AOR Replacement & the Joint Support Ship (Merged Threads)

[Humphrey Bogart]

OGBD,

Couldn't concur more... and so as to not seem one sided, I spent at least the last 7-9 years in the military banging my head on the lack of maritime, and in particular maritime warfare, skills in MH; I'm convinced that banging did nothing but leave me with a headache...

Exact same problem exists in the Army.  We don't even have a data downlink capability with our tac aviation.

 

[Baz]

It hasn't gotten any better since you left, Baz.

I have long advocated that select TACCOs and pilots should attend the ORO course, much like some Tac Hel Pilots go to Kingston. I am also coming to the opinion that a pilot, Tacco and AESOp should be posted to CFNOS (or, whatever it is called this week by the RCN) while an Above water warfare director, and underwater water warfare director and a SAC (I am agnostic about which of these should be NWOs or NCMs) should be posted to 406 Sqn. It would cost neither RCN nor the RCAF anything and may help prevent some of the procedures/doctrine divergence I am seeing daily.

During RCAF Project 91 I had a SAC posted to my team at HOTEF for the info sharing piece; he later became the fleet SAC.

We bandied about the idea of remoting a radar from Hartlen's Point down to Shearwater, and then have SAC's posted there continuously.  For operational (not 406) crew's the SAC would brief and then control the flights, so they would get control time (as it was sorely lacking in the fleet) and we would "train as we fight."  Then we could also use them in the sims.  Same thing for the west coast.

It would have been a start, and there was lip service support all around, but then the same thing as always happens to ideas; no resources (esp people) to plan and execute.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

During RCAF Project 91 I had a SAC posted to my team at HOTEF for the info sharing piece; he later became the fleet SAC.

We bandied about the idea of remoting a radar from Hartlen's Point down to Shearwater, and then have SAC's posted there continuously.  For operational (not 406) crew's the SAC would brief and then control the flights, so they would get control time (as it was sorely lacking in the fleet) and we would "train as we fight."  Then we could also use them in the sims.  Same thing for the west coast.

It would have been a start, and there was lip service support all around, but then the same thing as always happens to ideas; no resources (esp people) to plan and execute.

Let me take that one for action when I get back to work next week, Baz.

 

[jollyjacktar]

I just had a good glimpse of Asterix as l was crossing the bridge.  She looks nice. Parked close to Irving.  ;D

 

[Rifleman62]

What will Irving do to her, being that close?

 

[NavyShooter]

Melt in flames of jealousy?

I think they moved the AST up the harbour a bit to avoid the storm surge last night.

It was a good storm...

 

[jollyjacktar]

My youngest lives close to Lawrencetown Beach.  The storm surge washed large boulders onto the road and destroyed it.  Hubbards too, lots of damage.

Glad they moved her regardless of reason.  Gave me a good chance to eyeball her from the MacKay both ways.  Looks very tidley in ship's side grey.

 

[Stoker]

My youngest lives close to Lawrencetown Beach.  The storm surge washed large boulders onto the road and destroyed it.  Hubbards too, lots of damage.

Glad they moved her regardless of reason.  Gave me a good chance to eyeball her from the MacKay both ways.  Looks very tidley in ship's side grey.

She'll be moving to the dockyard soon to start dry runs for rasing across NB jetty. She also still have other work to get done on board.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

3/4" teredo worms..... 8)

 

[jollyjacktar]

She'll be moving to the dockyard soon to start dry runs for rasing across NB jetty. She also still have other work to get done on board.

Back to Nottawa tomorrow, so will miss out seeing more of her.

 

[Underway]

Let me take that one for action when I get back to work next week, Baz.

This is why I love this site.  Genius people who give a crap.

 

[Edward Campbell]

I think this is a peculiar Canadian problems.

The Australians understand the need for air training at sea. That is why they recently acquired the M/V Sycamore as a fleet auxiliary to do principally air training.

http://www.damen.com/en/news/2017/04/successful_sea_trials_for_australian_matv

The RN does the same thing with the RFA Argus.

[/color]pt]In my mind, the problems of understanding the needs for air training in the RCN started when they lost their air service as a result of unification. The further we got from the Navy having an air arm, the more people with connection to the old one retired, and as result the less knowledge of what is involved in air ops existed in maritime headquarters. Nowadays, that knowledge is almost nil.

This could be remedied in different ways: One of them is re-incorporating the MH world into the Navy (RCAF will never let that happen, so there would have to be an important political will to do so). On the other hand, it could be sufficient to do two things: Let air det pilots spend time on the bridge and acquire their BWK and stand some watches, then, after their tour as Air det commander, they would be allowed, if they wish, to go on the Combat officer course and become Combat officers, then X.O.'s and finally CO and so forth. They would have to OT to NWO at the Lcdr level, but it could be made into a form of career progression that would be seamless.

Don't blame Mr Hellyer for that. His initial plan had both MARCOM and MOBCOM with organic air groups ~ 100% command owned and operated. But times were tough in the late 1960s and Navy admirals and Army generals wanted more ships and more tanks and they, the Navy admirals and Army generals, not RCAF brass, gave short shrift to their air groups.

By the mid 1970s the air force, whose nose had been out of joint over a whole bunch of issues, convinced the CDS of the day (Dextraze) that it was impossible for anyone to do worse than the Army and Navy and so Air Command was born ~ the only time in history, as far as I know, that a major military command was organized around means of locomotion! It was an act of policy vandalism, but 100% of the blame lies with naval and military officers, none goes to Mr Hellyer and none to the civil servants who, I was told, mostly, just shook their heads, partially in silent exasperation and partially in awe of the depths of military stupidity that was on display.

 

[Good2Golf]

Exact same problem exists in the Army.  We don't even have a data downlink capability with our tac aviation.

[temporary OT]

You can thank the CLS of the day when INGRESS was built.  He said "no link, otherwise the 146 will be treated like a UAV."

You can watch him these days on CPAC, standing in for his boss when Goodale isn't in town... :nod:

[back on topic]

 

[Eye In The Sky]

[temporary OT]

You can thank the CLS of the day when INGRESS was built.  He said "no link, otherwise the 146 will be treated like a UAV."

You can watch him these days on CPAC, standing in for his boss when Goodale isn't in town... :nod:

[back on topic]

Most people have no idea just how much the long screwdriver can actually deter from local commanders being able to use their intelligence, initiative and 'feel', and usually not in a good way.  Aurora folks lived it the past few years and much frustration was experienced. 

 

[Good2Golf]

Most people have no idea just how much the long screwdriver can actually deter from local commanders being able to use their intelligence, initiative and 'feel', and usually not in a good way.  Aurora folks lived it the past few years and much frustration was experienced.

I will note that CLS and Comd CEFCOM were having a tiff between each other, each arguing that they were looking after "their" troops...combined effect of 6-leaf bickering.  Sad.

G2G

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Don't blame Mr Hellyer for that. His initial plan had both MARCOM and MOBCOM with organic air groups ~ 100% command owned and operated. But times were tough in the late 1960s and Navy admirals and Army generals wanted more ships and more tanks and they, the Navy admirals and Army generals, not RCAF brass, gave short shrift to their air groups.

By the mid 1970s the air force, whose nose had been out of joint over a whole bunch of issues, convinced the CDS of the day (Dextraze) that it was impossible for anyone to do worse than the Army and Navy and so Air Command was born ~ the only time in history, as far as I know, that a major military command was organized around means of locomotion! It was an act of policy vandalism, but 100% of the blame lies with naval and military officers, none goes to Mr Hellyer and none to the civil servants who, I was told, mostly, just shook their heads, partially in silent exasperation and partially in awe of the depths of military stupidity that was on display.

I should have been more specific and say that it was "in the wake" of unification, not as consequence of it.

However, you are incorrect in stating that MARCOM or MOBCOM "owned and operated 100%" their organic air assets.

They had 100% operational command of their use - which BTW was no different than before unification - but they did not own them, they were owned and maintained by this beautiful creation MATERIEL Command, and the Navy and Army lost all control over training to that other monster: TRAINING Command.

It took the Navy 4 years to regain control over the dockyards and five to regain control over the naval part of training, even after it became clear that the Materiel/Training commands could never be made to work properly for these specialized tasks.

You may recall that, as a result of unification, the RCAF was split apart: European portion became part of that CF Europe command, Fighters became part of the "NORAD command", all transport became part of TRANSPORT command, and of course, the other assets were split between Marcom and Mobcom.

In any event, I would not say that the loss of Naval air for the RCN (or Marcom, as it was then) is in any way the result of the Admirals giving short shrift to their air group (in fact five of the nine admirals at the time were from Naval Air group). It was a result of our good friend P.E.T. cutting the operation budget by fifty percent over five years, and naval personnel by the same amount (he didn't quite do it through cuts, but by freezing the budget at a fixed amount in a time when inflation was running at 7 to 9 % a year and, at the same time increasing the pay scales of personnel ).

In any event, Naval Air (Bonnie and her air groups) represented 50% of the Navy's operations costs. The decision came down to having Bonnie all by herself on the ocean or maintaining the four escort groups we were required to have under the current NATO plans and obligations. The 24 frigates and destroyers won, for obvious reasons (in the end, even that could not be maintained, and, to artificially maintain our 24 escorts requirement towards NATO, SAINT-LAURENT, SAINT-CROIX, COLUMBIA and CHAUDIERE were put in "ready" reserve when the IRO's came into service).

But it was by no way a NAVY decision due to ignorance of the importance of naval air or of not caring for it.

As for the RCAF, the way it was split all over the place after unification, I can perfectly see why their remaining Marshals (now Generals) would have "schemed" to get some form of control over most air assets. Please recall here that, while the long range maritime air patrol assets were under operational control of the RCN at the time of unification, they were already owned and operated by the RCAF. 

 

[Baz]

You may recall that, as a result of unification, the RCAF was split apart: European portion became part of that CF Europe command, Fighters became part of the "NORAD command", all transport became part of TRANSPORT command, and of course, the other assets were split between Marcom and Mobcom.

Splitting hairs here: "the other assets were split between Marcom and Mobcom" was not part of "the RCAF was split apart."  These other assets didn't belong to the RCAF prior to unification, they were wholly part of the RCN and Canadian Army, except for MPA, which was part of the RCAF, as you alluded to..  In a sense they were left were they were.

But that is an excellent explanation of the road that got us to the point were we have a Naval Air Arm in name only, belonging to an Air Force that doesn't care about or understand Maritime issues, working for a Navy that can't afford to pay anything more than lip service to Naval Air.  And as the decades of "cuts" passed, more and more of the institutions and organizations that were there to keep that from happening disappeared; I'm, of the opinion that the disappearance of MAG did in fact matter a lot.  It was important to have an Air Flag officer working directly for the admiral, with a dedicated staff dealing with Naval Air issues; as a matter of fact, I believe that MAG E&R (Engineering and Requirements) would have made a lot of things I did *much* easier.

The process seems to be continuing to happen, see https://army.ca/forums/index.php?action=post;quote=1515393;topic=17282.1625.  The logic stated makes sense, keep it in the ensign as the Air Dets embark but not in the badge as they are not organic to the RCN.  I am curious as to whether it was part of the pre-unification RCN badge... I goggled but couldn't find the answer?

 

[Good2Golf]

FWIW, Baz, and you more than many will know this, replace MARCOM with FMC and Fleet Air Arm with Army Aviation and you have the two corners of the RCAF that the RCAF inherently never liked from the outset.

#MiseryLovesCompany

 

[Baz]

FWIW, Baz, and you more than many will know this, replace MARCOM with FMC and Fleet Air Arm with Army Aviation and you have the two corners of the RCAF that the RCAF inherently never liked from the outset.

#MiseryLovesCompany

Yep, based on my understanding, concur.

There seems to be very good reasons why *most* countries navies retain Naval Aviation, and most countries armies retain Tactical Aviation...

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Yep, based on my understanding, concur.

There seems to be very good reasons why *most* countries navies retain Naval Aviation, and most countries armies retain Tactical Aviation...

You obviously don't understand that the rest of the world refuses to understand Canada's brilliance in military affairs...