"Trading Saber for Stealth" or "Are We a One Trick Pony?"

[TCBF]

"As much as a portion of the Armoured refuses to admit they need the extra dismounts they do -- and Matt's examples are proof of that requirment."

- We always knew we needed and wanted the dismounts.  Do a week as a four-man two-Lynx patrol and watch the sleep deprivation take it's toll on good judgement.

The Coyote mid-life upgrade follow-ons will hopefully give us the two seat trunk monkey establishment we need.  The only question is, will the TB Nazis give us the Person/Years to stock them?  The answer is "No, the TB Nazis all attended the Bob F School of minimal effort." (Bob F being the one to 'order' DND Coyote Tm NOT to trick out the Coyote when we bought it - an order which was disobeyed).

So, who will sit in the chairs?  Anyone who has done time as an M113 1/2 C&R Lynx Observer on a Petawawa winter exercise  knows a 'Yote has lots of room in the back by comparison.  As for tour loading, the lawn chairs and wading pool went outside, and all the ammo we could steal went inside - no problem.

I asked the Army Commander in 1999 if we considered putting the Coyote package on a LAV for signature reasons as well as commonality.  He said "Which LAV?  L3, L4, L5?  When do we stop upgrading?  As far as signature goes, most Canadian soldiers can't tell the difference between the Coyote and the LAV 3, I don't imagine the bad guys will either."

So, no reason to go to a bigger Surv/Recce veh, when the one we have now is too big as it is.

Tom

 

[Matt_Fisher]

I understand what you are saying, but I just don't really see it being a sustainable proposal except for short term Ops.   Any Ops over a long period would be too fatiguing for the crewmembers in back.   That is one of the reasons I say to upgrade to the LAV III.   Better ergonomics.

In TSS the guys may have gone out for a week.   At the Regt the guys may go on Ops for several weeks, and carry a lot more kit.   While down in Drum my GIB was buried under kit for the trip.   When we were operational down there he was able to move around.   Add another body and things get too tight.   We could always add a two seat extension... ;D

We lived out of our vehicle for 7 months with 7 guys in it, so what more do you want in terms of proving that a larger crew size is sustainable?  It was tight, but we survived and managed to accrue alot of creature comforts (by the time we were mid-tour, every body had fold up chairs, cots, individual crew tents, etc.) so I don't see how 4 guys in a Coyote (same vehicle hull as the LAV-25) can barely fit.  Maybe instead of putting the kitbags inside, they should be shackled externally to the lifting eyes on the 4 corners and the captain's chair should be switched out for something less voluminous.
Nothing a bit of creative thinking cannot overcome.

 

[George Wallace]

Are we now talking Static or Mobile?

 

[Matt_Fisher]

Are we now talking Static or Mobile?

IRT?  Living out of the LAV? 
Both static and mobile, for the first 5 weeks of the war during 'The March Up' we were constantly mobile, whereas the next 6 months was a mix of operating out of FOBs and multi-day patrols/ops .  In the FOBs you had the luxury of offloading a significant amount of junk from the vehicle, but we did some significant movements around the country, ie. Al Kut to Nasiriyah, Nasiriyah to Baghdad, Baghdad to Najaf, etc.

 

[KevinB]

What do you know Matt  :  That was just a war... 

;D


  Matt - The CF Coyote is VERY poorly layed out -- I think that given a LCIS tech with the authority to move some stuff around and a mat tech to move and re fix brackets (welding and grinding) You could make a lot more room than there is.  Secondly on patrol they can easily stick another in as long as they keep one up in the rear air sentry hatch as the Surv Op has been doing that in Afghan -- now for actual combat - he better have a place to fit himself into but - it is doable.

  Of Course when your dealing with a Army that has more interest in filling a bloated NSE or NCE - than filling Sharp End PY's...

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Just to be clear, I am proposing putting five soldiers in each Coyote (not two scouts plus the surv operator).  The two scouts in the back should have Coyote qualifications (at least Surv Op and Driver) and the rest of the crew should also be able to perform the Scout role.  When the Patrol is conducting an OP (of pretty much any type), the additional two soldiers would give greater local security and/or help out with crew rest.

Stowage is obviously a big issue.  I am told that a new OCS and sensor package may be in the pipeline.  With a smaller OCS you may find room for the fifth man, and with a smaller suite you could perhaps shove more inside.

I would like to see the Armour get more involved in dismounted reconnaissance.  At the moment it seems rather ad hoc.  The skills are most certainly there, but our courses should have something like the infantry's recce patrolman course.  The various Recce squadrons have all practiced dismounted recce skills, of course, but I'd like to see them as a core competancy.  We haven't run assault trooper in some time (to my knowledge).  One extra benefit of enhanced dismounted recce training would be the ability to keep soldiers trained and motivated within the realities of whole fleet management (sorry, bit of a tangent).

If, for laughs, this was to implemented (Scouts in the Coyotes), would you have that as the first role for a new trooper or have it after he has been in the crews for a while?  What kind of course would we use?  Would one "scout" MCpl per Patrol be workable?

Cheers,

2B

 

[Kirkhill]

2B:

Do all Coyotes need radar?  Or can they get away with most having an EO suite and only 1 or 2 in a troop having radar?

 

[George Wallace]

2 Bravo

I'd have 2 Surv Ops back there.  If anything happened, hopefully you would still have a Surv Op left.

 

[George Wallace]

Do all Coyotes need radar?   Or can they get away with most having an EO suite and only 1 or 2 in a troop having radar?

There are Three variants.   One with a Mast, one with a Ground Mount and then a Command Variant that has no Surv Suite, but should be equiped with SAS.   If the complete fleet is equiped with SAS, then that is another item that will fill up the Turrets and Surv stations.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Kirkhill,

I'll ponder the radar bit.  The radars are very useful in some situations and not very useful in others.  If I had to choose between the radar or the FLIR I'd take the FLIR in a heartbeat.  That being said the radar does give you an extra capability.

George,

I agree that both should have Surv Op.  I figure that any down time in a Sqn should be filled with Surv Op courses to get everybody qualified.  The course is very cheap, although it does take complete Surv Suites to run and they are in short supply sometimes.

Would you have new arrivals to the Regt go in as Scouts first or as drivers/gunners in the crew?

 

[Matt_Fisher]

Whilst I'm out of the Canadian career planning loop, this is a model I'll toss out there:

Year 1:   Scout
Year 2:   Driver
Year 3:   Surv. Operator/Sr. Scout
Year 4:   Gunner
Year 5:   Patrol Scout Team Leader (PLQ completed)
Year 6:   Junior Callsign Crew Commander (Armoured 6A/Crew Commander Course completed)

Obviously it's very theoretical and quite a 'stovepipe/silo' type career progression, but I'll throw it out there to be looked at/ripped apart.  Also, the model that I propose would have a 2 Coyote patrol crewed with 5 in the sr. vehicle (which would have a surv. station) and the jr. vehicle would have a 5-7 pers crew (vehicle would not be equipped with surv. station).

 

[KevinB]

The Recce/Surviellance Sqn on Roto II wanted C7CT or AR10T rifles for their patrols as well (yeah like we got tons to hand out) -- if they want that sort of capability -- they are best off simply posting in Infantry Recce pers for their Scouts -

Then give everyone a basic intro into everyone else's job so if shit does happen a "loading number" is not left trying to figure aout a task he has no concept about.

 

[George Wallace]

Would you have new arrivals to the Regt go in as Scouts first or as drivers/gunners in the crew?

I'd kinda go with Matt's line of thought and make them Surv Op/Scout first.  The Surv Op job is currently what is required most in OPs and will keep our crews effective in event of casualties.  From the Surv Op/Scout posn, the Career Progression can go up to Driver and then Gunner.  Commanders would then have progressed through all the stations and have the knowledge they require to complete all tasks.  If the necessity is for there to be Dismounts, a five man crew can do it.  After all the Surv Op doesn't have much to do unless the Surv Suite is in operation, and that doesn't occur on the move.  So Dvr, Gnr, CC and two Surv Op/Scouts in back.

In a static posn, you would have ten men to run a Surv Suite, rest, and patrol if necessary.  Seldom would a Patrol run out both Suites at once.  Two five man crews could offer a lot of flexibility.

The debate over radar is mote, as the Radar, FLIR, Thermal and Video are basically all one.  Removing a component would achieve nothing, but degrade the abilities to conduct Surveillance.

Remember also that the Coyote is a Surveillance Vehicle, not really a Recce Vehicle.

 

[TCBF]

"Remember also that the Coyote is a Surveillance Vehicle, not really a Recce Vehicle."

The Coyote was bought as "The Lynx Replacement Project".  Our Recce units and Recce vehs do Recce, Surv, and other tasks.  The fact that we have been focusing on 'force protection' and doing mostly RAS tasks vice hard Recce does not mean the 'Yote is a Surv veh. 

As for Trunk Monkey career flow, the scouts will be the guys who are OJTing on the Coyote because they have not been loaded on a PCF yet (Train To Need).  In any case, getting the Corps Support Command in on the gong show means there will be no tour slots for Trunk Monkeys uless we drop from 15 cars to ten on the tour.

And on a BTE as OPFOR, you won't be ordered as crews, but CFTPO'd as line items by veh and driver and CC.  If you are lucky, maybe gunners, too.  Gotta save money.

Any talk of full Sqns of three 7 car Troops plus an Assault Tp as well as  full 11 car RHQ Recce Troop belongs in a conversation that starts with "Remember the eighties..."

Tom

 

[Matt_Fisher]

So, on the one hand we've got a reg. force armoured manpower crisis, and on the other hand, you've got a reserve armoured corps that's drifting without direction.

Why not then employ reserve augmentees as scouts/surv. operators in the back of the vehicle?

 

[DG-41]

Hey, we're not "drifting without direction". We know exactly what we want, what we are doing, what we need, what we bring to the table, and how to get there. And we've got lots of highly motivated troops chomping at the bit to get out there and do the job. The problem is that we aren't being given the tools to do the job.

You give me my 8 GWagons, or RG-31s, or Coyotes, or Bisons, or dear God even go to http://www.iltis.ca and get me 8 referbed Iltis. Give me my radios, and I'll field a full troop any training day you ask.

DG

 

[a_majoor]

Personally, I would see a "Recce Coyote" with all the surveillance equipment stripped out and the interior reapportioned for dismounted patrolmen and sustainment supplies. Long range "eyes" would be through either the on board FCS or fitting something similar to the LRSS. The "Surveillance Coyote" would belong not to the Recce Squadron but to the ISTAR Bn or whatever other higher level organization can best use this capability (with the best will in the world, I believe the capabilities of a Coyote are wasted in the Surveillance role, perhaps some more RG-31s can be purchased and fitted with the surveillance suite instead.)

As we are constantly reminded, both by Major Taylor and our Armoured SMEs, Armoured Recce is about speed of movement. Mixed troops of Recce Coyotes and a smaller mud recce vehicle (Ferret 21?) seem to be worth exploring based on observations by DG-41, former Soviet recce tactics and interpolating from some other things I have read. Surveillance vehicles and dismounted troops provide a framework of sorts to keep the enemy from filtering back in and directing mobile forces to investigate and prosecute contacts, depending on the situation you find yourself in.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Finally, it's come full circle. My job is not to fight, nor is it to dismount and do infantry attacks. My job is to advance with as much speed as possible, collecting info on the way. I'm "Mud Reccce". I don't fight. If I can DESTROY, with Artillery, in place, great! If I can't, I PIQUET AND BYPASS. I don't fight for my info, nor do I dismount and fight the with enemy. If you don't agree with the current doctrine, get it changed. The problem we have, is with new Troppies that want to attack everything that shoots at them. Our doctrine for "Mud Recce" has never changed. If you want to lump a dozen (or less) guys, in the back of a vehicle, change the doctrine.

"It is in vain to say human beings ought to be satisfied with tranquillity: they must have action; and they will make it if they cannot find it". Charlotte Bronte

 

[KevinB]

Recceguy -- the Armoured are looking for a role.

  Since the CF decided to get out of Mechanised Warfighting (read no tanks), they are left in a spot that they have no role in the kinder and fuzzier CF --so they have to invent jobs -- jobs which they do not have the skill set of equiptment for -- and worse waste equiptment that they do have.

This issue put a face to simply amalgamating the Mech Inf with the Armoured guys --

Make a LAVIII+ Armoured Recce add four Inf dismounts

Normal Non Surv LAV's are Armoured Crewed and Inf Dismounts -- you can plug and play to your hearts content - some missions have strict LAVIII and some the + and some a mix.

Call them 1 Joint Calvary Squadron LdSh or something

s
  You will have to go with a 5 or 6 car Platoon/Troop setup
LAVIII  T12  Command Vehicle (Armoured Tp Cdr, Inf Pl Comd - yeah I know two commanders could get whacked but here are two warrant left so...)  Inf Pl Sig, and 1 GPMG Team
LAVIII  T12A  1 Sect
LAVIII  T12B  2 Sect
LAVIII  T12C (Tp WO) 2 GPMG Team and Wpn Det Cdr
LAVIII  T12D  3 Sect
LAVIII  T12E (Pl WO + remaining Wpn Det)

You have at least 1 SNCO in each vehicle (or two officers close enough  ;D)  So they can handle dispersed operations.  The Armoured can command and fight the vehicles --the Pl Comd the crunchies.  Both groups can seperate for periods and still remain effective (unlike and Inf Mech unit).  The Armoured gain expendible crewman in red star trek unifroms to provide the dismount task -- that are quite numerous in these days tasks.

  If there is room you could attempt to squeeze two surv varient into the troop to add extra versatility.






 

 

[TCBF]

I like this thread.

"Hey, we're not "drifting without direction". We know exactly what we want, what we are doing, what we need, what we bring to the table, and how to get there. And we've got lots of highly motivated troops chomping at the bit to get out there and do the job. The problem is that we aren't being given the tools to do the job.

You give me my 8 GWagons, or RG-31s, or Coyotes, or Bisons, or dear God even go to http://www.iltis.ca and get me 8 referbed Iltis. Give me my radios, and I'll field a full troop any training day you ask.

DG"

In my opinion - after 29 years of Coyote, Lynx, and some leopard - DG is spot on.  DG - whoever you are - you have my vote.  I have never been in a Militia Armoured Regt, but the Regular Regts I have been in sure could have used some augmentation now and then.  That we did not get it was never the fault of the Militia.

After a FALLEX when we had employed Militia Artillery as Lynx Observers because we were so understrength (flushing a 4 man patrol to six gives each of the two drivers a whole bunch more sleep at night - which keeps me and my Lynx alive on the Autobahn),  We asked: Where were the Recce and Armoured Militia?  - In the BSA helping the Svc Bn.  Why?  - Who Knows?

We sure could have used them.  I told a couple how much fun we had, and they wanted to come over on a FALLEX and go with Recce Sqn.  I told them "In that case, best bet is to join the Artillery."

No kidding - I said that to them.  1989.

KevinB:  One purpose of Armd Recce is "Economy of Force" tasks.  In other words, we use Recce Sqn to allow our over commited infantry to go where they can best employ their pointed-stick drills.  If we continuously penny packetted All Arms, we could not concentrate enough at the point of main effort.

Especially Inf, who are allways in short supply, especially once the intensity goes through the roof.

I say, give the Grunts back their Mortars, ADP, and Pioneers, and give us back our Six Nix (RHQ Recce Tp) and our Aslt Tps.

We still have a role: our Coyotes are doing what amounts to RAS - Rear Area Security, with the threat being comparable to a Heavy-Metal-On-The-Central-Front RAS mission - minus the 2000 plus Flogger Ds.

So, we don't need to re-org just yet, beyond putting us - and you - back into the tried and true, proven, flexible and 'staying power' capable  ORBATS we had in the not to distant past.

Mission Specifics?  Our 7 car Lynx Troop was once flushed out with a Troop of Tanks, a TOW Det, a Pl of Mech Inf, an Engr Recce Sect, and a FOO/FAC.  This was for a flank guard. 

When the flank Guard was done, we split up back to our units/BGs/Cbt Tms, where we could be Att'd/Dett'd as needed and Sustained/Reconstituted with minimal effort.

We still have a role - no one just recognizes that we are doing it.

Al Majoor: An ISTAR Bn is a sneaky way for all of the geeks to try and secure command appointments.  It is a career engine, not an operational one.  A Div Recce Regt has the flex to accomodate the new assets, and the iron to ensure the non-manoeuvrist pocket protector crowd don't get the funny idea they have the stones to actually run things.

Lions will not be led by Sheep.

Tom