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

Informing the Army’s Future Structure

FJAG said:
If anyone is still wondering why I dislike the M777 as being part of a mechanized force rather than a niche gun in a light force, here's what happened to a Russian D-30 (122mm) battery.



'Nuff said.

🍻
Click to expand...

That is an impressive stonking.

It looks like it might have been rocket type counter battery fire?
 
KevinB said:
I mean who'd have guess that non Armored systems would be so vulnerable - it's almost like the CAF never had M109's before ;)
Click to expand...
The interesting part about this scene is that the guns themselves appear generally undamaged and there are no significant impact craters to be seen while all the vehicles are cut to shreds. Looking in from a distance at a not very sharp image it strikes me this position was hit by a lot of airburst (gun or rocket) and perhaps more into the wagon lines than the gun line.

Incidentally I count nine guns and it looked like another being towed away in the distance. Russian batteries come in sixes so they may have adopted a few guns from another or two batteries. This might be the remnants of a battalion.

🍻
 
FJAG said:
The interesting part about this scene is that the guns themselves appear generally undamaged and there are no significant impact craters to be seen while all the vehicles are cut to shreds. Looking in from a distance at a not very sharp image it strikes me this position was hit by a lot of airburst (gun or rocket) and perhaps more into the wagon lines than the gun line.

Incidentally I count nine guns and it looked like another being towed away in the distance. Russian batteries come in sixes so they may have adopted a few guns from another or two batteries. This might be the remnants of a battalion.

🍻
Click to expand...
Cluster Bombs and a fair number of them being airburst if not all.
Stupidest thing we've ever done was signing that damned treaty. That and the ap land mine treaty.
What is the point of a treaty if we're the only ones who actually follow it ?
 
FJAG said:
Speaking of Scimitar yesterday:



:giggle:
Click to expand...

Whoa... upgraded with a Cummins diesel engine.

Nice

Thats Nice Reaction GIF by MOODMAN
 
GK .Dundas said:
Cluster Bombs and a fair number of them being airburst if not all.
Stupidest thing we've ever done was signing that damned treaty. That and the ap land mine treaty.
What is the point of a treaty if we're the only ones who actually follow it ?
Click to expand...

Convention on Cluster Munitions – UNODA

www.un.org www.un.org

FWIW - you can use an airbusting sub-bomblet - the way the cluster munition treaty was written, it only affects scatterable submunitions from aircraft.
NATO has a number of "Cluster" munitions in it's inventories - that are not banned by convention.

It also doesn't apply to rocket or tube artillery.

Convention+on+Cluster+Munitions+E.pdf
1. Each State Party undertakes never under any circumstances to: (a) Use cluster munitions;
Article 1
  1. (b) Develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile, retain or transfer to anyone, directly or indirectly, cluster munitions;
  2. (c) Assist, encourage or induce anyone to engage in any activity prohibited to a State Party under this Convention.
2. Paragraph 1 of this Article applies, mutatis mutandis, to explosive bomblets that are specifically designed to be dispersed or released from dispensers affixed to aircraft.
3. This Convention does not apply to mines.

2. “Cluster munition” means a conventional munition that is designed to disperse or release explosive submunitions each weighing less than 20 kilograms, and includes those explosive submunitions. It does not mean the following:
  1. (a) A munition or submunition designed to dispense flares, smoke, pyrotechnics or chaff; or a munition designed exclusively for an air defence role;
  2. (b) A munition or submunition designed to produce electrical or electronic effects;
  3. (c) A munition that, in order to avoid indiscriminate area effects and the risks posed by unexploded submunitions, has all of the following characteristics:
    1. (i) Each munition contains fewer than ten explosive submunitions;
    2. (ii) Each explosive submunition weighs more than four kilograms;
    3. (iii) Each explosive submunition is designed to detect and engage a single target object;
    4. (iv) Each explosive submunition is equipped with an electronic self-destruction mechanism;
    5. (v) Each explosive submunition is equipped with an electronic self- deactivating feature;
3. “Explosive submunition” means a conventional munition that in order to perform its task is dispersed or released by a cluster munition and is designed to function by detonating an explosive charge prior to, on or after impact;
4. “Failed cluster munition” means a cluster munition that has been fired, dropped, launched, projected or otherwise delivered and which should have dispersed or released its explosive submunitions but failed to do so;
5. “Unexploded submunition” means an explosive submunition that has been dispersed or released by, or otherwise separated from, a cluster munition and has failed to explode as intended;
 
Mortar guy said:
Awesome discussion here. I note that COA 3.1 was selected and we are losing light battalions - well we are really losing half of the Reg F infantry (27 rifle coys to 12) in the Army. We will be left with 6 x 'mech' bns with 2 x coys each (along with a ARes coy). The Army seems to gain a PSYOPS Bn and a FP Bn. Oh, and CANSOF gets a LIB that they don't want. Am I right in feeling this is the stupidest possible COA?
Click to expand...
McG said:
I have not seen anything saying this Bn is being given to CANSOF. Instead of three light battalions done half-assed, the Army is saying it will do one right ... which should mean properly structured resourced CS and CSS to go with it for the first time since the 90's. There is a role for such a unit, we just need a little institutional discipline to not allow individual COs to prance-off after a personal fantasy of pseudo-SOF.
Click to expand...
Mortar guy said:
OK, so "gets a LIB" is unclear. On the presentations I have seen it shows the one and only LIB as "earmarked for SOF support" - albeit under CCSB. Also, the structure presented is hardly properly structured and resourced - small rifle sections, small weapons platoons in the rifle coys, small mor pls (only 6 tubes), small DFS platoon (3 sects vice doctrinal 6). Don't let anyone blow smoke where they shouldn't - the RCIC is being decimated for no appreciable gain in combat capability anywhere. Our Army will be hollowed out so we can build faddish, boutique units that are too precious or specialized to deploy - all enablers and no enabled.
Click to expand...
Infanteer said:
I'll throw the challenge out to those arguing that the Divisions/Areas/Whatever in the CA are superflous. If your brigades are focused on managing the generation of combat power, and the CA is focused on corporate requirements, business planning, and force development, why would you eliminate a layer of HQ that handles the following (paraphrasing from a previous experienced poster):
  • Provides proper "span of control" to the CA's numerous Regular and Reserve formations;
  • Provides a regional structure for Dom Ops, and speaks with the provinces;
  • Manages infrastructure and interfaces with Real Property Management;
  • Manages the Reserves and much of its administration.
If you think this is going to be centrally managed from Ottawa, or handled by a CMBG, then I'd counter that your argument fails to consider what each echelon of command does from day-to-day.
Click to expand...

www.ctvnews.ca

'We've got to grow': Anand says CAF must recruit more troops amid heightened global uncertainty

National Defence Minister Anita Anand says there is an urgent need to attract more Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) personnel amid a 'clear and present' danger to the rules based international order.
www.ctvnews.ca www.ctvnews.ca
So, with the launch of Putin's war in Ukraine, has the situation changed on the Army's F2025 estimate? Even recognizing that new capabilities are required and the existing structure spreads PYs so thin that it is perpetually hollow, is the elimination of an infantry battalion politically viable in the current climate?
 
dapaterson said:
I'd invite the three regimental colonels to the Citadel, feed them a nice goat stew, and explain that the current situation with our Russian battalions that are culminated before they do anything is unsustainable.
Click to expand...
I think that argument can be made within the Army, but will the Canadian public/media accept that proposal right now?
 
McG said:
I think that argument can be made within the Army, but will the Canadian public/media accept that proposal right now?
Click to expand...

Do you really think the Canadian public really know or care?

Some of the people I've talked to recently are convinced that we are going to start conscripting people to send to the front, by about next week.

My attempt to share with them the spotted history of conscription in Canada didn't seem to allay their fears by much.
 
I've had variants of this conversation with various people over the years.
The understanding of this Country 's history is utterly appalling. Assuming that they have any knowledge whatsoever.
I have a strong urge to go through this Country's provincial education ministries with a ....flame thrower.
 
Last edited:
GK .Dundas said:
I've had variants of this conversation with various people over the years.
The understanding of this Country 's history is utterly appalling. Assuming that they have any knowledge whatsoever.
I have a strong urge to go through this Country's provincial education ministries with a ....flame thrower.
Click to expand...

I felt the same way until I saw what my kids were learning about WW1 & WW2 in High School recently. The curriculum has actually given me some hope.

It was certainly better laid out and presented than I experienced many years ago.
 
dapaterson said:
I'd invite the three regimental colonels to the Citadel, feed them a nice goat stew, and explain that the current situation with our Russian battalions that are culminated before they do anything is unsustainable.
Click to expand...

Dude, you missed a few dozen of the Regimental Colonels who are attached to the units on this list, I think:

List of units of the Canadian Army - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
daftandbarmy said:
Do you really think the Canadian public really know or care?

Some of the people I've talked to recently are convinced that we are going to start conscripting people to send to the front, by about next week.

My attempt to share with them the spotted history of conscription in Canada didn't seem to allay their fears by much.
Click to expand...

Left Coast....o_O
 
daftandbarmy said:
Do you really think the Canadian public really know or care?
Click to expand...
As on 01 Feb 2022, no.
As of 01 Mar 2022, the situation is changed. Many Canadians are realizing for the first time that you can’t keep the peace and prevent atrocity with good will and a blue hat. Many Canadians are experiencing for the first time a realization of the risks and dangers of global war. Some are looking to Europe with worry that f what may come next, while others feel frustration at our inability to make things right and to make them right now. There is a growing recognition that the west may need to use to protect itself or to act in the interests of humanity.

There will still be plenty of apathetic individuals and many more still actively opposed to the existence of a Canadian military. But I think that right now there is a large plurality of Canadians who would be unhappy to hear Canada is reducing the total number of combat units.
 
McG said:
As on 01 Feb 2022, no.
As of 01 Mar 2022, the situation is changed. Many Canadians are realizing for the first time that you can’t keep the peace and prevent atrocity with good will and a blue hat. Many Canadians are experiencing for the first time a realization of the risks and dangers of global war. Some are looking to Europe with worry that f what may come next, while others feel frustration at our inability to make things right and to make them right now. There is a growing recognition that the west may need to use to protect itself or to act in the interests of humanity.

There will still be plenty of apathetic individuals and many more still actively opposed to the existence of a Canadian military. But I think that right now there is a large plurality of Canadians who would be unhappy to hear Canada is reducing the total number of combat units.
Click to expand...

Polls seem to say stay out and send money, while clutching pearls and sending sternly worded messages, but not much about 'Stand to and tool up':


Ukraine war opinion synopsis

What Canadians want done

That grim realization of a potential nuclear conflict now governs how Canadians believe Canada should be responding to the crisis. A combined majority (73%) believe we should stay out of direct military contact altogether—Canada and its NATO allies should send as many weapons and as much funding as possible to fight the Russians without directly entering the country with troops and armaments (48%) or only use other means like imposing financial/economic sanctions (25%). The remainder (27%) are split between those (13%) who say Canada and its NATO allies should cross the Ukraine border or enter its airspace and commence fighting with the Russian forces, most likely triggering a broader war with potential nuclear consequences, and an equal group (14%) at the other end of the table who say we should stay out of everything altogether.

 
A poll question about if we should go into a war is not the same as a poll question asking if we need to be ready (or more ready) for a war.
 
Hello everyone,

I'd just like to preface this with the fact that I'm a completely ignorant civilian. My only exposure to the military is the internet (lurking this board off and on since ~06 when I was considering RMC), an uncle that served for his entire adult life, and fiction.

Been reading more and more lately, and wanted to take a shot at this as a resource allocation puzzle. I'm sure that some/many of my assumptions and ideas will be horrifically wrong and full of holes, but when you fine people point them out I'll come out of it a more understanding citizen.

Some of my underlying assumptions/requirements
1. Manpower is going to stay relatively constant
2. The regimental structure and division of combat arms/cap badges is going nowhere
3.The LAV is going nowhere
4. We need to be able to field a Bde size force somewhere in the world (presently the Baltics)
5. Purchasing needs to be kept "Canadian realistic"
6. This needs to happen fast

First step- Gain true heavy armour combined arms capability
How- abandon the idea of 3 symmetrical regiments, turn one of them into a US style cavalry battalion/regiment, and have a 2nd full set of kit that can be pre-positioned where we think they need to be. Use the Leo4+'s for domestic duty, the 6's as the prepositioned. UOR to get a proper tracked vehicle with integrated ATGM to support them in the short term, followed by a competition for replacement. My thought is to lease M3A3 Bradley's to gain near immediate capability, then choose between CV9035, Lynx, and Redback.

Set up the Regiment with a 3x3 squadron structure and a 2 vehicle command element:
1st Squadron = 11 Leo's
2nd and 3rd = 8 CFV's + 3 Leo's
Total 17 Leo's + 16 CFV's. Assuming a round purchase number both the "home" and forward sets would have 3 spare tanks from our existing stocks, and a UOR for 40 CFV's would have it up and running.

2nd Step- Outfit the rest of the RCAC
How- return to the turn of the century LAV as thing single chassis model, but follow through with the turrets. I'd use the same vehicle/platoon/squadron mix, with the LAV LRSS taking the place of the tracked CFV. 16+ spares allows for 3 full sets and 6+ left over. To replace the Leo's take 60 LAV ISC's from the RCIC, remove the current turret and replace with either Cockerill CVCT /3105 or at Kongsberg RT60 with the new 40mm + dual ATGM. I'm under no illusions that this LAV mounted force could fight as heavy armour, but would give us a lighter screening/cavalry formation with greater strategic mobility. 3 sets of kit again allows for pre-positioning one for swift deployment.

3rd Step- Restructure the infantry around remaining LAV ISC's and CP's, once again coming up with a full battalion set extra, UOR one Javelin CLU per platoon, and gain some mortars.
Platoon = 3x Lav ISC (2x 6man rifle section, one weapons section with CarlG/Javelin team, DMR, protection) + Lav CP (Platoon down to 34 from 40 to free up PY's)
2Lav CP's at company headquarters, battalion = 27 Lav ISC, 15 LAV CP. Times 7 battalions = 189 and 105, ~30 spare ISC's and 76 CP's for other uses.
Chop up the roofs of the next 35 ACSV's or some LAV CP's to make our version of the M1129. I'd love to mount NEMO or AMOS turrets, but you know, money.

4th Step- SP Artillery - I wanted the Archer, but given the low number in use currently and the number of existing orders it seems like that would take too long. We could probable get Paladin's as fast as the Brad's out of US stocks, but that comes with the weight, maintenance, and mobility issues of tracked and armoured system. I think the way out would be to leverage the Saudi LAV deal to talk them out of 48 Used Cesar's. (again spare prepositioned battery).

5th Step -GBAD- use the PY's saved from switching from M777 to Cesar to standup an additional battery per regiment, find the TAPV a home and beg our way in to mount the MADIS system - covers off counter UAV as well as traditional GBAD.


I may be completely out to lunch, but would this not allow us to have a semi-permanent infantry based battlegroup (with organic AT and mortars plus SP artillery and GBAD) stationed in Latvia, and the ability to surge to a full Bde?

Also, how unreasonable is a shopping list of
40x tracked IFV's
60x off the shelf turrets
50x used wheeled SPG's
35x LAV conversions + Mortars
50 dual station GBAD pairs?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kirkhill
    • Like
Multi Domain Task Force - Canada
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
daftandbarmy
daftandbarmy
Kirkhill
    • Insightful
    • Like
Analysis of US Wishlists 2025
Replies
0
Views
3K
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
Small Radio Networking and Clouds
Replies
15
Views
16K
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
Industrial Strategy - Capitalizing the Canadian Forces
2 3
Replies
47
Views
47K
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
dimsum
MND Mandate Letter 2021
2
Replies
25
Views
39K
FJAG
FJAG
Back
Top