3 RCR transfers to the Light Infantry Regiment

[Gordon Dundas/]

Also, dumb question: do we have doctrine for "light" units?
[/QUOTE]
Do we have a light infantry doctrine ? Probably, will we pay the slightest amount of attention to it while forming it, equipping it and operating it?
Probably not .

 

[FJAG]

One should never use capabilities that aren’t suited to the situation - but that doesn’t mean you should not want certain niche capabilities.

As ought to be obvious from reading the results of various campaigns/wars since WW2 everyone has been poorly structured for the next conflict. The best plan is to take a best shot at preparing for the more probable but keep something in your back pocket for the less probable. There's a very steep learning curve to reestablishing a needed capability once the last officer and NCM who knew how it worked retires.

M777, they can be towed by Hummers FWIW
If you want lighter: M119 105mm

We can currently do a good mixed light regiment with a couple of G1 batteries and an M777 battery or two. It would be nice to pick up some LINAPS to let the G!s self locate and orient. Could use some 120mm though.

Incidentally, I don't think an HMMWV is an answer for the M777. It can only tow some 4,000 lbs and the M777 "ultra" light howitzer comes in at 9,300. And then there is the ammo. The civvy Hummers do a lot better at between 7,500 - 12,000 lbs depending on version) The LMTV, at towing around 10,000 lbs is okay as long as the terrain doesn't get too rough. I read that the US gave LMTVs to the Ukrainians to uses as gun tractors but I wouldn't want to go below that and you'd need extra vehicles for ammo and anything over a minimal detachment.

I think the US TOE calls for the M1083 MTV rated at around 21,000 pounds which has the guts to tow the gun, carry the crew and a decent load of around 80 to 100 rounds. There are no dedicated gun limber vehicles for extra ammo, just the battery's five M1084 (MHE) ammo trucks and trailers. Canada uses the HLVW as the gun tractor and ammo carrier. We tend to put the crew in a separate armoured vehicle but I'm not so sure there are any around. @markppcli might know better where things stand now.

 

[markppcli]

As ought to be obvious from reading the results of various campaigns/wars since WW2 everyone has been poorly structured for the next conflict. The best plan is to take a best shot at preparing for the more probable but keep something in your back pocket for the less probable. There's a very steep learning curve to reestablishing a needed capability once the last officer and NCM who knew how it worked retires.


We can currently do a good mixed light regiment with a couple of G1 batteries and an M777 battery or two. It would be nice to pick up some LINAPS to let the G!s self locate and orient. Could use some 120mm though.

Incidentally, I don't think an HMMWV is an answer for the M777. It can only tow some 4,000 lbs and the M777 "ultra" light howitzer comes in at 9,300. And then there is the ammo. The civvy Hummers do a lot better at between 7,500 - 12,000 lbs depending on version) The LMTV, at towing around 10,000 lbs is okay as long as the terrain doesn't get too rough. I read that the US gave LMTVs to the Ukrainians to uses as gun tractors but I wouldn't want to go below that and you'd need extra vehicles for ammo and anything over a minimal detachment.

I think the US TOE calls for the M1083 MTV rated at around 21,000 pounds which has the guts to tow the gun, carry the crew and a decent load of around 80 to 100 rounds. There are no dedicated gun limber vehicles for extra ammo, just the battery's five M1084 (MHE) ammo trucks and trailers. Canada uses the HLVW as the gun tractor and ammo carrier. We tend to put the crew in a separate armoured vehicle but I'm not so sure there are any around. @markppcli might know better where things stand now.

We have ACSVs for the gun det.

 

[Ostrozac]

I was wondering what "security" tasks those additional infantry battalions performed.

Those UK battalions were originallly envisioned as battlefield casualty replacement pools — the initial planning estimates of casualties for Granby/Deaert Storm were extremely high. In the end they turned out to be useful for POW handling, but that wasn’t their primary intended role.

And using light forces as cheap filli-ins for gaps in the mechanized force structure has been what the light battalions have been doing in Canada for over 30 years now — this new 3rd regiment/brigade/combat group is supposed to be something different.

 

[KevinB]

As ought to be obvious from reading the results of various campaigns/wars since WW2 everyone has been poorly structured for the next conflict. The best plan is to take a best shot at preparing for the more probable but keep something in your back pocket for the less probable. There's a very steep learning curve to reestablishing a needed capability once the last officer and NCM who knew how it worked retires.

Agreed.

We can currently do a good mixed light regiment with a couple of G1 batteries and an M777 battery or two. It would be nice to pick up some LINAPS to let the G!s self locate and orient. Could use some 120mm though.

Incidentally, I don't think an HMMWV is an answer for the M777. It can only tow some 4,000 lbs and the M777 "ultra" light howitzer comes in at 9,300. And then there is the ammo.

Oh I don’t think it’s a great idea for general purposes, but if you need to lift a gun tractor with a BlackHawk - it’s a useful in that respect.
Better than an ISV dropping its transmission on the LZ.

The civvy Hummers do a lot better at between 7,500 - 12,000 lbs depending on version)

The Military slashed the tow rating the same way it slashed the weigh capacity.
The assumption is that it’s running off-road all the time.

Again, it wouldn’t be my first choice, but they can do it — especially the GMV variants that got all the powertrain and suspension upgrades.

The LMTV, at towing around 10,000 lbs is okay as long as the terrain doesn't get too rough. I read that the US gave LMTVs to the Ukrainians to uses as gun tractors but I wouldn't want to go below that and you'd need extra vehicles for ammo and anything over a minimal detachment.

I think the US TOE calls for the M1083 MTV rated at around 21,000 pounds which has the guts to tow the gun, carry the crew and a decent load of around 80 to 100 rounds. There are no dedicated gun limber vehicles for extra ammo, just the battery's five M1084 (MHE) ammo trucks and trailers. Canada uses the HLVW as the gun tractor and ammo carrier. We tend to put the crew in a separate armoured vehicle but I'm not so sure there are any around. @markppcli might know better where things stand now.

I’m more interested in BvS10 for most of that.

 

[FJAG]

I’m more interested in BvS10 for most of that.

I'm a great fan of those myself and for the life of me could never understand why the army hasn't replaced the 50-60 some odd of the 206s that we ash-canned. I think we have about a dozen or so left and no idea how good a shape they are in. I always thought they should be equipping all the light battalions with the newer ones - especially if at least assembled here.

The 206s could barely handle an L5. The BvS10 has more power but even there I still have some doubts. The glossy brochure says it can handle six tonnes but I presume one has to deduct the rear cabin and crew which would be about 4 tons. You'd basically need just a cab as gun tractor and a cab and cabin for the crew and then additional ammo vehicles. Also pulling a gun in snow is a lot harder than on the road - especially one with tiny wheels like the M777 which in snow can be more like dragging an anchor than something on wheels - gun skis?

When it comes to winter ops in austere terrain, I'm a great fan of aviation or heavy duty tracked vehicles. We portee'd L5s in the M548 for Norway AMF(L). An absolutely great solution. An M548 could handle an M777 as well albeit one would need to get ingenious with how to load and unload it - winching I'd guess? Not an easy shoot and scoot. They need a flatbed/open cargo AMPV. That still gives you a heli transport option which an SP wouldn't.

 

[Fabius]

Part of the problem that the Army needs to wrestle with is the conflation of names with tasks and roles.

Light Infantry is typically understood to be infantry that fights on foot. In the US, UK and NATO context that typically means lightly motorized as well. These forces are highly suited for complex terrain especially holding it.

Air Assault forces are typically understood to be operational level deep strike forces that are highly specialized combined arms teams of all components of both ground and aviation.

Correspondingly the employment of the VHRF and/or HNF designations are not specific to any type of element I would argue, it’s driven more by availability of aircraft and/or ships at sufficient scale to make the timelines work.

The Cdn Army has historically for the last several decades allowed the 3rd Bns to be everything but nothing.

A Coy trained for mountain, a Coy trained for air mobile and a Coy trained for parachute with combat support dabbling in everything. The result is that the Bns very rarely have a cohesive capability at a unit scale.

Ultimately the army needs to decide what it is this LIR and it’s Bn are.

Are they light infantry to reinforce Latvia as a VHRF inside MNB-L employing prepositioned stockpiles?

Are they an operational level air assault capability that operates with the Avn Bde as part of the joint force?

Are they a light infantry force that deploys from Canada as an independent global rapid response force anywhere in the world?

Right now despite appearances they are likely closest to the first.

No matter the answer it will be interesting to watch how the LIR coordinates with enablers like, engineers, artillery, medics, logistics etc since the LIR has exactly zero of those assets assigned.

 

[GR66]

I’m more interested in BvS10 for most of that.

I'm surprised that the Light Regiment hasn't been given an Arctic focus...and BvS10 would be great for that but I don't think you'd have much luck towing an M777 up there. Better choice would be to have a 120mm mortar version.

 

[Fabius]

I'm a great fan of those myself and for the life of me could never understand why the army hasn't replaced the 50-60 some odd of the 206s that we ash-canned. I think we have about a dozen or so left and no idea how good a shape they are in. I always thought they should be equipping all the light battalions with the newer ones - especially if at least assembled here.

The 206s could barely handle an L5. The BvS10 has more power but even there I still have some doubts. The glossy brochure says it can handle six tonnes but I presume one has to deduct the rear cabin and crew which would be about 4 tons. You'd basically need just a cab as gun tractor and a cab and cabin for the crew and then additional ammo vehicles. Also pulling a gun in snow is a lot harder than on the road - especially one with tiny wheels like the M777 which in snow can be more like dragging an anchor than something on wheels - gun skis?

When it comes to winter ops in austere terrain, I'm a great fan of aviation or heavy duty tracked vehicles. We portee'd L5s in the M548 for Norway AMF(L). An absolutely great solution. An M548 could handle an M777 as well albeit one would need to get ingenious with how to load and unload it - winching I'd guess? Not an easy shoot and scoot. They need a flatbed/open cargo AMPV. That still gives you a heli transport option which an SP wouldn't.

A Bn outfitted with all variants of the BvS10 from section carrier to CP to Amb to MRT would be great. It likely would not equate to a Light Bn then though, that’s a Mech Bn.

 

[exspy]

I'll just throw this into the mix. Isn't it time to re-animate The Canadian Guards?

It's what Strome would have wanted.

 

[FJAG]

A Bn outfitted with all variants of the BvS10 from section carrier to CP to Amb to MRT would be great. It likely would not equate to a Light Bn then though, that’s a Mech Bn.

Which does raise the issue of differentiating between armoured mech - Pumas, CV90 and the like (level 4-6) - and armoured mech folks in Senators and BvS10s (level 2-4). I'll leave the sorting out of this to the infantry. I always did get a kick out of the PPC-Light-I running around in 30 tonne vehicles.

I'll just throw this into the mix. Isn't it time to re-animate The Canadian Guards?

It's what Strome would have wanted.

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrgggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[KevinB]

I'm a great fan of those myself and for the life of me could never understand why the army hasn't replaced the 50-60 some odd of the 206s that we ash-canned. I think we have about a dozen or so left and no idea how good a shape they are in. I always thought they should be equipping all the light battalions with the newer ones - especially if at least assembled here.

The 206s could barely handle an L5. The BvS10 has more power but even there I still have some doubts. The glossy brochure says it can handle six tonnes but I presume one has to deduct the rear cabin and crew which would be about 4 tons. You'd basically need just a cab as gun tractor and a cab and cabin for the crew and then additional ammo vehicles. Also pulling a gun in snow is a lot harder than on the road - especially one with tiny wheels like the M777 which in snow can be more like dragging an anchor than something on wheels - gun skis?

Yes gun ski’s.
Been done before. Just an art I guess we lost.
Probably better as a 1 piece gun toboggan that one can clip the wheels into. Wider footprint for less ground pressure

When it comes to winter ops in austere terrain, I'm a great fan of aviation or heavy duty tracked vehicles. We portee'd L5s in the M548 for Norway AMF(L). An absolutely great solution. An M548 could handle an M777 as well albeit one would need to get ingenious with how to load and unload it - winching I'd guess? Not an easy shoot and scoot. They need a flatbed/open cargo AMPV. That still gives you a heli transport option which an SP wouldn't.

I never got the Portee concept instead of towing on skis, other than I guess if you had to cross some terrain that had no snow or bog swamp.

 

[PrairieFella]

I'm a great fan of those myself and for the life of me could never understand why the army hasn't replaced the 50-60 some odd of the 206s that we ash-canned. I think we have about a dozen or so left and no idea how good a shape they are in. I always thought they should be equipping all the light battalions with the newer ones - especially if at least assembled here.

The 206s could barely handle an L5. The BvS10 has more power but even there I still have some doubts. The glossy brochure says it can handle six tonnes but I presume one has to deduct the rear cabin and crew which would be about 4 tons. You'd basically need just a cab as gun tractor and a cab and cabin for the crew and then additional ammo vehicles. Also pulling a gun in snow is a lot harder than on the road - especially one with tiny wheels like the M777 which in snow can be more like dragging an anchor than something on wheels - gun skis?

When it comes to winter ops in austere terrain, I'm a great fan of aviation or heavy duty tracked vehicles. We portee'd L5s in the M548 for Norway AMF(L). An absolutely great solution. An M548 could handle an M777 as well albeit one would need to get ingenious with how to load and unload it - winching I'd guess? Not an easy shoot and scoot. They need a flatbed/open cargo AMPV. That still gives you a heli transport option which an SP wouldn't.

Maybe we can ask Spain. They still run M548s in Latvia lol. Living museums.

 

[FJAG]

Yes gun ski’s.
Been done before. Just an art I guess we lost.
Probably better as a 1 piece gun toboggan that one can clip the wheels into. Wider footprint for less ground pressure

I did safety officer for the Airborne battery on a winter exercise in Suffield and all that was dropped in was guns, ammo, snowmobiles and toboggans. The bty had rigged the standard toboggans to be strapped to each wheel of the L5 which were then moved around for short moves towed by the snowmobiles. It worked and to the best of my knowledge no snowmobiles died.

I never got the Portee concept instead of towing on skis, other than I guess if you had to cross some terrain that had no snow or bog swamp.

We had modified 2 1/2 tons and the M548 each capable of porteeing the L5. For the 2 1/2 ton we used the front bumper winch which had a rig that allowed the winch to pass through the passenger window and into the cargo area to winch the gun up. The M548 was easier with its low cargo deck.

The gunners hated porteeing. It was a crappy job of work at the best of times even with a gun as light as the L5. With the deuces we basically porteed on road moves to and from Wainwright but in the field it was simply tow. Same with the M548 where we only porteed in deep snow. Towing was a tricky thing too because the wheelbase of the gun was much narrower than the truck and M548 and it tended to slip into one rut or the other and was at risk of easily flipping.

The Airborne used 3/4 tons as gun tractors. They were terrific. Whenever we did quick action or open action competitions I'd always have the pistol gun towed by my TSM's 3/4. We'd routinely get the gun deployed off the truck and a round downrange in less than a minute from when we got the mission while moving down the road.

Fun times.

 

[Kilted]

Alright, this is probably bothering me more than it should about why they are calling it a regiment when it should be a brigade. I know there are people from NDHQ that monitor this site (where else would they get all their good ideas), could they for once break the fourth wall and explain this to us.

 

[vonGarvin]

For the sake of discussion, how come?

What do we need to be able to do? What do we envision them doing they need a light cav regiment? Do they need arty? What kind of arty is appropriate for a light formation?

I dont have these answers but its an interesting conversation to be had.

Why? Co-location is a great thing. Instead of having 3 disparate units across the country, instead have one formation that trains as such.

I'm not sure? That's why I ask. I mean, in terms of mobility and projecting combat power, a light unit can only do so many things; yet can do much that heavy units cannot.

No idea what a "light cav" regiment looks like; I just envision a formation-level reconnaissance unit that can screen and/or guard for the formation.

As for Indirect fire support, I would envision a 105mm artillery regiment (3 batteries of 8 guns each), and the infantry battalions would have their Medium Mortar platoons (and FSCC), so that there would be layers of indirect fire support. Able to be modularized for various missions.

At its core, this formation would need plenty of logistical transport to lug around all that ammo, etc. Then again, maybe go "all in" and make this a parachute formation?

I guess the mission ought to be sussed out first and then build the formation?


I dunno, I'm retiring soon, so my next job is to go to the front gate and protest all the noise. LOL

 

[KevinB]

I did safety officer for the Airborne battery on a winter exercise in Suffield and all that was dropped in was guns, ammo, snowmobiles and toboggans. The bty had rigged the standard toboggans to be strapped to each wheel of the L5 which were then moved around for short moves towed by the snowmobiles. It worked and to the best of my knowledge no snowmobiles died.

IIRC it was done for C1’s as well.
Mainly as I don’t think I did any gun line exercises with E Bty in the Winter

The Airborne used 3/4 tons as gun tractors. They were terrific. Whenever we did quick action or open action competitions I'd always have the pistol gun towed by my TSM's 3/4. We'd routinely get the gun deployed off the truck and a round downrange in less than a minute from when we got the mission while moving down the road.

Fun times.

E and F Bty at least during my day when they had the L5’s) used 5/4’s as gun tractors.

One reason I’m not so anti Hummer type vehicle for a gun tractor, is I never thought the MLVW and then the SEV Gun Tractor versions where very practical. While not as massive as an HLVW, they were way bigger than they needed to be. Making both an huge signature and causing untold damage to ankles, knees and backs (and more) of the poor gun numbers in back during dismounting for coming into action.

I’d rather 2 Hummer sized vehicles for a gun Det than one large.

 

[Sprinting Thistle]

Given that there are no new PYs, curious to know where they will take the PYs from for the Regimental HQ (CO, RSM, Adjt, Orderly Room Clerks, etc) as well as the Admin Coy personnel. Someone, somewhere will be losing positions.

 

[KevinB]

Given that there are no new PYs, curious to know where they will take the PYs from for the Regimental HQ (CO, RSM, Adjt, Orderly Room Clerks, etc) as well as the Admin Coy personnel. Someone, somewhere will be losing positions.

Even more reason to take the PPCLI lock stock and barrel.

 

[ueo]

For now. The presentations and briefings on modernization naming referred to the Light Infantry Regiment as a placeholder name. The same for the planned heavy cav regiment. Some of the lower level slide decks (RCIC and RCAC) pitched the Royal Rifles of Canada and the PLDG as possible cap badges for the LIR and new HCAV regt.

Will the regimental mafias allow such a thing? Who knows. Not me.


Some discussion talks about the LIR growing into a light brigade by 2040. So they probably should have just named it a brigade right off the hop.

Did we not play with LIBs etc Incl 10/90 Bns in the late 80s?