Army Reserve Restructuring

[dapaterson]

The CAF has successfully messed up sustainment to the point where we are arguing about levels and components where it should be vested.

Short version: the Reg F has been too lazy, too long, focused on CBT Arms and ignoring CSS, and then pushing those foundational sustainment issues to the Res F.

Readiness is personnel, equipment and materiel. When you try to shortcut any one of those three you fail. The Reg F has failed to generate and sustain readiness.

 

[MilEME09]

The CAF has successfully messed up sustainment to the point where we are arguing about levels and components where it should be vested.

Short version: the Reg F has been too lazy, too long, focused on CBT Arms and ignoring CSS, and then pushing those foundational sustainment issues to the Res F.

Readiness is personnel, equipment and materiel. When you try to shortcut any one of those three you fail. The Reg F has failed to generate and sustain readiness.

I think a CSS divorce is in order, and a PY increase when the the CDS gets the increase to 88k that she wants. Service battalions split back in Maintenance battalions and logistics battalions. This would increase the CSS support needed to properly support the brigades.

 

[PrairieFella]

I think a CSS divorce is in order, and a PY increase when the the CDS gets the increase to 88k that she wants. Service battalions split back in Maintenance battalions and logistics battalions. This would increase the CSS support needed to properly support the brigades.

Reallocating CSS to the reserve line units would go a long way in preventing institutional backlogs. Don't let first line stuff become second line stuff.

 

[KevinB]

I think a CSS divorce is in order, and a PY increase when the the CDS gets the increase to 88k that she wants. Service battalions split back in Maintenance battalions and logistics battalions. This would increase the CSS support needed to properly support the brigades.

IMHO the entire kettle of fish needs to be rebuilt. Everything is build on rotting timbers.

The entire Army needs a reorg.

Make 2 Divisions, then have a Divisional Support Brigade, and Divisional Sustainment Brigade per Division.
To me the majority of Combat Arms positions - outside of Rapid Reaction and Pre-Deployed Forces should be Reservists.
I would quite willingly cut one of Reg Force CMBG's to allocate those PY to CSS roles.

While I would accept a 30/70 ratio (Reg to Reserve) for Combat Arms, the CSS side should be 70/30.

 

[Fabius]

I think a CSS divorce is in order, and a PY increase when the the CDS gets the increase to 88k that she wants. Service battalions split back in Maintenance battalions and logistics battalions. This would increase the CSS support needed to properly support the brigades.

When the Infantry Corps is developing and discussing their planned ask for around 2000 of the extra 13,000-14,000 PYs and there is almost zero discussion of the CSS impacts of their plans for the Bns it’s hard not too laugh in sad frustration with our own institutions.

 

[PrairieFella]

When the Infantry Corps is developing and discussing their planned ask for around 2000 of the extra 13,000-14,000 PYs and there is almost zero discussion of the CSS impacts of their plans for the Bns it’s hard not too laugh in sad frustration with our own institutions.

What the hell do they plan to do with two full battalions worth of PYs? Stand up a new regiment? With what kit and infrastructure?

 

[KevinB]

What the hell do they plan to do with two full battalions worth of PYs? Stand up a new regiment? With what kit and infrastructure?

But think of the new cap badges they can make...

 

[Fabius]

What the hell do they plan to do with two full battalions worth of PYs? Stand up a new regiment? With what kit and infrastructure?

Reintroduce actual Cbt support platoons, additional personnel in the rifle coys etc. not additional units.
However the increased heavy weapons and vehicles should definitely be accompanied by substantial increases to the CSS elements. The increasing digital C2 infrastructure would also be helped by increased CS elements.

However neither of those are infantry PYs.

 

[KevinB]

Reintroduce actual Cbt support platoons, additional personnel in the rifle coys etc. not additional units.
However the increased heavy weapons and vehicles should definitely be accompanied by substantial increases to the CSS elements. The increasing digital C2 infrastructure would also be helped by increased CS elements.

However neither of those are infantry PYs.

Each 1st and 2nd BN from The RCR, PPCLI and R22eR should drop to 30/70


There I found the PY’s

 

[FJAG]

I would love see ARes SVC Bns be stand alone echelon support organizations for whole CBGs.

Me too. Both log and maint.

It makes no sense for a tactically orientated unit to be resp for institutional functions

I agree with the principle of having an organization that is not part of the deployable service battalion. That can be done in two ways, either a completely independent structure of the

Each 1st and 2nd BN from The RCR, PPCLI and R22eR should drop to 30/70


There I found the PY’s

Disagree. Each 1st Battalion of the RCR, R22eR and PPClI should drop the term "1st Battalion," stay at 100% RegF and be combined into one light brigade.

Meanwhile the six 2nd and 3rd battalion of each regiment should be broken into eighteen battalion headquarters and CS coy cores, and eighteen fully equipped mechanized rifle companies and used to form the 30% portion of eighteen 30/70 mechanized hybrid battalions using the names of eighteen ARes battalions located/centred in urban centres. Use those to form one RegF light brigade, three hybrid armoured brigades and three + hybrid mech brigades. Same, same for the armoured and artillery and CSS.

 

[MilEME09]

Me too. Both log and maint.

I agree with the principle of having an organization that is not part of the deployable service battalion. That can be done in two ways, either a completely independent structure of the

Disagree. Each 1st Battalion of the RCR, R22eR and PPClI should drop the term "1st Battalion," stay at 100% RegF and be combined into one light brigade.

Meanwhile the six 2nd and 3rd battalion of each regiment should be broken into eighteen battalion headquarters and CS coy cores, and eighteen fully equipped mechanized rifle companies and used to form the 30% portion of eighteen 30/70 mechanized hybrid battalions using the names of eighteen ARes battalions located/centred in urban centres. Use those to form one RegF light brigade, three hybrid armoured brigades and three + hybrid mech brigades. Same, same for the armoured and artillery and CSS.

Break off the three jump companies and reform 1 CPB from ww2. Have them report directly to 1 div.

 

[FJAG]

Break off the three jump companies and reform 1 CPB from ww2. Have them report directly to 1 div.

I see 1 Div being removed from CJOC and leaving 1 Div as the FG HQ generating for Europe and 2 Div as the FG HQ for everything else. Both Div HQs should be capable of FGing a div HQ (or slice of a div HQ) if required.

Somewhere amongst the boat that is CJOC there ought to be an element that can do

I'd put the RegF light brigade and the para capability in 2 Div. I'm agnostic as to whether the para capability should be in one battalion or split into one company in each of the three battalions. At least one battalion HQ and CS and CSS company needs to be para qualified so that a three coy para bn can be FGed - to me that nudges me to the CPB concept - but that would put the regimental mafias' noses out of joint.

 

[MilEME09]

I see 1 Div being removed from CJOC and leaving 1 Div as the FG HQ generating for Europe and 2 Div as the FG HQ for everything else. Both Div HQs should be capable of FGing a div HQ (or slice of a div HQ) if required.

Somewhere amongst the boat that is CJOC there ought to be an element that can do

I'd put the RegF light brigade and the para capability in 2 Div. I'm agnostic as to whether the para capability should be in one battalion or split into one company in each of the three battalions. At least one battalion HQ and CS and CSS company needs to be para qualified so that a three coy para bn can be FGed - to me that nudges me to the CPB concept - but that would put the regimental mafias' noses out of joint.

Oh but that's the beauty of it good sir, by creating a new jump battalion, we create a new mafia to fight back. Fight fire with fire, tackling that problem will be a problem for the CDS in 2100

 

[Eaglelord17]

Break off the three jump companies and reform 1 CPB from ww2. Have them report directly to 1 div.

Alternatively cut the jump companies and re-role them as light infantry.

If we have no capability to effectively use jump companies, and no actual intent to use jump companies, there is no reason to have jump companies.

 

[KevinB]

Alternatively cut the jump companies and re-role them as light infantry.

If we have no capability to effectively use jump companies, and no actual intent to use jump companies, there is no reason to have jump companies.

It is still the fastest way to the Arctic.

IMHO the entire Light BDE should be Para capable. Jump companies by themselves are a wasted capability as they don’t have the mass to do anything.

While Canada might not do JFE - the Para capability allows for the CA to contribute to joint operations that may require airfield seizure and other tasks that airborne insertion is the best option.

 

[KevinB]

Further to the who Airborne/Para Capability.

IMHO everyone in the CA should go through CABC (or whatever it is called now). Mostly to make jumping less exotic, as lets face it any idiot can fall out of a plane or helicopter - it is simply a means of delivery - no different than getting out of a LAV etc.
It's a solid confidence booster though, especially for folks who are afraid of heights.
I'm also a fan of having jump line serials MFP qualified as well - as there are a lot of times that dope on a rope is a good deployment method - but in some terrain and tactical situations, being able to jump higher and further way from the intended DZ, and track in with more control is vastly preferable.

Airborne Operations however are an extremely perishable skill - on the planning and logistics side, as well as the jumping in full equipment in different terrain and weather in day or night - as well as the what to do on the ground.

Bare Ass Hollywood jumps or other non tactical jumps may technically qualify for currency - but they really shouldn't. They are insufficient for a rifleman - and not even close for leadership or support weapon folks.

Also jumping a Bn, Bde or Div is a shit ton different than jumping a Det, Platoon or Company.

Given the # of Hercules and Globemasters the CAF has, a Para/Airborne Bde isn't a hard push - and with the way that 47 is acting down here, you may find that you need a JFE capability - or at least in concert with the UK and France, for NEO if nothing else, as you can't trust us to drop the 82nd in places anymore.

Now do I think that mass static line drops are practical for combat in a peer/near peer scenario -- no, but it does offer the ability to mover forces quickly - and especially in times of tension where competition hasn't hit conflict yet - being able to put a Bde in some place quickly is very very useful.

 

[OldSolduer]

Let the wheel break. By propping things up, you allow irresponsible people to continue pushing resources to things they'd rather do instead of things they should do.

Exactly

 

[CountDC]

So I would love to see the army resource situations like 36 Svc Bn to provide all Log and Maint support to the CBG units, taking that responsibility from CFB Halifax and Greenwood.

They should have learned and done that a long time ago. Halifax armoury use to have a clothing stores for the reserves that was open Tue and Thu evening that was a god send for army reserves needing kit issue/exchanges. Willow park had area for some log and maint support along with the tpt section. Seems to me that they could push/pull some things over to the army to improve service. Worse case Aldershot is always there.

The CAF has successfully messed up sustainment to the point where we are arguing about levels and components where it should be vested.

Short version: the Reg F has been too lazy, too long, focused on CBT Arms and ignoring CSS, and then pushing those foundational sustainment issues to the Res F.

Readiness is personnel, equipment and materiel. When you try to shortcut any one of those three you fail. The Reg F has failed to generate and sustain readiness.

Actually this applies to both reg and res. Neither one really concerned themself with recruiting for CSS. Walk into an infantry reserve unit and they don't push HRA/FSA/Sup, they sell the infantry. I once asked at an arty unit why they didn't recruit clerks and they replied "it's not our job to recruit clerks, that's what svc bn is for". At that time even svc bn didn't recruit clerks, they wanted supply, maint and drivers. That doesn't even account for the fact that svc bn wasn't recruiting for the other units. Reg recruiting centres for years would sell the "join now as infantry then once you are in you can change trades". Seen too many screwed by that one.

 

[Kirkhill]

When the Infantry Corps is developing and discussing their planned ask for around 2000 of the extra 13,000-14,000 PYs and there is almost zero discussion of the CSS impacts of their plans for the Bns it’s hard not too laugh in sad frustration with our own institutions.

How many "Reserves" could they supply, with 10 weeks training, for the same price as those 2000?

 

[MilEME09]

How many "Reserves" could they supply, with 10 weeks training, for the same price as those 2000?

About 6-8,000 probably