Cougars to Armoured Recce

[Lance Wiebe]

That is one of the points, isn't it?

Armour Units were told that they would be transforming from Armour to Recce.  They were informed that there would be a transition phase, where they would retain Cougars, but use them for recce tactics until they were issued the Gelandewagen.  Then, out of the blue, all of the Cougars (which had just come out of major rebuild) were taken away.  And replaced with nothing.  Then the Units were told that they would be receiving Iltis.  None of which have shown up.  And no qualified people to teach D&M, because they had never held the Iltis.  No plan, no guidance, just simply, no equipment.

So, the Reserves go out and get copies of the Recconnaissance Troop Leader in Battle.  In there is all sorts of useful information, such as how to properly store a Lynx, and how to make expedient antennas for the PRC-125.

We now have about 20 Reserve Recce Units.  Half with no equipment.  None with any idea of what their role is, their "Raison d'etre".  They are being treated like mushrooms.  One of the guys here commented on the Infantry losing some kit, and "they sucked it up".  They did not lose their prime reason for being equipment, however.  What this is akin to is, when we were told that the C7 was to be our new rifle, and they took away all of the FN's and SMG's two years before anyone was issued the new weapons.

No matter how many times those people in the Regular Army say "suck it up", or "Get on with it", it does not help the Reserves.  What would have helped is a well-thought out plan for the transformation, complete with the required new doctrine, and any reg force assistance they required.  Now, when some in the reserves are protesting, instead of assistance, they get plattitudes and/or derision.

Frankly, I'm surprised, and disappointed, at some of the attitudes displayed by some.  I have seen very little in concrete suggestions, for example.

Or am I seeing things differently?  Are the Reserve Armour Units being assisted in their transition?  Have they all been given the required new training, the qualified instructors, the books, the guidance?

 

[DOOG]

Greetings Folks..
I survived the RCAC conference..but that's another story.

Someone mentioned something about the Iltis that are being scaped up for the transitioning units getting TCCCS..Not!
The TCCCS equipment that was in the Iltis will go into MILCOTS. The TCCCS equipment that was in the Cougars will go into the G-Wagens. That leaves exacly none for the transitionary Iltis. The plan (at least down here) was to re-issue 77 sets. They had to go out and find batteries (which they did) and now we are just waiting for the final go-ahead. We will have to use the 77 sets until the G-Wagens arrive. I am unsure how the system will outfit the MILCOTS with TCCCS since there weren't enough radios for the Iltis to be all TCCCS equipped in the first place. A unit that is supposed to get 8 TCCCS equipped Milcots had only 5 or 6 TCCCS equipped Iltis. It just don't add up.
The plan for the transitionary (is that a word?) Iltis came about during the summer. My Regt is doing their first "recce" type ex in mid-November. So far they have about 9 iltis and 1 MILCOT. The Iltis aren't roadworthy (inspected) yet. Should be interesting.

Later..

 

[Lance Wiebe]

Thanks for weighing in, Doog!  I was kind of hoping that you would jump in with an update.

Not particularly good news, however..........but I wonder if all of the other units have received radio-less non-inspected Iltis as well?  Or is there still a waiting list?

 

[Recce41]

If the Armour units were smart, they cotrain with a Recce Regt. IE 8CH/PEIR, GGHG/QYR. The TTPs are out, the unit SOPs are out. For the School SOPs are common to all units. I help write both. We took the input from all 3 Reg Regts, and the training from Res units that we had in the summer.
An OP is an OP, no matter if it's a mud or Mast. A route recce is a route recce, no matter if it's in a Iltis or LEO. I could go on. I and other were on the writing board for most of the training. If you can turn a civie to Recce Tp Leader in 55 days. You can I hope covert a Cougar Sgt to a Ptl commander.
That's all I here now at the school, people complaining about changing. Remember, units have changed more times. Than you know. ie Wind R (Essex Tank)22 Recce to Tank to Recce to Cougar to Recce. All it takes is a bit of hard work. Train on the board, understand the basics, then go to the field. There are RSS staff pers, to help.  :evil: :tank:

 

[Ty]

Recce41 - Speaking as a civie with a lot of change management experience and attempting to enter  the RCAC, co-training is a great idea if you were co-training with experts in the field.  Your GGHG and QYR examples are valid if the QYRs were equipped with the current recce platform.  I'd be interested in knowing if, as you say, "recce is recce" across the board, is generally accepted.  I'm not marginalizing your experience at all (I'm in no positon to)- I just can't see (and granted as a civie, I am in no position to see) how reconnaissance on an Iltis or Mil-COTS can be identical to that on a Coyote or Cougar.  The gist of the opposition to the transition appears to be that Res units are told that they are loosing their armoured platform and are being converted to armoured recce with a new platform.  As of today, that may be the Milverado or maybe an Iltis, and probably the G-Wagen in the future.  Not only do they have to switch their mentality from Armoured to Recce, but have to keep adapting to the new platforms. 

I have no reservations on the ability of CF members to step up to the challenge- indeed, it grants NCO's and officers a great avenue to test their leadership skills to get their soldiers on board.  However, from an efficiency stand point, training and retraining as well as rolling out new platforms (and then re-rolling) seems a little silly.  Hindsight is 20-20, I suppose, and the decision has been made.

 

[Recce41]

Ty
Recce is and never been platform dependent. We train the Ress in Ilitis the same drills as the regs in Coyote. A lateral drill in a itlitis is done the same as in a Coyote. There are four basic parts of a drill. 1. Warning,2. Security, 3. Recce 4. Plan. I have done Recce for 18 of my 24+ yrs in. Recce troops don't fight the enemy, they find the enemy and destroy it if necessary by other means. The Coyote is NOT a RECCE veh. It is a Surv platform, used in the old style  Recce role. The Iiltis is just a small wheeled Lynx, the Coyote is just a wheeled turreted GWagon. The new TTPs have the same pictures as in the 1943 Recce Corp manuals for in a Dingo, Staghound, Stuart,etc. Take into acount the change in veh pic. I hope you get the idea.
You can even train without vehs. IE the sand table. This is how we start training soldiers from DP1 to DP4. People get rapped around the vehs and not the drills.
There are 4 types of OPs. 1. mounted,2.a hole in the ground, 3.remote, 4. mast. They are started the same. You start BP, go recce a spot, then setup or diggin. Report. So as for veh type is a mute point.

 

[GunfighterSB]

If the Armour units were smart, they cotrain with a Recce Regt. IE 8CH/PEIR, GGHG/QYR. The TTPs are out, the unit SOPs are out. For the School SOPs are common to all units. I help write both. We took the input from all 3 Reg Regts, and the training from Res units that we had in the summer.
An OP is an OP, no matter if it's a mud or Mast. A route recce is a route recce, no matter if it's in a Iltis or LEO. I could go on. I and other were on the writing board for most of the training. If you can turn a civie to Recce Tp Leader in 55 days. You can I hope covert a Cougar Sgt to a Ptl commander.
That's all I here now at the school, people complaining about changing. Remember, units have changed more times. Than you know. ie Wind R (Essex Tank)22 Recce to Tank to Recce to Cougar to Recce. All it takes is a bit of hard work. Train on the board, understand the basics, then go to the field. There are RSS staff pers, to help.   :evil: :tank:

http://www.army.dnd.ca/GGHG/Ops&Trg.htm
Recce41,

Your reference of Co-Training with current Recce Regts are valid. I fact ceratin members of my unit are waiting to Tag on to their excercises. The problem, the QYRangs have only a certain amount of equipment(IE: Vehicles) and draw alot of them from Meaford. For every member that we place in, one less of theirs can be trained. You could say that the ones left out do not need some more training, but that fact is they almost always do; and they rotate as well. IE: 1 Troop goes Friday to Sat Noon, 2 Tp Sat Noon until End Ex. We could alternate if you so could suggest, 1 weekend the QYRangs, the Other GGHG but the equipment is old and scarce. Damages one weekend cannot be fixed in time for the other weekends (spare parts are gone). Sand tables are fine; they can be held during Weeknights in Garrison. We could even use Steelbeasts to practice the virtual art of Recce. But on a practical note; we do not have the vehicles to go launch an excercise, the TCCCs radios to use, night vision equipment to set up an OP and view.

We could make like the Germans before WW2, cut out recce card board  vehicles and pretend like we are Recce Vehicles. It worked for the Germans, maybe it will work for us? But again, the Germans had conscription; they had a huge amount of "captured" participants. We could have LPs instead of OPs since we cannot see in the dark. We could use, runners or Cans on a string to replace radios.

The gist of my opposition to this entire excercise is that we are told to convert, and not given the support that we needed in terms of kit, vehicles and direction. The Horse Guards will soldier on, even if we have to buy our own equipment and vehicles and we will get this conversion done.

 

[12alfa]

Good points here, but I still can't understand why we left a veh that has done recce for both the regs and res with all the kit to replace us with a brokendown veh with no kit. Granted the tatics have not changed (no matter how much my unit tells me i'm not current), recce is recce.

I'm sadden to see lack of leadership....again.

Whoever made the desion did not give it much though, this is clear. We will muddle through as usuall, but this could have been done better I would think.

 

[12alfa]

I'm pretty much certain that there will be more Iltis available to train on than there would have been Cougars.

Really, please state your source, and did they just spend millions on a refit? Do they come with ticcs installed?

Do you want to train, or would you rather drive around posing in the "Pumpkin Launcher"?    

I want to train on a veh that works, has armour and a comm system and mostly PARTS!!!!, Don't ever recall "posing in the Cougar" , something you have done?,Explain please.

What training are you losing out on other than Cougar Driver courses in the next month?

[b]Gunnery, this is also is co-ax as with the cougars our ammo allotment i think was more co-ax that a recce unit.FTX that have all the veh;s we would require, support from our units pre postioned, pers who maintain our vehs, not a overworked meck that has more than 1 unit's veh's to fix and maintain (if he can get parts).Radio and comms trg'ing both in and on the veh (which we can't do now)
Veh mounted nav (we need a veh for this).
Shall I go on?

Reg Force Arty units are "sucking it up" having parked M109s, Infantry have lost Mor, Pnr, Coyote and TOW.

And thouse unit have other veh's and wpns, we don't, see my point?

 

[Ty]

Ty
Recce is and never been platform dependent. We train the Ress in Ilitis the same drills as the regs in Coyote. A lateral drill in a itlitis is done the same as in a Coyote. There are four basic parts of a drill. 1. Warning,2. Security, 3. Recce 4. Plan. I have done Recce for 18 of my 24+ yrs in. Recce troops don't fight the enemy, they find the enemy and destroy it if necessary by other means. The Coyote is NOT a RECCE veh. It is a Surv platform, used in the old style   Recce role. The Iiltis is just a small wheeled Lynx, the Coyote is just a wheeled turreted GWagon. The new TTPs have the same pictures as in the 1943 Recce Corp manuals for in a Dingo, Staghound, Stuart,etc. Take into acount the change in veh pic. I hope you get the idea.
You can even train without vehs. IE the sand table. This is how we start training soldiers from DP1 to DP4. People get rapped around the vehs and not the drills.
There are 4 types of OPs. 1. mounted,2.a hole in the ground, 3.remote, 4. mast. They are started the same. You start BP, go recce a spot, then setup or diggin. Report. So as for veh type is a mute point.

I stand corrected- thanks for the info.   However, a question that does come to mind is "why the IIltis? If, indeed, recce is recce, why not keep the Cougar?   Do you see a point in re-rolling to an obsolet evehicle?   I'm not knocking the Iltis, but there is a shortage of parts for the vehicle and it is on its way out forthe new LUVW (G-Wagen or MILCOTS or whatever).   Or,as has been suggested, re rolling in to a MILCOTS when the G-Wagen is coming in.   As an aside, any speculation on what we're going to do with the Cougars once the dust has settled?

Ty

 

[Recce41]

Money, as of Jul the Cougar will be targets.

 

[G .Dundas]

I was always  somewhat surprised that  no one ever combined the iltis and cougar into the recce role. It seemed like  a natural  idea following the example of the Staghound/ Lynx II at the official level.
I I've always wondered though if any one tried it "unofficially?

 

[Horse_Soldier]

I was always   somewhat surprised that   no one ever combined the iltis and cougar into the recce role. It seemed like   a natural   idea following the example of the Staghound/ Lynx II at the official level.
I I've always wondered though if any one tried it "unofficially?

We used a Cougar squadron from 12 RBC in a recce role on my Recce Sqn Cmdr's course in 1996.   It worked pretty well.   Not an ideal platform for recce, but the LAV/Coyote isn't ideal for recce either - both suffer from the same problem: too big (tall) for sneak&peek recce and not armoured/gunned enough for recce by fire.   That being said, recce is a concept - the vehicle is just the tool to do it other than on foot - we can do it in just about anything (including on horseback - don't laugh - the American SF troops in Afghanistan use them), and each platform will have its advantages and disadvantages.   It's simply easier and quicker to train reservists in a recce role with a four wheeled, unarmoured, machine-gun equipped platform than with something that requires specific driver/gunner training and which requires a bigger logistical tail.

 

[G .Dundas]

  Actually what I was trying to suggest( really badly it seems ) was using the cougar in the filled by the Staghound of WW II and the iltis in the role of the Lynx II scout car.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I think what you may be getting at is the old Light Armoured role. We used it in the '70's. We had 5 Lynx and 2 APC's per troop. The APC's represented the tanks we didn't have. So in effect, the Tp consisted of 5 x recce veh backed up by 2 x MBT's. All being tracked and the Lynx mounting .50 the (tanks) with 105. We called it Light Armour, but it was really recce by force. We had the capability to fight for info if necessary. That was the B Sqn role. A Sqn was tasked with the light recce using Ferrets. Both Sqn's used the same drills and did the same tasks.

 

[G .Dundas]

I think what you may be getting at is the old Light Armoured role. We used it in the '70's. We had 5 Lynx and 2 APC's per troop. The APC's represented the tanks we didn't have. So in effect, the Tp consisted of 5 x recce veh backed up by 2 x MBT's. All being tracked and the Lynx mounting .50 the (tanks) with 105. We called it Light Armour, but it was really recce by force. We had the capability to fight for info if necessary. That was the B Sqn role. A Sqn was tasked with the light recce using Ferrets. Both Sqn's used the same drills and did the same tasks.

Yeah come to think of it I seem to recall something about that.Were'nt the APC's armed either with the 106 mm RR or the Carl G?

 

[Fishbone Jones]

If you knew how hard it was to pull the last response from my memory, you wouldn't ask that! ;D

 

[G .Dundas]

If you knew how hard it was to pull the last response from my memory, you wouldn't ask that! ;D

Sorry it will never happen again*hangs head in shame* :-[

 

[Lance Wiebe]

The APC's were representing tanks.  We put a long stove pipe on them to represent a gun.  We also for a while practiced with a DFSV troop supporting recce.  The "DFSV's" were represented by 3/4 ton trucks with a log tied on them to represent a gun.

After all of this play acting, when we received the Cougar in 1980, we called it a "tank trainer" and never did train using it as a DFSV or a recce support vehicle.

No, we couldn't figure out the rationale then, either..........

Any of this jogging your memory, Dave?

By the way, we had a get together of the Atlantic Region chapter of the RCD Association last night.  Biff Watson showed up for it.  After I met him I went through some of my old copies of the Sabertache.  Lots of memories, from 74 on...

 

[ex-gunner]

How do I feel about losing the cougar?
I think it would not be so bad if the army gave us somthing other then Iltis's.