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

The Optimal Battle Group vs. the Affiliated Battle Group

Infanteer

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Donor
Reaction score
3,141
Points
1,160
Mountie said:
What have you been hearing?

That the concept is done for.  I don't see OBGs in the 2013 Org stuff I've been looking at.
 

old fart

Member
Reaction score
1
Points
210
At this time, the report offers two options to conclude the 2 RCR BG 2021 aspects of the study.

In short wrap things up this APS (Option 1 - Completion and Disbandment APS 11) or a gradual 'wind-down' completing the process by APS 2012 (Option 2 - Reduction and Completion APS 2012). 

Option 2 was recommended, and a final decision is awaited....One of the reasons for leaning towards option 2 is that it allows time for decisions to be made with regard to the establishment (or not) of a LEO II Sqn in Gagetown

Suffice to say, that had  CF combat operations continued in Afstan, the BG 2021 BG would have deployed - but given the nature of TF 2-12 that was not to be and therefore a key part of the study was thwarted.  That being said, a significant amount of insights have been gleaned in the realms of command, sense and the human dimension (HD) aspects manifest within  a permanently formed BG.

At any rate, various lines of investigation (Fmn and BG 2021) will continue within the Army of Tomorrow Campaign Plan....which will also draw on vast amounts of material derived from the CF's largest and most complex simulation experiment to date, namely CDX 2010.
 

Mountie

Full Member
Reaction score
1
Points
230
So what exactly does this mean?  Affiliated Battle Groups, Permanent Battle Groups, neither ???  All it talks about is winding down the experiment.  What are the conclusions?
 

TangoTwoBravo

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
929
Points
1,110
It means we bash on with the structures that we have. We have always mixed and matched in accordance with the estimate of the situation.

As for CDX 10, we (C Sqn) are going to finish the last day in a couple of weeks. I hate cliff hangers...
 

Infanteer

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Donor
Reaction score
3,141
Points
1,160
Mountie said:
So what exactly does this mean?  Affiliated Battle Groups, Permanent Battle Groups, neither ???  All it talks about is winding down the experiment.  What are the conclusions?

The Army has got enough on the go with reorg-ing the 9 Bns to potentially hold 3 different fleets and to balance the Armoured Corps between the Armoured and Recce tasks.  "Optimizing" sounds great, but our doctrine is flexible enough with Combat Teams and Battle Groups to give us the combined arms punch at the lowest of levels.  That doctrine gives us far greater return on investment than solidifying structures that are not guaranteed to be required for operations.
 

GnyHwy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1
Points
0
As I have said before, the OBG is a pipe dream of someone who thinks they can predict our enemy of the future.  Their vision and insistence on it's potential for success has made them ignore all of the logistical and training nightmares it would cause.

The ABG is somewhat of a myth also.  Has anyone ever seen a subunit at full strength?  To say that we could match all the CS1s and 2s accordingly is farfetched.  Augmenting from 1 CS to another to produce an effective subunit is the only real solution.
 

Tango2Bravo said:
It means we bash on with the structures that we have. We have always mixed and matched in accordance with the estimate of the situation.

Infanteer said:
That doctrine gives us far greater return on investment than solidifying structures that are not guaranteed to be required for operations.

What they said.

Interestingly enough, we already have  what I would call an optimized Bde, with an existing CoC and capable of producing many combinations of BGs, perhaps even 2 if we stretch the numbers.
 

Mountie

Full Member
Reaction score
1
Points
230
I found the paper I read that suggested the ABG's would become permanent in 5 years.  It was a 2007 JADEX paper written at the very start of the OBG experiment.  My apologies.  I didn't realize the date on it at first.
 

b00161400

Sr. Member
Reaction score
80
Points
430
With the decision now being officially made for C sqn of the RCD's to be re-rolled to Tanks and being detached from 2 RCR the OBG seems to be dead for all intents and purposes.
 

vonGarvin

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
20
Points
430
So....C Sqn RCD will be co-located in Gagetown?  Along with 2 RCR? 

Sounds like 1989 all over again.

 

George Wallace

Army.ca Dinosaur
Reaction score
4
Points
410
Technoviking said:
So....C Sqn RCD will be co-located in Gagetown?  Along with 2 RCR? 

Sounds like 1989 all over again.

If we go back to 1983, we can see the reincarnation of 22 Fd Sqn. 

With W Bty..........The makings of a very compentent Cbt Team.
 
Top