Informing the Army’s Future Structure

[Colin Parkinson]

You are absolutely missing the issues.
It worked in days of old when you got issued a rifle and helmet and off you went.

It simply doesn’t work in this day and age for anything BUT territorial defense forces.

Well it worked well with the Shia Militia's and the Taliban and they skipped on the helmet bit.

 

[KevinB]

Well it worked well with the Shia Militia's and the Taliban and they skipped on the helmet bit.

Both supplied heavily by China, Russia and Iran, as well had no qualms losing lots of people, or conducting attacks way outside the LOAC.

 

[Kirkhill]

The US Army is working with Sikorsky on UH-60V as right now Bell can only deliver 20-30 Valor a year for the next 5-10 years, no one else will be getting Valors for 20-30 years.

Really? So your game plan is to ditch as much dewatted, derated, second hand junk from your warehouses as you can while trying to find the bucks to buy new kit?

Other people tend to find buyers for their new kit so they can share the exorbitant cost of developing and marketing that kit.

I seem recall us jumping the queue on M777s to get us into Afghanistan.

Everything is contractual. Everything is negotiable. Everything is transactional.

 

[KevinB]

Really? So your game plan is to ditch as much dewatted, derated, second hand junk from your warehouses as you can while trying to find the bucks to buy new kit?

It’s not an Army $ issue , it’s Bell, they have never had a large Helicopter contract and they need to ramp up exponentially.

Other people tend to find buyers for their new kit so they can share the exorbitant cost of developing and marketing that kit.

Yes except most countries like to sit on the sidelines and dither until it’s done.

I seem recall us jumping the queue on M777s to get us into Afghanistan.

Because the USMC was buying off an Army contract and there was no pressing need for them to get guns as they had many already. While they wanted the CAF to get them sooner.

Everything is contractual. Everything is negotiable. Everything is transactional.

Except for when it isn’t.

 

[FJAG]

Fine Parachute Regiment then

Done - but Parachute Brigade.

I’ve resigned myself to the fact Canada might equip 4 Bde’s if you’re lucky. I think 2 Div’s is a bridge to far. \

Just using the math for our current equipment levels and RegF and ResF personnel authorized strengths you can do two - use 1 bde as the 30% RegF core for 1 Div and the Prairies and Southern Ontario for the 70% ResF for a 30/70 total of three manoeuvre brigades. Technically there is a fourth. A prepositioned fully equipped/very lightly manned bde/CMTC in Europe. - these constitute 1 Div.

I’d kick all the Armor/Mech (excluding training items) to Latvia/Poland.
40/60 for 1 Brigade with 30% and the Bde Staff over there.
30/70 for the second Bde and have it in Valcatraz.
Both doing annual flyover’s for training.

Basically my thought too except Prairies and Ontario as the source

70/30 Edmonton Light Bde

Nope. I put a 70/30 Mech bde in Valcarier/Quebec City region and a 30/70 light bde into Montreal.
In addition there is capability for a 1 light regiment (1 light battalion/1 light recce regiment) in each of BC and the Maritimes.
All belong to 2 Div

70/30 Petawawa Light Bde

Yup - two 100/0 para battalions in Pet and one 30/70 para battalion in the Ottawa/Hull region - also 2 Div

*both would require significant infrastructure changes to build airfields and hangars

Mine has very few infrastructure changes other than Latvia.
An additional note - all artillery concentrated into one 30/70 arty bde under 1 Div; while brigades have BSB, there is also a 30/70 sustainment bde using additional CSS ResF units across Canada but assigned to 1 Div; finally 6CCSB is assigned to 2 DIV and concentrates engineer, EW, MI, MP IATF.
This totals 6 manoeuvre brigades and 3 support brigades (changed from 3 CMBGs, 10 CBS and 1 CCSB) Note that all my brigades are generally 3,000 - 3,300 all ranks: smaller than a current CMBG but a bit bigger than the average CBG

** if necessary one could rotate the taskings, so there was a high readiness Lt Bde at all times, and Bde rotations to Europe as well, but I’m not sold on that - I’d rather have the Forward Deployed entity be a voluntary 3 year posting.

I'm giving short shrift to the high readiness, road to high readiness etc construct. IMHO the three 100/0 battalions (2 para, 1 LAV) will be "ready" and able to generate QRF forces. Everyone else is in a build cycle. Either building for a specific roto or mission or just building/training in general.

My construct for Europe is a permanent 3-year posting Bde HQ; maintenance company, logistics platoon and CMTC training team. One battalion will be the eFP battle group but without its Canadian element (There are enough rifle companies and support weapons from other nations for a battalion) The second infantry battalion is fully Canadian and rotational. The armoured regiment has one squadron drawn from the already deployed eFP tanks there while the other two squadrons are rotational. The artillery question is up in the air. I definitely see a Canadian artillery rotational HQ (albeit a dozen or so positions could be posted as part of the Bde HQ (i.e the core of the Bde FSCC and RCPO). Batteries should have a least one rotational Cdn battery plus some STA but also batteries/STA from Latvia and other eFP countries.

Mostly the rotational forces come from 1 Div but, if other operational loads on 2 Div are light, can also come from the Mech and Light bdes from Quebec or even the Para bde and the two coastal regiments.

Agreed - but domestic support as well to the internal.

Absolutely.

I'm getting itchy to rewrite "Unsustainable at any Price". My work on "With a Few Guns" should wind down in June (I hope) so maybe then I can give it more time.

 

[FJAG]

I seem recall us jumping the queue on M777s to get us into Afghanistan.

We didn't jump the queue at all.

The Marines sold us the first twelve of their guns off the production line (in fact it was a 100-gun, low-rate production line which runs primarily to work out production issues and difficulties). It was a generous gesture on the Marines part that they didn't have to do and had more to do with personal relationships between high-level commanders rather than economics.

The M777 line was very tightly controlled.

 

[IKnowNothing]

If napkins are back in play.... focusing on combat arms (assuming engineer and arty regiments could follow the same basic structure/ratios)
Assumptions- , IKN is King and allowed to break many eggs, slay many sacred cows, personnel crisis resolved, RegF healthy enough to support (fully manned)

• 9x Armoured Squadrons
• 27x Inf Coy
• 12x Unit HQ's

Formation A

• 2x 100/0 Mech Battalion (Edmonton & Petawawa)
• 2x 30/70 Mech Battalion (Edmonton & Petawawa)
• 1x 70/30 Tank Regiment (Edmonton)
• 1x 70/30 Wheeled Cavalry Regiment (Petawawa)

Hard NATO tasking. Deployment plan: 1x Unit HQ as long term posting to eFP Latvia. 1x Inf Coy to eFP Latvia (6 month roto). eFP Coy from 30/70 Bn's, Coy's rotate into / out of Bn's to balance the deployment schedule. 2x 100/0 Mech Bn's, 1x Cavalry squadron, 2x Tank Squadron, Bde HQ, as flyover forces to round out Canadian Bde of Multi-national Bde North. Initial deployment 100% RegF, more responsive and can be done without PRes recall/ mobilization. In a war time scenario a Bde deployment would leave the following in Canada:

• 1x Tank Squadron (PRes)
• 2x Cav Squadron (1 Reg 1 Pres)
• 5x Mech Coy (1 Reg 4 Pres)

available o replace combat losses (or be formed and worked up as a pocket bde with 2x Triangular Wheeled CAB's with a Square Combat Team bde reserve)

Equipment - Full Sets for 2x Tank Squadron (+ Spares), 1x Cavalry Squadron (+Spares), 7x Mech Coy (+Spares), 3x Mech Bn HQ in Latvia, remaining disbursed in Canada for Training
Purchases:

• 80 Lav 6.0 CFV (thinking Cockerill 3035 with twin ATGM) to mix 50/50 with LRSS to give Cavalry regiment more teeth and give to Mech AT platoons
• 40 LAV 6.0 NEMO for mortar Platoons

Reserves Integrated - 41 and 33 CBG

RegF Resources Remaining

• 5x Armoured Squadron
• 21x Inf Coy
• 5x Unit HQ (I'm not going to use any where near the PY's so bump this to 8, rob an armoured squadron and two inf coy's)

Formation B & C (Borden and Valcartier+Montreal Respectively) each

• 1x 60/40 Light Cavalry Regiments (2 RegF Sqn + 2 Pres)
• 1x 100/0 Light Inf Bn
• 2x 30/70 Light Inf Bn

Flex tasking. 100/0 Bn Para qualified as QRF. One Formation duel roled as Arctic/Jaeger, the other as motorized

Purchases

• 100 CVR(T) 2.0 (Modernized Chassis with Moog RwIP 30mm Gun, Hunter-Killer Sight, Twin ATGM) for Arctic Assigned Cavalry
• 100 JLTV Heavy Guns carrier for Motorized Assigned Cavalry (or double the CVR(T) 2.0 order
• 1 Bde Set of BvS10
• 1 Bde Set of light weight wheeled section carriers (arguments for ISV vs Senator vs Eagle 6x6 proceed)

Reserves Integrated- 31&32 CBG and 38&39 CBG respectively

I may be off entirely, but assuming RegF CS and CSS ratios are in alignment with the armoured/infantry, and the reserves can be counted on at comparable ratios. it seems like this has conventional army needs covered.

But there are still 11 Inf Coy's worth of PY's to play with, along with 36/37/38/39 CBG's, with Shilo and Gagetown under utilized.
Potential uses: LRPF, GBAD, Coastal Missile Bty's, UAV/Loitering Munitions, depth for formations B and C

 

[daftandbarmy]

Reserves Integrated- 31&32 CBG and 38&39 CBG respectively

I may be off entirely, but assuming RegF CS and CSS ratios are in alignment with the armoured/infantry, and the reserves can be counted on at comparable ratios. it

If by 'integrated' and 'counted on' you mean 'turn up one weekend a month for an FTX but the Reg F won't be there because it's a weekend' then yes., of course that would work

 

[McG]

I’m vehemently against the Battle Group, as it’s really just a Bde Minus, as you still need the HQ and support portions when you deploy it by itself.

To be fair, a deployed solo brigade group still needs something that looks like the DISGP holding together a national rear link. A division alone in a theatre still needs something that looks like a very lean COSCOM to endure for protracted operations.

If Canada cannot do one deployable division, then it certainly cannot do three independently deployable brigades because sustaining separate brigade efforts is actually more demanding.

This thread spends a lot of time looking at tactical platforms and counting fighting sub-units. What supports these? What organizations form the in-theatre length of magic pipe that feeds commodities and assistance to the sustainment component integral to the deployed tactical force? The Admin Coy is not properly supporting the BG of it is also doing shipping & receiving at the theatre APOD. The service battalion is not properly supporting the brigade if it is stretched all the way back to receive and move goods from the SPOD.

 

[McG]

… and that’s before touching our aspirations of being a framework nation which should be able to extend some support to other contingents that fight under our umbrella.

 

[KevinB]

@McG no disagreement here.
However the same would apply to a Deployed Div, it would need some Corps and Army/Theater level support as well.

Which then begs to ask, is it worth creating CEBG’s (Canadian Expeditionary Brigade Groups) that have the supporting structures for both linking to a Multinational Division and Rear Link. Or just making 2 or 3 fixed Canadian Expeditionary Groups) that can be plugged into the deploying CXBG (using the X to mean a gamut from Light to Heavy).

 

[daftandbarmy]

@McG no disagreement here.
However the same would apply to a Deployed Div, it would need some Corps and Army/Theater level support as well.

Which then begs to ask, is it worth creating CEBG’s (Canadian Expeditionary Brigade Groups) that have the supporting structures for both linking to a Multinational Division and Rear Link. Or just making 2 or 3 fixed Canadian Expeditionary Groups) that can be plugged into the deploying CXBG (using the X to mean a gamut from Light to Heavy).

We already have that setup, pretty much.

Reserve CBGs are able to FG troops for Reg F led 'expeditionary' formations, as well as various Domops etc, which is wholly within the current mandate and capabilities of the leadership and other infrastructure of the Reserves.

Could it be alot better? Sure. But the current setup is already, to a certain extent, working.

 

[FJAG]

@McG and @KevinB This is exactly why we need a sustainment brigade in the inventory. It needs to have just enough full timers and be structured and equipped to properly deploy several NSEs indefinitely for 2 or 3 battle-group level deployments during peacetime and have enough ResF personnel and equipment to deploy and support a brigade or two in an emergency situation.

I have the same views about what we call a CCSB, the Yanks used to call manoeuvre enhancement brigades and now call protection brigades. A place to park all the esoteric combat enablers not organic to the brigade group and again with enough RegF to enable peacetime support and enough ResF to mobilize in an emergency. (when are we going to adopt the term "brigade combat team" like the Brits and Yanks or will we remain stubborn. I guess one doesn't want to change all the letterhead and base signage). The Americans put a lot of their ARNG and USAR into that category because they know it matters.

 

[KevinB]

We already have that setup, pretty much.

Reserve CBGs are able to FG troops for Reg F led 'expeditionary' formations, as well as various Domops etc, which is wholly within the current mandate and capabilities of the leadership and other infrastructure of the Reserves.

Could it be alot better? Sure. But the current setup is already, to a certain extent, working.

I’d argue Canada has it backwards.

@FJAG If I was King, the sustainment side would have a lot more full time personnel, and the teeth side of all but the RDF Light Bde(s) would be mostly Reserve.
It’s much easier to get #1 Rifleman’s Line Serial Filled than 99% of the Command, Combat Support, Service and Support and Operation Sustainment side.

 

[FJAG]

I’d argue Canada has it backwards.

@FJAG If I was King, the sustainment side would have a lot more full time personnel, and the teeth side of all but the RDF Light Bde(s) would be mostly Reserve.
It’s much easier to get #1 Rifleman’s Line Serial Filled than 99% of the Command, Combat Support, Service and Support and Operation Sustainment side.

Ditto - except I'd say maintenance a lot more for sure. Transport doesn't need many full-timers in peacetime but it becomes a major issue in wartime. Same with supply. Much of the peacetime needs can be met by static warehouses run by civies who would remain in place for wartime. But you would need a lot more deployable bin rats. My models run heavy on full-time maintainers and light on full-time loggies and transport. You do need enough loggies and transport to develop and run the leadership side.

 

[GR66]

To be fair, a deployed solo brigade group still needs something that looks like the DISGP holding together a national rear link. A division alone in a theatre still needs something that looks like a very lean COSCOM to endure for protracted operations.

If Canada cannot do one deployable division, then it certainly cannot do three independently deployable brigades because sustaining separate brigade efforts is actually more demanding.

This thread spends a lot of time looking at tactical platforms and counting fighting sub-units. What supports these? What organizations form the in-theatre length of magic pipe that feeds commodities and assistance to the sustainment component integral to the deployed tactical force? The Admin Coy is not properly supporting the BG of it is also doing shipping & receiving at the theatre APOD. The service battalion is not properly supporting the brigade if it is stretched all the way back to receive and move goods from the SPOD.

Well, maybe you could do three separate deployable Brigades IF you're cheap bastards...and I think we might qualify!

1 x IBCT with US kit and structure to plug into a US Light Division (US provides the support elements beyond the Brigade Service Battalion)
1 x Armoured Brigade with US kit and structure to plug into a US Armour Division or Armour Division, Reinforced

We could then have a Canadian LAV Brigade with all the support and enablers for independent deployment.

Reserve units would provide the depth for the above formations as well as CSS support. Three Brigades deployable with only having to actually provide the support elements for a single Brigade Group.

 

[quadrapiper]

To be fair, a deployed solo brigade group still needs something that looks like the DISGP holding together a national rear link. A division alone in a theatre still needs something that looks like a very lean COSCOM to endure for protracted operations.

Would a good starting point be to build a single Division, minus any brigades/brigade groups, but including all divisional enablers and whatever unique capabilities are found at Corps level, then with the PYs left build brigade groups?

 

[KevinB]

Would a good starting point be to build a single Division, minus any brigades/brigade groups, but including all divisional enablers and whatever unique capabilities are found at Corps level, then with the PYs left build brigade groups?

You’d have run out of CA PY trying to build Corps enablers.

 

[markppcli]

Corps is probably not achievable. A division centered on 2 Mechanized Bdes of 2 Bn and 1 Armoured regiment with detailed, established, funded, and formalized augmentation from reserves is doable. A light Bde outside of that is also achievable. You

 

[daftandbarmy]

You’d have run out of CA PY trying to build Corps enablers.

Whisper the word 'tours' in any militia armoury and you'll start a stampede to the BOR...