Humour My Ignorance...

[MikeL]

Well I don't see this happening ("shock infantry") I think there is proof of concept but only in militaries that can afford it.

USA (Rangers, maybe marines, airborne)
England (paras, commandos)
France (marines, some para regiments)
Dutch (marines... Not sure if they are sf or not?)

I'm not sure if you are trying to list of SOF units, or SOF and non SOF units that can achieve the "shock" effect.

AFAIK, the Netherlands Marines are not as a whole SOF but there are specialized units within.

Aside from differences in size and equipment/support at their disposal how do these units greatly differ from the Canadian Infantry battalions and CANSOF?

However Canada is more similar to New Zealand/Australia. I don't believe they have non-sf units designed to be more proficient at light infantry skills.

Curious to what you mean by "more proficient at light infantry skills" what skill sets are these based on? What nations do have non SOF that are highly proficient at light infantry skills?

IMO, the money saved when it comes to troop retention would outweigh the costs of transferring soldiers.

I assume you support the original idea of each regiment having a specialized company?  What would the mission/tasks be for this specialized Coy? Can a single company achieve those tasks? Are they tasks something that a Infantry Bn can not achieve now, or something that CANSOF  could be tasked with?  What would be required to support it?

Who knows maybe one day they'll finally make that Marine Commando Regiment. Which I would assume would have been based on the royal marines. I wonder what killed that idea?

I assume the costs associated with starting it, manning, equipment, etc would be challenges to forming a Marine Commando Regiment. As well, is it required? Is the CF large enough to have another unit added without hurting the manning of pre existing units? Can the Navy support it?

Would tasks given to a Canadian Marine unit be something the Infantry and CANSOF can not already do?

 

[Flaker]

I wasn't trying to list sof units. I was attempting to point out "shock" capable units.

As for size and equipment I'm not sure the size of any of these units. But Canada is not capable of keeping up with the size of the first three countries mentioned. The difference between the units IMO (will not compare to cansof, as these units are not sof) is that they have higher entrance requirements. So they have now recruited the top pool, as a generalization.

The nations I have mentioned are ones that have more "proficient" light infantry skills. This is not entirely a testament to their training programs as the short comings of ours. I am not aware of any amphibious capability, raid training (st.nazaire) , long range rucking (ie Falklands march)

As for a regiment having a specialized company, I'm not sure if that's the best approach. I'm not aware of other countries doing this. Then again we're already doing this with our jump companies. If we want to have maintenance phase on everything then it would work (sarcasm)

I agree aside from costs I don't think the CF could man the regiment properly without damaging per existing units. I'm not aware of what cansof is capable of, could they do it. Probably yes, but would a raid like the one on st.nazaire be the best use of a sof unit? I know it's from WW2 but who knows what war is next. Maybe port seizure will be a large part of it.

 

[MikeL]

The difference between the units IMO (will not compare to cansof, as these units are not sof)

Just wanted to clarify as most of the units/services listed were non SOF; but the 75th Ranger Regiment is SOF.

is that they have higher entrance requirements

IMO, yes and no.  Some do(ex 75th Ranger Regiment, Para Regiment, etc) when comparing to the standard fitness test for that branch of service. Others do not(US Airborne do the same PT test as everyone else in the Army AFAIK), and the USMC fitness test is unique to them, much like how every other branch in the US has it's own test.

The nations I have mentioned are ones that have more "proficient" light infantry skills. This is not entirely a testament to their training programs as the short comings of ours. I am not aware of any amphibious capability, raid training (st.nazaire) , long range rucking (ie Falklands march)

For an amphibious capability, what does the CF require? For example, do we want to be able to assault a beach with a large force? As well can the RCN support sea to shore landings with their ships, etc?

Do we want to expand on the maritime capabilities we already have with Boarding Parties and CANSOF?

I've heard 2RCR has done some amphibious stuff(not sure to what extent) and other units have gotten to do amphibious assaults in training outside Canada(such as with the USMC, etc). If Canada pursues an amphibious capability for the Infantry, do we need to create a new unit, or would running units through some amphibious training during yearly training, pre deployment training, etc work?

As for raids, is this not a tasking a Infantry Bn can already achieve; at least to a certain extent?

long range rucking (ie Falklands march)

IMO this is something that can either already be achieved or can be worked on. Wasn't the 3PPCLI BG conducting some rather long marches during Op Apollo?

As for a regiment having a specialized company, I'm not sure if that's the best approach. I'm not aware of other countries doing this. Then again we're already doing this with our jump companies. If we want to have maintenance phase on everything then it would work (sarcasm)

Do we need to create a new unit/sub-unit or just enhance capabilities within preexisting units?

Probably yes, but would a raid like the one on st.nazaire be the best use of a sof unit?

IMO that would be dependent on the mission/objectives, is it in a new theatre or a new one, and so on.

Maybe port seizure will be a large part of it.

Maybe, but will a new unit need to be required, or just have a preexisting unit train for this as required?

 

[Kat Stevens]

Isn't "raid" just another way to spell "big fighting patrol"?

 

[Infanteer]

A Raid is a type of Fighting Patrol.

 

[Kat Stevens]

A Raid is a type of Fighting Patrol.

Sort of my point, nothing mystical and door kickery about it.

 

[Flaker]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Biting      -British Paras

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Nazaire_Raid        -Commandos

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Archery      -Commandos

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yomp                        -Paras and commandos 90km march in 3 days

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raid_at_Cabanatuan    -Rangers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raid_at_Cabanatuan  -Canadians reg inf/Commandos (Massively botched up due to lack of int. However the "raid" was more of a diversion for 30 assault unit)

Granted most of my examples are from WW2, it's an area of interest so I know about them. But I'm sure there's lots of evidence of the concept working. Thus why those units have stuck around. I can assure you our reg infantry are not prepared for undertakings such as that. And these units have proven themselves time and again capable of meeting new threats on short notice. If hypothetically you could have one of our infantry battalions do one of the above ops. Vs One of the units I've mentioned previously. Who would fair better?

Maybe we should stop trucking our soldiers to and from the range in BIQ. And not give our Officers s**t for taking us on 15km runs. Or our NCO's trouble for giving us a little extra pt, or trouble them for them telling us what we can and can not eat.

A Raid is a type of Fighting Patrol.

Maybe so but it's not just "poking the bear". It usually has a larger objective than that. *See above

Do we need such a unit... No. Should we enhance these capabilities within a Battalion. IMO yes. Are our soldiers able to train for this, yes. On short notice, not likely as the pre-existing skills for such operations are not currently within the Battalions.

What it comes down to is the lack of direction the CF as a whole has.

 

[UnwiseCritic]

Flaker: trying to change the CF into a leaner meaner fighting machine is like trying to make something from nothing (an act of god). There are professionals but the bureauracy you would have to navigate through would require the rank of CDS while willing to commit career suicide.

What you can do is be an example for others to follow. Much like why I picked a coy to start. So it can be an example. I also suggest you start with something smaller and if your successful at that try changing bigger things.

Also skeletor I would like to hear some of the answers to the questions you've asked. Though I feel I may already know the answers.

 

[MikeL]

Regarding some of those WWII examples, I'm not sure if some of them would be done by a conventional force today, but perhaps with SOF. Also, givin today's technology, etc would the military throw a battalion into the slaughter and be willing to accept losing over half the force as KIA/WIA and POWs(such as in St Nazaire)? Or perhaps look more for a precision strike(such as a missile/bomb) and have a small team with a JTAC on the ground.


Before new units are created, new tasks assigned, etc to the Army the RCAF and RCN also have to be in on this and be able to actually support it. Unless of course it is expected that we just bolt our forces onto existing allied units and have them provide the support/transport.

Also, what does the GoC want out of the CAF?  Once we actually have clear assigned roles/tasks then we can tailor the forces as required. Look at the Airborne for example, what is their role? They are maintaining a parachute capability but Canada hasn't used that capability since WWII. As well, is a Airborne Company per brigade really enough? Or would it be more practical to have them all grouped together in a battalion - provided of course Canada is actually seriously about it.  If not, perhaps we should go the way the Australians went and maintain the Airborne capability within SOF only.


If we are just looking at improving what we already have, what do we really need/want out of our battalions?  Do we need to turn them into a type of "Commando" unit? Probably not. Can we enhance some of their capabilities, sure. But, again, if we want an amphibious capability we need to be able to support that.

It's great that we can have Infantry that can dismount from a vehicle and hit a beach, etc but do we internally have the means to get them there, and support? Do we want this to be a capability we can have on our own? Or something we can have troops familiar with it by participating with our allies(eg USMC) when they conduct that type of training.

 

[myself.only]

Well, I imagine the CSOR largely fills the role previously tasked to a "commando" unit and isn't called a Commando Regt only because the terminology has shifted to SOF as an umbrella term that reflects deployment into a broader spectrum of ops.
Yet, if we dug up Churchill, with libation in hand, he'd probably call them commandos.... and wish he had had them at his disposal 70 years ago.

Any other glaring differences in organization, assets and tactics between the two units probably exist to realize modern capabilities and capitalize on technological advances.
So I think - and I am just venturing amateur opinion here - those same capabilities and advances make this more of a question of "Would the CAF mount a 600-man raid on a port?" rather than "Could the CAF mount a 600-man raid on a port?"
Wiser men may debate that.... but if the answer is yes, then I'd imagine the CSOR would get the task rather than a LIB.
:2c:

 

[Journeyman]

Do we need to turn them into a type of "Commando" unit?

That would likely be the government response. 

Given the recent fixation on all-things-fashion (Navy curl, Areas becoming Divisions, Pips & Crowns for Army officers, the ubiquitous Chinese 1812 pins...), the good idea fairies would likely get a bunch of Commando patches embroidered and say "that was easy; you people must be so proud."


[/sarcasm......somewhat]

 

[myself.only]

That would likely be the government response. 

Given the recent fixation on all-things-fashion (Navy curl, Areas becoming Divisions, Pips & Crowns for Army officers, the ubiquitous Chinese 1812 pins...), the good idea fairies would likely get a bunch of Commando patches embroidered and say "that was easy; you people must be so proud."


[/sarcasm......somewhat]

Do we get to hear the MND announce: "Canada is going commando"

 

[Portnord]

Out of curiosity (and seeking cover under the thread title), what would we use a force of paratroopers for in this day and age? Is there a plausible scenario for a sizeable body of troops that couldn't be more efficiently handled by helicopter transport?

If I discount tiny special forces or espionage scenarios, all I could imagine is esprit de corps. There's nothing wrong if it's just advanced skill training with cachet that improves retention of professional soldiers, but there seem to be a lot of alternatives being kicked around the thread. Granted what I know is paper thin (like someone else said coloured by WWII and whatever can be gleaned from reading military history), if there's some advantage or flexibility that someone can share, always happy to learn.

Some of you seem to be questioning what they might be tasked with - I'm wondering if we will ever want or need to have anyone jump from a plane into combat ever again.

 

[MikeL]

Out of curiosity (and seeking cover under the thread title), what would we use a force of paratroopers for in this day and age? Is there a plausible scenario for a sizeable body of troops that couldn't be more efficiently handled by helicopter transport?

In modern times, there have been multiple occasions of Airborne forces being dropped - French in Mali, Indochina; I think the US has done this in almost every conflict they've been involved with since WWII; etc.

They have been used to seize airfields, drop a large force into an area to open a new front(eg 173rd Airborne in Iraq 2003), etc. Helicopters may not have the range, or may be more susceptible to a anti aircraft threat.

As for Canada ever having a Airborne Company Group (or larger sized element) conduct a combat jump, I don't know.. I don't see it happening going off the past, but who knows what may or may not happen in the future.

 

[medicineman]

Not everywhere in the world can be reached by helicopter in a short period of time unless they're already prepositioned there.  There have been post-Second World War operational para drops with varying degrees of success - Sinai and Suez, Dien Bien Phu, Kolwezi, Grenada immediately spring to mind...the US Rangers also did a jump in Afghanistan in 2001, though IRRC, that was more a camera stunt than anything.  Israel dropped paratroops into the Sinai in '56 and the UK and France dropped paras into the Suez shortly thereafter.  The French airborne forces jumped into Dien Bien Phu.  The Kolwezi crisis was dealt with quite decisively by FFL paratroops being able to jump in quickly and then aggresively clear the baddies and rescue the goodies in the town.  Grenada was a bit of a shyte show, but was still successful on the objective side of the fact that the Rangers did an opposed drop onto and then captured an airhead. 

I somehow don't see many mass drops in the coming future, but battalion level ops domestically are a possibility in a disaster situation or armed incursion into remote areas of our own country...however, I do believe there is a unit that's already designated for that sort of thing now in the form of CSOR?  The question(s) is (are) - "Does the GoC feel there is a need"? followed by "If there is indeed a need, how do we (the CF/GoC) fulfill that need?" followed by "Are resources immediately available and if not, can they be made so readily?" followed by "Who the Hell is going to pay for it all?"...and in the current fiscal climate, my guess is the question order is going to be reversed somewhat.
:2c:

MM

Edit to add: Skeletor, you beat me to it...with a couple extra examples each  ;D...we both forgot the Turks into Cyprus in the 70's.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

The government doesn't know a para company from a para legal, or even a pair of MC Hammer parachute pants.  It is the Army and CAF that has to do this analysis.....

 

[dapaterson]

The government doesn't know a para company from a para legal, or even a pair of MC Hammer parachute pants.  It is the Army and CAF that has to do this analysis.....

NEWSWIRE - Ottawa.  Minister of National Defence announces 3 PPCLI to wear parachute pants as part of Army Transformation.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Her we go...

 

[UnwiseCritic]

Is there a thread or open source website that states what capabilities the government wants from us? Or what we want from ourselves?

Or is there no clear defined goals for us, aside from being a re-election tool?

 

[dapaterson]

Read the Canada First Defence Strategy.