Divining the right role, capabilities, structure, and Regimental System for Canada's Army Reserves

[Brad Sallows]

The key question, though, is do we need that occupation in time of war but can't afford to have them all working as full-timers during peacetime.

Reminds me that people seem to spend a lot of time not quite figuring out how to come to grips with how to best employ and train a force of mixed full-time and part-time maintainers, while looking after materiel earmarked for full-time and part-time users.

 

[Brad Sallows]

No guarantees that low cost civvy designs are easy to service.

Ease of maintenance is not really a priority of engineers, and maybe never has been. It's just that for the first few decades everything was mechanically simple and was not being fitted into as small a space as possible. "Efficient" to an engineer does not refer to maintenance. I was appalled how complicated relatively simple jobs - replace a water pump, thermostat, starter, fuel filter, etc - evolved to be merely in the couple of decades from 1970 to 1990.

Some good design principles for military softskin fleets are simple to operate, simple to maintain, and approximately disposable after a few months' wartime service.

 

[Brad Sallows]

For themselves, yes. For everyone else? No.

I guess that goes in the leadership failure bin. One or both COs for failing/refusing to negotiate compromises, and a brigade commander for not banging heads together and relieving COs when necessary.

 

[FJAG]

Some good design principles for military softskin fleets are simple to operate, simple to maintain, and approximately disposable after a few months' wartime service.

Back in my subbie days I owned one of these.

Notwithstanding that I have very little good to say about British cars, the hood (bonnet?) was one of the positive things. There wasn't anything on that engine that wasn't easy to access and work on.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I guess that goes in the leadership failure bin. One or both COs for failing/refusing to negotiate compromises, and a brigade commander for not banging heads together and relieving COs when necessary.

I'm not in a position to comment with any authority because I only had 33 years of experience watching the inadequacy play out in various ways. It's possible things were different before I arrived on the scene.

TBF, I assume the Svc Bn didn't have enough bandwidth either.

And most of our vehicle servicing was done by the local CFB... where I recall one MSVS remained for several months while they waited for a bulb for the tail light to be delivered so they could replace it for us

 

[Brad Sallows]

Back in my subbie days I owned one of these.

Notwithstanding that I have very little good to say about British cars, the hood (bonnet?) was one of the positive things. There wasn't anything on that engine that wasn't easy to access and work on.

[Tangents]I had a 69 and then a 76 Dodge Dart. My brother had a Monte Carlo at one point. It was almost possible to stand inside the compartment while working on the engines.[/Tangents]

 

[Kirkhill]

Ease of maintenance is not really a priority of engineers, and maybe never has been. It's just that for the first few decades everything was mechanically simple and was not being fitted into as small a space as possible. "Efficient" to an engineer does not refer to maintenance. I was appalled how complicated relatively simple jobs - replace a water pump, thermostat, starter, fuel filter, etc - evolved to be merely in the couple of decades from 1970 to 1990.

Some good design principles for military softskin fleets are simple to operate, simple to maintain, and approximately disposable after a few months' wartime service.

A buddy of mine drove up from Philly in 1978 in a 5 year old Honda Civic. I got a phone call from Niagara on the Lake telling me his car had crapped out. I drove down from Peterborough to pick him up.

His timing belt had shredded.

It took a week to get it repaired. The belt was at the back up against the firewall. The engine had to be removed to replace the belt.

The problem isn't new.