• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Best Base/Training Area for Tanks/Combined Arms

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
1,196
Points
910
Looking at the British experience re: Army training being low impact as far as natural areas, wonder if a long-term deal for training use during parts of the year/in parts of the territory without significant traditional uses would be of interest as a low-effort source of income.

Obviously LdSH doing gunnery training might not be conducive to your second option, depending on the intended atmosphere.
A Leopard firing a training Sabot round does next to no damage to the environment. It is a steel dart.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,113
Points
940
Returning it to traditional use. Or setting up a Casino :)


While the Tŝilhqot'in recovered from population decimation, the lands were used less than previous countless generations of indigenous people. This changed in the mid 20th Century when First Nations leaders established at Fish Lake (AKA "Chilcotin Forest") an interdisciplinary cultural centre and field school, where youth and others were taught traditional hunting and gathering practices, net making, hide tanning, etc. A revival of Tŝilhqot'in language also took place at Fish Lake. However, the lands were acquired by the Canadian Federal Government with questionable consent from those using the land, and today all that remains of the cultural centre are decrepit building foundations and overgrown driveways

Not to mention the area was going to be turned into a Mine, until Harper told them to piss off after they first refused by the EA process and then rejigged their proposal to do what they said could not be done in their first proposal. I might add that I don't recall either the FN centre or the military training area being mentioned in the EA documents?
 

Blackadder1916

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
335
Points
1,030
. . . wonder if a long-term deal for training use during parts of the year/in parts of the territory without significant traditional uses would be of interest as a low-effort source of income.

Yes, the experience of First Nations in providing territory for "temporary" military training areas were always such examples of mutual respect, trust and fair dealing. (where's a sarcasm smiley when you need it)

 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
2,834
Points
1,060
A Leopard firing a training Sabot round does next to no damage to the environment. It is a steel dart.

Shopping Malls are a more certain way to destroy the natural world.

Selling the military as a way to preserve the environment for the long term is the way to go!

BTW, for the land management geeks out there, this in an interesting read:

More bang for your buck: Managing the military training and environmental values of military training areas​

Abstract

Management of military training areas (MTA) is complex. These areas are environmentally significant, covering an estimated 250M hectares globally. Often the dedicated military training values of these sites are in competition with the potential for protection of local environmental values. Globally, no current MTA management approach effectively integrates both the military training and environmental values of these areas. We present a new conceptual model of how military training and environmental values of an MTA can be integrated into management. Our approach identifies and assigns a value to all military training and environmental values that occur on an MTA, allowing for management trade-offs to be made. We demonstrate the application of our model with a case study.

 

GR66

Sr. Member
Reaction score
183
Points
510
Ok...turning the original question on its head. Presumably the general preference for the larger, Western training areas is based on the fact that we envision our tanks conducting maneuver warfare in relatively open terrain.

What if in the age of PGMs, stealth aircraft, armed UAVs, loitering munitions, ATGM's etc., our potential future tank battles end up looking less like Kursk or Desert Storm and more like Mogadishu, Grozny, Fallujah, Gaza, Mosul or Marawi? Where would be the best base to train our Leopards and accompanying infantry for combat in Urban areas and other close terrain?

Are we making assumptions about the type of battles we expect to fight (would prefer to fight?) that may not match the type of battles we are actually more likely to fight? Does that affect WHERE we choose to train as much as HOW we choose to train (and equip)?
 

RangerRay

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
181
Points
680
Not to mention the area was going to be turned into a Mine, until Harper told them to piss off after they first refused by the EA process and then rejigged their proposal to do what they said could not be done in their first proposal. I might add that I don't recall either the FN centre or the military training area being mentioned in the EA documents?
I believe their are two different Fish Lakes in the Chilcotin, which would explain their absence from the EA. The training area is just north of Riske Creek, and the Prosperity project is southwest of Lee’s Corner, at least a 2 hour drive.
 

GR66

Sr. Member
Reaction score
183
Points
510
Several people have suggested that Suffield is the best training area for tanks. What kind of facilities are available at Suffield?

Some have suggested that the "Heavy" elements of the Army (like tanks) would be well suited to the Reserves as they are for the most part mainly required in the serious "break glass in case of fire" type situations.

The South Alberta Light Horse are based in Medicine Hat with their A Squadron (30 min from Suffield), B Squadron in Edmonton and a troop of B Squadron in Lethbridge (2 hrs from Suffield). The King's Own Calgary Regiment is only 2-1/2 hrs away from Suffield.

I believe we have 82 Leopards in our inventory. That's enough for 4 x Squadrons. Would it be possible to do a set-up something like this?

  • 2 x Squadrons based in Edmonton and maintained by the LdSH and KOCR.
  • 1 x Squadron detached during the training season to Wainwright for use by one LdSH Squadron and B Sqn SALH for training
  • 1 x Squadron detached during the training season to Suffield for use by A Sqn SALH and the KOCR for training.

So we could maintain a Reg Force maintenance system for the tanks in Edmonton (with support from the KOCR) with a single Reg Force Squadron available for deployment. We'd also have Reserve Squadrons from the SALH (Medicine Hat/Suffield and Edmonton/Wainwright) and the KOCR (Calgary/Suffield) to augment the Reg Force as required.

Thoughts/Comments?
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,225
Points
940
I'll take a stab at sketching out something on the back of a paper napkin.

So here're my parameters:

a) Use 41 CBG's roughly 1,200 Res F members and RSS staff to augment 1 CMBG into 1 ABCT while substantially reducing 1 CMBG's PY requirements;

b) create a system that facilitates equipment maintenance and Reg F/Res F interaction;

c) maintain a capability to generate a heavy Roto 0 BG and a heavy Roto 1 BG;

d) ability to force generate a full ABCT;

e) borrow as much as possible from the US ABCT establishment (including a 14 tk per squadron structure and Bde Sup Bn structure)

My suggest force structure would look something like this:

a) LdSH Combined Arms Regt - Hq Sqn, 1 x tk sqn, 2 x LAV coys (1 PPCLI) - 100% Reg F - Roto 0 force;

b) 1 PPCLI Combined Arms Bn- Hq Coy, 1 x LAV Coy, 1/2 Sup Coy (1 PPCLI), 1 x Tk Sqn (LdSH), 1 x LAV Coy, 1/2 Sup Coy (LEdm Regt) - 25% Res F - Roto 1 force;

c) CalH Combined Arms Bn - Hq Coy, 2 x LAV Coy, Sup Coy (Cal H), 1 x Tk Sqn (KOCR) - 90% Res F - augmentation force and mobilization capability;

d) SALH - Hq Sqn, 2 x Recce Sqn, 1 x tk sqn (KOCR) - 90% Res F - augmentation force and mobilization capability;

e) 20 Fd Regt - 1/2 x Hq Bty, 1 x gun bty, 1 x STA bty (20 Fd), 1 x gun bty (20 Ind Fd Bty), 1/2 Hq Bty, 1 x gun bty, 1 x FOO Bty (1 RCHA) - 70% Res F - Roto 0 bty and augmentation and mobilization capability;

f) 1 CER - Hq Sqn, 1 x Cbt Engr Sqn (1 CER), 1 x Cbt Engr Sqn (41 CER) - 70% Reg F - Roto 0 Sqn and augmentation and mobilization capability;

g) 1 Svc Bn - Hq Coy, 1 x Maint Coy, 3 x Fwd Sup Coys (1 Svc Bn), 1 x Tp Coy, 3 x Fwd Sup Coys (41 Svc Bn) - 50% Res F - Roto 0 Fwd Sup Coy and augmentation and mobilization capability;

h) 1 Fd Amb - 1/2 x Fd Amb (1 Fd Amb), 1/2 x Fd Amb (15 Fd Amb), - 50% Res F - Roto 0 Fwd Sup Coy and augmentation and mobilization capability;

i) 1 ABCT HQ - 3/4 Bde HQ (1 CMBG HQ), 1/2 x Sig Sqn (1 Sig Sqn), 1/4 Bde HQ (41 CBG HQ), 1/2 Sig Sqn (41 Sig Regt) - 50% Res F - Roto 0 Fwd Sup Coy and augmentation and mobilization capability

Notes

a) 1 Svc Bn is organized as a brigade support bn and whose Forward Support Companies provide the full support provided by existing admin companies. This restructure allows the brigade to control all supply and maintenance functions across the brigade and augment support resources across the brigade internally to support the varying requirements of Reg F to Res F unit/subunit maintenance throughout the year;

b) at 14 tks per sqn, we currently have enough tanks to equip all six required squadrons as well as have seven spares.;

c) approximate numbers required dictate a need to generate appx 1,750 Res F in units plus probably a BTL of 300 which exceeds the current numbers being generated. With a population of close to 4.5 million, however, that should be feasible.

d) 2 PPCLI gives up its LAVs to CalH and becomes a light bn and, together with 3 PPCLI, become light bns within a light IBCT (in Shilo) potentially with another light bn from BC and another from MB/SK together with mostly Res F arty, engrs, recce, svc sp, medical, sigs and bde staff taken from across 1 CMBG, 38 CBG and 39 CBG). This IBCT will have the capability to also force generate a Roto 0, and a Roto 1 light BG as well as provide augmentation internally and force generate a complete IBCT.

🍻
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,113
Points
940
I believe their are two different Fish Lakes in the Chilcotin, which would explain their absence from the EA. The training area is just north of Riske Creek, and the Prosperity project is southwest of Lee’s Corner, at least a 2 hour drive.
You are correct, thanks. Fish Lake, bear creek, Beaver Valley, rather common names in Canada :)
 

GR66

Sr. Member
Reaction score
183
Points
510
I'll take a stab at sketching out something on the back of a paper napkin.

So here're my parameters:

a) Use 41 CBG's roughly 1,200 Res F members and RSS staff to augment 1 CMBG into 1 ABCT while substantially reducing 1 CMBG's PY requirements;

b) create a system that facilitates equipment maintenance and Reg F/Res F interaction;

c) maintain a capability to generate a heavy Roto 0 BG and a heavy Roto 1 BG;

d) ability to force generate a full ABCT;

e) borrow as much as possible from the US ABCT establishment (including a 14 tk per squadron structure and Bde Sup Bn structure)

My suggest force structure would look something like this:

a) LdSH Combined Arms Regt - Hq Sqn, 1 x tk sqn, 2 x LAV coys (1 PPCLI) - 100% Reg F - Roto 0 force;

b) 1 PPCLI Combined Arms Bn- Hq Coy, 1 x LAV Coy, 1/2 Sup Coy (1 PPCLI), 1 x Tk Sqn (LdSH), 1 x LAV Coy, 1/2 Sup Coy (LEdm Regt) - 25% Res F - Roto 1 force;

c) CalH Combined Arms Bn - Hq Coy, 2 x LAV Coy, Sup Coy (Cal H), 1 x Tk Sqn (KOCR) - 90% Res F - augmentation force and mobilization capability;

d) SALH - Hq Sqn, 2 x Recce Sqn, 1 x tk sqn (KOCR) - 90% Res F - augmentation force and mobilization capability;

e) 20 Fd Regt - 1/2 x Hq Bty, 1 x gun bty, 1 x STA bty (20 Fd), 1 x gun bty (20 Ind Fd Bty), 1/2 Hq Bty, 1 x gun bty, 1 x FOO Bty (1 RCHA) - 70% Res F - Roto 0 bty and augmentation and mobilization capability;

f) 1 CER - Hq Sqn, 1 x Cbt Engr Sqn (1 CER), 1 x Cbt Engr Sqn (41 CER) - 70% Reg F - Roto 0 Sqn and augmentation and mobilization capability;

g) 1 Svc Bn - Hq Coy, 1 x Maint Coy, 3 x Fwd Sup Coys (1 Svc Bn), 1 x Tp Coy, 3 x Fwd Sup Coys (41 Svc Bn) - 50% Res F - Roto 0 Fwd Sup Coy and augmentation and mobilization capability;

h) 1 Fd Amb - 1/2 x Fd Amb (1 Fd Amb), 1/2 x Fd Amb (15 Fd Amb), - 50% Res F - Roto 0 Fwd Sup Coy and augmentation and mobilization capability;

i) 1 ABCT HQ - 3/4 Bde HQ (1 CMBG HQ), 1/2 x Sig Sqn (1 Sig Sqn), 1/4 Bde HQ (41 CBG HQ), 1/2 Sig Sqn (41 Sig Regt) - 50% Res F - Roto 0 Fwd Sup Coy and augmentation and mobilization capability

Notes

a) 1 Svc Bn is organized as a brigade support bn and whose Forward Support Companies provide the full support provided by existing admin companies. This restructure allows the brigade to control all supply and maintenance functions across the brigade and augment support resources across the brigade internally to support the varying requirements of Reg F to Res F unit/subunit maintenance throughout the year;

b) at 14 tks per sqn, we currently have enough tanks to equip all six required squadrons as well as have seven spares.;

c) approximate numbers required dictate a need to generate appx 1,750 Res F in units plus probably a BTL of 300 which exceeds the current numbers being generated. With a population of close to 4.5 million, however, that should be feasible.

d) 2 PPCLI gives up its LAVs to CalH and becomes a light bn and, together with 3 PPCLI, become light bns within a light IBCT (in Shilo) potentially with another light bn from BC and another from MB/SK together with mostly Res F arty, engrs, recce, svc sp, medical, sigs and bde staff taken from across 1 CMBG, 38 CBG and 39 CBG). This IBCT will have the capability to also force generate a Roto 0, and a Roto 1 light BG as well as provide augmentation internally and force generate a complete IBCT.

🍻
In the absence of major changes to the legislation regarding Reserve service I'm not sure what this achieves.

Currently 1 CMBG has the following 100% Reg Force combat elements supposedly available to deploy without calling up the Reserves (individual augmentation requirements conveniently ingnored :cool: ).

1 x Armoured Regiment (2 x Tank Squadrons and 1 x Armoured Recce Squadron)
2 x LAV Infantry Battalions (3 x LAV Infantry Companies each)
1 x Light Infantry Battalion (3 x Light Infantry Companies)
1 x Artillery Regiment (2 x M777 Batteries)

Total: 2 x Tank Squadrons (38 Leopards)
1 x Armoured Recce Squadron
6 x LAV Infantry Companies
3 x Light Infantry Companies
2 x Artillery Batteries


Under your proposes system, without mobilizing Reserve units we'd have:

1 x Combined Arms Battalion (LdSH with 1 x Tank Squadron and 2 x LAV Infantry Companies)


In total, with full mobilization of the Reserves to fill out 1 ABCT and the Light Brigade we'd have:

Total: 4 x Tank Squadrons (60 tanks)
2 x Armoured Recce Squadrons
6 x LAV Infantry Companies
6 x Light Infantry Companies
3 x Artillery Batteries

So with your system at full mobilization you are gaining the following over the existing all Reg Force units:

22 x Tanks (however if LdSH were to go with all 3 x tank squadrons the gain in tank numbers would be only 3 tanks)
1 x Armoured Recce Squadron
0 x LAV Infantry Companies (In the existing system all 6 x LAV Companies are Reg Force. In your system it's 3 x Reg Force and 3 x Reserves)
3 x Light Infantry Companies
1 x Artillery Battery (no accounting in your system for where the extra guns come from)
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
2,834
Points
1,060
In the absence of major changes to the legislation regarding Reserve service I'm not sure what this achieves.

Currently 1 CMBG has the following 100% Reg Force combat elements supposedly available to deploy without calling up the Reserves (individual augmentation requirements conveniently ingnored :cool: ).

1 x Armoured Regiment (2 x Tank Squadrons and 1 x Armoured Recce Squadron)
2 x LAV Infantry Battalions (3 x LAV Infantry Companies each)
1 x Light Infantry Battalion (3 x Light Infantry Companies)
1 x Artillery Regiment (2 x M777 Batteries)

Total: 2 x Tank Squadrons (38 Leopards)
1 x Armoured Recce Squadron
6 x LAV Infantry Companies
3 x Light Infantry Companies
2 x Artillery Batteries


Under your proposes system, without mobilizing Reserve units we'd have:

1 x Combined Arms Battalion (LdSH with 1 x Tank Squadron and 2 x LAV Infantry Companies)


In total, with full mobilization of the Reserves to fill out 1 ABCT and the Light Brigade we'd have:

Total: 4 x Tank Squadrons (60 tanks)
2 x Armoured Recce Squadrons
6 x LAV Infantry Companies
6 x Light Infantry Companies
3 x Artillery Batteries

So with your system at full mobilization you are gaining the following over the existing all Reg Force units:

22 x Tanks (however if LdSH were to go with all 3 x tank squadrons the gain in tank numbers would be only 3 tanks)
1 x Armoured Recce Squadron
0 x LAV Infantry Companies (In the existing system all 6 x LAV Companies are Reg Force. In your system it's 3 x Reg Force and 3 x Reserves)
3 x Light Infantry Companies
1 x Artillery Battery (no accounting in your system for where the extra guns come from)

Dude, you forgot to list the secret weapon of the Reserves: Pipe Bands :)
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,225
Points
940
In the absence of major changes to the legislation regarding Reserve service I'm not sure what this achieves.
The one thing that you have to remember about anything that I say is that, as a precondition, the reserves need to be reformed. The fact that they have not been strikes me as the greatest failure by our leadership in the effective management of DND's human resources.

That said, and other than Federal employment legislation, only a few matters require legislative change. The vast bulk of the change is regulatory, orders and directives, and a major change in attitude, all within DND's power to make and enforce.
Currently 1 CMBG has the following 100% Reg Force combat elements supposedly available to deploy without calling up the Reserves (individual augmentation requirements conveniently ingnored :cool: ).

1 x Armoured Regiment (2 x Tank Squadrons and 1 x Armoured Recce Squadron)
2 x LAV Infantry Battalions (3 x LAV Infantry Companies each)
1 x Light Infantry Battalion (3 x Light Infantry Companies)
1 x Artillery Regiment (2 x M777 Batteries)

Total: 2 x Tank Squadrons (38 Leopards)
1 x Armoured Recce Squadron
6 x LAV Infantry Companies
3 x Light Infantry Companies
2 x Artillery Batteries


Under your proposes system, without mobilizing Reserve units we'd have:

1 x Combined Arms Battalion (LdSH with 1 x Tank Squadron and 2 x LAV Infantry Companies)
That's actually 3 x Combined arms battalion HQ (the Cal H bn has a 10% Reg F leadership component) with 2 x tank squadrons and 3 x rifle companies
In total, with full mobilization of the Reserves to fill out 1 ABCT and the Light Brigade we'd have:

Total: 4 x Tank Squadrons (60 tanks)
2 x Armoured Recce Squadrons
6 x LAV Infantry Companies
6 x Light Infantry Companies
3 x Artillery Batteries

So with your system at full mobilization you are gaining the following over the existing all Reg Force units:

22 x Tanks (however if LdSH were to go with all 3 x tank squadrons the gain in tank numbers would be only 3 tanks)
1 x Armoured Recce Squadron
0 x LAV Infantry Companies (In the existing system all 6 x LAV Companies are Reg Force. In your system it's 3 x Reg Force and 3 x Reserves)
3 x Light Infantry Companies
1 x Artillery Battery (no accounting in your system for where the extra guns come from)
You're essentially right although you are missing out on a reduction (and corresponding ability to reassign) of other trades from signals to service support and medical.

The premise here was to maximize the use of the Wainwright and Suffield ranges. The organization I proposed has the following objectives:

a) to recognize that heavy armoured forces is both a necessary skill level we need to maintain and at the same time is the one we are least likely to use in the future;.

b) to reduce the annual personnel costs for the ABCT by making the force appx 40% reservists allowing the reallocation of scarce Reg F PYs (2 and 3 PPCLI and various support trades) to higher priority roles and missions;

c) to maintain a sufficient core of Reg F PYs to maintain a high level of expertise in the field of heavy armoured warfare and to be able to meet possible roto 0 and 1 missions if required in OOTW scenarios;

c) to be able to generate a full ABCT if required;

d) to concentrate all heavy armour to maximize use of Wainwright and Suffield (when available) and to simplify heavy armour maintenance; and

e) to do all of the above in an infrastructure neutral, equipment neutral scenario.

As an aside if one chose to exercise the option to combine 2 and 3 PPCLI (now in Shilo) with two light battlegroups in BC and MB/SK using all of the RSS, CBG staff, and various support units, you would essentially double the number of equipped and trained brigades in western Canada with little or no change in infrastructure or personnel levels while having removed two unnecessary CBG headquarters. Again, this IBCT would have roto 0 and 1 capabilities and a mobilization capability (this time with the ability to focus on amphibious, mountain and open terrain capabilities which could be oriented to the Pacific theatre. This force, could with time be reformed into something in the nature of an MDTF - the ranges in Shilo and the rest of the West would be very suitable for both LRPR and AD firing and practice; the vast distances between facilities somewhat mimic the distances in the Pacific.

Just as another aside, I'm not changing any guns at all. 1 RCHA's gun battery in Shilo will still have M777s and 20 Fd and 20 Ind Bty still have their C3s. The artillery equipment problem can't be solved with a reorganization. Hopefully, with a formal reorganization into a proper ABCT, an artillery re-equipping program will follow and all the M777s will be reassigned into IBCTs while the C3s are given a well-earned retirement (or sold to Bolivia)

I take your pipe band and raise you the Artillery Band!
Another bonus is the Artillery band can be demobilized and the PYs traded in for an anti-armour platoon.

GR66. I quite like doing these mental paper napkin exercises because I can stretch them to test the possibilities and the weaknesses of maximizing all the people available to the Army. I've seen a number of Reg F folks on this forum participate in them and my hope is that one of these days the concept will hit a high enough rank level where it will stick and real reform will happen. It's too late for my generation - we blew it in the eighties when all our leadership was firmly mired in the NATO forces-in-being mythology and completely ignoring the US Army's reserve forces model.

🍻
 
Top