know the material before you arrive then you shouldn‘t be there.  All it really does if weed out the individuals who should not proceed, although it seems that they‘ll pass anyone nowadays.
Don‘t get so hung up about this whole "ResF vs. RegF" thing.  Remember they are SEPARATE elements, they were never meant to be exactly the same. Accept it, for it will never change.  Enjoy what you have.


----------



## herbie (11 Jun 2002)

Doug 
that was my point as well.  A res is a part time soldier.  For the most part they attend school or work full time then also parade on a semi regular basis.  Some are very dedicated, some are slugs.  The reg is a " full time soldier ".  they parade on a regular basis.  Some are dedicated, some are slugs.  I know this is like telling people to suck eggs, but with the number of times this conversation comes up, I figured I would try to clarify the obvious differences.
Those res who think they are better trained / more capable then the regs are deluced.  Conversley those who say the res are lazy / useless don‘t forget these people put in 40-50 hour weeks PLUS army time.  
The two elements are different and only partially compatable. 
It is the reg soldier ‘s job to try to impart his experience and lessons learned to the res working with him.  The res meanwhile must mantain an open attitude to learning and on his own time mantain his fitness and basic knowledge.
It takes an honest effort from all involved, but if we wait around for some magical ( and effortless ) solution from the puzzle palace, then we‘ll be having this conversation in 30 years still.
G0DDAMN I‘ve never typed so much in my life.  I gotta go soak my hands in some epson salts .  Cheers


----------



## Recce41 (12 Jun 2002)

Thanx Doug
 Yes not a QL3 Tpr, I remember when we sent 2 yr Tprs on the old 14 week CLC, I‘ve met Res MCpl-WO+ that could not even command a Iltis. I have 22 yrs in and seen it all. Last Summer I had a 9 Month Gunner on a JNCO course, just to keep the number up. Canidates showing up with the PT Test dated the same day they were traveling. What he do? Do it in his car.
 Why do you think Res soldiers were only Cpls on Tours. I‘ve only seen ex Regs or now on the easy tours keep their rank. On the PPCLI UNPROFOR tour, they tryed to form a Res Coy, most of the soldiers could not even get alog, due they were from different Regts. I remember On Guard 90, when we the REG FORCE soldiers sweated weeks away to dig your trenches, to save the Res time to play. What are you going to do for real? call us!


----------



## ArmyAl (12 Jun 2002)

God damn recce you are a crusty old fart!
LMAO.
Never will you give a res. credit for even cleaning his ***  and appling a fresh coat of CLP.


----------



## Sharpey (12 Jun 2002)

Been lurking in this thread for awhile, I‘ll drop my 1 cent in now. Been a reservist for about 9 years. Have over the years wished and complained about our training, wishing we had more, more opportunities etc... But, I (we) are Reservists. Yes we are being Restructured, but we are still here to basically augment the Regs. When the s**t hits the fan, we can, with predeployment training, be of better use to the Regs. In the mean time, UN tours and Ice Storms are about all we can get. In my oppinion, this will never change, as much as I wish it would. But, this is the Military career I chose when I was in High School. So be it. If Canada‘s security was ever threatened, on our own soil, no doubt we would be called out as the Reg Force are hurting for Soldiers, much like us to.

 The Regs are training for their roles, as we are training for ours. Take RECCE for example. Regs lean towards Survaillance, Res lean towards Mud. Two important aspects of RECCE, but quite a bit different. For this, speaking from the RECCE side as I can‘t speak for other trades, it is hard to compare Regs and Res.


----------



## Recce41 (12 Jun 2002)

Sharpy
 Reg still have Mud Recce Sqns, A Sqn RCD, B Sqn 12RBC. Strats are going tank.


----------



## Zoomie (12 Jun 2002)

Lol, I would hardly call the Coyote a viable platform for Mud Recce.  Ever since the loss of the Lynx, the RegF mud recce element has lost a few key ingredients for conducting survivable "sneak and peak".  Perhaps with the advent of a new LUVW this will change.  Don‘t get me wrong, they know how to do it, but is the equipment ideal, not really.  That being said, the Reserves mud recce vehicle is small, quiet and fast, but has a survivability factor of about 7 seconds (or has that been downgraded to 5 secs??).  Here‘s hoping whatever is chosen as LUVW replacement will fix these shortcomings.  If you really are interested in this topic, check out the thread in the Armour Forum.


----------



## Sharpey (13 Jun 2002)

Recce41...with the tanks going West, this leaves only one Full Tank regiment now doesn‘t it?


----------



## Recce41 (13 Jun 2002)

Yes
 The RCD/12RBC will be Recce, and both Bges will be light.


----------



## portcullisguy (14 Jun 2002)

Now, I know I am about to bring up special forces, but hear me out...

The Brits (SAS) used the long wheel-based Land Rover, no roof, no doors, with much success in recce & strike mobility patrols deep behind the lines in Iraq in 1991.  I wouldn‘t give a Land Rover more than a few seconds in a battle involving tanks or anti-armour missiles, and I doubt the SAS did either.  It all depends on how the hardware is used, I would surmise.

I was shocked, as any civilian would be, when I learned the QYR‘s idea of "armoured recce" was driving an Iltis around with a cam net and building OPs.  Now, after a bit of reading and talking to people in the unit and elsewhere, it begins to make a little sense.  Sure, armour is great, but if you need it to protect your skin, you‘re in the sh*t anyway, and you might as well have something easier to conceal or quicker to haul a$$.

Just my not-yet-BMQ/SQ‘d PTE(R) 2 cents.


----------

