Informing the Army’s Future Structure

[Kirkhill]

@Kirkhill you need to add the tank Coy for the Cav Sqn in the ABCT too.

We'd have to Canadianize that Squadron - we only have enough tanks for the 5 Tank Coys with 10 tanks in Reserve.

Of course we could go the Swedish route and swap 4 gun tanks in each company for 4 AMOS mortar tanks by buying those instead of additional gun tanks. We would need 32 of them to marry up with our 80 gun tanks.

 

[KevinB]

We'd have to Canadianize that Squadron - we only have enough tanks for the 5 Tank Coys with 10 tanks in Reserve.

Of course we could go the Swedish route and swap 4 gun tanks in each company for 4 AMOS mortar tanks by buying those instead of additional gun tanks. We would need 32 of them to marry up with our 80 gun tanks.

Get more tanks.
But again so many missing assets anyway that it’s not as simple as that.

 

[GK .Dundas]

Get more tanks.
But again so many missing assets anyway that it’s not as simple as that.

Oh I can simplify that quite easily...we need... basically everything.

 

[Kirkhill]

Found a really interesting quote in an article on the Hellfire replacement, the JAGM.

Winning a fight between developed industrial nations will really come down to the efficient use of available systems. That means fielding updated and upgraded low-cost weapons and finding new and creative ways to leverage existing systems is just as important as developing and fielding next-generation tech.

While hypersonic missiles and AI-powered drones may draw the majority of attention when it comes to new defense developments, systems like the AGM-179 JAGM offer a glimpse into the economically efficient near-future of warfare. A large-scale conflict with a near-peer like China is often seen as “the big game” of sorts for exquisite and supremely expensive systems like $100 million boost-glide weapons and sleek next-generation stealth fighters.

The truth is, these technologies really do matter, but their cutting-edge nature means their use in such a fight would be limited. In 2021, for instance, the U.S. Air Force had approximately 272 F-35As in service — more stealth fighters than any other country has in total — but the vast majority of America’s fighter fleets remain older 4th generation jets. Flying alongside those 272 F-35As were more than 450 F-15s of various sorts and nearly a thousand F-16s. Likewise, China’s 1,800 fighters include just 150 or fewer stealth jets — with 800 or so 4th generation fighters and the rest coming from even older stock.

AGM-179 JAGM: Replacing the legendary Hellfire missile

Lockheed Martin's new AGM-179 JAGM will replace two different versions of the legendary Hellfire missile that's been in service for 40 years.

www.sandboxx.us

The Ukrainians are demonstrating this philosophy every day.

Or as Donald Rumsfeld would have it: "You go to war with the Army you have -- not the Army you might wish you have"

So, working within the framework of the tanks, guns and helicopters we have, might be a useful starting point. Figuring out what else can be done with them might also be useful.

 

[Kirkhill]

Best example of the above, in my opinion.

Converting obsolete rifle anti-tank grenades to be compatible with hobby drones by means of 3D printers.

Drones the new snipers of Ukraine war as 3D tech turns Soviet grenades into airborne tank killers

Modified grenades are now highly accurate at destroying Russian tanks by attacking the relatively less-protected top of the turret

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[KevinB]

Or as Donald Rumsfeld would have it: "You go to war with the Army you have -- not the Army you might wish you have"

So, working within the framework of the tanks, guns and helicopters we have, might be a useful starting point. Figuring out what else can be done with them might also be useful.

I don’t disagree, but given that Canada isn’t in a shooting war currently, there is some ability to acquire items that are needed deficiencies. The world isn’t exactly a stable place, I would suggest that given the massive gaps that are in the CAF that a pressing need to fill those gaps exist.

Canada needs a modernized Defence White Paper to make a goal to work forward too.

The last holistic look at Defence in Canada was Perrin Beatty’s 1987 WP

A defence plan for Canada | Maclean's | JUNE 15, 1987

archive.macleans.ca

Until that is done, it’s just rearranging deck chairs.

 

[Kirkhill]

I don’t disagree, but given that Canada isn’t in a shooting war currently, there is some ability to acquire items that are needed deficiencies. The world isn’t exactly a stable place, I would suggest that given the massive gaps that are in the CAF that a pressing need to fill those gaps exist.

Canada needs a modernized Defence White Paper to make a goal to work forward too.

The last holistic look at Defence in Canada was Perrin Beatty’s 1987 WP

A defence plan for Canada | Maclean's | JUNE 15, 1987

archive.macleans.ca

Until that is done, it’s just rearranging deck chairs.

I can't disagree entirely but ...

Perhaps the whole problem begins with the lack of a sense of urgency. Canada, and I will include citizens, politicians and soldiers, has no sense of impending doom. Lacking that sense of urgency time is spent thinking in stead of doing.

People never get around to testing out all their hypotheses for fear that it is going to cost money and that their hypothesis will fail. And with it their careers. The safe thing to do is to do what has been done. There is little obvious effort to keep pushing the limits and expanding envelopes.

Those failed experiments are critical to development. They demonstrate the limits of what is available, what critical gaps exist and how current technologies might fill those gaps.

Canada's most fortunate and secure position should be resulting in the world's most experimental force. Not the most conservative force.

And to achieve that, with the world's most uninterested government, that has to mean using the available kit in the most outrageous manners possible while incremental additions are made. Increments from internal workshops, civilian market (non milspec) and freebies from vendors. And whatever government grants can be scrounged.

In other words, act like every other shoe-string start up with a bright idea. You need one department that throws out the rule book and plays.

 

[Kirkhill]

I can't disagree entirely but ...

Perhaps the whole problem begins with the lack of a sense of urgency. Canada, and I will include citizens, politicians and soldiers, has no sense of impending doom. Lacking that sense of urgency time is spent thinking in stead of doing.

People never get around to testing out all their hypotheses for fear that it is going to cost money and that their hypothesis will fail. And with it their careers. The safe thing to do is to do what has been done. There is little obvious effort to keep pushing the limits and expanding envelopes.

Those failed experiments are critical to development. They demonstrate the limits of what is available, what critical gaps exist and how current technologies might fill those gaps.

Canada's most fortunate and secure position should be resulting in the world's most experimental force. Not the most conservative force.

And to achieve that, with the world's most uninterested government, that has to mean using the available kit in the most outrageous manners possible while incremental additions are made. Increments from internal workshops, civilian market (non milspec) and freebies from vendors. And whatever government grants can be scrounged.

In other words, act like every other shoe-string start up with a bright idea. You need one department that throws out the rule book and plays.

Come to that... doesn't that department already exist? How does it integrate with F Echelon and the Operational Units?

Future Force Design - Canada.ca

As Minister of National Defence, it is my privilege to present the 2020-21 Departmental Results Report for the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF).

www.canada.ca

2020-2021 - 2223 people (FTE) with 881,591,666 CAD to spend

Money being spent on cyber, comms and Transport Canada projects rather than buying half a dozen Javelins to bolt on to LAVs and deploy on foot. Leasing 4 M109s for Maple Resolve. Or at least sending some gunners down to the US to train on them in a unit and invite the Yanks to bring their guns to Maple Resolve. Experimental purchases of the full range of CG-84 ammunition to play with on exercise.

Chopping and channeling a couple of TAPVs to see what has to be done to make them acceptable rides......

I could go on but there are other much better qualified to rant than me. HIMARS, NASAMS-GBAD-CSC overlaps....

 

[Weinie]

I don’t disagree, but given that Canada isn’t in a shooting war currently, there is some ability to acquire items that are needed deficiencies. The world isn’t exactly a stable place, I would suggest that given the massive gaps that are in the CAF that a pressing need to fill those gaps exist.

Canada needs a modernized Defence White Paper to make a goal to work forward too.

The last holistic look at Defence in Canada was Perrin Beatty’s 1987 WP

A defence plan for Canada | Maclean's | JUNE 15, 1987

archive.macleans.ca

Until that is done, it’s just rearranging deck chairs.

Nailed it. SSE was a tick in the box, instead of a way forward. Promises made were not met, future capabilities were not capitalized, and the PY promises/initiatives were re-allocated or cut. It is/was a shit-show, yet people keep trotting it out (because we have nothing else/in the absence of anything else).

 

[Kirkhill]

Place to start....

TAPVs - generally agreed to be surplus to requirement.

Hand 24 of them over to DRDC, 6 with RWS and 18 clean utility. Have them evaluate the beasts. Enumerate the faults. Find fixes. And then use them as platforms to find out what capabilities they can realistically support once they are fixed as much as they can be.

But make sure there are some field soldiers holding the engineers' hands. And bring the trial units into the field on exercises like Maple Resolve for evaluation.

Some of those capabilities might be tranferrable to LAVs, LUVs or even CCVs.

Defence Research and Development Canada research centres - Canada.ca

DRDC operates eight research centres across Canada, each with a unique combination of expertise and facilities to carry out world-class science and technology research.

www.canada.ca

 

[GK .Dundas]

Please tell me the almost 1200 various types of M113s haven't all been converted to hubcaps or something?

 

[FJAG]

Or at least sending some gunners down to the US to train on them in a unit and invite the Yanks to bring their guns to Maple Resolve.

The 12 M109A6 Paladins of the two batteries of the 1st Bn of the 148th FAR of the Idaho National Guard enter the chat. Or the two batteries of HIMARS of the 2nd Bn of the 300th FAR of the Wyoming National Guard enter the chat.

 

[Kirkhill]

The 12 M109A6 Paladins of the two batteries of the 1st Bn of the 148th FAR of the Idaho National Guard enter the chat. Or the two batteries of HIMARS of the 2nd Bn of the 300th FAR of the Wyoming National Guard enter the chat.

Calgary Highlanders have (or had) an annual cross-border social event with the Washington State National Guard in Spokane. There are exploitable links all along the border.

 

[Kirkhill]

Come to that... doesn't that department already exist? How does it integrate with F Echelon and the Operational Units?

Future Force Design - Canada.ca

As Minister of National Defence, it is my privilege to present the 2020-21 Departmental Results Report for the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF).

www.canada.ca

2020-2021 - 2223 people (FTE) with 881,591,666 CAD to spend

Money being spent on cyber, comms and Transport Canada projects rather than buying half a dozen Javelins to bolt on to LAVs and deploy on foot. Leasing 4 M109s for Maple Resolve. Or at least sending some gunners down to the US to train on them in a unit and invite the Yanks to bring their guns to Maple Resolve. Experimental purchases of the full range of CG-84 ammunition to play with on exercise.

Chopping and channeling a couple of TAPVs to see what has to be done to make them acceptable rides......

I could go on but there are other much better qualified to rant than me. HIMARS, NASAMS-GBAD-CSC overlaps....

The more I think about this the more annoyed I become.

0.9 BCAD is not chump change. It is about 4% of the Defence Budget.

I see the Navy and the Air Force seem to be fully exploiting the opportunities with big budget, long term projects. The Government certainly is exploiting the budget with crossovers into Transport Canada, DFO, Energy, Arctic, Environment, Pollution, Security, Disaster Management and Emergency Preparedness....

Is the Army doing all it can to exploit the opportunity with near term combat arms experimentation - new systems, modifications, tactics, techniques and procedures?

 

[Kirkhill]

A bunch of students, 1.5 MUSD and 18 months

Students Teach Army About Rapid Prototyping

 

[IKnowNothing]

Moreso on the topic of making the best of what we have. Given the things a TAPV can do vs. the things a TAPV can't do, the RCAC's desire to go Cavalry, and the potential to have 2 Bde's tasked primarily with COIN/peacekeeping/QRF, it seems to me that the question becomes whether or not LAV mounted mech battalions outside of 1 CMBG make sense, and I think the answer is no.

Whether it's 3 combined arms battalions or 1 tank regiment + 2 mech Bn's, the maneuver units of 1CMBG will eat up ~2 battalion sets of LAV's. Three more sets + LRSS has all three armoured regiments mounted as LAV based cavalry (strap on ATGM's and UAV's as needed, dismount scout and tank hunter teams). 6th set pre-positioned to Europe with a squadron worth of tanks to have a flyover combined arms BG. RCR and 22 go light with TAPV's assigned for COIN/convoy escort/ protected mobility as needed for non-peer fight taskings .

 

[Kirkhill]

ACSV for the infantry.

 

[IKnowNothing]

ACSV for the infantry.

ACSV line is already going to be stretched thin with gap filling, 20-30 hulls to each of AGM, RiWP, and Spike N-Los makes a dent

 

[KevinB]

A bunch of students, 1.5 MUSD and 18 months

View attachment 73765

Students Teach Army About Rapid Prototyping

Oh. the stories I could tell about students and rapid prototyping projects for people...
Sadly all Classified

 

[AmmoTech90]

Hand 24 of them over to DRDC, 6 with RWS and 18 clean utility. Have them evaluate the beasts. Enumerate the faults. Find fixes.

Do not do this. It is not DRDCs job. R&D is. They get stuck doing shit like this and produce long, off target reports too late.
Use LETE for this. Oh wait. Army grown ups don't care enough about technical stuff to do anything serious about fixing short comings in a fast and good manner. They were given the opportunity to take two out of three options and chose cheap.