Informing the Army’s Future Structure

[Underway]

I think for CAV the Black hats drive and the green hats sit in back works best.
It’s not a Inf Bn or a Tank Sqn - it’s a mix and needs a bunch of different skillsets IMHO.

I can't help but think that would be a disaster. An RCR platoon just plunked into the RCD lines to do dismounted ops. Recce sqns already do (or did) dismounted ops for their tasks. The platoon-sized unit is there to provide OP's, and internal manpower for other tasks like that.

The CA just seems allergic to permanent mixed trade formations like this. Actually my mistake, it's not mixed trade it's mixed regiment! I mean look at our new "Cavalry Sqns" They are square with 19 LAV or 19 TAPV.

 

[Kirkhill]

Full disclosure, I don't read all your data. I read your first para and last para and ignore skim the rest.

Sure, but now you're running into the jack of all trades master of none trap. Let's just bolt on everything to a CMBG just in case. How about a CLBG construct instead. I know around the buoy with the same argument.

I'm trying to drill down here. Is a CMBG better or worse off with a Light Infantry Battalion as integral to the formation? It seems like (from what others here have mentioned) they inhibit the operations of the rest of the CMBG more than they enable them, and that the Mech Inf Battalions can provide a lot of what the Light can if they leave their rides behind.

No problem with the skimming. I do a lot of that myself.

On the other hand I like to think some folks, those that read footnotes, might occasionally find something of interest there. If nothing else it makes me feel better that I have done my homework and that I have left my data available for challenge.

With respect to the jack of all trades master of none trap I don't perceive the trap.

The only reason we can afford the luxury of focusing on two or three scenarios is because we have the luxury of picking our battles. Our forces aren't really for National Defence. They are for National Interests. Most of the stuff Canadians want the CAF to do could be done by the RCMP, the Coast Guard and the local Emergency Services. They see no reason to shoot anyone ever. They don't like soldiers doing it, police doing it or their fellow citizens doing it. Loud noises are scary.

That really is the reason that @FJAG's proposals, or mine for that matter, that would provide for the ability to raise a citizen army of jacks of all trades capable of taking on any eventuality, never gets off the ground.

The most useful, in my opinion, element of the CAF, is the one that most Canadians have likely never heard of - The Canadian Rangers. And their greatest utility, I think, is likely to be finding lost neighbours for the RCMP and just keeping their eyes open.

The Army, Navy and Air Force will only get used when Global Affairs thinks it is a good idea.

And that makes it very difficult to decide what type of force structure works. As I've noted in the past the Navy and the Air Force have day jobs. They perform tasks that the government, Canadians at large and the neighbours value. Even CANSOFCOM justifies itself through discretion.

The Army is uniquely challenged. And the Militia (Primary Reserve) even moreso.

 

[Kirkhill]

Is a CMBG better or worse off with a Light Infantry Battalion as integral to the formation? It seems like (from what others here have mentioned) they inhibit the operations of the rest of the CMBG more than they enable them, and that the Mech Inf Battalions can provide a lot of what the Light can if they leave their rides behind.

My response is: Are we talking administratively or operationally?

A LIB may not be a useful addition to a Mechanized Brigade. It may inhibit planning if it is limited to black caddy's and trucks.

On the other hand I have noticed that deployed British Divisions and Brigades tend to add Infantry Battalions and Companies for Defence and Duties, base security, line of communication security and PW management. They are assigned whatever vehicles work in the environment. Often they are paired with helicopters for Quick Reaction Companies and Blocking Companies.

They are also often independently tasked internationally in multiple roles across the spectrum of conflict - starting with training the locals and conducting anti-poaching patrols.

Personally I find the idea of having a light infantry and a mechanized infantry capability in one brigade a useful concept for readiness management. It should be easy to say that 1,2 or 5 Brigade is on High Readiness and regardless of the crisis that Brigade will deploy the requisite force. Combat Team, Battle Group or Brigade Group. Light or Heavy. Temporary or Sustained. Light, Medium or Heavy. Airmobile or Heliportable.

We are quite capable of finding the bodies and command structure for a Lt Combat Tm, or even a Battle Group. Or a Medium Cbt Tm or Btl Gp. Or even a Hvy Cbt Tm. We can air lift Heliportable Lt Cbt Tms. Now if only we had better kit.

The one thing we can't do effectively is deploy a Bde Gp, light, medium or heavy.

We might be able to manage a Division, if everybody else supplied all the necessary bodies and bits and pieces.

As to "Mech Inf Battalions can provide a lot of what the Light can if they leave their rides behind"

I could as easily re-write it as "Light Inf Battalions can provide a lot of what the Mech can if they are paired with suitable rides".

Canadian Jacks have to learn at least two trades.

 

[Kirkhill]

Only for Roto 0. By Roto 1, all elements were starting to mechanize. Roto 2 had a motorized company, but after that, they were pretty much all mechanized.

Which, surely is the whole point about the value of the Light Force. The Mech/Motor element, especially in a land-locked environment, took time to establish.

Roto 0	August 2003– February 2004	3rd Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment Battalion Group
Roto 1	February 2004– August 2004	3rd Battalion, Royal 22e Régiment Battalion Group
Roto 2	August 2004– February 2005	1st Battalion, Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry Battalion Group
Roto 3	February 2005– July 2005	1st Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment Battalion Group

The first 12 months were conducted by LIBs. Transport, especially in Roto 0, was characterized by John Deere Gators, the Iltis, the Bv206 and the Chinook. I can't speak to the make up Roto 1 except to note that it was a Light Bn. If there were any mechanized/medium/heavy/motorized elements they were added to a Light Infantry Bn core.

From Roto 2, 12 months later, the Canadian Army started deploying full time Mechanized Battalions with reinforcements.

I would say that the Light - Medium mix worked pretty much as it would be expected to. Although taking a year to get a full LAV Battle Group in country might seem a bit excessive to some. Tanks arrived in 2006. Combat Ops ended in 2011 and Withdrawal occurred in 2014.

I agree that the Medium Force made the better force for the long term deployment. But it was the Light Force that established the theatre. And there seems to have been an awful lot of infantry flying around in helicopters as well. Even if they had to park their LAVs.

 

[McG]

Roto 0	August 2003– February 2004	3rd Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment Battalion Group
Roto 1	February 2004– August 2004	3rd Battalion, Royal 22e Régiment Battalion Group
Roto 2	August 2004– February 2005	1st Battalion, Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry Battalion Group
Roto 3	February 2005– July 2005	1st Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment Battalion Group

Your table is Kabul. That is not even the same mission that eventually got the tanks you speak of.

 

[KevinB]

I can't help but think that would be a disaster. An RCR platoon just plunked into the RCD lines to do dismounted ops.

Yet we do it here with no issues...
It wouldn't be RCR Platoon in RCD lines - it would be soldiers in a Cav Sqn. - Heck we can give them a florescent yellow beret and a new capbage if it helps.
New building - new CO etc.

Recce sqns already do (or did) dismounted ops for their tasks. The platoon-sized unit is there to provide OP's, and internal manpower for other tasks like that.

The CA just seems allergic to permanent mixed trade formations like this. Actually my mistake, it's not mixed trade it's mixed regiment! I mean look at our new "Cavalry Sqns" They are square with 19 LAV or 19 TAPV.

 

[Kirkhill]

Your table is Kabul. That is not even the same mission that eventually got the tanks you speak of.

Thanks. As I said previously I include data to keep me honest.

Operation ATHENA - Canada.ca

Canada’s contribution of peace-support and combat forces to the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan from July 17, 2003, to December 1, 2011.

www.canada.ca

 

[FJAG]

Which, surely is the whole point about the value of the Light Force. The Mech/Motor element, especially in a land-locked environment, took time to establish.

Roto 0	August 2003– February 2004	3rd Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment Battalion Group
Roto 1	February 2004– August 2004	3rd Battalion, Royal 22e Régiment Battalion Group
Roto 2	August 2004– February 2005	1st Battalion, Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry Battalion Group
Roto 3	February 2005– July 2005	1st Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment Battalion Group

The first 12 months were conducted by LIBs. Transport, especially in Roto 0, was characterized by John Deere Gators, the Iltis, the Bv206 and the Chinook. I can't speak to the make up Roto 1 except to note that it was a Light Bn. If there were any mechanized/medium/heavy/motorized elements they were added to a Light Infantry Bn core.

From Roto 2, 12 months later, the Canadian Army started deploying full time Mechanized Battalions with reinforcements.

I would say that the Light - Medium mix worked pretty much as it would be expected to. Although taking a year to get a full LAV Battle Group in country might seem a bit excessive to some. Tanks arrived in 2006. Combat Ops ended in 2011 and Withdrawal occurred in 2014.

I agree that the Medium Force made the better force for the long term deployment. But it was the Light Force that established the theatre. And there seems to have been an awful lot of infantry flying around in helicopters as well. Even if they had to park their LAVs.

That's not quite correct.

Rotos 0 and 1 of Op Athena 1 were large rotos with a brigade headquarters and a battlegroup with one company of infantry (Mike "Para") in Iltis and another in LAV/Bison (mostly from 1 RCR). On top of that the recce sqn had Coyotes. Our gunners had a troop of guns four FOO parties, 3 in LAV one in Iltis. Patrolling tasks varied based on whether the terrain was urban or rural and if rural if mountains needed climbing.

For Rotos 2 and 3 the battlegroup was greatly downsized. The brigade headquarters and the artillery went home and the infantry component was reduced to one company of two platoons - one as camp security and the second as a mounted QRF while the long and slow process of sending kit home or preparing it for Kandahar took place.

 

[FJAG]

I think you are giving the CA too much credit.

I'm not sure I've ever been accused of that before.

@Infanteer points out that realistically only the Roto 0 for Op Apollo was Light.

True. My point was that there were numerous positions within within TFK where light infantry was useful. From OMLTs to the PRT to CLP escorts where they had a variety of vehicles, some armoured, but not necessarily LAVs working as mech infantry. With a six month predeployment training cycle and with horse trading trained crews from other battalions, things got done. Not an advocate of this system but I can see it.

At the end of the day Canada could have moved all the Light Infantry BN’s to one Bde should they wanted to years ago.

I think the 108 CCVs would have gone a long way in closing the mechanized gap. Unfortunately I do know that the ultimate plan was to penny packet those across the three brigades as well. Sigh.

Remember just before 9/11 the LIB’s and Para Coy’s where going to be chopped. The CMBG’s don’t need a LIB and have been trying to sink them since the end of the CAR.

Let's not forget that the infantry resuscitated LIBs from the 10/90 experiment which I think put them into an eventual PY bind.

I completely agree that the LIBs should be in a light force. Whether in a light brigade or a light regiment depends entirely upon whether we ever have any intention of deploying a light brigade or just light battalions.

I think the fundamental problem with the LIBs is that there simply aren't enough infantry PYs to properly staff 9 infantry battalions. There is enough mechanized equipment to support six battalions which could all use more people than 600 some odd all ranks. I can see a use for one LIB. But would think there would be an advantage in breaking up the other two for different, more necessary purposes.

I’d argue that the CA has been derelict WRT that - the farce of managed readiness and has not conducted an honest review of the needs of the CA in decades

You won't find me disagreeing with either of those. Add to that the fact that even when some decent reviews of the reserves have been done, the implementation has been bungled. We work too much by rice bowl committees and not enough by enlightened, decisive fiat.

 

[Infanteer]

I'm still stuck in 2007. TF 1-07 with 2 RCR had two LAV companies H and I and had C Coy 3 PPCLI attached which was mounted in RG 31s which is mechanized of a sort. Task Force 3-07 reorganized themselves with A Company (1 R22eR) giving up a platoon each to B Coy (2 R22eR) and C Coy (3 R22eR) and then forming a new coy with its remaining platoon and the ANA which I think was basically Ranger mounted and maybe some RG 31s. (Just starting into 3-07s story this week so not too sure yet)

RG-31 - Motorized.

3-07 began BG transition to 2x big coys (4 Pls) which continued to 1-08 (2 PPCLI) and 3-08 (3 RCR). 1-09 (2 R22eR) shifted back to three companies. I think 1-10 (1 RCR) saw the BG absorb the PRT company too.

Which, surely is the whole point about the value of the Light Force. The Mech/Motor element, especially in a land-locked environment, took time to establish.

Roto 0	August 2003– February 2004	3rd Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment Battalion Group
Roto 1	February 2004– August 2004	3rd Battalion, Royal 22e Régiment Battalion Group
Roto 2	August 2004– February 2005	1st Battalion, Princess Patricia’s Canadian Light Infantry Battalion Group
Roto 3	February 2005– July 2005	1st Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment Battalion Group

The first 12 months were conducted by LIBs. Transport, especially in Roto 0, was characterized by John Deere Gators, the Iltis, the Bv206 and the Chinook. I can't speak to the make up Roto 1 except to note that it was a Light Bn. If there were any mechanized/medium/heavy/motorized elements they were added to a Light Infantry Bn core.

From Roto 2, 12 months later, the Canadian Army started deploying full time Mechanized Battalions with reinforcements.

You've completely mixed missions. Those Rotos were force protection missions for the big peace support operations in Kabul (no Bv206/Chinook). They really were "infantry - any" missions.

The Roto 0 combat mission in Kandahar was the 1 PPCLI BG with 2 Coys from that Bn and a Coy from 2 PPCLI that was jeep mounted. It did not "take longer" to get mechanized forces in theatre - Afghanistan saw four different theatres, and each mission consisted of conscious force structure decisions based on mission specific tasks.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Much to respond to.

I was on Roto 0 of Kabul. While 3 RCR was tapped as the BG, a LAV company from 2 RCR was on the ground first with the Theatre Activation Team. Once 3 RCR was there they had two infantry companies in Iltis and an infantry company from 1 RCR in LAVs. The ISTAR Coy, with Coyotes, MEWTs, initially Arthur Radars, then Sperwer was a Bde asset. The idea, though, was that Iltis would be a non-intrusive way to patrol the city. In Jan 04 after two suicide bombs only armoured vehicles were allowed off camp. We can argue the decision, but there it is. My point is that there were plenty of LAVs in theatre.

I was also on the Feb to Aug 06 rotation into Kandahar. There were LUVWs in B Coy, but they also had LAVs. Anyhoo.

I was also in the 2 RCR Optimized Battle Group as the OC of the Recce Sqn. There were bumps along the way, but it worked. The Human Dimension of Operations surveys revealed by the end of the experiment that the Dragoons identified more with 2 RCR BG than the riflemen in the companies did. Weird eh? A lot of hard work went into that below the waterline. So permanently mixed BGs can work, but I think this was more a feature of geography and a perfect storm of personalities (that clicked together).

I have worked in a mixed CMBG at MAPLE RESOLVE (so real troops on real ground) and UNIFIED RESOLVE. A light battalion with no integral A vehs is not a good fit in a mechanized brigade. It is a solution desperately looking for a problem. Give them Bisons or TAPVs (but many) and at least they can keep up and do something.

Finally, when I was working with them the US Army Cavalry Squadrons did not have infantryman (except for the mortar dudes). The Scout Platoons in the Cavalry Troops were not manned by infantrymen.

 

[markppcli]

Yet we do it here with no issues...
It wouldn't be RCR Platoon in RCD lines - it would be soldiers in a Cav Sqn. - Heck we can give them a florescent yellow beret and a new capbage if it helps.
New building - new CO etc.

Sorry but that’s not true anymore is it? Bradley’s and Strikers are crewed by 11Bs no?

 

[KevinB]

Sorry but that’s not true anymore is it? Bradley’s and Strikers are crewed by 11Bs no?

And by 19D’s (CAV Scout) - depends on the formation. https://www.cool.osd.mil/army/enlisted/19d.htm

The 19K MOS is the ‘hard armor’ M1 Crewmen.


My point being for Canada that a CAV Sqn would have Armored Recce trade, Infantry trade and some other trades in it to achieve a optimal force. I don’t see the point in training Armor troops to do a bunch of dismount stuff (much in the same way I don’t think Infantry for armored vehicles)


Down here 19D’s no longer go through Sniper School, that has been a on the bus, off the Bus routine down here - so Infantry again fill the sniper role in the Cav formation, as well as Mortar platoon.
There has been a lot of discussion as to how to optimize the ORBAT for the CAV with MoS’s - a friend of mine just did a paper at C&GSC on a more mixed system I really like it - if it gets beyond FOUO I’ll share.

 

[Underway]

I think 1-10 (1 RCR) saw the BG absorb the PRT company too.

I was 3-09 PRT and did the turnover to 1-10. STAB Coy A (Charlie 2VP) , and STAB Coy B (I think 3VP but may be wrong) were merged under STAB A at CNS. It really gave us a Coy+ (five platoons 4 mech, one light) if memory serves as two of our original 2VP platoons were outside of CNS.

When I left India Coy 2 RCR (STAB A's replacement) was being transferred to the BG and moved out of CNS. Not sure who replaced STAB B, but I think they arrived and directly joined the BG.

 

[Kirkhill]

Thanks. As I said previously I include data to keep me honest.

Operation ATHENA - Canada.ca

Canada’s contribution of peace-support and combat forces to the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan from July 17, 2003, to December 1, 2011.

www.canada.ca

During the period 2003 to 2014 Canada committed a Battlegroup to Afghanistan. Over that period the mission of the force changed. It morphed constantly in my opinion, as I would expect. Combat operations ended in 2011.

As the situation evolved the commitment evolved and the force structure evolved.

 

[FJAG]

Sorry but that’s not true anymore is it? Bradley’s and Strikers are crewed by 11Bs no?

There used to be a 11M for fighting vehicle infantry but they consolidated that into 11B. They also did that with 11H- anti-armor. All that's left as a separate MOS is 11C - Indirect fire infantryman (mortars)

 

[Kirkhill]

Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle

Army details 'highest level,' but 'not final' OMFV requirements for next phases - Breaking Defense

As the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle enters phases three and four, a senior Army official details some requirements but says the service is flexible.

breakingdefense.com

the vehicle includes a two-person crew with six dismounted infantry

Dean said the vehicle includes a two-person crew with six dismounted infantry in the back, down from a three-person crew in the Bradley. Dean said that decision will come with some cultural adjustments for soldiers, who will say they need a third crewman, but highlights the need to implement tools on the OMFV that will reduce the cognitive burden on soldiers. While fighter jets have evolved to give pilots more situational awareness and fly-by-wire capabilities that ease the burden on soldiers, combat vehicles have not, he said.

“We haven’t evolved,” Dean said. So that’s the opportunity for the future because without that evolution, again in the future space, as we’re seeing in Ukraine, is very complex.

To address the change, the OMFV will maintain a third crew station to ease the transition from a three soldier crew to two.

“That’s how we’re going to balance in the transition toward the application of greater autonomy on the platform,” Dean said. “Two crew is challenging today. I don’t have all the apps I need loaded to handle my data.”

the vehicle have a medium caliber cannon, with a minimum .30 caliber cannon, though the acquisition objective is .50 caliber cannon. The service is also weighing anti-tank guide missile systems for the platforms, though “we haven’t specified which missile,” Dean said.

I assume .30 caliber and .50 caliber are supposed to be 30 and 50 mm cannons

 

[Underway]

I assume .30 caliber and .50 caliber are supposed to be 30 and 50 mm cannons

Yes. 50mm supershot and standard 30mm.

 

[KevinB]

Report to Congress on Army’s Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle - USNI News

The following is the Dec. 28, 2021, Congressional Research Service report The Army’s Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) Program: Background and Issues for Congress. From the report In June 2018, in part due to congressional concerns, the Army announced a new modernization strategy and...

news.usni.org

 

[IKnowNothing]

I see it a bit different.

My suggestion to turn a light battalion into a cavalry regiment applies to only to 1 CMBG - the heavy brigade - so that it has one armoured regiment and two mech battalions as its manoeuvre units plus a new cavalry unit.

2 and 5 CMBG already have an armoured regiment that could be modified into a cavalry regiment. As well each has three infantry battalions. If one battalion's worth of LAVs were passed over from 2 CMBG to 5 CMBG then 5 CMBG would have all the makings of a medium brigade while 2 CMBG turns primarily into a light brigade. IMHO, the way I see a cavalry regiment (regardless if light, medium or heavy) it does not come up to the standard as a manoeuvre unit. You still need either three infantry, tank or combined battalions as the manoeuvre element plus a cavalry regiment. (and again I throw in my caveat that CS and CSS needs work as well)

See my comments above.

I do this solely on a reorganization of the RegF and staying PY neutral. Effectively, if you want a heavy brigade and you want a cavalry regiment with each brigade then you will need four armoured units (one tank, three cavalry) and only need eight infantry battalions (5 mech, 3 light). It's the simplest, math based shuffle available.

Fair enough, I was going off the basis of the 2 non continental US BCT's running with 2 infantry battalions as precedent for "enough"

Challenge, does the Light Brigade need a standing cav unit, or is it's primary purpose to force generate QRF battalions and potentially light based battlegroups? If it does need a Cav capability, wouldn't it make more sense for the LIB -> Cav conversion to happen within the light force? Good geographic location to play with your reserve ideas in PRes rich Ontario, strip a company each from 1,2,3 RCR to form the new RegF Cav, 3RCR becomes a 10/90 reserve LIB.

If so, the math changes to 3 armoured (1 tank and 2 cav) 6 mech. Two symmetrical medium Bde's, one independent/floating tank regiment that can turn either "heavyish" as needed. Or, if we got wild, two 70/30 tank regiments where the 30 trains on the 70's tanks to end up with two heavy-ish Bde's.