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

[tango22a]

Michael:
I won't get in a flame war with you as I have been retired for over 20 years and am not really current in present-day situations. I do KNOW for example that my old unit was to have received 4 AVGPs in the early 80s. I also attended the second PRes Gunnery course and was staff on the third course. Instead of 4 pristeen AVGPs we got two (2). One had been loaned to the USMC for user trials and it had bullet strikes all over it. Also the hull was so twisted that the back doors would not close properly. After about six months or so they all disappeared to MTC Borden.  The only time we ever saw them after that was at Borden,for Gunnery or D/M courses or at summer concentration. You must admit it's hard to remain current on a vehicle when you don't have even one (1) to play with. I am willing to admit I am biased towards the PRes, having BTDT with nothing for years. Have you ever done road recce in a 3-ton Stake?...I have because you train with what you got!

Cheers,

tango22a

 

[Michael OLeary]

tango22a,

Neither am I looking for a flame war, but you are generalizing current Reg F/Res conditions based on your own experience which you admit is limited to Armoured Recce, and ended 20 years ago.

 

[tango22a]

Michael:

You win I Quit.

I still have ties to my old Regiment and to family members that are serving soldiers both RegF and PRes.

Cheers,

tango22a

 

[George Wallace]

When it comes to the Training Delta between Regular and Reserve Force Armour Corps soldiers, it has been discussed in quite a few forums already.  It started back in the days when the Lynx was being retired, the Cougar was on its last legs and kept alive by the Reserves, and the arrival of the Coyote.  Followed soon after by the disappearance of the LEO 1 C 1 and the gap continued to spread.  No longer could Reservists train on Tracks, and fill positions in Light Track or Tanks.  The cost of training Reservists on the Surveillance Suites and Turret Gunnery alienated them from the Regs.  Manpower cutbacks, the loss of a Regular Force Regiment, cut down on employment opportunities for Reservists in the Reg Force Regiments.  

That being said, there is still a requirement for "Mud Recce" skills, as the Coyote is not a true Recce Veh, but a Surveillance Veh.  The Reserves need the tools (Vehs and Radios) to conduct this training.   Perhaps, they may luck out and have Coyotes cascaded down to them, if the Reg Force units upgrade to a more 'robust' vehicle, and they will gain some of the Surveillance skills that will make them more employable in a Armour role overseas.

Of course, not only will the decision makers in the Corps have to want this, but DND will have to win the LOTO to fund these ideas/dreams.


[EDIT TO ADD:  Conversion to TCCS Radios was a costly venture as well, and severely limited Reserve Armour training, in the lack of addequate numbers being alloted to not only Reserve Armour Units, but all Reserve MOCs.]

 

[aesop081]

Have you ever done road recce in a 3-ton Stake?...I have because you train with what you got!

I had to run my engineer section out of an LSVW and that was in a RegF regiment. Whats your point again ?

 

[Nfld Sapper]

I had to run my engineer section out of an LSVW and that was in a RegF regiment. Whats your point again ?

Ouch now that sucks.

 

[George Wallace]

I had to run my engineer section out of an LSVW and that was in a RegF regiment. Whats your point again ?

You did tactical Route Recces in an LSVW?

 

[aesop081]

You did tactical Route Recces in an LSVW?

Yup.......for IRF(L) training no less.

 

[George Wallace]

Yup.......for IRF(L) training no less.

As attachment to a RECCE TROOP doing a Route Recce?

 

[tango22a]

CDNAviator:

At least you had a Loud Squeaky Vehicle, Wheeled. As I said before I Quit!!

Cheers,

tango22a

 

[aesop081]

As attachment to a RECCE TROOP doing a Route Recce?

As an attachement to recce platoon...doing route recces to detemine trafficability for the BG and site obstacles ( explosive and non-explosive)

 

[George Wallace]

As an attachement to recce platoon...doing route recces to detemine trafficability for the BG and site obstacles ( explosive and non-explosive)

Quite a bit different from being the lead Patrol. 

At least the LSVW was capable of moving cross country to some extent.  A far cry from the capabilities of a 3 ton Stake, and perhaps the MILCOT. 

 

[aesop081]

  A far cry from the capabilities of a 3 ton Stake, and perhaps the MILCOT.   

I would have taken the 3 ton steak truck. At least then i would have had room for all the troops, their kit, the section stores, weapons, explosives, field defensive stores.......yadi yadi yada....

My point is, RegF or PRes, we all have to make due with alot less than the ideal. Making due is not a PRes issue.

 

[tango22a]

George Wallace:

PM inbound!

Cheers,

tango22a

 

[George Wallace]

My point is, RegF or PRes, we all have to make due with alot less than the ideal. Making due is not a PRes issue.

The "Making do" part has cascaded down to the PRes quite fine.  They are "Making do" with much less that their Reg Force counterparts, who are "Making do"  with much more (as it should be or our government would really be screwed.).  Perhaps this makes the Reservists much better at "Making do with less".   ;D

It is the result of the Public wanting the Peace Dividend every year since 1953 and the end of the Korean War.  Canada's Military has been constantly cut in manpower, equipment, infrastructure and funding since the Korean War, and the John Q Public hasn't let up with his cries for the "Peace Dividend".

 

[aesop081]

 Perhaps this makes the Reservists much better at "Making do with less".   ;D

Perhaps it does indeed. It never cease to amaze me the ingenuity of Canadian service members when compared to those of other nations.

It is the result of the Public wanting the Peace Dividend every year since 1953 and the end of the Korean War.  Canada's Military has been constantly cut in manpower, equipment, infrastructure and funding since the Korean War, and the John Q Public hasn't let up with his cries for the "Peace Dividend".

I agree 100% George. Beleive me, i would love to see Leos and things parked at reserve units ready for use. But does anyone think its realistic ?

 

[McG]

I had to run my engineer section out of an LSVW and that was in a RegF regiment.

I've also seen regular engineer Recce Sgt operating out of the back of LSVW attempting to support BGs ... and we do attach Recce Sgts to Recce Sqn from time to time.

The only problem is if you forcefully re-role, re-badge or re-name PRes Regiments that....

I was not proposing a forceful re-rolling of units.  Instead, I was presenting the idea of maintaining a combat role while adding a second domestic role.  That being said, if the combat role of a unit is not relevant to operational requirements then the CF is not getting a good return for any investments made into that unit.

I am also willing to bet if the Armoured Recce Role disappears that there will be more than a few VRs.

Maybe but if we are hypothesizing that the reserve armd recce role is not relevant to operational requirements, then the interests of the CF are best served by re-rolling to something which is relevant.  We will just have to accept that some pers may choose to leave because their hobby is not in line with the military's needs (and that's okay because the military is not a federally funded hobby club).

The problem is that due to over-tasking the RegF cannot train people from PRes to a standard useful to deploy in an ARMOUR trade.  Most PRes Armour soldiers end up being employed outside their trade.They still deploy and do a good job, but I am sure many would prefer to be employed as Armoured soldiers. Lack of money, lack of training and mainly a lack of WILL to remedy this situation  will lead us into careering around in ever-decreasing circles until we finally bite ourselves on the a**.IMHO the system is badly strained and the only solution is an increase in funding which I can't see happening with today's economic situation.

This drives right to the heart of defining relevance to operational requirements.  It is not enough to show that a capability is required on the battlefields of today or tomorrow (though if the capability is not required for either that would be a clear indicator of no relevance to operational requirements).  For a reserve capability to be relevant to operations, we must be able to employ the reservist within his occupation.  We must also be able to properly train and maintain that capability internal to the reserves (ie. no expectation of reg force training cadres coming down to do it).  We must be able to provide whatever equipment this requires (recognizing that there are resource limitations regardless of component).

For as long as I can recall, the government has never funded procurement of sufficient AFV to meet the requirements of the regular force (it is possible that M113 purchases were adequate but that is too far before my time).  This under-resourcing is unlikely to change, and it would be irrational to degrade the already limited regular force capability in order to carve out the charity case vehicles to sustain that capability in the reserves.  The CLS has stated that he will not be seeking multi-million dollar vehicles for the reserves (it is only affordable at the expense of an operational regular force capability).  Cascading Coyote to the reserves will not resolve the problem either.  When Coyote is replaced, there will be a new vehicle with new fires & sensor systems and the Coyote trained reservist will still not be employable in regular force armd recce.

It was not my recent intent to discuss the utility of various reserve type units, but as Armd Recce was brought up: perhaps those units would better serve the CF through providing combat engineers (for which there is a high demand for reservists to deploy in their role), CIMIC or some other capability.

I seem to get the feeling that many RegF personnel would rather be done with PRes, since they feel monies could be better expended elsewhere.

As I said before I feel that the RegF would be more than happy to see  the PRes  Strike its tents, turn in what little equipment it has and disappear QUIETLY.

Some might feel that.  I've seen a summary of a report done by finance pers in Ottawa showing that the reserve Bde as a collective were significantly more costly than the regular brigades.  Could we do better putting all our money into the regular force?  I don't know, but I suspect such a move would do more harm than good.  As it is, the report that I previously mentioned certainly did not study enough detail to allow anyone to answer this question either.  There were too many details which could not be broken down further for any refined insight.

Reserve units with operationally relevant mission tasks (both domestic and international) are what the Army and the CF needs.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

True, Edward, and that number approached 40-45% on the final big rotos in Bosnia.  However there are still members of the Reg F who see the operational employment of Reservists as a political rather than strategic initiaitive.  In short, I've often been told that there are Reg F soldiers being left at home "so a Reservist can have a tour".

Rubbish??  You bet!  But to a homebound Reg F soldier who sees a Reservist "deploy in his place", it a favourite axe to grind.  On the other side of the coin, once deployed, you can't tell the diference between them because "there ain't no hatbadge on a helmet"!

I bet if they suddenly told the Reg forces guys that due to manning shortages they will be pulling 1 year tours and those with speciality skills are subject to stop loss clause on their contracts would be wishing for any relief after completing their tour and hoping to spend a little time in Canada with their families. I have noted that much of the Reg vs Res stuff is fading thanks to the work and sacrifices of Reservists overseas, I hope the lessons learned from all of this are applied and not quickly forgotten again.

I would love to see a couple of Leo C2's sent to some of the larger armoured units where young troopers can learn some basic skills like track changing, etc. The Svc Bat can use for training as well, swapping engine packs and such.

 

[aesop081]

I would love to see a couple of Leo C2's sent to some of the larger armoured units where young troopers can learn some basic skills like track changing, etc. The Svc Bat can use for training as well, swapping engine packs and such.

So that we can then hear the laments of young and not-so-young reservists about how they are forced to use cast-offs from the RegF that are at the very end of their useful lives ?

Is the bill of dispersing small fleets of old vehicules worth a negligeable training gain ?

 

[Haggis]

My point is, RegF or PRes, we all have to make due with alot less than the ideal. Making due is not a PRes issue.

In my "day job" I recently spent a couple of days watching REGULAR FORCE  recruits and officer candidates field training at CFLRS.  Guess what?  They're short, too!  Wearing one pair of Mk 3s, carrying nuke bags and 82 butt packs in place of small packs, wearing more mixed ICE/IECS than most Reserve units and carrying C7 (not A1 or A2s).

So, "big deal.. they're recruits", some would say.  My point is this:  We're fighting a war on a budget.  Everybody is short of everything and there no new kit/toys/equipment on the horizon.  The cupboards are almost bare and our credit card is maxed out.  What I saw at CFLRS is symptomatic of that.  But, y'know what?  They still turn out a pretty damned good product.  And those instructors are Regular Force AND RESERVISTS!  (Yes, Virginia, there are Reservists teaching Regular Force recruits.)

So that we can then hear the laments of young and not-so-young reservists about how they are forced to use cast-offs from the RegF that are at the very end of their useful lives ?

And they should be damned glad they're still allowed to parade and are getting paid.  Some of the "not-so-young" should remember those days.  They weren't all that long ago.