Reconstitution

[Lumber]

Can that be changed within a framework of trade training the hell out of reservists during their school summer breaks and adding simulators at stone frigates for continuation training coupled with a two week "summer camp" on a ship with RegF leadership.

My understanding is that there are some 5,000 Naval Reservists who if trained up could crew 20-30 ships. Are we simply wasting most of their lives for the benefit of generating a handful Class Bs and Cs every year?

Short answer to you question in yellow: yes.

Medium answer: the purpose of NavRes, as described to me by SJS, and from what I realized myself after three years working with the reserves, is no more than to make the public aware (in areas outside the coasts) that we actually have a Navy.

Longer answer: as @Humphrey Bogart said, the level of training and experience required to effectively do your job on a major surface combatant is just not feasible for naval reservists, with a few exceptions, such as Boatswains, Cooks, Clerks, and NavComms. Some trades don't even exist in the reserves because there is no way to maintain their currency at an NRD, such as NESOPS and Weng Techs (though I believe they've started trying to incorporate them).

Adding simulators to train combat operators wouldn't be possible. We have a hard enough time paying for/maintaining and crewing our combat simulators in Halifax and Victoria; there would be no way to build, maintain, and crew something like that elsewhere (not to mention the security requirements).

"Summer camp" aboard ship is already being attempted, but isn't working. There are already not enough spots aboard ships that are actually sailing to keep all the RegF people trained and current, especially the Engineers. Even when they do find room aboard ship, the reservists generally are so far behind, that they spend their whole time playing catch-up, and haven't really learned anything new or become "proficient" by the time they go home.

 

[TacticalTea]

Longer answer: as @Humphrey Bogart said, the level of training and experience required to effectively do your job on a major surface combatant is just not feasible for naval reservists, with a few exceptions, such as Boatswains, Cooks, Clerks, and NavComms. Some trades don't even exist in the reserves because there is no way to maintain their currency at an NRD, such as NESOPS and Weng Techs (though I believe they've started trying to incorporate them).

Most trades, actually. If I'm not forgetting any, you were only missing MarTech, IntOp, NCIop, SuppTech and Musician.

Adding simulators to train combat operators wouldn't be possible. We have a hard enough time paying for/maintaining and crewing our combat simulators in Halifax and Victoria; there would be no way to build, maintain, and crew something like that elsewhere (not to mention the security requirements).

"Summer camp" aboard ship is already being attempted, but isn't working. There are already not enough spots aboard ships that are actually sailing to keep all the RegF people trained and current, especially the Engineers. Even when they do find room aboard ship, the reservists generally are so far behind, that they spend their whole time playing catch-up, and haven't really learned anything new or become "proficient" by the time they go home.

I'd suggest that the problem isn't that FJAG's ideas are impossible to implement, but that the Navy is just in such a sorry state that we do not currently have any room to maneuver.

The ''summer camps'' idea seems to be working fine with the RegF NWO students that have been taken from PAT to place them on ships such as Brandon.

I must echo what he said previously; it would be hazardous to miss the forest for the trees. Just because an idea can't work in the current conditions, doesn't mean we should abandon all hope of change.

 

[TacticalTea]

Medium answer: the purpose of NavRes, as described to me by SJS, and from what I realized myself after three years working with the reserves, is no more than to make the public aware (in areas outside the coasts) that we actually have a Navy.

So the question then is, in the event of a major, protracted naval engagement, how do we deploy all our ships?

How would we surge our naval capabilities? In the current construct, and how would we ideally surge our naval capabilities in the best of worlds? What would be the best way to prepare and be ready to surge our capabilities in a major protracted naval engagement?

 

[KevinB]

So the question then is, in the event of a major, protracted naval engagement, how do we deploy all our ships?

How would we surge our naval capabilities? In the current construct, and how would we ideally surge our naval capabilities in the best of worlds? What would be the best way to prepare and be ready to surge our capabilities in a major protracted naval engagement?

Hope it ends before you need to show up?

It seems to work for the Army

 

[Kirkhill]

@FJAG the problem with the ResF Navy is much the same as the Air Force. Once you introduce any sort of complex weapon systems, sensors or ships with capabilities greater than an MCDV, a Reservist isn't going to cut it anymore for the most part.

There are certain trades where they can slide in but most would be off limits to them and outside their capabilities.

So here's the question. I am of the opinion, at least compared to some of our allies, that the RCN overmans its hulls. By definition this is a peacetime practice.

In war time, if all hulls went to sea, would those ships be crewed with skinnier complements? Or would they be fleshed out with Reservists? Reservists meaning recently released Regs with time afloat. Similar to the RCAF Reservists. And, conceivably, the Ordnance Corps Reservists?

 

[KevinB]

So here's the question. I am of the opinion, at least compared to some of our allies, that the RCN overmans its hulls. By definition this is a peacetime practice.

I think you mean theoretically overmans -- just judging by a lot of the RCN and Ex-RCN folks posting these days, they aren't overmanned as they are not sailing with full complements.

In war time, if all hulls went to sea, would those ships be crewed with skinnier complements? Or would they be fleshed out with Reservists? Reservists meaning recently released Regs with time afloat. Similar to the RCAF Reservists. And, conceivably, the Ordnance Corps Reservists?

 

[TacticalTea]

that the RCN overmans its hulls

Definitely not the case currently (ships have been going out with reduced manning), or normally when compared to the USN. Admittedly that is a very small sample, I'm not familiar with how other navies operate and the US is an outlier in just about everything.

In war time, if all hulls went to sea, would those ships be crewed with skinnier complements? Or would they be fleshed out with Reservists? Reservists meaning recently released Regs with time afloat. Similar to the RCAF Reservists. And, conceivably, the Ordnance Corps Reservists?

Presumably, but as @Lumber highlighted, there is only a very limited number of trades for which NavRes can currently provide. Such that NavRes could not really facilitate the all-around crewing of anything other than an MCDV, a carryover from when it used to be responsible for that class of ships.

Think ''okay, I have 20 ships' worth of boatswains, but I'm still short 10 ships' worth of technicians. What does that do for me?''

 

[dapaterson]

There are not 5,000 members of the P Res within the RCN. Not even close.

 

[stoker dave]

Regarding 'over-manning' (over-personning?) ships, all three ships that sailed for the Gulf War in 1990 had their ship's company increased by about 25% to include all the people required. I know we carried an expanded medical team and a lawyer but I don't know remember who else got added (some ops room people and sea training comes to mind). Bunks were added here, there and everywhere to accommodate all the extra bodies. So my experience is that in time of war, the ship's company swells beyond what the ship was built for.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Regarding 'over-manning' (over-personning?) ships, all three ships that sailed for the Gulf War in 1990 had their ship's company increased by about 25% to include all the people required. I know we carried an expanded medical team and a lawyer but I don't know remember who else got added (some ops room people and sea training comes to mind). Bunks were added here, there and everywhere to accommodate all the extra bodies. So my experience is that in time of war, the ship's company swells beyond what the ship was built for.

Extra Air Defence; a weapons tech land; photographer; public affairs officer; the Air Det (at least on PRO) was well above its normal peacetime complement. Those are the ones I can think of, offhand, without checking some of the books on Op Friction.

 

[Kirkhill]

I think you mean theoretically overmans -- just judging by a lot of the RCN and Ex-RCN folks posting these days, they aren't overmanned as they are not sailing with full complements.

Right you are!

That conversation confuses me. At the same time the RCN plans for more sailors per hull in the CSCs, and for that matter the AOPSs, than the minimum design standards, and allied practice, it bemoans the absence of sailors to man the existing hulls.

 

[FJAG]

There are not 5,000 members of the P Res within the RCN. Not even close.

So once again Wikipedia lied to me. I note the RCN webpage says 4,100. I take it form your post that that's probably a bit optimistic too.

 

[dapaterson]

Much as it pains me to say so, I trust the RCN's number

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Getting people to go to sea at all is a real issue everywhere, for commercial and Federal fleets. If you want Engineers you better start training them young, like in Sea Cadets and pay for them to get experience and training. Double up on the Orca's or similar and get people interested in the various non-combat sea trades early on.

 

[dapaterson]

I suspect that with the tight labour market we will see increased opportunities for paid apprenticeships, with some educational institutions (mostly community colleges) losing students.

Employers will have to swing back to developing employee skills on their own dime.

 

[MilEME09]

Getting people to go to sea at all is a real issue everywhere, for commercial and Federal fleets. If you want Engineers you better start training them young, like in Sea Cadets and pay for them to get experience and training. Double up on the Orca's or similar and get people interested in the various non-combat sea trades early on.

Sounds like we need some kind of program to encourage maritime careers and training. For a country surrounded by water on 3 sides we sure do not put emphasis on naval careers be it military or civilian. Perhaps a education reimbursement program, as well as an aggressive marketing campaign could start getting bodies in the door in the civilian sector atleast.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The commercial sector generally treats their people (and vessels) like crap. BC Ferries can't get crew because they keep people on causal for a year(s) and expect them to be available all the time. The small tugboat companies try to run the boats with two people when it should be 3-4 and end up killing people. TC is part of that problem as well. Even the big companies are trying to cut wages, while wondering why people aren't pounding on the door for jobs. The whole marine industry seems dysfunctional and the RCN is by no means the worse employer.

 

[Furniture]

Based on recent experiences, one of my first fixes for reconstitution would be to immediately cease all use of memos, replace them with emails, and electronic forms in MM/online. This prevents admin from being "lost" on its way up the chain and removes the ridiculous typewriter and thousand-miler era system we currently have.

It would also remove the CoCs ability to prevent/hinder a member's request by using process. i.e., "correcting" the wording in a memo five times because each person up the chain prefers different phrasing.

 

[TacticalTea]

Based on recent experiences, one of my first fixes for reconstitution would be to immediately cease all use of memos, replace them with emails, and electronic forms in MM/online. This prevents admin from being "lost" on its way up the chain and removes the ridiculous typewriter and thousand-miler era system we currently have.

It would also remove the CoCs ability to prevent/hinder a member's request by using process. i.e., "correcting" the wording in a memo five times because each person up the chain prefers different phrasing.

I see we both just got back from the thread about the guy waiting two weeks for a lost leave pass...

 

[dapaterson]

About 15 years ago, my email trail of grievance to the Adjt, grievance to the CO, grievance to the formation commander, with date stamps, had a very positive outcome...