- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
NNEO? What the HELL is that? Are you talking about emergency embassy evacuations?
Future Canadian Airborne Capability and Organisation! Or, is it Redundant? (a merged thread)
GK .Dundas
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,330
- Points
- 960
It covers a multitude of sins actuallyCenturian1985 said:
,but embassy evacuations is one of them
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Okay, I'll grant you NNEO or similiar mission type (i know them by a different name used by the AF). So they could have at least one type of specific mission; :akimbo:
And how often would these missons occur? And how would said unit(s) get to said mission area? This would also require standby aircraft ready to transport troops/armour/arty at a 48-hour notice to anyplace in the world. How do you argue the cost versus the use? These are the questions that higher levels will ask. What is the use of a unit that cannot deploy anywhere because they are being held in readiness for a special mission, but the special mission occurs only once every, say, 3 years (for example)?
These are the basic questions preventing their formation right now. If you can justify the cost and need, everyone will jump on board! (oooh, is that a bad pun or what?) ;D
(Before anyone says it, yes, we already have a few of those types of units around; and no, Im not talking about JTF2)
And how often would these missons occur? And how would said unit(s) get to said mission area? This would also require standby aircraft ready to transport troops/armour/arty at a 48-hour notice to anyplace in the world. How do you argue the cost versus the use? These are the questions that higher levels will ask. What is the use of a unit that cannot deploy anywhere because they are being held in readiness for a special mission, but the special mission occurs only once every, say, 3 years (for example)?
These are the basic questions preventing their formation right now. If you can justify the cost and need, everyone will jump on board! (oooh, is that a bad pun or what?) ;D
(Before anyone says it, yes, we already have a few of those types of units around; and no, Im not talking about JTF2)
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
I would have figured you'd know what NEO was.
Nonpermissive is when the airhead has to be taken by force, either because it is not safe, or that it is not in control of the responsible government. Canada has engaged (in 03 if I recall correctly) in a NEO op in Haiti. Usually we are part of a coalition group where we would go in to get all Commonwealth citizens out of a country. There has also been standby for East Timor, and a couple crappy African countries in the last few yrs.
The only piece of the puzzle missing is the strategic/tactical airlift capability. The Army can and has put the troops together. It is the Gov't and the Air force who can not get them to wherever they need to go.
Hopefully with CF Transformation, CANCEFCOM or CANSOFCOM will be able to put together all the pieces to make it fly.
Nonpermissive is when the airhead has to be taken by force, either because it is not safe, or that it is not in control of the responsible government. Canada has engaged (in 03 if I recall correctly) in a NEO op in Haiti. Usually we are part of a coalition group where we would go in to get all Commonwealth citizens out of a country. There has also been standby for East Timor, and a couple crappy African countries in the last few yrs.
There has been a unit on standby for NEO tasks for 3-4 yrs the most recent being 3 RCR. And as far as I know, CSOR could be inheriting that role once they stand up.Centurian1985 said:
The only piece of the puzzle missing is the strategic/tactical airlift capability. The Army can and has put the troops together. It is the Gov't and the Air force who can not get them to wherever they need to go.
Hopefully with CF Transformation, CANCEFCOM or CANSOFCOM will be able to put together all the pieces to make it fly.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 10,008
- Points
- 1,160
I am not an expert in the field, but Airborne missions have a history of going incredibly right or incredibly wrong. I think for the ones that go wrong it is often a case of overconfidence or ignorance of their capabilities and weaknesses. Most of the failures seem to be caused by overreaching and failure to reinforce.
If you are going to have airborne/airmobile forces, you need to have a Regional commander that is well aware of the risks of using them and has done proper planning. Also going against their use for most western countries is that the politicians have become risk averse, so they will not like to hear: “if the operation goes wrong expect 50% causalities”
I think having them combined as Airmobile and Airborne makes sense, from a economic and tactically point of view. Another thing that seems common in reading of historical airborne operation is the desire by Commanders to do a combat jump, either for their careers, ego’s or to justify the cost and existence of the unit. We had a saying in rescue/recovery diving: the best dive is no dive at all.
I don’t blame the soldiers for wanting to do what they have trained to do, that’s just normal, but can the commanders resist the urge to use the force and the delivery method when not required?
If you are going to have airborne/airmobile forces, you need to have a Regional commander that is well aware of the risks of using them and has done proper planning. Also going against their use for most western countries is that the politicians have become risk averse, so they will not like to hear: “if the operation goes wrong expect 50% causalities”
I think having them combined as Airmobile and Airborne makes sense, from a economic and tactically point of view. Another thing that seems common in reading of historical airborne operation is the desire by Commanders to do a combat jump, either for their careers, ego’s or to justify the cost and existence of the unit. We had a saying in rescue/recovery diving: the best dive is no dive at all.
I don’t blame the soldiers for wanting to do what they have trained to do, that’s just normal, but can the commanders resist the urge to use the force and the delivery method when not required?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
why, exactly, are we discussing this AGAIN? How often do we need to re-visit the same arguments?
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
What was the decision and/or consensus in the last argument? Ive read through several threads and their was never a single answer. It always seemed to drift off about the new unit forming at Pet that would support JTF2 in case of a massive domestic or overseas operation.
Of note, in all those threads I noticed a blind angle nobody covered. In a lot of these domestic emergency situations its not the JTF2 you have to worry about being able to work with, its the civilians and police elements you have to work with. And a lot of police elements did not like the airborne in the past, and will definately be prejudiced against a unit that reinvents itself as the 'new airborne'. There is a lot of bridges to be crossed vis-avis community relations before this unit could be effective.
Of note, in all those threads I noticed a blind angle nobody covered. In a lot of these domestic emergency situations its not the JTF2 you have to worry about being able to work with, its the civilians and police elements you have to work with. And a lot of police elements did not like the airborne in the past, and will definately be prejudiced against a unit that reinvents itself as the 'new airborne'. There is a lot of bridges to be crossed vis-avis community relations before this unit could be effective.
- Reaction score
- 5,897
- Points
- 1,360
Quote,
And a lot of police elements did not like the airborne in the past,
Yea..sure,right...start naming names if you wish to generalize like that.
And a lot of police elements did not like the airborne in the past,
Yea..sure,right...start naming names if you wish to generalize like that.
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
Centurian1985 said:
??? I am sure that if this was the case, those same Agencies harboured the same feelings to all Units of the CF, not just the Airborne. I await your answer to Bruce's question/challenge.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
This goes back to when I worked with some RCMP units, not just once but across several years. I could not help but notice many times they were not very trustful of me despite our common goals, so I asked them about it. The blunt reply was that they had encountered too many CF and ex-CF persons who were mixed up in illegal activities, including drugs, llegal types of fishing, and association with OMGs and Mohawk groups. It also springs from too many incidents of soldiers bringing back illegal items from overseas duties.
Is this sterotyping and generalization on their part? Yes it is. In the end, it didnt matter that over 99% of the forces have a good reputation and are law-abiding members of society, what matters is the 1% who get in trouble and from whom the reputation springs. And, Wallace is right, in many cases it is an antagomsim against the CF in general, which was very annoying as their antagonism impacted some joint operations. And again, this is not true for every police officer, I had good working relationships with many of them, but there were too many were who were antagonistic of the CF, but many were specifically distrustful of soldiers from the airborne units.
Of all the operations that RCMP/CF have worked on together, Panamerican games, Kananaskis, etc, your telling me that no one else has ever encountered or noticed this??? Have you not noticed that you dont get invited to coffee, or that you dont get invited to meetings, or that certain information doesnt get given to you until you call up and bitch about it? Think about it - when you start working with someone or a new company, whats the first thing you? You go out and get to know each other, you hold meetings to get to know how each other operates. It works like this in EVERY organization both CF and civi. Once you get allowed into the 'inner circle' it is a big shock to realize just how excluded you were before! Its part of why I was always tasked as a liaison officer to work with LEAs and other units, I had a talent for getting through these barriers and get working partnerships going.
As for specific examples, Wallace and Monkhouse can PM me for further details about incidents, but I cant post those in an open forum.
Now, this is not a rant against police officers; they are doing good work. For every one I met who disliked the CF, I met 2-3 others who had no problems with CF members. The point is that if you expect to work on domestic operations, be prepared to do some liaison work across the country so that police departments know who they are going to work with and how you will operate. This is how the most successful DND units operate.
Is this sterotyping and generalization on their part? Yes it is. In the end, it didnt matter that over 99% of the forces have a good reputation and are law-abiding members of society, what matters is the 1% who get in trouble and from whom the reputation springs. And, Wallace is right, in many cases it is an antagomsim against the CF in general, which was very annoying as their antagonism impacted some joint operations. And again, this is not true for every police officer, I had good working relationships with many of them, but there were too many were who were antagonistic of the CF, but many were specifically distrustful of soldiers from the airborne units.
Of all the operations that RCMP/CF have worked on together, Panamerican games, Kananaskis, etc, your telling me that no one else has ever encountered or noticed this??? Have you not noticed that you dont get invited to coffee, or that you dont get invited to meetings, or that certain information doesnt get given to you until you call up and bitch about it? Think about it - when you start working with someone or a new company, whats the first thing you? You go out and get to know each other, you hold meetings to get to know how each other operates. It works like this in EVERY organization both CF and civi. Once you get allowed into the 'inner circle' it is a big shock to realize just how excluded you were before! Its part of why I was always tasked as a liaison officer to work with LEAs and other units, I had a talent for getting through these barriers and get working partnerships going.
As for specific examples, Wallace and Monkhouse can PM me for further details about incidents, but I cant post those in an open forum.
Now, this is not a rant against police officers; they are doing good work. For every one I met who disliked the CF, I met 2-3 others who had no problems with CF members. The point is that if you expect to work on domestic operations, be prepared to do some liaison work across the country so that police departments know who they are going to work with and how you will operate. This is how the most successful DND units operate.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
well, here's what I see:
Every other army in the world that is capable of it, has an airborne force. The most effective military in the world has an enormous airborne capability and has employed it several times recently. The simple threat of employing that force has, on occasion, prevented war. Our largest enemies are currently working on improving their airborne forces.
Seems to me that if the airborne concept were out-dated, there wouldn't be such pressure for them. (Everywhere else but here, of course.) I dunno dude, I just sense an anti-Airborne feel to your posts. Maybe I'm imagining it, but I still feel it. I kinda get the impression that you just dislike paratroopers for some personal reason, and no amount of argument is going to change your mind, so I think I'll just go hang out somewhere else.
You have yourself a fine Airborne day, now.
Every other army in the world that is capable of it, has an airborne force. The most effective military in the world has an enormous airborne capability and has employed it several times recently. The simple threat of employing that force has, on occasion, prevented war. Our largest enemies are currently working on improving their airborne forces.
Seems to me that if the airborne concept were out-dated, there wouldn't be such pressure for them. (Everywhere else but here, of course.) I dunno dude, I just sense an anti-Airborne feel to your posts. Maybe I'm imagining it, but I still feel it. I kinda get the impression that you just dislike paratroopers for some personal reason, and no amount of argument is going to change your mind, so I think I'll just go hang out somewhere else.
You have yourself a fine Airborne day, now.
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,023
- Points
- 1,010
The truth is we had alot of serious disciplinary problesm in the CF in the 80s and the 90s. Anybody who is denial of this is living with their head in the ###.
If you don't beleive me take a look at what Clayton Matchee attitude and action did towards the the Airbourne, the army and the CF as a whole. He bloody tortured and killed a prisoner. Yeah the guy he killed was a scum bag but if we are going to be the good guys we have to behave better than that.
A friend of mine who asked to specifically not be named but served in the airbourne regt said they're was no denying that they had problem soldiers. Some units were using the CAR as a dumping ground for these guys (instead of using the C and P system and booting them to civilian street).
Don't get me wrong, the Airbourne had alot of really superb soldiers but they had their d*ckheads as well.
Another theory I have heard as well is that they snagged the best leadership from the airbourne to stand up JTF2 in 92-93 when the Forces took over the RCMP SERT.
When post in a whole new crop of leaders for soldiers whoi were already a tight knit group, well its maybe going to take some time to shake it out.
Further more IMO, Kenward was doing a good and ballsy job of getting rid of the beligerents but the "political damage" caused by the media and the Matchee incident was too much. So the Liberals did a typical knee jerk reaction and ordered the regiment disbanded in disgrace.
Further IMO, (Using my crystal ball) I see jump companies no longer being jump companies and the only combat para unit will be the CDN SPEC OPS REGT. Watch and shoot. Keep in mind there is limited number of basic para courses being run now.
If you don't beleive me take a look at what Clayton Matchee attitude and action did towards the the Airbourne, the army and the CF as a whole. He bloody tortured and killed a prisoner. Yeah the guy he killed was a scum bag but if we are going to be the good guys we have to behave better than that.
A friend of mine who asked to specifically not be named but served in the airbourne regt said they're was no denying that they had problem soldiers. Some units were using the CAR as a dumping ground for these guys (instead of using the C and P system and booting them to civilian street).
Don't get me wrong, the Airbourne had alot of really superb soldiers but they had their d*ckheads as well.
Another theory I have heard as well is that they snagged the best leadership from the airbourne to stand up JTF2 in 92-93 when the Forces took over the RCMP SERT.
When post in a whole new crop of leaders for soldiers whoi were already a tight knit group, well its maybe going to take some time to shake it out.
Further more IMO, Kenward was doing a good and ballsy job of getting rid of the beligerents but the "political damage" caused by the media and the Matchee incident was too much. So the Liberals did a typical knee jerk reaction and ordered the regiment disbanded in disgrace.
Further IMO, (Using my crystal ball) I see jump companies no longer being jump companies and the only combat para unit will be the CDN SPEC OPS REGT. Watch and shoot. Keep in mind there is limited number of basic para courses being run now.
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,023
- Points
- 1,010
Add to the above, 3RCR no longer calls Para coy PAra coy, it is once again called Mikes Company.
Oh, I do like alot of the guys from the CDN AB REGT (BIlly Bolen, Joe "cock" Hillier and Mark Cushman are a few examples of great paratroopers and people in general). But I stand by what I said above.
Read the first paragraph above carefully, I said the CF in general and I mean alot of units had disciplinary problems, not just the 'bourne.
Oh, I do like alot of the guys from the CDN AB REGT (BIlly Bolen, Joe "cock" Hillier and Mark Cushman are a few examples of great paratroopers and people in general). But I stand by what I said above.
Read the first paragraph above carefully, I said the CF in general and I mean alot of units had disciplinary problems, not just the 'bourne.
- Reaction score
- 5
- Points
- 430
ArmyRick said:
Mike Company was never officially named "Para Company". Mike Company is its official title in the Regimental order of battle, in accordance with Regimental Standing Orders. "Para" is a role that Mike Company has been assigned.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
yup, any of the Old Dogs from the Commandos will verify this. They told us many a story.ArmyRick said:
as does any unit. Which is the crux. You, of all people, should be well aware that paratroopers are soldiers like any other. The differences are:
1. the way we commute. The job is the same, but how we get to it is different. And a lot more fun.
2. the morale and drive. We try to instill a drive in our troops that they have to meet the standards established by our predecessors in WW II. That they have to prove themselves to be better. They don't all make it, but they try. And that rep draws the best from other units, doesn't it? And they then take that attitude with them when they leave.
"best" is debatable. Depends entirely on your definition. But the core for the JTF was drawn fom the Airborne regiment, as I understand it.
directly contrary to what the MND has said to us in 3 PPCLI on his visit here. So watch and shoot.
The limited number of courses is directly attributable to the lack of aircraft and lack of instructors due to both being over-tasked. It's going to change (or so we've been assured.)
Mike Coy. Not possessive. And Para Coy was never the Official designation. But the use of the nickname was banned. And that was a decision by a self-obsessed, tyrannical careerist who cares nothing what-so-ever for his troops or their morale. He simply wanted to 'make his mark on Regimental history'. And destroyed what little morale the troops had at knowing he was leaving. Which was high, knowing that they wouldn't have to deal with him or his Chairborne Garatrooper regime any more.
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,023
- Points
- 1,010
Paracowboy, my hats off to you. You are speaking on current fact not fiction.
You obiously have first hand info on the way things are going para, did MND give you guys in 3 RCR any other good tid bits?
I know the next several DP1 Infantry courses are predominantly ear marked for 3 RCR because of the guys you sent over to CDN SPEC OPS REGT.
You obiously have first hand info on the way things are going para, did MND give you guys in 3 RCR any other good tid bits?
I know the next several DP1 Infantry courses are predominantly ear marked for 3 RCR because of the guys you sent over to CDN SPEC OPS REGT.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Rick,ArmyRick said:
dude, I left 3 RCR waaay back in 'ought-3. Right after we got back from Kabul. I'm in 3 PPCLI now.
MND gave us a whole song and dance, none of which any of us believe for a minute. Lots o' crap about a seperate Airborne BN, in addition to CSOR, with the Air assets to make it work. Beefing up CPC. 3 more Infantry BNs IN ADDITION to filling out the existing BNs, AND the CSOR, AND a new Airborne BN, AND amphibious infantry capabilities on each coast. :
He also babbled on inanely about how them bad ol' moo-lahs, over there in Afghanny-stan, is tellin' them Tally-ban to kill us all, and otherwise managed to display his posterior. Some of the troops were getting excited, but none of us with more than 4 years service bought into any of it. He's blowing smoke and talking crap.
Canada is not going to have a capable Airborne unit for several years yet. And as we go on without it, that's one more arrow we don't have in our quiver. Which is a shame.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
When the MND visited Petawawa, he said all the same things as paracowboy mentioned above.ArmyRick said:
He also specifically said that 3 RCR will keep a para capability for the forseeable future.
One thing I am not sure is a good thing, is the renaming CPC to the new name (which escapes me right now). If it becomes the SME center for all things para, airmobile and mountain ops, then it could be an improvement. But I see it as another place where they take all the best soldiers (instructors) out of the Bns for a couple yrs.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 60
I've been wondering this for a long time and despite searching here and reading several threads, I never came up with an official reason as to why (after the CAR was disbanded) anything and everything that said 'airborne' was removed.
I'm assuming the reason is because with the media coverage back in the early 90s, the word 'airborne' became a negative term in the public's eye and the government wanted it gone completely. I remember in 96, I spent a few weeks in Petawawa and I was told that wearing a CAR or airborne t-shirt on the base was not permitted. The CABC was then moved and called the CPC where new t-shirts were made (old-style CABC-logo wings with ex-coelis written underneath).
Disbanding the CAR is one thing but why call the parachute school something different from what it was before? Or, not call the para coys 'airborne' coys?
Thanks.
edit. Ah crap, I thought I was in the 'infantry' forum. Mods, if you want, you can move this.
I'm assuming the reason is because with the media coverage back in the early 90s, the word 'airborne' became a negative term in the public's eye and the government wanted it gone completely. I remember in 96, I spent a few weeks in Petawawa and I was told that wearing a CAR or airborne t-shirt on the base was not permitted. The CABC was then moved and called the CPC where new t-shirts were made (old-style CABC-logo wings with ex-coelis written underneath).
Disbanding the CAR is one thing but why call the parachute school something different from what it was before? Or, not call the para coys 'airborne' coys?
Thanks.
edit. Ah crap, I thought I was in the 'infantry' forum. Mods, if you want, you can move this.
Similar threads
