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

FORCE 2025: Informing the Army’s future structure

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
4,082
Points
1,060
As for the rest of the Regular Army - 3 Light Brigades modeled on the SSF (+), the CCSB and a Canadian Artillery Group.

1 CBG2 CBG5 CBG
Light Recce Strike BnLight Recce Strike BnLight Recce Strike Bn
LAV Inf BnLAV Inf BnLAV Inf Bn
Lt Inf BnLt Inf BnLt Inf Bn
Eng SqnEng SqnEng Sqn
Helo SqnHelo SqnHelo Sqn
HQ&SigsHQ&SigsHQ&Sigs
SvcSvcSvc
CCSB
CAG
1 RCHA2 RCHA5 RALC
4 RCA
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
4,082
Points
1,060
For the Reserves, keep the Divisions and Territorial Brigade (Groups) as adminstrative centres focused on HQ&Sigs, Svc and Engineering.

Redesignate the infantry according to precedence in the RCIC with its current title as an honourific in the same way the Brits have handled the Rifles and the Royal Regiment of Scotland. The GGFG for example would become 1 RCIC (GGFG). Likewise the RCAC would reorganize. The RRCA is already in position to easily reorganize.

So.

I propose the RCIC focus on generating 51 Light Infantry Company Combat Teams, complete with AD, AT, Pnr, DFS and Mor/PF elements, while the RCAC focus on generating 18 Light Recce Strike / ISTAR / Cav Squadrons. The RRCA, with its 40 Batteries under it various Regiments could perhaps manage 30 Field Batteries and 10 Missile Batteries (NASAMS type launchers for SHORAD as well as Pods for HIMARS/NSM type missiles).

Once the Sub-Unit level is sorted out and working adequately then we might be able to start thinking about Reserve battalions, brigades and divisions.

2 Cdn Div3 Cdn Div4 Cdn Div5 Cdn Div
34 TBG35 TBG38 TBG39 TBG41 TBG31 TBG32 TBG33 TBG36 TBG37 TBG
RRCA (Reserves)
Btys
1 RRCA5 RRCA9 RRCA13 RRCA17 RRCA21 RRCA25 RRCA29 RRCA33 RRCA37 RRCA
2 RRCA6 RRCA10 RRCA14 RRCA18 RRCA22 RRCA26 RRCA30 RRCA34 RRCA38 RRCA
3 RRCA7 RRCA11 RRCA15 RRCA19 RRCA23 RRCA27 RRCA31 RRCA35 RRCA39 RRCA
4 RRCA8 RRCA12 RRCA16 RRCA20 RRCA24 RRCA28 RRCA32 RRCA36 RRCA40 RRCA
RCAC (Reserves)
LRS Sqns
1 RCAC (GGHG)3 RCAC (8CH)5 RCAC (QYR)7 RCAC (12RBC)8 RCAC (1H)10 RCAC (RCH)12 RCAC (SALH)13 RCAC (SD)15 RCAC (BCD)17 RCAC (RdH)
2 RCAC (HR)4 RCAC (OR)6 RCAC (SH)9 RCAC (PEIR)11 RCAC (BCR)14 rCAC (KOCR)16 RCAC (FGH)18 RCAC (WR)
RCIC (Reserve)
Light Inf CCTs
1 RCIC (GGFG)6 RCIC (RRC)11 RCIC (4RCR)16 RCIC (SDGH)21 RCIC (FMR)51 RCIC (2 RNR)26 RCIC (NNSH)31 RCIC (48HC)36 RCIC (LSSR)41 RCIC (QOCHC)46 RCIC (CSR)
2 RCIC (CG)7 RCIC (RHLI)12 RCIC (RHFC)17 RCIC (FdSL)22 RCIC (PLF)27 RCIC (RdM)32 RCIC (RdS)37 RCIC (NSR)42 RCIC (RWR)47 RCIC (RMR)
3 RCIC (QORC)8 RCIC (PWOR)13 RCIC (GSF)18 RCIC (RdlC)23 RCIC (1RNBR)28 RCIC (CHO)33 RCIC (CBH)38 RCIC (RRR)43 RCIC (CH)48 RCIC (2RIRC)
4 RCIC (RHRC)9 RCIC (HPER)14 RCIC (LS)19 RCIC (4R22R)24 RCIC (WNSR)29 RCIC (RWR)34 RCIC (AR)39 RCIC (RMR)44 RCIC (FdS)49 RCIC (TSR)
5 RCIC (VG)10 RCIC (LWR)15 RCIC (BR)20 RCIC (6R22R)25 RCIC (NSNBR)30 RCIC (EKS)35 RCIC (ASHC)40 RCIC (LER)45 RCIC (SHC)50 RCIC (1RNR)
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
4,082
Points
1,060
Standard Infantry Coy for Reserves and Regs

A LAV Coy is a Standard Coy with LAVs and crews added on top.

Numbers are intentionally left out, as are the number of Regular coys

AD
Sensors
Effectors
IFS
FO/FSC
Mor
PF
DFS
Sniper
MG
GMG
Cannon
Missile
RifleRifleRifleRifle
Pnr
Svc
Cmd
 

Skysix

Full Member
Reaction score
654
Points
810
This could be Canada's best CAS option, and a reserve SQN or two fron the prairies could easiy be stood up.


On a related note, I wonder if this will be flown by USAF pilots or if it will become an Army program. I doubt all the fastair jocks/wannabees that already hate the A10 will love on it
 

Ostrozac

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
319
Points
930
On a related note, I wonder if this will be flown by USAF pilots or if it will become an Army program. I doubt all the fastair jocks/wannabees that already hate the A10 will love on it
Crews will be USAF. Previous media reporting on the subject quoted the commander of Air Force Special Operations Command, Lieutenant Genreal James Slife, who has a background as a helicopter pilot (MH-53 Pave Low). There’s more to the USAF than fighter pilots.

 

Skysix

Full Member
Reaction score
654
Points
810
Crews will be USAF. Previous media reporting on the subject quoted the commander of Air Force Special Operations Command, Lieutenant Genreal James Slife, who has a background as a helicopter pilot (MH-53 Pave Low). There’s more to the USAF than fighter pilots.

In general, yes. The MH-53 was retired almost 15 years ago (yet the USAF still flies Hueys!) and was replaced by the HH60W. But institutionally and at the General Officer levels they have been trying to ditch the A10 and the CAS mission for years preferring to use F16 etc and GPS bombs over gun runs at 30' in the A10. Let alone the even more austere locations and risky operations this aircraft would be doing. It makes more sense for the Army to fly it.

Not to mention the long standing interservice agreement that the Army would stay out of jets in return for being the helicopter operator. An agreement stretched by the HH60W, UH1N and MH139 on one side and the C20, UC35 and C37 on the other.
 
Last edited:

markppcli

Sr. Member
Reaction score
579
Points
860
This could be Canada's best CAS option, and a reserve SQN or two fron the prairies could easiy be stood up.


On a related note, I wonder if this will be flown by USAF pilots or if it will become an Army program. I doubt all the fastair jocks/wannabees that already hate the A10 will love on it
Alternatively give the training Hawks a secondary light attack role, I think the Brits had them armed for a while.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
4,399
Points
1,160
At the rate we are going, just contract out to the Commemorative Air Force, the planes are roughly the same vintage and they are used to working on old stuff.
 

markppcli

Sr. Member
Reaction score
579
Points
860
Maybe we should get a primary combat aircraft before we even consider looking at a second platform...

Well F35s are selected, apparently. I’m a little biased based on what I’m doing now, but we would benefit from have some Canadian pilots who could do CAS instead of relying of contracted air craft when the CF18s are more focused, quite rightly, on their primary task of defending Canadian Airspace. But we’re wildly off topic now I think.
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,159
Points
1,040
Part of the problem with the highlighted portion is related to equipment and another part is political.

On the equipment side we don't have enough tanks to make all of our Brigades "Heavy". On the other hand we don't have enough LAVs to make all three of our Brigades fully "Medium" either. You could make all three Brigades "Light" but then what do you do with the LAVs and tanks you do have? You could give them to the Reserves, but there's a 193 page discussion of why that's not going to happen any time soon.

So what are your options? You can either have Brigades that are a mix of unit types that don't really work together (like we have now), or you can have asymmetrical Brigades (1 x Heavy, 1 x Medium and 1 x Light). This is where we run into the political problems.

Firstly you have the language issue. If you create asymmetrical Brigades what does that do for career planning? If all the tanks for example are in Edmonton then what do you do with the Francophone tankers (or recruits that want to become tankers)?

Secondly you have the Regimental mafias. Which Regiment gets to be Heavy/Medium/Light? What if the bulk of deployments to places/missions that are considered "favourable" go disproportionately to one Brigade due to them having the most appropriate force type while more of the "less favourable" deployments fall to another Brigade? Same thing goes with deployment splits between the Anglo and Franco Brigades.

The Regimental issue could at least partially be helped by splitting up the existing 3 x Regiments into 9 x individually named Battalions (or alternately make them all Battalions of a single Regiment (like in Australia), but the geographical/linguistic issue would still remain.

Personally I think the best route would be to have all three Brigades configured the same so that you'd have the makings for a full Division but going Heavy or Medium would require significant new vehicle purchases while going Light would be politically difficult with all the money that's recently gone into the LAV fleet.
Replying to myself with a possible solution.

We have enough equipment for a fly-over Mechanized Brigade in Latvia (upgrade our existing eFP Latvia commitment to a full Brigade Group).
  • 1 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group
    • Lord Strathcona's Horse (Edmonton)
    • 1 PPCLI (Edmonton)
    • 1 RCR (Petawawa)
    • 1 R22eR (Valcartier)
    • 1 RCHA (Shilo)
    • 1 CER (Edmonton)
    • 1 Svc (Edmonton)
  • LdSH would have 3 x Squadrons of tanks in Latvia and 1 x Training Squadron in Edmonton/Wainwright. LdSH squadrons rotate deployments (1 deployed to Latvia, 1 in work-up training, 1 in refit).
  • Each infantry Battalion has one vehicle set in Latvia and one at their home base. Battalions rotate forward deployments.
  • 1 RCHA gets new SP gun system with 3 x Batteries in Latvia and a Training Battery in Shilo. Batteries rotate deployments.
  • 1 CER and 1 Svc rotate Squadrons/Companies to Latvia. Additional vehicles/equipment may be required for training in Canada.

The remaining 6 x Regular Battalions would be formed into two Light Brigade Groups. Each of these Light Battalions could take on an individual Regimental name from the list of existing Regiments (The Queen's Own Rifles, The Black Watch, etc.) or they could all be numbered Battalions from a Regiment from the Supplementary Order of Battle (for example 1 Royal Rifles of Canada, 2 Royal Rifles of Canada, 3 Royal Rifles of Canada, etc.) similar to the Royal Australian Regiment.
  • 2 Canadian Light Brigade Group
    • Royal Canadian Dragoons (Petawawa)
    • 1 Royal Rifles of Canada (Edmonton)
    • 2 Royal Rifles of Canada (Shilo)
    • 3 Royal Rifles of Canada (Petawawa)
    • 2 RCHA (Petawawa)
    • 2 CER (Petawawa)
    • 2 Svc (Petawawa)
  • 5 Canadian Light Brigade Group
    • 12 RBC (Valcartier)
    • 4 Royal Rifles of Canada (Quebec)
    • 5 Royal Rifles of Canada (Valcartier)
    • 6 Royal Rifles of Canada (Gagetown)
    • 5 RAL (Valcartier)
    • 5 CER (Valcartier)
    • 5 Svc (Valcartier)

Each of the Reserve Brigade Groups could each be amalgamated into additional Light Battalions. If the two Maritimes Brigades (the region with the lowest population to draw from) were amalgamated then you'd be able to have a complete Reserve Light Infantry Division to draw on:
  • 3 Canadian Light Brigade Group (Reserve)
    • Armoured Regiment (Amalgamated 38/39/41 Bde Regiments)
    • 7 Royal Rifles of Canada (Vancouver - Amalgamated 39 Bde Regiments)
    • 8 Royal Rifles of Canada (Calgary - Amalgamated 41 Bde Regiments)
    • 9 Royal Rifles of Canada (Winnipeg - Amalgamated 38 Bde Regiments)
    • Artillery Regiment (Amalgamated 38/39/41 Bde Regiments)
    • Combat Engineer Regiment (Amalgamated 38/39/41 Bde Regiments)
    • Service Battalion (Amalgamated 38/39/41 Bde Battalions)
  • 4 Canadian Light Brigade Group (Reserve)
    • Armoured Regiment (Amalgamated 31/32/33 Bde Regiments)
    • 10 Royal Rifles of Canada (London- Amalgamated 31 Bde Regiments)
    • 11 Royal Rifles of Canada (Toronto- Amalgamated 32 Bde Regiments)
    • 12 Royal Rifles of Canada (Ottawa- Amalgamated 33 Bde Regiments)
    • Artillery Regiment (Amalgamated 31/32/33 Bde Regiments)
    • Combat Engineer Regiment (Amalgamated 31/32/33 Bde Regiments)
    • Service Battalion (Amalgamated 31/32/33 Bde Battalions)
  • 6 Canadian Light Brigade Group (Reserve)
    • Armoured Regiment (Amalgamated 34/35/36/37 Bde Regiments)
    • 13 Royal Rifles of Canada (Montreal- Amalgamated 34 Bde Regiments)
    • 14 Royal Rifles of Canada (Quebec- Amalgamated 35 Bde Regiments)
    • 15 Royal Rifles of Canada (Halifax- Amalgamated 36/37 Bde Regiments)
    • Artillery Regiment (Amalgamated 34/35/36/37 Bde Regiments)
    • Combat Engineer Regiment (Amalgamated 34/35/36/37 Bde Regiments)
    • Service Battalion (Amalgamated 34/35/36/37 Bde Battalions)
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
12,991
Points
1,160
Replying to myself with a possible solution.

We have enough equipment for a fly-over Mechanized Brigade in Latvia (upgrade our existing eFP Latvia commitment to a full Brigade Group).
  • 1 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group
    • Lord Strathcona's Horse (Edmonton)
    • 1 PPCLI (Edmonton)
    • 1 RCR (Petawawa)
    • 1 R22eR (Valcartier)
    • 1 RCHA (Shilo)
    • 1 CER (Edmonton)
    • 1 Svc (Edmonton)
  • LdSH would have 3 x Squadrons of tanks in Latvia and 1 x Training Squadron in Edmonton/Wainwright. LdSH squadrons rotate deployments (1 deployed to Latvia, 1 in work-up training, 1 in refit).
  • Each infantry Battalion has one vehicle set in Latvia and one at their home base. Battalions rotate forward deployments.
  • 1 RCHA gets new SP gun system with 3 x Batteries in Latvia and a Training Battery in Shilo. Batteries rotate deployments.
  • 1 CER and 1 Svc rotate Squadrons/Companies to Latvia. Additional vehicles/equipment may be required for training in Canada.

The remaining 6 x Regular Battalions would be formed into two Light Brigade Groups. Each of these Light Battalions could take on an individual Regimental name from the list of existing Regiments (The Queen's Own Rifles, The Black Watch, etc.) or they could all be numbered Battalions from a Regiment from the Supplementary Order of Battle (for example 1 Royal Rifles of Canada, 2 Royal Rifles of Canada, 3 Royal Rifles of Canada, etc.) similar to the Royal Australian Regiment.
  • 2 Canadian Light Brigade Group
    • Royal Canadian Dragoons (Petawawa)
    • 1 Royal Rifles of Canada (Edmonton)
    • 2 Royal Rifles of Canada (Shilo)
    • 3 Royal Rifles of Canada (Petawawa)
    • 2 RCHA (Petawawa)
    • 2 CER (Petawawa)
    • 2 Svc (Petawawa)
  • 5 Canadian Light Brigade Group
    • 12 RBC (Valcartier)
    • 4 Royal Rifles of Canada (Quebec)
    • 5 Royal Rifles of Canada (Valcartier)
    • 6 Royal Rifles of Canada (Gagetown)
    • 5 RAL (Valcartier)
    • 5 CER (Valcartier)
    • 5 Svc (Valcartier)

Each of the Reserve Brigade Groups could each be amalgamated into additional Light Battalions. If the two Maritimes Brigades (the region with the lowest population to draw from) were amalgamated then you'd be able to have a complete Reserve Light Infantry Division to draw on:
  • 3 Canadian Light Brigade Group (Reserve)
    • Armoured Regiment (Amalgamated 38/39/41 Bde Regiments)
    • 7 Royal Rifles of Canada (Vancouver - Amalgamated 39 Bde Regiments)
    • 8 Royal Rifles of Canada (Calgary - Amalgamated 41 Bde Regiments)
    • 9 Royal Rifles of Canada (Winnipeg - Amalgamated 38 Bde Regiments)
    • Artillery Regiment (Amalgamated 38/39/41 Bde Regiments)
    • Combat Engineer Regiment (Amalgamated 38/39/41 Bde Regiments)
    • Service Battalion (Amalgamated 38/39/41 Bde Battalions)
  • 4 Canadian Light Brigade Group (Reserve)
    • Armoured Regiment (Amalgamated 31/32/33 Bde Regiments)
    • 10 Royal Rifles of Canada (London- Amalgamated 31 Bde Regiments)
    • 11 Royal Rifles of Canada (Toronto- Amalgamated 32 Bde Regiments)
    • 12 Royal Rifles of Canada (Ottawa- Amalgamated 33 Bde Regiments)
    • Artillery Regiment (Amalgamated 31/32/33 Bde Regiments)
    • Combat Engineer Regiment (Amalgamated 31/32/33 Bde Regiments)
    • Service Battalion (Amalgamated 31/32/33 Bde Battalions)
  • 6 Canadian Light Brigade Group (Reserve)
    • Armoured Regiment (Amalgamated 34/35/36/37 Bde Regiments)
    • 13 Royal Rifles of Canada (Montreal- Amalgamated 34 Bde Regiments)
    • 14 Royal Rifles of Canada (Quebec- Amalgamated 35 Bde Regiments)
    • 15 Royal Rifles of Canada (Halifax- Amalgamated 36/37 Bde Regiments)
    • Artillery Regiment (Amalgamated 34/35/36/37 Bde Regiments)
    • Combat Engineer Regiment (Amalgamated 34/35/36/37 Bde Regiments)
    • Service Battalion (Amalgamated 34/35/36/37 Bde Battalions)

Isn't that kind of what we did for WW1 and Korea e.g., abandon the organization we have now as impossible to deal with, and create a new one from scratch, to avoid having to deal with all the petty politics and in fighting?
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,632
Points
1,010
Prep for Korea was made easier by the fact everyone had just gone through an extended master class in warfare and knew the difference between that and whatever it is the forces revert to in peacetime.
 

Old Sweat

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
105
Points
630
Prep for Korea was made easier by the fact everyone had just gone through an extended master class in warfare and knew the difference between that and whatever it is the forces revert to in peacetime.
The 1950-1953 time frame must have been interesting. On one hand we had a population of veterans snd adolescents who grew up watching the war. We also had field army's worth of kit.

But we were faced with two theaters emerge more or less simultaneously. Somehow we went from three infantry battalions training for an airborne role to defend North America to 15 infantry battalions (three AB) with a brigade in Germany and another fighting in Korea. Try that today
 

Ostrozac

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
319
Points
930
Prep for Korea was made easier by the fact everyone had just gone through an extended master class in warfare and knew the difference between that and whatever it is the forces revert to in peacetime.
There is a strong argument that the Commonwealth’s regimental system is designed and suitable for peacetime service, to give garrison soldiers in places like India and Hong Kong something to organize their cricket leagues around. The British Army, who invented the thing, certainly seem quick to abandon it once shots are fired, only to re-embrace it in extended peacetime. The Canadian Army, on the other hand, seems uncritically fascinated by this system.
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,159
Points
1,040
Isn't that kind of what we did for WW1 and Korea e.g., abandon the organization we have now as impossible to deal with, and create a new one from scratch, to avoid having to deal with all the petty politics and in fighting?
I'm not sure we really abandoned the existing organizations in WW1 or Korea. More we simply ignored them and got on with the business of fighting the war. When the wars were over we slid back into what existed before and never really solved the problems.
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,159
Points
1,040
And this piece, also from the Wavell Room, I think describes quite well the circles we end up talking about in this and similar threads.

Canada by virtue of it's location clearly needs our forces to have "Reach". So which of "Scale" and "Capability" do we sacrifice?
 
Top