# Navy working to increase enrollment and examine sailor workload



## OceanBonfire (17 Mar 2022)

> While personnel shortages are a Canadian Armed Forces (CAF)-wide problem, it is even greater for the navy as fewer than eight per cent of CAF applicants ultimately choose a naval career.
> 
> ...
> 
> “The problem is circular. By not recruiting enough members, positions aren’t filled and people get overworked,” says Rear Admiral Angus Topshee, Assistant Chief of the Naval Staff – Personnel and Training, and Commander Maritime Forces Pacific, who oversees Project Navy Generation.  “Overworked sailors will be less likely to recommend a navy career to others. This is unfortunate as word-of-mouth has historically been our most successful recruiting method. We need to get more people in, get them trained, and then keep them in – that’s essentially the answer.”











						Navy working to increase enrollment and examine sailor workload - Pacific Navy News
					

The Royal Canadian Navy has a plan to fill the 1,000 personnel shortfall that often impacts currently serving sailors.




					www.lookoutnewspaper.com


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (17 Mar 2022)

OceanBonfire said:


> Navy working to increase enrollment and examine sailor workload - Pacific Navy News
> 
> 
> The Royal Canadian Navy has a plan to fill the 1,000 personnel shortfall that often impacts currently serving sailors.
> ...


Step 1, stop screwing your people around that work hard for you. 

🤣


----------



## Quirky (17 Mar 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> Step 1, stop screwing your people around that work hard for you.



Poor choice of words in a Navy thread.

👹


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (17 Mar 2022)

Quirky said:


> Poor choice of words in a Navy thread.
> 
> 👹


Why?   Everybody and their dog knows the Navy eats their own.


----------



## Lumber (18 Mar 2022)

We don't eat our own. We just have a bad habit of beating to death the horses that are actually running. i.e. the curse of competence.


----------



## Quirky (18 Mar 2022)

Bruce Monkhouse said:


> Why?   Everybody and their dog knows the Navy eats their own.



Oh I realize that.


----------



## SupersonicMax (18 Mar 2022)

Seems like a pretty shallow initiative.  Doing more advertising won’t fill 1,000 positions.  The Navy needs systemic changes to attract the new demographic.


----------



## Quirky (18 Mar 2022)

Modern boats would be a good start.


----------



## daftandbarmy (18 Mar 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> Step 1, stop screwing your people around that work hard for you.
> 
> 🤣



And no smoking in the Wardroom


----------



## Colin Parkinson (18 Mar 2022)

SupersonicMax said:


> Seems like a pretty shallow initiative.  Doing more advertising won’t fill 1,000 positions.  The Navy needs systemic changes to attract the new demographic.


Shallow dives that have high scores in the "Leading Change" category or the Senior Officers PER's


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (18 Mar 2022)

Quirky said:


> Modern boats would be a good start.


Modern anything would be a good start.

Stop treating sailors like it's the age of sail for a start.  Look at the Navy's investment in it's facilities for NCOs vs Officers, it's criminal.


----------



## daftandbarmy (18 Mar 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> How dare you!  CRCN decreed you shall not share it!  Hahahaha



oops.....


----------



## dimsum (18 Mar 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> Stop treating sailors like it's the fucking age of sail for a start


Hey, it's called "tradition"


----------



## Good2Golf (18 Mar 2022)

Quirky said:


> Modern boats would be a good start.


As Humphrey said, stop treating its people like shit would be a start. SSM was right - systemic changes required to move ahead, and those with at least in inkling of critical thought understand fully that it starts with its people.


----------



## OldSolduer (18 Mar 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> Modern anything would be a good start.
> 
> Stop treating sailors like it's the age of sail for a start.  Look at the Navy's investment in it's facilities for NCOs vs Officers, it's criminal.


What no rum the lash and sodomy? How shall the RCN ever survive?


----------



## tomydoom (18 Mar 2022)

OldSolduer said:


> What no rum the lash and sodomy? How shall the RCN ever survive?


I thought they considered that feature, not a bug.  Some people pay good money for  those things.


----------



## FSTO (18 Mar 2022)

CRCN needs to acknowledge to the government of the day the following:

Our ships need to be husbanded to last until 2035 at least;
Institute a plan to take 4 ships out of the rotation and go into a massive structural refit to ensure they are safe and capable for the next 15 years;
Crews from those 4 ships will be absorbed by the other 8 to enable a ship to sail with a full complement of qualified people and allow a sustainable sea-shore rotation;
Sea days will be rationalized and superficial sailings reduced to critical public outreach events;
Ships internal schedules will be rationalized to ensure proper rest and rehab is achievable without inhibiting war fighting capability;
Excess personnel will be posted to schools to fill the training billets;
Shortfalls at the schools will be filled with retired trades who retain the required skillset;


The government will need to know that the Navy will have to make these radical steps if they expect to have a deployable fleet for the next 15 years.
The government will also have to revamp the base housing issue so that sailors and officers can afford to live in the areas they are posted to. This is a Forces wide problem that is critical in retention of serving pers.

Don't know how much of this is achievable, especially in the current international climate.


----------



## FM07 (18 Mar 2022)

Demolish Nelles Block ffs.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (18 Mar 2022)

FM07 said:


> Demolish Nelles Block ffs.


This what I was alluding to when I said they need to invest in facilities for NCMs.  Compare Kingsmill to Nelles Block and you see where all the money goes.


----------



## FM07 (18 Mar 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> This what I was alluding to when I said they need to invest in facilities for NCMs.  Compare Kingsmill to Nelles Block and you see where all the money goes.


For sure, even Halifax has Tribute Tower, which has the west beat by a long shot. I feel bad for those JRs on endless PAT staying in Nelles developing that perpetual shack hack.


----------



## Jarnhamar (18 Mar 2022)

Quirky said:


> Modern boats would be a good start.


Heavy Cruisers.  
HMCS Jack Hanson, HMCS Steve Hanson, and maybe a small carrier named HMCS Jeff Hanson.


----------



## FSTO (18 Mar 2022)

FM07 said:


> Demolish Nelles Block ffs.


The replacement plan is in the works. Procurement delays are not unique to equipment.

Edit to add: Construction to start April of next year. If you know Naden it will b located in the area where the old drill shed used to be.


----------



## dimsum (18 Mar 2022)

removed - FSTO answered my question


----------



## Navy_Pete (19 Mar 2022)

FSTO said:


> CRCN needs to acknowledge to the government of the day the following:
> 
> Our ships need to be husbanded to last until 2035 at least;
> Institute a plan to take 4 ships out of the rotation and go into a massive structural refit to ensure they are safe and capable for the next 15 years;
> ...


Is this the same CRCN that drives the current fleetsched that is overworking people?

It's disconnected from reality, and if we dropped 4 ships that wouldn't create excess personnel, just means we could properly crew some ships. We still need people for the massive refits and even mothballed ships need maintenance.

You can maybe occassionally do 6 weeks worth of work in a 4 week work period, but you can't sustain that, and you can't do 3 or 4 of them concurrently. Meanwhile, that's our SOP.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (19 Mar 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> Is this the same CRCN that drives the current fleetsched that is overworking people?
> 
> It's disconnected from reality, and if we dropped 4 ships that wouldn't create excess personnel, just means we could properly crew some ships. We still need people for the massive refits and even mothballed ships need maintenance.
> 
> You can maybe occassionally do 6 weeks worth of work in a 4 week work period, but you can't sustain that, and you can't do 3 or 4 of them concurrently. Meanwhile, that's our SOP.


I did not think CRCN had anything to do with the Fleet Schedule?


----------



## SupersonicMax (19 Mar 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I did not think CRCN had anything to do with the Fleet Schedule?


I hope he at least has some influence on it…


----------



## SeaKingTacco (19 Mar 2022)

SupersonicMax said:


> I hope he at least has some influence on it…


Why? Does CRCAF sign the ATO everyday?


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (19 Mar 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I did not think CRCN had anything to do with the Fleet Schedule?


He does in the same way the Army Comd has influence over the MRP.  He doesn't control it but he has influence over it.

The real issue is that most Naval Officers don't understand that the Navy isn't it's own service, rather it's an environment within one single service 😁

Ditto their lack of knowledge WRT the differences between Force Generation vs Force Employment.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (19 Mar 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> He does in the same way the Army Comd has influence over the MRP.  He doesn't control it but he has influence over it.
> 
> The real issue is that most Naval Officers don't understand that the Navy isn't it's own service, rather it's an environment within one single service 😁
> 
> Ditto their lack of knowledge WRT the differences between Force Generation vs Force Employment.


That line between FG/FE can get pretty blurry. Usually, even aircraft are doing FE, there is still an element of FG involved.


----------



## SupersonicMax (19 Mar 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> Why? Does CRCAF sign the ATO everyday?


No but he certainly has influence on what is being accomplished, by setting priorities.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (19 Mar 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> That line between FG/FE can get pretty blurry. Usually, even aircraft are doing FE, there is still an element of FG involved.


Agreed, I don't really think the terms are that helpful at times.  I generally don't use it to describe anything that is below the level of a unit. 

The Navy force generates Ships for CJOC which is the force employer.

I also think people confuse the word training with force generation.  The two aren't the same thing.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (19 Mar 2022)

SupersonicMax said:


> No but he certainly has influence on what is being accomplished, by setting priorities.


The CRCN and his subordinate commanders absolutely do control the training requirements to force generate a ship for force employment.  

The problem is that the Fleetsched and the Trainingsched aren't synced and they also aren't sync'ed to personnel requirements or issues.

It's the same people going out over and over again for WUPS, even though they are already worked up.  😉


----------



## SeaKingTacco (19 Mar 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> The CRCN and his subordinate commanders absolutely do control the training requirements to force generate a ship for force employment.
> 
> The problem is that the Fleetsched and the Trainingsched aren't synced and they also aren't sync'ed to personnel requirements or issues.
> 
> It's the same people going out over and over again for WUPS, even though they are already worked up.  😉


That is one of my biggest bug bear. A simple, but welcome change would be that if you have done WUPS lectures in the past 12 months, you are excused the current set of lectures. That would free up a huge amount of people.

Even IMSRT/BSRT should be used with a bit more thought. If almost everyone onboard has done a set of WUPS in the past year or so, maybe a modified or short program could be put in place, just to knock off the rust and gel the team?


----------



## SeaKingTacco (19 Mar 2022)

The HELAIRDETs are victims of this system, because they move from high readiness ship to high readiness ship. Yes, the Det composition changes somewhat, but there are only so many techs and aircrew.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (19 Mar 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> That is one of my biggest bug bear. A simple, but welcome change would be that if you have done WUPS lectures in the past 12 months, you are excused the current set. That would free up a huge amount of people.


I mean I try to explain the nuances of training, force generation and force employment to Naval Officers all the time but they unfortunately suffer from institutional incest in that they have very little experience outside of either Halifax or Esquimalt.

They don't listen to what I tell them and look at me as if I'm speaking Greek.  What can be really done for those that do not want to help themselves 🤔


----------



## Navy_Pete (19 Mar 2022)

SeaKingTacco said:


> I did not think CRCN had anything to do with the Fleet Schedule?



There are a lot of key, high level direction for things like  'the RCN will commit 4 ships to Ex BLOGGINS' (while already doing x,y and z and maintaining so many ships at HR etc).

Those anchors drive everything else.

We used to hold deploying ships to a much higher material standard, but now it's just aiming for basic safe at sea. Standard readiness ships also to be at least basic safe at sea, plus things like helo-capable.

We've so massively compromised on standards argue about basic things like, yes, fire detection in high risk spaces is a basic requirement, and no, you probably shouldn't cover things in plywood and trim. On commercial ships the quals would just be pulled until it's rectified, but we just (sometimes) risk assesss things away. When you have over a thousand defects though, really hard to figure out the cumulative impacts, and let alone figure out what might happen if you sail with a skeleton crew.

If CRCN knows sailors are overworked, but doesn't do anything to reduce the ops tempo, then they are part of the problem. Making op commitments without asking 'can we do this' first is a big issue, and we are driving the fleet hard enough I have zero confidence we will make it to CSC before ships fall apart and 'self retire'.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (19 Mar 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> There are a lot of key, high level direction for things like  'the RCN will commit 4 ships to Ex BLOGGINS' (while already doing x,y and z and maintaining so many ships at HR etc).
> 
> Those anchors drive everything else.
> 
> ...


That's why anyone with any ability to do anything else should be jumping ship as fast as they can.


----------



## FSTO (19 Mar 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> There are a lot of key, high level direction for things like  'the RCN will commit 4 ships to Ex BLOGGINS' (while already doing x,y and z and maintaining so many ships at HR etc).
> 
> Those anchors drive everything else.
> 
> ...


Octobob just came from the MARPAC and now is CJOC. So as the FE he should have enough residual knowledge about the state of the fleet that he should be able to tell the FG, "You are full of s*** Craig to tell me that WIN and CAL are ready to go, they were barely holding on when I was MARPAC and I sure a shit know that fairies and gnomes haven't arrived at dockyard since I left."  

So who says no to whom? Has the minister been briefed on the state of all of our equipment (CAF wide)? Would have loved to been a fly on the wall when she was briefed on that and then the look she would have gave the former minister at the next cabinet meeting.

Cripes I was listening to Gen Day (Ret) talking about the state of our tanks and if that is transferred to the rest of the CAF inventory then we are fubared beyond belief!


----------



## Furniture (19 Mar 2022)

Navy_Pete said:


> If CRCN knows sailors are overworked, but doesn't do anything to reduce the ops tempo, then they are part of the problem. Making op commitments without asking 'can we do this' first is a big issue, and we are driving the fleet hard enough I have zero confidence we will make it to CSC before ships fall apart and 'self retire'.


On my ILP last April the RCN Chief was asked about what they were doing to address burn out in the sailors, his response was to say that they would work people until they "take a knee", and ask for help. 

Essentially saying "we will knowingly drive you until you break", and now the RCN leadership wonders why people are getting out, and not recommending the navy to others.


----------



## Ostrozac (19 Mar 2022)

When we break an occupation, we like to start with the technical tradesmen that actually have to maintain and operate all this equipment. The navy isn’t alone, they share this approach to personnel with the army and the air force. 

A fleet without enough techs isn’t a fleet. Just as running tanks without enough RCEME isn’t a good idea, although the army is trying. And failing.


----------



## rmc_wannabe (19 Mar 2022)

Ostrozac said:


> When we break an occupation, we like to start with the technical tradesmen that actually have to maintain and operate all this equipment. The navy isn’t alone, they share this approach to personnel with the army and the air force.
> 
> A fleet without enough techs isn’t a fleet. Just as running tanks without enough RCEME isn’t a good idea, although the army is trying. And failing.


The RCCS has entered the chat....


----------



## Lumber (19 Mar 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> I mean I try to explain the nuances of training, force generation and force employment to Naval Officers all the time but they unfortunately suffer from institutional incest in that they have very little experience outside of either Halifax or Esquimalt.
> 
> They don't listen to what I tell them and look at me as if I'm speaking Greek.  What can be really done for those that do not want to help themselves 🤔


I'm surprised by the statement, because don't think I've ever met a naval officer, other than pre-NWOPQ subbies, who didn't understand the difference between FE and FG.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (19 Mar 2022)

Lumber said:


> I'm surprised by the statement, because don't think I've ever met a naval officer, other than pre-NWOPQ subbies, who didn't understand the difference between FE and FG.


Oh they can read the book definition, they have to memorize it after all.  It's that fine line between rote memorization and application that it starts to fall apart.  

Training ≠ Force Generation

Force Generation is tied directly to an assigned mission.  

The Navy will say it's Force Generating even when it is not assigned a mission.  It will sail its Ships when it doesn't have an assigned mission, break them, continue to sail them when they are broken and skip the planned maintenance.

Then when it does have an actual assigned mission, it won't have the necessary forces available to Force Generate and meet its commitments.  

It has continued to do this and maintained an incredibly ambitious CT program while cutting the bottom out from under itself by massacring its IT, particularly for its Tech Trades.


----------



## SupersonicMax (19 Mar 2022)

Humphrey Bogart said:


> Oh they can read the book definition, they have to memorize it after all.  It's that fine line between rote memorization and application that it starts to fall apart.
> 
> Training ≠ Force Generation
> 
> ...


Not sure I agree.  We should always train (Force Generate) towards our stated mandate, regardless of whether an operational mission has been assigned or not.  The RCAF Capstone doctrine states “[f]orce generation involves an extensive range of activities including recruiting, training, educating, and retaining the right personnel. These activities are essential to the readiness of a competent force with the ability to execute all air power missions.”


----------



## Lumber (19 Mar 2022)

SupersonicMax said:


> Not sure I agree.  We should always train (Force Generate) towards our stated mandate, regardless of whether an operational mission has been assigned or not.  The RCAF Capstone doctrine states “[f]orce generation involves an extensive range of activities including recruiting, training, educating, and retaining the right personnel. These activities are essential to the readiness of a competent force with the ability to execute all air power missions.”


I agree. Though it's coming from the RCAF doctrine (not sure if there is an RCAF equivalent), the only things I wouldn't consider "FG" would be individual training. Just about any other "training" I would consider FG. If you send a ship to Joint Warrior in Great Britain as the command ship for one of the Task Groups, even though that particular ship is scheduled to go into a deep refit right after this sail, I'd still call it Force Generation. You are giving experience and training in things that members of that crew may have little to no experience in (operating as a flag ship, operating in a task group, maintain NATO comms circuits, navigating in a high traffic density area, etc.). They may not use these new found skills on _that_ ship, but most of them are going to get farmed out to other ships as soon as she goes into refit, and they'll bring those new found skills and experiences to their new units, whether they be deployers or the school. You've Force Generated because you've provided the Navy and CJOC with people who are now more capable and _employable_.


----------



## NavyShooter (19 Mar 2022)

As a former W Eng Tech, who was a Senior Instructor at CFNES shortly after the conversion from NET to W Eng, I observed a lot of reduction in training - primarily in training time.  A CIWS course that was once several months became several weeks.  A CANTASS course that was over a month for just the dry end became just over 2 weeks for both the wet and dry end.  Certain training was eliminated and was to be 'learned in the fleet'. 

Then the School re-organization in 2016 put the nail in the coffin - the section I had run as Senior instructor in 2012 went from having 12 instructor positions with Standards support...to having 5 instructor positions, with the Senior Instructor being "Standards", since the whole east coast Standards Cell was shut down.

With 12 instructors, I was able to run 3 courses with 2 instructors each, supply 2 instructors to a project in Montreal for 2 months, have one out on MATA/PATA, one on PLQ, another on leave, and still have a spare or two in case someone called in sick.  Oh, and I could manage things so that I could let one do the full Nijmegen workup and deployment. 

Now, with 5 instructors including the Senior instructor, you're lucky to staff a single course from what I hear - and that on a rotational basis.  With 4 instructors in house (plus the SI) you have 2 in class, one who's on leave, one who's probably out on MEL's.  

(Note, due to electronics/power/etc, you need to have 2 present for safety...which wasn't factored in by the 'genius' brain trust that cut it to 5.)

Running a single class of 8 techs at a time....I mean, it's been 3 years since this was anything like my problem, but I'm not surprised at the burnout, and the dwindling numbers of techs around.

From my perspective - there has not been a single actual Electronics Technician trained since September 2011 when the W Eng conversion was done.  Since that time, they've produced Maintainers, not Technicians.  

Some of those Maintainers have developed into good Technicians, due to good mentoring and supervision in the fleet, but that's the exception, not the rule. 

The only 'hope' I hold for the RCN at this point is that after this surge of deployments is done, maybe they will call an "OPS TEMPO PAUSE" and take a year to reconstitute, maintain, and catch up.


----------



## daftandbarmy (20 Mar 2022)

NavyShooter said:


> The only 'hope' I hold for the RCN at this point is that *after this surge of deployments is done*, maybe they will call an "OPS TEMPO PAUSE" and take a year to reconstitute, maintain, and catch up.



Too bad that RCN Officers who want to be Admirals, and Admirals who want to be CDS, will probably look at the recently resurgent Russia as a great career builder, which also means that this 'surge' may not be done for years.

Oh, and of course we need to measure up to our NATO commitments... almost forgot that.


----------



## Furniture (20 Mar 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> Too bad that RCN Officers who want to be Admirals, and Admirals who want to be CDS, will probably look at the recently resurgent Russia as a great career builder, which also means that this 'surge' may not be done for years.
> 
> Oh, and of course we need to measure up to our NATO commitments... almost forgot that.


The new CO just needs everyone to dig deep, and give 100% for the next two years. Just like the last three new COs...


----------



## NavyShooter (20 Mar 2022)

Oh, and then there's the crew who wasn't subjected to a 'crew swap' after their deployment, who had a patch made up calling themselves 'the forgotten'....feeling very hard done by to have remained on the same ship for over 18 months.  I spent almost 5 years on CHA from '96-01 and over 4 years on MON from 04-08...both ships I did multiple deployments/taskings on. 

The funniest part of the whole school re-organization was when the 'leadership' stated that if we were short on instructors, we would 'CFTPO them from the fleet.'...that was the plan...they legitimately thought they'd have priority over ships.


----------



## Furniture (20 Mar 2022)

As a funny side note to this RCN tale, I was asked on Tuesday if I'd still consider relinquishing rank to go sail on the West Coast... (I brought it up a couple of years ago as an option)

Apparently support trades that aren't RCN managed are getting desperate for people to deal with sailing as well. I told the boss I'd go, but I wouldn't be willing to go back to Sgt.


----------



## Good2Golf (20 Mar 2022)

Furniture said:


> As a funny side note to this RCN tale, I was asked on Tuesday if I'd still consider relinquishing rank to go sail on the West Coast... (I brought it up a couple of years ago as an option)
> 
> Apparently support trades that aren't RCN managed are getting desperate for people to deal with sailing as well. I told the boss I'd go, but I wouldn't be willing to go back to Sgt.


You’re clearly asking for more than the CMP-RCN combined-arms team can give, Furniture.


----------



## Underway (24 Mar 2022)

Every time a ship leaves the wall it has a mission.  You are operational as soon as you begin flash-up procedure.

Training/FG, and FE are all concurrent activities most of the time for Navies worldwide.


----------



## dapaterson (24 Mar 2022)

Furniture said:


> Apparently support trades that aren't RCN managed are getting desperate for people to deal with sailing as well. I told the boss I'd go, but I wouldn't be willing to go back to Sgt.


MCpl it is then!


----------



## daftandbarmy (24 Mar 2022)

dapaterson said:


> MS MCpl it is then!



There, FTFY


----------



## Furniture (24 Mar 2022)

daftandbarmy said:


> There, FTFY


Until Tuesday I was air force, now MS would be appropriate.


----------



## dapaterson (24 Mar 2022)

Furniture said:


> Until Tuesday I was air force, now MS would be appropriate.


You realize that by changing to a naval DEU you're guaranteed to never get posted to either coast ever again.


----------



## dimsum (25 Mar 2022)

Furniture said:


> Until Tuesday I was air force, now MS would be appropriate.


Wait - did the Met Tech trade stop being RCAF DEU?  Did you OT?  Am I even referring to the right trade?


----------



## Halifax Tar (25 Mar 2022)

dimsum said:


> Wait - did the Met Tech trade stop being RCAF DEU?  Did you OT?  Am I even referring to the right trade?



Ya I was confused too.... But I didn't wanna pry lol


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Mar 2022)

I had understood…


----------



## Furniture (25 Mar 2022)

dimsum said:


> Wait - did the Met Tech trade stop being RCAF DEU?  Did you OT?  Am I even referring to the right trade?


Theoretically we have been "purple" since 2012, we just didn't allow people to switch DEU, and didn't seem to recruit many people in CA or RCN DEU. 

Right now we are at 83% RCAF when we should be 41%, and we are at 6% RCN when we should be at 34%. 

@Good2Golf


----------



## Halifax Tar (25 Mar 2022)

Furniture said:


> Theoretically we have been "purple" since 2012, we just didn't allow people to switch DEU, and didn't seem to recruit many people in CA or RCN DEU.
> 
> Right now we are at 83% RCAF when we should be 41%, and we are at 6% RCN when we should be at 34%.
> 
> @Good2Golf



That's awesome!  So you're a PO1 MetTech now ?  Happy for you bro.


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Mar 2022)

Semi-related… @Furniture Where did the ballistic met folks get to?  I lost track in the mid-90s.


----------



## Furniture (25 Mar 2022)

Good2Golf said:


> Semi-related… @Furniture Where did the ballistic met folks get to?  I lost track in the mid-90s.


1 RCHA, 2RCHA, and 5 RALC all still have a Ballistic Met section of 6, and W Battery still gets ballistic support from the Joint Met Centre, which replaced the old Army Met Centre in Gagetown. The artillery is transitioning to using METGM(model data) rather than balloons for most shoots, so I expect ballistic Met will die a slow death of neglect.


----------

