• 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

TangoTwoBravo

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
327
Points
880
I understand the point about NEO operations. Lebanon is the one that most immediately comes to mind. In an active combat zone non combatants found their own way to the docks and then were shuttled to a safe haven in Cyprus as I recall.

I am thinking more along the lines of the government being able to react rapidly to a developing crisis before the bullets start flying and discourage the opening of hostilities. And then, when they discover they got it wrong and decide they don't want to hang around, are capable of extracting their troops, and their gear before they lose them all.

Where do you find vessels to urgently extract troops when the docks are under fire?
In a NEO there are points where people gather - they get themselves to those points. They get screened etc before moving to where they will be evacuated from.

We should not invest in shipping based on the fear of being stranded in a theatre.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
532
Points
1,060
As much as I like the Mistrals, I be happy with 2 Bay Class ships and would give up a CSC and AOP's for them. They need a crew of 63 and the RN runs them with the RFA. It would mean we also have secure transportation to move our forces overseas as required.

This is what the Point Class RoRo offers as PPP/PFI

Hartland+Point.jpg


This is what the Multi Role Vessel / Littoral Strike Ship / Special Operations Mothership looks like.

Yörük Işık on Twitter: "Danish: https://t.co/OZNVKy2DDh… "

Operational experience in the 1990's (Gulf War, Bosnia, ... ) demonstrated the difficulties the Ministry of Defence (MoD) had in rapidly obtaining and chartering suitable ships to move military equipment in the short timescales demanded by the Joint Rapid Reaction Forces, and for supporting the Armed Forces’ needs in operations worldwide.
The Strategic Defence Review 1998 identified a need for six Roll-On Roll-Off vessels (Ro-Ro) to give an improved strategic sealift capability to support the Joint Rapid Reaction Forces. Operational experience has demonstrated the difficulties in obtaining suitable ships to move military equipment in the short timescales demanded by the Joint Rapid Reaction Forces, and for the Armed Forces' needs in operations worldwide. An improved strategic sealift capability was a commitment in the SDR. It will play a key role in fulfilling the Armed Forces' equipment lift requirements in a wide range of operations, including those involving the deployment of the Joint Rapid Reaction Forces.
The full six-ship service is only required for major operation and exercise, so the MOD has pursued a contract for a long term service under the Private Finance Initiative. Under the terms of the contract the service provider can make ships available for the generation of commercial revenue, at times when they are not needed by MOD - thus delivering better value for money for the taxpayer.

 

Attachments

  • 1624042313147.png
    1624042313147.png
    148.9 KB · Views: 2

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
532
Points
1,060
In a NEO there are points where people gather - they get themselves to those points. They get screened etc before moving to where they will be evacuated from.

We should not invest in shipping based on the fear of being stranded in a theatre.


I'm not asking you to invest in anything. I am asking the government to invest in a capacity that will serve the civilian economy in peace and also be available to pull the fat from the fire when and if. It would also be available for charter for exercises and operations.

Personally I would sooner trust Canadian assets to a Canadian contract rather than rely on the good auspices of Cypriot, Panamanian, Ukrainian or even American commercial interests.


No photo description available.



Canada

G-T-S Katie standoff ends​

CBC News · Posted: Aug 03, 2000 6:36 AM ET | Last Updated: August 3, 2000
Canada's navy has boarded G-T-S Katie and two destroyers are now escorting the ship to port.
The Navy landed 14 Canadian soldiers on the vessel by helicopter.
The captain of the ship claimed his vessel was under attack.
Defence Minister Art Eggleton says there was no attack, the boarding went without incident and all Canadian personnel are safe. Eggleton says Canada has "stayed fully within the bounds of international law".
The small convoy is expected to arrive in Quebec on Sunday.
The American cargo ship is carrying $200 million worth of military equipment back from Kosovo, equipment used by Canadian peace-keepers in the Yugoslav province. It also had three Canadian military personnel returning from Kosovo.
The owners of the ship were refusing to bring it into port until a dispute over money owed was settled with the company contracted by the military to transport the equipment. Both sides are claiming the other side is not living up to their contract.
G-T-S Katie was supposed to have docked in Montreal a couple of weeks ago. But the cargo vessel anchored off the coast of Newfoundland about 160 kilometres off the Avalon Peninsula just outside Canadian territorial waters.
The two warships escorting the vessel are HMCS Athabaskan and HMCS Montreal.


Is it really right to suggest that we have a viable plan and structures in place that should give us the necessary sense of comfort?



This is NOT proposed as a DND budget item. This is and OGD/Private industry item which could be used to benefit the Government, including its DND.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
3,480
Points
1,060
I'm not asking you to invest in anything. I am asking the government to invest in a capacity that will serve the civilian economy in peace and also be available to pull the fat from the fire when and if. It would also be available for charter for exercises and operations.

Personally I would sooner trust Canadian assets to a Canadian contract rather than rely on the good auspices of Cypriot, Panamanian, Ukrainian or even American commercial interests.


No photo description available.



Canada

G-T-S Katie standoff ends​

CBC News · Posted: Aug 03, 2000 6:36 AM ET | Last Updated: August 3, 2000
Canada's navy has boarded G-T-S Katie and two destroyers are now escorting the ship to port.
The Navy landed 14 Canadian soldiers on the vessel by helicopter.
The captain of the ship claimed his vessel was under attack.
Defence Minister Art Eggleton says there was no attack, the boarding went without incident and all Canadian personnel are safe. Eggleton says Canada has "stayed fully within the bounds of international law".
The small convoy is expected to arrive in Quebec on Sunday.
The American cargo ship is carrying $200 million worth of military equipment back from Kosovo, equipment used by Canadian peace-keepers in the Yugoslav province. It also had three Canadian military personnel returning from Kosovo.
The owners of the ship were refusing to bring it into port until a dispute over money owed was settled with the company contracted by the military to transport the equipment. Both sides are claiming the other side is not living up to their contract.
G-T-S Katie was supposed to have docked in Montreal a couple of weeks ago. But the cargo vessel anchored off the coast of Newfoundland about 160 kilometres off the Avalon Peninsula just outside Canadian territorial waters.
The two warships escorting the vessel are HMCS Athabaskan and HMCS Montreal.


Is it really right to suggest that we have a viable plan and structures in place that should give us the necessary sense of comfort?



This is NOT proposed as a DND budget item. This is and OGD/Private industry item which could be used to benefit the Government, including its DND.

Various European powers need shipping for troops etc mainly because: colonies and residual colonial commitments.

Canada? We're one of the main reasons they needed Navies in the first place.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
532
Points
1,060
Various European powers need shipping for troops etc mainly because: colonies and residual colonial commitments.

Canada? We're one of the main reasons they needed Navies in the first place.


I think I could argue that the Labrador and Nunavut are Canadian colonies that could benefit from a "Navy". In fact if the Navy had been implemented in time then Joey Smallwood's evacuation of the outports may not have been necessary.

Between the mid-1950s and the early 1970s, the Newfoundland government led by Premier Joey Smallwood closed 250 coastal villages. Thirty thousand people were uprooted and relocated to larger villages and towns.

....

The provincial government also decided that it could not afford to bring modern services to these outports, many of which could be reached only by sea.

 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
532
Points
1,060
Another couple of examples of civil infrastructure dual tasked for defence needs.

Swiss highway tunnels are built as bombproof shelters.
Swedish highways are built as runways.
 

Underway

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
656
Points
1,010
Where do you find vessels to urgently extract troops when the docks are under fire?

Anywhere you can. You would be surprised how many ships can be chartered for a giant pile of money, even in a war zone.
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
225
Points
710
Please describe the scenario where you foresee NATO being driven off the continent and forced to repeat a Dunkirk-type extraction?
 

medic5

Member
Reaction score
50
Points
380
Please describe the scenario where you foresee NATO being driven off the continent and forced to repeat a Dunkirk-type extraction?
Perhaps trapped in the Baltics if Putin decides to gamble it all? Maybe if the SCS goes hot and it plays out like 1942 in the Pacific where nearly every island is overrun? Near impossible but I just wanted to give some examples.
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
225
Points
710
Perhaps trapped in the Baltics if Putin decides to gamble it all? Maybe if the SCS goes hot and it plays out like 1942 in the Pacific where nearly every island is overrun? Near impossible but I just wanted to give some examples.
If Russia overruns the Baltics we certainly won't be sending any transport ships...military or commercial into the Baltic State ports to pull out our troops. And unless we by some miracle suddenly get a Marine Corps with all the offensive, opposed landing tools that would go with that we won't be landing any mechanized troops on the islands of the South China Seas.

There are a lot of other military needs where I'd prefer to see the GOC spend our tax dollars before it spends any money purchasing/subsidizing Ro-Ro ships (even in a PPP scheme). To be honest, if we ever get to a situation where we have to deploy a Mechanized Brigade to Europe to defend against a Russian attack then the government could simply press the existing ferries into service due to the State of Emergency.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,444
Points
1,040
If Russia overruns the Baltics we certainly won't be sending any transport ships...military or commercial into the Baltic State ports to pull out our troops. ...
No. But we might want to land a brigade or two in Bremen or Antwerp or Le Havre or Brest or even Bilbao and move north and make the line in the sand in Poland, or wherever, stronger.

I personally don't care if we have RCN ships or ones picked up from trade or some other structure. All I care about is that a) there's a plan and b) we exercise it at reasonable intervals.

🍻
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
225
Points
710
No. But we might want to land a brigade or two in Bremen or Antwerp or Le Havre or Brest or even Bilbao and move north and make the line in the sand in Poland, or wherever, stronger.

I personally don't care if we have RCN ships or ones picked up from trade or some other structure. All I care about is that a) there's a plan and b) we exercise it at reasonable intervals.

🍻
I agree 100% that we need a plan and to practice it. I just don't think that subsidizing new ships is worth the cost vs taking up civilian ships when required. I imagine you could buy a lot of Javelin missiles or whatever for the cost of a pair of Ro-Ro ships on each coast.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,444
Points
1,040
I agree 100% that we need a plan and to practice it. I just don't think that subsidizing new ships is worth the cost vs taking up civilian ships when required. I imagine you could buy a lot of Javelin missiles or whatever for the cost of a pair of Ro-Ro ships on each coast.
My guess is that you are right considering we would only need one or two for a few months every few years or so. The only problem is ensuring a system whereby the ships are guaranteed when required which might require some legislation, some cash on a stand-by basis and perhaps crews trained to operate the ships if the crew balks. - Nothing to worry about except if you don't plan for it and have contingency plans in place. Something we're not to good with as far as I know.

🍻
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
532
Points
1,060
My guess is that you are right considering we would only need one or two for a few months every few years or so. The only problem is ensuring a system whereby the ships are guaranteed when required which might require some legislation, some cash on a stand-by basis and perhaps crews trained to operate the ships if the crew balks. - Nothing to worry about except if you don't plan for it and have contingency plans in place. Something we're not to good with as far as I know.

🍻
CAST Redivivus.
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
574
Points
890
My guess is that you are right considering we would only need one or two for a few months every few years or so. The only problem is ensuring a system whereby the ships are guaranteed when required which might require some legislation, some cash on a stand-by basis and perhaps crews trained to operate the ships if the crew balks. - Nothing to worry about except if you don't plan for it and have contingency plans in place. Something we're not to good with as far as I know.

🍻
What about that annual exercise I thought they started in Norway a few years ago. Trident Juncture?

Even if done every 2nd year, like RIMPAC - that one exercise alone would help us smooth out a game plan for if we need to quickly contract ships & deploy.

Good practice for DND in finding, acquiring, contracting the ships.

Good practice in moving & loading kit on this end, and unloading kit on the other end.

Could we not just follow the plan we do for Trident Juncture? Seems like a decently thought out and practiced plan?
 

suffolkowner

Sr. Member
Reaction score
97
Points
280
I've always liked the Bay Class and Point Class as well. Maybe subsidize a couple of extra ships for the Arctic sealift?


 

TangoTwoBravo

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
327
Points
880
What about that annual exercise I thought they started in Norway a few years ago. Trident Juncture?

Even if done every 2nd year, like RIMPAC - that one exercise alone would help us smooth out a game plan for if we need to quickly contract ships & deploy.

Good practice for DND in finding, acquiring, contracting the ships.

Good practice in moving & loading kit on this end, and unloading kit on the other end.

Could we not just follow the plan we do for Trident Juncture? Seems like a decently thought out and practiced plan?
We done a couple of Trident Junctures. TRJE 18 involved us moving a Bde HQ, an infantry battalion and associated supports along with the ATF and national command/support elements into Norway. It was good to do it live and also as part of a large movement of troops (7 brigades flowing in), but it was also very expensive. I believe the TRJE livex series has been morphed into something less intensive (I’ve changed jobs since 2018).

We have strat movers and an organization that coordinates this.
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
225
Points
710
Do the ships we're using for practicing our loading/unloading have to actually "sail"? I'm sure the existing Marine Atlantic ferries for example must go in for refit at Atlantic yards on some type of scheduled basis. Could we contract with them to have their ships sit dockside for an extra week during their regular maintenance so we can do a loading/unloading exercise?
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
3,480
Points
1,060
We done a couple of Trident Junctures. TRJE 18 involved us moving a Bde HQ, an infantry battalion and associated supports along with the ATF and national command/support elements into Norway. It was good to do it live and also as part of a large movement of troops (7 brigades flowing in), but it was also very expensive. I believe the TRJE livex series has been morphed into something less intensive (I’ve changed jobs since 2018).

We have strat movers and an organization that coordinates this.

Good stuff! I assume that 'trains' were involved at one point?

It's not a real logistics test of a formation level landing unless it involves train networks, of course :)
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
1,527
Points
910
Good stuff! I assume that 'trains' were involved at one point?

It's not a real logistics test of a formation level landing unless it involves train networks, of course :)
Trains are “super fun”.

I remember the train loading in Wainwright after RV92. A day long affair, as each CN rail employee had a different opinion on how vehicles were supposed to be chained and chocked. We must have chained and chocked at least a dozen different ways that day….
 
Top