I found this some years ago on an RRCA Powerpoint in the Public Domain
Disregard the numbers and focus on the array of tasks that the Artillery anticipates performing and assume that it is broken into Troops for accounting purposes. One task requires one Troop. Some will be brigaded into Batteries, some will be assigned to Battle Groups, some to Brigades.
Note the Act Function and the GBAD function.
Note the small number of Gun Troops, the absence of Mortar Troops and the lack of MLRS, AT and LAM Troops.
Note the (at the time) lack of Air Defence, the absence of VSHORAD, SHORAD, MRAD and LRAD Troops
And the Artillery wanted to add the MRR Radar (which it did), a longer range UAV, and a Meterological capability.
We talk about span of control.
At this point I figure that a Brigade should be commanded by a Brigadier so that he can continue to outrank his CRA because with that array of assets in a Brigade the CRA needs to be a Colonel because his Regiment needs to be an III Regiment and not an II Regiment just to manage all the Batteries and Independent Troops required.
This is not a slag of the Arty. It is to draw attention to all the technical skills that are necessary but taken for granted when talking about operating an independent Brigade Group. The Engineers can bring their own list. As can the Service and Sigs folks.
The problem as I see it is that both the Techies and the Combat arms types are at fault. The Techies are only too happy to say "We can do that!" while the Combat Arms are saying "Fill yer boots! That's not our job. - Charge!"
Meanwhile all of that lot needs to be protected, shielded, defended. Call it what you will. And that takes Infanteers that are not swanning around in LAVs like Spam-in-a-Can targets waiting to be useful.
And then there are the Infanteers necessary to protect the helicopters that should be working with the Brigade. And those protecting the BMA and the LoC. And a bunch of other mundane tasks.
And the RCAC searches for jobs to do.
Here's some thoughts.
All of that defensive work - turn that over to Reserve heavy infantry companies. They could even be Independent Companies attached to one of the three Regular regiments but outside the Battalion structure. They don't need to be part of a Battalion because they will be under control of the Service Bn CO, the CRA, the CRE, CRCAF, Bde HQ, on independent taskings.
Turn all of the Met work, the UAV work, the Air Space Co-Ordination Work, even the GBAD work, over to the RCAF along with the Helicopters as part of their Expeditionary duties. Hire bodies that don't mind being muddy and sleeping under canvas.
Transfer the FOO/FAC parties to the Cavalry and the Infantry. Teach them how to request fires to the Arty's satisfaction.
Let the Arty concentrate on STA work, Fire Support and Counter-Battery Fires and Fire Support Co-Ordination and equip them with SP Mortars, SP Guns and SP Missiles - Direct Fire (for taking out tanks, helicopters and UAVs) Indirect PGMs and LAMs and LRPFs
And that just leaves the RCAC and the RCIC to continue their grudge match as to who gets to lead raids.
Personally I would make the RCAC the ISR specialists using UAVs and conducting their jobs on foot or using what ever vehicle is most suitable to the terrain and environment. Maybe it is a tank. Maybe it is a snowmobile.
Like the Arty, the RCAC would find they have more technical specialties to fill than resources to fill them.
This is the typically Canadian conundrum. We normally seem to solve the problem by airily dismissing it and saying "Oh don't worry about that. We'll work in a coalition. Someone else will manage that!" The problem is that everyone else seems to be emulating Canada in that regard. All our Allies have big gaps in their systems and need all their assets themselves.
We need highly flexible, adaptable people capable of managing a broad array of tools and a toolshed full of gear that might come in handy someday.
