# Deployment duration



## Ex-Dragoon (11 Nov 2005)

It is understandable that many people interested in joining the CF are curious on how long they could be away for so as they may help prepare their loved ones for the inevitable separation. Folks there is no easy formula to say how long you will be away. Depending on the reasons of your deployment, your trade, and what is the situation you could be gone for awhile. So unless you have an actual end date for your deployment I would not sweat it. Even then you may be delayed, so until your back in your loved ones arms after a job well done, just relax and do your country, your unit and yourself proud by doing what your suppose to be doing.


----------



## jmackenzie_15 (14 Nov 2005)

And if you feel like complaining or saying something, think of the yankees in Iraq, and ask them how long their deployments are, and what fun stop loss is.


----------



## Hollywog (16 Nov 2005)

Well the government makes too many comitments for the number of troops it has.

Was it Timor they had to cancel?


Troops who served in WWII spent less time overseas than some canadian troops will serving now.

Something wrong with that, were at peace.


----------



## buzgo (16 Nov 2005)

Hollywog said:
			
		

> Well the government makes too many comitments for the number of troops it has.
> 
> Was it Timor they had to cancel?
> 
> ...



Umm. IIRC, there were guys that left home in 1939 and didn't come back until 1946.... Thats a pretty long 'tour'. (correct me if I'm wrong Mr. Dorosh!)


----------



## jmackenzie_15 (16 Nov 2005)

Hollywog said:
			
		

> Well the government makes too many comitments for the number of troops it has.
> 
> Was it Timor they had to cancel?
> 
> ...



What the hell are you talking about ? yeah, guys that left in 39 didnt come back untill the war was over. 

Some guys spent less time in ww2 than troops spend in afghanistan do today, because they were sent home. They were no longer alive and could not be used as soldiers to the army. Yeah, thats one way to end a tour.


----------



## BSmith12 (16 Nov 2005)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're on a tour until:
A) You die
B) You are relieved by another soldier
C) The conflict ends
Time spent on duty cannot be measured, as all conflicts are different.
We can only hope that all goes well for our troops as well as those who we serve with (Britain & the U.S.)


----------



## jmackenzie_15 (16 Nov 2005)

2332Piper said:
			
		

> We are?



Yeah! didnt you hear? All those terrorist attacks and threats, the tours overseas and the thousands and thousands dead are all just an elaborate scheme and illusion concocted by Ashton Kutcher! He's pulling his biggest Punk'd episode ever! Ashton punks the planet!

hollywog, how exactly would you define peace again ? I dont consider somebody jumping on the hood of an Iltis jeep on patrol in Kabul with two mortar rounds strapped to his chest, and blowing himself up, something that happens in a time of peace.

Again, this is a perfect example of the ignorance the public has on what our military is involved in, and why nobody really cares enough to do anything, budget cut after budget cut. I said in a previous thread, ironically, a terrorist attack in downtown toronto would be the best thing to happen to the forces in a while. The public would be out for blood, and be totally dumbfounded and wonder why it happened, and why our military is in such rough shape as it is.


----------



## aesop081 (16 Nov 2005)

Hollywog said:
			
		

> Well the government makes too many comitments for the number of troops it has.



i'll give you that one



> Was it Timor they had to cancel?



NO....Troops went to East Timor.   Guess you dont follow current events much...or know anything about the CF do you ?



> Troops who served in WWII spent less time overseas than some canadian troops will serving now.



Guess you are not into history either.   Put the nintendo down...you might learn something


> Something wrong with that, were at peace.



We are ?   Could have fooled me   :


----------



## Gayson (17 Nov 2005)

signalsguy said:
			
		

> Umm. IIRC, there were guys that left home in 1939 and didn't come back until 1946.... Thats a pretty long 'tour'. (correct me if I'm wrong Mr. Dorosh!)



You are correct.  My grandfather was overseas with the field ambulance from Thunder Bay from 1939 to the end of 1945.


----------



## Pte. Bloggins (17 Nov 2005)

jmackenzie_15 said:
			
		

> ironically, a terrorist attack in downtown toronto would be the best thing to happen to the forces in a while.



Be careful what you wish for, my friend...


----------



## Sharpey (17 Nov 2005)

From knowing people that have been on tour, typically tours seem to be 6 months actual deployment over seas (I've heard of 4 as well in one case). This of course is less leave time (if any) and does not include work up time. I do not know from personal experience, but I will find out soon enough.


----------



## jmackenzie_15 (17 Nov 2005)

Cpl Bloggins said:
			
		

> Be careful what you wish for, my friend...



It's hardly a wish of mine. I was just pointing out, if that were to happen, you would see a quick turnaround in regards to public opinion and government spending. Of course I could be wrong, but either way it would still suck. 

Wishing for it not to happen would also be irrellevant... its just a matter of time and we all know it. Lovely world we live in sometimes.


----------



## Pte. Bloggins (17 Nov 2005)

True enough. What a great time to live in downtown Toronto!


----------



## Doug VT (17 Nov 2005)

Slightly off topic, but since reference was made to the "incident", I want to clarify something.  "Somebody" didn't jump on the hood of and Iltis jeep and blow himself up.  "Somebody" was +/- a meter off the front passenger side of the Iltis (the 2nd one) before he chose to blow himself up.  Only one mortar bomb detonated.  He did not jump on the front of the jeep, or the back of the jeep, which many believe.  Don't you think the injuries and the outcome could have been much worse if this were the case?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (17 Nov 2005)

Sorry to inject here Doug, but anyone who wishes to post that "they heard or read different", well don't,

....he knows.


----------



## 3rd Horseman (18 Nov 2005)

The Air force had a good idea when they were trying to limit tours to 90 days
- you get the gong,
- you can leave your job and the unit wont miss ya for 90
-  the family probably needs a 90 day break from ya.
- You could do more tours because 90 days is not that bad no need for retraining if we rotated ever 18 months on 90 day tours. Back in the 80s I can remember 40 to 70 day exercises. 6 months she knocks the stuffing out of your life ever 2 to 3 years. There is somthing to be said for the 90 day cycle.


----------



## armyvern (19 Nov 2005)

3rd Horseman said:
			
		

> The Air force had a good idea when they were trying to limit tours to 90 days
> - you get the gong,
> - you can leave your job and the unit wont miss ya for 90
> -   the family probably needs a 90 day break from ya.
> - You could do more tours because 90 days is not that bad no need for retraining if we rotated ever 18 months on 90 day tours. Back in the 80s I can remember 40 to 70 day exercises. 6 months she knocks the stuffing out of your life ever 2 to 3 years. There is somthing to be said for the 90 day cycle.


If you are talking about the 56 day rotos brought about by the AF side during Op Apollo, one of the main reasons for this occurance was to enable the Aircrews/groundcrews to remain current in others aspects of their duties. So even while at home during their 56 days out of theatre, the guys usually weren't at work but were out getting all their other quals made current. You think their Units weren't missing them? I'd guess again here. I'd personally rather go for the full 6 and get it over with all at once, although as a Sup Tech, I've found my typical tour length to be 6.5 to 7 months long.  
Sailors, if their ship happens to pull a NATO are often at sea 7-9 months per year. This used to be the norm for them but has slackened off in recent years and usually only occurs should they become part of the NATO fleet these days. I guess any job or task in the military has the ability to knock the stuffing out of you without having the proper resources and equipment. That is key.

As for 'Doktor Hollywog' and all his beaucuop d'experience...I've got news for him. My husband once came home from a tour to a 1 month old he'd never met. My grandfather once came home from a war to find a 5 year old he'd never met. How does he explain this little mystery? And please remind me on Monday, to tell my Cpl that he must remove his East Timor medal from his inventory, as apparently the CF didn't go there!!


----------



## Jungle (19 Nov 2005)

Hollywog said:
			
		

> Was it Timor they had to cancel?


They should have told me... I guess the 5 months I spent there with INTERFET don't count ??


----------



## Ralph (20 Nov 2005)

A slight hijack, but as the subject is "deployment duration"...
My WO, who only rarely lies to me, swears tour lengths are all being lengthened to a full year. I'm sure there's at least a grain of truth to this - anybody know who it's going to affect?
Cheers.


----------



## Sandbag (20 Nov 2005)

For the Army, tour lengths are not being extended to one year, though many options are being studied to try to relieve operational stress/deployment pressures and this is one option.  This, IMO, is what your WO probably heard about and rumour nets being as fast as they are, this flew.  Could tour lengths be extended or shortened? Of course as some of the people in Kabul found out.  Are tours longer than 6 months? Of course as many operations have found out, (and I believe almost all).  For example, the Bde HQ going in on TF 1-06 will be approximately a 9 month deployment.  If you are on, or going on a tour, then your chain of comd willl/should know your deployment and redeployment dates.
Sandbag


----------



## ZipperHead (20 Nov 2005)

I think there are problems with "assuming" how long a deployment is going to be, and then having that hardwired into your brain. When my wife was on Op Apollo, I was the spouse who stayed behind and attended the rear party family briefings. I heard on more than a few occasions the wives saying things like "He HAS to be home in 6 months. When he went to Cyprus/Bosnia/Kosovo/etc, it was only 6 months" I rained on one of the wife's parade when I told her that they could be there as long as they need to be, because if the gov't decided on, say a 9 month deployment, they probably wouldn't have a second roto for just 3 months. Boy, was she thrilled with my dose of reality.

My tour to Bosnia in 00-01 was 7 months long, mainly because "they" wanted to gradually extend the tours so that they started/ended in Apr/Sept for money/planning issued, as the rumour went. Whatever the reason, we were there (on average) for 7 months.

The 6 month long tour is what everybody should get out of their head as the "norm": if you are gone for 2 months, 6 months, 9 months or 5 years, that's part of being in the military. I have a service wife and 3 kids, and I have resigned myself to the fact that it could happen. Odds are that the deployments will likely stay 6 months, but don't program yourself to think that's as long (or as short) as they will ever be. 

Oh yeah Hollywog, if "we" aren't at war, put a fake suicide bomber vest on, walk up to one of the main gates of one of our camps overseas, and see how you make out. The soldiers there that aren't at war will shoot holes into your argument (literally).

Al


----------



## wack-in-iraq (20 Nov 2005)

Year long tours are a bad idea, the main operational reason is complacency. the troops i deal with on a regular basis over here admit to it, and i can see a big change in the group that got here around the time i did, especially the guys on gate duty. when they first arrived they were aleart, keen and observant, now 11 months later i can see a big difference, most notably at the gates where there is not a lot of action. of course if you are going through the airport road checkpoint thats a different story.... those guys are on their toes 24 - 7. personally i think 6 months its the ideal length, just enough time to be operationally effective, but not long enough to come overly complacent.

To the clown who hinted that an attack in toronto would be a good thing for the CF, you are an idiot, dont even joke about that stuff.


----------



## HADES 1962 (20 Nov 2005)

From my little experience in the military all of my deployments to UN or NATO lead overseas have been 6 months; yes I also remember exercises in the 80's being in the 50-70 days ranges.
Hell even gun camps on my own base being 1 month.
The length of deployments will no doubt depend on the foreign policy of the current government.

Quote "a terrorist attack in downtown Toronto would be the best thing to happen to the forces in a while" end quote.
Is at this time a pretty dumb statement, if you ask me.

Quote "Wishing for it not to happen would also be irrelevant... its just a matter of time and we all know it" end quote.
Again a pretty interesting statement would the person who stated this like to enlighten the remainder of Canada with its just a matter of time? Do you have an inside scoop?


----------



## kirkmell (12 Dec 2005)

My wife is thinkis about joining the CF.  I was just wondering....
- How likely is it that she will get sent overseas?
- What is the earliest in her CF career that she CAN be sent overseas?
- How long on average is an overseas deployment?
- When she is overseas what kind of contact will she have with myself and our childeren?
- Can she be sent overseas right after basic training?

Thank you to whomever answers these questions!
I (we)look forward to reading the answers.  And getting the extra help in deciding if this is the best move for our family


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (12 Dec 2005)

1.  It depends on her trade 
2.  It depends on her trade
3.  About 6 months.  It can be more it can be less
4.  There are phones, email, personal mail
5.  Most likely not as she won't have a trade after basic.


----------



## Hansol (12 Dec 2005)

that being said, I have a question regarding over-seas as well:

I'm in an arguement with my friend. He is saying that I won't get posted to afghanistan or anywhere for at least about 2 years, just because. I says that after I've completed my initial training and have been posted to my unit, that if my unit gets told they are shipping out, then I will be going with them too. (I'venlisted in the infantry)

Can anyone clear this up for me? Cheers -Cameron


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (12 Dec 2005)

If you get the infantry and your BN is going oversea's there is a chance you will go.  If you went say mat tech they won't normally bother until you've done your 5's.


----------



## D-n-A (12 Dec 2005)

Hansol
Theres quite a few no hook privates overseas(Infantry, some CSS trades, etc). If your company is going overseas, so will you, juat aslong as you meet the requirements to go(training, medical, phsyical, etc) you will get to go overseas.

Don't listen to people who have never been in the military an have no idea wtf they are talking about.


----------



## kirkmell (12 Dec 2005)

CFL, or anyone else

Thanks for your answers she is thinking about going in for construction tech or refrigeration something.

what are the possabilities of oversea deployment with these trades?

Also what are the best ocupation for her to apply for if she wants to get a job offer right away?

And with the trades mentioned above about how long (estimate) will she have to wait for a job offer?

Thanks again


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (12 Dec 2005)

the question about time getting a job offer is anyone's guess.
the people that can answer these questions the best or the recruitment pers


----------



## GO!!! (13 Dec 2005)

Hansol said:
			
		

> that being said, I have a question regarding over-seas as well:
> 
> I'm in an arguement with my friend. He is saying that I won't get posted to afghanistan or anywhere for at least about 2 years, just because. I says that after I've completed my initial training and have been posted to my unit, that if my unit gets told they are shipping out, then I will be going with them too. (I'venlisted in the infantry)
> 
> Can anyone clear this up for me? Cheers -Cameron



If you are in a unit, and it is deployed - you go with it, unless sick, lame or lazy. If they only deploy part of the unit, you may be left behind. In my experience, new guys have just as much chance to go, because they are usually in rifle companies, which are, by necessity, 40%-60% troops with 3 years of service or less.

If you don't want to be deployed, don't go infantry.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (13 Dec 2005)

And ladies and gentlemen this question and many like this has been asked before, you will be surprised what the search function will dig up for you.


----------



## Hansol (13 Dec 2005)

no no, i'm actually looking forward to the chance of going over-seas. That's one of the reasons i chose infantry. (Besides the fact that I think you get to work with some of the best and highly motivated people in the forces)

And while the "search" function does solve a lot of problems, some questions come close to, but don't fully answer the question. Or I am stupid. It most likely is the latter. Cheers -Cameron


----------

