Informing the Army’s Future Structure

[MilEME09]

Below is the 2023 edition of the military balance for the Canadian army,

Army 22,500
FORCES BY ROLE
MANOEUVRE
Mechanised
1 (1st) mech bde gp (1 armd regt, 2 mech inf bn, 1 lt inf
bn, 1 arty regt, 1 cbt engr regt, 1 log bn)
2 (2nd & 5th) mech bde gp (1 armd recce regt, 2 mech
inf bn, 1 lt inf bn, 1 arty regt, 1 cbt engr regt, 1 log bn)
COMBAT SUPPORT
1 engr regt
3 MP pl
AIR DEFENCE
1 AD regt
EQUIPMENT BY TYPE
ARMOURED FIGHTING VEHICLES
MBT 82: 42 Leopard 2A4 (trg role); 20 Leopard 2A4M
(upgraded); 20 Leopard 2A6M (52 Leopard 1C2 in store)
RECCE ε120 LAV-25 Coyote
IFV 550 LAV 6.0
APC 443
APC (T) 268: 235 M113; 33 M577 (CP)
APC (W) 175 LAV Bison (incl 10 EW, 32 amb, 32
repair, 64 recovery)
AUV 507: 7 Cougar; 500 TAPV
ENGINEERING & MAINTENANCE VEHICLES
AEV 23: 5 Buffalo; 18 Wisent 2
ARV 12 BPz-3 Büffel
ANTI-TANK/ANTI-INFRASTRUCTURE
MSL • MANPATS TOW-2
RCL 84mm Carl Gustaf
ARTILLERY 287
TOWED 163 105mm 126: 98 C3 (M101); 28 LG1 MkII;
155mm 37 M777
MOR 124: 81mm 100; SP 81mm 24 LAV Bison
UNINHABITED AERIAL VEHICLES • ISR • Light 5
RQ-21A Blackjack

Reserve Organisations 26,800
Canadian Rangers 5,300 Reservists
Provide a limited military presence in Canada’s northern,
coastal and isolated areas. Sovereignty, public-safety and
surveillance roles
FORCES BY ROLE
MANOEUVRE
Other
5 (patrol) ranger gp (209 patrols)
Army Reserves 21,500 Reservists
Most units have only coy-sized establishments
FORCES BY ROLE
COMMAND
10 bde gp HQ
MANOEUVRE
Reconnaissance
18 recce regt (sqn)
Light
51 inf regt (coy)
COMBAT SUPPORT
16 fd arty regt (bty)
3 indep fd arty bty
10 cbt engr regt (coy)
1 EW regt (sqn)
4 int coy
10 sigs regt (coy)
COMBAT SERVICE SUPPORT
10 log bn (coy)
3 MP coy

looking at where our strengths are, we have considerable weakness in armour, and artillery. Our mechanized infantry though via the LAV 6 has the most potential but lacks variants to flush out all our needs. Reserve elements should be tactically grouped for administrative control, and to reduce officer bloat. Given our personal issues, we should look at more inventive ways to plug the gaps, such as OIC's to activate reserve units to augment the reg force for over seas service.

 

[KevinB]

Below is the 2023 edition of the military balance for the Canadian army,



looking at where our strengths are, we have considerable weakness in armour, and artillery. Our mechanized infantry though via the LAV 6 has the most potential but lacks variants to flush out all our needs. Reserve elements should be tactically grouped for administrative control, and to reduce officer bloat. Given our personal issues, we should look at more inventive ways to plug the gaps, such as OIC's to activate reserve units to augment the reg force for over seas service.

That list is highly highly suspect.
The Leo C1 where divested
The Coyote and Bison were divested as well.

I believe that all the M113/TLAV where divested as well but not 100% on that

 

[Kirkhill]

Below is the 2023 edition of the military balance for the Canadian army,



looking at where our strengths are, we have considerable weakness in armour, and artillery. Our mechanized infantry though via the LAV 6 has the most potential but lacks variants to flush out all our needs. Reserve elements should be tactically grouped for administrative control, and to reduce officer bloat. Given our personal issues, we should look at more inventive ways to plug the gaps, such as OIC's to activate reserve units to augment the reg force for over seas service.

How "official" is that list?

I would like to think that somebody was bright enough to go through the warehouses and add the stored non-operational kit to the bucket of tools available to the CAF. That would include divested kit for which no takers were found.

Ukraine should give people a different view of the value of that inventory.

Even 52 Leo C1s (40 tonnes = Griffin II MPF) with associated AEVs and ARVs could find a home in the CAF Orbat. (A Squadron for each of the Recce Regiments?) If the Slovenians can take T55s and turn them into NATO compatible tanks welcomed in the Ukrainian Orbat then there should be Canadian opportunities for Canada's Leo C1s.

The M-55S is significantly different from its predecessor. The tank received a new gun – a 105 mm Royal Ordnance L7 with a thermal insulation jacket, (standard issue on the Leo C1 I believe and comparable to the MPF gun) one of the most successful tank guns of all time. The tower and hull were covered with additional reactive armor, which even changed the silhouette of the tank, bringing it closer to modern ones. (MEXAS armour available for the Leo C1) The M-55S received a digital ballistic computer (upgrades available) and gun stabilization (standard issue for the Leo C1), a Fotona SGS-55 sight with a laser rangefinder, (upgradable) a Fotona COMTOS-55 commander’s sight, an improved engine, and new rubber-metal tracks, and even a LIRD-1A laser radiation detector linked to the smoke grenade launcher IS-6.

The M-55S tank: a deep modernization of the Soviet T-55 for the Armed Forces • Mezha.Media

Slovenia transfers 28 of its own M-55S tanks to Ukraine. This is a deep modernization of the Soviet T-55 tank.

mezha.media

And it would be nice to know what the status on the 35mm Oerlikon GDF-005s and their fire controls and radars.

 

[KevinB]

How "official" is that list?

I would like to think that somebody was bright enough to go through the warehouses and add the stored non-operational kit to the bucket of tools available to the CAF. That would include divested kit for which no takers were found.

Ukraine should give people a different view of the value of that inventory.

Even 52 Leo C1s (40 tonnes = Griffin II MPF) with associated AEVs and ARVs could find a home in the CAF Orbat. (A Squadron for each of the Recce Regiments?) If the Slovenians can take T55s and turn them into NATO compatible tanks welcomed in the Ukrainian Orbat then there should be Canadian opportunities for Canada's Leo C1s.

The M-55S tank: a deep modernization of the Soviet T-55 for the Armed Forces • Mezha.Media

Slovenia transfers 28 of its own M-55S tanks to Ukraine. This is a deep modernization of the Soviet T-55 tank.

mezha.media

And it would be nice to know what the status on the 35mm Oerlikon GDF-005s and their fire controls and radars.

Divested in CAF terms means no longer in warehouse — either cut up or used as a range target.
The Leo and Bison fleet were beyond refurbishing.

 

[Kirkhill]

Divested in CAF terms means no longer in warehouse — either cut up or used as a range target.
The Leo and Bison fleet were beyond refurbishing.

Nothing is ever beypnd refurbishing... if you have inventory number.

 

[KevinB]

Nothing is ever beypnd refurbishing... if you have inventory number.

When I worked at KAC we called that a Danish Refurb. You kept the S/N but that was it, it was completely new and the old ones got destroyed or X marked on the S/N if it had life remaining and could be sold commercially. I did Danish refurbs for a bunch of US entities as well- as it kept the property books correct.

The problem with the Leo 1 and Bison/Coyote’s is that they were being replaced or simply removed (the Leo’s) with no planned replacement.
You can’t run a refurb program like that, as you can’t get funding.

It just hides the issues with the system - and while for some items it can solve an issue in the short term, it’s a work around as opposed to a fix.

In the ideal world the CAF would have a ORBAT of X and 3x of the equipment to provide for warstock.

 

[FJAG]

How "official" is that list?

I would like to think that somebody was bright enough to go through the warehouses and add the stored non-operational kit to the bucket of tools available to the CAF. That would include divested kit for which no takers were found.

Ukraine should give people a different view of the value of that inventory.

Even 52 Leo C1s (40 tonnes = Griffin II MPF) with associated AEVs and ARVs could find a home in the CAF Orbat. (A Squadron for each of the Recce Regiments?) If the Slovenians can take T55s and turn them into NATO compatible tanks welcomed in the Ukrainian Orbat then there should be Canadian opportunities for Canada's Leo C1s.

The M-55S tank: a deep modernization of the Soviet T-55 for the Armed Forces • Mezha.Media

Slovenia transfers 28 of its own M-55S tanks to Ukraine. This is a deep modernization of the Soviet T-55 tank.

mezha.media

And it would be nice to know what the status on the 35mm Oerlikon GDF-005s and their fire controls and radars.

Never underestimate the pressure the bean counters put on the CoC at the end of a new piece of equipment acquisition process to turn all of the replaced kit into razor blades as quickly as possible. Divestment of older gear is close to holy dogma. There is no equivalent of the Sierra Army Depot in the CAF notwithstanding that the odd thing gets squirreled away in Montreal when no one is looking.

It's the CAF's own fault because usually high up on the rationale for new gear is the argument that the old gear has become a maintenance burden. When you truck out that old canard it makes it very hard to argue within the department that it should be handed-down to the reserves who have zero maintenance capability.

 

[Kirkhill]

It may just hide system problems but the hardest thing to do is change the rules of the game. Urgent results often require working the system to its limits.

Even if it does cause the accountants to have nightmares (a net benefit in my view)

 

[FJAG]

It may just hide system problems but the hardest thing to do is change the rules of the game. Urgent results often require working the system to its limits.

Even if it does cause the accountants to have nightmares (a net benefit in my view)

I think the first thing that you need is an accepted plan to grow the size of the force's equipment holdings.

As an example you could take a certain type of equipment with a designated "hard use life cycle of x years" and plan that it will be used hard for 2/3 x years and then replaced with a new item while the replaced item goes into a "soft use cycle" with the reserves. Let's assume the soft use cycle is at one third the wear and tear rate of "hard use". In the end that soft use cycle ends up being a full x years which means that particular piece of equipment has now seen 2/3 x years hard use plus 1 x years soft use and been in inventory for a total of 1 2/3 x years before being totally rubbished.

That way you can grow the force, but right from square one, the plan has to provide for maintenance for those additional years of "soft use".

 

[KevinB]

I think the first thing that you need is an accepted plan to grow the size of the force's equipment holdings.

As an example you could take a certain type of equipment with a designated "hard use life cycle of x years" and plan that it will be used hard for 2/3 x years and then replaced with a new item while the replaced item goes into a "soft use cycle" with the reserves. Let's assume the soft use cycle is at one third the wear and tear rate of "hard use". In the end that soft use cycle ends up being a full x years which means that particular piece of equipment has now seen 2/3 x years hard use plus 1 x years soft use and been in inventory for a total of 1 2/3 x years before being totally rubbished.

That way you can grow the force, but right from square one, the plan has to provide for maintenance for those additional years of "soft use".

But that would require adult like thinking.

 

[Kirkhill]

You mean instead of buying a pickup truck with a five year life expectancy and driving it for thirty years?

 

[markppcli]

That list is highly highly suspect.
The Leo C1 where divested
The Coyote and Bison were divested as well.

I believe that all the M113/TLAV where divested as well but not 100% on that

We still have some TLAVs and Coyotes kicking around.

 

[Kirkhill]

That list is highly highly suspect.
The Leo C1 where divested
The Coyote and Bison were divested as well.

I believe that all the M113/TLAV where divested as well but not 100% on that

Last available public info on the Leo C1 I am aware of - circa 2018 Canada had 50 Leo C1s in good enough condition to be shopped to Jordan. No takers then. No disposal decisions reported then.

Canada fails to find buyer for surplus army tanks, final attempt to sell to Jordan Armed Forces fizzles | Globalnews.ca

After trying for more than two years to unload about 50 surplus army tanks on a foreign buyer, Canada has given up and will likely use its old Leopard 1s for target practice or scrap.

globalnews.ca

Canada has about 50 surplus Leopard 1C2 battle tanks and 11 Leopard 1 armoured engineering vehicles left over from the original batch of about 127 Leopard 1s Canada purchased, beginning in 1978.

But the Canadian Army parked its Leopard 1s for good last year and has moved over completely to the more modern Leopard 2 tanks. The army has a fleet of 82 Leopard 2 battle tanks, spread throughout the country at CFB Edmonton, CFB Montreal, and CFB Gagetown near Fredericton, New Brunswick.

The surplus Leopard 1s are parked largely in the same locations.

Le Bouthillier said 11 of the surplus tanks will be converted to artifacts, museum pieces that will be displayed outside armouries or other facilities to mark Canada’s military heritage.

No decisions have been made on what will happen to the rest of the surplus fleet. Several — perhaps all — could be used as targets for practicing gunners in the newer Leopard 2s.

“The last option would be to destroy the tanks,” Le Bouthillier said

It sounds as though, if you haven't been shooting them up on the ranges, they might be hiding in hangars somewhere.

 

[Kirkhill]

Does that mean that there might be a phantom fleet of TLAVs, Bisons, Coyotes, Leos, GDF-005s and Bofors 40s somewhere to match the stockpile of CRV-7s slated for destruction at Dundurn? Add in 500 modifiable TAPVs looking for something useful to do.

I wonder if Magellan thought to buy the CRV-7s back from the CAF for sale to Ukraine?

 

[MJP]

Last available public info on the Leo C1 I am aware of - circa 2018 Canada had 50 Leo C1s in good enough condition to be shopped to Jordan. No takers then. No disposal decisions reported then.

Canada fails to find buyer for surplus army tanks, final attempt to sell to Jordan Armed Forces fizzles | Globalnews.ca

After trying for more than two years to unload about 50 surplus army tanks on a foreign buyer, Canada has given up and will likely use its old Leopard 1s for target practice or scrap.

globalnews.ca

It sounds as though, if you haven't been shooting them up on the ranges, they might be hiding in hangars somewhere.

They are gone.

 

[Kirkhill]

They are gone.

Shyte. Oh well. Momentary hope is better than none.

 

[MilEME09]

Does that mean that there might be a phantom fleet of TLAVs, Bisons, Coyotes, Leos, GDF-005s and Bofors 40s somewhere to match the stockpile of CRV-7s slated for destruction at Dundurn? Add in 500 modifiable TAPVs looking for something useful to do.

I wonder if Magellan thought to buy the CRV-7s back from the CAF for sale to Ukraine?

CRV-7 would be great for Ukraine, especially the PG version that can be laser guided. Heck take a Mack truck or a milcot and put a couple launchers on it, be effective and cheap indirect fire for us, especially the PRes.

 

[Kirkhill]

The nature of the threat evolves - an Iranian "warship" off the coast of Brazil at the invitation of the Brazilian government

Iranian warships spotted off Brazilian coast sparking fury over 'dangerous development'​

Senator Ted Cruz called the docked ships a "direct threat" to the US and called for "crippling sanctions" on the port involved.​

By LUKE WHELAN
16:53, Sat, Mar 4, 2023 | UPDATED: 20:52, Sat, Mar 4, 2023
96BOOKMARK

Beach dwellers have spotted Iranian warships off the coast of Brazil. (Image: GETTY)
Iranian warships have been spotted off the coast of Brazil in a move that has infuriated US politicians. The south American nation gave Iran permission to dock two sanctioned ships in Rio de Janeiro, sparking a backlash from the US and Israel.

​

Lior Haiat, the spokesperson for Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, called the docking of the ships a "dangerous development" and scorned Brazil for granting a "prize" to Iran.

The ships, sanctioned recently by the US State Department, were told they could stay until today.
The US State Department spokesperson Ned Price said it wants to ensure Iran "is not able to acquire a foothold" in "our hemisphere".
He added: "It is certainly not the case that the Brazilian government, the Brazilian people would want to do anything that would assist, that would aid a government, a regime that is responsible for a brutal crackdown and violent repression against its own people."

Just as a reminder about what could be on board a ship of that type

Iran’s drone factory in Tajikistan

Iran becoming global drone producer on back of Ukraine war, says US

Officials share declassified intelligence as US seeks wider support for sanctions against Tehran

www.theguardian.com

 

[markppcli]

Last available public info on the Leo C1 I am aware of - circa 2018 Canada had 50 Leo C1s in good enough condition to be shopped to Jordan. No takers then. No disposal decisions reported then.

Canada fails to find buyer for surplus army tanks, final attempt to sell to Jordan Armed Forces fizzles | Globalnews.ca

After trying for more than two years to unload about 50 surplus army tanks on a foreign buyer, Canada has given up and will likely use its old Leopard 1s for target practice or scrap.

globalnews.ca

It sounds as though, if you haven't been shooting them up on the ranges, they might be hiding in hangars somewhere.

The Leo’s are on the Cold Lake Air Weapons range as targets.

 

[ArmyRick]

The Leo’s are on the Cold Lake Air Weapons range as targets.

Those Leo1 were old and worn down. Like Keith Richards level old.