Army Reserve Restructuring

[McG]

Hmmm... interesting comparison

Where was this from?
The table is missing the new Army Training Centre (the formation) which will own the Army Training Centres (former div TCs) and (I believe) also the reserve battle schools.

 

[PrairieFella]

The same or more headquarters isnt necessarily a bad thing - it depends on deliverables. Like if the new fires brigade works out in the divisional fight context, thats a win. A sustainment brigade is absolutely a win long-term. We plan on growing the Army substantially so this will buff as we grow.

 

[FJAG]

Hmmm... interesting comparison

Where was this from?

Yeah. Where is this from?

As a long time advocate for reducing admin overhead in the past, I tend to reject the argument made in that paper. In fact, my position now is that we have too few headquarters at the unit to div level.

My change of opinion comes almost exclusively from the change in the world in the last decade. I used to think two divisions was adequate; now I believe that five aren't enough. Mind you my view of the size of a division is significantly smaller than the army's current view.

In short we need more units and formation headquarters trained and equipped to mobilize and deploy. The current CBGs are entirely inadequate as is our basic training structure which has a limited production pipeline. I can't see any other solution that does not include more full-time headquarters at that level even when the bulk of the troops are part-time. OTOH, I think there are a lot of efficiencies that could be gained at the national level to reduce admin overhead.