MJP
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 2,794
- Points
- 1,260
From the outset there were some support relationships that didn't make much sense and needed adjustment (still do IMHO). One example from 3 Div (that was replicated through the other Divs less 5 Div) was all PRes TAPV support relationships went through the 1 Svc Bn 2nd Line TAPV account, which is not an established support relationship. We found that out when we cut away the Svc Bn TAPV account for an exercise and all of a sudden the Div staff started yelling they need that account for PRes support. 5 Div only escapes this because they are 2nd line for the PRes and RegF units alike so it works for them.When the TAPV was adopted how many points of use were there supposed to be? 3 Light Battalions, 5 Recce Squadrons and a handful of training areas?
Now the fleet appears to be more broadly distributed among elements that never expected to own TAPVs. Has that changed the support imperatives?
The TAPV EMT should be looking at if the current support relationships make sense and adjust them as needed to fix these issues. They will likely have to wait for the CA to firm up their the responsibilities between the CMBG Svc Bns and the supporting CDSGs and what moves where to make those sorts of decisions
However, the above doesn't explain the poor serviceability and lack of parts within the CMBGs who have strong established ties to their 2nd line support entities. A part is a part is a part when it comes to sending it it from 2nd to 1st line (or even 3rd) there is nothing hard about the process if there is stock