CAF Security Forces [Split from RCN Anti Drone Weapon]

[Colin Parkinson]

My best sleeps were always in a mod tent on a cot, so that part doesn't bother me. Not sure how I'd feel making that my home....

With the lack of projects in Canada, portable camps companies would love to get some long term contracts on DND bases. They can build them faster than we can recruit them.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

If we need police to be able to do the job in Canada, why create a whole new force when MP and RCMP already exist?

Because why resource something when you can simply empire build... the heraldry alone (designed by a Québecois artist of course) will be enough to stimulate some serious pork & barrel activity!

 

[SupersonicMax]

What’s the combat capability of the fighter force right now?

I’d say that pretty good right now. Nowhere near 5th Gen but our offensive capabilities are pretty good.

To say nothing of treaty obligations, that includes ships, Bdes, Role 3s etc

Brigades as in plural? I’d like a source for that.

The Canadian Army has four Divisions plus CADTC. Each division has a Regular Force Brigade and a bunch of Reserve Brigades. None of the divisions are fully staffed: a division should be around 15-20K personnel. The entire Army is about 23K Reg and 21K Res Force. That’s a lot of overhead with no added value. People like talking about HQ bloat here, that’s a prime example.

Restructure the Army with two divisions and keep CADTC. One division staffed with a Reg Force Brigade and supporting elements, and one Division staffed with a Res Force Brigade and supporting Elements. Each Brigade has an Armoured Regiment, an Infantry Regiment, an Artillery Regiment and a Combat Engineer Regiment. Keep Edmonton, Valcartier and Petawawa as Garrisons and have a Battalion of each combat arm at each Garrison. You can still regularly train together and the Army becomes better structured for its size. But it would ruffle many feathers because of sacred cows and all.

Oh yeah no I don’t disagree we need airfield security. However the idea that we would drop 80 percent of the army to do it is absurd.

Except it is a zero sum game. We don’t have more people to do this. Where do we sacrifice while providing what the government mandates us to provide in terms of strategic effects?

 

[markppcli]

I’d say that pretty good right now. Nowhere near 5th Gen but our offensive capabilities are pretty good.

Oh yeah lot of flyable air frames and a ton of pilots eh?

Brigades as in plural? I’d like a source for that.

The Canadian Army has four Divisions plus CADTC. Each division has a Regular Force Brigade and a bunch of Reserve Brigades. None of the divisions are fully staffed: a division should be around 15-20K personnel. The entire Army is about 23K Reg and 21K Res Force. That’s a lot of overhead with no added value. People like talking about HQ bloat here, that’s a prime example.

Our Divs are force generators. Our brigades our force employers. Divisions sit between 10-15 k on average.

Restructure the Army with two divisions and keep CADTC. One division staffed with a Reg Force Brigade and supporting elements, and one Division staffed with a Res Force Brigade and supporting Elements. Each Brigade has an Armoured Regiment, an Infantry Regiment, an Artillery Regiment and a Combat Engineer Regiment. Keep Edmonton, Valcartier and Petawawa as Garrisons and have a Battalion of each combat arm at each Garrison. You can still regularly train together and the Army becomes better structured for its size. But it would ruffle many feathers because of sacred cows and all.

I’m trying to understand your approach here. You want a Bde to control 4 multi Bn regiments of each arm. So in essence the Bde staff would be controlling 6 maneuver elements, 3 artillery Bns, and 3 engineer Bns. Have you ever heard the phrase span of control? Go take a Quick Look at any other Bde in the worl, possible exception being Ukraine but that has its own issues, and tell me where you find a Bde staff trying to fight an organization that large. Oh and it has no internal supports. This isn’t a sensible way to organize anything, and the feathers it ruffles aren’t do to sacred cows. They’re ruffled from common sense.

Except it is a zero sum game. We don’t have more people to do this. Where do we sacrifice while providing what the government mandates us to provide in terms of strategic effects?

Oh we will have to sacrifice that’s certain. I don’t think reducing the CA by 2/3s like your earlier suggestion is the fix.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Any operators of these use non-military security forces?

Well the Brits have the Ministry of Defence Police Force which as its name implies belongs to the UK MoD, but is composed of civilian officers. Their mandate is to provide armed security/counter terrorism services to designated high-risk areas, as well as uniformed policing and limited investigative services to Ministry of Defence property, personnel, and installations throughout the United Kingdom.

The one catch is that they do not deploy overseas.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Phase 1: despite years of advance notice the military will panic last minute because they never came up with a solution. The OPI in charge of planning is on work from home 2 days a week and not answering emails.

Phase 2: infantry companies will be deployed in mod tent camps and rotate through a 4-6 month security tasks.

Phase 3: a security company will be contracted to provide airport security in Canada.

 

[Quirky]

The OPI in charge of planning is on work from home 2 days a week and not answering emails.

….and will be posted out to a different office or promoted out of the job before seeing the project to completion. The new person will have to start from scratch due to lack of handover or agreement with current plan. In the end, no one will be held responsible for the failures.

 

[SupersonicMax]

Oh yeah lot of flyable air frames and a ton of pilots eh?

Enough to do NORAD and NATO missions (we already do that albeit with a cost to Force Generation when we go overseas). We’re short in part because we’re transitioning. We have a decent amount of available jets on a daily basis (more than we can reasonably fly).

Our Divs are force generators. Our brigades our force employers. Divisions sit between 10-15 k on average.

The only Force Employers are CJOC and SOFCOM. The RCN, CA and RCAF are Force Generators.

You want a Bde to control 4 multi Bn regiments of each arm. So in essence the Bde staff would be controlling 6 maneuver elements, 3 artillery Bns, and 3 engineer Bns. Have you ever heard the phrase span of control?

Looking at 5 CMBG, aren’t they controlling three Infantry Battalions, three armoured Squadrons, four artillery Batteries, three engineer Squadron and a service battalion? That’s 14 entities (6 maneuver elements, 4 artillery Batteries and three Engineer Squadrons). I’m suggesting a CMBG controls the same amount of elements it is now. The entities are just not based at the same Garrison…

 

[markppcli]

Enough to do NORAD and NATO missions (we already do that albeit with a cost to Force Generation when we go overseas). We’re short in part because we’re transitioning. We have a decent amount of available jets on a daily basis (more than we can reasonably fly)

My experience has been drastically different.

The only Force Employers are CJOC and SOFCOM. The RCN, CA and RCAF are Force Generators.

That’s not really true. While yes any formation would be cut to CJOC, the command and control is integral. When we’re were pushing out the task forces in Afghanistan it was Bde HQs that were in control operationally.

Looking at 5 CMBG, aren’t they controlling three Infantry Battalions, three armoured Squadrons, four artillery Batteries, three engineer Squadron and a service battalion? That’s 14 entities (6 maneuver elements, 4 artillery Batteries and three Engineer Squadrons). I’m suggesting a CMBG controls the same amount of elements it is now. The entities are just not based at the same Garrison…

Do you not understand the difference between Bn and sub units ?

 

[McG]

Nailed it. Trying to use existing police resources would be horribly expensive, inefficient, and likely to fail. You want to take 500 Mounties off of border integrity and national security? Cops also cost a hell of a lot more that individuals appropriately trained and empowered with the necessary limited skill set. This is where POS IS a useful comparator, because they directly replaced a duty that was previously RCMP.

So what is the difference between a police force and a peace office force?

 

[OldSolduer]

So what is the difference between a police force and a peace office force?

I’m a peace officer if I’m in the jail. If not I’m just another dude.
Jurisdiction matters

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

Canadian Army Division is the wrong name tbh and confuses the issue. The only actual Operational Division HQ in Canada is 1st Canadian Division as the CAF's deployable Theatre Level HQ.

The Canadian Army considers itself a "Brigade Army" and actually the Government is the one who decided that and it's written right in to their Defence Policy:

The Brigade Group​

The Army trains to fight at the brigade group-level. This is the minimum level at which it is possible to execute joint campaigns while integrating various components, be they from another service, government department, non-governmental organization, or coalition partner. The brigade group consists of approximately 4,800 soldiers, organized in eight major units generally including Artillery, Armour, Infantry, Engineer, and Combat Service Support organizations. Combinations of these units operate together in “battle groups” to provide the joint force with the requisite firepower, mobility, protection, sustainment, and command and control functions to effectively coordinate their employment.

2. Long-term investments to enhance The Canadian Armed Forces’ Capabilities and capacity to support Peace and security - Canada.ca

The scale of our re-investment in the Canadian Armed Forces is significant. This long-term investment is meant to modernize, renew and restore this vital national institution and provide our women and men in uniform with the modern tools they need to succeed in – and return home safely from –...

www.canada.ca

The other "Divisions" themselves are really just geographic organizations that are administrative in nature, they have no Force Employment function.

The Canadian Army itself is modeled after the Prussian tradition and those divisions & reserve brigade groups represent the foundation of what would be a far larger force that could be mobilized should war break out. It's a system that has served us well in all the major conflicts we have fought in.

 

[brihard]

So what is the difference between a police force and a peace office force?

"Peace officer" is a legal status that conveys certain powers and authorities under the law. A police officer is also a peace officer. But a pilot in command of an aircraft is a peace officer too. So's a correctional officer. So are mayors and justices of the peace. There are others too.

Being designated a 'peace officer' means that you have a legal status under the law that automatically conveys upon you certain powers and authorities without having to have a new law passed to do so. That can include use of force in the execution of lawful duties such as arrest, or the prevention of the commission of criminal offences.

That's not the only possible legal mechanism to have those powers. But it's the most legally convenient one, and where existing peace officer authorities under the Criminal Code can be leveraged, it simplifies things. However, those criminal code authorities would not allow someone employed in airfield security to shoot someone to prevent an act of theft, espionage, or sabotage. I would content that with some of the new capabilities and technologies Canada will be getting, that's a gap that will need to be filled. I could be wrong but I suspect it's something the US will demand.

As to 'why not police' for airfield security, well, it's a huge waste of 90% of what we bring to the table, and it's also hella expensive. Base pay for a 3 year RCMP member these days is something like $115k. That's before shift premium, before any sort of seniority pay that starts kicking in at four or five years... It's like building a security force staffed entirely by senior captains or up, pay wise. It also means taking people with not enough training for the real kinetic security tasks, and a lot of unnecessary training in other things they'll never do. It also means that just as people have a couple years in the role and are getting good in it, they'll be getting the hell out transferring to where they can do real police work, or do other similar work in more comfortable settings and locations. If CAF wants a professionalized security force, it needs to build something that actually is that.

Police can do security, but it's not our forte, and it's not a good use of our already badly strained resources.

 

[SupersonicMax]

My experience has been drastically different.

Great. Last experience was yesterday. When was yours?

That’s not really true. While yes any formation would be cut to CJOC, the command and control is integral. When we’re were pushing out the task forces in Afghanistan it was Bde HQs that were in control

Great. Please read our doctrine. The RCAF, CA and RCN are only force generator. From the 4th Canadian Division website: "The mission of 4 Cdn Div is to generate and maintain, at designated states of readiness, combat ready, multi-purpose land forces to meet Canada’s defence objectives, both at home and abroad. Members of 4 Cdn Div take part in continuous, challenging, individual and collective training to prepare them to achieve this mission."

Do you not understand the difference between Bn and sub units ?

I understand what they are but I don’t think we currently have Battalions for Armoured, Artillery or Combat Engineer Regiments. AFAIK, the Regiments are made of Squadrons and Batteries. What I am suggesting, in simpler terms, is to take one of the divisions, remove all reserve CBGs from it, staff it at 100+% and base units/sub-units out of three garrisons, in a way you can train with all combat arms together. Keep one more division for the reserve CBGs. Take the people that’s left and assign them to installations defence and security (Air Defence, Asset Security, etc). The Army could maintain control of the organization and capabilities but be required to provide enough personnel to secure the CAF’s installations at home and abroad. It may be a 2/3 reduction in positions in direct contribution to CA’s combat capability but it wouldn’t be near that in terms of personnel or actual capabilities. I really don’t understand how we can have four divisions with only 40K Reg and Res Force personnel…

 

[markppcli]

Great. Last experience was yesterday. When was yours?

With 18s? Shit last time you guys were available to fly for us would be….. a year and a bit ago? I just assume the no fills are a reflection of availability when we get told “we’re no filling because of availability.”

Great. Please read our doctrine. The RCAF, CA and RCN are only force generator. From the 4th Canadian Division website: "The mission of 4 Cdn Div is to generate and maintain, at designated states of readiness, combat ready, multi-purpose land forces to meet Canada’s defence objectives, both at home and abroad. Members of 4 Cdn Div take part in continuous, challenging, individual and collective training to prepare them to achieve this mission."

So exactly what I said ? The Divisons are force generators. The Brigades annd Battalions are tactical employers.

I understand what they are but I don’t think we currently have Battalions for Armoured, Artillery or Combat Engineer Regiments. AFAIK, the Regiments are made of Squadrons and Batteries.

Yes and what you said was on regular Brigsde with a regiment of each, and then a Bn of each of those regiments at a base. Hence my confusion.

What I am suggesting, in simpler terms, is to take one of the divisions, remove all reserve CBGs from it, staff it at 100+% and base units/sub-units out of three garrisons, in a way you can train with all combat arms together.

Only you can’t. Because those sub units perform a wide array of functions and don’t break down that nicely. We organize Bdes the way we do for a reason. You’d also strip them of their second line maintenance in your suggestion. If you went down to one artillery regiment, in our context today, and tried to split it in three it simply wouldn’t work. You would have to triplicated the FSCC and RCPO for the batteries to function. You’d have to triplicated the support functions. Similar with the engineers who operate lots of small bespoke capabilities.

Keep one more division for the reserve CBGs. Take the people that’s left and assign them to installations defence and security (Air Defence, Asset Security, etc). The Army could maintain control of the organization and capabilities but be required to provide enough personnel to secure the CAF’s installations at home and abroad. It may be a 2/3 reduction in position in direct contribution to CA’s combat capability but it wouldn’t be near that in terms of personnel or actual capabilities.

Why should the army take on the responsibility of protecting the Navy and Iwr force? Surely the best people to define the requirements of their own installations defence would be the Navy and the Air Force. I’m no rocket scientist but I tend to assume the protection of a port facility might involved something in the water.

I really don’t understand how we can have four divisions with only 40K Reg and Res Force personnel…

Well a division is usually 10-15 so in theory 4 small divisions would be workable.

 

[brihard]

The "fuck you" move by RCAF providing their own ground security for new generation aircraft instead of the army would be to divest Tac Hel and leave it to the army.

Which could actually be brilliant and make practically everybody happy.

 

[McG]

I really don’t understand how we can have four divisions with only 40K Reg and Res Force personnel…

They are divisions in name only. They were previously called areas, which was a better name. They are each commanded only by BGen.

 

[SupersonicMax]

With 18s? Shit last time you guys were available to fly for us would be….. a year and a bit ago? I just assume the no fills are a reflection of availability when we get told “we’re no filling because of availability.”

Typically, it’s because it doesn’t fit with our training cycle. We’ve supported CAS for SOFCOM, Canadian Army and Allied Forces about 3 times in the last year, for two weeks at the time.

So exactly what I said ? The Divisons are force generators. The Brigades annd Battalions are tactical employers.

Not quite. The CA doesn’t Force Employ. Units and people may employ but under CJOC. The CA only has a mandate to be ready to employ. I understand you typically deploy a Brigade but doctrinally saying the Brigade is a Force Employer is false.

Only you can’t. Because those sub units perform a wide array of functions and don’t break down that nicely. We organize Bdes the way we do for a reason. You’d also strip them of their second line maintenance in your suggestion. If you went down to one artillery regiment, in our context today, and tried to split it in three it simply wouldn’t work. You would have to triplicated the FSCC and RCPO for the batteries to function. You’d have to triplicated the support functions. Similar with the engineers who operate lots of small bespoke capabilities.

That’s when we make hard choices when it comes to bespoke capabilities. Maybe we need to retain them (or partially retain them), or get rid of it. The maintenance piece is something to consider but can’t you just keep the current second line maintenance construct you have now?

Why should the army take on the responsibility of protecting the Navy and Iwr force? Surely the best people to define the requirements of their own installations defence would be the Navy and the Air Force. I’m no rocket scientist but I tend to assume the protection of a port facility might involved something in the water.

Why is the RCAF required to provide the Army with airlift? We’re one service. The USMC seem to have it figured out. No reasons we can’t.

They are divisions in name only. They were previously called areas, which was a better name. They are each commanded only by BGen.

They still come with overhead and a staff. Why do we have 13 Brigades? We should structure ourselves to make up as many units with 100% staffing as possible and sacrifice others.

 

[dapaterson]

They still come with overhead and a staff. Why do we have 13 Brigades? We should structure ourselves to make up as many units with 100% staffing as possible and sacrifice others.

We should structure ourselves to make up a sustainable force that can survive casualties, equipment losses and materiel consumption at rates comparable to what UKR is experiencing.

 

[SupersonicMax]

We should structure ourselves to make up a sustainable force that can survive casualties, equipment losses and materiel consumption at rates comparable to what UKR is experiencing.

That would require more people and more positions than we can dream of. Within the current constraints we have, having multiple small units and formations doesn’t work. It just consumes resources that are needed elsewhere.