Reserve A-stan Tour in 2007; 36 bde

[Michael Dorosh]

Guys are chomping for action - my attitude is if reservists want tours they should take a 3 year BE

That's brilliant.

And when the reservist comes back to his regular job after three years - well, he probably won't have it any more, will he?  We have no job protection legislation in place.

We also have retention problems in the reserves as it is.  So taking away deployability unless you - divorce your wife, sell your dog, quit your job and give up your civvie pension and career - isn't exactly going to entice anyone.

I get the feeling you don't have the first clue why Canada even has a Reserve force.  Doubtless some Regulars would prefer it that way, but luckily they're not the ones making the big decisions.  Reservists WILL be employed increasingly on overseas missions; I suspect it is only a matter of time before they start deploying as formed units. 

Isn't that what this whole "task force" concept is all about?  Interchangeability between company/squadron/battery sized units into/out of mission-based task forces?

 

[KevinB]

[quote author=Michael Dorosh]I suspect it is only a matter of time before they start deploying as formed units.  
[/quote]

Look back at what you just said.

You really think you will find a unit of reservists that will under go a 11 month work up for a tour - a 6 month tour and then a month or two return phase?

Roto 11's D Coy RAPED LFWA of reservists to go on tour and needed regular cadre to deploy to Bosnia in the twilight of the tour.

Retention issues in the reserves are not an immediate operational issue.  Looking at 3VP's deployment to Afghan shows that retention in the regs can be.


and the TF system is the WORSE piece of garbage foisted upon the Army - defeading it is criminal, and promoting it is inconcievable.

 

[gate_guard]

True Story - US enters Iraq - meanwhile Cbt Spt Coy 1VP is sweeping and mopping Hangar 2 in Edmonton for the Roto 11 Reserve Company farewell parade...  

Sorry Kev,
I do understand that a lot of A Coy guys were po'd, I would be if I were them but with regards to the farewell dismissal...D Coy swept out the hangar with a few of your no hooks for moral support. Don't blame the mo though, blame the MAN!

On a side note, I do know quite a few reservists who would sign up for a year and a half contract. They see the discontent in the regs with regards to not being deployed. Why sign up for the regs for 3 years and maybe get a tour when you can stay a reservist, wait for a tour, and essentially get a guaranteed deployment (of course with exceptions). Fair to the regs? No, but can you blame the average reservist for taking advantage of a system that will pay a reg soldier to stay at home while a reservist deploys? The problem is the higher ups not having a clear idea of how the use reservists and regs properly.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

Look back at what you just said.

You really think you will find a unit of reservists that will under go a 11 month work up for a tour - a 6 month tour and then a month or two return phase?

Roto 11's D Coy RAPED LFWA of reservists to go on tour and needed regular cadre to deploy to Bosnia in the twilight of the tour.

Retention issues in the reserves are not an immediate operational issue.  Looking at 3VP's deployment to Afghan shows that retention in the regs can be.


and the TF system is the WORSE piece of garbage foisted upon the Army - defeading it is criminal, and promoting it is inconcievable.

I guess I have some Searching to do in order to find out your objections to the TF system.  *shrugs*  Seems to be the way of the world these days.  Better than training to fight World War Three on the North German Plain.

Why does an issue need to be an immediate operational issue to be important?  I think it has long term effects that will potentially become operational issues.  If you don't think a shortage of trained, experienced reservists has the potential to be an operational issue at some point in the future, then disband the reserves altogether.

For the first time since Confederation, Reservists are enjoying equitable pay, scales of equipment, and opportunities for operational employment.  I'll stop short of saying equitable training.  I think dedicated reservists would be happy to take 18 months off for tours - and civvie employers would find it more palatable than a 3 year BE, especially if the BE offers no guarantee of "important" (in the perspective of a civvie employer) work.

 

[KevinB]

We swept and mopped the bird shit out a day before the parade...


I agree - it is a poor sit both ways.

WRT TF1-06 it is my understanding they could not generate much more than 2 Platoons of reservists for the 18months they required, out of 41 Bde...
 

In '07 you have the LdSH(RC) 2VP and several other org's in LFWA lookign for tours - add in the RCR Bn's the R22eR, the RCD's 12 Rubber Boot and the Guns - plus the CER folks...

It is going to be hard to make those troops swallow a reserve deployment - if at all possible.

Economically its much smarter to pay the regs to do it...

Heck IF I where High Overlord - I'd have Brigades in Iraq and Afghan and use reservists fully as well - but my budget for defence would be about 10x as much.  I'd go to 1 year tours as well.  


Michael,

I've been bitching at the TF stuff since Roto 2 started training.  I would say that previous history of the reserves is no longer relevant in todays conflicts, they dont get the kit or training on it to be relevant in the grand scheme

 

[RCA]

  I can't talk to the infantry but I can comment on the artillery. I don't think the Reg F is to the point where they are self-sufficient in force generating the TFs and do and always will require reserve augmentation. As to a slap in the face for Reservists displacing Regs, I don't think so, for one its not happening, and two, aren't we all the same army? Returning gunners may or may not pass on the knowledge, but they do come back as better gunner, broadening the depth of experience in their units.
  It makes more sense augmenting a Battery with two guns then cannibalizing the other two to bring A Battery to bring it up to strength, because 1 RCHA will just have to do it again for its next TF. Besides that, all LFWA TF (1-07? & 3-08) will have Batterys attached so there will be deployments for both B and C Battery.
  As for Reserve gun Dets for the 155, I don't see a problem. Being a det mbr is a quick conversion, and this time around, all A Battery gunners, Reg or Reserve are in the same boat, as this is a new system. As well, being a   Det Comd is well within a Reserve MBdr/Sgt's capabilities, and the same thing again, the #1 all in the same boat converting to   anew weapon system. The pre-deployment trg (BTE 05) will integrate the Reserve Dets into the Battery.

 

[Blakey]

and the TF system is the WORSE piece of garbage foisted upon the Army - defeading it is criminal, and promoting it is inconcievable.

BRAVO!, i agree 110 %!.
With this new TF crap in place, its the same old same old, robbing Peter to pay Paul. Can anyone tell me (since the inception of the TF garbage) the last time a unit deployed without having to rape or receive augmenties from another BN???, and guess what, whatever unit suplies the augmenties is now down x number of soldiers for when they are in the breach. Easy solution...BUILD UP THE DAMN BN'S to 4 rifle coy's w/ the cbt sp and adm, have all the other supporting arms up to strength, go back to the BG deployments, and stop raping the other units!. For god sakes, it sure would be a morale booster for a young ( 3-4 year Pte/ Cpl) soldier to at least get on a tour and do what he was trained to do before he gets his CD.
But alas all the above recommendations require 3 things:
1.MONEY
2.MORE SOLDIERS AND
3.THE WEARWITHALL TO FIX A BROKEN WHEEL, NOT JUST OIL IT AND PUT IT BACK ON THE BIKE!
Or they could keep this wonderful little plan and keep draggin TF's out of there arses...

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Hey with this new system our BN can send both rifle coy's (albet different tours) and still go again in 2008.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

I don't think the Reg F is to the point where they are self-sufficient in force generating the TFs and do and always will require reserve augmentation. As to a slap in the face for Reservists displacing Regs, I don't think so, for one its not happening, and two, aren't we all the same army?

Had to wade in with a quick burst.  First, as far as I am concerned there is very little operational requirement to deploy Reservists on our current missions.  We are going to great lengths to do so for "other reasons".  I'll leave it up to everyone's vivid imagination to determine what those reasons are - I've expressed my opinion on the rationale for it in other threads.

Second, Reservists have, on other missions, deliberately displaced Regulars on tours for what I would argue are entirely "political" reasons.  KevinB has used Roto 11 as an example and I agree completely.

I will argue until I am blue in the face that PRes sub-unit deployments are not operationally effective nor are they warranted in the current resource and operational climate.  Moreover, I cannot see, under any circumstance, the CF having the capability to deploy PRes units on tours - any tour - without massive changes to the manner in which we train and force generate.  The accompanying angst only serves to seriously handicap the force generation process.

I'm tired and will leave my critique of the TF "plug and play"  : system for another day.  It isn't really relevant to this thread anyway.

My 2 cents...

Teddy

 

[Britney Spears]

Seeing as the majority of Jr. Ranks in the reserves are more concerned with going SOMEWHERE, regardless of who with, what do you think of the old model of individual augmentees?

 

[GO!!!]

The displacing of Reg Force members with reservists is a travesty, and not operationally required. Furthermore, the idea that the reserves even could be deployed as formed units seems a little iffy to me.

Some units in LFWA are unable to even raise a Platoon of reservists for a BTE, either as the trg audience or support, yet when the opportunity to deploy arises, there are dozens of volunteers - from the same unit. How is it that there is enough time to be deployed, and a willingness to "sell your dog, divorce your wife" : for a tour, but not to do something as simple as a few platoon attacks on the may long weekend? Where is the "commitment" that all of these devoted reservists have then? The same logic applies to percieved "gucci" courses like BMO, Para, Recce etc. The eddies will beat down your door to get on one, but when they are given the opportunity to do a full kit double door mass night into Wx, theres not a windmill to be seen - even if they have an "airborne platoon".

I agree with Kev and Teddy that the reservists that do deploy are there for no good operational reason, other than that tours are somehow seen as some sort of operational buffet, where everyone deserves a taste.

Also, the idea that somehow reservists are "sacrificing" so much to go on tours is BS. If it's such a sacrifice, don't go. There are tons of reg force guys dying to get overseas.

While the regs might get tapped providing enough troops for A-stan in the future, and require reservists then, let's cross that bridge when we come to it. The LACK of opportunity to deply is the major reason most reg force Ptes get out after their first contract, and alot more resources are put into training a regular than a part timer.

Economically speaking, reservists are cheap, and relatively easy to train. Reg force soldiers are expensive, consuming pay, pensions, benefits and expensive training ALL the time. Why would the army use the militia if they have a large pool of untapped resources that are already bought and paid for? Thats a waste of already limited resources.

Finally. The army is supposed to grow by five thousand souls in the next few years. Where is the incentive to join the regs if reservists are permitted to take advantage of the benefits of being a civvy, and then go overseas to boot?

 

[Marauder]

Seeing as the majority of Jr. Ranks in the reserves are more concerned with going SOMEWHERE, regardless of who with, what do you think of the old model of individual augmentees?

Gee, how could a guy turn down an offer to spend a year being subjected to attitudes like...

Had to wade in with a quick burst.   First, as far as I am concerned there is very little operational requirement to deploy Reservists on our current missions.   We are going to great lengths to do so for "other reasons".   I'll leave it up to everyone's vivid imagination to determine what those reasons are

not to mention...

The displacing of Reg Force members with reservists is a travesty, and not operationally required. Furthermore, the idea that the reserves even could be deployed as formed units seems a little iffy to me.

Of course, I'm not going to say that a guy would turn down a tour simply because he has to deal with anyone's hard core 1%ers. I'm sure there are plenty of quick picks out there that could give you a better education on that.

 

[Britney Spears]

Gee, how could a guy turn down an offer to spend a year being subjected to attitudes like...

Well he was talking about reserve SUB UNITS, not reservists as a whole. Hence my question. The sub unit thing is a relatively new phenomenon, as I understand.

 

[Jarnhamar]

I still remember showing up for roto 8 palladium and the reg force platoon I was augmenting had 9 reg soldiers.

There may not be a requirement in afghanastan for reserves to work along side regular force infantry sections, but what happens when the time does come?

As far as Im concerned, reserves deploy because the higher ups decided they will have positions overseas.

We hear about how the regular force is over taxed and over worked. We see interviews of soldiers saying they are overworked.
So we augment more reserves and, reserves are stealing positions?

I'm sorry I've seen a lot of reg force soldiers who would bend over backwards to get off going on a tour. Problems with their wives problems , with their girlfriends, sickness in the family, you name it.   Seena   guy lie about his parents getting in a car accident.

Reserves who will quit theirh full time job or quit school to go on tour for reasons of their own.

Whats the big fucking deal?

 

[Michael Dorosh]

The Army doesn't exist to go on operational tours in the next six months.  It exists as a resource to be drawn on in perpetuity.  It is only as good as the experience it gets, regular and reserve both, and the real test of the Army is not in what it does in the next six months, but in how it will respond when we have a true crisis.  Thank God we haven't had one since 1953, and let's hope we never have another one.  But that's not the point. 

Bleating about how the Reserves don't deserve this or how much they sacrifice that really belies the main issue - if the nation had to go to a full scale war (or if we suddenly had one within our borders) in 6 month's time, how prepared would we be?  Whom would we draw on to form the cadre of a large scale field force?  Surely that is one of our mandates.

If not - if we're truly not even thinking about mobilization, then why have a Reserve Force at all?  According to GO et al there are more than enough Regulars in the country to fulfil all the short term operational requirements, so why pay the Saturday and Sunday crowd just to take food out of the mouths of Regular soldiers? 

I'm thinking a few posters here aren't really looking past the end of their own noses at this one.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

Well he was talking about reserve SUB UNITS, not reservists as a whole. Hence my question. The sub unit thing is a relatively new phenomenon, as I understand.

Exactly, Britney.  Sub-units (and units) came up in this discussion, hence my point.  It IS a new thing.  We deployed two (IIRC) coys on OP SNOWGOOSE before my time, but only really got back into it with Roto 11 PALLADIUM, which I have expounded upon in other threads.

I believe that there will always be a place for individual augmentees.  That's a different requirement entirely.  Individual augmentees do not overly strain the system and, in some instances, can help to alleviate operational problems.  For instance, most of the UNMO positions are now going to PRes personnel rather than strip a unit of its command structure.  People jump at these opportunities to do some real solid soldiering - and the theatre is irrelevant.

 

[GO!!!]

1) I still remember showing up for roto 8 palladium and the reg force platoon I was augmenting had 9 reg soldiers.

2) There may not be a requirement in afghanastan for reserves to work along side regular force infantry sections, but what happens when the time does come?

We hear about how the regular force is over taxed and over worked. We see interviews of soldiers saying they are overworked.
So we augment more reserves and, reserves are stealing positions?

1) The time came, and not even necessarily. Bosnia was winding down, so why not let the reserves get a few people in - I'm not saying the reserves shoul'dnt deploy at all, just that they should only be used to individually back fill reg force units IF that unit is understrength.

2) Then we can do that. By then the TMS trg will be a little more finely tuned, and the milita mbrs will be able to get a full trg cycle in before they deploy. But not now, when you have reg F soldiers ready to deply on 1-3 months of trg,  and militia in 6-12. Why would you spend the extra $$ to train someone when you have a superior product ready to go NOW?

3) THERE IS NO TIRED ARMY. This is a myth foisted upon us by Ottawa. This may have been the case five yrs ago, but the No.1 reason reg force infanteers quit today is a LACK of opportunity to deploy.

And finally, there are lying, lazy POS in every unit/trade. If you want to start talking about all of the fuc*** up things I've seen the militia do, this could get ugly, so lets leave the ancdotal evidence out OK?

 

[Britney Spears]

3) THERE IS NO TIRED ARMY. This is a myth foisted upon us by Ottawa. This may have been the case five yrs ago, but the No.1 reason reg force infanteers quit today is a LACK of opportunity to deploy.

GO, I had alluded somewhat to this in a previous thread <a href=http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/2276.345.html>here</a>, where I was sternly corrected by 2 Cdo, to wit:

Britney, I qualify my statements by the fact that I am serving in the Forces and I have been posted to both "Line Battalions" and am now presently with a Service Support unit. In the Battalions I have rarely had a full section (unless getting ready to deploy), in fact in some cases I've had as few as 3 total troops in a 10 man infantry section! This, sadly is usually the norm for an infantry battalion.
Presently I am employed with a service support unit that has approximately 90% of it's mandated troops. I know this because I conduct ALL their pre-deployment training, thus I know the numbers involved.
As far as your statement referring to recruitment goals, this is not the same as numbers in the units. Borden alone, mainly a service support training facility has HUNDREDS of young potential recruits sitting around waiting, sometimes for a few YEARS, for a course start date. So "as far as you know" maybe you can explain where you come up with your info, because I live with my info every day!
Have a nice day.

Since I had no evidence to back up my assertion other than anecdotal conversations, I could only take his word for it

what say you to this?

 

[KevinB]

FWIW,

IF they got rid of the plug and play TF idea - we would be able to plug individual reservists into roles quite easily.


Look at TF1-06  1VP has 2 Coy's and a Coy from 2VP that are attached, as well as a Recce Pl (and more?) from 3R22eR.
Plus two D&S Platoons from 41Bde (Mirage and K Towns Gate Guard)

Okay for they employed two Platoons.

If this was an "old school" Bn Btl Grp.

B Coy 1VP would be deploying and as a result A-B-C Coys would be understrength, requiring reservists augmentees.  Recce PL 1VP woudl be deploying not left hanging in the breeze wondering if its going or not.
I woudl suggest that reserve augmentees into a 1VP Btl Grp would be taken with a better mind set than seperate units and plug and playing and leaving some of 1VP pers behind (shades of Roto11)

 

[Jarnhamar]

But not now, when you have reg F soldiers ready to deply on 1-3 months of trg,   and militia in 6-12. Why would you spend the extra $$ to train someone when you have a superior product ready to go NOW?

Pre-Pre work up training
Pre work up training and
work up training 'enjoyed' by the reserves is seriously overdone.   You can easily compress it all down within the 1-3 month time period.

Infact, Didn't the reserves augmenting roto 0 to afghanastan get the rushed training?   I remember the reserves going on roto zero got the word/arrived AFTER those of us going to bosnia and they left for afghanastan before us.   If I remember correctly they had a few months of work up and near a month of leave.

Theres no reason why reserves augmenting the regular force (aside from the flinsh factor) should need 6-12 months of catch up training.
All you need to do is augment with reserves who are not fresh off their recruit training.

just that they should only be used to individually back fill reg force units IF that unit is understrength.

Agreed. Some people will argue the regular force is not understrength, others will.

And finally, there are lying, lazy POS in every unit/trade. If you want to start talking about all of the fuc*** up things I've seen the militia do, this could get ugly, so lets leave the ancdotal evidence out OK?

Yes because we need to have this turned into a regular force vs reserve stupidity contest and have yet another interesting thread locked up.