Author Topic: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia  (Read 200904 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline CBH99

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 37,025
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,013
Re: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia
« Reply #500 on: September 01, 2018, 05:47:05 »
Will be interesting to see how our CF-18's compare to Su 30's. Might even cause the government to be more serious in looking for a new fighter jet.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_157836.htm


The RCAF is a regular contributor to air policing missions over Iceland, Romania, and other countries that NATO provides fighter aircraft to help police their own airspace.  (Why on earth Romania can't just get some post-SLEP F-16's is beyond me...unless their MIGs are so low maintenance that they just prefer them?  Which honestly wouldn't surprise me.)

RCAF aircraft intercepting modern Russian aircraft isn't anything new.  The government won't move any faster on this project than they already are...elections, NAFTA up in the air, the value of Canadian currency being very much up in the air along with NAFTA - which has a huge affect on our buying power, etc.

A snail picking up the pace is still a snail...
Fortune Favours the Bold...and the Smart.

Wouldn't it be nice to have some Boondock Saints kicking around?

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 211,830
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,860
Re: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia
« Reply #501 on: September 01, 2018, 11:06:30 »
CAF to replace the RAF in patrolling the black sea.
And while these will be Op REASURANCE, they will not be a part of the eFP (which this current thread is supposed to be about).

Offline milnews.ca

  • Info Curator, Baker & Food Slut
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Relic
  • *
  • 453,555
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 22,898
    • MILNEWS.ca-Military News for Canadians
Re: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia
« Reply #502 on: February 26, 2019, 12:20:08 »
Bumped with this latest tidbit from Latvian state media -- shared with the usual "fair dealing" caveats from the Copyright Act ...
Quote
Well-prepared and locally invested: Interview with commander of NATO's Latvia-based battle group
Yesterday, 12:10
Authors: eng.lsm.lv (Latvian Public Broadcasting), Jānis Rancāns (LSM.lv ziņu redaktors)   


Lieutenant-Colonel Philippe Sauvé recently took over as top brass of NATO's enhanced forward presence in Latvia, thereby concluding the rotation of the third group of troops deployed in Latvia.

The multinational battle group in Latvia is based at Camp Ādaži. It is led by Canada and consists of approximately 1,400 soldiers from Albania, the Czech Republic, Italy, Canada, Montenegro, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and Spain who perform rotational duties in Latvia by participating in training with Latvia's own National Armed Forces.

Sauvé spoke with LSM's Jānis Rancāns about the battle group's activities and challenges in Latvia, as well as his impressions of the country and its soldiers.

Nine nations are partaking in the battle group. How do you overcome all the problems that may arise with the different mentalities and language barriers?

I wouldn't say there's any major or unforeseen issues with nine nations working together especially in the military context. All our militaries are completely professional and all the soldiers that come here are well-equipped and well-trained.

So just having that base and that military culture that is very similar among all the nations makes integration very easy. You touched on the point of language.

    Language is the biggest barrier. We all have different levels of English as it's the working language and since we, as a Canadian unit, come from a French-speaking brigade, all my soldiers are also using English as a Second Language, unlike the previous rotation.

So the way we work is – we talk a little bit slower and we keep things very simple. Simplicity is one of the hallmarks of military doctrine. So that makes us even more efficient and interoperable on the battlefield.

Before deployment, Spanish troops had special training for operations in the northern part of Europe.

All the nations conduct their own certification within their own nations. I can't speak to the specifics of the training that they completed to come here, but once they landed here - and I've seen them work in the training area - they're well integrated. They have no issues with the cold weather. I am very confident that the way they are preparing within their own nations is extremely good.

There have been many reports that NATO place a great importance to being able to deter from [hostile] activities in internet – fake news or cyber-attacks. Have you or personnel of battle group experienced any of such attacks?

Since I've arrived to the theatre, I haven't seen any specific disinformation against the Battle Group, but we are prepared through public affairs and other means to counter any disinformation or fake news about the Battle Group and our role here.

We're here to be completely transparent. It's part of alliance solidarity and collective defense. Anything we do – we're very open about it. Any disinformation that can come, we can easily counter that by showing how transparent we are as an alliance. We take that information and we analyse it and we make sure that we counter it, if there is a need to and we remain transparent in our mission here

We train our soldiers to follow specific procedures – and I can't speak of those specific procedures for the protection of our soldiers –, but we take it very seriously. Force protection and the protection of our soldiers here in Latvia is very important to us..

Do you cooperate with the other battle groups in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland? Do you have common exercises or are you operating autonomously?

We try to cooperate as much as possible. Our main effort is to integrate and work alongside the mechanized Latvian brigade and alongside the reserve brigades. After that our priority for integration is with the other eFP. We seek opportunities in the north and south to work with them. We will have a chance on the exercise “Spring Storm” in Estonia to send about one third of the Battle Group to train alongside them. We have to show that we can move easily from one country to the other, to show that we can defend throughout the Baltics and Poland.

Do you also train for unconventional warfare? I know the Americans are doing things like this in Eastern Europe as well.

We are training for any kind of threat that could come our way. That ranges from unconventional to conventional warfare. We incorporate all these different aspects in our standing operational procedures. When we do an exercise, we have specific objectives. Some of them might be unconventional, some might be conventional but we are ready to face any threat.

The battle group who has invested heavily to show its presence outside the camp Ādaži, showing their equipment to locals and visiting schools. What do you think is the local attitude towards the battle group?

I think we've had great support from the population and I think the outreach activities are critical to show our presence in Latvia. To be able to project our force throughout the country so we can react to any threat within the country.

    Just by the number of people that have come to our different outreaches in different regions shows that there's an interest and willingness to understand what we are doing here and what our role is within Latvia.

I've been in command about three weeks we've already done three outreaches and we will continue to do them.

In the past rotations we have done something to help some local institutions with either building or improving improvements. I seek to continue that. Outreach is to show that the eFP is here to deter but we're also here to help. We're not just a military force [and] there's more than we can do.

Do you have any special lectures or something to teach soldiers about local culture or local traditions?

We have specific lectures to teach our soldiers. Different nations, as they prepare in their country, will do it differently. I can speak specifically to Canada - we have about a week of training in cultural awareness. I mean our cultures are very similar but there's little things that are different that soldiers need to [know]. And we also do language training about two days very basic language training but at least our soldiers can say “Hi thank you. Good morning. Good afternoon” [in the local language]. That in itself just builds small relationships and people are happy to see that another nation has made an effort to understand their culture. Soldiers that are here can continue to do a little bit of that should they want to do so.

A few years ago, there very public cases when British soldiers got into fights in Riga. How do you work with the people to prevent such things? I fully well understand guys who are fresh from the exercise and want to grab a beer, but accidents happen. Do you have any methods to prevent things like this that could be later blown out of proportion?

Yes, we have rules in place to ensure or try to minimize what soldiers can do that can have a negative impact on the battle group. However - as you saw with the British soldiers - incidents can happen.

We take those extremely seriously and we take the appropriate administrative or disciplinary action within the different national chains to ensure these actions aren't repeated and the people that are found guilty of any such action are treated very severely through their national disciplinary processes.

It is very important. That's one of the big key messages that we passed to our soldiers is that their presence here as an individual, can have a strategic impact. They're well aware of the rules and they're well aware of the consequences if they do not follow the rules. As long as they're not getting in trouble - and no soldiers so far have have gotten into trouble within the eFP Battle Group, the British soldiers were not from the Battle Group - in over 20 months here, all soldiers have behaved and well-represented their country and have shown that we're a very professional and credible force here in Latvia.

How do Canadians feel about their soldiers being deployed in Latvia?

We've had a positive response. It's a different deployment than Afghanistan. I think for the population it's well-received as the threat level is lower from a conventional threat point of view. I've not heard any negative news about our deployment here.

The population can have their thoughts. Our prime minister came out in July and extended us as a framework nation until 2023. It shows our commitment to NATO as a country and as part of the alliance.

What about the fourth-generation warfare - for example the drone systems and cyber warfare. Do you have capabilities to fight those threats?

You have to understand that we're equipped to counter and deal with drones and cyber warfare. The enhanced Forward Presence Battle Group is only one part of the NATO alliance that can come to bear should there be any incursion. We have assets from other headquarters and other resources that can assist us to defend against all threats.

We are monitoring through the information we get through the chain of command and what is actually happening east of the border. But I do not have a mission or a task to conduct any activity on that side of the border. My main goal here is to deter and be prepared to defend within Latvia.

There have been many discussions of things like Suvalki gap, that Americans practiced crossing last year. It is still one of weakest points to link up forces in Baltic region with rest of NATO. Do you think that your strategic position here is sustainable?

The mission here started with the incursion by Russians in 2014 [in Ukraine]. What we're doing here is part of a larger picture of what NATO is trying to accomplish. And our main goal is just to prevent conflict whether it be in Estonia, Poland Lithuania, Latvia or any other NATO country. That is what our goal is by creating the enhance Forward Presence:  to deter any country from potentially thinking about attacking. Are we sustainable? Every NATO operation or activity is sustainable and demonstrates our resolve to be transparent and to show collective defence within the alliance.

The capabilities that we have right now are what we need for the mission at hand. And as I like to explain – we are the tip of the iceberg. Should there be any incursion, along with the Latvian brigade, we will be able to defend the country. The forces from the Very High Readiness Joint Task Force and additional forces from division core would come in and support the defence of NATO countries.

We have to think as an entire alliance and not just the enhanced Forward Presence Battle Groups. We have put the measures in place to ensure that we are more responsive to any threat. A prime example is all the enhanced Forward Presence Battle Groups. We weren't here two years ago and now we are. We have a very high readiness task force that is brigade-size that is willing to come in at very short notice and then we have all of the other alliance countries following that can command and support. The alliance, although we are 29 countries, is extremely responsive to any threat that could come on our territory.

Would it be easy to defend Latvia? Because when you are looking at the think tanks who are saying that Russian forces could be in our capitals in 48 hours it doesn’t seem so good. I mean it’s a flat country. You can’t have good fighting positions.

I won’t speak specifically to how we will defend Latvia. There are plans in place but it comes back to operational security. There are ways that we've learned from lessons of many wars. That's how the military establishes its doctrine - learn from previous wars. There is a plan and I'm extremely confident that everything has been put in place and we can accomplish our mission here.

Could you describe the average day of a soldier serving in the battle group?

The soldier wakes up at six or seven. They then will do physical training and then will go to the field for the day to do training inoperability either with Latvian brigade, or with other companies in Battle Group. We continue every day to hone our skills between the different sub-units. They will work until about a six at night and the usually they have evening to rest. When we do exercises it’s 24/7 seven days a week. We have the flexibility that we can go twenty four hours a day, seven days a week for six months. We adjust the operational tempo to ensure that they get sufficient rest, but we maximize training. We are always ready to fight. We are always ready at any notice to get in our vehicles and conduct our mission.

What's your assessment of Latvian soldiers?

Latvian soldiers are as competent as those of any of the nations in the Battle Group. I would be happy to integrate any company in my Battle Group. That is why we are able to seamlessly integrate within the Latvian brigade. The military culture is all the same. We are NATO. Integrating, understanding how we work, is very easy to do.

The next six months, our objective is to continue with our mission: interoperability, deterrence and be prepared to defend. How we accomplish that is through continued training with the brigade, the Battle Group and the other eFP’s. The more we train alongside each other, the more confidence we get, the more easily it is to react and do our job. We can always get better – practice makes perfect. The more we practice, the more fluid our activities and operations can be.
“The risk of insult is the price of clarity.” -- Roy H. Williams

The words I share here are my own, not those of anyone else or anybody I may be affiliated with.

Tony Prudori
MILNEWS.ca - Twitter

Offline GR66

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 62,430
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 696
Re: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia
« Reply #503 on: April 29, 2020, 10:50:03 »
Posting a random thought here based on discussions on the "C3 Howitzer Replacement" thread (https://army.ca/forums/index.php/topic,122373.300.html) rather than further derailing that topic.

Basically there was discussion about the difficulty in quickly transporting heavy equipment like SPGs (and tanks) to Europe in time to counter a rapid Russian invasion of the Baltic States.  The suggestion was made to either pre-position vehicles/equipment in theatre or have them on ships so that you can just fly the troops over to man them rather than have to try to quickly move a whole bunch of heavy equipment from Canada.

In light of that, would it make any sense to group all of our tanks into a single regiment and deploy that to the Baltics in place of our current infantry battalion commitment to OP Reassurance? 

Here's my reasoning:
- Russia is the most likely opponent that we'd have to quickly deploy our tanks en masse for combat (conflict with China will be mainly an air and sea conflict)
- IF Russia were to attack the Baltics we wouldn't have time to deploy our tanks in time to defend (estimates are that the Russians could reach the capitals of Latvia and Estonia in approx. 72 hours)
- Armoured forces are a much greater deterrent to Russian invasion than lightly-armed infantry, so deploying our tanks there would better meet the political goal of the deployment.
- Being on the ground in advance would give our tankers better opportunity to know the terrain they would be defending and also a chance to work directly in advance with the troops they would likely fight beside.
- Not sure what the training situation on the ground in Latvia is like, but I'd imagine that based on the situation it would be a great place for our tanks to get a chance to practice combined arms operations.
- Having our tanks specifically as part of our commitment to NATO would help protect them from (again) being divested from the CAF inventory.

Thoughts?


Online MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 46,225
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,095
Re: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia
« Reply #504 on: April 29, 2020, 11:50:23 »
Given that if war breaks out Latvia has about 63 hours to hold out before over run. I do not think having all our tanks there is a good idea, with the infantry and arty already there, if the tanks were too and fighting broke out the Canadian Army would be combat ineffective after 72 hours because we would have no tanks left, a battery of m777s gone, plus everything else. We would be out of the fight for awhile.
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline GR66

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 62,430
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 696
Re: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia
« Reply #505 on: April 29, 2020, 12:18:46 »
Given that if war breaks out Latvia has about 63 hours to hold out before over run. I do not think having all our tanks there is a good idea, with the infantry and arty already there, if the tanks were too and fighting broke out the Canadian Army would be combat ineffective after 72 hours because we would have no tanks left, a battery of m777s gone, plus everything else. We would be out of the fight for awhile.

Isn't the ultimate purpose though of OP Reassurance to DETER the Russians from attacking in the first place?  Which better fulfills that role, a regiment of tanks or a battalion of infantry without any serious Anti-armour capability.  And if Russia did invade and take the Baltic States in 72-hours would there be any use for our regiment of tanks sitting in Canada in face of a Russian fait accompli? 

I honestly have my doubts that NATO would launch a counter attack against an already victorious Russian army if the Russians were to take the limited win then stop.  Especially if the Russians laid the political grounds for the invasion properly in advance (a persecuted Russian minority population, etc.).  Not sure if the political will would be there in the West for a potential nuclear conflict for the sake of the Baltics. Call me cynical.

In that case we'd save the combat power of our tanks for what?  The next failed deterrence? 

Online MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 46,225
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,095
Re: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia
« Reply #506 on: April 29, 2020, 12:39:26 »
The infantry have dismounted TOW launchers again, so they have actual anti armour capabilities beyond the Carl G, I would argue we need to haul the TUA turrets out of storage and get them on LAV 6's as well. Deterrence is great until it doesnt work, our allies have a lot of armour in Latvia already. I'd argue we should have our tanks and a secondary force in Poland or Germany ready to counterattack. We have to plan for the what it's after all.
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Online MJP

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 182,450
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,646
Re: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia
« Reply #507 on: April 29, 2020, 13:28:36 »
Isn't the ultimate purpose though of OP Reassurance to DETER the Russians from attacking in the first place?  Which better fulfills that role, a regiment of tanks or a battalion of infantry without any serious Anti-armour capability. 

Presence not equipment fills that role, hence the Enhanced Forward Presence name for all four of the NATO BGs. 


- Not sure what the training situation on the ground in Latvia is like, but I'd imagine that based on the situation it would be a great place for our tanks to get a chance to practice combined arms operations.
- Having our tanks specifically as part of our commitment to NATO would help protect them from (again) being divested from the CAF inventory.


Some very quick thoughts
- Training area(s) are extremely limited and not conducive to tank ops/trg
- Tanks or any other equipment doesn't have to be in a specific area to be "pegged" against a NATO commitment
- We can barely keep the tanks off VOR (for a variety of reasons) moving them to Latvia will not help that situation

Hope is not a valid COA

Offline LoboCanada

  • Member
  • ****
  • 3,355
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 185
Re: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia
« Reply #508 on: April 29, 2020, 14:33:24 »
Interesting thread, makes for a good read.

Slightly off-topic, but i'm not a fan of the discrepancy between our commitment to NATO vs. our commitment to our pacific friends. Where is the cooperation in Australia, ROK, or Japan on the Army side?

Would we be over-extended if we had a similar "Forward Presence" working in Australia? Would enable us to keep some equipment there, experience, etc... should things flare up in the pacific? Access to jungle environment and amphib training as well.

Offline reverse_engineer

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 63,500
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,604
Re: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia
« Reply #509 on: April 29, 2020, 14:54:32 »
How would we move our equipment from Australia to somewhere it was actually needed? I suppose we'd be begging for a lift from our allies? Sounds like more a burden than anything else.

Maybe better to send ships, aircraft etc (which we have done)

Offline GR66

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 62,430
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 696
Re: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia
« Reply #510 on: April 29, 2020, 15:49:18 »
At least there is a consistent response to postings on the website.  I've yet to see an idea floated to in some way make the Army more effective/better equipped/better organized without it being declared as impossible because:

- we don't have the right equipment "X" for that
- we don't have enough equipment "X" to do that
- the equipment "X" we do have isn't serviceable
- we don't have the maintainers to keep equipment "X" serviceable
- we have no way of getting equipment "X" there
- we can't buy equipment "X" because we don't have "Y"
- we can't buy equipment "X" because the government/CAF/public will never go for that
- we don't have the PY available for that
- we don't have enough trained people in trade "Z" for that
- we can't train enough people in trade "Z" to do that because the recruiting and/or training system is broken
- everyone in trade "Z" will quit if we do that because they don't want to be there/do that
- Reserves can't do that because they don't have enough training hours to learn/maintain that skill

It's a wonder the Army is able to do anything!   ;D

[/sarcasm]

Just kidding (a bit...). 

MJP - could you please explain for us civies what VOR is?  (I'm assuming it's not Voluntary Occupational Reassignment)

MilEME09 - Not sure if a handful of TOWs will put much of a dent in a Russian armoured attack. 

In the RAND articles quoted in the "C3 Howitzer Replacement" thread they are suggesting that at least 3 x Armoured Brigades would be required to defeat a Russian invasion of the Baltics

Here are a few more to pique your interest:

A 2017 RAND paper discussing what is needed "to win in the Baltic":

https://www.rand.org/pubs/testimonies/CT467.html

A 2018 RAND paper assessing competing force structures in the Baltic:

https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2402.html

A 2019 RAND paper on an out-of-the- box discussion of Total Defence/Unconventional Warfare in the Baltic:

https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2779.html

A news article respecting the Defender 2020 exercises in the Poland/Baltic regions showing how the US is using prepositioned equipment and fly-over forces to "bulk-up" its forces there including a National Guard "heavy" ABCT and a National Guard Engineer brigade.

https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2019/10/15/these-army-units-are-going-to-europe-this-spring-for-defender-2020-but-theyre-pretending-its-2028/

...

As for pre-positioning ground forces in Australia, what ground combat do you expect to see happening in that theatre?

Online Blackadder1916

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 227,070
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,288
Re: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia
« Reply #511 on: April 29, 2020, 16:28:44 »

Slightly off-topic, but i'm not a fan of the discrepancy between our commitment to NATO vs. our commitment to our pacific friends. Where is the cooperation in Australia, ROK, or Japan on the Army side?


Unlike our NATO defence obligations required as a signatory to the North Atlantic Treaty, Canada has no mutual defence treaties with any country  on the other side of the Pacific.  Though we are part of the Five Eyes with Australia and New Zealand, that agreement does not bind us to respond in defence of attack on their territory. 
Whisky for the gentlemen that like it. And for the gentlemen that don't like it - Whisky.

Online MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 46,225
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,095
Re: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia
« Reply #512 on: April 29, 2020, 16:50:32 »

MilEME09 - Not sure if a handful of TOWs will put much of a dent in a Russian armoured attack. 

As for pre-positioning ground forces in Australia, what ground combat do you expect to see happening in that theatre?

On it's own maybe not, depends how many we have, the cold war era tank hunting platoon tactic is still valid, combined with allied armour can work. I have also heard the army wants to upgrade al our Carl Gès to the new M4 model replacing all M2 and M3's. While being lighter, the M4 has a new family of ammo, including a new Guided munition. It's armour penetration is much higher now compared to the older family of munitions.


As for australia, pre-postioning makes more sense to put our airforce or navy in Guam, sending some light infantry to work with Australia might be a good idea. However working in the asian theatre would also mean recognizing China as a threat, something or government seems unwilling to do.
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline YZT580

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 28,690
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 819
Re: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia
« Reply #513 on: April 29, 2020, 23:00:47 »
Everything old is new again.  My mind may be confused and if it is I am sure there is at least one other oldie on line to post an amendment.
 But I seem to recall that way back in I believe the late 60's when Trudeau senior was downsizing I believe our commitment to NATO involved positioning a tank regiment in Norway with only a maintenance squad permanently deployed to maintain readiness.  The rest of the troops were to remain here in Canada. 

Online MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 46,225
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,095
Re: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia
« Reply #514 on: April 29, 2020, 23:04:25 »
Everything old is new again.  My mind may be confused and if it is I am sure there is at least one other oldie on line to post an amendment.
 But I seem to recall that way back in I believe the late 60's when Trudeau senior was downsizing I believe our commitment to NATO involved positioning a tank regiment in Norway with only a maintenance squad permanently deployed to maintain readiness.  The rest of the troops were to remain here in Canada.

ah yes the CAST brigade, unfortunately they promised, and never actually followed through with anything meaningful. Here is a CBC investigative report from back then, really in depth look at our NATO promises vs reality. Really our problems are the same even today, they just change what the problem looks like.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_XYb3AWK58
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Online MJP

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 182,450
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,646
Re: CAN Enhanced (Permanent?) Fwd Presence in Latvia
« Reply #515 on: April 29, 2020, 23:24:05 »

MJP - could you please explain for us civies what VOR is?  (I'm assuming it's not Voluntary Occupational Reassignment)


Vehicle off road = Broken

The entire fleet, like most tanks is very labour intensive in terms of corrective and preventative/pre-determined (inspections schedules essentially).  We have a low density of everything (tanks, parts, tech, infra, tooling) so every new place you put tanks stretches already thin resources further. 
Hope is not a valid COA