Author Topic: Reserve artillery terminology.  (Read 8941 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline beardedsawyer

  • Guest
  • *
  • 920
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8
Reserve artillery terminology.
« on: November 14, 2016, 23:21:46 »
Good evening folks,

Can someone tell me what the difference is between an Independent Field Battery and a Field Artillery Regiment? Both are reserve units in Alberta. But you probably guessed that...

Thank you
"If people had rubber pockets, they'd steal soup."

Offline Simian Turner

    is a veteran who enjoys oddities!

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 49,510
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,641
  • Do the right thing; do the thing right!
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #1 on: November 14, 2016, 23:48:23 »
As you can see from the list of Reserve Artillery units below, a Reserve Regiment consists of two or more batteries.  An Independent Battery do not belong to a Reserve Regiment and therefore functions as their own "independent" unit.  The continuation of an independent unit relates to heritage/history, location, and its ability to recruit and retain sufficient personnel to fill the required positions to "man" their equipment.

Despite functioning as separate units some Regiments and Independent Batteries have long exercised together as in the case of 26 Fd Regt and 116 Indep Fd Bty as the closest Artillery Training Area is in Shilo.


1st (Halifax-Dartmouth) Field Artillery Regiment, RCA (Halifax)
51st Field Battery, RCA
87th Field Battery, RCA

2nd Field Artillery Regiment, RCA (Montreal)
7th Field Battery, RCA
50th Field Battery, RCA
66th Field Battery, RCA

3rd Field Artillery Regiment, RCA (Saint John, New Brunswick)
89th Field Battery, RCA
115th Field Battery, RCA (The Loyal Company)

5th (British Columbia) Field Artillery Regiment, RCA (Victoria, British Columbia)
55th Field Battery, RCA
56th Field Battery, RCA

6th Field Artillery Regiment, RCA (Lévis, Quebec)
57th Field Battery, RCA
59th Field Battery, RCA
58th Field Battery, RCA

7th Toronto Regiment, RCA
9th Field Battery, RCA
15th Field Battery, RCA
130th Field Battery, RCA

10th Field Artillery Regiment, RCA
18th Field Battery, RCA (Regina, Saskatchewan)
64th Field Battery, RCA (Yorkton, Saskatchewan)

11th Field Artillery Regiment, RCA (Guelph, Ontario)
11th Field Battery (Hamilton-Wentworth), RCA
16th Field Battery, RCA
29th Field Battery, RCA

15th Field Artillery Regiment, RCA (Vancouver, British Columbia)
31st Field Battery, RCA
68th Field Battery, RCA

20th Field Artillery Regiment, RCA
61st Field Battery, RCA (Edmonton, Alberta)
78th Field Battery, RCA (Red Deer, Alberta)

26th Field Artillery Regiment, RCA
13th Field Battery, RCA (Portage la Prairie, Manitoba)
71st Field Battery, RCA (Brandon, Manitoba)

30th Field Artillery Regiment, RCA (Ottawa)
1st Field Battery, RCA
2nd Field Battery, RCA

42nd Field Artillery Regiment (Lanark and Renfrew Scottish), RCA (Pembroke, Ontario)[6]
35th Field Battery, RCA

49th Field Artillery Regiment, RCA (Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario)
30th Field Battery, RCA
148th Field Battery, RCA

56th Field Artillery Regiment, RCA (Brantford, Ontario)
10th Field Battery, RCA
54th Field Battery, RCA
69th Field battery, RCA

62nd Field Artillery Regiment, RCA (Shawinigan, Quebec)
81st Field Battery, RCA
185th Field Battery, RCA

Independent batteries
20th Independent Field Battery, RCA (Lethbridge, AB)
84th Independent Field Battery, RCA (Yarmouth, Nova Scotia)
116th Independent Field Battery, RCA (Kenora, Ontario)

Since spring 2005, 10th Field Regiment, 26th Field Regiment and 116th Independent Field Battery have been grouped together as 38 Canadian Brigade Group's (38 CBG) Artillery Tactical Group (ATG).


The grand essentials of happiness: something to do, something to love, something to hope for.  Allan K. Chalmers

Offline beardedsawyer

  • Guest
  • *
  • 920
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #2 on: November 14, 2016, 23:56:59 »
That is fantastic. Thank you Simian Turner.

The closest I could come up with was size of unit and number of guns used. But only in a very general sense. Wikipedia failed me tonight.
"If people had rubber pockets, they'd steal soup."

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 144,530
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,598
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #3 on: November 15, 2016, 10:19:51 »
Most of the batteries have shrunk from 6 guns to 3-4 or to 81mm mortars as the 105mm slowly die off.

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 208,270
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,774
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #4 on: November 15, 2016, 11:53:43 »
So, I did a quick establishment check of the 1st, 2nd, and 10th.  All of those regiments are established with only one Fd Bty.  I assume the pattern extends to other regiments as well.  The list of Bty above must include several that are do not actually exist.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 204,395
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,430
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #5 on: November 15, 2016, 16:09:36 »
So, I did a quick establishment check of the 1st, 2nd, and 10th.  All of those regiments are established with only one Fd Bty.  I assume the pattern extends to other regiments as well.  The list of Bty above must include several that are do not actually exist.

I can't be more recent then the establishment listed in the Regiment's Standing Orders Vol 2 as of March 2015 but all the batteries listed by Simian Turner are correct. For the last several decades a battery represented six guns of whatever calibre and the people necessary to man operate them (F echelon) and maintain and support them (A echelon) (roughly 100 to 130 people). (Artillery however wasn't limited to field guns an a battery could also be a headquarters battery, surveillance and target acquisition battery, missile battery, anti-aircraft battery etc) For the reserves however the battery was typically a 105mm howitzer battery.

The fact of the matter is that for many decades, the actual equipment held by each regiment was confined to the reduced F echelon of a battery. Similarly, authorized manpower actual manpower also rarely exceeded that of the F echelon of a battery. It is for reasons like that that 26th Fd, 10th Fd and 116 Ind frequently grouped their resources in order to deploy one fully manned and equipped battery on field exercises. Even in Ontario, 7th Tor, 11th Fd, 30th Fd, 42nd Fd, 49th Fd and 56th Fd grouped their resources to produce both 105 mm, 81mm mortar and Surveillance and Target Acquisition capabilities of one small regiment.

The removal of mortars from the infantry and reintroduction of STA has made a significant change in the structure of the artillery. Where once a battery consisted of six guns with a battery commander and two or three forward observers, there is now have a mix of resources that is changing both as a result of dictates from higher authorities as well as the realities of the limitations of local resources. Some regiments designated one of their batteries as an 81mm mortar battery, others designate one of their batteries as a headquarters or a training battery.

That said, the answer to beardedsawyer's question was correctly answered by Simian Turner.

In essence, the battery is the building block of the artillery. An independent battery stands as it's own unit where the battery commander (by establishment, a major) is the "Commanding Officer" while in a regiment, several batteries are grouped together with (by establishment) a Lieutenant Colonel as the "CO".

 [cheers]
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 208,270
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,774
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #6 on: November 15, 2016, 16:16:57 »
I can't be more recent then the establishment listed in the Regiment's Standing Orders Vol 2 as of March 2015 but all the batteries listed by Simian Turner are correct.
A unit's standing orders are not the authority on establishment.  A unit can organize however it wants, but in the CAF establishment those batteries do not exist.  If a unit is spreading itself to organize in more batteries than it is established to have, then it does so understanding that it will never be resourced or manned to actually achieve that organization.

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 462,790
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,793
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #7 on: November 15, 2016, 16:48:34 »
I suspect many of those listed are the HQ batteries, which show in ARE as generic HQ structures.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 204,395
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,430
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #8 on: November 15, 2016, 17:41:07 »
A unit's standing orders are not the authority on establishment.  A unit can organize however it wants, but in the CAF establishment those batteries do not exist.  If a unit is spreading itself to organize in more batteries than it is established to have, then it does so understanding that it will never be resourced or manned to actually achieve that organization.

Actually the "establishment" for the batteries, regiments etc come from CFOOs etc not from the whim of the unit.

Units might temporarily not man or assign resources to a battery but that doesn't mean it doesn't officially exist. It continues to be active in the order of battle.

An interesting example of the reverse was back in the early 1970s when there was no CFOO for F Bty 2 RCHA (2RCHA only had D Bty [in Pet] and E Bty [in Gagetown and actually serving the School of Artillery]) however to create a second fire unit in Pet, the CO redistributed his personnel and borrowed equipment from the Ontario reserve arty units to stand up an unofficial F Bty for a number of years.

What Vol 2 of the RCA's Standing Orders does is list the establishments and lineage of artillery units/subunits at any given point in time as per the actual CFOOs. The link to Vol 2 is here: http://canadianartillery.ca/orders-and-library/standing-orders-for-the-rca/

As of Mar 2015 all of these batteries were still there. I don't know off hand as to whether or not there has been an actual reduction of these batteries from the official order of battle since then. My guess is that they have been unofficially stood down due to manning issues (That's my guess because changes to the reserve CFOOs have been quite rare over the last few decades because no one cares very much and because it does effect authorized strength levels).

OldSweat has much better ties into the arty net than I do and might be able to shed some light on any recent strength reductions.

 [cheers]
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 208,270
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,774
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #9 on: November 15, 2016, 19:22:55 »
Actually the "establishment" for the batteries, regiments etc come from CFOOs etc not from the whim of the unit.
CFOOs establish units but not the sub-units.  Whims of the unit also, as you state, do not establish sub-units (though, units may attempt to organize batteries based on whims - these batteries are not established).  Approved establishments are found in HRMS, and that is where sub-units are established.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 204,395
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,430
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #10 on: November 15, 2016, 21:46:48 »
CFOOs establish units but not the sub-units.  Whims of the unit also, as you state, do not establish sub-units (though, units may attempt to organize batteries based on whims - these batteries are not established).  Approved establishments are found in HRMS, and that is where sub-units are established.

In a way we're talking apples and oranges a bit. Historically batteries were "established" long before HRMS existed.

The various artillery batteries were "established" over the last 150 years through various General Orders, Militia General Orders and Canadian Army Orders. During the 1800s some two dozen independent field and garrison batteries were authorized. Early in the 1900s the practice of allocating some batteries to artillery brigades occurred and during the 1st World War (when the number of batteries expanded greatly) it became a regular practice to allocate some four batteries per field or garrison artillery brigade.

At the time of the 2nd World War the term "Brigade" changed to "Regiment" but the batteries all retained their numerical designations (except Horse Artillery batteries which are lettered). The numerically designated batteries that exist now can all trace their linage back to their initial formation by virtue of a specific GO, MGO or CAO even though they may have from time to time been allocated from one Regiment to another. E.g. 7th Toronto Regiment was originally formed in Sarnia as 7th Fd whereas the three batteries that now reside in Toronto (9th, 15th and 130th) belonged to Toronto's 29th Fd Regt. (A separate 7th Toronto Regt RCA had existed from between 1931 until disbanded in 1954). In 1965 29th Fd was amalgamated with 42 Med Regt and 1 Locating Regt in Toronto (7th Fd's, 42nd's and 1st Loc's batteries all went to  the supp OoB) and at that time 7th Fd Regt RCA was renamed 7th Toronto Regt RCA, the title moved to Toronto, where it was allocated the three battery numbers that had belonged to 29th Fd and also all the personnel from the 29th, 42nd and 1st Loc.

I guess all of that is a long roundabout way of saying that in the artillery, batteries endure while regiments are transient. MOOs and CFOOs and HRMS and Tables of Organization and Equipment might create and allocate the units personnel and equipment, but batteries are not simply a minor component. They are historically created entities that exist on the order of battle allocated to a specific regiment (or exist as an independent entity). They remain active and allocated as such (even if temporarily zero manned) until they are officially reallocated to another regiment or allocated to the supplementary order of battle.

Like I said, apples and oranges.

 [cheers]
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline BC Old Guy

  • Member
  • ****
  • 10,535
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 153
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #11 on: November 15, 2016, 22:08:12 »
FJAG - Thanks for the succinct and complete detail of how the Artillery organizes itself.  I've been aware of some of this from previous experience/discussions/Arty friends.  You've made the development of the current Artillery much more understandable.

BCOG

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 208,270
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,774
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #12 on: November 15, 2016, 23:22:51 »
It is appropriate that you keep using quotation marks, because you are not talking about establishments.  You are talking about heritage and lineage.  While important for identity, these are not elements of establishment.

Yes, organizations were established before we had MOO, CFOO, and HRMS.  But these are the authorized mechanisms to manage establishments today.

So, while the regimental lineage may include two or three field batteries, the regimental establishment authorizes only one field battery.

Generally, PRes units have a second established sub-unit identified according to corps as HQ&Svcs Bty, Admin Sqn, HQ Sqn, or Admin Coy.  This second sub-unit usually holds a mini-RQMS, an ROR, a course instructor cadre, and a place to stash an extra Maj and MWO. It is not an uncommon practice for units to grab the Maj & MWO, split the one mission sub-unit in half, and claim the unit to consist of two sub-units.

My concern, and I have seen it played out, is that this becomes a source of disillusionment for soldiers who are told by thier chain of command that the unit is two mission sub-units and they are told what personnel & resources constitute a mission sub-unit.  These soldiers look around, see everything lacking for two mission sub-units, and lament "why doesn't the Army give us everything we need to to our job!"  But it is not the Army's fault for not providing the resources for a sub-unit that does not actually exist.  Rather, the predicament is something the unit chose to do to itself.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 204,395
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,430
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #13 on: November 16, 2016, 16:54:17 »
Originally, artillery regiments did not have a headquarters and services battery; they had a regimental headquarters and field batteries. The QM, OpsO, Maint etc was all part of the Regimental Headquarters. In some case in the 1970s we in the RCHA started forming unofficial headquarters batteries for administrative control and eventually that turned into official headquarters and services batteries. To my knowledge no such structure was ever introduced within reserve artillery units because their service tail is only a tiny fraction of that in regular force units.

It's been some time since I've seen the establishments for reserve arty units but in my day they included personnel staffing for each of the "allocated" subunits. This was significant from the point of view of how many majors, captains, master warrant officer and warrant officers you could promote to within the unit (no unit ever had enough lieutenants, sergeants or bdrs/gnrs)

I understand the morale issue that you refer to but quite frankly the last time that I saw a reserve artillery unit that could properly man all the equipment that it had was back in the 60s in Toronto when we had over two hundred all ranks but effectively only a four gun troop of equipment plus a battery headquarters (part of the problem was space available at Moss Park armoury) Since then most two and three battery regiments are hard pressed to man a single six-gun battery which is why you find the grouping of regiments into these brigade tactical artillery groups in order to form a viable organization for an exercise.

Establishments aside, I'm a major critic of the Canadian Forces approach to its regular and reserve force artillery structure. IMHO, the Canadian Army has greatly compromised it's artillery capability by ignoring what the reserves can bring to the table.

Artillery is one of the combat arms whose role during peacetime is very limited but it's need in combat situations is highly important. The skill levels on the gunline/STA elements for the most parts are drills which can easily be mastered by reservists. IMHO, it is an organization where the regiments should be a blend of regulars and reservists with the regular force staffing the key command appointments, the more complex technical skills, and a sufficient base of guns to make the unit function in its day to day training.

Most of the gunline and some forward observers should be reservists who bring the units to full strength. The result would be more and more effective deployable artillery units. The PY savings in regular force junior ranks and reserve force senior ranks would easily fund the extra equipment which the artillery desperately needs.

 [cheers]
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline MCG

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 208,270
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,774
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #14 on: November 16, 2016, 17:12:00 »
I understand the morale issue that you refer to but quite frankly the last time that I saw a reserve artillery unit that could properly man all the equipment that it had was ...
Personnel are one of the resources that I have heard soldiers blame the Army for not providing.  "We are supposed to be three field batteries, why don't they let us recruit the people"

IMHO, the Canadian Army has greatly compromised it's artillery capability by ignoring what the reserves can bring to the table.
:nod:  We need to do a lot of improvement in our Artillery.  The Russians have us out-gunned in both volume and range of fire, and they still use things like DPICM.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 144,530
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,598
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #15 on: November 16, 2016, 17:46:48 »
Give the artillery newer 105mm guns, the right trucks to haul them, ammo and the ability to recruit and train and I bet many of the units will be able to field a 6 gun battery. In 15th Fd we used to have a "Band gun" which the band would provide the crew for it and we also took promising cadets. I recall having a 9 man gun crew once.

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 204,395
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,430
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #16 on: November 16, 2016, 18:44:39 »
I was an RSSO when we still did our own recruiting. Ever since reserve recruiting went to the CFRC there have been problems. The matter was still a constant topic when I last sat on CRes&C Council in 2009.

I sometimes have to laugh. My entire 44 year army career started because a buddy of mine got a $10.00 bounty for hauling me down to the armouries and convincing me to sign up. Underage drinking, driving 2 1/2 ton trucks at sixteen and making things go boom had a lot to do with keeping me there.

Only a few units, including 7th Tor, 15th Fd, 62e RAC, regularly have over a hundred all ranks and do okay but the rest barely scrape together sixty or seventy if they are lucky (even less when you consider regularly parading effectives). Then there are budget issues.

As far as a new 105mm is concerned I think the first thing that we need to do is to determine whether their is a tactical role for it or whether we standardize across the board on 155mm and rockets. That's one of my big complaints as well. Our 105s are really just training aids (which to some extent is good considering the comparative price of ammo) but we haven't done anything to really identify what our overall force structure ought to be and thus determine what type of artillery to support it with (I could just cry every time I see one of our M109s as a monument in front of some legion)

The system is limping along and we all know it. To my utter regret I worked at the top and could see that the will to radically fix things simply wasn't there. We did accomplish some minor fine tuning but the lethargy within the regular force establishment that own us was impossible to overcome.  :brickwall:

 [cheers]
« Last Edit: November 17, 2016, 12:16:17 by FJAG »
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 144,530
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,598
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #17 on: November 17, 2016, 12:00:27 »
While I prefer a 122mm solution, it ain’t to happen. The reserves had the 155 howitzer for a bit, named the “pig” for good reason. The 105mm is still getting used around the world and is the perfect size for the Reserves. It’s not perfect but it works on many levels people tend to ignore. You can run a 105mm with 4 guys, 3 for a short bit. Make the sighting system the same as the 155 so any cross training is easy. Plus if you have 150x 105mm in your system and the world goes to crap, you can bring them to the fight. The constant bickering and replacement avoidance means you have effectively removed your artillery capability, the 37 or so guns that the reg force has is just not enough and if you went 155 to the reserves , we would be lucky to have 2 guns each and only 1 serviceable for gun camp and several units won’t be able to fit them into the armouries. What would work is a mix of 105mm and 120mm mortars, both are in NATO service and will work well with the reserve capacity. Give the 81mm back to the infantry where they belong.

Offline beardedsawyer

  • Guest
  • *
  • 920
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #18 on: November 18, 2016, 01:21:55 »
WOW...

I love this board! A guy asks a question and starts a whole conversation. Very cool.

Thanks to everyone for all the responses.
"If people had rubber pockets, they'd steal soup."

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 556,550
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,197
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #19 on: November 18, 2016, 04:48:03 »
Give the 81mm back to the infantry where they belong.
I love you man.  ;)

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 144,530
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,598
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #20 on: November 18, 2016, 11:04:58 »
and enough PY's for a heavy weapons, AT and AD Platoons, a strong infantry keeps the arty safe, who keep the infantry safe :)

Offline FJAG

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 204,395
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,430
  • Ex Gladio Justicia
    • Google Sites Wolf Riedel
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #21 on: November 18, 2016, 21:02:09 »
and enough PY's for a heavy weapons, AT and AD Platoons, a strong infantry keeps the arty safe, who keep the infantry safe :)

 :bravo:
Illegitimi non carborundum
Semper debeatis percutis ictu primo
Access my "Allies" and "Mark Winters, CID" book series at:
https://sites.google.com/view/wolfriedel
Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/WolfRiedelAuthor/

Offline CTD

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 3,415
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 504
Re: Reserve artillery terminology.
« Reply #22 on: November 18, 2016, 23:14:38 »
in the late 90s 56 Bty 5th BC Field Regiment had a strength of 120 persons and paraded 60-70 a night for a little while, 55Bty was around 60.  Biggest reason for the decline was the lack of proper equipment to train with and also lack of funding to support the training. Had a hard time keeping Soldiers interested when you have to yell bang bang and wrap rocks in paper to simulate required grenade training.
Between the 5th and 15Fd we could have had 2 full gun Btys possibly 3 and all the support like Recce and FOO partys with a few spares. We did not have the equipment nor the money to support it all.