# QOR Airborne Coy & proposed Airborne Battalion



## cameron (5 Mar 2006)

I know it may be a bit early to ask, but does anybody know what will happen to the QOR's Airborne Coy when the Conservatives' proposed new Airborne Battalion is formed?  Will the company become a reserve component within the Airborne Battalion, similar to the TA battalion in the British Army's Parachute Regiment?  :threat:


----------



## Michael OLeary (5 Mar 2006)

Considering that there's been no discussion on this beyond the vague statements during the election, it may be a little premature to speculate.  Why don't we wait and see if it actually happens before we start second guessing organizational changes.


----------



## Trinity (5 Mar 2006)

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> before we start second guessing organizational changes.



What...  not speculate? 

And ruin our only past time?


----------



## geo (5 Mar 2006)

QOR para capacity was "outside" of the CAR when the CAR was still around... no reason it would be any different in the futur.
QORs might provide augmentees at one point of another but..... that would be "it"


----------



## AFireinside13 (5 Mar 2006)

Well I hope nothing happens to us, I am trying to get on the fall jump course  :'( But it is the government, if anything WAS to change, it would take 10 years  >



			
				Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> Considering that there's been no discussion on this beyond the vague statements during the election, it may be a little premature to speculate.  Why don't we wait and see if it actually happens before we start second guessing organizational changes.



Like he said.....


----------



## Michael Dorosh (5 Mar 2006)

geo said:
			
		

> QOR para capacity was "outside" of the CAR when the CAR was still around... no reason it would be any different in the futur.
> QORs might provide augmentees at one point of another but..... that would be "it"



Didn't the Loyal Edmontons also have a jump company in years past - in the same situation as the QOR?


----------



## MikeL (5 Mar 2006)

The Loyal Eddies had a jump coy/plt? I thought the Westies were the only Reserve unit out west to have a jump coy/plt when the CAR was around.


----------



## geo (5 Mar 2006)

Each area had a Reserva Para Coy.
Pacific - Westies
Western - Loyal Eddies
Central - QOR
East (QC) - R du Sag or R de Chaud (one or the other)...
Atlantic - ?????

After the CAR went down, the frequency of Para courses went down considerably.
Serials were few and far between
Budgets were chopped and Para Courses aren't cheap
end result - units had trouble maintaining a viable sub, sub, sub components...

Not sure, think QOR is the only one to have managed to eek out it's survival.


----------



## Gunner (5 Mar 2006)

QOR maintained a jump (not airborne) capability in order to provide assistance to CPC.  No tactical reason or capability requirement was involved in the decision.


----------



## davidk (5 Mar 2006)

geo said:
			
		

> Each area had a Reserva Para Coy.
> Pacific - Westies
> Western - Loyal Eddies
> Central - QOR
> ...



That would be the R de Sag with the Reserve Para Coy.


----------



## geo (5 Mar 2006)

.... defined as a Coy.... but not fielding such a size.
Also, the Jump capacity is not taken into account in LFQA capabilities.


----------



## cameron (5 Mar 2006)

Thanks for the replies, I found the discussion to be really educational.  I didn't even know that QOR and certain other reserve units had their own separate para capability back when the CAR existed, interesting.  One question though, this is particularly directed at 'Gunner'.  Whats the difference between a jump capability and an airborne capability?


----------



## Ed Gagnon (5 Mar 2006)

In my opinion, a jump capability is a group of soldiers who can go out for cas para on a regular basis.  An airborne capability is a unit that can contribute an airborne sub-unit or sub-sub-unit to an airborne operation.  The two are quite different.

As for the rebirth of the Airborne Regiment or its reincarnation, I will believe it when I see it!  I suspect that this whole idea came from MP Gallant who surrounded herself with ex-airborne guys who convinced her that the airborne regiment should be brought back.  Now that the Conservatives have been elected, this proposal has again been mentioned with the unit being located in Trenton which I don't think makes any sense.   I see the major challenge would be just finding the troops to man such a unit not to mention the funds.

Time will tell.  

Ed Gagnon
Petawawa


----------



## Gunner (5 Mar 2006)

> One question though, this is particularly directed at 'Gunner'.  Whats the difference between a jump capability and an airborne capability?



The three parachute companies inherent in the three light infantry battalions are there to maintain a *jump capability * within the army, not provide a *tactical capability * for the army. 

An airborne unit (battalion or otherwise) is structured to fight as an independent unit for limited operations.


----------



## geo (5 Mar 2006)

Yup.... the airborne soldier is a special breed
A shock troop that is deployed to surprise and create havoc in the rear of ennemy lines.
Definitively not a "light fighter" but, due to the inherent limitations of the equipment they can carry, cannot be expected to be roughing things up for any length of time.

They aren't Light infantry (can't stress that enough)


----------



## Razic (6 Mar 2006)

the QOR does white wing training..


----------



## MikeL (6 Mar 2006)

White Wing Training?


Once a person passes the Basic Airborne Course they earn their wings(red maple leaf) if they go into a jump position(like in a Jump Coy) they replace the red maple leaf wings with white maple leaf wings.


----------



## vonGarvin (6 Mar 2006)

geo said:
			
		

> Yup.... the airborne soldier is a special breed
> A shock troop that is deployed to surprise and create havoc in the rear of ennemy lines.
> Definitively not a "light fighter" but, due to the inherent limitations of the equipment they can carry, cannot be expected to be roughing things up for any length of time.
> They aren't Light infantry (can't stress that enough)


And, apparently, if they are surrounded, that's how they best perform
(Sorry, "Band of Brothers" on my mind)
Cheers


----------



## Michael Dorosh (6 Mar 2006)

vonGarvin said:
			
		

> And, apparently, if they are surrounded, that's how they best perform
> (Sorry, "Band of Brothers" on my mind)
> Cheers



Tell that to the survivors of Arnhem...all twenty percent of them.  :


----------



## vonGarvin (6 Mar 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> Tell that to the survivors of Arnhem...all twenty percent of them.  :


Hey.  No disprespect intended.
Peace


----------



## Michael Dorosh (6 Mar 2006)

vonGarvin said:
			
		

> Hey.  No disprespect intended.
> Peace



No skin off my nose, I wasn't one of them.  At the risk of speaking out of turn, I am sure they would have preferred not to have been surrounded for over a week.   If you get my meaning.  Or Sean Connery's.  "Two days you said...we've been here nine!"


----------



## vonGarvin (6 Mar 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> No skin off my nose, I wasn't one of them.  At the risk of speaking out of turn, I am sure they would have preferred not to have been surrounded for over a week.   If you get my meaning.  Or Sean Connery's.  "Two days you said...we've been here nine!"


For star power, that movie is not often equalled.  The Longest Day comes to mind.  Special effects aside, I think that A Bridge Too Far is an excellent movie.
Now, to keep this post on track ;-)
The CSOR is, I believe, going to have a jump capability.  I just inferred that from the prerequisite of a jump course OR willingness to take a jump course.  Also, given the entire force generation structure, I imagine that the reserves will have a "trickle down" capability.  Makes sense to have the reserve units that have held these jump positions to keep doing that (Status Quo).  I mean, why take away from QOR and give to say the HAST PER? (even though they are virtually co-located with CPC in Trenton).  Though, as a former serving Plough Jockey (once a Plough Jockey, always a Plough Jockey!), I'd like to see The Regiment get a beret at least close in colour to the scarlet berets they used to wear 

PARATUS/PRO PATRIA


----------



## geo (6 Mar 2006)

(unfortunately, the MPs have spoiled it for us - the Cherry berries aren't what they used to be)


----------



## GO!!! (6 Mar 2006)

MikeL said:
			
		

> White Wing Training?
> 
> 
> Once a person passes the Basic Parachutist Airborne Course they earn their wings(red maple leaf) if they go into a jump position(like in a Jump Coy) they replace the red maple leaf wings with white maple leaf wings.



Could you elaborate on "White Wing Training"? 

Apparently, I've been missing out...


----------



## Razic (7 Mar 2006)

maybe the terminology was wrong, but the QOR jumpers do a number of different training exercises to earn their white wings, IE. LD/DZ drills (tactical), hand to hand, explosives, full equipment night winter etc, things like this, I meant to say that they dont just do bare ass jumps to keep the pilots current, they do training for airborne operations, based around 3RCR doctrine, they have to complete a number of different things before they are given their white wings.


----------



## geo (7 Mar 2006)

???? oy vey!!
Explosive training?... to infantry???
have some doubts on that subject...


----------



## the 48th regulator (7 Mar 2006)

t-flashes and arty sims?

dileas

tess


----------



## geo (7 Mar 2006)

(that's what I was thinking)


----------



## Fishbone Jones (7 Mar 2006)

geo said:
			
		

> ???? oy vey!!
> Explosive training?... to infantry???
> have some doubts on that subject...



Why not? I've done basic demo in the Armoured Corps a number of times in my career. The last being about five years ago. Even used to teach it at one time, until it became pervue of the Engineers.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (7 Mar 2006)

Razic said:
			
		

> maybe the terminology was wrong, but the QOR jumpers do a number of different training exercises to earn their white wings, IE. LD/DZ drills (tactical), hand to hand, explosives, full equipment night winter etc, things like this, I meant to say that they dont just do bare *** jumps to keep the pilots current, they do training for airborne operations, based around 3RCR doctrine, they have to complete a number of different things before they are given their white wings.



Should you not as a menber of said regiment know what the proper terminology is, especially after being a member for 2 years.....


----------



## Razic (7 Mar 2006)

Im not a jumper yet and this info was given to me from a friend in the unit and others who told me about the all the things they had to complete before they were given their white wings.


----------



## geo (7 Mar 2006)

(you should temper what "war stories" :warstory: you're told.)
There's a grain of truth BUT............


----------



## Razic (7 Mar 2006)

I don't understand why this is so unbelieveable. moving on, I dont think the QOR jump tasking will be affected by a new airborne battalion unless they just use them to keep the pilots current and its deemed no longer relavant for us to have the tasking.  But with CSOR coming into to play how many of you guys think this airborne idea will be scrapped anyways?


----------



## MikeL (7 Mar 2006)

Razic, as it stands right now there is NO official word on a Airborne BN, it was mentioned by someone months ago an at the time they probably never knew about CSOR.

I highly doubt Air Force pilots need QOR jumpers to keep them current...


----------



## Razic (7 Mar 2006)

thats the point of the qor jump tasking to keep the pilots current for dropping dudes.


----------



## GO!!! (7 Mar 2006)

Razic,

While some military members have been guilty at some point in the past of inflating the "hardcore-ness" of their training, you have been fed a load of crap. The ONLY training that ever qualified as what could be construed as "white wing trg" was the Airborne Indoctrination course. This was a test of fitness, with a long (and fast) weighted march (and shoot?) and a test of regimental history. (I may be forgetting something)

This has'nt been done since the Airborne Regiment was disbanded, so you might find a few old dogs who could tell you about it. If you are being told that there is some sort of checklist of training that they must pass, they are just plain wrong. 

As has been discussed before, you wear white wings if;

1) You are basic para qualified
2) You serve in an authorised parachute position

Once you have served in a Para role for two years, and ask to leave, you may keep them for life. If you have to leave, through no fault of your own (injury, posting etc.) you may keep them.

If you refuse to jump, you lose 'em, if you ask to leave in less than two years, ditto.

If members of your unit are feeding you this crap (hand to hand, trg with explosives etc.) *ask them to show you in writing.*

The other stuff (LZ/DZ, end stick rollups, DZORV drills etc.) are taught at unit level, usually in a walkthrough-talkthrough immediately before an exercise.


----------



## Razic (8 Mar 2006)

Hey Go!!!, as soon as possible ill talk to the para ops guy in my unit and i'll ask him what is exactly needed to be given white wings in our unit, may it be possible that because the QOR does not have a dedicated jump company (our maroon hats are slotted in with the leg platoons)that we may have different conditions for the white wings? as for the hand to hand class and explosives ive seen this first hand, and for the explosives one or two engineers come down to do a lecture or two, probably nothing too in depth, definitly not live, but we have dummy satchel charges in our QM aswell.  Now you've got me really interested because I know you're very experienced on this topic so any questions you raise I think should go and find out about.


----------



## geo (8 Mar 2006)

Razic,
Hate to busrst your baloon but regulations on white leaf jump wings is not a unit "quiff" thing. Common throughout the CF. 
Ahhh.... Engineers are present for lectures & your boys walk around with dummy satchel charges -  now that makes more sense..... though I am still skeptical that  Infantry types are permitted to fire charges (note - I am not trying to slag infantry - did many years as an infanteer before seeing the light).


----------



## dangerboy (8 Mar 2006)

From Geo


> though I am still skeptical that  Infantry types are permitted to fire charges



Just so you are aware there is the Basic Demolition Course which quals all arms to fire non-electric charges. The course covers the basics of simple charges and using manufactured charges (Bangalores, beehives destructors).


----------



## the 48th regulator (8 Mar 2006)

dangerboy said:
			
		

> From Geo
> Just so you are aware there is the Basic Demolition Course which quals all arms to fire non-electric charges. The course covers the basics of simple charges and using manufactured charges (Bangalores, beehives destructors).



Well I hope you show me some of that this summer at my house,  I have that brush in the backyard to get rid of, remember?

dileas

tess


----------



## Mr_Bund (10 Mar 2006)

Firing basic charges was part of my AIC course, and, I was told, one had to complete 2 'exercises' with the CAR (Involving jumps of course) to earn your white wings in the QOR. Of course, this was 20 years ago.
"The man with a 2, is a friend to you"


----------



## 2 Cdo (10 Mar 2006)

> though I am still skeptical that  Infantry types are permitted to fire charges (note - I am not trying to slag infantry - did many years as an infanteer before seeing the light).



Geo, basic pioneer, at least up to a couple of years ago and advanced pioneer as well. Since losing our Pioneer platoons we seem to have lost these courses also. 

To reiterate what others have said, there has not been a "white wing" course (AIC) since the disbandment of the Airborne Regiment. In order to qualify to wear white wings one must be in a para position, end of story!


----------



## geo (11 Mar 2006)

2CDO and all... 
I understand and agree that basic demo course qualifies all arms trades to fire charges - my point was that this is not an "at large" qualification and capability in the CF at this time.

Pioneers had a lot of the basic Sapper capabilities - to the chagrin of all.... they are no more......

we will remember them!

Chimo!


----------



## 4CDO PARA (31 Mar 2006)

I know I have posted on this topic before, but since it has come up again here goes...
1- The QOR was tasked to provide a platoon to augment 3CDO 
2- That tasking was later increased to a Company size augmentation to 3CDO
3- After the disbandment of the Cdn AB Rgt., the unit was tasked to provide 66 jumpers to the CPC
4- The potential for future similar taskings with CSOR or the new "Airborne Battalion" has not been discussed. Speculate away!

5- The QOR Para Coy DOES do what we refer to as "White Wings Training", and Razic is pretty much correct.  This training program is _*unit specific,*_ borrowing from the old AIC and current 3RCR Para Coy training standards. First of all, the jumper must hold a hard para posn with the QOR.The checklist maintained by the unit that must be completed before that Jumper can qualify for his white wings WITH THE QOR is as follows; 
- Para PT test - EPL and BFT
- Basic Swim Test
- Annual Para Refresher
- Rigging of Standard and Non-Standard Loads
- DZ Drills
- Exercise Jump
- TOET's (9mm Pistol / C7 / C7 PWT3 / C9 / C6 / 84mm / 60mm / M72 / M203)
- Unarmed Combat
- Navigation refresher
- Para related First-Aid
- Comms Refresher
- Basic Demolitions ( since its availability is almost nil now, we usually get a familiarization from the sappers instead and are signed off )
- Para History
- Minimum Jump Attendance (75%)

As you can plainly see, the unit takes the wearing of white wings and the maroon beret very seriously. Whereas the 3 Reg Force Para Coys present white wings ( in absence of a current version of the AIC ) to their jumpers in hard para posns ( as commented on by Go! ), because our Para Coy is a shadow Coy and not a primary tasking, and also due to the nature of our current tasking with CPC, these kind of pre-requisites are necessary in order for us to continue to maintain our Airborne skills and  capability ( the difference already illustrated in this thread ). We use the white wings training as a way to maintain the Airborne skills and not slide into the "cas para" only role. It is for this purpose that the QOR uphold this standard for our members that want to wear the white wings of a Paratrooper. 

I can not re-emphasize this enough, talk about what you KNOW. If you are not a member of the unit or sub unit in question, you probably ought not to comment on what they do and do not do. Better to just ask. I would not dream of commenting on how 3VP Para Coy does its business, regardless of what I might have heard.


----------



## Gunner (31 Mar 2006)

Most of what you list is simply normal refresher training conducted by most reserve units.  A more definitive authority on parachute training and qualification badges is LFCO 22-2:



> The Parachute Badge with white maple leaf will be worn by parachutists who have received Paratroop Allowance in a Designated Parachute Position:
> 
> (1)	The Canadian Parachute Centre;
> 
> ...



Sounds like you get to wear white wings once you are in a parachute designated position at CPC, within a Para Coy or within the QOR.



> FORFEITURE OF THE PARACHUTE BADGE
> 
> 15.	In accordance with the Reference B a qualified parachutist will normally forfeit the parachute badge when:
> 
> ...



No "white wings training" mentioned as being required to qualify for the badge.


----------



## Michael Dorosh (31 Mar 2006)

Gunner said:
			
		

> No "white wings training" mentioned as being required to qualify for the badge.



What I am getting from his posting is that he is saying is that the unit itself is holding soldiers to a higher standard than the cited references in order for them to qualify to wear the white wings within the QOR.


----------



## 4CDO PARA (31 Mar 2006)

BINGO! You nailed it. That is what I was trying to communicate with the bold and italic "this training is _*unit specific*_"


----------



## Gunner (31 Mar 2006)

Thanks for that Michael, but we have an army standard, not individual unt standards.  

The QOR should be using the jump role as a key attraction and retention issue, but until someone shows me differently, it has no role to provide nor train as an "airborne coy".  

We will see what happens with CF transformation and the potenial stand up of Reserve SOF capabilities.


----------



## 4CDO PARA (31 Mar 2006)

Nothing has been mentioned officially, but as the only reserve unit with a current Para tasking, we are of course keeping our fingers crossed for a role in any expansion of the Parachute capabilities in the CF. I know that it will certainly be a topic of discussion at the upcoming RCMI Airborne luncheon next month. Watch and Shoot.


----------

