- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
For those truly not in the know, Monty is a TRUE legend in the Corps. I knew all of his exploits before I ever met him.
Nice to hear from you Bruce.
Al
Nice to hear from you Bruce.
Al
LeoC2s for Armoured Reserve
- Thread starter Pikache
- Start date
S
SALH
Guest
well, interesting discussion but in my view wasted.
If memory serves me correctly the objectives of the reserves are to augment, sustain and support deployed forces. Since the Regs will not be deploying in tanks, not using tank doctrine then what operational benefit would be get from doing this? In my view none.
The key will be to have the reserves fully trained in close recce and where supported, have them able to keep as many crew skills up as possible to augment who ever is tasked overseas. Units near LAV concentrations shouild keep driver skills up as much as possible.
Just my thoughts.
If memory serves me correctly the objectives of the reserves are to augment, sustain and support deployed forces. Since the Regs will not be deploying in tanks, not using tank doctrine then what operational benefit would be get from doing this? In my view none.
The key will be to have the reserves fully trained in close recce and where supported, have them able to keep as many crew skills up as possible to augment who ever is tasked overseas. Units near LAV concentrations shouild keep driver skills up as much as possible.
Just my thoughts.
B
bgreen
Guest
Seems to me that the answer to the question of could or should the reserves get Leos or any MBT would depend upon whether or not they were given that role.
Up to the middle 60s we had real tanks Shermans in our armoury complete with a static turret system to learn your gun drills. The tanks were maintained for driver maintenance by the troopers and for more specialized maintenance by SVC BN techs that were also reservists but attached to the armour unit. These were local men that worked on CATS and other tracked equipment in their civvy job ( heavy equipment mechanics) and on the reserve equipment part-time.
The tanks were flat bedded to trg areas 8 km from the city or major army centres for concentrations. They could also be driven on grid (read gravel) roads in good weather. So back to my original statement if given the role the reserves could do it.
My bias was to keep a MBT capability in the armour corps. But our politicians have directed another course-wheeled gun platforms. Our trg for the armour reserves is being focused on recce tactics with Iltis or Cougar until such time as LUVW and MILCOTS come to the units sometime in 2005. If we are given a role as div recce or medium (Bde) recce then we can fulfill a role that perhaps would augment or enhance existing capabilities in the Full time (reg) world.
As I am catching up on LFRR there seems to be movement to give us unique tasks or roles that currently are missing in the CF like CIMIC, PSY Ops, NBCW recce tasks, water and road building specialties. If these tasks were assigned to armour units the equipment scale would be different. However were our command chain to decide that we needed heavy armour our reserves would be up to that training challenge with some FCS tech support as there is no civvy equivalent training with that size of wpn system.
I am not yet current enough to know if the LFRR direction would mean taking whole units and re-roling them or just adding in a capability to the existing combat arms units. Personally I think we should keep our combat arms roles.
I think we really need to define our role in conjunction with LFRR and get on with it.
BG
Up to the middle 60s we had real tanks Shermans in our armoury complete with a static turret system to learn your gun drills. The tanks were maintained for driver maintenance by the troopers and for more specialized maintenance by SVC BN techs that were also reservists but attached to the armour unit. These were local men that worked on CATS and other tracked equipment in their civvy job ( heavy equipment mechanics) and on the reserve equipment part-time.
The tanks were flat bedded to trg areas 8 km from the city or major army centres for concentrations. They could also be driven on grid (read gravel) roads in good weather. So back to my original statement if given the role the reserves could do it.
My bias was to keep a MBT capability in the armour corps. But our politicians have directed another course-wheeled gun platforms. Our trg for the armour reserves is being focused on recce tactics with Iltis or Cougar until such time as LUVW and MILCOTS come to the units sometime in 2005. If we are given a role as div recce or medium (Bde) recce then we can fulfill a role that perhaps would augment or enhance existing capabilities in the Full time (reg) world.
As I am catching up on LFRR there seems to be movement to give us unique tasks or roles that currently are missing in the CF like CIMIC, PSY Ops, NBCW recce tasks, water and road building specialties. If these tasks were assigned to armour units the equipment scale would be different. However were our command chain to decide that we needed heavy armour our reserves would be up to that training challenge with some FCS tech support as there is no civvy equivalent training with that size of wpn system.
I am not yet current enough to know if the LFRR direction would mean taking whole units and re-roling them or just adding in a capability to the existing combat arms units. Personally I think we should keep our combat arms roles.
I think we really need to define our role in conjunction with LFRR and get on with it.
BG
1
12alfa
Guest
Bgreen....
Some people here don't want to hear that the res's had and did mantain tanks!!!!!
Get with the program!
Did you not read all the reasons we did not, and could not do this tasking?
Glad to see that I'm not the only person who can read our history by the way. LOL
12Alfa
Some people here don't want to hear that the res's had and did mantain tanks!!!!!
Get with the program!
Did you not read all the reasons we did not, and could not do this tasking?
Glad to see that I'm not the only person who can read our history by the way. LOL
12Alfa
- Reaction score
- 9,802
- Points
- 1,260
Is a LeopardC2 or any other MBT for that matter even comparable to a Sherman? I would think the logistical burden behind a modern MBT has only gotten bigger with the increase in technology; with the result that the reserves sustaining tanks seems even more remote. Sure, a farmer could maintain a '57 Chevy pickup with a wrench and a butter knife, but try doing the same with a 2004 Cadillac....
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
Further to Infanteer's comments; as many of the Maintainance requirements of the Reserves are now being purposely designed so that local contractors can now do the work, as seen by the MILCOT purchase, it is highly unlikely that any local contractor would fill any of the capabilities to do repairs or maintainance on a modern MBT. Civilian pattern vehicles and "Militarized" civilian vehicles like the MILCOT can easily be taken into the local auto dealer for repairs; a MBT can not. The technology incorporated into the modern MBT does require a longer logistical support train than the Shermans of old, and there is not enough Reserve manpower to provide that support.
GW
GW
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
I think that the issue of reserve armoured units being given MBT roles comes down to a regular vs. reserve superiority complex alot of the time.
True, most armoured reserve units lack the maintenance facilities to maintain MBTs. However most armoured units have gone to a "pool" type system where all the Cougars are maintained and stored at a central training area location (Wainwright, Meaford, Gagetown, etc.), and the reserve unit travels there to conduct training.
Here in the US, reserve units are using M1s and M1A1s and are being deployed in combat environments as a unit (not the system of individual augmentees that Canada often uses). These units only train one weekend a month, as opposed to 4 evenings and one weekend that Canadian units do.
The way such a system would work in Canada would be that the reserve unit would need a turret simulator at their armoury to practice gunnery on. Their actual tanks would be kept at the training area. The reserve units would be grouped into a composite armoured regiment with each reserve unit providing a squadron (ie. SALH would be A Squadron, Western Tank Regiment (Composite), KOCR would be B Squadron WTR (Composite), etc.) The headquarters squadron would be regular force so that the maintainers would be able to work on the tanks as needed, and each squadron would have a class B/C section of 4 crewmen that would be stationed with the tanks to perform routine maintenance.
By transferring the MBTs to the reserves, Canada could maintain a tank capability at a much reduced cost by having to pay for reservists vice full-time regulars. A major argument for retirement of the MBT is its perceived non-deployment in peacekeeping/peace support operations that Canada has been focusing on for the last 20 years. Since the Leopard doesn't get deployed out of Canada much above the troop level, and given that we're paying for a regiment of reg. force pers. to man them, it makes financial sense to let the regs transition to something like MGS (even though it's a piece of garbage) which will get deployed alot more, and have the reserves take over the MBT role for "sh*t hits the fan" type situations which are not very likely given Canada's lack of paticipation for ground units in the last two mechanized conflicts (The Gulf and Iraq Wars).
True, most armoured reserve units lack the maintenance facilities to maintain MBTs. However most armoured units have gone to a "pool" type system where all the Cougars are maintained and stored at a central training area location (Wainwright, Meaford, Gagetown, etc.), and the reserve unit travels there to conduct training.
Here in the US, reserve units are using M1s and M1A1s and are being deployed in combat environments as a unit (not the system of individual augmentees that Canada often uses). These units only train one weekend a month, as opposed to 4 evenings and one weekend that Canadian units do.
The way such a system would work in Canada would be that the reserve unit would need a turret simulator at their armoury to practice gunnery on. Their actual tanks would be kept at the training area. The reserve units would be grouped into a composite armoured regiment with each reserve unit providing a squadron (ie. SALH would be A Squadron, Western Tank Regiment (Composite), KOCR would be B Squadron WTR (Composite), etc.) The headquarters squadron would be regular force so that the maintainers would be able to work on the tanks as needed, and each squadron would have a class B/C section of 4 crewmen that would be stationed with the tanks to perform routine maintenance.
By transferring the MBTs to the reserves, Canada could maintain a tank capability at a much reduced cost by having to pay for reservists vice full-time regulars. A major argument for retirement of the MBT is its perceived non-deployment in peacekeeping/peace support operations that Canada has been focusing on for the last 20 years. Since the Leopard doesn't get deployed out of Canada much above the troop level, and given that we're paying for a regiment of reg. force pers. to man them, it makes financial sense to let the regs transition to something like MGS (even though it's a piece of garbage) which will get deployed alot more, and have the reserves take over the MBT role for "sh*t hits the fan" type situations which are not very likely given Canada's lack of paticipation for ground units in the last two mechanized conflicts (The Gulf and Iraq Wars).
1
12alfa
Guest
Infanteer said:
We went from horses and motorcycles to shermans, was that a big jump in veh's?
We can maintain MBT's if given the proper training, nothing new here.
For some reason, that really I can't understand from posters here that seem smart, hold a great deal,of knowledge can't or won't see beyond there own world.
To say that a reservist can't maintain a MBT, but then when said reservist joins the regular force then can is somewhat ....foolish!
I maintain that given the same ccourses, same support, we can, and if one looks in our past can clearly see that we did.
You may come up with all kinds of excuses or statements, but can provide no proof.
No res unit has had tanks taken away from to support your statements that we could not.
Therefore I maintain (no pun ) that we can. Offer me some proof, or data to the contrary and I'll stop this , otherwise the reasons that one gives are just impressions,comments,bias, and chest beating,uninformed, or other "I love to hear myself" statements.
How a profession armoured member can make such statements is beyond me, and a few other here.
To say we could not build a rocket to fly to the moon I could live with, this I can't.
- Reaction score
- 9,802
- Points
- 1,260
...and all those changes required organizational shifts, an alteration in the way we approached mounted warfare. Simply plunking cowboys into tanks did not make an effective armoured fighting force, and I don't think throwing 8 panzers on a reserve armoury floor can allow us to say "look, we still have a tank capability!"
That is why I like Matt Fischers idea; it gets us looking towards a shift in organizational trends rather then simply moving a resource from one area to another. Maybe with a restructring of how we view are reserve armoured units (to a system of depots for a centralized tank park) and finding a proper role for that organization within current political and military trends the idea of reservist Panzer units is possible.
I don't think the issue is training, its time and resources. I am no tanker, but I've seen enough opinions on this thread to understand that a reservist who dedicates no more than 2.5 days total to the military is able to maintain and operate a troop of tanks.
Since you are the one proposing the transformation, I think the onus is on you to prove that we can. Otherwise, you are equally guilty of the above offences. If you could submit a clear proposal on this forum on how would go about creating an reservist Armoured specialty, then we can deal with the specifics of your proposal based upon their merit, rather then simply just saying "yes it will" or "no it won't".
I would honestly be interested to read something if you were willing to submit your ideas and experience to paper.
Cheers,
Infanteer
1
12alfa
Guest
Good points....
We have in our past operated tanks, and if one looks into our history the time and money was than as it is now in short supply, we made do and carried on as per normal.
How this would happend I would think would be in the same manner as we operate the Cougars we have now.
Pooled in a training area where the support trades and supply systen is. We run courses on weekends and in the summer at the unit level. I like the unit level because this gives the reserve unit more flexability on timings and the availability of students and instructors.
We have done this in the past and with support can work better that on a fixed timetable like the reg force uses, a start date and end date with no deviations as the next course starts almost right after.
I myself took a D&M course in G-town in the last example, and in the winter. If a snow storm had happened the timetable would have caused a problem as we were using another units buildings and trg aids.
For the D&M training we would as in the above do it on the same system now in place, at first using reg force instr's, then after our instr's were trained we would take over the instruction for then next courses.
The gunnery would be the same, but with the new Sims, this could be done at the unit instead of the area now, moving to the base to qual on the range and for small parts of gun maintenance,although a Leo could as in the past be flatbed down to the unit for this also.
The loader trg could I believe done at the unit, and then on the range to run with the gunnery quals.
The c/c courses for the most part I would think ( I'll get flack for this) is not that far from comanding a cougar. I admit there is now a longer tube and more devices to learn, but it's not rocket.....
My unit went from jeeps to Cougars, it was a big jump for us, but looking back it was easy to learn and we soon found we were teaching our selves, i see no difference with any equipment, even tanks that are not that far from Cougars.
We would not be the experts we have now, but in time as they have, we would get there.
I will agree it would take more time due to our trg days, but what is the hurry anywho.
In the end it would as for the regs ...support and having someone who can smash the roadblocks that will come our way. I would think this person would have to have the authority to step in and stop the BS that we would certainly get in this project.
In the end it's do-able if the need was there, most of it is allready in place, a change of personnel is all that is required. We keep the trg area's, the maintenance pers now in place, the instr's, the supply chain, the sims, everything, just a new crop of students with a modified trg timetable suited to the reserve world, and oh ya NO BS from anybody..... That i would think will be the hardest, LOL
Hows that for a plan?
I probably have missed something, and a few here will jump on this.
We have in our past operated tanks, and if one looks into our history the time and money was than as it is now in short supply, we made do and carried on as per normal.
How this would happend I would think would be in the same manner as we operate the Cougars we have now.
Pooled in a training area where the support trades and supply systen is. We run courses on weekends and in the summer at the unit level. I like the unit level because this gives the reserve unit more flexability on timings and the availability of students and instructors.
We have done this in the past and with support can work better that on a fixed timetable like the reg force uses, a start date and end date with no deviations as the next course starts almost right after.
I myself took a D&M course in G-town in the last example, and in the winter. If a snow storm had happened the timetable would have caused a problem as we were using another units buildings and trg aids.
For the D&M training we would as in the above do it on the same system now in place, at first using reg force instr's, then after our instr's were trained we would take over the instruction for then next courses.
The gunnery would be the same, but with the new Sims, this could be done at the unit instead of the area now, moving to the base to qual on the range and for small parts of gun maintenance,although a Leo could as in the past be flatbed down to the unit for this also.
The loader trg could I believe done at the unit, and then on the range to run with the gunnery quals.
The c/c courses for the most part I would think ( I'll get flack for this) is not that far from comanding a cougar. I admit there is now a longer tube and more devices to learn, but it's not rocket.....
My unit went from jeeps to Cougars, it was a big jump for us, but looking back it was easy to learn and we soon found we were teaching our selves, i see no difference with any equipment, even tanks that are not that far from Cougars.
We would not be the experts we have now, but in time as they have, we would get there.
I will agree it would take more time due to our trg days, but what is the hurry anywho.
In the end it would as for the regs ...support and having someone who can smash the roadblocks that will come our way. I would think this person would have to have the authority to step in and stop the BS that we would certainly get in this project.
In the end it's do-able if the need was there, most of it is allready in place, a change of personnel is all that is required. We keep the trg area's, the maintenance pers now in place, the instr's, the supply chain, the sims, everything, just a new crop of students with a modified trg timetable suited to the reserve world, and oh ya NO BS from anybody..... That i would think will be the hardest, LOL
Hows that for a plan?
I probably have missed something, and a few here will jump on this.
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
12Alfa said:
They're, they're fella...
THEN is not NOW.
The proposal put forward by Matt, along the US system, is the most likely to be effective. Get away from the past "we had tanks" and get into the present. The greatest problem facing the idea of Reserves getting Leopards is MONEY.
If ewe cant sea that then they're is a serious problem wear eye sea ewe two will get put down again and again. Eye find it hard to find words to misspell and get down to you're level of grammar, butt Eye m trying sew that Eye can better understand this knew forum of English sew many ewes nau. Maybee, Eye will bee able to better sea the point of few put forward bye the likes of Cpl Forrester two. Thier must bee a better whey, butt four nau it is fun. Sew Thier iam catching on. ;D
(Two much thyme on my hands.)
GW
Lance Wiebe
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 6
- Points
- 230
I am surprised that nobody has brought this up earlier.
Back in the olden days, when the reserves had aircraft, Shermans, Bren Gun Carriers and the like, they also had one other thing that is missing now. That is Manpower. I recall, back in the olden days, when every city that had a few Units, also had a RCASC Unit nearby. This unit was made up of about 50-50 split of reg and reservists, and they did 90% of the first and second line maintenance. Reserve Units normally fielded hundreds of people on parade days.
I remember when the FGH lost the last Sherman, and we were given six or so jeeps, and told we were recce. A month later, the unit strength was down to about 60 or 70 people.
My point is, with lots of people, and the right infrastructure, the reserves CAN have equipment. Air Force Reserve units operated aircraft, and that is slightly more complex than operating Cougars. Obviously, in todays world, with little manpower, and even less support, the reserves cannot operate much of anything anymore. Its a pretty sad state of affairs, considering that at one time, the reserves always operated kit one generation behind the reg force.
Back in the olden days, when the reserves had aircraft, Shermans, Bren Gun Carriers and the like, they also had one other thing that is missing now. That is Manpower. I recall, back in the olden days, when every city that had a few Units, also had a RCASC Unit nearby. This unit was made up of about 50-50 split of reg and reservists, and they did 90% of the first and second line maintenance. Reserve Units normally fielded hundreds of people on parade days.
I remember when the FGH lost the last Sherman, and we were given six or so jeeps, and told we were recce. A month later, the unit strength was down to about 60 or 70 people.
My point is, with lots of people, and the right infrastructure, the reserves CAN have equipment. Air Force Reserve units operated aircraft, and that is slightly more complex than operating Cougars. Obviously, in todays world, with little manpower, and even less support, the reserves cannot operate much of anything anymore. Its a pretty sad state of affairs, considering that at one time, the reserves always operated kit one generation behind the reg force.
1
12alfa
Guest
Cool, if you can't back up your posts, make fun of the poster, ...I like it!
1
12alfa
Guest
Lance Wiebe said:
This is the greatest problem we now face. With troops on callouts there is not many left at the unit.
Getting them in is not the problem, we have done well in this area, but after their trade trg and they are placed in a troop with no practice for what they have taken (dr,grunner) except for 2-3 ftx's a year they get a componet trans or get out. The day when a reservist staying more than 5 years is gone.
And yes money is another problem.
B
Bsqn2tp
Guest
The key word here is intergration. We cannot continue to have the regs and the reserves operating different equipment. Unfortunately the "decision makers" have decided to replace the Leopard C2's with the MGS. Unless the armoured reserves are given a separate and distinct role, along with the proper equipment to support that role, they will continue to see falling enrollment and retention rates.
Therefore giving C2's to the reserves is out of the question. New roles and a new mandate must be implemented for the reserves before it is too late!
Therefore giving C2's to the reserves is out of the question. New roles and a new mandate must be implemented for the reserves before it is too late!
1
12alfa
Guest
Although I'm a firm believer in operating the same platforms as our reg force brothers this as we have seen doesn't look like it's going to happen.
Our main role (so we are told) is to supplement the reg's, so operating the same equipment is vital. The milcot is the latest example how little of that is being implemented.They talk the talk, but don't walk the walk. Empty words, meant to seem like they are doing something, rather going in circles.
On the Leo's going to the reserve world, it would allow us to keep some skills that will be lost if and when the MGS comes online.
Both idea's are good, but will not happen.
RCH, is this Royal Canadian Hussars?
Our main role (so we are told) is to supplement the reg's, so operating the same equipment is vital. The milcot is the latest example how little of that is being implemented.They talk the talk, but don't walk the walk. Empty words, meant to seem like they are doing something, rather going in circles.
On the Leo's going to the reserve world, it would allow us to keep some skills that will be lost if and when the MGS comes online.
Both idea's are good, but will not happen.
RCH, is this Royal Canadian Hussars?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 60
Lace hit the issue on the head, the Army Res have in the past had and maintained equipment, that is not in question. The Air Res and Nav Res to the best of my knowledge still trg on more modern equip than the Army Res. This boils down to the one great deciding factor that is the bane of all Army pers [all Forces pers] these days, MONEY. If the funds were in fact there to continue to supply and support the Leo's then they would not be going to the grave they way they are now, the MGS, while being touted as the best new thing to come, is in large fact a money driven issue. Lance who has spent sometime looking into future trends and costs I believe might support this.
The Armour Res pers will not see the Leo cascaded to them for one main reason FUNDING. If the money were there in abundance we would not be losing the Leo's [we might still get MGS for deployment for OOTW]. With the required funding, indeed long ago the Res might have seen trg on the same piece of kit that the Regs did as it is amazing how money can solve most problems. With additional funding more troops can be recruited as well as the trades pers and equip / supplies required to properly support the vehs, sure they would most likely have to be pooled as were the Cougars but what would be the big difference [not to take away from the maint issues].
There is no reason why Res or Reg soldiers cannot be trained on any piece of equip that we currently have other than MONEY. Granted there are soldiers on BOTH sides of the fence who might not be all they can be but I hope that they are in the minority. [Al, I was there for Total Force as well, I think you would admit that there were soldiers on boths sides of the fence who could have been more that what they were.]
Everything is looked at these days by the powers to be in, WHAT IS THE COST, WHAT DO WE GET FOR OUR MONEY!
I recall reading someone commenting on "they can talk the talk but cannot walk the walk" or something along those lines. It is not your average Reg or Res soldier making the calls on who is to get what piece of gear, I think we all know that is driven by the pers in Ottawa, most of who ARE NOT wearing an army uniform.
Yes the Reserves are there to augment the Reg Force. We currently have quite a few of 12Alpha's units soldiers employed at The Armour School and indeed most of them were qualified on the M113 and TLAV family of vehs and are out in the field along side the Reg Force guys doing the same jobs. With the downsizing of the Leo fleet [8 left at The School] these same Res soldiers might very well see themselves on a Coyote / LAV III D&M crse this Sep or perhaps a Surv Op crse as there will not be as big of a demand for the TLAV.
I guess I have rambled on long enough, to sum up on why the Leo's will not go to the Armour Res soldiers has nothing to do with the soldiers or the unit it has to do with MONEY and the lack of it.
The Armour Res pers will not see the Leo cascaded to them for one main reason FUNDING. If the money were there in abundance we would not be losing the Leo's [we might still get MGS for deployment for OOTW]. With the required funding, indeed long ago the Res might have seen trg on the same piece of kit that the Regs did as it is amazing how money can solve most problems. With additional funding more troops can be recruited as well as the trades pers and equip / supplies required to properly support the vehs, sure they would most likely have to be pooled as were the Cougars but what would be the big difference [not to take away from the maint issues].
There is no reason why Res or Reg soldiers cannot be trained on any piece of equip that we currently have other than MONEY. Granted there are soldiers on BOTH sides of the fence who might not be all they can be but I hope that they are in the minority. [Al, I was there for Total Force as well, I think you would admit that there were soldiers on boths sides of the fence who could have been more that what they were.]
Everything is looked at these days by the powers to be in, WHAT IS THE COST, WHAT DO WE GET FOR OUR MONEY!
I recall reading someone commenting on "they can talk the talk but cannot walk the walk" or something along those lines. It is not your average Reg or Res soldier making the calls on who is to get what piece of gear, I think we all know that is driven by the pers in Ottawa, most of who ARE NOT wearing an army uniform.
Yes the Reserves are there to augment the Reg Force. We currently have quite a few of 12Alpha's units soldiers employed at The Armour School and indeed most of them were qualified on the M113 and TLAV family of vehs and are out in the field along side the Reg Force guys doing the same jobs. With the downsizing of the Leo fleet [8 left at The School] these same Res soldiers might very well see themselves on a Coyote / LAV III D&M crse this Sep or perhaps a Surv Op crse as there will not be as big of a demand for the TLAV.
I guess I have rambled on long enough, to sum up on why the Leo's will not go to the Armour Res soldiers has nothing to do with the soldiers or the unit it has to do with MONEY and the lack of it.
