• 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

It's hard to explain that the cool shit you see on Instagram has a large CS and CSS element in the back
 
Managed readiness is a requirement when you are an expeditionary army that deploys on rotations. Its how we allocate resources to the troops that need it at the right time. The US Army also employ rotational readiness. We need to be prepared to pivot to a surge of readiness across the forces in certain situations, but that does not mean that we always train everybody to the highest level.

Managed readiness is changing to a new model, and our Collective Training (CT) is also evolving. I won't get into too much pre-decisional information, but if you are in the army you can look it up to get a sense of where we are going. Change is coming, but the principles remain the same.

I should point out that MAPLE RESOLVE (MR) in its current incarnation is focused on validating the Battle Groups of our NRF commitment. It is the capstone of the Build Year for the mechanized elements. BTS are set by Comd CADTC, but of course Divs have input. MR is not the only validation event. UNIFIED RESOLVE (UR) validates the CMBG HQ, Artillery Regt HQ, Engineer Regt HQ and Service Battalion HQ. We also have GLOBAL RESOLVE to validate the light infantry battalions. GLOBAL RESOLVE has been conducted at JRTC since 2020, and will now begin alternating between JRTC and JPMRC where the Light Infantry Battalion will be validated as part of a US IBCT.

Going back to managed readiness, things like MAPLE RESOLVE have to be seen in the light of Foundation Training (FT). This is a fairly new concept where all CMBGs (and CBGs) train to a baseline level every year regardless of managed readiness phase. For the Reg F this is Level 5 Live or Level 4 while for the ARes it is generally Level 3. Level 5 Combat Team is reserved for those in the Build Year and is resourced by Enhanced Warfighting Proficiency (EWP). Level 6 FTX are for Reg F units in the Build Year. So with FT we assure that there is a baseline and also that leaders/soldiers develop a level of warfighting skills regardless of when they are at a field unit.

If there is a general war then we shift from managed readiness to a broad surge of training levels.
 
FJAG said:
There seems to be a dearth of positive comments on this idea. I think numbers mean very little unless you see the structure and terms of service that goes with them.

I think they could do with a 60/60 army if its done right.

🍻
Click to expand...
Importantly the British can actually order their Reservists to deploy, subject to Op tempo restrictions. They also favour dispersed sub units and integration into the various “regimental families.” Heck they even have one that’s a mechanized infantry Bn scattered over the. Roth of England. Probably not worth looking into emulating.
 
markppcli said:
Importantly the British can actually order their Reservists to deploy, subject to Op tempo restrictions. They also favour dispersed sub units and integration into the various “regimental families.” Heck they even have one that’s a mechanized infantry Bn scattered over the. Roth of England. Probably not worth looking into emulating.
Click to expand...

It's important to note that they have a couple of different Reserve Forces.

The Army Reserve is the former Territorial Army, like our militia.

The Regular Reserves are retired Regular Force soldiers who have an obligation to serve when called up for 8 years after leaving the military.

e.g.,

Regular Reservists are soldiers who have left the Regular army but are recalled in times of need to come back and join operations alongside Regular soldiers.

 
markppcli said:
Importantly the British can actually order their Reservists to deploy, subject to Op tempo restrictions. They also favour dispersed sub units and integration into the various “regimental families.” Heck they even have one that’s a mechanized infantry Bn scattered over the. Roth of England. Probably not worth looking into emulating.
Click to expand...
And they have no qualms about amalgamating regiments either.
 
markppcli said:
Importantly the British can actually order their Reservists to deploy, subject to Op tempo restrictions. They also favour dispersed sub units and integration into the various “regimental families.” Heck they even have one that’s a mechanized infantry Bn scattered over the. Roth of England. Probably not worth looking into emulating.
Click to expand...
We can order our Reserves to deploy as well, we just lack the will to do so.
 
markppcli said:
Sorry I’ll rephrase for the pedants in the room:

The British Army has the authority to compel reservists to deploy itself without requiring legislative change.
Click to expand...


From the NDA

‘Placing forces on active service
  • 31 (1) The Governor in Council may place the Canadian Forces or any component, unit or other element thereof or any officer or non-commissioned member thereof on active service anywhere in or beyond Canada at any time when it appears advisable to do so
    • (a) by reason of an emergency, for the defence of Canada;
    • (b) in consequence of any action undertaken by Canada under the United Nations Charter; or
    • (c) in consequence of any action undertaken by Canada under the North Atlantic Treaty, the North American Aerospace Defence Command Agreement or any other similar instrument to which Canada is a party.’

No legislative changes required, actually a fairly simple and easy process to enact. Again what is lacking is the will power to do so rather than any sort of law or legislation.
 
Eaglelord17 said:
From the NDA

‘Placing forces on active service
  • 31(1) The Governor in Council may place the Canadian Forces or any component, unit or other element thereof or any officer or non-commissioned member thereof on active service anywhere in or beyond Canada at any time when it appears advisable to do so
    • (a) by reason of an emergency, for the defence of Canada;
    • (b) in consequence of any action undertaken by Canada under the United Nations Charter; or
    • (c) in consequence of any action undertaken by Canada under the North Atlantic Treaty, the North American Aerospace Defence Command Agreement or any other similar instrument to which Canada is a party.’

No legislative changes required, actually a fairly simple and easy process to enact. Again what is lacking is the will power to do so rather than any sort of law or legislation.
Click to expand...

And there are lessons learned from the UK roaming about, e.g.,


But the most significant mobilisation of Reserve Forces (volunteer and regular reserves) since the1950s occurred with the invasion of Iraq in 2003 – Operation TELIC.

We called out over 8000 reservists of which about 5200 were mobilised. Reservists continued to be involved after the main combat was over, right until the end of the campaign, providing key enablers to support deployment; backfilling of posts in the UK; individual augmentees to bring units up to war-fighting establishments; manning Reserve sub-units including niche capabilities such as CBRN; and providing specialist services like linguists, media operations and medics (760 were medical staff, including 93 doctors).

Lessons learned from this, the first really compulsory mobilisation since the Suez operation in the 1950s, included:

  • The importance of notice. The nature of the invasion decision meant this was difficult and reservists and employers got very little formal notice.
  • Fitness. A considerable number were medically unfit and not properly trained – this also applied to Regulars !
  • It was difficult to mobilise people effectively, particularly individuals. Support; administration, kit and equipment issue, and basic refresher training, all caused problems. This led to the rapid development of a mobilisation centre, with dedicated staff.
  • Many people were not used in their proper role, and felt that administration in theatre of reservists – for example pay - was poor.

The UK Experiemce:- Reserves as a part of the whole Force

The UK Experiemce:- Reserves as a part of the whole Force DRA - Defence Reserves Association
dra.org.au dra.org.au
 
daftandbarmy said:
And there are lessons learned from the UK roaming about, e.g.,
Click to expand...
The lesson here, primarily, was that when the system of reserve mobilization is not properly maintained in peacetime then it goes to hell in a handcart in an emergency.

Compare this to the US ARNG and USAR systems which, while they do have some issues, performs light years better than the Brits.

And then there's Canada .............

🍻
 
south park blame canada GIF by Paramount Movies
 
Eaglelord17 said:
From the NDA

‘Placing forces on active service
  • 31(1) The Governor in Council may place the Canadian Forces or any component, unit or other element thereof or any officer or non-commissioned member thereof on active service anywhere in or beyond Canada at any time when it appears advisable to do so
    • (a) by reason of an emergency, for the defence of Canada;
    • (b) in consequence of any action undertaken by Canada under the United Nations Charter; or
    • (c) in consequence of any action undertaken by Canada under the North Atlantic Treaty, the North American Aerospace Defence Command Agreement or any other similar instrument to which Canada is a party.’

No legislative changes required, actually a fairly simple and easy process to enact. Again what is lacking is the will power to do so rather than any sort of law or legislation.
Click to expand...
By “under the United Nations Charter” and “under NATO,” what is meant? Does that mean if compelled to act by treaty or does it mean if operating under their auspices ? @FJAG id be interested in your input. It seems to be that is lays our three specific circumstances Vs “the needs of the CAF” type deal. In effect what I’m asking is can you place a reserve Bde on active duty to priced soldiers for a rotational deployment in Latvia.
 
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