We are driving good soldiers out of the Army

[Scoobie Newbie]

Well devil39 I hope that there won't be a time when we need both at the same time and if so the manpower/equip is in place.  P.S.  You'd be surprised as to how many made up jobs there are in my BN and the personal that left TOW, Mortars, PNR's rarely ended up in the colonies, I mean rifle companies.

 

[devil39]

Well devil39 I hope that there won't be a time when we need both at the same time and if so the manpower/equip is in place.   P.S.   You'd be surprised as to how many made up jobs there are in my BN and the personal that left TOW, Mortars, PNR's rarely ended up in the colonies, I mean rifle companies.

I might be somewhat surprised... but I doubt it.   I have just spent 6.5 of the last 7 years in Bn.    I certainly am willing to listen though.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

OC's (cmbt support) LAV gunner/LAV driver/LAV CC, but what no LAV nor will he get one anytime soon.  I could go on but its getting late.

 

[devil39]

I guess it is what you are established for.

However, Cbt Sp should have the full complement of LAV quals in my opinion.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

I think all members should have some LAV component regardless of station job.  That said only Sigs has them (9er, 9A, 0) and the simulators aren't up to keep current.

 

[McG]

So if I read that right your saying that there is still no one manning the mortar or doing PNR specific tasks because the Artillery and Eng don't have the manpower?

The Op Tempo for the Gunners has been low enough that they could have rerolled a gun troop to mortar to meet the needs of recent missions.   The Op temp for Engineers has been far to high for the corps to meets its commitments and fill jobs formerly done by 9 pioneer platoons and 3 assault troops. (http://army.ca/forums/threads/2128.0.html)

OC's (cmbt support) LAV gunner/LAV driver/LAV CC, but what no LAV nor will he get one anytime soon. I could go on but its getting late.

Well, with only recce and sigs left in Cbt Sp, I understand that Army is now examining the need for a Cbt Sp Coy.   Cut the Coy HQ PYs and put the rest directly under the COs control.

 

[Lance Wiebe]

I think all members should have some LAV component regardless of station job.   That said only Sigs has them (9er, 9A, 0) and the simulators aren't up to keep current.

Not trying to hijack the thread, but the simulator statement caught my eye.  Can you clarify?  Do you mean that the sims cannot keep personnel current, or that they are not "up", ie they are broken?

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

If used enough they should keep the troops (except drivers) current.  Nothing like doing it live though.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Just as an after thought McG, the reason I believe we need a redundancy of PNR's (eng) and Mortar man (Arty) can be illustrated in the following.  During a FIBUA ex in Edmonton at the old barracks none of the Eng det made it to the objective without having to be re keyed and the only people allowed to blow walls were Eng and Pioneers (this was prior to PNR disbandment).  In a lot of cases the Pnr det or members who had the pnr course end up blowing the walls as the hallways were either kill zones or impassable.  With this redundant factor we were able to carry on with the mission with little delay.

 

[Kirkhill]

Think you should get that info out to Human Resources ASP CFL.  Perhaps they can run a recruiting drive around it. 

Sounds like just the stuff to boost enrolment. ;D

 

[KevinB]

They haven't been put together since we just moved to Shilo.   If used enough they should keep the troops (except drivers) current.   Nothing like doing it live though.

The LAV sim is not a great system - but it does keep the Gunner/CC "in the game" until they can get out and do it live.

IF they were to post 041's and 021's into an Inf Bn to keep the CBt Spt functions alive - I would not have the same ammoutn of animosity that I current have to this restructuring.

Unfortunately due to the nature of the recent deployments we are getting into a poor mindeset and simply assuming that we will have enough of these arms sitting around at the 031 beck and call.  If we deployed in a Bde or larger nature we would receive a nasty kick in the ass when they capabilities were needed and unavailable.

Given the nature of the plug and play system I woudl argue it would have been wiser to pull the LAV's from the Bn's and use 011's as Dvr/CC/Gnr's if the LAV was needed (3R22eR did this with a Coy for RotoI)  This would free up 031's for the Pnr and Mortar roles and as well they could be used as 'normal' 031's if the tube etc were not needed.

 

[jlshone]

Impressively thoughtful remarks, Mark C.; thanks.

This issue of a back-end solution to a front-end problem - that is, low manning leading to hyper-specialisation, plug-and-play, deterioration of unit identity & cohesion, and a stripping of the authority normally tied to the responsibility of command - is also a problem in the Militia.   On the up side, hemorrhaging of the Reg F can lead to some experienced people joining the P Res.   Whether they will ever become true Class A reservists is, however, another question.

That being said, the trend we are seeing is a continued split between the force generators and the force employers, and this is not good.   One reason it is not good is that it is incoherent.   An example is Land Force Reserve Restructure (LFRR).   This project can't figure out whether it exists to remove redundancies from the Militia, increase the Militia's capabilities in the area of domestic operations, or provide capabilities to the deployable field force.   This lack of coherence is evident in the fact that LFRR seeks to: (1) increase the size/manning of select infantry units (with a view to vital point security) while (2) re-roling armoured units as CBRN recce - without the equipment or mandate to conduct such operations - and (3) standing up new capabilities, specifically PsyOps, which are wholly deployable assets (we can't use PsyOps on Canadians!!).   How this seems rational to anyone is a mystery to me.

 

[McG]

. . . curious here, did a rifle coy HQ deploy with the infantry platoons or did we stick to the original Ottawa plan of having platoons dedicated to specific tasks and under different leadership through the NCE and the Recce Sqn? 

Too answer my own question, it seems that we did stick to the original plan (or something like it) for the most part.  However a Coy HQ was established in theater at the expense of the platoons.

Even more that not basing the mission on a Bn, I think this would have pushed any infantry officer's buttons.

 

[KevinB]

Originally we had a Platoon that was over 60 pers. (the D&S Pl) - It had 6 sections...  When Ottawa chopped the OP Sections from the 3rd (20 guys gone) it went down to the 4 section Pl that was deemed nec to operate the gate.

The QRF PL was a standard PL as was the late approved Mission Draw Down Pl.  Now once in theatre it became obvious that the PL's would have to rotate or the Gate PL would become psychotic within a few weeks.

Coy Hq was setup for no one on the NSE or NCE side was eqipped to do our CQ or other HQ tasks.


All of B Coy belongs to NCE now (phew)
however it does not belong to KMNB