Informing the Army’s Future Structure

[ueo]

Admittedly @FJAG and @McG I think I spawned the Corps issues, as I had suggested that a 3.5% GDP DND Budget with a 20% Capital Equipment Acquisition Plan could support a CDN 3 Div Corps.

Great if dealing with internal ops! How do we project it overseas?

 

[daftandbarmy]

Great if dealing with internal ops! How do we project it overseas?

Easy.

On ships. Built in China. In convoys protected by the RCN

 

[KevinB]

Great if dealing with internal ops! How do we project it overseas?

Well I also pointed out that in a 3.5% DND that the RCN and RCAF would expand dramatically.

The Army going from a 2 Div to 3 Div sized force isn’t that significant.

 

[PuckChaser]

Well I also pointed out that in a 3.5% DND that the RCN and RCAF would expand dramatically.

The Army going from a 2 Div to 3 Div sized force isn’t that significant.

If we went that way. The politically expedient way to 3.5% is expensive toys for RCAF and RCN that may or may not have any strategic value. CA kit is relatively cheap in comparison, it's costs are more in the pay/benefits for the human workforce.

 

[daftandbarmy]

If we went that way. The politically expedient way to 3.5% is expensive toys for RCAF and RCN that may or may not have any strategic value. CA kit is relatively cheap in comparison, it's costs are more in the pay/benefits for the human workforce.

Especially if we continue to ignore the need to upgrade our artillery and air defenses to the modern level through buying a fully layered system including, somewhere near the top of the food chain, NASAMS

 

[FJAG]

Admittedly @FJAG and @McG I think I spawned the Corps issues, as I had suggested that a 3.5% GDP DND Budget with a 20% Capital Equipment Acquisition Plan could support a CDN 3 Div Corps.

In a 3.5% scenario I can agree that, even with appropriate resources given to the RCAF and RCN and other national assets, we could probably create a 3 div structure. That said I would still leave it under an army HQ responsible for force generation and the basic jobs that need to be done by a non deployable static headquarters. I would only consider forming a corps headquarters if the GoC creates a task whereby we either need to project more than one division into a theatre or our allies ask us to deploy one division and form a corps HQ for a multinational corps.

I don't believe that you can have one HQ that fulfils both the force generation and the force employment functions.

Similarly, I cannot see taking CJOC or a CJOC-like headquarters out of the mix for the simple reason that we will probably operate in several theatres concurrently and, again, you need your force employer kept separate from your force generators.

I do appreciate that during the GWOT, several US corps and divisions split into forward and rear components with the forward component actively managing the fight but, even there, the army still maintained the force generation side of the force while the combatant commands were the force employers. Not sure if you can do that in LSCO. Yes, there will always be a rear party to a deployed force, but not functioning forward FE and (back at home) rear FG headquarters from the same formation.

 

[PrairieFella]

Canadian Army Today piece on modernization.

Modernizing for major combat operations | Canadian Army Today

canadianarmytoday.com

 

[KevinB]

Canadian Army Today piece on modernization.

Modernizing for major combat operations | Canadian Army Today

canadianarmytoday.com

Well that was unfortunately underwhelming.

 

[PrairieFella]

Well that was unfortunately underwhelming.

At least they're publicly acknowledging it. If you aren't sailing the high seas as an ACIMS pirate, you'd have no idea it was ongoing in force haha.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Well that was unfortunately underwhelming.

Whatever do you mean?

They seem to be extending the 'haves vs. have nots' that traditionally existed between the ARes and Rg F to implement that concept internally, within the ARes itself.

Clearly a breakthrough policy


"Does that mean a rethink of the mission tasks assigned to Reserves?

Yes. Those have worked in some areas and with some units, but overall, it’s not working as expected. We will look holistically at who should do what. One of the things the Army Commander will accept is asymmetry, so we will not have a one-size-fits-all approach. We will look at where we can have success, and where we need to invest to ensure the relevance of the Reserve for our force generation efforts at home and abroad."

 

[markppcli]

Commanders are the best people to run training for their units/formations, IMHO.

Give them the direction, tools and support, then let them do the job.

Snoopy 'externals' can get in the CP and sit a watchkeeping shift if they really want to help out

Then who trains the commanders? Who trains our formations?

 

[FJAG]

Then who trains the commanders? Who trains our formations?

The whole officer development system is designed so that commanders are progressively provided education, training and experience to prepare them for the next command level. When they get there, they are already trained.

Command itself includes the concept that the commander of any organization, together with his staff and subordinate commanders have the ability to train their formation and units PROVIDED THEY ARE ALLOCATED THE RESOURCES TO DO SO. Senior commanders at all levels monitor the training of their subordinate formations and units.

I'm an old school guy who doesn't believe much in the concept of having outside agencies monitor and certify an organizations readiness. I do believe in having training centres set up to facilitate the training of organizations in various ways. That, to me, is part of the resources provided to units and formations.

 

[daftandbarmy]

The whole officer development system is designed so that commanders are progressively provided education, training and experience to prepare them for the next command level. When they get there, they are already trained.

Command itself includes the concept that the commander of any organization, together with his staff and subordinate commanders have the ability to train their formation and units PROVIDED THEY ARE ALLOCATED THE RESOURCES TO DO SO. Senior commanders at all levels monitor the training of their subordinate formations and units.

I'm an old school guy who doesn't believe much in the concept of having outside agencies monitor and certify an organizations readiness. I do believe in having training centres set up to facilitate the training of organizations in various ways. That, to me, is part of the resources provided to units and formations.

Yeah, Bingo - pretty much.

Commanders at the Formation and Unit level should have enough resources to help them prepare for just about anything. The tests should be done during exercises where their bosses decide if they've done their jobs OK and, if not, give them a chance to reset and give it another go

If there's still a problem then that's time to sort out the Commanders, of course..

When 'Standards Cells' etc start getting in between Commanders, the rot starts...

 

[dapaterson]

A CO who tells their HQ that their unit is unfit is relieved, and his replacement turns a blind eye, and we end up with war crimes.

Intellectual honesty is career ending.

 

[MilEME09]

Canadian Army Today piece on modernization.

Modernizing for major combat operations | Canadian Army Today

canadianarmytoday.com

The reserves do to much? and needs to reduce their commitment? tell me you dont want to invest in a credible and viable reserve force without telling me you dont wanna invest in a credible and viable reserve force.

 

[PrairieFella]

The reserves do to much? and needs to reduce their commitment? tell me you dont want to invest in a credible and viable reserve force without telling me you dont wanna invest in a credible and viable reserve force.

I hope it turns out for us, I dont expect anything though. Upper brass hates us haha.

 

[Kirkhill]

I hope it turns out for us, I dont expect anything though. Upper brass hates us haha.

It seems in keeping with the comments on Light Infantry.

Do operations in the Indo-Pacific suggest expansion of the Light Forces capabilities? Do you have to be able to island hop?

Yes. Our light forces construct is viable and will remain. It gives the Army and the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) a high level of agility, responsiveness and options.

"We have enough of them and they are properly organized".

I know I use words differently and I know that Light Infantry connotes to some a special force. To me Light Infantry is just bog standard foot borne infantry with the weapons and sensors they can carry on their back or, these days, can be carried in the same aircraft the troops can walk on to.
That basic rifle company should be the model for the reserve force.

And don't look to the reserves for mechanics and weathermen. Not their job.

 

[dapaterson]

I hope it turns out for us, I dont expect anything though. Upper brass hates us haha.

No.

They may have frustration with Army Reserve senior leadership, but there is a strong support for the Reserve force writ large.

 

[PrairieFella]

No.

They may have frustration with Army Reserve senior leadership, but there is a strong support for the Reserve force writ large.

Then they're cowards. The highest command rank in the Reserve is a Col. If a MGen or LGen cant tell a Col to get in line, they shouldn't be a Gen to begin with. Sounds like a failure of our flag officers to me.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I hope it turns out for us, I dont expect anything though. Upper brass hates us haha.

Lt Sobel does not hate Easy Company