Do We need designated EOD units (or sub-units)?

[EODSpr]

Hmmm... I never realized the centres closed.   :-[ That changes it somewhat about the training aspect but not the operational.

IED response is not the question. The question is "Why is it so crucial to have an IED capability at Battle Group level?" Its primary purpose is to fight on a battlefield. That said then it follows that there are other assets a Battle Group needs before an IED capability. Operationally, the threat isn't justified. Why can't it be handled in the BIP manner? Suicide bombers are not countered with an IED suite. To clarify what I'm saying, given the number of IED incidents in areas that Canadians (directed at us or not) were responsible for, in say the last fifteen years, compared to the numbers of fired mortar or artillery (again, directed at us or not) rounds, which would be greater? So why isn't there counter-mortar/artillery radar attached to the Battle Group? Thats my point.

Is the Ammo-tech still posted to MWD ala Graham Goodrum? Is there still a Sapper in Borden at the EOD school?

1. Without getting into details, in both Iraq and Afghanistan IED's are prevalent and are used to target Security Forces ie: command IED's to attack convoys. Suicide bombers are just one method of attack. Just ask the Americans how important IEDD techs are.

2. BIP is not an option in most IED scenarios.

3. Engineer support will be task tailored for each mission. If there is minimal IED/EOD threat but you need heavy equipment then you take heavy equipment. It is just another tool in the toolbox, but one that requires constant training to keep the skills up, so if we are going to deploy these assets then it only makes sense to ensure that they are well trained and current in the tools of the trade.   We already depend on other nations enough for support so lets not become even more dependant.

4. Yes we have an Ammo Tech in the Engr School still as well as Combat Engineers at the EOD School.

5. I agree that counter Arty radar is another tool that we should have and deploy. It would have been valuable on many occasions.

E45

Chimo!

 

[043]

5. I agree that counter Arty radar is another tool that we should have and deploy. It would have been valuable on many occasions.

E45,

On Op Athena, Roto 0, we had Counter Arty Radar with us. They were deployed up at the palace however it was very expensive to operate!

ChimO!

 

[Ammo]

Good topic, but I would like to bring up some points for discussion:

a. EOD and IEDD are two completely different and separate matters. What I mean by that is that an EOs are predictable (i.e. you know how the "package" will/can be triggered and therefore established SOPs are in place to deal with them) as opposed to IEDs (i.e. you don't know how the "package" will/can be triggered). So, why not treat these two subjects as two separate matters (NATO is finally starting to see the difference between the two).

b. Fully agree that once trained as EOD and IEDD operators, time must be dedicated to maintain those skills. Why not make it a trade then? Opened to anyone from the four trades (and equivalent officer MOC), if they wish to. Units could then be established at each major ANAF base and manned properly. Even maybe have a national deployable unit (they did it for DART!!!), similar to SAR Techs...

Food for thought

 

[Sea-dog]

Ammo

You have the right idea,the system that you are proposing was practised in South Africa years ago and stood the test of time under difficult conditions varying from urban to rural conditions.
I,myself is a product of this idea and through cross training and flexability we managed to contain not only a terrorist onslaught from with in,but also outside of our borders in difficult combat conditions.

Those EOD members that passed IEOD selection went on to do an additional 9 week intensive IEOD training.Learning new mind sets and practising new RSP's. Members that successfully passed this phase then became new operators of small (3 to 6 man) IEOD units which was based all around the country,but especially near stradegic centers,sea and air-ports to combat terrorism in support of local law enforcement,
and anti-terrorist units.
The members came from all defence services.It was truly a combined forces afford,and as such was very flexible.These self-contained mobile units,could very easily be dispatched to join other similar units during a major event where one unit had difficulty couping.

It was law,and all members had to attend ad least once per year a refresher course,either acting as    instructors or as students during which time these members are subjected to strict examination and real-time evaluation in order to retain their qualification pay.
All members attended regular seminars held to brief operators on new developments supported by operational intelligence to ensure a constant high level of operational readiness.

It is a recommended system and can only benefit the Canadian Defence force in its quest to become a more flexible integrated mobile defence force ,based on a more effective manpower utilization.  

Good luck !
Bubbles Up, Navy Divers do it the Deepest !  

 

[EODSpr]

I agree with you Ammo on both points, you are absolutely correct on EOD and IEDD being different. I think that with those who know this is not an issue. Since 9/11 Canada and the chain of command has become more aware of the need for these skills and there are good things happening in this field CF wide ie: new kit, more courses etc. The driving force for this seems to be due to the requirement on current deployed ops.

As for creating a trade, I think it would solve a lot of the headaches and the inter trade bickering that happens primarily between Engrs and Ammo Techs of which I am sure you are aware. I am not optimistic that that will ever happen but you never know.

E45

Chimo!

 

[SprCForr]

1. Without getting into details, ...

2. BIP is not an option ...

3. Engineer support...even more dependant.

4. Yes ...

5. I agree ...

1. Once again, I don't want or need the details. I am aware of the procedures from time at EOD 24. IED procedures do not address the command detonated device problem. IED procedures can only come into use if the device is detected first. If the device involves loss of life to civilians, then it is up to the civilian authority to deal with it, not us. If it involves Canadian troops, then the first rule is evacuate and cordon off. There is nothing that comes to mind that would prevent Canadian pers from being evacuated to prevent the loss of life. That leaves the equipment and infrastructure that the contingent is using. Everything a Battle Group deploys with has the potential to be lost through enemy action, anything critical to the operation of the targeted group could be removed, i.e. a computer/laptop with critical information. There is nothing at this level that justifies sending an EOD operator in to save equipment that can be replaced. That leaves infrastructure. You can't convince me that saving an Afghan or Iraqi or whatever else building we happen to be using for the next 6 months justifies the life of an EOD team. To me, this whole thing smacks of 'mission creep". Lastly, save the BS, I wasn't born yesterday and I'm not a complete moron. I'm not asking Americans how important it is, I'm asking Canadians how important it is.

2. BIP is simple solution to the problem. This would also cover the employment of a disrupter since a possibility exists for the device to function anyway.

3. Ho hum,  :boring: staff answer.

4. At least we haven't lost that yet. Sounds like we need to reopen the centres as a start. Maybe now the chain will get serious about it. I am not implying that there is not an IED threat in our operational environments. What I am trying to emphasize is that this is and should be beyond Battle Group level, who gives up the bayonets to man an EOD det c/w IED kit?. 1 Cdn Div didn't even possess an EOD/IED capability and now we need to foist it upon what was supposed to be a lean mean fighting machine concept? Make it an army level asset. Post a det to each contingent. Maybe give it to 4 ESR with increased manning to built a large troop to draw those dets from. I dunno about making it a seperate trade though.

5. Yep, and damn the cost. Penny pinching weenies have ruled too long.  :rage:

Every Ammo tech that I have worked with I never had a problem with operationally or training. Once past the BS we both realized it's just that, BS. I think its the weenies on both sides trying to keep the issue alive or using it to justify some hidden agenda thing. It really came to a head over the Slesse Dml Range accident. We (Sappers) are in the same fight with EME over generators for f*ck sake. Does anyone else see this as ridiculous?

 

[AmmoTech90]

Similiar discussion going on in the UK.   Just to show that we are not the only military that has bun fights, and ours are actually quite quiet compared to these guys.

From their Sapper board...
http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=6773

From their Loggie board...
http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=8441

Home board...sort of similar to this one...
http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn/index.php?name=Forums&file=index

Oh CHIMO, and Mark is right across the hall from me, I'll try to get him hooked up on here, he wanted to talk to you anyway.

 

[EODSpr]

1. ...IED procedures can only come into use if the device is detected first. If the device involves loss of life to civilians, then it is up to the civilian authority to deal with it, not us. If it involves Canadian troops, then the first rule is evacuate and cordon off...  

2. BIP is simple solution to the problem. This would also cover the employment of a disrupter since a possibility exists for the device to function anyway.

3. Ho hum,    :boring: staff answer.

4. At least we haven't lost that yet. Sounds like we need to reopen the centres as a start. Maybe now the chain will get serious about it. I am not implying that there is not an IED threat in our operational environments. What I am trying to emphasize is that this is and should be beyond Battle Group level, who gives up the bayonets to man an EOD det c/w IED kit?...Make it an army level asset. Post a det to each contingent. Maybe give it to 4 ESR with increased manning to built a large troop to draw those dets from. I dunno about making it a seperate trade though.

5. Yep, and darn the cost. Penny pinching weenies have ruled too long.   :rage:

Every Ammo tech that I have worked with I never had a problem with operationally or training. Once past the BS we both realized it's just that, BS. I think its the weenies on both sides trying to keep the issue alive or using it to justify some hidden agenda thing. It really came to a head over the Slesse Dml Range accident. We (Sappers) are in the same fight with EME over generators for f*ck sake. Does anyone else see this as ridiculous?

1. Roger that. As for the civilians my geuss is that they don't currently have the capability, just a geuss. I would like to believe our involvement has force protection in mind.

2. BIP is the simple solution but disruptor use and employment is still only with IEDD ops. Any thoughts?

3. Just stating the way it is now.

4. Re-open the Centres, i'm all for it. Create a Tp in 4ESR, sounds good, it might solve the "remaining current" issue. As a stop gap I believe it is my units intention to keep a core group of qualified pers in Ress Tp.

5. CHIMO stated they had the capability on ROTO 0. Not sure if it still there, or if it is the only one in the inventory.

Yes, the BS is just that, not quite sure if it is a hidden agenda thing or empire building.

E45

Chimo!

 

[Spr.Earl]

Yes,each Reg. have at least one designated Section who has members who have all the   E.O.D./I.E.D. ticket punch's and once established,train and prepare future Tech.'s for their course's and also cross train with other Arms with in Canada and also cross train with our fellow NATO Countries to keep up to speed.
What is 5 economy plane tickets plus Q. & R. over seas when it comes to an evil mind ?
Also the School should bring back the Forensic's back also.

I just returned from the States off a Combined Air Field Eng Ex. and was part of our E.O.D. Team   doing post attack recovery and I learnt a lot form the U.S.A.F. E.O.D. Cadre in regards to our trade.
I.E.D. is a big time concern right now,ununderstandably so.
Oh another note,it's not BMD any more it's CMD (Conventional) plus there is also a Advanced CMD   part now.


P.S. I know that right now there is a big stink on over CMD vs the   H.A. Qual.
I think that CMD,then the advanced CMD should be the introduction courses for F.E.'s for E.O.D. then start with H.A. as full ticket punch and forward from there as this will give a better prepared candidate for the harder Course's in E.O.D./I.E.D.

 

[SprCForr]

IMHO it would be easy to include the use of the disrupter/x-ray in our current scheme of things. The .50 de-armer and rocket wrench are a part of it now, keep going with the trend. It might help address the need at a basic level and not prove to be unsustainable in the future. Any advanced requirements could come from a dedicated team.

It is truly a shame that so much ground has to be recovered before a decent start can be made.  :'(

 

[Block 1]

For those of you out there, that have not read the new â Å“Canadian Forces Joint Explosive Ordnance Disposal Support To Canadian Forces Operations dated: 2004-11-01 by J3 Engr Ops3â ? you should. Its good reading. Once you start to make your way through it you will quickly see its a milestone for the Canadian EOD world. I believe its the first step to a new and coordinated EOD world within the CF. No more stumbling around guessing at policy and reading between the lines of the CFAO. 

Now I firmly believe you need to draw the lines in the sand first. Then you can accomplish your responsibilities within your area of responsibility. There should be no reason why Ammo Tech and Combat Engineers should not share in the EOD world. But one thing we as EOD tech must remember is we are all here for one thing and that's to close with and destroy the enemy first â Å“Soldiers Firstâ ? then above and beyond that comes EOD. And in the three block war that's paramount every man / women on that battlefield will have to be a â Å“Soldier Firstâ ?. In â Å“block 1 the high intensity warfareâ ? will be brutal in a urban environment without understanding you threat â Å“suicide bombersâ ? and just what implications that's going to have on our troops and the accomplishment of the mission. You must know and I know understand your enemy is a key to this problem. This can only be accomplished by EOD int and exploitation of all aspect of EOD. This in turn will provide us with the information on the enemy's ability to use EOD as a weapon. A buddy I know in the NIC told me once you have to understand you enemy first them locate and destroy insurgences with a surgical strike into the hart of the cell. This can only be  accomplished with good up to date int. Anyways have a read of the above ref it will all become clear.           

 

[Spr.Earl]

Block 1,yes I am sure it is a good read as most of our Doctrinal papers are.
But it is very rare that they ever get implemented.

It will take J3 Eng. having to realy push to implement what is needed as I do know what most of our short falls are when it comes to E.O.D. and as to your O.I.

"But one thing we as EOD tech must remember is we are all here for one thing and that's to close with and destroy the enemy first â Å“Soldiers Firstâ ? then above and beyond that comes EOD. And in the three block war that's paramount every man / women on that battlefield will have to be a â Å“Soldier Firstâ ?.

I feel you are wrong,reason why is we in the Army have no EOD standing Units anymore and we must have them because it's take time to train a Tech as we have found of late.

Remember EOD/IED is a volunteer trade,you have the choice of refusing.

Lets make good Units with those who wish to be in the Trade as it is hard trade learn and keep up on as it's changing every hour of every day,new tools ,IEDS  etc.,, not like the normal life of the F.E. which remains pretty static when it comes to training and methods.

We must be proactive and get on this now or we will be on the back burner if and when we end up with IED attacks here in Canada.

Yes we will be attacked,the only question is when?
When we are,we must be prepared!!

 

[McG]

Something at the national level would be good if it allowed our guys more exposure to the RCIEDD guys.  However, for the levels of our deployments, this capability should exist in each Bde (so it exists locally when putting BGs together and it would be available during a Bde deployment).

Why should we involve ourselves with IEDD?  For the same reason we worry about booby traps (which are really a sub-set of IED).  With the skill sets resident in a deployed force, we would be able to respond immediately to EOD or IEDD calls.  We would also have the ability to look for IEDDs along intended routes and deal with them to keep the routes open (we would not have to wait for them to be seen by chance or to detonate).  I believe this capability is a div or higher responsibility in the traditional view of things, but do we want our deployed soldiers to be waiting on the decision of a multinational HQ to employ some other nation's soldiers when we need this?  I did propose the MWED Tp organization in recognition of the traditional level that EOD and IEDD are held at.  This Tp would have the dual capability of the mine warfare role that is traditional to the Bde level.

I don't think shutting down the Tp that provides us with our boat ops, wood milling capabilities, ROWPUs, MCM, and bridge lift is the right solution to create an EOD Tp.  BTW, doesn't 2 CER still have its Armd Tp PYs?

 

[kj_gully]

Do you fellas really think that you need to tie up combat engineers on what is basically a secondary duty? Train volunteers throughout the entire Army, hell throughout the CF, to do that task, then attach an element to every deployment. the need is real, but the employment is limited. We need to take back EOD& IED domestically from Police, in order to provide training and currency for our operators. The Navy deploys Clearance Divers to take care of EOD, and IED in shore installations, and guess what? Being opportunistic, they have found ways to be employed far inland by the land forces the navy is supporting. I'm sure that most of you that care about this stuff remember not that far back  most bases had a viable EOD centre that was realistically employed from time to time in aid to civil power roles. With the influx of troops this could happen again. The military offloaded the IED response to civil authorities, or rather, billed them to a point where it was cost prohibitive for them to use military, stifling an excellent training venue. I bet most municipal and provincial Goverments would love to employ their police forces for other than bomb squad duties.

Take care, warriors