Infantry training in Air Force

[Fishbone Jones]

Back in the late 70s I got shipped off to the Tactics wing at the Combat Arms School for a month to prepapre for and teach a two-week course for RCAF officers to teach them everything they need to know about the Army. We even had a half day in the field for a looksie at the gear and a tiny fire power demo.

Do they still do that?

Do we still have ammo to do that?

 

[FJAG]

Do we still have ammo to do that?

? No idea.

It wasn't much then. A belt or two of each type of MG, a Centurion round or two, 1 round fire for effect from a troop of 105s.

They did that for us on the basic arty O course as well. Flew us down to the Infantry and Armour School in Borden. Took us up to Meaford to watch one of everything fired (including an SS11 and 106) and let us drive M113s and Lynx's on snowy hills in February. No arty though; we got lots of that in Shilo.

 

[Furniture]

A trade to do the most monotonous aspects of the air tech world, but also let’s add WASF to it! I wonder how that program is doing

Yeah, I thought it was odd that the RCAF placed security on the same level as the jobs that are "beneath" the Techs...

Though, it ties in with my experiences with the air force... The lack of regard for people who neither fly, nor fix aircraft is quite obvious.

 

[childs56]

Yeah, I thought it was odd that the RCAF placed security on the same level as the jobs that are "beneath" the Techs...

Though, it ties in with my experiences with the air force... The lack of regard for people who neither fly, nor fix aircraft is quite obvious.

Honestly it was put to me this way, you either fix the aircraft so it can fly and perform the job its designed to do... Or you pull gate duty, you cant do both at the same time and the jet needs to fly.
The boss said let someone else perform the Gate duty and you fix the jets. Because someone else is not going to fix the jet. It isn't that it was below the Techs in any way, its simply a non tech is not going to fix the jet and can be used elsewhere more effectively.

 

[dimsum]

Though, it ties in with my experiences with the air force... The lack of regard for people who neither fly, nor fix aircraft is quite obvious.

Is that specific to the Air Force though? I would argue that the Army has that bias against non-Combat Arms, and the Navy against non-hard sea trades.

 

[Quirky]

The boss said let someone else perform the Gate duty and you fix the jets.

It’s awesome seeing two Level A Cpls sit in the WASF shack on shift rotations while aircraft sit broken with no one to fix them. That’s a waste of resources and has nothing to do with force protection being below them. We had MPs deployed with us in Kuwait watching the flight line, why we can’t have trades that aren’t techs, not saying it has to be MPs, doing the same for WASF is just an unwillingness to spend money on air field security. Management sees air techs as the biggest pool of people in the RCAF so they drop secondary taskings like WASF on them.

 

[dimsum]

It’s awesome seeing two Level A Cpls sit in the WASF shack on shift rotations while aircraft sit broken with no one to fix them. That’s a waste of resources and has nothing to do with force protection being below them. We had MPs deployed with us in Kuwait watching the flight line, why we can’t have trades that aren’t techs, not saying it has to be MPs, doing the same for WASF is just an unwillingness to spend money on air field security. Management sees air techs as the biggest pool of people in the RCAF so they drop secondary taskings like WASF on them.

So, short of having a trade for that (RCAF Regiment, anyone?), it will always mean that WASF is taking folks from their primary duties. Supply, clerks, techs, etc.

 

[GR66]

So, short of having a trade for that (RCAF Regiment, anyone?), it will always mean that WASF is taking folks from their primary duties. Supply, clerks, techs, etc.

Maybe it shows that you can't have a peacetime military that doesn't account for all the roles you're going to have to fulfill in wartime.

 

[Quirky]

So, short of having a trade for that (RCAF Regiment, anyone?), it will always mean that WASF is taking folks from their primary duties. Supply, clerks, techs, etc.

Almost like an air field security trade, like what the USAF does, would reduce the secondary non sense on your primary trades/duties. Problem is, you need to find people who are willing to live in places of high cost of living (comox) or isolation (cold lake), for non-spec pay. As always, it’s a problem easily solved by money which the gov won’t give.

 

[brihard]

Almost like an air field security trade, like what the USAF does, would reduce the secondary non sense on your primary trades/duties. Problem is, you need to find people who are willing to live in places of high cost of living (comox) or isolation (cold lake), for non-spec pay. As always, it’s a problem easily solved by money which the gov won’t give.

In Canada, does it need to be a CAF trade or could a civilian security service, backed my the MP det, suffice?

For an overseas deployment, camp security is a role we’ve succesfully filled with composite reserve subunits, and it’s usually a responsibility shared with coalition partners.

 

[Furniture]

Is that specific to the Air Force though? I would argue that the Army has that bias against non-Combat Arms, and the Navy against non-hard sea trades.

In my experience it was more noticeable in the air force, when I worked with the artillery I was treated very well, same on with on ship. Might be part of my occupation, as others have mentioned it to me as well.

Almost like an air field security trade, like what the USAF does, would reduce the secondary non sense on your primary trades/duties. Problem is, you need to find people who are willing to live in places of high cost of living (comox) or isolation (cold lake), for non-spec pay. As always, it’s a problem easily solved by money which the gov won’t give.

If the RCAF was serious about security it would have a security force, but because we live in sleepy Canada it isn't taken seriously.

 

[dimsum]

In my experience it was more noticeable in the air force, when I worked with the artillery I was treated very well, same on with on ship. Might be part of my occupation, as others have mentioned it to me as well.

I would say it is due to your occupation.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Is that specific to the Air Force though? I would argue that the Army has that bias against non-Combat Arms, and the Navy against non-hard sea trades.

But, unlike the schism ridden Army, the Airforce are all wearing the same uniform and are supposed to be the model of unified purpose and strategic egalitarianism, aren't they?

Now, if you really want to see a bunfight, put Airforce pilots in the same room with Navy and Army pilots.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Air Force security; something else the RAAF appears to take more seriously compared to the RCAF…

ADF Careers - ADF Careers

Discover the details about each role including hours, salary and requirements. Then when you’re ready, simply hit Apply Now.

www.adfcareers.gov.au

 

[Eye In The Sky]

But, unlike the schism ridden Army, the Airforce are all wearing the same uniform and are supposed to be the model of unified purpose and strategic egalitarianism, aren't they?

Now, if you really want to see a bunfight, put Airforce pilots in the same room with Navy and Army pilots.

The question is, which branch would be the first to blurt out “hey I’m a pilot!”

 

[Quirky]

In Canada, does it need to be a CAF trade or could a civilian security service, backed my the MP det, suffice?

You mean like the commissionaires, but more useful than calling 911? Sure.

If the RCAF was serious about security it would have a security force, but because we live in sleepy Canada it isn't taken seriously.

If Canada was serious about anything we would have a lot of things, but we talk big without actually being to back it up. In realistic terms, even WASF is overkill for domestic ops. Our biggest deterrent is geography, isolated bases and just basic irrelevance.

 

[brihard]

You mean like the commissionaires, but more useful than calling 911? Sure.

Yup, I’m thinking an armed security team for domestic work only. There are precedents in nuclear security, the Parliamentary Protective Service, security at the Royal Canadian Mint, etc. Someone better than you at doing security and protective stuff, so you and your troops can stick to fixing planes, which the rest of us definitely can’t do. In the case of an overseas deployment, CAF could determine if it needs to force generate either a fully self sufficient security force, or a contribution to a coalition force. This could be grabbed from RegF combat arms for a “right the fuck now” deployment, or force generated from PRes for subsequent rotos.

I take it as a given that the force protection posture will differ in Canada versus on a deployed operation, and that domestic requirements should generally be pretty steady-state. Not to say CAF troops couldn’t augment domestically if needed.

I mean, obviously it would be great if we had a full time, fully deployable tailored force, but a lot of things would be great that aren’t necessarily viable or cost effective. And I think our inevitable junior partner role in any coalition makes it more likely that we can continue to risk manage this.

Though, credit where it’s due, obviously there was that one time at Bagram where the RAF mechs geared up and merked a bunch of Talibs who breached the wire.

 

[dimsum]

The question is, which branch would be the first to blurt out “hey I’m a pilot!”

The Navy folks will scoff and say "we're Naval Aviators".

Not a joke - I actually heard that once.

Air Force security; something else the RAAF appears to take more seriously compared to the RCAF…

ADF Careers - ADF Careers

Discover the details about each role including hours, salary and requirements. Then when you’re ready, simply hit Apply Now.

www.adfcareers.gov.au

The Aussies I knew had some...let's say "not very nice words" about the role and utility of AFSEC.

That being said, they have dogs. The puppies are cute.

 

[SupersonicMax]

RCAF regiment would be nice. I am sure we could build the structure. Heck, it has been seriously talked about recently in organizations that could make it happen. But I known we wouldn’t be able to fill it, leaving us in the same place we are now.

 

[Quirky]

Yup, I’m thinking an armed security team for domestic work only. There are precedents in nuclear security, the Parliamentary Protective Service, security at the Royal Canadian Mint, etc. Someone better than you at doing security and protective stuff, so you and your troops can stick to fixing planes, which the rest of us definitely can’t do. In the case of an overseas deployment, CAF could determine if it needs to force generate either a fully self sufficient security force, or a contribution to a coalition force. This could be grabbed from RegF combat arms for a “right the fuck now” deployment, or force generated from PRes for subsequent rotos.

I take it as a given that the force protection posture will differ in Canada versus on a deployed operation, and that domestic requirements should generally be pretty steady-state. Not to say CAF troops couldn’t augment domestically if needed.

I could only assume that with the F-35 arriving and likely the P-8 purchase soon to be finalized, our current WASF model and general base security won’t cut it with the Americans. Maybe the security issue, among other shortfalls with our infrastructure, will have to be fixed before the keys to the planes are handed over.