• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Fleet Managment: Army plan for pre-positioning eqpt

bossi

Army.ca Veteran
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
410
Ironically, we used to have a "forward base" in Germany which met this purpose for deployments in that direction ... (but, it's been said we can thank ADM Fowler for unnecessarily closing it, and ham-stringing our Army in the process)

Army plans to stockpile gear at ports
Equipment overhaul: Move would cut response times for overseas missions
a journalist, CanWest News Service
Monday, July 05, 2004

OTTAWA - In an effort to better respond to an overseas crisis, the Canadian army will reduce the amount of equipment at its bases and instead stockpile gear and armoured vehicles for up to 2,000 soldiers at ports on the east and possibly west coasts.

As part of a major overhaul of how it handles its equipment, the army is in discussions to locate the equipment stash in Montreal or Halifax and possibly Vancouver. A similar stockpile to train up to 2,000 soldiers will be set up in Wainright, Alta., while enough transport trucks needed to help out in a domestic emergency will be located at installations across the country, such as Canadian Forces Base Petawawa in Ontario and CFB Edmonton in Alberta.

The positioning of equipment at the ports, already prepackaged for shipment, is part of the army's new plan to cut down on the time it takes to reach foreign war zones.

"Our experience, especially over the last five years, is that it's not the soldiers who have the readiness problem," said Col. Mike Kampman, the army's director of strategic planning. "It's the equipment."

Such delays, in everything from painting armoured vehicles to ensuring weapons were operating properly, slowed down the speed with which the army was able to respond to the first mission in Afghanistan, dubbed Operation Apollo, he noted.

Army and navy officers, as well as other defence officials, are in discussions about where the equipment stockpile should be located. The navy is keen on Halifax because of the easy access to its vessels.

The army is interested in Montreal because of its rail links and port facilities. But a potential drawback with that location is the need for icebreakers in the winter to open up the waterways so transport ships can get to the army supplies, Col. Kampman acknowledged.

The navy has also raised the possibility of putting a stockpile in Vancouver to deal with operations in the Pacific region, he said. "If an East Timor mission comes up again, you would like to project out of Vancouver as opposed to projecting out of Halifax or Montreal," Col. Kampman said.

If needed, warehouses could be leased to store the gear. Security arrangements would also have to be made for the storage depots.

Whatever the decision about the location of the stockpile, the equipment should be in place by late next year in time for the Canadian military to assume its duties as a NATO quick response force.

In addition, a stockpile of similar equipment will be sent to Canadian Forces Base Wainright so it could be used at a high-tech training centre being built there. Soldiers would train on that gear, identical to the equipment they would use overseas, and then ship out for their mission.

The stockpiling plan means equipment at bases across the country will be reduced somewhat.

One hurdle to get over is the expected resistance from troops to using or trusting equipment and vehicles that are not located right in their units. "There's this kind of mindset in the army that your unit owns the vehicle," Col. Kampman explained.

One way around that is to ensure the stockpiled vehicles and gear are in top shape and ready for action overseas. "We've got to build that trust and the only way you can do that is to focus maintenance resources on those stocks, to make sure they're ready to go when they need them," Col. Kampman said.

The army will also ensure that there are enough vehicles, mainly trucks, located at every base in the country to handle a domestic emergency. While armoured vehicles are not seen as being required in most situations, there would be the need for transport equipment to handle everything from moving medical supplies to the evacuation of communities in the event of an ice storm or large-scale forest fire.

Col. Kampman noted in many cases, the army does not need specialized military transport to deal with a domestic emergency. That job could be handled by commercial trucks that could be purchased by the army.

(Ottawa Citizen)
 
This sounds like a cluster-[you know] waiting to happen.
Lets see I sign for my Artillery piece in Buttland and hope the *keeners* who scored the storing job actually test fired it in ???Vancouver/Halifax???.
 
I like the plan to have prepositioned stores, as it is the only way to ensure the rapid reaction capability of any force. 82 nd Airborne has a complete brigade on perm standby ready for airborne deployment. Here are a couple things I would do instead...

Adequately kit out the training center in Wainwright, but continue with 1/3 or 1/2 strength of vehicles for training at the brigades, not a complete removal of all armoured/cbt vehicles away from the brigades. My reasoning is that only working on those same vehicle can you get good and really know the quirks of each veh type. Particularly useful for the actual drvivers and veh techs...

Preposition the one brigade worth of vehicle in a central location with adequate amount of railcars for complete immediate transport somewhere in Western ON, or Man (Shilo comes to mind). This allows a larger albiet cheaper storage area then Longe Point. Problem then is the 2-3 day rail transit to get those veh to port, and pers to load, unload the train and load the ships. But then that will guarentee servicablity of the vehs onto the ship.

In this way the military still only has to purchase equipment to fill the 4 reg force brigades (1 stand by, 1 Wainwright, and 2 split amoungst the 3 brigades, and Gagetown.)
 
bossi said:
Army plans to stockpile gear at ports
Equipment overhaul: Move would cut response times for overseas missions
a journalist, CanWest News Service
Monday, July 05, 2004

OTTAWA - In an effort to better respond to an overseas crisis, the Canadian army will reduce the amount of equipment at its bases and instead stockpile gear and armoured vehicles for up to 2,000 soldiers at ports on the east and possibly west coasts.

.... The navy has also raised the possibility of putting a stockpile in Vancouver to deal with operations in the Pacific region, he said. "If an East Timor mission comes up again, you would like to project out of Vancouver as opposed to projecting out of Halifax or Montreal," Col. Kampman said.

If needed, warehouses could be leased to store the gear. Security arrangements would also have to be made for the storage depots.

Whatever the decision about the location of the stockpile, the equipment should be in place by late next year in time for the Canadian military to assume its duties as a NATO quick response force.

In addition, a stockpile of similar equipment will be sent to Canadian Forces Base Wainright so it could be used at a high-tech training centre being built there. Soldiers would train on that gear, identical to the equipment they would use overseas, and then ship out for their mission.

I can think of something else ironic here. Anybody else notice that they're talking about leasing warehouses in Vancouver? Let's see... if Chilliwack were still around, they could have had equipment stored in Vancouver without leasing, plus security would also be "free" as it would be covered by already existing base security.

Additionally, the equipment would be available for training the people on the base. Any force wanted on standby for deployment could have been posted to Chilliwack and actually be training on the exact same equipment that they would deploy with.

Sadly, this all would have made too much sense. Aparently a warehouse is more desirable than a functional base. I can see it now:

"OTTAWA - In an effort to cut costs and response times, DND has announced that all equipment will be placed in warehouses. This will allow all bases to be closed at significant savings to the department, while creating a large pool of equipment to be permanently available for rapid deployment. A block of office towers will be leased in Ottawa's downtown core to house all the displaced administrative staff. This deployment strategy will also be applied to members of the combat trades, who will also be on standby for rapid deployment by being "stockpiled" in hotels beside the warehouses."   ::)

Ok, so I'm just ranting, but hopefully someone can take this plan for equipment on the West Coast, compare the practicality to if we actually still had a base there, make a very thick and heavy report out of the findings, then use said report to smack each and every Liberal MP who was in parliament when Chilliwack was closed repeatedly upside the head. (Anyone care to guess where I weigh in on the closing of CFB Chilliwack discussion?   ;D)
 
Sadly, this is not new information.   It is being called "fleet management."   A battalion can expect to keep enough equipment for a Coy and everyone will have to share it.   Annually, the brigade going into high readiness will go to Wainwright and exercise at the battalion and brigade levels.  

ags281,
We do have a base on the West coast.   CFB Esquimalt is even closer to the water that Chilliwack was.   Nobody will be allowed to use the operational stocks (it would reduce readiness).   Every now and again, a tech will go run things up, drive them around, and operate all parts to ensure they still work and to keep the seals wet.   That will be it.

I don't think this is the right way to go, but our government is not about to buy enough equipment for everyone to be at 100% for training, provide vehicles for the CMTC, and fill operational stocks.
 
Reference the discussion on prepositioning in Vancouver/Esquimalt -  isn't there some concern out here about earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes, that kind of thing?

How does that square with prepositioning out here?  Chilliwack might beat the tsunamis, it would be a toss-up on the earthquakes but a real bugger in the event Mt. Baker blows.

Or maybe we don't really need to worry about that stuff.
 
I think the idea has great merit and I'm surprised it has not been active.

Theres nothing worse than a unit given orders for a quick deployment, running around scrounging
for equipment, loading onto transport, getting over to the location, off-loading and setting all
the stuff up.  In scenarios with little planning, the cluster f**** happens with lost time, efficiency,
gear you wished you had brought, replacements, and parts management. 

With deployable equipment packages, the packing, transport, and parts management is built in
and it saves so much time especially in the last days of preparation and the first few days or weeks
of deployment.
 
I do know that I am new here, but I am rather confused with this idea.

Prepositioning stocks, wouldn't it just be easier to keep them with the brigades? Or detach battalion sized groups to the west and east coast with all of their equipment, using LFQA instead of LFAA for the east coast (Since the only LFAA regular infantry battalion is 2RCR right now). Plus, with this new maneuver center at Wainwright, aren't we looking at all of a Brigade's assets being siphoned off, either to readiness stocks or to Wainwright, where I'm sure since multiple units being trained up will make considerable use of the equipment all year round, causing more wear and tear.

So, will the government buy more equipment, say trucks for example for domestic emergencies, or will it remain at the current levels and just deploy them in smaller numbers everwhere? I'm sure with the current empasis on domestic operations, that more soft skinned vehicles and trucks are desirable to hold in reserve than heavy armored vehicles. Here's a question though, what happens if somthing bad happens in Ontario, rather far from the west coast and east coast (well not so far from the east) What does Ottawa plan on then, will the use equipment at the training center in Wainwright? Or willl the CMBG in ontario be called in at reduced strength of equipment?
 
This is one of the worst cr*p I have ever heard.

How sad.

All of our equipment will be either stockpiled, overseas, or in Wainwright.  No armoured vehicles at the units, as the article says, commercial vehicles can be used to move troops in Canada.

So now, we can entice troops to join, and then sit around playing pepper or euchre, because they'll have no equipment to work on or train on.

Deployments will mean two trips to Wainwright first, the first time to take equipment refresher training on vehicles, weapon stations, and comms.  The second time for your deployment training.

Canada does not have enough equipment to do as the US does.  The 3ID may use deployed equipment, but they also have equipment at their home base.

This should sound as a warning to all the way the government is heading.  First, delay expansion of the reserves.  Then place most of our equipment in storage.  Already we have Leopard tanks and CF-18's in "storage", where they are unusable.

Oh man, to have the reins of power for just a couple of years, most of those in NDHQ would be out looking for a new line of work.  Because they are truly incompetent as leaders of our Armed Forces......
 
Good Idea Lance,
Didn't the Col. heading up the project wear the same capbadge as you?  ;D

I concur on your point about the troops having little else to do, but play cards. I also believe that an "in case of emegerncy, break glass" military will negate us from being one of the most professional, to just average. Its all to conserve the mighty dollar.
 
I suspect that this 'forward deployment' of equipment requires a bigger army than Canada has.  I also imagine that the stored equipment has to be carefully maintained.  The logistics possibilities boggle my mind.  

What's the likelihood that this pre-positioned gear will really be closer to the next place Canadian troops have to deploy?  And what's the difference between carrying gear 8,000 miles as opposed to carrying it 4,000?  If the equipment is airmobile, the difference ought to be minimal.  For ship borne stuff, the time saved could be critical.  Do you have ships?

This sounds to me like one more step in the emasculation of the CF.  The Liberals want to have a 'stealth' military -- one tucked away in storage  -- not out running around shooting nasty guns and wasting precious natural resources.

Don't get me wrong -- pre-positioned equipment is useful.  I just think that the Canadian government is more interested in gradually eliminating the CF than any possible increase in efficiency.  Hope I'm wrong.

 
Lance Wiebe said:
All of our equipment will be either stockpiled, overseas, or in Wainwright.  No armoured vehicles at the units, as the article says, commercial vehicles can be used to move troops in Canada.
No.  Only most of our equipment will be in WATC or Op Stock.  There will be enough kit in each unit for a sub-unit to deploy to the field.

Old Guy said:
What's the likelihood that this pre-positioned gear will really be closer to the next place Canadian troops have to deploy?  And what's the difference between carrying gear 8,000 miles as opposed to carrying it 4,000?  If the equipment is airmobile, the difference ought to be minimal.  For ship borne stuff, the time saved could be critical.  Do you have ships?
We do not have ships, but we do not have planes to move the kit either.  It will be moved by chartered civilian ships.

Old Guy said:
I suspect that this 'forward deployment' of equipment requires a bigger army than Canada has.  I also imagine that the stored equipment has to be carefully maintained.  The logistics possibilities boggle my mind. 
Mechanics will be stripped from units that no longer have as much equipment.  Very soon a large number in the EME world will get posting messages that say â Å“Wainwrightâ ?.
 
I wish that the plan called for a subunit to deploy to the field.  I hear that the plan is to keep 15 of each of the LAV III or Coyote at each Base.

While in theory, it would be enough to send a subunit to the field, in practice, with maintenance issues, the abnormal wear and tear that these vehicles would incur, would all mean that maybe a platoon/troop would make it past range control.

The plan sux.  There is no way around it, no matter what spin is put on it.
 
Lance Wiebe said:
The plan sux.  There is no way around it, no matter what spin is put on it.
I cannot argue with that.

The new priorety for the Army is the collective training on a scale that we have not seen since the Cold War.  Even if we do not have Op Stock sitting at ports, whole fleet management is the only way that CMTC can work.  As it is, most units are short vehicles because those vehicles are overseas.

I think we need the training opportunity that the CMTC will allow for, but I do not know that units will be able to arrive in Wainwright, after almost three years on minimal equipment, ready to train at that level.
 
McG said:
I think we need the training opportunity that the CMTC will allow for, but I do not know that units will be able to arrive in Wainwright, after almost three years on minimal equipment, ready to train at that level.
It will not work.   Units will not be able to train enough LAV drivers, gunners, or crew commanders in the first two years of ATOF.   Those who are trained will suffer the worst skill fade this country has ever seen.   The same can be said of the Coyote Recce suite.  You can bet that everyone will have to re-learn how to use the radios. 

Blah! :evil:
 
I think they are hoping that the simulators make up for it.

Hopefully our next enemy decides to simulate hostile fire for us....
 
Back
Top