# QOR operations



## QORvanweert (28 Aug 2004)

I have just recently joined the Queens Own Rifles and am still slightly confused about the nature of their operations. Is this regiment completely airborne or are there other qualifications that I can get and ops to participate in?


QOR attack another Beach 

Exercise Neptune Reach was conducted 18-20 Jun 2004 in Georgian Bay.   Augmented by the 48th Highlanders and 2 Fd Engr Regt, a platoon sized patrol performed reconnaissance, rehearsals and an ambush each involving amphibious insertions from the Canadian Coast Guard Ship Samuel Risley



Originally I was under the impression that they were solely airborne, and having a slight aversion to jumping out of planes, this was not the reason I joined. However, I am an avid swimmer, schnorkler etc. and the above ops hold great appeal.
           Excuse my ignorance,
                                                   Van Weert


----------



## Blindspot (28 Aug 2004)

QORvanweert said:
			
		

> I have just recently joined the Queens Own Rifles and am still slightly confused about the nature of their operations. Is this regiment completely airborne or are there other qualifications that I can get and ops to participate in?



The QOR has an airborne company. No one is made to take the jump course. You are (will be) first and foremost a rifleman. Rifle regiments have different traditions than that of other infantry and it will serve you to research this. Do they still hand out the Regimental Catechism? Other than that, I believe you are open to most other infantry qualifications.

Prepare to march very quickly.


----------



## homerjsimpson (28 Aug 2004)

Im baffled as to why you would come to an internet forum and ask complete strangers about the regiment that you are in. Do not get me wrong im not flaming you but, why would you not go and ask people in your unit these questions?


----------



## skura (29 Aug 2004)

Curiosity...I've asked a ton of questions on these forums for answers I could have gotten elsewhere...I guess because he's the new guy he may feel kind of nervous to ask higher-ups or others in the unit which he will get over very quickly...

As a matter of fact, I will be joining the QOR in the late winter or early spring in 2005, and wouldn't mind if this question was answered...so even if he may be able to get this information elsewhere, it will still benefit someone...


----------



## Mr. Ted (30 Aug 2004)

The QOR has three separate companies(but I don't believe each is at company strength) - the Gurkha coy, 60th, and the 3rd Airborne Coy, if I recall correctly.

One is admin or training, one is infantry, one is airborne(para) infantry.  If I'm wrong on this, someone jump in.

Essentially, your first year or two will revolve around you getting trained as a rifleman.  After that, if you're somewhat switched-on, you may be offered a chance to get your basic para course.  After that, you must pass para fitness test, and your para indoc course and then you're a member of the 3rd Airborne Coy. That's a voluntary member, by the way.  There will be a lot of people who will be trying to get in.  So if you wanna join and become a clerk, I'm sure they'll allow you to.

Neat.  Maroon beret, challenge coin, airborne creed on the wall(but I don't believe there is a CADPAT jump smock is there?)  You will be offered the chance to jump on a pretty regular basis and hopefully work as a para coy during summer concentrations.  

England has a similar unit - 4th battalion, the Parachute Regiment.  In fact, I believe QOR claims 4PARA as a sister reg or some such thing.  Worth investigating.

Mr. Ted


----------



## The_Falcon (30 Aug 2004)

We are across the Parade square from them, but thier basic structure that I remember one of them telling me is, Admin Coy, Training Coy, Fighting/Jump Coy. From what I remember he said they basically amalgamated the Jump and Fighting Coy into one as both were not much more than oversized platoons. Things might have changed, or I am slightly confused. I do know that the 3 Para Coy designation is/was only used during MilCon (Ex SG 03/04). 3 Para was basically most of the jump qualified people in the are lumped into one Coy, However most jump qualified reservists just happen to be Queens Own Rifles.


----------



## Mr. Ted (30 Aug 2004)

Hmmm.  I'm sure the jumpers still belong to a "Para Coy" or "Para Element" within the Regt.  

I'm sure they've maintained that distinct grouping within the unit, have they not?

Anyone QOR here?

Ted


----------



## skura (30 Aug 2004)

From what I've read on the QOR site and heard from others on this site, you wouldn't join the the Para Coy belonging to the QOR when your done your training, you'd end up in either the RCR or the PPCLI or the Quebec one (can't remember the name)...but, I think, this is only when / if you transfer to the regs, I don't know if you'd want to join the 3rd Para Coy unless you were interested in becoming an instructor.


----------



## Bartok5 (30 Aug 2004)

Uhhh, Skura....

You are awfully confused about the distinction between the Regular Force Infantry Regiments and the Army Reserve Infantry Regiments and their respective roles.   Please check your facts before posting information that will only serve to confuse your information-seeking peers.   I see from your profile that you are 16 years old and just "itching for action".  All well and good, but I am here to tell you that your "information" is so abjectly false as to be laughable.  You got it completely ass-backwards!  Congratulations for your ability to obfuscate reality for those who are actually "of age" and looking to join the Army!  !  

I for one, resent having to sort out disinformation (however well intended) promulgated by Army Cadets that have no clue what they are talking about.  This is precisely what led me to leave this forum a couple of years ago when it was headed down-range.  This forum has come around "big-time" since then, and I'd hate to see it devolve.  So what do we do about the "Skura's" of the world?  Aside from telling them to find their own adolescent playground....

I am pissed that a cadet can get me pissed, but there it is.  Perhaps I'm overly touchy, but this sort of "planet pluto" stuff gets me annoyed.  Can we please sort this out?


----------



## The_Falcon (30 Aug 2004)

Mr Ted reread my post.  The para element is more or less a seperate Platoon within the Fighting/Jump coy. Skura you are way off base. And like I already mentioned the 3 Para Coy is the designation of the Jump Coy during the annual summer MILCON.


----------



## Bartok5 (30 Aug 2004)

Further to my last,

I have a great deal of respect for the Canadian Cadet movement, of whatever environmental stripe.   I spent 6 years as a member of 2422 RCACC myself, albeit in the "bad old days" where you could be a Cadet CSM and a Reserve MCpl at the same time.   Yes, that was me - and I wasn't alone.

My "issue" is with "know nothing" posts such as that offered by "Skura" above.   It serves no practical purpose on a "Canadian Army" discussion board, and serves only to confuse those who don't know better.   

If Mike Bobbit and his (now) competent band of moderators truly want this board to be a forum for serious discussion of Canadian Army issues, then something evidently needs to be done about the keen young Army Cadets who don't yet know their place.   All the power to them (I was one), but their ill-informed ramblings have no place in a forum which aspires to serious "non-official" discussion of Canadian Army matters.   The above post by "Skura" being an abject case in point.

I propose several potential solutions:

1.   Mike creates a Cadet forum, for the under 16 crowd to trade stories about CL and CLI shooting pellet guns at summer camp.   Based on my experience with the Wheeler's "Equipment Forum", this is a disaster waiting to happen and an abject waste of bandwidth, or

2.   Mike establishes a 16 year-old "cut-off" for membership which entails that Army Cadets who have reached the age of potential military service are included in the membership/conversation.   With the proviso that said cadets not tell "camp stories about CLI", nor presume to offer "military advice" - to even the civilians.   Cadet enquiries would be constrained to subjects pertaining to enrollment and "life" in the various Canadian Army trades, or

3.   Mike bans cadets outright from what should rightfully be a forum for serving members of the Canadian Forces, not the affiliated and "oh so enthusiastic but invariably wrong" military-themed youth groups.   

My personal preference is for option 2, as I was an Army Cadet and at one point was actively seeking advice regarding the "way ahead".   I honestly believe that this re-vamped forum serves a viable purpose outside of the "we're in, we're damned" majority of serving members with a clue.   We need to encourage the participation of prospective recruits.   However, we need to find a reasonable cut-off which will preclude the 14 year-old "JTF-2 Ninja Sniper Wannabe's", because they simply waste our time and Mike's bandwidth.

An "Army Cadet looking to move on" forum might be of some use.   Then again, the "Recruiting Forum" probably suffices, given that Army Cadets looking to transition to the Reserve or Regular Force can find all of the answers that they require right there.

Perhaps I'm an unfeeling arsehole, but in my day as a Cadet we didn't presume to offer advice to ANYONE.   This was because WE KNEW NOTHING OF PRACTICAL VALUE, and realized the fact.   We had benefitted immeasurably from a DND-sponsored program designed to inculcate "Canadian Values" (throught the barrel of a C1 SMG), but we had no delusions about telling anyone in the "real Army" the way it is.   So what the heck has changed to give today's Army Cadets (who are quite evidiently subject to a horrifically "dumbed down" and "non-Army" curriculum), the right to suddenly chime in on matters pertaining to the real Army?    Quite frankly, I am at a loss for words when I read Skura's post.   It almost reads like he is pretending to know something....

Just my mixed-emotion thoughts....


----------



## Michael Dorosh (30 Aug 2004)

Well, Mark, we DO have an Army Cadet forum as part of this site.  In the absence of a qualified answer, this moderator sees no problem with "cadets" trying to jump in - so long as they know what they are talking about.

I think perhaps skura will not be so quick to jump into future conversations unless he knows what he is speaking of.


----------



## Bartok5 (30 Aug 2004)

Michael,

Fair enough - I've never visited (nor to my shame, noticed) the Army Cadet forum.  Colour me chasitised.

At the end of the day however, I would humbly suggest that we need a means of discouraging inappropriate and misinformed comment in the "mainstream" forums.  I am fully cognizant that there is nothing aside from the condemnation of existing members to shut down ill-informed adults (civilian, reserve or regular) who post manifestly wrong information.  More's the pity.  But given the fact that cadets DO have their own forum, perhaps we could tighten up the applicable guidelines to suggest that they not offer "advice" outside of their purview.  It is bad enough that we so-called adults have to correct each other on occasion.  

Don't get me wrong - I am happy to entertain "cadet transition" questions in the "adult" forums as time permits.  What I don't appreciate seeing is a misinformed cadet purporting to know how things are in the Reserve or Regular Army world.  

Yes, I'm a crotchety old bastard.  So sue me if I don't like wading through "wrong" crap....


----------



## muskrat89 (31 Aug 2004)

Sir -as you have noted, the Site has greatly improved over time. The posting of erroneous info is one of the last "thorns in our side", and agreed - probably one of the biggest irritations (now). Only recently we have posted stickies, FAQs, and policies regarding unqualified info, and embellishment. 

One thing that has helped decrease the "signal to noise" ratio (as Infanteer likes to call it) is an influx of new and returning members of a very high quality.

Mr. Bobbitt is on vacation, but I can assure you that we'll beat this around in Mod-land, including your specific suggestions. Thanks again for raising the bar, and hopefully we won't chase you away again.

Sgt. MacFarlane MJ


A reminder to all who may offer information:



> We've had a few instances lately where opinion and rumour have been presented as hard evidence. Unfortunately in many cases, the information is flat out wrong.
> 
> Due to the anonymous nature of these forums, it can be hard to tell if information is coming from someone in a position to know or just someone who "has a friend whose uncle served with the Botswana Defence Force in the 70's."
> 
> ...


----------



## Michael Dorosh (31 Aug 2004)

yup, can't put it better than muskrat just did, Maj. C.   However, as he hinted at, "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem."   As long as the truly knowledgeable like yourself are here to lend a hand at providing the best information possible, the problem works itself out.  

I understand your point about the "noise" driving away those in the best position to provide "signal" and do agree.  I don't think an age limit is the answer.  Like you, I stopped coming to the board altogether for a little while because there was simply no reason to post here.  I hope those days are gone for good - don't think for a second your help with that has gone unappreciated.

I would hate, though, for some of the younger members to feel inhibited about joining in the conversations in a constructive manner.  A few reminders to specific individuals as time goes on as to what constitutes constructive or not will, I hope, solve the problem.


----------

