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

CF FORCE PROTECTION PROGRAM-PROPOSAL

PJ D-Dog

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Hello All:

I have been working on developing a Force Protection course for the CF. For the past year, I have been teaching force protection to the Navy and other members of joint commands in the DC area and the more I teach the course, the more I find there may be a need for this in the CF.

The Marine Corps Security Forces Battalion (MCSF) is responsible for providing security forces for a variety of missions.  Some of these include assets that involve national security as well as quick reaction forces for some US installations both domestic and international.  Up until recently, MCSF was tasked with training sailors in force protection for both domestic and international shore installations.  This program was called the Auxiliary Security Forces (ASF).  Sailors were assigned to the program for a period of 18 months.  During that time, they would perform security functions at their naval installation.

In the global war on terror, force protection has become a priority.  It is not enough to go out on missions and kill the enemy.  There is a need to protect the fighting forces when in base camp within the theatre of operations.  My concept for the CF is rooted in the function of ASF but adapted to meet the needs of the CF.

I am told the Infantry school at Gagetown is currently working on developing the force protection program although it is still in its infancy.  I have asked my buddies in the great white north what the CF does for force protection and the response was simple:  "a little bit of everything, they're still writing the book."  In view of the fact that CF units are now operating jointly, and some are even integrated with American units overseas, it would only make sense that a force protection program currently being used by US forces be instituted unilaterally across the CF as a means to standardize some training between the two nations.  It would only be logical that the infantry school take a page out of the book of Marine knowledge and adapt it for use at home.  If anyone knows who is working on this at the infantry school, PM me to let me know so that I can contact them.

Here is an overview of my plan:

The program would be a three-week basic course.

Subjects would include physical security, weapons, anti-terrorism.

Physical Security:
-Use of force/deadly force
-Interior guard
-Entry control points (ECP)
-Unarmed Self-defense (strikes, pressure points, throws, take-downs)
-Force protection conditions
-Communications
-Observation techniques
-Response to alarm or incident
-Vehicle Search
-Personnel Search

Anti-Terrorism
-Introduction to anti-terrorism
-Terrorist operations
-Hostage survival techniques
-Individual protective measures

Weapons
-Introduction to the Marine Corps Known Distance Course of Fire
-Zeroing the C-7 Rifle
-Fundamentals of Marine Rifle Marksmanship (aiming, breathing, trigger control)
-Effects of weather
-Shooting positions (seven common factors)
-Use of the shooting data book
-C-7 Weapons handling
-Range exercise (1 week)

Final Evaluations:
-Final Exercise would consist of a simulated compound where skills are confirmed through practical application.

Other Evaluations:
1. Deadly Force and anti-terrorism (written exam)
2. Academics (everything else) (written exam)
3. Qualification shoot using the Marine Corps KD course of fire (200, 300 & 500 meters).
4. C-7 Weapons handling test
5. Unarmed self-defense practical test

My view is that that first two serials of this course would include those who would become Force Protection trainers in their respective area (LFW, LCF etc).  Since all MCpls and above must be qualified to instruct, they would only need to confirm their ability through certification at the infantry school.  In order to obtain FP trainer certification, they would need to give a period of instruction on unarmed self-defense, a weapons lecture and Deadly force/use of force.  This would be in addition to taking the basic course.

This program would be very useful for the reserve since many of reservists are augmenting the regular force on missions.  This would ensure they are trained to at least perform force protection duties as opposed to just standing watch at a gate with a set of rules of engagement and a rifle.  I would even go as far as to suggest that all deploying soldiers would require to take this training before heading to any hot spot regardless of the mission at hand.

This training would also benefit all domestic bases for force protection.  Although the Commissionaires are guarding the gate, should there be an incident where the base is on alert, there would be a large number of personnel trained to respond to it effectively.  My own experience at visiting CFB Gagetown during a base security exercise was dismal.  Soliders just didn't really know what to do at the entry control point while others just let me through a checkpoint saying that "it's only an exercise and for all intensive purposes, I searched your vehicle."...and this was an officer.  In my opinion, most CF bases are at risk.

There should also be a plan to train 10 per cent of all base personnel through this course in order to have a force in readiness for force protection.  We have to remember that force protection is not just for overseas missions, but for at home as well.  Your thoughts and reactions as per normal.

PJ D-Dog
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,131
Points
1,140
The Infantry does 99% of the FP overseas  -- the issues you mention above are covered in most DLOC's.

  So of the issues are related stricly to the USMC and have no corelation to the way FP is provided in the CF -- and some the MSG's have already.


 

 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,686
Points
1,140
Having trained and deployed a Company for (among other things) FP duties, I see nothing new or revoultionary here.   As KevinB said, everything here is covered in MSIT, DLOC/MLOC or QL3/BIQ/DP1 (whatever it's called this week).

However, I do like the approach formalizing the training.

That being said, everything you propose could easily be done by a Reserve unit.   Since there's been tons of discussion on the roles/tasks of Canada's Army Reserve on this site, this ties nicely into a couple of other threads:

Reserves - are they of any value? (Locked)
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/33430.0.html

Force Protection a good job for the reserves?
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/28456.0.html
 

COBRA-6

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
410
I can see a lot of value in formalizing the training across the CF. With the creation of Canada Command, and the increased focus on DomOps, it would make sense to have everyone reading off the same songsheet, from naval dockyards to airfields to NDHQ.

 
M

MG34

Guest
WE do read off the same sheet already,this proposed as said earlier is nothing new and is being done already.
 

PJ D-Dog

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Haggis said:
Having trained and deployed a Company for (among other things) FP duties, I see nothing new or revoultionary here.   As KevinB said, everything here is covered in MSIT, DLOC/MLOC or QL3/BIQ/DP1 (whatever it's called this week).

Forgive my ignorance, but at what point in one's career do soldiers take the above courses?  How often do they get refresher training on it?

PJ D-Dog
 

Scoobie Newbie

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
0
Points
410
DLOC/MLOC is done yearly.  QL3/BIQ/DP1 is your trade (more or less) the next training you would get after basic.  MSIT not so sure about.
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,686
Points
1,140
CFL said:
DLOC/MLOC is done yearly.   QL3/BIQ/DP1 is your trade (more or less) the next training you would get after basic.   MSIT not so sure about.

Mission Specific Individual Training is part of pre-deployment training.  It is task tailored to a unit or sub unit mission.

Sorry PJ D-Dog.  Didn't mean to toss a bunch of ABL* at ya!

*Acronym Based Language
 

PJ D-Dog

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Thanks for the clarification Gents.

My whole idea behind this Force Protection program was to initially put it all together in one place.  From what I gather, some of you are telling me that this would be a redundant program as much of the subject matter is covered in other courses.

I tend to agree that this would be a perfect program for the reserves.  It would standardize their training in these subject matters.

I've received a few PMs about this subject and it seems some members of the Air Force and Navy side of the house are quite interested in a program of this nature.  There seems to be a discrepancy in training between all three elements of the forces.  This is partially my intent, to introduce a program that would tie all three elements together in a standardized form of training.

Here in the Marine Corps, we have annual training as well.  Those Marines selected to serve in Security Forces go through a course which reinforces the annual training (because we've all done it before) but which makes it their primary job for three years.

I think the US Navy model of Auxiliary Security Force (ASF) using a Marine Corps Security Forces curriculum would lend itself well to all three elements of the CF.  Up until recently, this is what the US Navy has been doing since 1988.  If it worked for the Navy, I'm sure it can be adapted to work for the CF.  Just my thoughts.

PJ D-Dog
 
Top