Armoured Light Recce Vehicle for PRes Armd? (Merged splits from LAV III MGS and from TAPV)

[TCBF]

- Surv Op is about the cheapest course, folowed by Coyote Driver.  Doable.  If the Reg F foots the bill for the man-days, R&Q, etc.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

George what are the possibilities of putting turret simulators into the armouries? At least 1-2 per brigade so some regional training and familiarization could take place. I am a big fan of Steel Beasts and the Professional version seems a fairly cheap way to give some gunnery training and some training for Officers commanding AFV’s units?

 

[McG]

George what are the possibilities of putting turret simulators into the armouries? At least 1-2 per brigade so some regional training and familiarization could take place.

All existing trainers require the slaving of an actual vehicle.  Therefore, the chance of getting these is none.  Buying synthetic environment crew trainers which do not require the actual vehicles would be an option, but this would require getting the momentum for a capital project to make it happen.  Even more than money, limited manpower resources in DLR & DGLEPM would prevent this from happening in the near future (unless you can convice CLS that these trainers are more important that TAPV, CCV, FME, LWTH, LRPR, etc, etc).

 

[George Wallace]

Makes the CLS sound like a "dinosaur" doesn't it.  No money for Training Simulators on the big ticket items, but lots for small ticket items.  We have small arms simulators, why not simulators to train on the 'big' guns?  The price tag for Tank and LAV turrets and Trg is quite high and it has been proven that very valuable training can be done cheaper on simulators.  Small arms ammo is far cheaper than 25, 105 and 120 ammo.  Let's cut those costs with more simulation. 

On the downside, Colin, is the training and retention of operators to keep the simulators functioning.  These similators can be expensive (not as expensive as a real LAV or Tank) and complex pieces of equipment.  Perhaps a couple of "National" centers set up in Edmonton/Wainwright, Petawawa and the CTC, along the lines of what is set up in Ft Knox would be more practical.

Just to cover the Turret Stand question a little:  A Turret usually means that there is a Hull sitting somewhere, hopefully being used for D&M rather than sitting useless in the back 40.

 

[dapaterson]

There are projects to acquire simulators - the goal is to have them integrated, so exercises can be conducted between non-colocated units.  Problem, as always, is money - not so much availability of it (though that is a concern) but the estimated value of the project exceeds MND authorities - therefore approvals are much more involved, and are challenging other, similar big-ticket items or other items requiring external approvals for priority.

 

[George Wallace]

To add to that, with the speed of advancements in technology, and the amounts of technology out there, there is the fairly complicated matter of finding the right simulators and technology for this.  Will it be upgradable, or will it just become obsolete the minute it comes online?

 

[McG]

If the Reg F foots the bill for the man-days, R&Q, etc.

No.  We’d be going down the wrong path in telling the RCDs that they have to cover all the costs (from pay to rations) in order to run reserve individual training courses that the Army did not find important enough to provide a budget for.  It is an outstanding recipe for failure.

George has it right.  If the decision makers in Ottawa feel that such an approach is appropriate, then the resources should be given to the reserves in the Army & Areas’ business plans.

The thought then developed in my mind that if the Corps really wanted to bring Reserve Armour up to speed on the current equipment and tactics, etc., then perhaps the Corps should budget now, and plan now …

But, it is probably already too late even for the 10/11 FY.  If the Armd Corps is going to decide it will take a new direction for the training of its reserve units, it needs to make that decision and sell it to the Army early enough that the planning direction can be included when the call letters start cascading downward in the spring.

Makes the CLS sound like a "dinosaur" doesn't it.  No money for Training Simulators on the big ticket items, but lots for small ticket items.  We have small arms simulators, why not simulators to train on the 'big' guns? 

Only if you don't look at this in any sort of context of time lines.  The SAT & WES did not have to compete with TAPV, CCV, LRPR, etc for project manpower resources or a time slot at PMB, TB, etc.

… spend time in the Summer months to run Crses for Reservists.  Run Turret Operator (25 mm and 120 mm) for Reservists.  Run Surv OP courses.  Run D&M Crses.  Get rid of the Training Delta.  Provide for a good pool of trained pers to draw from to supplement Operations.

Unfortunately, there are not enough vehicles for the regular force to provide this level or training for itself.  The plan for all the vehicle procurements that we have planned will only see this reality continue or get worse.  I don’t doubt there is significant value to having reserves qualified on the same platforms for individual augmentation, but not if that compromises the regular force capability.

As discussed above, there may be a middle ground with synthetic environment training systems.  However, even here there must be dispassionate assessments as to what reserve units could be effectively sustained through this means and contribute to operations.  If some usage of the real equipment is required (and it probably should be) then there may be a ceiling on the number of Armed Res that actually can be effectively sustained even with the synthetic environment trainers.

What does it take?  Drive and Determination and above all, Strong Leadership at the top in the Corps.

Maybe.  I was recently accused of blaming “the multitude” (the poor individuals of the Armd reserve units at the bottom) for what is really “lack of leadership from above” (those bad men in the RCAC hierarchy). 

In reality, I feel there are a lot who could be blamed though very few (if any) who could be blamed individualy.  However, there has been a deficiency of initiative & leadership at many (to all) levels from the units up to the top of the Army.

At the top, the Army & the RCAC should have identified a problem.  If there is a surplus of Armd Res units, then that should have been identified (including a breakdown by brigade and metropolitan areas) and solicitations should have been made to the units in order to find who might have been willing to transform into a new (and more potentially more relevant) role outside the branch.

At the bottom, units “left hanging for years and years minus a Role or Doctrine to implement” (without a viable, attainable and doctrinally relevant role) have continued to hold to a pipedream of training on modern AFV for individual to Lvl 3 training.  It is not going to happen.  COs should have recognized their predicament and could have pushed for a new role (sans black hat) that is doctrinally supported and achievable in a way that is more relevant to the Army.

All the layers of command & staff in between might have observed and achieved momentum for a solution based on a perspective with some combination of the previous two.

In the end, it is collectives & organizations which have failed to adequately resolve the problem of the PRes Armd “place” in the larger picture.

 

[tango22a]

MCG:

Firstly: Why don't you come out and admit to yourself and others on this thread that you ARE prejudiced against the PRes in general and PRes Armour in particular?...starve them of equipment, a VIABLE ROLE, training etc....and when they complain DISBAND or RE-ROLE them!

Secondly: I could sit here for a Millennium crossing swords with you but it's not worth my time or effort!
With your armour of righteousness (I'm RIGHT and the other a$$hole is WRONG!!) it' a lost cause!

Thirdly: Due to SITE CONDUCT GUIDLINES I can't really say what I really want to say about you, but IMHO you are suffering from a terminal case of C.R.I.S (thanks "medicineman")

Fourthly: Since I am"an old R011C Recce Crewman Dinosaur" I have been posted to the Old Dinosaur Farm and am presently waiting for the Wrecker/flatbed to haul me off.

tango22a

 

[SeaKingTacco]

T22A,

With all respect, that is not how I read any of MCG's posts.  He is simply laying out the situation as it currently is, not how you wish it was.  It is not Reserve bashing- you will note, that if you actually read his posts, he lays plenty of blame on Regular Force decision makers.

If you honestly think anyone in Canada is going to download Leo 2s or Coyotes or LAVs to any reserve unit, you are not living in the real world.

I agree with him.  It may be time for the more forward thinking Regiments to go actively search out a new role.

And you seriously need to take some of the emotion out your posts.  It really hurts your credibility when you come off like a raving lunatic.

 

[tango22a]

Sea King Tacco:

I stand corrected. I may be a raving lunatic but unfortunately I feel that I have to stand up to people who dispense their views from ivory towers. I will admit that I have a major attitude problem, but when people step on my crank with their golf spikes I feel that I should be allowed at least one teeny-weeny scream of pain. I will resume "Lurking in the shadows" and leave this thread to persons better qualified.

Cheers,

tango22a

 

[Eye In The Sky]

A few comments/observations:

- I can't say I disagree with MCGs position here, as I see it, he is forcing *us* to ask, think about and answer some basic, though hard to swallow, questions.  I think that is a good thing.  How can you fix something properly before even addressing the "what is wrong" aspect.

- the absolute best trg ever done in my old unit was probably the stuff we did at the Mounted Warfare Simulation Center in Fort Knox.  Why?  In the Bradley sims, we had to adapt QUICKLY to (1) a veh with a turret (2) having a Gnr (3) hatches-down at all times [no more tapping someone on the shoulder and saying "no no over there".  It forced dvrs, gnrs, CCs, et al to get rid of the *Iltis-Warrior skill-set*.  Anyone who did Iltis recce knows the bad habits developed in that time for the P Res Recce world.  Also, we went as 60 Tp for a Tank Sqn.  That was a new beast in itself that most people had never seen before.  On one of these trg ex's I was on, we worked with Apache crews who, IIRC, were sitting in their simulators in Germany or something like that; atleast that is what the MSG told our RSS staff when we showed up on Adv Party.  I could go on and list all the *small* things that made the trg the best I had ever attended.

- I have always thought the Engineers did it right when they stood up RETS (Reserve Engineer Trg Sqn) when CFSME moved to Gagetown.  For whatever reason, the Res Combat Engineer courses were never a part of the ARTS slate and I envied them for this.  Although we used Armd School resources (bays, Dvr Examiners, etc) we never "belonged" to the Armoured School and, IMO, CFSME did (if they still do it this way) right.  Although out of the PREs and Armour worlds now, I will always think that the Armour School should have a Reserve Trg Sqn and all Res Crmn trg should come from that organization. 

- In '96, we did ARCON in Bisons.  It took about 1-2 days for the crews to get used to this veh from an Iltis.  I'd say that was the best exercise we ever did in a trg area (we were in the Lawfield for most of it).  Knowing the Bison's are all spoken for before I say this, I will say, IMO, this veh was the BEST veh for PRes Armour types to train with as a stepping-stone to the Coyote or other "real" recce veh. 

 

[Nfld Sapper]

- I have always thought the Engineers did it right when they stood up RETS (Reserve Engineer Trg Sqn) when CFSME moved to Gagetown.  For whatever reason, the Res Combat Engineer courses were never a part of the ARTS slate and I envied them for this.  Although we used Armd School resources (bays, Dvr Examiners, etc) we never "belonged" to the Armoured School and, IMO, CFSME did (if they still do it this way) right.  Although out of the PREs and Armour worlds now, I will always think that the Armour School should have a Reserve Trg Sqn and all Res Crmn trg should come from that organization.

Not sure if you want to hold us as high up on the pedestal as you want......


RETS has it owns problems within CFSME if you catch my drift.......

We usually are the child that no one wants...... example we have some hard training classrooms to use but if FETS (Field Engineer Trg Sqn, REG FORCE) is there we get thrown out to the makeshift classrooms (i.e. MOD tents) . Same goes for equipment, most of our stuff is TSR'd from the units and are usually the only items we are allowed to use, the stuff in the storage bays are for the Reg Force courses only.....

I can go on but that shouldn't be for the open forums.


There is talk of doing away with FETS and RETS and replacing it with an Engineer Training Squadron which will train both sides of the house year round.

 

[blacktriangle]

Reading Infanteer's post in the TAPV thread, I think his idea might be the smartest thing. Buy LAV H, put a new surv suite in them with some dismounts. Keep a turret. Take that money out of TAPV.

Call the reserve units. "OK guys, good news and bad news. You don't get any vehicles but you are staying blackhat"

DP1 will be dismounted training and patrolling, OP's, Comms etc (take some of the training out of the PRes DP2 recce observer course, and the DP1 inf) Take that the first summer. Screw driving G wagons, it's not like they will be around forever anyways.

Second summer if they are still in and doing well, pick the best troops and send them on a surv op crse.

During the training year, units would train on dismounted skillsets and would not require vehicles. Train on comms, weapons handling and physical fitness. If we're going to get any simulators, let's simulate the surv suite for the reserves.

You would then have a small pool of semiskilled individuals who could volunteer to go on ex with the reg f to gain experience, or if they self ID for a tour, they are already employable and could be loaded on additional courses if needed.

MCG is bang on.There are some really good people at PRes armd units, give them a doctrine and a task and you will get some excellent individual augmentees. The army needs to step up and define something realistic, and the units should help themselves and begin pushing for a new role.

So if the reserve armd world is to have a point besides working Class B at the CFRC, let's get on with it already, otherwise, re-role/stand down.

Any thoughts? I joined at 16 as a reserve crewman if anyone is wondering my interest...

TCBF do you happen to know the ballpark difference in cost of a surv op course when compared to the training already undertaken by an armd reservist?

Just me trying to think outside the box.

 

[George Wallace]

OK.

It is really nice that there are so many posting here with all kinds of suggestions.  Unfortunately, it is really grating on Armour Corps personnel when people who have absolutely no smic of what they are talking about, start making suggestions about what the Armour Corps needs.

LAV H with a Surv Suite and dismounts is just the latest example.  There is no room for dismounts with a Surv Suite in the back. 

If you don't have the knowledge and experience, you are only making a mockery of the discussion.  Your "outside the box" ideas are for the most part out of the ballpark in the realms of the Tinfoil Hat Brigade.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Not sure if you want to hold us as high up on the pedestal as you want......


RETS has it owns problems within CFSME if you catch my drift.......

We usually are the child that no one wants...... example we have some hard training classrooms to use but if FETS (Field Engineer Trg Sqn, REG FORCE) is there we get thrown out to the makeshift classrooms (i.e. MOD tents) . Same goes for equipment, most of our stuff is TSR'd from the units and are usually the only items we are allowed to use, the stuff in the storage bays are for the Reg Force courses only.....

I can go on but that shouldn't be for the open forums.


There is talk of doing away with FETS and RETS and replacing it with an Engineer Training Squadron which will train both sides of the house year round.

Me, Shane Stachnik, and a few others spent our entire summer on Swan Lake as boat ops for mostly RETS courses, with a Phase whateverthehellitisnow course thrown in for good measure.  A good chunk of my squadron was there as support to ALL Field Engineer training, not just FETS.

 

[tango22a]

Popinfresh:

No Vehicles? Train on Comms, weapons handling and PT? NO problem! Should do wonders for retention and enlistments.

Perhaps we could also study Guard Mounting and Duties of a Sentry?

I realize that we will never see front-line vehicles in the PRes, but give us a break,please!

tango22a

 

[SeaKingTacco]

So what do you suggest?

 

[tango22a]

SeaKing Tacco:

Most PRes Regiments do "Mud Recce" at this time. We do not do strictly Cavalry tasks, but operate more like Mounted Infantry, using our vehicles for extra mobility.

I, personally would like to see a four to six-wheeled vehicle,carrying weapons suitable for defence, crew of four to six and equipped with night vision devices. It should be reasonably mine proof and armoured against at least 14.5mm on the frontal aspect. It might also come equipped with either Slat armour or ERA as a defence against IEDs, EFPs and RPGs. These extra armour add-ons would only be used in a  war zone.

By having this vehicle on the ground at the Regiments, formed crews would be possible. People would be able to learn the ins and outs of the vehicle and the best way(s) to employ it.

I really would prefer to have a tracked, amphibious vehicle but its nearly impossible to train on them confined to the local road net.

tango22a

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Ok.  So would this vehicle be the same as is used by the Regular Force units, or a unique fleet to the Reserve Force? 

If unique, who does the project management (given that there is no one left to project manage the stuff currently on the books)?  Where, doctrinally does this fleet in?  Most importantly- what is its operational role?  You have to admit, it would be a tough sell to any government to buy a fleet of (expensive) vehicles whose only purpose was to train people.

Now- How many vehicles for each Regiment?  A Troop? A Squadron? How do you propose to maintain these vehicles at each armoury?  How many maintainers and supply techs are you going to post to each Reserve Regiment to hand repairs and the Spare Parts accounts?  Which regular force units are you going to take them from?  Or are you just going to get the Minister to authorize 100s of new full-time positions?

Not to be cynical, but I think you are glossing over a lot of important details here and are given to wishful thinking.  And before you tell me to bugger off- I have more than a little experience in the Total Force world from the 1990s where a Reserve Unit was given almost a full Air Defence Battery's worth of equipment to use and maintain.  We had over 30 full time people working in the unit and it was a nightmare maintaining just trucks and Iltis, within 30 mins of Petawawa.  I cannot imagine a Reserve Armoured Regiment maintaining armoured vehicles without a significant manpower bill.  Who pays?

 

[tango22a]

SeaKing Tacco:

Proposed vehicle could be used by RegF. If one type of vehicle were chosen by both RegF and PRes it would surely ease the task of PRes soldiers converting to RegF vehicles.The only problem being that once RegF pounds the piss out of theirs they make up their shortages out of vehicles ear-marked for the PRes.

One troop (7 veh) per Regiment, Unless the Regiment has the trained manpower to man an extra troop.I would suggest using G-Wagons for training in basic Recce tactics leading up to conversion to the new vehicle.

Duties to include Zone Recce, Route Recce, Spot Recce, Screens, Convoy Guards, Advance to Contact, etc.

Maintenance is a poser, but if there is  a Service Battalion nearby they could perform some of the maintenance supported by an MRT posted to the Regiment supplemented by the trained vehicle crews It won't be cheap but if you want trained augmentees for RegF Armoured Regiments you're going to have to spend some money. It's much cheaper to train PRes pers at their home Regiments than to fly them to Gagetown periodically.Possibly we could learn a bit from watching how the Army National Guard supports its Cavalry Regiments.

tango22a