An Arctic Army without Arctic Boots, only in Canada (From: Brown Boots)

[MilEME09]

The power point matches what a supply tech at clothing stores told me where I am, that the Mukluks were being reworked. That said they were telling people to triple sock with wet weather boots to stay warm and that it would be just as good. dumb idea in my opinion to discontinue issue of an item before the replacement is ready

 

[OldSolduer]

The mukluks we were issued worked just fine.


So which "good idea fairy" decided they needed to be redesigned?

 

[Tibbson]

I think this is indicative of the CFSS as whole.

We have gone from an organization that warehouses supplies to one that stores some stuff, relies on LPOs way to much, and now just try's to put out fires as they arise.

Its my belief that we have made supply much more complicated than it has to be.  DRMIS is and MIMS was an example of this.  It shouldn't take multiple transactions to order or receive a part, which is our bread and butter.  I contend supply consists of issues, receipts, orders and adjustments. Why we make it more complicated is beyond me.

An example of how simple supply can be:

I was in CT last week.  I needed a sight and rail system for my new shotgun.  My local CT didn't have any in stock.  The clerk looked around the local area none there either.  So she place an order and had 10 ea delivered in 7 days.  That's excellent logistics if you ask me.  It took her 5 mins to locate, order and set up delivery for a part AND she got spares.

Perhaps we have gone too far in trying to run our logistics like a money making company.  I know its cliche but no operation will succeed if your logistics train breaks down.  We came close in AFG WRT to ammo supplies and I don't think we have learned from it. 

Some of the older members of the forum may be able to shed light but I am told our logistics system used to be excellent and the envy of others.  At what point did we lose this focus and how can we get it back ?  Well my answer is a massive shift in military mind set and huge reworking of the logbranch as a whole.

I've always been lead to believe a lot of our issues developed around the time the government determined that we were required to follow all Treasury Board guidelines and that the CAF was unworthy of having their own way of doing things.  Now we just get bogged down in the TB process and have to bear the brunt of the criticism without being able to "fight back".

 

[Tibbson]

4. Seriously, seriously, seriously, if your like old and ancient and have been in forever, and have no real position (yes you dinosaurs know who you are), please get out. Your kit could be useful and the money for your wages better spent.

Um...just what leads you to believe that those of us who have been in for some time are unworthy of continuing to serve?  I pass every BFT in the lead group(s), I pass every Expres Test and FIT test they require I do.  I provide the best advice, leadership and guidance I can while performing my duties and I have a wealth of experience and trade knowledge to share.  The moment I can no longer provide all of that to the CAF, I'll retire and get out of your way.  Until that time, keep striving to reach our level.  It must be earned on merit not by attrition. 

 

[acen]

No doubt that we've made great strides (or strides at least), but that doesnt mean they can't be light years behind at the same time. Some things just work and there is little need to change them, so there is no real point in doing so (ground sheet for example, simple but effective, and actually has undergone a few changes in regards to the material used and it's weight, but these have been seamless changes), but I think there was a quantum leap ahead in the military gear world as a result of being at war for over a decade. The COTS items that are available now are far and above what we could design internally (especially with the good idea fairies tasked with the job), and generally are cheaper to purchase as well. I wouldnt quote this figure and it may all be hearsay, but I was told the CTS ruck cost approximately $800 a piece. For that kind of money, we could have outfitted everyone with a Mystery Ranch ruck, without volume discounts and with cash to spare. Think of how many colonels and MWO's had their salaries covered for the better part of a decade+ and the COTS option is an even bigger bargain.

 

[Infanteer]

That said they were telling people to triple sock with wet weather boots to stay warm and that it would be just as good.

Who was recommending that?  Sounds like a way to make the feet sweat and then freeze....

 

[acen]

Not only that, but the three socks would restrict blood flow so much that you wouldnt get warm blood to the feet in the first place! Seems like whoever suggested this has never actually tried the feasibility of their brilliant idea.

 

[dale622]

Maybe I'm just cranky because it's PER season... but our kit right now is a joke. We claim that we want to be hard charging into supporting arctic sovereignty and yet we don't have any vehicles that can travel the arctic for 12 months of the year. With the exception of a BV 206. Those however are in an absolutely junk state. I'm so glad we spent a boatload of money on a stupid stealth snowmobile though.

I have now heard so many stories of troops returning from clothing without being issued what they need to survive up north. I'm not blaming anyone in supply at all. I want that said... But my troops can't wear f**king Mk IV combat boots with double socks in -40 for weeks at a time! This is bloody outrageous! The basic bits of kit done well is what makes all the difference to the guy on the ground. We as an army "make do" with a whole lot but at some point something has to give, and some s**thead needs to hang.

Well enough of a rant from me. Time to go see how the divestment of our B vehicle fleet is going. 

 

[MilEME09]

Who was recommending that?  Sounds like a way to make the feet sweat and then freeze....

airforce supply tech posted to our clothing store

 

[Loachman]

Invite him along, perhaps via the appropriate chain-of-command, to confirm the wisdom of his advice.

 

[Bzzliteyr]

airforce supply tech posted to our clothing store

I'm sure he was saying that tongue in cheek.. he's moved up to LPO section now so you won't see him at the counter anymore.

 

[Nfld Sapper]

That was quick.....

 

[Bzzliteyr]

Oh no, completely unrelated actually.  He was already going there...

 

[Fabius]

And we wonder why we have a retention problem...
Although I would not bill this as a primary factor, the shortages and lack of basic kit sure is a contributing one to our retention problems.

 

[blacktriangle]

I have a simple solution (might be knee jerk reaction, be warned)

1. Reduce Regular Force Regiments to 2 x battalions each (lets stop pretending we can field 9 x battalions), wave a magical wand and re-allocate funds towards supplying and clothing the troops (better to have well equipped 6 battalions worth of troops!)
2. Reduce the P Res recruiting to almost nothing (oh wait, we are already doing that)
3. God forbid, GUT HQ elements at all levels
4. Seriously, seriously, seriously, if your like old and ancient and have been in forever, and have no real position (yes you dinosaurs know who you are), please get out. Your kit could be useful and the money for your wages better spent.
5. Gut the HQ elements (Mentioned twice, driving a point home)

Like I said, a few ideas to cough up some quick money and shift money around the budget

Oh, of course, Really need to fix the procurement system. I don't know how to do that, not my thing. Supply Techs should be all over it.

I agree on all points. I have long thought we could do "more with less". This however would require people to actually sit down and discuss what critical tasks we want the the CAF to complete, and what things we're willing to do without. As others have said before, defence isn't taken that seriously in Canada, so I won't hold my breath.

I don't think Canada will choose to afford a world class mechanized army. At the same time, I don't think we can afford NOT to have a modern Navy and AF. I will agree with Loachman that if we start cutting BN's, someone will still find a way to under-man and equip the remaining units. Something has to give though, but I feel we will all suffer equally.

As for the reserves, I have no knowledge of what they end up costing us...but I do feel that certain jobs (Armd, SIGINT/EW...various techs etc) may best be left to the Reg F due to training times and equipment shortages.

 

[George Wallace]

I agree on all points.

I wouldn't agree with all of ArmyRick's points as quickly as you have.  Why not?  Those points were covered already by a few other posters, such as Jim.  I felt that ArmyRick's suggestions were rude and ignorant of what the facts may actually be. 

As for the reserves, I have no knowledge of what they end up costing us...but I do feel that certain jobs (Armd, SIGINT/EW...various techs etc) may best be left to the Reg F due to training times and equipment shortages.

As you admit to having no knowledge as to costs of Reserves, you might as well admit to lack of knowledge about their training as well, and NOT have made a comment.

 

[blacktriangle]

I wouldn't agree with all of ArmyRick's points as quickly as you have.  Why not?  Those points were covered already by a few other posters, such as Jim.  I felt that ArmyRick's suggestions were rude and ignorant of what the facts may actually be. 


As you admit to having no knowledge as to costs of Reserves, you might as well admit to lack of knowledge about their training as well, and NOT have made a comment.

Well that's your freedom to do so George. But my freedoms allow me to agree with who I see fit, thanks.

If I may ask (and you may freely decline to answer) which of his points did you find rude or ignorant? 

As to your second point, while I may not forecast budgets for the PRes, I have both worked as a reservist, and as a RegF member at a PRes unit. I just question the validity of certain trades in the reserves. It's not a res/reg thing. I have done both, so have you. It's not an argument, just an honest thought to consider.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

If I may ask (and you may freely decline to answer) which of his points did you find rude or ignorant? 

Probably this one:

"4. Seriously, seriously, seriously, if your like old and ancient and have been in forever, and have no real position (yes you dinosaurs know who you are), please get out. Your kit could be useful and the money for your wages better spent."

It was rude and ignorant of knowledge. Many, myself included, have served to CRA in full capacity ensuring skills, knowledge and mentorship were maintained. Anybody and anyone in agreement, that denigrates that type of service is a jerk and can go piss up a rope.

 

[George Wallace]

As to your second point, while I may not forecast budgets for the PRes, I have both worked as a reservist, and as a RegF member at a PRes unit. I just question the validity of certain trades in the reserves. It's not a res/reg thing. I have done both, so have you. It's not an argument, just an honest thought to consider.

In the Reserves, as with the Reg Force, not all Trades are created equal; and even broken down further by: not all units being created equal.  What a certain Trade may do in one unit, they may have totally different operating criteria in another unit.  If you have a broad and lengthy period of service, you will see these minute details/differences over time.

 

[Mr. St-Cyr]

May or may not be the actual equipment we get....only showing the winter items

Thanks for the pics!

We need more of those old snow shoes. They just work. Neos? Sure! It will save wear on my personal pair. New mukluks? Interesting... Mittens and gloves. Excellent. If they buy some Outdoor research gloves like in the picture and don't attempt to invent their own, I would wear them and save the wear on my personal pair as well.