Do We need designated EOD units (or sub-units)?
- Thread starter Spr.Earl
- Start date
E
EODSpr
Guest
As we are now more serious about EOD and IEDD on current deployed missions established EOD units would be a benefit (Although how they would look and be organized could spawn huge debate). On previous missions our main focus was on ordnance disposal as opposed to RSP and disposal. We rarely if ever deployed the personnel with the tools to conduct RSP and have never in my knowledge deployed IEDD assets until Afghanistan. We have always had the training an skill sets but lacked the tools and mandate to be employed to the fullest capability.
We do not have a domestic mandate to conduct IEDD operations in Canada outside of defence establishments except for in support of civil agency's on request. Military ordinance disposal is conducted by the remaining EOD Centres in Canada. Due to the limited number of current qualified techs and the fact that they all have another primary trade I see it as unlikely that this will change unless there is a policy shift.
That being said there are good things happening in this field in the CF in the way of long overdue equipment replacement and upgrades with a larger scale of issue. There are talks at unit levels about the way ahead and what changes should be made. As for CF policy and what the big picture is we will have to wait and see.
E45
Chimo!
We do not have a domestic mandate to conduct IEDD operations in Canada outside of defence establishments except for in support of civil agency's on request. Military ordinance disposal is conducted by the remaining EOD Centres in Canada. Due to the limited number of current qualified techs and the fact that they all have another primary trade I see it as unlikely that this will change unless there is a policy shift.
That being said there are good things happening in this field in the CF in the way of long overdue equipment replacement and upgrades with a larger scale of issue. There are talks at unit levels about the way ahead and what changes should be made. As for CF policy and what the big picture is we will have to wait and see.
E45
Chimo!
McG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 2,383
- Points
- 1,160
I believe APOLLO had an EOD section (although we had not yet won the tactical vs controlled environment fight with the Ammo Tech world), and the Engr Sp Tp on ATHENA is primarily EOD (including IEDD and RCIEDD). I think it is very important that we develop this capability within the regiments and that we dedicate specific personnel within our TO&E.
The UK has dedicated EOD units that are seen as force assets. Yes, a Fd Tp does & should have to capability to do EOD. However, the British argument is that in an environment with a high threat of UXO, IED, and other explosive hazards, responding to these tasks can overwhelm the available time and resources of the Fd Tps. A purpose organized EOD element can respond to these needs and keep the Fd Tps free to do more important jobs.
My recommendation would be a Mine Warfare & Explosive Devices (MWED) Tp in each CER. I've thought that our MCM sections should have been larger and with more specialised kit. When combined with our EOD/CMD needs, I think there is sufficient employment for a full troop. This one Tp could generate MCM or EOD & IEDD sections to support battle group deployments. For a regimental deployment, it could be structured as either EOD/IEDD, or MCM, or a split of both.
The UK has dedicated EOD units that are seen as force assets. Yes, a Fd Tp does & should have to capability to do EOD. However, the British argument is that in an environment with a high threat of UXO, IED, and other explosive hazards, responding to these tasks can overwhelm the available time and resources of the Fd Tps. A purpose organized EOD element can respond to these needs and keep the Fd Tps free to do more important jobs.
My recommendation would be a Mine Warfare & Explosive Devices (MWED) Tp in each CER. I've thought that our MCM sections should have been larger and with more specialised kit. When combined with our EOD/CMD needs, I think there is sufficient employment for a full troop. This one Tp could generate MCM or EOD & IEDD sections to support battle group deployments. For a regimental deployment, it could be structured as either EOD/IEDD, or MCM, or a split of both.
E
EODSpr
Guest
The kit is coming and we are currently getting a larger number of qualified troops due to the recent deployments in Afghanistan. Lets hope that this leads to some sort of permanent organisation within the Regts. I agree that this would be the way to go in order to maintain the skill sets that we have.
I think some of this will depend on wether or not the CF intends on being able to deploy this asset on future missions or if they view Afghanistan as being a unique situation. I have never liked depending on foreign IEDD assets on previous missions because the response time if needed is to long (usually they are not co-located in our camps).
It seems to from recent indications that more people in the chain are viewing this as important as well, so lets hope this leads to bigger and better things.
E45
Chimo!
I think some of this will depend on wether or not the CF intends on being able to deploy this asset on future missions or if they view Afghanistan as being a unique situation. I have never liked depending on foreign IEDD assets on previous missions because the response time if needed is to long (usually they are not co-located in our camps).
It seems to from recent indications that more people in the chain are viewing this as important as well, so lets hope this leads to bigger and better things.
E45
Chimo!
AmmoTech90
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 854
- Points
- 1,010
Just jumping in as Ammo Tech, but I would say the Army needs to re-establish EOD/IED units. The Navy and Air Force never got rid of them. It's nice that kit is being procured and fielded, and the training tempo is picking up at the school but if you don't have a unit, you don't have a budget to sustain that training. That being said, you can do no cost training, in Gagetown we do it, and quite effectively I think. I did invite Engineers along, but never got a response. PM me if you have a legitimate inquiry about it.
As far as the controlled/un-controlled environment responsibilities go, I hate that, because it ends up a cap badge fight that doesn't have a whole lot of application in the real world. I realize that BMD, breeching mines and disarming booby traps is part of the role of the 043s, thats what you guys train for and have the most experience with. You guys are going to be on the frontlines where quick solutions are required and thats what you do. As far as RSP goes, I have my doubts about doing an RSP in a full out shooting environment regardless of your trade. If a RSP is required I would think that an element of control environment over your environment would be required. As several medics have brought up on other threads, winning the firefight is the first step in first aid. That would apply to EOD too. If you are available, and have the tools and training, then you should be able to be tasked with the mission.
The new EOD DOADs have helped to outline tasks and responsibilities, but there is still some conflict between them and DDIOs that has to be ironed out. I think that a combined unit would work best, Engineers and ATs, and if large enough Clearance Divers and whatever Taz's are called now. We both have our strengths in different areas and field and we should try to compliment each other rather than shut each other out.
As far as the controlled/un-controlled environment responsibilities go, I hate that, because it ends up a cap badge fight that doesn't have a whole lot of application in the real world. I realize that BMD, breeching mines and disarming booby traps is part of the role of the 043s, thats what you guys train for and have the most experience with. You guys are going to be on the frontlines where quick solutions are required and thats what you do. As far as RSP goes, I have my doubts about doing an RSP in a full out shooting environment regardless of your trade. If a RSP is required I would think that an element of control environment over your environment would be required. As several medics have brought up on other threads, winning the firefight is the first step in first aid. That would apply to EOD too. If you are available, and have the tools and training, then you should be able to be tasked with the mission.
The new EOD DOADs have helped to outline tasks and responsibilities, but there is still some conflict between them and DDIOs that has to be ironed out. I think that a combined unit would work best, Engineers and ATs, and if large enough Clearance Divers and whatever Taz's are called now. We both have our strengths in different areas and field and we should try to compliment each other rather than shut each other out.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I like that MWED Tp idea. It would keep up the EOD skills ala ADR, and provide a ready to use resource at the unit level. As for RSP in the F ech environment, never happen for the above mentioned reasons. Peacekeeping ops etc, yes. Combat, no. AmmoTech90 nails it pretty good, I think. Sappers are just going to be too darned busy to worry about stuff in the rear. WATC has its EOD Sect and a number of the sappers here have worked on the team. One of them just got the Bronze Star recently. 
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 260
I would prefer to see any EOD unit formed outside of the Regiment. If the "EOD Troop" (or whatever it's called) belongs to the Regiment, it gives the regiment the ability to move pers around every time their is a re-org. It would become such a d#@ *&@k trying to keep qualified pers and maintain currency (it's bad enough trying to keep qualified drivers around let alone EOD pers). If it was estblished as a separate unit, their would be more scope for continuity.
When in Borden a couple of years ago their was talk of the Army forming some EOD units, one in each Area. The concept had Engineers and a few Ammo Techs combined and would be located in bigeer cities (such as Edmonton). They would also have formal links to the local police departments and would be placed in the duty rotation. This would allow for real world calls to maintain expertise. i haven't heard anything recently, so can only assume the idea has died, but if it's ever resurrected I plan on being at the front of the line.
When in Borden a couple of years ago their was talk of the Army forming some EOD units, one in each Area. The concept had Engineers and a few Ammo Techs combined and would be located in bigeer cities (such as Edmonton). They would also have formal links to the local police departments and would be placed in the duty rotation. This would allow for real world calls to maintain expertise. i haven't heard anything recently, so can only assume the idea has died, but if it's ever resurrected I plan on being at the front of the line.
The importance of IEOD units have over the last 20 years grown and now while we find ourselves in the post 9/11 phase it will become a major player also in the urban warfare situation.
It was our experience in South Africa that the same techniques used in the battle field was eventually brought to play during terrorist activities in the urban environment.
In Israel this same phenomena has emerged and I see every day how this devil is very effectively making the lives of those serving in Iraq very hard and dangerous.
The introduction of suicide bombers have escalated the threat/danger level to a point where suspicious people are being searched using remote controlled robots.
I think like in SA the most experienced EOD operators will be trained as IEOD operators ,as such they have the capability to operate both in the field and in support of anti-terrorist units during urban warfare or as members of the Homeland Security system.
Luckily Canada until now has not experienced the effects of terrorism on its own soil,however this could change overnight.Although some of the members on this site believe that by taking the battle over-seas they will be able to avoid attracts on Canadian soil .
This will be a costly illusion as it is your enemies (whoever they are !) that will decide where the battle field will be fought.
It is up to you to be prepared to fight the enemy even on his own terms.... and win !
The cross training of EOD operators to become IEOD/EOD operators is in my experience a very good thing, and this in its self will ensure a better integrated and more flexible force.
All of the above is part of the total requirements to consolidate,integrate armed forces to meet the new demands of a post 9/11 era.This will make your forces smaller and through more effective man power utilization will make the Canadian Defence Force a more cost effective organisation.
IEOD is here to stay,the sooner you prepare for the worst ,be alert and hope for the best,the better it will be for all those currently enjoying the safety living in a democracy in Canada.
Ships of wood,Men of steel !
Navy Divers " Bubbles Up!"
It was our experience in South Africa that the same techniques used in the battle field was eventually brought to play during terrorist activities in the urban environment.
In Israel this same phenomena has emerged and I see every day how this devil is very effectively making the lives of those serving in Iraq very hard and dangerous.
The introduction of suicide bombers have escalated the threat/danger level to a point where suspicious people are being searched using remote controlled robots.
I think like in SA the most experienced EOD operators will be trained as IEOD operators ,as such they have the capability to operate both in the field and in support of anti-terrorist units during urban warfare or as members of the Homeland Security system.
Luckily Canada until now has not experienced the effects of terrorism on its own soil,however this could change overnight.Although some of the members on this site believe that by taking the battle over-seas they will be able to avoid attracts on Canadian soil .
This will be a costly illusion as it is your enemies (whoever they are !) that will decide where the battle field will be fought.
It is up to you to be prepared to fight the enemy even on his own terms.... and win !
The cross training of EOD operators to become IEOD/EOD operators is in my experience a very good thing, and this in its self will ensure a better integrated and more flexible force.
All of the above is part of the total requirements to consolidate,integrate armed forces to meet the new demands of a post 9/11 era.This will make your forces smaller and through more effective man power utilization will make the Canadian Defence Force a more cost effective organisation.
IEOD is here to stay,the sooner you prepare for the worst ,be alert and hope for the best,the better it will be for all those currently enjoying the safety living in a democracy in Canada.
Ships of wood,Men of steel !
Navy Divers " Bubbles Up!"
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 410
Yes the Navy and Air Force have and still do have standing EOD/IED Units.
I think with in the Army each Brigade that we should have at least one designated EOD/IED Unit that trains constanlty at this task and also be able to be the training Cadre for those who have that ticket punch to bring them up to speed but also all those with the Qual.'s also serve with in that Unit
on a rotation of 3yrs and the max of 5 depending on the man.
To spread our knowlege.
I think with in the Army each Brigade that we should have at least one designated EOD/IED Unit that trains constanlty at this task and also be able to be the training Cadre for those who have that ticket punch to bring them up to speed but also all those with the Qual.'s also serve with in that Unit
on a rotation of 3yrs and the max of 5 depending on the man.
To spread our knowlege.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Brigade has access to EOD services through the established EOD Centres. There are a number of people (Sapper and Ammo-tech) qualified HC (IED). You get that capability through the EOD Centre. Once you get it you have to maintain that qualification through requal training. That way you stay up to speed. The primary focus of the centres (based on EOD 24 Chilliwack) was IED. Weekly Thurs mornings were spent training and formal links did exist with the RCMP. Being placed in a duty rotation sounds good, but I can't see the chain buying that. All them PC managers would collapse of heart failure. It's only been since '91 that the HB side has gained more recognition outside of the ADR (Airfield Damage Repair) world. It ramped right up when 1 CER went to Iraq/Kuwait and had to deal with the horde of UXO. 2 CER and 5 RGC followed and pow! it was suddenly on everyones mind. Until then it was a small part of our QL 5A course. Now we have BMD, HB qual pers all over the place. IMHO, operationally, Bde doesn't need an advanced IED capability.
"The importance of IEOD units have over the last 20 years grown and now while we find ourselves in the post 9/11 phase it will become a major player also in the urban warfare situation..."
Actually it has always been important. People just realize it now. Basques, Irish, Palestininans, etc have been doing this for alot longer than 20 years. That information is shared throughout NATO so we all learn the tricks of the various bad actors out there. The Landmine database is a form of that cooperation. So are EOD "B"s.
"...Luckily Canada until now has not experienced the effects of terrorism on its own soil,however this could change overnight..."
We have. They were called the FLQ, and they were nipped quite early on. And yes, we learned those lessons real well. As for other incidents, you'll have to get that out of the RCMP/EDU. They have been handling that quietly for years, and quiet it shall remain.
I like it that Res Tp is doing EOD. Is it just adding another section or completely changing over? You guys are living in interesting times.
Congrats on the pay-raise.
"The importance of IEOD units have over the last 20 years grown and now while we find ourselves in the post 9/11 phase it will become a major player also in the urban warfare situation..."
Actually it has always been important. People just realize it now. Basques, Irish, Palestininans, etc have been doing this for alot longer than 20 years. That information is shared throughout NATO so we all learn the tricks of the various bad actors out there. The Landmine database is a form of that cooperation. So are EOD "B"s.
"...Luckily Canada until now has not experienced the effects of terrorism on its own soil,however this could change overnight..."
We have. They were called the FLQ, and they were nipped quite early on. And yes, we learned those lessons real well. As for other incidents, you'll have to get that out of the RCMP/EDU. They have been handling that quietly for years, and quiet it shall remain.
I like it that Res Tp is doing EOD. Is it just adding another section or completely changing over? You guys are living in interesting times.
Congrats on the pay-raise.
E
EODSpr
Guest
Right now Bde does not have access to EOD centres as the Army dropped this some time ago. BMD is now CMD (Conventional Munitions Disposal) and all BMD qualified pers are required to do a conversion course. Since the Army is now into IEDD in Afghanistan and are learning valuable lessons it would be a crime to not establish an IEDD grouping in the Army in some way shape and form or risk letting these lessons be lost and the skills atrophy. IED's are playing a large part in the hotspots of the world and that will not change so we should remain ready to meet this threat while on deployment and at home.
E45
Chimo!
E45
Chimo!
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
How many centres does the Army "control" that are on LFC bases? So, for example, 1 CMBG could not request through LFWA the services of the EOD team here in Wainwright? How is it different than requesting any other type of support outside of Bde? The skills are already atrophying from not filling the HC (or whatever they're calling it these days) courses when they came down. Preventing qualified pers from requalifiying cost us some more. Sappers got posted into CFSME and had the opportunity to join EOD 24. It was a great way to get and maintain the qualification as well as get a butt load of experience. Sure people would whine about time being taken, Bloggins is off swanning again, but hey, that happens everywhere right? Is pers posted to CFSME/FETS not able to do the same thing since the move? If no, then why not? Did anybody ask? What about any other place? They do here in WATC. The Regiments are a different situation all together of course, but they would benefit from having these people posted back in, no? So it begs the question, "Why is it so crucial to have an IED capability at Battle Group level?"
AmmoTech90
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 854
- Points
- 1,010
SprCForr,
There are no longer any EOD teams on Army bases like in the old days. They had firm numbers of pers and were manned by volunteers on a secondary duty basis. What has happened is that the Base Commanders are responsible for dealing with UXO/IEDs as required by DAOD 8000-1. So the Base Commander does what he has to meet those responsibilities and local organizations evolve, usually centered around the now defunct EOD Centre. If the Base Commander doesn't have qualified pers in his establishment then the request is kicked up Area HQ. However they have no budgets or training mandate other than staying current with basic charges.
This isn't a suitable forum for discussion of our IED response so I wont get into that.
Oh and by the way CHIMO, I've done stocktakings on Engineer units, and you cant count your own ordnance
There are no longer any EOD teams on Army bases like in the old days. They had firm numbers of pers and were manned by volunteers on a secondary duty basis. What has happened is that the Base Commanders are responsible for dealing with UXO/IEDs as required by DAOD 8000-1. So the Base Commander does what he has to meet those responsibilities and local organizations evolve, usually centered around the now defunct EOD Centre. If the Base Commander doesn't have qualified pers in his establishment then the request is kicked up Area HQ. However they have no budgets or training mandate other than staying current with basic charges.
This isn't a suitable forum for discussion of our IED response so I wont get into that.
Oh and by the way CHIMO, I've done stocktakings on Engineer units, and you cant count your own ordnance
AmmoTech90
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 854
- Points
- 1,010
Yep, I know, and it's too bad. I've never had any trouble working with Engineers. Where I think the problem lies is in confusion over responsibilities. We never had deployed EOD units prior to Afghanistan so there was little work together except on courses and occasions like range clearances, etc. I know that when the EOD Centre in Gagetown was open we invited pers from 4 ESR to join, but they wouldn't/couldn't because they could not guaruntee their place in the duty rotation due to the possibility of deploying. Doesn't show a whole lot of flexibility on either side, but to an extent understandable.
Well, gotta go eat. ILQ is such fun.
Well, gotta go eat. ILQ is such fun.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
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?
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?
Similar threads
