# Canadian troops left to beg for basic equipment: report



## D-n-A (18 Oct 2004)

http://www.mytelus.com/news/article.do?pageID=canada_home&articleID=1741632

Monday, Oct 18, 2004  Email this to a friend 
 print this page 

Canadian troops left to beg for basic equipment: report 

FREDERICTON (CP) - Canadian troops sent to Haiti earlier this year on a peacekeeping mission were left "prodding and begging" for basic equipment, according to an internal Defence Department report obtained by the Canadian Press. 
The report examines the deployment of about 500 Canadian troops as part of Operation Halo - a U.S.-led mission to restore calm after a three-week rebellion prompted then Haitian president Jean-Bertrand Aristide to flee the troubled Caribbean country. 

The soldiers and equipment were airlifted to Haiti from Canadian Forces Base Gagetown in New Brunswick. 

The report, obtained under the federal Access to Information Act, identifies a shortage of operational equipment including ballistic plates, fragmentary vests, tan safety boots and even protective latex gloves. 




"Historically, these items have been required for previous missions, therefore, the additional strain of procurement should not be borne by the mounting base - these items should be held nationally and expedited to the unit without Area HQ prodding and begging for the equipment," the report states. 

Defence analyst Martin Shadwick of York University in Toronto said he finds the report distressing. 

"We're talking equipment which in most cases seems to be pretty straight forward, relatively low-technology, that should be available in adequate quantity, and with dispatch, readily accessible," he said. 



"If we're having difficulty quickly equipping troops going overseas, and in relatively small numbers, that suggests that some corrective action is immediately required." 

The report says the effort to source the equipment "re-directed a considerable amount of time and manpower which could have been better spent dealing with the mounting process." 

Some of the items, including the tan boots, had to be sent after the troops were already in Haiti. 

"As a general rule, one would want to be able to say when we're deploying people that they've been able to take at least the core, essential equipment with them, and can operate straight away when they get there . . . not have to wait for gear to arrive, or spending an inordinate amount of time trying to track down stuff." 


According to the report, tracking all the equipment proved difficult as the result of a software program that was used. 

At one point, a large piece of equipment needed for the deployment had arrived at Gagetown and sat for three days in a compound before being discovered, the report says. 

The software program was abandoned in favour of Microsoft Excel spreadsheets. 

This isn't the first time a shortage of equipment has plagued Canadian troops. 

They were mocked for wearing green uniforms in the desert of southern Afghanistan in 2003. 

Again this summer, some of the Canadian soldiers, nearing the end of their tour in Afghanistan had to resort to the relish greens because of a shortage of the desert combat fatigues. 

"Some of the equipment shortages have rational explanations, such as late deliveries from manufacturers," Shadwick said. 

"But they tend to pop up with too great a regularity, and surely we can do much better on such fundamental items. 

"This raises questions about our ability to deploy as quickly as possible." 

The Defence Department wasn't offering any immediate comment on the report. 

Department spokesman Capt. Greg Poehlmann said it would be at least mid-November before the department is able to formulate a response. 



© The Canadian Press, 2004


----------



## tabernac (19 Oct 2004)

And now they want to cut 700 mil. Go figure. I think we should ADD 700 mil and stop replacing people in top heavy NDHQ.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (19 Oct 2004)

It would be nice to see that report in its entirety.


----------



## KevinB (20 Oct 2004)

The fact that shocks me - is that people are actually shocked by this report.

We have known for ages we don't have enough kit.  In fact most items are not acquired until the troops hit the theatre (talk about a steep learning curve)...


----------



## PPCLI Guy (20 Oct 2004)

Of course, the other way of looking at it is that despite our 15 year procurement cycle, we still somehow manage to (mostly) get the kit to the troops when they need it - and top of the line kit at that.

Now, I agree that a 15 year procurement cycle is ludicrous (and a legacy of an unchallenged military stuck in the Cold War, with little operational experince), but like many parts of the military, the sudden change in optempo 10 years ago has meant that we have had to change the way we do things.  The fact that we have purchased all that we have managed to so far amazes me (over $300M for Athena ROTO 0 alone), all while feeding a ridiculously bureaucratic procurement policy.

The good news is that real efforts are being made to change the process.

Dave
The Optimist


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (20 Oct 2004)

No disrespect meant but "Of course, the other way of looking at it is that despite our 15 year procurement cycle, we still somehow manage to (mostly) get the kit to the troops when they need it - and top of the line kit at that." is the kind of thinking that perpetuates the cycle.
"The good news is that real efforts are being made to change the process."  I REALLY hope your right.


----------



## KevinB (20 Oct 2004)

We can move this to a more private discusion if need be - but I humble disagree that we have the kit when we require it.


When we require it is not gearing up for an op when we are already overseas but in the mission predeployment at minimum (and I still think it is criminal to no train as you fight).

The idea of giving troop kit only for overseas it going to get some of us killed - either due to fraticide or fairlure to properly employ the kit we have for we don't understand how to.

It is all we and good to give every soldier a MNVG and a IR laser but unless they and the leaders know to to use and employ them there is a HUGE probability for fatal error.

Body armour and Plates - necessary - I think so in thse environemnt - but if the troops onyl get them in theatre - they have no idea how it effects the rest of their kit and their manuverability.
 Muslce memory the key to battlefield survivability - all skewed do the the chnages int he way kit now sits on the body - reaching for mags that are not there etc.
 Throw the weapon to the shoulder and even instinctive shooting is changed (trust me I shoot a lot and my positions where all skewed with the kit changes)  Heck even my pistol shooting was effected.

I can go on...


----------



## PPCLI Guy (20 Oct 2004)

You are both right of course.  We certainly don't have it right yet.  i was just trying to give a little historical (not hysterical) perspective, thats all.  Things are getting better, and the kit that deployed soldiers have now is truly top-notch.  We are slowly working our collective way out of the 15 year cycle mindset.  

Think of it as praising your not too bright kid when they come home with a C, instead of the normal D.  You can beat him because it isn't an A, or you can acknowledge the improvement.


----------



## Armymedic (20 Oct 2004)

Now here is the difference between personal protective kit, and other types of mission essential kit.

Every deployable soldier currently in a brigade group should be fitted with and wear whenever possible TV Ballistic vest etc, etc. Like Kev B, I'll push further by saying we should shoot our PWTs with body armour. Items like boots should be issued to everyone at the beginning of predeployment tng and once issued the first time, kept thru the remainder of your career.

The idea of a deployment issue of anything worn (except things like undies, tshirts, and socks) is BS.

Soldiers should carry 2 pr medical gloves at all times, in addition to 2 fd dressings, and 2 triangulars.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (20 Oct 2004)

Boots are kept once you aquire them.  The list we have for our TV has 2 field dressings/gloves to be packed in specific pockets as is.  Like you say though train how you would fight.  Every troops should have a compass and know how to use it and every troop should also have NVG's and know how to use them.  But then the gov't drops 1000 ballistic vests in Africa.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (20 Oct 2004)

xxx


----------



## 735_winnipeg (28 Oct 2004)

i have a feeling that it'll get worse for equipments.  my CO told my unit that the gov't is asking for more budget cuts from defense again and that the proposed reg and res forces increase of 5000 and 3000 respectively is on hold until further notice.  my unit is already at bare bones minimum since we have 5 radio trucks, 3 for training and 2 for spare (sometimes used as maintanance or medic truck in field ex).  my CO said that he would like to see at least 8 radio trucks for training since we have 8-9 detachments in my unit and was told we will be getting more but it's taking too long for it to happen.


----------



## NavyGrunt (28 Oct 2004)

ARMYboi69 said:
			
		

> It's really sad that we've got parents in Canada buying their kids Kevlar vests and sending the vests to them in Iraq or Afghanistan because the Canadian Government won't get new ones!!   We need new equipment!



Why are Canadian parents kids in Iraq now? : And secondly I read the stpries you were refering to and it was American national guardsman not Canucks. At least as far as my reading.

Maybe KevinB could shed some light- Have you seen guys not have armour when they are on ROTO and needed it?


----------



## MJP (28 Oct 2004)

ARMYboi69 doesn't know what he is talking about. Everyone here has flak jackets w/ plates.  Another example of someone talking outside his arcs.


----------



## dutchie (28 Oct 2004)

From my limited and (mostly) res perspective, our kit has improved substantially over the last 5-10 years. I'm not referring to just the normal evolution of kit, but it seems to me that the level of quality (if not quantity) has improved drastically when compared to other western armies over the same period. Am I wrong? 

When I joined (97), I had a steel pot, OD combats, the only standard issue boot was the 'Black Cadilac', we had no M203s, no NVGs (as far as I know), no goretex, and so on. Now we have kevlar helmets (long overdue), Cadpat (supposedly the best in the world for it's role), WWB, poly-pro long underwear, a bunch of accesories/add ons for weapons (NV, M203, etc), LAVs, the whole clothe the soldier program, plus a whole bunch I'm forgetting. We're supposedly getting new rucks, load bearing vests for the res (I've heard mixed reviews), more boots, and so on.

Not bad for 7 or 8 years, I say.

But all this does not preclude me from my God given right as a soldier to complain about my kit.


----------



## Armymedic (28 Oct 2004)

ARMYboi69,
Its not the the Army doesn't have the kit required to equip these troops. Two major things went wrong:
1. It didn't have the right kit in right quantities in the right place at the right time and,
2. It lack the means of transporting the kit to the area that needed it quickly.

As for the right kit, it is coming slowly, but due to budgeting (Friggin $$$ again), they can't buy 1+1 for everyone in the CF, nor buy it all at the same time.


----------



## Armymedic (28 Oct 2004)

ARMYboi69 said:
			
		

> My point wasn't that we don't have it it was that the soldiers that need them don't have them to use!
> 
> What good is a Flak Jacket just sitting in a warehouse???




Exactly, and my post points out why.  The CF has them, just not enough in Gagetown where they were needed.


----------



## KevinB (29 Oct 2004)

Sadly we do not have enough Gen3 Vests and Plates for our 3 Operational Brigades...

Nor do we have enough other mission essential equiptment.

Fine is you base your army on only work 1/3 of the time (really that is the bare basic that we can only USE a 1/3 of our army at a time)

 If I were a civilain manager and I coudl not use 2/3 of my employees for I did not have equipment for them to use - I'd fire them or buy more equiptment - cause you are not gettignmuch value added from the nonoperative 2/3rds

 In an ARMY having only 1/3 good to go - I'd say that was criminal.

What would happen if a NATIONAL Crisis came up (I say NATIONAL because apparently we are too stupid to view the GWOT as a NATION crisis)  -- When the next terror attack blows up a Canadian Port WHAT then?


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (29 Oct 2004)

This is what will happen if there is a major terrorist act.  A collective hands to the face (see Home Alone) followed by a call to the gov't to deploy its military.  Military has its hands ties and shows the exact extent of how bad things are.  Next election a new gov't with the promise of more care for the military and gov't.  Gov't gets in and takes more money away from the military.


----------



## Lost_Warrior (29 Oct 2004)

The Liberals will never leave office IMO.  Not in my lifetime anyway.  The government has done such a good job at scaring our population0 into thinking that the COnservatives will make Canada look more like the "evil imperialist Americans" which they think contradicts with the apparent "lovey dovey peacekeeper of the world" view most Canadians have of themselves, that Canadians will most likely never vote for a Conservitave government.

I know it came close in the last election, but close isn't good enough.  All the Liberals have to do is start the compare game with the Conservitaves and the US and Canadians get all huffy puffy...."durr!  We dont need a military!  We're not that kind of country!  Let the US protect us"

It's a catch 22...


----------



## eliteboris (2 Nov 2004)

Alot of people in my unit including myself are still wearing OD (Mopad) Combats, we won't be getting the LBV's for a while yet. kinda sad.


----------



## devil39 (2 Nov 2004)

eliteboris said:
			
		

> Alot of people in my unit including myself are still wearing OD (Mopad) Combats, we won't be getting the LBV's for a while yet. kinda sad.



Don't feel sad "eliteboris".  I've had 3 different sets of webbing in my day, *AND* the TV, and personally I will stick with the current issued webbing until they order me to turn it it.  At which point I may lose my webbing and pay for it, to ensure I have it when I have to go to a war.  The current webbing, if you tie the individual pouches down to your web belt, and tape the Velcro down, is a great piece of load bearing kit.


----------



## KevinB (4 Nov 2004)

I did my basic with 1951   webbing - I could fir 20 FN C1A1 mags in my bren gun pouches (10 in each) [ask me how I know - I borrowed mags from guys in my section just to see how many the pouch would swallow before I could actually reach some...]

Then I got parts of the 64 webbing - but just parts - and a month later I got the '82 pattern.  I got the 'combat shirt with the sleves cut off' vest briefly for an op we were slated for, and a year ago got the TV.

 While the 82 pattern is not the pinnacle of humman engineering it is much better than the TV.


----------



## Bartok5 (5 Nov 2004)

I must agree with KevinB,

I was offered the Bosnia-era "jean jacket" LBV for my own Afghan deployment and tried it out during pre-deployment training.   This, despite my previous abject disgust with that particular piece of kit during my 1997 Roto 0 Palladium tour.   If at first you don't succeed...don't be stupid enough to try again.   Anyhow, wearing the "jean jacket" over the Gen 3 vest with plates, I found that the mags were situated far too high to access and (worse) they direcetly interfered with the butt-stock placement of my rifle.   End of story for that sorry piece of shite.

I deployed on combat operations with the 82 pattern webbing, and I had zero complaints.   With a large-size belt, it held everything that I needed on my fighting order - to include 8 mags (4 per side).   The other 2 mags were on my weapon in the form of a mag in the well and another sitting alongside in a "Redi-Mag" attachment.   The rest of my belt-kit was pretty standard.   I found that sans ruck, I could live quite well out of my 82 pattern gear with an assault pack.   In my humble view, there is nothing wrong with the 82 pattern web-gear assuming that the savvy user knows how to adapt it with zap-ties for the pouches, etc.   It is good stuff.   In that regard, I thoroughly echo Devil39's contention in another thread.   Decent web-gear is miles ahead of a poorly considered "fancy" vest.   It doesn't hurt that we share common practical experience on fairly recent operations, but the fact remains that those who have tried all of the alternatives tend to be continued supporters of the web-gear over the non-modular (and non-functional) Tac-Vest....

The ideal answer lies beyond what we have institutionally acquired.   Unfortunately, what the Army fields is generally 5 to 10 years behind current operational experience and requirements.   Viewed in that context, the Tac Vest is a good piece of kit.   It would have served us very well 7 years ago doing my purely "Peace Support" skit in Bosnia.   Nowadays however, where we need to deploy "combat ready" it is sadly lacking in terms of ammo capacity and adaptability (read, modularity).   Just what is an M-203 gunner supposed to do?     

The answer of course, is to buy "off the shelf" and simply get on with procuring what the troops want and need.   Will that actually happen?   I have my doubts.   In the interim untill we get it right, don't even think about taking away my suitably modified 82 pattern web-gear.   It has, and will continue to do the job just fine.....


----------



## devil39 (5 Nov 2004)

And when you don't have a Gen 3 you wear the jean jacket if you want plates.

82 does fine and has served me well also, especially when you tie down or zapstrap each pouch and gun tape the velcro.   I would choose that configuration over the TV or the Lunch Bearing Vest anyday.


----------



## excoelis (5 Nov 2004)

My two cents (although probably flogging the horse by now).

We also just reconfirmed on PPF that webgear is still the way to go for field ops in all types of terrain.  Carrying heavy rucks for sustained ops, helo casting, S/L para, MFP, blue water amphib and riverine ops, mountain ops, etc....  Webgear was always the best, or ONLY, viable solution to effective load bearing of kit.  I will not get into the reasoning, as most who are in the know or NEED to know, can relate.

Cheers.


----------



## KevinB (7 Nov 2004)

excoelis - as far as issued kit I will agree.

 However looking at a certain unit and units down south that conduct those ops regularily they have adopted integrated vest systems 
I bought a RAV after exposure to it with abuddy who had it issued...

Paraclete RAV
Dan (a SF medic with 1SFG 1bn Okinawa) with RAV






 US SFOD-D Assaulter in IRAQ with one of those funny numbered TF's





USMC pers wearing RAV and Eagle FSBE II






If I had the option to mod the Gen 3 vest to MOLLE/PALS I would do it in a heart beat that would give the troops a modular system w/o the requirment to buy a new system to replace the POS TV...


----------



## excoelis (7 Nov 2004)

Kev,

Which is the heart of the issue really, isn't it?

Modular = versatile.

Versatile = useful for more types of soldiers on more types of ops.

I'm all for a TV if it can be tailored during battle procedure to suit the type of op, different load requirement, etc......

I've still got an old chest rig that one of the guys from 2 CDO made for me back in the day........ ;D


----------



## KevinB (8 Nov 2004)

You got it.


----------

