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

[Kat Stevens]

I'm going to chime in with a question here; I guess the question is what is more important? Operational Readiness/Effectiveness or Tradition? Will having one larger unit isntead of two smaller ones (with one being small to the point of being ineffective) help improve the readiness of those soldiers to train and prepare for deployment (which ultimatly is the role of every reserve unit, as they do not deploy as a formed unit) and therefore further better the operational readiness/effectiveness of the army? And is that more important then tradition.

Coming from a reserve reg't in my short-lived 'Mo days (and a highland one at that, we all know those units have ALOT of pride in their traditions) I can say that reg't traditions are important, but I still say that amalgamating ineffective reserve units is the best course of action. And re: your comment about respecting those who formed a hollow square under that regiment's colours...isn't that what we have DHH and museums for?

Tradition and pride should never come before the needs of the army as a whole. If the brigade and the army as a whole will be better served by the QOCH being amalgamated with the Winnipeg Rifles, then there should be no hesitation to do so. IMO.     

So it's your opinion that during a time of war, it is to the Army's advantage to rearrange the deck chairs while the scuppers are overflowing?

 

[geo]

For your edification, some Regiments carry Standards and some Guidons - usually the more senior and distinguished Regiments in our given Army.  Let's not forget our comrades in the Royal Regiment of Canadian Artillery, for whom their guns serve as their Colours.

And let us not forget the dirty old engineer who opens the way to the army..... who carries his one immense battle honour "UBIQUE" (everywhere) on his cap badge.

(Note that this is not to be confused with the Royal Regiment of Canadian Artillery, for whom their guns serve as their Colours and who carry their one immense battle honour "UBIQUE" (All over the place) on their cap badge

 

[McG]

- Anytime there is talk of tinkering with the regimental system, one should understand that it is not about cost.  ... That's right: No amount of tinkering will save any money that won't be pissed away somewhere else by someone else.  Re-organizing is not done for efficiency, it is done to pad PERs and build careers.  ...

That's a little below the belt there.  If you don't agree that regiments should not be re-organized then you are a careerists trying to pad their own PER?  Lets not be silly & start trying to approach this a little more objectively.

Re-organization is about efficiency and effectiveness (two different things).  Yes, bringing multiple regiments of the same arm into a single unit will save some dollars here & there (and those dollars will add up).  But, in an army that is hurting for full time soldiers, tactical groupings could reduce the demand for a few PYs here & there.  With multiple tactical groupings, these PYs add up and allow the army to better put full time pers where they will bring us greater benefit.  That's about all we gain for efficiency.

Effectiveness is the biggest pay off.  How effective is a platoon sized regiment when it comes to developing company and battalion skills?  How effective is a vertically linear chain of command when it comes to producing CWO, Maj & LCol?  If tactical groupings only serve to ensure reserve battalions are regularly able to put real companies in the field on a weekend ex, then we will have introduced a significant improvement in effectiveness of force generating capabilities.

 

[TCBF]

...Effectiveness is the biggest pay off.  How effective is a platoon sized regiment when it comes to developing company and battalion skills?  How effective is a vertically linear chain of command when it comes to producing CWO, Maj & LCol?  If tactical groupings only serve to ensure reserve battalions are regularly able to put real companies in the field on a weekend ex, then we will have introduced a significant improvement in effectiveness of force generating capabilities.

- Right, then group them TACTICALLY all we can, but retain the Regiments as a basis for future expansion if needed - which is what the Militia was designed for to start with.  We don't need to disband, amalgamate or reduce to nil strength local units to group their sub-units or sub-sub-units tactically.  We merely need to introduce a disciplined structure - a "Peacetime Establishment" if you will.

- Being a Regular, I am amazed at the amount of Reservists who would again gut the Militia, when few - if any - modern guttings have done the Militia any good at all.

- Regular units in their trg areas have a difficult time bonding to their local areas.  We need local units and cadet corps to keep the Army and the people as one.  There are still a lot of young Canadians who know their ancestors served in the local unit - even if they themselves are not in it.

 

[Monsoon]

Send all Class Bs back to the Armoury floor - if you want a full-time job, you know where the recruiting center is.  Give the man days back to the units.   

That's right. And we can staff the full-time manning requirements of reserve units with our vast regular force personnel surplus, because all those class B folks will sign up for seven year engagements (including a substantial demotion, of course) because we told them to. Fortunately the Canadian labour market is so flexible these days that it's easy to force skilled workers to do things they don't want to.  :

 

[TCBF]

That's right. And we can staff the full-time manning requirements of reserve units with our vast regular force personnel surplus, because all those class B folks will sign up for seven year engagements (including a substantial demotion, of course) because we told them to. Fortunately the Canadian labour market is so flexible these days that it's easy to force skilled workers to do things they don't want to.  :

- Noted.

;D

 

[geo]

Retaining old regimental; NAMES for when they can be used again ???

As a soldier / sapper / crewman / gunner, do I feel prouder belonging to a Regiment of 100 odd sould OR belonging to a Regiment of 400 - 600 odd souls ???
What are the chances or probabilities that the regiment can or would be required to be raised to such a force ???

Once the Winnipeg Grenadiers were reduced to nil strength on the '60s - what are the chances of them EVER being resurected AND what kind of pertinence would they have for the future?  If recruiting prospects in the Winnipeg region are such that they can only support ONE battalion, then I would suggest that...
They be massed into ONE battalion of the Winnipeg Regiment
A Coy Camerons
B Coy Rifles
C Coy Grenadiers
D Coy C&S

If at some time in the future there is a need to expand the forces in the Winnipeg region AND the Winnipeg region is capable of supporting such an expansion then they could raise a Second and later a Third Battalion.
At that time, the Battalions could "adopt" the names of the Regiments that once formed their Unit.

... Anecdote :warstory:
In 1914, when the Canadian militia was forming the 1st Canadian Division for overseas service, Storied regiments dating back to confederation didn't have the capacity to field full battalions.
In Montreal, The Victoria Rifles of Canada, the Canadian Grenadier Guards and the Les Carabiniers Mont Royal were all ready to deploy overseas but none had the full complement required....
A new unit was formed: the 14th Bn CEF, The Royal Montreal Regiment.  Each unit contributed 3 Coys to the endeavour and, after training in Valcartier, off they went overseas with the 3rd Inf Bde of the 1st Cdn Div.  They made their own history & upon their return to Canada in 1919, the 23rd Westmount Rifles, an old Militia regiment volunteered to be struck off the order of battle so that the RMR could take it's place.

You aren't doing a unit any favour by retaining them as rifles company.  You aren't doing someone a favor by stretching a career and making him a LCol or CWO to lead a Company.  Matter of fact, you are hindering him AND, for those who dream of having a reserve Coy or Battalion deploying on Operations - it won't happen cause, the leaders have never benefited from doing it at home.

:warstory:

 

[Old Sweat]

Piper

Something along the lines of your suggestion was done in 1951 to mobilize our army contribution to NATO. It was decided to deploy a brigade group in Germany with another brigade training in Canada. At the same time a brigade was fighting in Korea with another preparing to replace it and a third being formed. The six battalions for the NATO force were created by directing selected militia regiments to mobilize a company for each of the 1st and 2nd Battalions of the Canadian Infantry, Canadian Highland or Canadian Rifle Battalions. In the case of the rifles, the selected regiments (with company in brackets) were the Victoria Rifles of Montreal (A), the Royal Hamilton Light Infantry (B), the Royal Winnipeg Rifles (C), the Regina Rifles Regiment (D) and the Queen's Own Rifles of Canada (Support). Something similar was done for the rest of the force, except for the RCAC which stayed with two regiments for the next few years.

Thus the army went from three infantry battalions in 1950 to 15 in a year and a bit. It was not quite a general mobilization, but was not far off the number called to the colours in 1939. The plan worked because the concept relied on Second World War veterans, who were still young and fit, voluntarily re-enlisting and because there was enough kit in the supply system to equip and arm them. I will leave it you to decide if it woud be possible to do it today.

 

[AJFitzpatrick]

... Anecdote :warstory:
In 1914, when the Canadian militia was forming the 1st Canadian Division for overseas service, Storied regiments dating back to confederation didn't have the capacity to field full battalions.

But didn't the Ad Hoc method of mobilization adopted by Sir Sam Hughes without reference to the existing mobilization plan cause this situation?

 

[vonGarvin]

I've read that the existing plans could have seen 25000 soldiers mobilised in very short order.  Sir Sam buggered that up, but that's another story.

 

[Michael OLeary]

But didn't the Ad Hoc method of mobilization adopted by Sir Sam Hughes without reference to the existing mobilization plan cause this situation?

Yes.  Anecdotes about the existing Militia marching off to war are great regimental lore, and neatly disguised by poor general understanding of perpetuation after the war, but the CEF was Sam Hughes' construct, and not a direct evolution of the existing Militia.

 

[Infanteer]

"Colours shall not be taken overseas during active operations, including United Nations, NATO, international and other peacekeeping type operations, and units serving overseas at the outbreak of hostilities shall immediately return their Colours to Canada",

Didn't 1 PPCLI take their colours overseas in 2006?

As for the "get rid of the regimental system" bunfight - don't equate wanting to change the way two militia units parading minimal amounts of soldiers with wanting to eliminate the regimental system.  As well, let's not assume that the preservation of the regimental system rests upon how many units with kilts we have left in Canada.

 

[Old Sweat]

Michael is absolutely correct. Sam Hughes described his mobilization approach as carrying a flaming torch through the Scottish Highlands or the Irish countryside in the old days. The result was about as uniform in dress and everything else and less cohesive than a gathering of the clans.

 

[Michael OLeary]

Didn't 1 PPCLI take their colours overseas in 2006?

But were they officially authorized to do so? And were they ever carried on the field of battle?

As for the "get rid of the regimental system" bunfight - don't equate wanting to change the way two militia units parading minimal amounts of soldiers with wanting to eliminate the regimental system.  As well, let's not assume that the preservation of the regimental system rests upon how many units with kilts we have left in Canada.

I think CSA's comment, and the degree of frustration it lends voice to, is the exact counterpoint to those who cry that the existing "regimental system" is an all or nothing deal.  Anything which might affect any regiment is decried as being destructive to the regimental system, therefore it cannot be rationally discussed or supported at any level.

It is the staunchly misguided defenders of that regimental system status quo, no matter how great the perpetuated inefficiencies, that have presented this as a "good vs. evil", "black vs. white" dilemma over and over again.  No one can accuse me of not being a fan of regiments and the regimental system, but if we cannot acknowledge any need to examine and guide the evolution of that system, along with the organization itself, then credible arguments can be put forth to set it aside as a factor in any discussion of Army modernization.

Those who would defend the anachronistic elements will bring the death of the regimental system if it happens, because they will force an "all or nothing" choice, and may well lose that battle to the detriment of us all.

 

[TCBF]

...
TCBF;

I don't forsee any time in the future where we will need reserve units to act in the role you describe them in (being there to be filled out in time of war). It will never happen again, it's not WW2 where soldiers can be trained quickly and shipped over. We could have a 150,000+ size army if we filled out ALL the reserve units to max strength, and that will NEVER happen, much less happen quick enough to justify having all these LCol run platoons hanging around. ...    

- How many times in the Military history of this planet have people said "It will NEVER happen again.."?

Recall that WW1 was the war to end all wars...

- I wrote earlier of 'ruthlessly' enforcing ranks to positions, and not getting a Major until the unit has 100 people, and not getting a LCol until it has 500.  You may have missed that.  We can still ruthlessly squash the over-ranking and feather-bedding of positions without disbanding regiments.  THE TWO PROBLEMS ARE UNRELATED.  But remember, if no one has the nuts to stop corruption of the old (present) organisation, they won't have the nuts to prevent corruption of the new one.  The house has to be cleaned BEFORE it is re-organized, not after.

- By all means, tactically group effective sub-sub units and sub-units into units.  All four or five regiments can compete for the combined command positions, and may the best leaders win.  We STILL don't need to disband units to do that. 

 

[Michael OLeary]

- By all means, tactically group effective sub-sub units and sub-units into units.  All four or five regiments can compete for the combined command positions, and may the best leaders win.  We STILL don't need to disband units to do that. 

So, in this model we would be left with the Rinky-Dink Fusiliers, of platoon strength, organizationally under command of the Notional Highlanders (who provide two platoons and get a Major's position because they have the RDF under command for the numbers).  The NH/RDF Company parades under command of the Regional Rifles, who have a Colonel's and RSM's position because of their accumulated 500 positions filled by a dozen or so units.  But,  because we're not actually disbanding any units to do this, the Platoon Commander of the RDF gets to be a Commanding Officer IAW the NDA, and the platoon has its own set of Colours to parade.  And how many orders of dress will we keep for this?

 

[TCBF]

So, in this model we would be left with the Rinky-Dink Fusiliers, of platoon strength, organizationally under command of the Notional Highlanders (who provide two platoons and get a Major's position because they have the RDF under command for the numbers).  The NH/RDF Company parades under command of the Regional Rifles, who have a Colonel's and RSM's position because of their accumulated 500 positions filled by a dozen or so units.  But,  because we're not actually disbanding any units to do this, the Platoon Commander of the RDF gets to be a Commanding Officer IAW the NDA, and the platoon has its own set of Colours to parade.  And how many orders of dress will we keep for this?

- The key is tactically group.  Like we do know on exercises and like was done on MILCONS of days of yore.

- The rest of the time, units would carry on as before.  Most could muster a hundred, and retain a Major.  There is no need for units commanded by captains or majors to come under the day to day command of a unit with an LCol just because it has an LCol.    If 4 MP Pl was led by a Captain and 4 CMBG HQ and Sigs Sqn was led by a Major, that did not mean they came under command of the 8 CH(PL) because it was commanded by an LCol - all of those elements had their own distinc relationship with their parent Brigades.  Same-same the NH and the RDF.  Grouped tactically during operations as directed.  Otherwise, function as different sized elements in a Brigade.

Why is this so hard?

 

[Michael OLeary]

Why is this so hard?

I suppose it doesn't have to be, as long as one agrees that every estimate must be situated to save each and every existing regiment.

And that is exactly the mindset that will see the regimental system set aside as an inefficient anachronism when the Army decides that change must be pursued.

The diehards will be hoist on their own petards.

 

[tomahawk6]

Regiments that cannot recruit to sustain its numbers need to be deactivated as they waste valuable resources.
Their personnel can be transferred to a nearby unit. Our Guard units may have a battalion with hq company and a manuever company in a large town/city with other manuever companies located in neighboring smaller towns. The state of Virginia has something like 48 national guard armories supporting units anywhere from a company to multiple units.

I guess what I propose is to make cuts in the militia to strengthen the Pres. Make the rest of the militia a volunteer unpaid force that report to the provincial government for interoperable communications, less-than-lethal security, emergency medical triage, traffic control and general manpower support of the Pres. I would configure,man and equip a Pres unit to be able to deploy in the event of war or other emergency.

 

[TCBF]

Regiments that cannot recruit to sustain its numbers need to be deactivated as they waste valuable resources....

- Interesting standard - let's hold all units to it, regular and reserve.  Let's put all regular units in competion with other units to see how well they can recruit and retain, then offer them the same future the Camerons face if they can't compete..

p.s: I'm a Reg.