Canadian Special Operations Regiment (CSOR)

[Combat Sailor]

Hey, I am in the same boat, just got back from the field, and have to do my PT Test next week, not alot of time for training. I have a buddy who was on the first course that went through. He said that you really have to emphasize on the ruck marches. I spoke with the CSOR guys when they were doing their recruiting tour, and they said that you have a chance to improve or grow as the course progresses. If you can pass the PT Test, you should not have a hard time on the course. Good luck, maybe I will see you in February.

 

[Rhibwolf]

Its a link in the CSOR website.  http://cansofcom-comfoscan.mil.ca/EN/noticeofintent_e.asp
once you fill it in, they should contact you to tell you what you need to do next - like see the BPSO, etc.

 

[The_Falcon]

Does anyone know what the notice of intent to join CSOR is? It's not an actual application to the unit, but what exactly is it?

When I went to an info session, they said it was basically so they could keep tabs on you, say you apply, but don't get around to booking the test or interview or something, they call you up to say "Hey whats going on, is their something that has kept you from progressing (ie injury, family situation changed, etc.)"

 

[Dilea_Gu_Bas]

The word I received is that,

CLS is screening all CSOR applicants from Land Force to ensure that we maintain our ability to meet our operational commitments overseas. Reg F Battalions are already hurting, especially with everyone releasing upon return.

Essentially the SOBQ course dates are constantly being pushed back. Hope those PT tests don't lapse.

 

[little jim]

If I was going to start a rumour about course dates I would say that there is a course starting on 10 Apr (Tuesday – it is a long weekend) and the second one soon after the end of the first – prob early  Oct 07.

As for the PT scores - another rumour might be that everyone is doing the PT test during the first week of the course.

 

[AIC_2K5]

I think 3 yrs is a minimum, and that you can stay after that.

I don't really think that will be the arrangement. Logic suggests it will end up something like how the U.S. Army Rangers are organized.

Pers who are selected would serve with the unit for 3 years and each of the DA companies will rotate through a managed readiness basis. After the 3 year term is up and due to high op tempo, pers will be released to their previous units and may or may not be posted back to the unit later in their careers.

 

[Armymedic]

Pers who are selected would serve with the unit for 3 years and each of the DA companies will rotate through a managed readiness basis. After the 3 year term is up and due to high op tempo, pers will be released to their previous units and may or may not be posted back to the unit later in their careers.

Logic says you are right of of 'ere. Think about what you are saying. First mistake is CSOR does not = US Army Rangers.

Unless the Army is to create a new occupation for CSOR, then members will have to leave regularly in order to develop & get promoted in their occupation.

The CF (not the army...CANSOF is not "army") did that for assaulters, why not same for Cat 1 in CSOR? Also as a separate CANSOF regiment, would they not be able to promote within their unit as posns open?

 

[McG]

The CF did that for assaulters, why not same for Cat 1 in CSOR? Also as a separate CANSOF regiment, would they not be able to promote within their unit as posns open?

It is possible, that is why I suggested it was possible.  However, the CF would then have to answer the question: after what time & what number of promotions, as a CSOR MSOID in CANSOFCOM, would a solder/sailor/airman be so out of touch with his/her initial occupation that a formal OT would be required in order to return to that occupation.

 

[AIC_2K5]

Logic says you are right of of 'ere. Think about what you are saying. First mistake is CSOR does not = US Army Rangers.

I didn't say CSOR was like Army Rangers, in fact I disagree with that statement. There are definetly similarities that I can see, but they are not one in the same.

As for pers rotation, watch and shoot I geuss.

 

[devil39]

Logic says you are right of of 'ere. Think about what you are saying. First mistake is CSOR does not = US Army Rangers.

SMMT,

In your opinion what does, or what should, CSOR equate to?

 

[Armymedic]

In your opinion what does, or what should, CSOR equate to?

CSOR, by definition, is a tier 2 SF unit. I would have to say more along the line of Navy Seals, and Army SF, resembling the Aussie 4 RAR. I don't know enough about foreign SF units to make an educated comparison to other countries. But they are definitely not young, underexperienced, and over-disciplined US Rangers.

But I would imagine by working closely with the JTF2 in the next couple yrs, they will make their own "name" and earn their own place for we unwashed masses .

 

[McG]

CSOR, by definition, is a tier 2 SF unit.

By who's definition?

But they are definitely not young, underexperienced, and over-disciplined US Rangers.

All the mean things you can say about the US Rangers aside, that organization does provide a certain capability to the US SOF community.  If CSOR does not do this, then there is no organization in Canada which can.  The Army's light battalions are being mechanized, so this will not exist as a fall back.

 

[Weinie]

  The tiers construct is an American one, and doesn't really apply for CSOR. The org will have both a DA and SF capability. A Rangers comparison is fitting: think 75th Ranger Bn and its' role within USSOCOM.

 

[Journeyman]

Have a look at the testimony of Col Barr, Commander CANSOFCOM, in Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence, 27 November 2006

Senator Banks: It [CSOR] is a regiment, and I gather that it would never, in the conventional sense, be in the field as a regiment.
Is that correct?
Col. Barr: I would not rule it out.

Senator Banks: It would be in a force-on-force situation.
Col. Barr: It would be rare. In most of the force employment models, most of the scenarios we foresee, it probably would have a company group or, what we call, a direct action company deployed. It might have elements of its regimental headquarters with it and would be part of an overall special operations task force, but I would not rule it out. It could, in extreme, do a task that might be associated with a ranger battalion in the United States.

Senator Banks: That is what I am thinking. If you have 750 people, who are trained to a standard that is different—if not
higher than other regiments — when a rotation comes up, there would be a great temptation to use them as a unit. However, you say that would be rare, if at all.
Col. Barr: I believe it would be rare. If it is treated as just another conventional unit — not that there is anything wrong with conventional units, I commanded 3PPCLI and am proud of it — but if it was thrown at a conventional task, then we would have, frankly, made a mistake. Due to the training, investment and selection, if we were to put it to a task for which someone else was able, then that is probably not a task for our special operations forces.

--------
[further on in the transcript]
Col. Barr: I can understand that analogy, but it is not perfect. For certain tasks, JTF2 is clearly the best capability we have. Your analogy of 100 per cent for a hostage rescue, let us say, is absolutely right and the Canadian Special Operations Regiment would bring a supporting role to something like a hostage rescue scenario.

However, particularly in operations abroad, there are some types of operations where it would be better to have the Canadian Special Operations Regiment, given its training, its insertion capability and its size than throw a small element of JTF2 at a particular problem. In the main, the Canadian Special Operations Regiment enables special operations and, specifically, JTF2; thus, JTF2 can focus on the precise tasks for which they are so well selected and trained. However, particularly in out-of-area operations, we see that the Canadian Special Operations Regiment would be the more appropriate organization to put to the task.

My emphasis.

The tiers construct is an American one, and doesn't really apply for CSOR.

By virtue of our ABCA membership, we commonly use "tiers" in discussions amongst allies.

 

[KevinB]

Secondly in terms of itself CANSOFCOM does refer to its assets as Tier I, TierII capability...

 

[McG]

Col. Barr: It would be rare. In most of the force employment models, most of the scenarios we foresee, it probably would have a company group or, what we call, a direct action company deployed. It might have elements of its regimental headquarters with it and would be part of an overall special operations task force, but I would not rule it out. It could, in extreme, do a task that might be associated with a ranger battalion in the United States.

It seems to me that Col Barr is saying that the Regt will operate as companies & not as a battalion.  So it will not get the task of a US Ranger battalion, but it might get such company tasks.

Secondly in terms of itself CANSOFCOM does refer to its assets as Tier I, TierII capability...

Without providing a run-down of US interpretation, how does CANSOFCOM define these tiers?

 

[Sf2]

I couldn't find any official CANSOFCOM defintions.  Its not up to them to define.  Its a common system considered and used by many countries.

However, if you still want a rundown from a canadian source, consider this quote from the Canadian Military Journal, Vol 5, No 3:

And, it is not just anyone who is capable of such feats.
The focus on the individual, and specifically his capability, is
not surprising when one considers the rigorous selection
process and the performance standards achieved. As such,
SOF can be broken down into roughly three tiers that
correspond both to the rigour of the selection standards and
to the role equated with each level. For example, ‘Tier One’
SOF consists of primarily ‘black operations’ or counter
terrorism. Normally, only 10 to 15 percent of those
attempting selection are successful. What makes this number
so impressive is that a large percentage of those trying out
are already second or third tier SOF members. Organizations
that fall into this category include the US 1st Special
Forces Operational Detachment (Delta), the German
Grenzschutzgruppe-9 (GSG 9), the Canadian Joint
Task Force-2 (JTF 2), and the Polish Commandos
(Grupa Reagowania Operacyjno Mobilnego) (GROM)
(Operational Mobile Response Group), to name but a few.

Tier Two SOF reflects those organizations that have a
selection pass rate of between 20 and 30 percent. They are
normally entrusted with high value tasks such as Strategic
Reconnaissance and Unconventional Warfare. It is at this
level that selection is separated from training because the
skill sets are considered so difficult that the testers are
looking only for attributes that cannot be inculcated.
The actual skills required can be taught later during the
training phase. Some examples include the American Special
Forces (also referred to as Green Berets), the US Navy
SEALs, and the British, Australian and New Zealand SAS.72

The final grouping, or ‘Tier Three’, consists of those
units, such as the American Rangers, that have a selection
success rate of 40 to 45 percent, and whose primary mission
is Direct Action. At this level, selection is mixed with
training. However, the quality control line is drawn here.
Generally, units below this line are not considered SOF.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I'm thinking that Tier 1 are the guys going in and doing the door kicking. Tier 2 are the 'cavalry' who provide cordon/ area ambush and other associated tasks that allow the Tier 1 guys to go in and do the business without having to look over their shoulders. If the mission calls for it, the Tier 2 support could be up to battalion size. I assume that we'll learn more about this, as a nation, once we get more experience in action.

The value of having a standing unit like CSOR that works with JTF on a regular basis is familiarity with procedures and personalities. For example, SF in Northern Ireland were regularly supported by police and other assets formed into a unit specifically designed to support SF operations. This avoided problems with security and familiarity with SOPs etc etc. This means that small and specialized units can stick their necks way out there with the back up they need to survive and achieve even more than planned. Even James Bond needed a support team.

Ultimately, a sound Tier 2 organization can make Tier 1 operations far more successful and broad ranging in terms of their effects.

 

[Weinie]

  You won't find a CANSOFCOM definition because they avoid the usage of the tier construct. As indicated in the post above from the Cdn Military Journal, the tiers definitions can not be applied to CANSOFCOM, because units can/do slip across the "boundaries" if you will, that have been defined in terms of role.   
 

 

[KevinB]

Honestly - I have no idea on how they are splitting hairs right now

JTF-2 is a Tier1 entity - it gets mentioned repeatedly now in the recruiting days. The fact it does all three tiering missions -- but the kicker - is the Domestic and Foreign CT and National Level Incident responce.

Depending upon which side of the CANSOFCOM coin your on, depends on how CSOR is viewed in the Tier.

From my own world view - I would view them as a TierII unit, by the TierII equated to Tier1 support.


  However that argument over Tier'age comes back up - in that by US def'n the TierIII unit (ie. USSF ) may (and in the SF does) have a back up TierII role, and even have emergency standalone TierI capability.)


I think the Tierage issue is a misnomer in many respects since it tries to divide warfare into a neat little pie.