Informing the Army’s Future Structure

[daftandbarmy]

Remember I’m American. Moving forward is our MO

 

[Blackadder1916]

That's an axe, not a stick . . so much for standard quotes.

 

[KevinB]

You're wrong.

The money spent on a Heavy Brigade could be used otherwise. And our single Heavy Brigade will neither last long nor can it be used widely.

You should have three.
Heck even just the equipment for three, and 1 x 30/70 brigade. Put one Bde of Equipment in storage, one predeployed, and one for domestic training.

The best that will happen is that it keeps you or the Brits happy, or maybe the Germans.

1 poorly equipped Heavium Bde isn’t going to make anyone happy.

Meanwhile, maybe we could try our luck in riverine warfare in the islands of the South China seas and Indo-China with the USMC and the Aussies.

Even more important expensive FWIW.
Many More Ships
New Rotary Wing assets

Don’t get me wrong, I think that Canada as a nation needs both that and more, but I don’t see a national will to do much.
Right now it seems a new DEU is very important to the Army…

 

[Brad Sallows]

That is the heart of our disagreement.

I am unwilling to entrust the defence of our nation to a single magical rapier.

If anyone wanted parts of Canada (eg. for resources), there's no way we could defend it all. We have a "magical rapier" - the US, provided we make enough effort to be a good neighbour.

The irony is we have people in our governing classes who work to maintain good relationships with antagonists (eg. China) while enjoying occasionally pissing off the US for what mostly seems to be their own personal satisfaction - and I dislike people who spend any kind of Canada's "capital" on their own behalf.

 

[Kirkhill]

If anyone wanted parts of Canada (eg. for resources), there's no way we could defend it all. We have a "magical rapier" - the US, provided we make enough effort to be a good neighbour.

The irony is we have people in our governing classes who work to maintain good relationships with antagonists (eg. China) while enjoying occasionally pissing off the US for what mostly seems to be their own personal satisfaction - and I dislike people who spend any kind of Canada's "capital" on their own behalf.

Fair comment on the US

But since 1945 (42 if we accept the original Devil's Brigade as a Joint Force designed for North American usage) the Americans have been asking for us to put up a brigade or two dedicated to the defence of our north. They even offered to defend Newfoundland and Labrador when they were not part of Canada.

NATO depended on us to supply a transportable arctic brigade to Norway that we reneged on. They also wanted us to meet our ACE Mobile Force (Land) commitment.

But we chose to ignore all of those commitments in favour of the 4 CMBG and UN commitments.

The US maintains its magic rapiers (multiple) at home from where they can be tasked domestically and internationally as well as on its neighbours' territories.

We are only 10% of them. We are not asked to provide nuclear forces. Nor even strategic bombers.

The new Arctic Division revives an asset originally required in the late 1940s to which we were asked to add a Brigade.
Our LAV battalions were an easy fit to both the USMC and the Stryker Brigades
Our Militia should be equally as capable as the USNG.
Domestic Air Defence should mirror that found in the US.
Domestic Air Lift (fixed and rotary) should also mirror that found in the US.

At very least that would give us a claim to doing our bit and acting in a sovereign fashion on the territory we claim.

If we want to demonstrate that we are a really good friend and ally then we can join the Americans in ponying up the assets to deploy half a heavy division and half a light division from their home bases in Canada.

(The US has 11 active divisions (excluding the USMC equivalents of another 2 to 3 light divisions), one of which is tasked to Alaska in close proximity to Russia, 5 heavy divisions and 5 light divisions. 10% of each would be half a heavy and half a light. If the USMC were included then our share would be a full light division and a reinforced heavy brigade group)

 

[Kirkhill]

Sounds fantastic until Enemies EW Capabilities are turned to 11…

If EW were the solution then these technicals probably wouldn't be as popular - heavy machine guns with high rate of fire, lots of ready rounds and good sights.

Light Anti Aircraft Guns are recovering their popularity. And they are also very effective in the ground role against infantry and light vehicles.

The Netherlands to finance the production of mobile air defense systems for Ukraine

The Netherlands will pay for the production of mobile anti-aircraft systems for air defense of Ukraine

mil.in.ua

Marry that with this

Or add them to armoured pick up trucks.

 

[Brad Sallows]

We are only 10% of them. We are not asked to provide nuclear forces. Nor even strategic bombers.

What we provide is diplomatic/political support, which is worth more than our likely military capability. But in order to look credible while participating in any given coalition-of-the-willing, we should be able to provide larger contributions than we usually scrape together.

 

[Kirkhill]

What we provide is diplomatic/political support, which is worth more than our likely military capability. But in order to look credible while participating in any given coalition-of-the-willing, we should be able to provide larger contributions than we usually scrape together.

Agreed on the value of the support we do supply - but self-respect and, it seems to a growing extent, the respect of our neighbours, demands a greater effort.

And, a lot of that extra effort, could be to the domestic advantage. That effort would also be to our advantage in Washington if we turned up at more of their natural disasters, or assisted in their domestic emergencies by taking over some of their domestic duties to free them up.

Transport and Engineering would be particularly welcome, along with GBAD and patrol assets, I would think.

 

[Blackadder1916]

Fair comment on the US

But since 1945 (42 if we accept the original Devil's Brigade as a Joint Force designed for North American usage) the Americans have been asking for us to put up a brigade or two dedicated to the defence of our north. They even offered to defend Newfoundland and Labrador when they were not part of Canada.

"Offered to defend"?. That phrasing somewhat suggests that their "offer" was based on magnanimity. While the value of American bases in Newfoundland during the war was significant in both the Battle of the Atlantic as well as contributed greatly to Newfoundland's economic and social improvements, they were there because they recognized the military importance of the Rock's location. Additionally, they got basing rights on the cheap.

Some comments extracted from a 1946 US Army CGSC study, "Regional Survey of Canada and Newfoundland" provides a bit of insight into some contemporary opinion of the US military with regard to Newfoundland.

18. Economically Newfoundland and Labrador are not too important. Their principal industry is fishing. They are rich in lumber and minerals but the resources have not been exploited to any extent, principally because of inaccessibility. The entire country is operated at a loss and, in 1933, relinquished it's Dominion status and became a Crown Colony.

16. Newfoundland is important only because of its suitability as an advanced bomber or rocket base on the Great Circle air 'route between North America and Europe.

9, Newfoundland and Labrador do not have as high a standard of livi.ng as Canada. The population of about 300,000, all but 5000 of which are in Newfoundland, are predominately of British descent. Compared to Canadians, they live a rather primitive life, have inferior educational facilities, and suffer from deficiency diseases, However, the wartime boom may improve living standards. In any case, their social' shortcomings are of little consequence, since both Canada and the United States will take over their defense in the event of war.

 

[Kirkhill]

"Offered to defend"?. That phrasing somewhat suggests that their "offer" was based on magnanimity. While the value of American bases in Newfoundland during the war was significant in both the Battle of the Atlantic as well as contributed greatly to Newfoundland's economic and social improvements, they were there because they recognized the military importance of the Rock's location. Additionally, they got basing rights on the cheap.

Some comments extracted from a 1946 US Army CGSC study, "Regional Survey of Canada and Newfoundland" provides a bit of insight into some contemporary opinion of the US military with regard to Newfoundland.

18. Economically Newfoundland and Labrador are not too important. Their principal industry is fishing. They are rich in lumber and minerals but the resources have not been exploited to any extent, principally because of inaccessibility. The entire country is operated at a loss and, in 1933, relinquished it's Dominion status and became a Crown Colony.

16. Newfoundland is important only because of its suitability as an advanced bomber or rocket base on the Great Circle air 'route between North America and Europe.

9, Newfoundland and Labrador do not have as high a standard of livi.ng as Canada. The population of about 300,000, all but 5000 of which are in Newfoundland, are predominately of British descent. Compared to Canadians, they live a rather primitive life, have inferior educational facilities, and suffer from deficiency diseases, However, the wartime boom may improve living standards. In any case, their social' shortcomings are of little consequence, since both Canada and the United States will take over their defense in the event of war.

I forgot to put my tongue in cheek.

 

[Prairie canuck]

Or add them to armoured pick up trucks.

Would this not fit on the TAPV?

 

[ueo]

If EW were the solution then these technicals probably wouldn't be as popular - heavy machine guns with high rate of fire, lots of ready rounds and good sights.

Light Anti Aircraft Guns are recovering their popularity. And they are also very effective in the ground role against infantry and light vehicles.

The Netherlands to finance the production of mobile air defense systems for Ukraine

The Netherlands will pay for the production of mobile anti-aircraft systems for air defense of Ukraine

mil.in.ua

Marry that with this

Or add them to armoured pick up trucks.

Sorta looks like Bagdad, Somalia etc!

 

[GK .Dundas]

I still remember reading a fictional what if story in the late 70s about a WW 3 scenario that due to the incredibly dense and heavy EW environment basically almost all modern weapon systems were rendered ineffective
The US Navy dealt with this by recommissioning several old gun cruiser's.

 

[Kirkhill]

Would this not fit on the TAPV?

Perhaps if the ride height were lowered?

 

[daftandbarmy]

Perhaps if the ride height were lowered?

Like, lowered to ditch level?

 

[KevinB]

If EW were the solution then these technicals probably wouldn't be as popular - heavy machine guns with high rate of fire, lots of ready rounds and good sights.

EW is often a double edge sword.
The Russians found that out.
The Ukrainians don’t have significant EW options, and we aren’t about to provide them with our cutting edge stuff.

But I’d argue that the Gerpard and dedicated AD guns are infinitely more effective than those technicals in terms of actual shooting down enemy systems.
The issue is that often people want an illusion of effectiveness, so that is what the gun trucks do.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

EW is often a double edge sword.
The Russians found that out.
The Ukrainians don’t have significant EW options, and we aren’t about to provide them with our cutting edge stuff.

But I’d argue that the Gerpard and dedicated AD guns are infinitely more effective than those technicals in terms of actual shooting down enemy systems.
The issue is that often people want an illusion of effectiveness, so that is what the gun trucks do.

EW, like most comms based warfare, moves like a game of Cat and Mouse.

You find a vulnerability, exploit it, the enemy realizes it, develops a fix, and the cycle repeats itself. This happens at a much faster rate when technological innovation screams past doctrine and tactics.

SEAD and traditional EW haven't worked too well for Russia, but they're still a viable threat to Ukraine. My best assumption is that Starlink and other Low Earth Orbit communications have enabled the Ukranians to hide in plain sight comms wise. Instead of hot-spots receiving and transmitting on and off, it's a 10-15km coverage map where anything and everything could be an emitter. The Russians like to waste gridbsquares, but they don't have enough artillery rounds to get lucky.

Works the same for AD.

My hope is that we learn as an Army that we cannot always assume the technical advantages we plan for will be effective in all instances. I can split a log with a pocket knife, but an Axe would work better, unless I'm trying to bring down the tree; which would necessitate a chainsaw, but that chainsaw won't carve or whittle like the pocket knife.

 

[FJAG]

Like, lowered to ditch level?

I think a Porsche would have rolled in that situation.

 

[Prairie canuck]

Perhaps if the ride height were lowered?

The AD system looks smaller and lighter than the remote weapon stations that some have installed.

 

[MilEME09]

Perhaps if the ride height were lowered?

Tow it on a trailer?