Informing the Army’s Future Structure

[Fabius]

Getting close to point 1, last I looked at the future rotos, entire class B work up period and class C deployment is around 12 months.

That is for overseas preplanned deployments on though not GRTF.
Is the CA going to Class B personnel in the 3 Bns day in, day out waiting for a hot spot to erupt?
I haven’t seen any indication that’s in the works.

 

[WestIsle]

That is for overseas preplanned deployments on though not GRTF.
Is the CA going to Class B personnel in the 3 Bns day in, day out waiting for a hot spot to erupt?
I haven’t seen any indication that’s in the works.

No I believe that has all been kiboshed. There will largely be no change in formations but reserve units will be required to have formations generated by the units themselves and on call as required

 

[MilEME09]

No I believe that has all been kiboshed. There will largely be no change in formations but reserve units will be required to have formations generated by the units themselves and on call as required

Good luck without meaningful change to the PRes, even the MT for CSS was watered down to individual augmentation still instead of a platoon element

 

[daftandbarmy]

No I believe that has all been kiboshed. There will largely be no change in formations but reserve units will be required to have formations generated by the units themselves and on call as required

Meanwhile, the Formation:

 

[WestIsle]

Meanwhile, the Formation:

Ironically it appears that unit groupings/amalgamations are still moving forward. But without any other changes to training and employment the "leadership" at these consolidated units likely wont know what to do with a company on ex. Personally I would like to see us adopt a USNG style method of promotion where you have to spend time at another formation upon promotion to learn how to do your job. This would mean the end to a lot of Capt/Maj Class B positions at brigade HQs

 

[daftandbarmy]

Ironically it appears that unit groupings/amalgamations are still moving forward. But without any other changes to training and employment the "leadership" at these consolidated units likely wont know what to do with a company on ex. Personally I would like to see us adopt a USNG style method of promotion where you have to spend time at another formation upon promotion to learn how to do your job. This would mean the end to a lot of Capt/Maj Class B positions at brigade HQs

OMG!!!!

 

[Kirkhill]

Moved from the Ukraine thread.

The MGS barely met exceptions, ammunition capacity was to small, crew overheating issues, etc. Yes it is funny that the new Griffin despite all the talk is basically an updated Leopard 1.

It's all a matter of how the carpenter uses their tools. Don't blame the tools. Blame the carpenter.
To be fair there were better tools on the market.

It Seems Ukraine’s French-Made Recon Vehicles Are In Position To Break Through Russian Lines​

Look for Ukrainian reinforcements to roll into Novodonetske in order to exploit the gap the 23rd and 31st Mechanized Brigades are opening in the Russian line.

www.forbes.com

(L)ook for Ukrainian reinforcements to roll into Novodonetske in order to exploit the gap the 23rd and 31st Mechanized Brigades are opening in the Russian line.

It’s possible one reinforcing unit already is in place: the Ukrainian navy’s 37th Marine Brigade. As it happens, the brigade is uniquely equipped for exactly the kind of fast-moving exploitation operation that should follow an initial mechanized breach of enemy defenses.

That’s because the 37th Marine Brigade operates some of the 40 AMX-10RC reconnaissance vehicles France donated to Ukraine this spring. A Russian drone seems to have spotted a couple of the AMX-10RCs tucked into a treeline somewhere in Zaporizhzhia on Monday.

It’s unclear whether the Russians followed up the drone reconnaissance with a missile or artillery strike on the recon vehicles.

To be clear, the Ukrainians wouldn’t want to expose the four-person AMX-10RCs to heavy Russian fire. The speedy, wheeled AMX-10RC with its 105-millimeter main gun and day-night optics is a “sniper rifle on ... fast wheels,” Oleksii Reznikov, the Ukrainian minister of defense, crowed after test-driving one of the vehicles back in April.

French firm GIAT specifically designed the 15-ton, aluminum AMX-10RC for exactly the attributes the defense minister singled out. Fighting range. Situational awareness. Speed.

But not protection. The AMX-10RC has just enough armor to resist machine-gun fire and shell fragments. An autocannon—to say nothing of tank fire, a mine or a close hit by artillery—would chew it right up.

If the Ukrainians have launched a major attack in the south, perhaps aiming to execute a left hook from Zaporizhzhia toward Russian-held Crimea, the 37th Marine Brigade’s AMX-10RCs could find themselves in their element.

The vehicles’ simplicity, reliability and fuel efficiency—500 miles on a single tank of diesel for their 280-horsepower engines—could help the 37th Marine Brigade to move long distances, fast.

The lightly-equipped brigade would need help, of course. It’s the job of heavier army formations to break through Russian defenses so that the marines can roll into the Russians’ thinly-fortified rear area and make a mad dash for Mariupol, Kherson, Crimea or some other objective deeper inside Russian-occupied Ukraine.
Click to expand...

Our Medium Weight Army is not a Break-Through/Penetration Army. It can be a Patrolling Army that can dominate large areas of the field in War and Peace. It can be a Multi-Domaine Army.

It would be nice though, if the 60% of the Army that was designed for the Medium Weight / Multi-Domaine / Patrolling fight were balanced by a longer ranging lighter 30% (heli and air portable with lighter vehicles), as well as a really heavy, really well equipped 10%.

Regular - 50% Command and Support-Logistics and Training, 30% Medium/LAV, 15% Light/Helo, 5% Heavy/Armoured.
Reserves - Platoons, Troops, Batteries, Squadrons and Companies - focused on basic skills. Truck drivers, communicators, AD gunners, rifles, light cavalry - and secondary roles as support gunners, tankers and IFV operators.

 

[GK .Dundas]

My dream recce (wheeled) unit for decades consisted of AMX 10 RC's and VBL's with an assault troop mounted in Bisons not mention Bison mounted 120 mm mortars and used for CPs .
The French actually do offer a 105 that can be fitted to the AMX that takes NATO rounds. The difference in recoil isn't noticable..at least according to the sales brochure.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Whether or not a wheeled gun platform passes as a tank depends on what the other guys have to deal with it.

 

[KevinB]

Moved from the Ukraine thread.



It's all a matter of how the carpenter uses their tools. Don't blame the tools. Blame the carpenter.
To be fair there were better tools on the market.

It Seems Ukraine’s French-Made Recon Vehicles Are In Position To Break Through Russian Lines​

Look for Ukrainian reinforcements to roll into Novodonetske in order to exploit the gap the 23rd and 31st Mechanized Brigades are opening in the Russian line.

www.forbes.com



Our Medium Weight Army is not a Break-Through/Penetration Army. It can be a Patrolling Army that can dominate large areas of the field in War and Peace. It can be a Multi-Domaine Army.

It would be nice though, if the 60% of the Army that was designed for the Medium Weight / Multi-Domaine / Patrolling fight were balanced by a longer ranging lighter 30% (heli and air portable with lighter vehicles), as well as a really heavy, really well equipped 10%.

Regular - 50% Command and Support-Logistics and Training, 30% Medium/LAV, 15% Light/Helo, 5% Heavy/Armoured.
Reserves - Platoons, Troops, Batteries, Squadrons and Companies - focused on basic skills. Truck drivers, communicators, AD gunners, rifles, light cavalry - and secondary roles as support gunners, tankers and IFV operators.

Honestly I’d suggest that 30% Medium, 40% Heavy and 30% Light would be the best choice. Mainly because Mediuk forces are generally not suited to a lot of things due to too light to fight significant enemies - and too handy to move quickly.
I’d break down the Light into two types as well 10% Para, 10% Airmobile and 10% Arctic Mobility (BV etc).

10% of the CA is fairly insignificant as that’s less than a Brigade, even being charitable.

But if we suggest that 10 Cbt Bde’s is the CA’s number

You could get from that:
1 Heavy Div Reinforced 1 CAD
1 Med Div 2 CMD
1 Light Div. 3 CLD

3 Div’s and voila the 1st Canadian Corps

All of which is smoking crack without major equipment increases and a Reg/PRes reboot and integration.

 

[WestIsle]

All of which is smoking crack without major equipment increases and a Reg/PRes reboot and integration.

Good news, cracks legal!

 

[ueo]

My dream recce (wheeled) unit for decades consisted of AMX 10 RC's and VBL's with an assault troop mounted in Bisons not mention Bison mounted 120 mm mortars and used for CPs .
The French actually do offer a 105 that can be fitted to the AMX that takes NATO rounds. The difference in recoil isn't noticable..at least according to the sales brochure.

Was trialed on AVGP hull. Blew doors off literally and deformef hull, Years ago but...

 

[KevinB]

Was trialed on AVGP hull. Blew doors off literally and deformef hull, Years ago but...

Imagine the annoyance of physics being a thing right

The recoil forces of cannons are massive.
For smaller vehicles to mount them, they need to be able to manage the recoil energy differently than tanks.
Both in terms of limiting the arc of fire to ensure that the forces don’t tip a vehicle over - but also lengthen the time of the transfer of the energy —- so they need a much longer cycle of operations and thus a longer recoil system which requires a longer turret and can often then limit gun elevation and depression (or you need a huge tall turret) as well as an effective muzzle brake.

Just look at the platform rock on a 60+ ton MBT when the gun fires, and why some SPA have spades and arc limits.

There is no free lunch or physics defying abilities in platform designs.

Most smaller platforms use lower velocity cannons, or smaller diameter less energy cannons.

 

[GR66]

Imagine the annoyance of physics being a thing right

The recoil forces of cannons are massive.
For smaller vehicles to mount them, they need to be able to manage the recoil energy differently than tanks.
Both in terms of limiting the arc of fire to ensure that the forces don’t tip a vehicle over - but also lengthen the time of the transfer of the energy —- so they need a much longer cycle of operations and thus a longer recoil system which requires a longer turret and can often then limit gun elevation and depression (or you need a huge tall turret) as well as an effective muzzle brake.

Just look at the platform rock on a 60+ ton MBT when the gun fires, and why some SPA have spades and arc limits.

There is no free lunch or physics defying abilities in platform designs.

Most smaller platforms use lower velocity cannons, or smaller diameter less energy cannons.

Luckily the LAV 6.0 is a behemoth among wheeled vehicles so should be able to mount a significant gun...but doesn't that defeat the purpose of having a light, fast-moving, hard hitting vehicle?

If you're not wanting your light vehicle to engage against tanks (Stryker MGS/MPF/RC-10's are NOT intended to be used as tanks) then does it need a gun that's designed to take out tanks? Mounting the larger gun will make you heavier and less mobile which kind of defeats the initial objective. Stay light and maintain your mobility advantage to avoid enemy tanks. An autocannon can deal with lighter vehicles and a couple of ATGMs mounted on the turret can deal with tanks in those "oh crap!" scenarios where you can't avoid them.

The only reason that a soft recoil 105mm/120mm gun platform might make sense for Canada is that we're stuck with a LAV 6.0 that is too heavy to be really have the mobility of a true Medium force so the loss of mobility due to the extra weight doesn't really affect our overall force mobility. That and we're too cheap to buy enough tanks to provide both an anti-tank capability AND fire support for the infantry in sufficient numbers at the same time.

If there really is a need for a DFS weapon to support the infantry (due to limited availability/high cost of missiles and hand-held recoilless rifles) I'm wondering if a turreted 120mm mortar in direct fire mode would be sufficient for the role? Gives you a 2-fer in support capabilities. For true light/medium forces I wonder if the old 106mm Recoilless Rifle might work if an autoloader could be developed (I'm sure someone here posted a proposed design years ago but I couldn't find it). Much less weight, cheap rounds compared to ATGMs, larger warhead vs hard targets and no temptations to try and use it as a tank!

 

[FJAG]

If there really is a need for a DFS weapon to support the infantry (due to limited availability/high cost of missiles and hand-held recoilless rifles) I'm wondering if a turreted 120mm mortar in direct fire mode would be sufficient for the role? Gives you a 2-fer in support capabilities. For true light/medium forces I wonder if the old 106mm Recoilless Rifle might work if an autoloader could be developed (I'm sure someone here posted a proposed design years ago but I couldn't find it). Much less weight, cheap rounds compared to ATGMs, larger warhead vs hard targets and no temptations to try and use it as a tank!

You might convince me of that if you can get past the logistics.

IMHO there are three classes of target: hard armour (i.e MBTs); medium to soft armour (IFVs, APCs etc); and other.

A DFS is not a prime anti-hard armour system - you have other MBTs and ATGMs for that. It's good against soft/medium armour but doesn't need a 105mm for that. a 50mm + is good enough and allows for much more on-board ammo. The question is will it do "other" - bunkers etc and the like.

A mortar carrier with a direct fire capability with a round sufficient to penetrate soft/medium armour and fortifications would do. The problem is that a 120mm mortar round is also limiting for on-board ammo especially if it truly has a dual role of indirect fire support. There are issues here of location (you don't want radar attracting mortars too close to your manoeuvre elements - they attract counterfire) Similarly indirect fire resources generally work from areas where they can't quickly switch to direct fire support. You end up having to choose. And then there's the feeding of the beast with ammo.

 

[Kirkhill]

Honestly I’d suggest that 30% Medium, 40% Heavy and 30% Light would be the best choice. Mainly because Mediuk forces are generally not suited to a lot of things due to too light to fight significant enemies - and too handy to move quickly.
I’d break down the Light into two types as well 10% Para, 10% Airmobile and 10% Arctic Mobility (BV etc).

10% of the CA is fairly insignificant as that’s less than a Brigade, even being charitable.

But if we suggest that 10 Cbt Bde’s is the CA’s number

You could get from that:
1 Heavy Div Reinforced 1 CAD
1 Med Div 2 CMD
1 Light Div. 3 CLD

3 Div’s and voila the 1st Canadian Corps

All of which is smoking crack without major equipment increases and a Reg/PRes reboot and integration.

The Army consists of:​

• 23,000 Regular Force
• 19,000 Army Reserve
• 5,200 Canadian Rangers
• 3,300 Civilians

Informing the Army’s Future Structure

Getting close to point 1, last I looked at the future rotos, entire class B work up period and class C deployment is around 12 months. That is for overseas preplanned deployments on though not GRTF. Is the CA going to Class B personnel in the 3 Bns day in, day out waiting for a hot spot to...

www.army.ca

Nominally, per ministerial guidance ca 2020. Stipulating for discussion.

Regs - 23,000.

50% to Command and Support (Logistics and Training) - 11,500
30% to Medium Force - 6,900
15% to Light Force - 3,450
5% to Heavy Force - 1,150

6,900 yields two LAV brigade groups of 3,450.
3,450 yields one Light brigade of 3,450
1,150 yields one Heavy Cavalry regiment of 1,150

Make the brigades and the regiment F-Echelon heavy. Make Command and Support responsible for pushing all the forwards from national central to the field in a timely fashion. Put the Commissaries into the field with the troops after showing them this film clip from the Battle of Isandlhwana:

Maybe they will decide that precision guided cargo missiles direct from Uplands to the field is a better use of their money.

 

[Kirkhill]

As for the Brigades:

Two regional LAV Brigades - Valcartier and Petawawa - Lots of lovely highways for them to train on.
One national Light Brigade organized as three independent Battle Groups capable of operating up to 6 independent company teams each (mix of Regular companies and Reserve companies. HQ Gagetown.
One Heavy Regiment HQ Shilo, Wainwright, Edmonton or Winnipeg. I care not.

Reserves?

19,000 authorized expanding to 23,000?

Stipulating 20,000.

200 Battery/Squadron/Companies of 100 persons each.

Non Combat Arms (including Arty and Engineers for the purposes of this discussion) to focus on Communications and Transportation.
Combat Arms to focus on F-Echelon, manning the Front and putting rounds down range.

 

[Kirkhill]

My dream recce (wheeled) unit for decades consisted of AMX 10 RC's and VBL's with an assault troop mounted in Bisons not mention Bison mounted 120 mm mortars and used for CPs .
The French actually do offer a 105 that can be fitted to the AMX that takes NATO rounds. The difference in recoil isn't noticable..at least according to the sales brochure.

Whether or not a wheeled gun platform passes as a tank depends on what the other guys have to deal with it.

Was trialed on AVGP hull. Blew doors off literally and deformef hull, Years ago but...

Imagine the annoyance of physics being a thing right

The recoil forces of cannons are massive.
For smaller vehicles to mount them, they need to be able to manage the recoil energy differently than tanks.
Both in terms of limiting the arc of fire to ensure that the forces don’t tip a vehicle over - but also lengthen the time of the transfer of the energy —- so they need a much longer cycle of operations and thus a longer recoil system which requires a longer turret and can often then limit gun elevation and depression (or you need a huge tall turret) as well as an effective muzzle brake.

Just look at the platform rock on a 60+ ton MBT when the gun fires, and why some SPA have spades and arc limits.

There is no free lunch or physics defying abilities in platform designs.

Most smaller platforms use lower velocity cannons, or smaller diameter less energy cannons.

And yet.....

Hitfact-MKII

electronics.leonardo.com

And if the enemy outguns you to the extent that you can't engage then follow the advice of the doctor to the guy who complained that it hurt when he smiled: Don't!

 

[KevinB]

And yet.....

View attachment 78035View attachment 78036View attachment 78037
View attachment 78038

Hitfact-MKII

electronics.leonardo.com

And if the enemy outguns you to the extent that you can't engage then follow the advice of the doctor to the guy who complained that it hurt when he smiled: Don't!

From your link: The turret’s flexible design allows it to be integrated with either 105/52 mm rifled or 120/45 mm smoothbore low recoil force guns.
The turret is a good three feet longer than the LAV turret - as it needs to make room for the low recoil force gun.


The AMX-10 has a "medium velocity" 105mm. Use of full pressure 105mm tank rounds will destroy the system in short order, can they be used in extremis - yes, but understanding that you are going to beat the system to death in a basic load -- which may be acceptable in the circumstances - but shouldn't be a goal.


The question I ask for proponents of this sort of system is what role do you see for them?

 

[OldSolduer]

"Don't let the laws of physics get in the way of a good idea. Pesky things" Said the Good Idea Fairy