CAF Security Forces [Split from RCN Anti Drone Weapon]

[daftandbarmy]

They can be if required, it's not too uncommon to see a spot or two for reservists on a gunnery or D&M course, especially in the past couple years. Nevermind that there are plenty of previous Reg tankers that end up at Res units and act as a reservoir of institutional knowledge should the need arise.

That said, reserve units are all light doctrinally.

If there was a requirement to augment a Reg F formation as part of an Army wide airfield defence program, that might work.

If this was an attempt to dump the airfield defence tasking, in situations short of general war, on the A Res alone?

IMHO that would probably be a disaster, and the RCAF would hate the Army (even more)

 

[dapaterson]

IMHO that would probably be a disaster, and the RCAF would hate the Army (even more)

RCAF doesn't think about the Army enough to hate them.

 

[dimsum]

RCAF doesn't think about the Army enough to hate them.

 

[PrairieFella]

If there was a requirement to augment a Reg F formation as part of an Army wide airfield defence program, that might work.

If this was an attempt to dump the airfield defence tasking, in situations short of general war, on the A Res alone?

IMHO that would probably be a disaster, and the RCAF would hate the Army (even more)

I agree. This is an air force problem to solve and I hope they really take the bull by the horns. Hopefully by not trying to scalp a battalion's worth of dudes from the Army haha.

 

[dimsum]

I agree. This is an air force problem to solve and I hope they really take the bull by the horns. Hopefully by not trying to scalp a battalion's worth of dudes from the Army haha.

If the various new RCAF trades (Air Ops Officer, Air Ops Support Tech, etc) are anything to go by, it will be a VOT trade with various incentives.

If the majority of the people who VOT happen to be from the Combat Arms…

 

[daftandbarmy]

If the various new RCAF trades (Air Ops Officer, Air Ops Support Tech, etc) are anything to go by, it will be a VOT trade with various incentives.

If the majority of the people who VOT happen to be from the Combat Arms…

We had fairly minimal interaction with the RAF Regiment (thank Gawd!) but it was pretty clear that they had a fair few people transferring in from various army backgrounds, mainly because of quality of life/ family stability opportunities.

Unlike doing the Infantry thing, for example, guarding airfields doesn't require alot of travel.

 

[PrairieFella]

If the various new RCAF trades (Air Ops Officer, Air Ops Support Tech, etc) are anything to go by, it will be a VOT trade with various incentives.

If the majority of the people who VOT happen to be from the Combat Arms…

We can sure as shit hope not. We don't have enough dudes as is in the Army, finding 1000-1500 dudes for a security force between the infantry, armoured, arty and chimos will be a devastating loss and honestly, could collapse our enhanced presence in Latvia. Maybe that's hyperbole on my part but man is manning tight these days. Maybe a compromise is needed and they recruit heavy for the trade for a couple years and have combat arms as trainers for a posting cycle or two.

 

[dimsum]

We can sure as shit hope not. We don't have enough dudes as is in the Army, finding 1000-1500 dudes for a security force between the infantry, armoured, arty and chimos will be a devastating loss and honestly, could collapse our enhanced presence in Latvia. Maybe that's hyperbole on my part but man is manning tight these days. Maybe a compromise is needed and they recruit heavy for the trade for a couple years and have combat arms as trainers for a posting cycle or two.

Short of denying transfers (which would go over like a fart in church), I’m not sure how the CA would not lose people to the RCAF Security Forces - or whatever they decide the name to be.

 

[PrairieFella]

Short of denying transfers (which would go over like a fart in church), I’m not sure how the CA would not lose people to the RCAF Security Forces - or whatever they decide the name to be.

Denying transfers should 100% be on the table. If the 30-50% of a sub-units dudes put in a vot, that can cause a lot of problems for the institution very fast if repeated across the combat arms units.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Call up reserve unit's to full active duty for 6 months just like the US National guard does for deployments.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Call up reserve unit's to full active duty for 6 months just like the US National guard does for deployments.

If they tried that it might be remembered as 'The Great DAG Red Anomaly'

 

[dapaterson]

Call up reserve unit's to full active duty for 6 months just like the US National guard does for deployments.

Start firing Reg F members without valid fitness tests - you know, treat them as if they're in the military.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Start firing Reg F members without valid fitness tests - you know, treat them as if they're in the military.

Better yet; put them on security detail.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Start firing Reg F members without valid fitness tests - you know, treat them as if they're in the military.

How many of those do we have these days, and have they all been properly shamed for failing/ dodging the (ridiculously easy but quite practical and fair) FORCE test?

 

[Ostrozac]

Start firing Reg F members without valid fitness tests - you know, treat them as if they're in the military.

This idea keeps getting kicked around, notable was General Rick Hillier’s directive in January 2006 that we were to start emphasizing fitness. (How did the last 19 years go for our collective fitness? Do we even care enough to keep track?)

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/forces-must-be-fit-to-fight-hillier-says-1.593898

The idea that all military personnel should all actually be physically, medically and dentally fit or else they should just go work on civy street seems to fall apart once leadership realizes that we are absolutely incapable of recruiting and training fit replacements, so their only options are waivers or nobody.

We might not have a fitness problem — we might actually have a recruiting and training problem.

 

[dapaterson]

We might not have a fitness problem — we might actually have a recruiting and training problem.

The two are not exclusionary.

The pipeline from attractions through OFP needs renovations and investment to enlarge it, but at the same time the CAF needs to make people keep their end of the bargain. MELs? Fine. Can't be assed to spend two hours in the gym for a simple test once a year? Leadership needs to get involved and start documenting deficiencies.

 

[markppcli]

We can sure as shit hope not. We don't have enough dudes as is in the Army, finding 1000-1500 dudes for a security force between the infantry, armoured, arty and chimos will be a devastating loss and honestly, could collapse our enhanced presence in Latvia. Maybe that's hyperbole on my part but man is manning tight these days. Maybe a compromise is needed and they recruit heavy for the trade for a couple years and have combat arms as trainers for a posting cycle or two.

Shift to 8 months tours, reduce rotational cycles. Probably securing our commitment to NORAD should rank ahead of Latvia in priority.

 

[PrairieFella]

Shift to 8 months tours, reduce rotational cycles. Probably securing our commitment to NORAD should rank ahead of Latvia in priority.

In my opinion, Latvia should be a posting like Lahr was. Just keep the guys there and rotate augmentees as required. Let their families come as well.

 

[FJAG]

Shift to 8 months tours, reduce rotational cycles. Probably securing our commitment to NORAD should rank ahead of Latvia in priority.

In my opinion, Latvia should be a posting like Lahr was. Just keep the guys there and rotate augmentees as required. Let their families come as well.

Rotational tours work fine and well for short term operational missions, but once you get into something like Latvia, which is a peacetime, indefinite mission, one should revert to a CFE model of units and positions assigned to the force and either rotating units, subunits or individuals through there on accompanied postings of three years or so. My guess is with a young enough army only about a half would be accompanied in any event. Make a good bit of the force structure to be flyover of units, subunits or individual augmentees onto prepositioned equipment with maybe two annual 3 to 4 week exercises. It's a sustainable model that worked for the US and Canada for decades.

I agree on securing our commitment to NORAD as a priority but since we're on the security force thread, how exactly do we do that? Do we break up 3 PPCLI and 3 R22eR into security companies located at RCAF bases and make those postings? Do we do rotations? Do we move RCAF bases to airports at larger civilian centres so that service there is at least semi attractive v Cold lake and Bagotville? All of those and more have been discussed above but I see nothing in the way of a practical consensus here.

We're in the midst of the worst manning crisis that the CAF has seen during my lifetime. While I expect that people are working on a strategy, I see nothing public facing that explains the strategy to the public or tries to mold public opinion - just the usual drivel which has the effect of alienating much of the public. I've lived in a military whose aging equipment was self-divesting, but never a military like the current one where the people were self-divesting.

 

[AmmoTech90]

If we moved families and built quarters (small town) for them, that would be a nice boost to defence spending. Also stimulate local economy so we make friends there. Baby steps to 2+%.