Preserving Army Fleets

[GR66]

Everyone should read this post.

The fact is the Canadian Army is an expeditionary Army.
Due to the fact you guys live above us, you don't really need to worry about foreign invasion. So the concern about having equipment to mobile in case of invasion isn't a concern, like that of European nations.

Due to this, CAF units that are deployed should have top of the line kit - and while some cascading to reserves could be looked at, in all reality the likelihood of reserve forces being deployed is extremely slim.

I guess this is really what it comes down to isn't it?

Is there any intention or expectation of mobilizing Reserve units for expeditionary deployments in formed units? If they are only to be used as augmentees for the Reg Force units (or to fulfill certain, specific support roles like convoy escort, etc.) then what specific roles do we expect them to fulfill? Drivers and Gunners or just guys in back? Tankers or just Recce? Replacement gun crews for existing howitzers or additional complete gun batteries?

Having a clear and official decision on that will allow for the proper organization and equipping of the Reserves to meet those specific requirements. Right now to my understanding current defence policy doesn't really address the potential issue of a major conflict and the potential for wide scale mobilization of the Reserves. As a result the role and equipping of the Reserves remains up for debate.

 

[KevinB]

Bureaucracies have little trouble burying or destroying programs they do not favour. With respect to the reserve force that has been a successful process for seven decades. Regardless of who stands on what side, I have only to look across the border to see what could be. It too has its warts but simply put it provides a potential capability that can be called on when needed - and its been called on many times. At my most cynical I have the view that the present position the Army is in is because if the government found out it could put the same number of people on peacetime deployments as it does today but would have twice the force to put into the field in an emergency but for a lower year to year pay envelope it might rethink the force ratio. Keeping the reserves ineffective protects many rice bowls.

TBH, unless the entire Res employment model is changed and proper legislation to both encourage employers and protect members, the PRes is unemployable in its majority.

There needs to be a major culture shift in Canada as a whole to make the PRes effective - blame sits at a lot of feet.

If the Senior PRes leaders where willing to sacrifice units for the good of the entire organization, it might give both the Cdn Gov and the Reg Army the reason to support it more.

 

[Underway]

I'm just guessing here, but while one or the other versions of the ACSV would do the job, I betcha there ain't no armoured gun det carriers in the ACSV allotment. 'Cause we're not at war now and a 10 tonner is just fine. I'm wondering what they're using in Latvia right about now?

Two trucks per M777. One to tow the gun and carry the gunners, one for the ammo.

 

[MilEME09]

If the Senior PRes leaders where willing to sacrifice units for the good of the entire organization, it might give both the Cdn Gov and the Reg Army the reason to support it more.

I think its going to require a senior leader to tell the units to shut up and deal with the change. IMO every ARes brigade should only have a single unit of each type. Heck the argument could be made of using a battlegroup model fir PRes CBGs, a single LCol, and a bunch of companies underneath them. More realistic then companies commanded by LCols.

 

[Brad Sallows]

You previously suggested that Bv206s/NTVs/DAMEs/Bisons should be held in Service Battalions and Transport Companies. I agree. Put the M113s and Bisons into warehouses co-located with the Service Battalions.

IF Canada decided to have armoured personnel transport, primarily for use as taxis (operational moves, and moves up to but not into contact), then I would rather see them grouped into independent transport units and given over to Res F (train drivers and maintainers).

But that's a long way short of APCs integrated into Res F infantry units, which is where I was thinking the "hand-me-downs" discussion was going.

 

[dapaterson]

. More realistic then companies commanded by LCols.

With some units having fewer than 80 all ranks, with 2/5 either releasing or not yet complete their basic occupational training, calling them companies is optimistic.

 

[MilEME09]

With some units having fewer than 80 all ranks, with 2/5 either releasing or not yet complete their basic occupational training, calling them companies is optimistic.

Being in a unit where 1/3 of my platoon is releasing, transferring, or CTing, I'd agree

 

[Brad Sallows]

Is there any intention or expectation of mobilizing Reserve units for expeditionary deployments in formed units?

Intention - some people dream; expectation - not reasonably.

Canada's Res F provides augmentees and CTs and dom ops wallahs. The augmentees need time to work up, regardless whether or not the units they are sent to also need time to work up.

Simple arithmetic comparison: how long would it take for Canada's Res F to provide a division of people trained to adequately function as a division, and how long would it take "industry" to tool up to provide the kit. If the former time is longer than the latter, kit stockpiles are not needed for "mobilization".

 

[MilEME09]

Intention - some people dream; expectation - not reasonably.

Canada's Res F provides augmentees and CTs and dom ops wallahs. The augmentees need time to work up, regardless whether or not the units they are sent to also need time to work up.

Simple arithmetic comparison: how long would it take for Canada's Res F to provide a division of people trained to adequately function as a division, and how long would it take "industry" to tool up to provide the kit. If the former time is longer than the latter, kit stockpiles are not needed for "mobilization".

Or because of our limited PYs we should adopt a stance Similar to the US or UK and deploy reserve units every few years as a way to maintain readiness and build experience in the reserve force.

 

[Kirkhill]

Everyone should read this post.

The fact is the Canadian Army is an expeditionary Army.
Due to the fact you guys live above us, you don't really need to worry about foreign invasion. So the concern about having equipment to mobile in case of invasion isn't a concern, like that of European nations.

Due to this, CAF units that are deployed should have top of the line kit - and while some cascading to reserves could be looked at, in all reality the likelihood of reserve forces being deployed is extremely slim.

So Kev,

Just to be clear. You and Uncle Sam are happy with Canada freeloading on the domestic front. Have I got that right?

Just in case I haven't -

A single ACSV with parts, costs $5,500,000. And I am willing to bet that the CP versions of which the CAF seems so fond cost considerably more than that. It also requires annual maintenance and repairs resulting from training accidents AND it requires a climate controlled warehouse.

Subtract one ACSV from the production order and build the Reserves 5x 50,000 square foot warehouses. Sacrifice 4 ACSVs and every Regional Brigade Service Battalion could have its own 50,000 square foot warehouse for storing stuff that might come in handy.

And old kit doesn't need spares. If it breaks it breaks. In the mean time it has bought some time to build newer gear more appropriate to the new era or it will be replaced by newer gear that gets handed down in turn. And it has lived out its life usefully.

And that is the alternative to my silly buggers solution of disbanding 2 CMBG to find money for storing kit against the day that Just In Time fails.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Similar to the US or UK

Canada has never had that kind of international profile. The least sniff of something that looked like "colonial/imperial" military adventurism and the politicians who had the temerity to undertake it would be submerged under waves of ankle-biting malcontents.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

New depots or expanding current ones is going to become necessary.

Below is the depot that was in Hamilton
View attachment 70320

I'd wager its a big bigger then 25 in Montreal. 25 we can't expand because it's in the middle of a city, 7 could but I'd argue we need to diversify our stock locations.


Ask your self this, if the flag went up right now, every PRes and SupRes member was called up, and we were at war. Do we have the equipment holdings to fully equip these forces to a set standard? I bet that answer is no, because our procurement has been about ordering the bare minimum fir decades.

I think that photo is actually of the Highbury Complex in London Ontario. It began in 1941 as a vehicle reception depot - I think a link between industry and the army. It changed forms and roles over the years, initially as a Ordnance Depot and ending as CFB London Base Maint and Supply when I was a young Reservist. My point is that it was part of a massive wartime expansion. That wartime expansion contracted; Highbury was repurposed for a time but eventually it was downscaled and then closed.

Perhaps it is time for the Militia to consolidate within means and requirements as well?

 

[KevinB]

I think its going to require a senior leader to tell the units to shut up and deal with the change. IMO every ARes brigade should only have a single unit of each type. Heck the argument could be made of using a battlegroup model fir PRes CBGs, a single LCol, and a bunch of companies underneath them. More realistic then companies commanded by LCols.

The only way I see fixing the mess is to force amalgamation.
There is zero sense in having PRes formations if there isn’t equipment to supply them or infrastructure to support.

Thus they are adopted/absorbed by Reg Force units.
The Regular Regimental HQ’s can finally do something beyond the annual yearbook

 

[MilEME09]

Thus they are adopted/absorbed by Reg Force units.
The Regular Regimental HQ’s can finally do something beyond the annual yearbook

We do great BBQs too!

Seriously though our structure needs to be torn down and rebuilt, until a realistic model. If units could be successful in the 50s and 60s with remote coys and platoons everywhere. In the modern age of technology we should be just fine.

 

[KevinB]

We do great BBQs too!

Seriously though our structure needs to be torn down and rebuilt, until a realistic model. If units could be successful in the 50s and 60s with remote coys and platoons everywhere. In the modern age of technology we should be just fine.

Where there is a will, there is a way.

Somewhere someone misplaced the Will.

 

[MilEME09]

Where there is a will, there is a way.

Somewhere someone misplaced the Will.

Remember that one box in the CQ your CSM said to never open? It's in there

 

[MJP]

Just so it is clear we have 2+2 supply depots in the CAF. Edmonton and Montreal being "CAF" centric however both Esquimalt and Halifax function as 3rd line depots albeit focused primarily on Naval items.

Plus utilities, plus PILT, plus building & vehicle maintenance.
Plus the fleet re-life costs and the continued fleet lifecycle costs.
Plus the pay of the fleets equipment management team (LCMM, supply manager, etc).

You keep waiving your hands to demonstrate how cheap you think this can be, but you have not come around to explaining what you propose give-up to cover the costs.


You are wishing away the problem. The depots are stuffed. If your proposal is to open a new depot, then from where do we take the funds to pay for a new depot?

They are and they aren't. In many cases they are full of material from fleets that are no longer used but people like to hold onto the parts & material just in case. In many cases it is because people have lost visibility on the material in the depots and no one is "managing" it. That is improving under a concerted effort to remove dormant stock from the depots and has yielded some substantial gains but there is still much more to do in that realm.

The largest constraint is bulk space for large items as by their very nature they are hard to store in a way that can maximize avail horizontal and vertical space. A great recent example of space usage is HQSS which IMHO will never be used properly or in large numbers till we do something like Afghan again that needs semi permanent solutions.

Aside from the small tangent on supply depots you are bang on on the real costs! Having seen what happens when someone builds infrastructure without a real plan (TAPV Barns anyone) I don't think this is a route we want to go down.

Depots are full(I'm skeptical of that) because we closed 90% of them, we only have 7 CFSD in Edmonton, and our depot in Montreal. Edmonton is tiny, Montreal is larger by far but we have a very reduced storage capacity compared to pre 1990

90% is a gross exaggeration and yes the aggregate of space avail is lower but we also got out of the business of buying 20 years of parts right off the hopper in the 90s so the need for space was greatly reduced. I won't say that more modern methods like JIT work the best because things like JIT are not what we need but we also don't need a life cycles worth of spares sitting around.

Edmonton is far from "tiny" but has lots of room to expand unlike Montreal which as you point out is constrained by the city that grew up around it. If needed and quite frankly there are few viable scenarios I envision where new depots become a requirements Edmonton can expand and be like Montreal which is a collection of buildings rather than one building (TBF Edmonton already has a number of outbuildings).

New depots or expanding current ones is going to become necessary.

Below is the depot that was in Hamilton
View attachment 70320

I'd wager its a big bigger then 25 in Montreal. 25 we can't expand because it's in the middle of a city, 7 could but I'd argue we need to diversify our stock locations.


Ask your self this, if the flag went up right now, every PRes and SupRes member was called up, and we were at war. Do we have the equipment holdings to fully equip these forces to a set standard? I bet that answer is no, because our procurement has been about ordering the bare minimum fir decades.

TB2 got to it before me but before careful that you are actually comparing apples to apples as that was not a pure supply depot and had a variety of functions over the years. Downsview in Toronto and #5 in Moncton would have been better examples.

 

[FJAG]

Perhaps it is time for the Militia to consolidate within means and requirements as well?

It's long, long overdue.

The reason there is so much resistance to that is that every time there is a consolidation, it comes accompanied by a personnel reduction as well.

Back in Toronto, I joined the 7th Toronto Regiment RCA which had just been consolidated from 29th Fd Regt, 42 Medium Regt and 1 Locating Regiment. The three units combined could pretty much fill the parade square at University Armoury but it was demolished in 1963, the land handed over to the City to build a new law complex and the units distributed across the city. The combined regiment was moved to an old three story warehouse on Richmond Street for a few years while they finished building Moss Park Armoury.

Guess what. By the time we moved into Moss Park we could barely field a hundred folks. (a hundred and fifty with the band which was enormous )

When one amalgamates/consolidates three units one needs to aggregate the authorized positions and provide the core resources to actually house and train that amalgamated unit and not look at the amalgamation as a force reduction and infrastructure reduction opportunity. This is why Reserves 2000 and all those honorary colonels fight so hard to retain units. (plus there's the CO/RSM multiple majors and CSM rice bowl thing too)

Amalgamation is an absolute necessity. No question. The current system is archaic and not fit for purpose.

I'm a big fan of hybrid units where one CO and his command team is responsible for some 600 folks, both RegF and ResF, like 4 AD was. I frankly don't care if there is a QOR reserve company in greens, a 48 Highlanders reserve company in kilts and an RCR regular company in scarlet tunics on parade and if each company resides at different armouries day-to-day. Hell, the battalion can have one honourary colonel and three honourary lieutenant-colonels (one for each company) as long as it gets proper training, proper equipment and a role.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I'm a big fan of hybrid units where one CO and his command team is responsible for some 600 folks, both RegF and ResF, like 4 AD was. I frankly don't care if there is a QOR reserve company in greens, a 48 Highlanders reserve company in kilts and an RCR regular company in scarlet tunics on parade and if each company resides at different armouries day-to-day. Hell, the battalion can have one honourary colonel and three honourary lieutenant-colonels (one for each company) as long as it gets proper training, proper equipment and a role.

This has been tried before, with limited success.

The only way to make it work, IMHO, is to nuke the unneeded regiments leaving only a handful of 'winners'.

The political fallout would be unsustainable though...

 

[FJAG]

Two trucks per M777. One to tow the gun and carry the gunners, one for the ammo.

There are multiple ways of doing it. But it needs to be planned and programed into fleet purchases. There's been a fall down on that for some time. Underestimating the vehicle requirements for moving war levels of artillery ammunitions (and even ammunition expenditure rates) is a continuing problem and was to a large degree a problem in Afghanistan with its relatively low amounts used. Low for a war; yet too high for the CAF supply system.

There was once an MLVW gun tractor version and then the MSVS MILCOT gun tractor, for the 105mm fleets,. The former is long gone and the latter has many limitations and IMHO is not fit for operations or the M777.

The way the TLAV became employed was really just an example of how old and superseded equipment is sometimes exactly what one needs to fill an operational role.