Divining the right role, capabilities, structure, and Regimental System for Canada's Army Reserves

[dapaterson]

This is a good example of the red tape we regularly wrap ourselves in: I have no idea why it takes us weeks to get smart recruits to the point where they can actually fire a rifle at a target when we do 'fun shoots' for civvies all the time.

We probably figure that since the civvies are smart enough not to join that they can figure it out faster than those of us foolish enough to join...

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Despite that everyone across the CAF wants to reduce costs and PERSTEMPO, no one is willing to sacrifice course content to do so.  The oft heard complaint that courses are "too long" is heard alongside the assertion that all the content that fills that white space is necessary.

Yet comments like those from Colin P are commonplace.  This begs the question of why, in the Infantry, for example, do we need 34 weeks to train a Regular Force Infantry soldier from civvy to OFP when other nations, who fight in more wars that we do, can do it in 1/2 to 2/3 the time? (see reply #2735 by FJAG).  How much of that content could be safely declared "no train" or "developmental" and delivered either in unit lines (rather that "personal administration time or maintenance on vehicles that don't move) or as part of the now lengthy pre-deployment training?

Every Reg F manoeuver unit travels down the road to high readiness (RTHR).  That's where a lot of this delta can be closed for both Reg F and P Res augmentees. Those augmentees then take it back to the Armoury floor thus shortening the RTHR for the next batch.

To be fair the course content I got was far more than I would have gotten at a Reserve course and had the rest of the time been used more wisely, I would have been happy. I was aware how much that course was costing my unit in paydays and that we had a finite number of them. 

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Based on our Afghanistan experience, we admitted that the Regular Force isn't ready to deploy without a lengthy work-up, so I am less concerned about the need of the Reserve Force to do the same.

2 points on this.

1.  Was there really a need to do that much work-up?  What % of it was a waste of time shit-show.

2.  Some Reg force units are high readiness and go out the door much quicker than 3 months. 

 

[dapaterson]

Agreed. I was focusing on the Army, which has never found a two week course it can't fit into four...

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Problem is some trades are different now reg vs Pres, specifically weapons and vehicle techs, Pres gets the shaft and only gets about 60% of what the reg force does. Just had one of our vtechs transfer reg force. Was ql5 qualified but now must start from the begining because of all the missing stuff PRes doesnt get.

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

Using the current (yet old) system we have though (Reg Force, Reserve Force and Special Force), the Reg gets the full meal deal for trg, the Reservist (in most cases..not all) gets a little less and, if ever used, the Special Force members would get even less.  Take a look at trade Occupation Specifications and (if your trade uses them) JTARs. 

Now question....when was the last time the Special Force was ever mobilized... ;D

Another problem the Reserve suffer from is the lack of original training, we show up every september, ask whats the training year going to be like and get basically told SALY, Same as Last year, I'm sorry but I am going to be bored of EX's rather fast if your trying to accomplish BTS is the quickest most direct way instead of making it dynamic and interesting for the troops.

But, this is also part of military life and Reg force endures it as well.  I've done the same 'battle' in the simulator time and time again.  COREXs get repetitive, etc.  BUT part of that is to drive the mental/muscle memory and form the foundation of, if needed, follow on work-up/bolt on/TST as required...

Difference being...Cl A types likely will eventually get bored and stop showing up.  (Somedays I wish I still had that option  8))

 

[daftandbarmy]

Agreed. I was focusing on the Army, which has never found a two week course it can't fit into four...

There have been a few times where I have been impressed by some courses delivered in the reserve world that have been exponentially better than their Reg F equivalent, which gives me hope. One was the Cbt Tm Comd's course which was only 2 weeks long but, in the quality and quantity of learning delivered, was a marvelous example of well deployed adult learning principles.

 

[Old Sweat]

Now question....when was the last time the Special Force was ever mobilized... ;D

1950 for Korea.

 

[Eland2]

I know a guy who joined the RLI in the 70s. He had had previous experience with the CF as an NCO, and described their weapon training like this:

"During the first week of recruit training they got us in a room, issued us FNs, and took us outside to the range. After a quick safety brief they gave each of us a full mag which we then proceeded to fire off at the targets. We then went back inside and learned about the stripping and assembly of the weapon while we cleaned it."

Much of the rest of the training was apparently like this, and targeted towards new recruits who would be parachuting into combat within 6 months of joining. I have had similar experience with local police on the ranges where they had me shooting a Glock, a weapon I had never used, quite confidently and safely within a couple of hours along with some of their newly recruited reservists (many of whom had never fired a gun before).

This is a good example of the red tape we regularly wrap ourselves in: I have no idea why it takes us weeks to get smart recruits to the point where they can actually fire a rifle at a target when we do 'fun shoots' for civvies all the time.

The introduction I received to the FNC1A1 when I joined an armoured reserve unit in 1979 was somewhat more detailed and structured than this. I joined up under the auspices of something that was called SRTP, or Summer Reserve Training Program, which was basically a summer job-creation programme aimed at young people aged 16 - 19. Most of our basic training was done in the summer months in the armoury, from 0830 to 1630, Monday to Friday, although we later had a field component lasting about a week where we learned how to live in the field, dig trenches, prepare basic defensive positions and learn basic infantry section tactics and drills.

In the second week of training, we were issued our FN rifles. We were introduced to the basic parts and capabilities of the FN, and learned how to strip and clean them, and this took less than a half day to accomplish. On the next day, we were introduced to IA's and stoppages.

We spent the rest of our time taking courses on first aid and other things, and doing more foot drill, this time with our issued weapons.

We didn't actually fire them for the first time until we went to Wolseley Barracks at CFB London for a week of additional training and our passing-off parade. The range they took us to was the pistol range that was located next to one of the barrack blocks. There we were issued .22 calibre barrel adapters and shown how to install them, along with breech blocks adapted to accept the smaller round. We were also given magazines adapted to hold .22 calibre rounds.

Because the ammunition didn't have enough power to properly cycle the action of the rifles, we had to manually cock our rifles after each round. The reason for using the low-power rounds, of course, wasn't just because of the small size of the range we were on, but because CFB London was located practically in the middle of London, with lots of residential areas nearby, so noise was a concern. I say 'was' because CFB London doesn't really exist anymore, save for the original Wolseley Barracks building and a small collection of buildings allocated for the use of 22 Svc Bn and 'A' Sqn 1st Hussars.

We didn't actually get to use full-power 7.62 NATO ammunition until after Milcon, when we went to CFB Borden for a range meet. After a box lunch that we ate while on the range, we were marched over to the Terra theatre, where we were treated to a showing of Zulu, which I thought was a pretty fun way to end our basic training.

 

[MilEME09]

Using the current (yet old) system we have though (Reg Force, Reserve Force and Special Force), the Reg gets the full meal deal for trg, the Reservist (in most cases..not all) gets a little less and, if ever used, the Special Force members would get even less.  Take a look at trade Occupation Specifications and (if your trade uses them) JTARs. 

Now question....when was the last time the Special Force was ever mobilized... ;D

But, this is also part of military life and Reg force endures it as well.  I've done the same 'battle' in the simulator time and time again.  COREXs get repetitive, etc.  BUT part of that is to drive the mental/muscle memory and form the foundation of, if needed, follow on work-up/bolt on/TST as required...

Difference being...Cl A types likely will eventually get bored and stop showing up.  (Somedays I wish I still had that option  8))

While I understand that, what I mean is we go to the same training area and use the same site. How is that usefull to the troops exacuting the same thing they kmow from the previous year, and how can SNCOs really be good at siting a location if its the same location every time?

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Not just Snr NCOs.  It applies to Jnr NCOs, Warrant Officers and Officers alike...and, as I said I've done the exact same "sim" time after time and learn something from each one.

If repetition is a military reality (which it is), then people need to accept that and get on with getting better at their duties and skillsets.

 

[FJAG]

... After a box lunch that we ate while on the range, we were marched over to the Terra theatre, where we were treated to a showing of Zulu, which I thought was a pretty fun way to end our basic training.

Hey. We got to see Breaker Morant on our Basic Legal Officers Course.  ;D

:cheers:

 

[OldSolduer]

2 points on this.

1.  Was there really a need to do that much work-up?  What % of it was a waste of time crap-show.

2.  Some Reg force units are high readiness and go out the door much quicker than 3 months.

In most cases the work up was longer than the actual deployment, which is ridiculous.

 

[Eland2]

Hey. We got to see Breaker Morant on our Basic Legal Officers Course.  ;D

:cheers:

How apropos that you would have been shown Breaker Morant, of all things, while on a legal course. One of the things that has always impressed and amazed me
was how one of the soldiers who was being ordered to give testimony managed to haul himself out of his chair on one leg and snap to attention in the required fashion before giving his testimony. I've never seen anyone do that before.

 

[Haggis]

There have been a few times where I have been impressed by some courses delivered in the reserve world that have been exponentially better than their Reg F equivalent, which gives me hope. One was the Cbt Tm Comd's course which was only 2 weeks long but, in the quality and quantity of learning delivered, was a marvelous example of well deployed adult learning principles.

in 2007 (or 2008, maybe?  Can't quite remember) I was teaching on a DP4 Infantry CSM Course in Gagetown.  It was a mixed course, 2 Reg F and 2 P Res syndicates.  When it came time to do up the course reports, the decision was made by the chain of command to only grant the P Res graduates the "Reserve" qualification code, because, well, they were Reservists, despite having done EXACTLY the same work to EXACTLY the same standard as the Reg F candidates.  The instructors, both Reg F and P Res argued against it and won their case.  Everyone was awarded the Reg F qualification.  But how many other times was this done and either not noticed or not challenged?

 

[a_majoor]

Sadly, one of the main reasons to have extended workup training for deployments has little to do with the amount of training (or lack thereof) but rather to build a cohesive unit from all the mix'n'match parts that are bolted together to create a deployable battlegroup. If you are bringing in another company from a different battalion, filling the files in the Admin company and Support company with mechanics, cooks and clerks who volunteered from all over the place for a tour and also have to absorb 20% Reserve augmentees, you don't have a real unit at that point, but a large collect of of uniformed personnel.

The building of personal relationships and trust takes a long time, and having hollowed out units as the building blocks of deployed battlegroups is the first problem. If each battalion was at its establishment of @ 800 men, the amount of workup training would be drastically reduced because the personal relationships within the unit will already be strong and established.

 

[Monsoon]

Sadly, one of the main reasons to have extended workup training for deployments has little to do with the amount of training (or lack thereof) but rather to build a cohesive unit from all the mix'n'match parts that are bolted together to create a deployable battlegroup. If you are bringing in another company from a different battalion, filling the files in the Admin company and Support company with mechanics, cooks and clerks who volunteered from all over the place for a tour and also have to absorb 20% Reserve augmentees, you don't have a real unit at that point, but a large collect of of uniformed personnel.

...who ideally will have been trained and conditioned to cohere quickly with people who have similar training and conditioning. The real shame is that our HR structure's shift towards "a career for life" over the past couple of decades has decreased our capacity to quickly mobilize civilians into soldiers and increased our tolerance of administration and leadership approaches that rely on long-term relationships.

 

[Journeyman]

..... because the personal relationships within the unit will already be strong and established.

Everyone will already know who to hate and avoid  ;D


Edit: see post #2779 by dapterson.  The rest of mine on Engen's book was posted before the coffee kicked in.  :facepalm:

 

[Kirkhill]

...who ideally will have been trained and conditioned to cohere quickly with people who have similar training and conditioning. The real shame is that our HR structure's shift towards "a career for life" over the past couple of decades has decreased our capacity to quickly mobilize civilians into soldiers and increased our tolerance of administration and leadership approaches that rely on long-term relationships.

That bears repeating........

 

[daftandbarmy]

...who ideally will have been trained and conditioned to cohere quickly with people who have similar training and conditioning. The real shame is that our HR structure's shift towards "a career for life" over the past couple of decades has decreased our capacity to quickly mobilize civilians into soldiers and increased our tolerance of administration and leadership approaches that rely on long-term relationships.

Once upon a time, good leaders could get any team of rag tags together to work miracles with a simple 'Follow Me'.

I wonder how much we expect that from our senior leaders in particular these days?

 

[dapaterson]

Is that a follow-on to Engen's "Strangers in Arms" (https://www.amazon.ca/Strangers-Arms-Motivation-Canadian-1943-1945/dp/0773547258)?