I think that the tank vs. LAV debate will go on for some time. With the size of our Armoured Corp, we can only, really, support one or the other.
It was probably a good idea to keep the tanks together in one Regiment. It has been some time since we had three squadrons of tanks in one Regiment.
Since the CLS has mandated interoperability with the U.S., wouldn’t it be a good idea to equip ourselves with the same direct fire support vehicle they are using? Granted, we have climatic considerations to keep in mind. As was demonstrated in Afghanistan, we may have to get our bullets (and who knows what else) from them so it might make sense to have the same vehicle.
Because of the state of the military, we may have to let our allies fight the heavies and we would have to take the highly mobile, flank security duties.
Doctrine changes as the need changes but unfortunately, the doctrine changes much slower than the need. Look at the way we train to meet the Soviets, oh, I mean Genforce in Europe. I don’t know the last time we sent guys down to train in a desert environment. Given the situation in the world today that might be a good idea. It might be a good idea to look at the U.S. doctrine and adopt it, with a Canadian slant.
We can only hope that one day our political masters will see the need for a strong military (hopefully before it is needed, not after). Maybe some day we will have a few Regiments of tanks and others with LAV based DFS vehicles.
:tank: