Triforce concept coming back??

[TCBF]

"If Bigmac thinks that you can pick up an ill-trained, unwilling group of support people, toss them into theatre as infantry and have them succeed, ..."

- We have Military Cemetaries in Europe full of headstones with maple leaves on them as proof that this has been tried once to often.

 

[McG]

Take a look at CSOR they have effectively trained pers from all elements. Yes, they were all volunteers but it prooves it can be done.

. . . and look how long it has taken.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

. . . and look how long it has taken.

Yup, even with the "assistance" of a bunch of guys from 3 RCR...

 

[Good2Golf]

      Triforce was just CF as a whole and we all wore one uniform. We were still Army, Airforce and Navy. Today we must jointly work together to achieve missions just as in the past but now since infanteers are greatly needed perhaps pers could be trained as infanteers first. You would still have your environmental identity and trade just like then but would look more unified with one uniform and could be rerolled for further infantry training and roles as required. 
   
      Take a look at CSOR they have effectively trained pers from all elements. Yes, they were all volunteers but it prooves it can be done.

      Obviously I have stirred a hornets nest.

Dude, you're not getting it, are you?

We were still Army, Airforce and Navy.

No, not after unification.  RCN, CA, and RCAF all ceased being on 1 Feb, 1968.

Today we must jointly work together to achieve missions just as in the past but now since infanteers are greatly needed perhaps pers could be trained as infanteers first.

We need all trades and occupations, not just infanteer.  This is not the same as saying that all those trades and occupations involved in deployed combat operations should have a firm grip on individual and collective combat skills consistent with their trade/occupation to allow them to contribute to the overall operation.  As a pilot deployed on the ground in AFG, I was trained in the required sequences mandated for the theatre, including dual weapon qual, driving, TCCC, etc...all skills used or required for the op.  I felt comfortable that I would not become a biological paper-weight to my bud if stuff headed south and we needed to keep ourselves safe to fight another day.

You would still have your environmental identity and trade just like then but would look more unified with one uniform...

It's called CADPAT(AR).

...could be rerolled for further infantry training and roles as required.

And then combat support and combat service support functions required by the hoards of 031'ers would be done by....... ???

Bicmac, guys have laid out good reasoning for why things are the way they are...please listen to them, they have a pretty wide base of knowledge on what makes operations work, either ops in general or ops for specific theatres.

G2G

 

[Bigmac]

    Just so you know where I stand, I do not agree with putting sailors  and airforce pers into infantry roles but the studies are being done. Don't shoot the messenger. Please read the link below.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com//servlet/story/RTGAM.20061023.wxafghans23/BNStory/Afghanistan/home

 

[George Wallace]

I think a lot of confusion is occurring in what is being said.  All Recruits should be trained as 'Basic' Infantry so that in whatever Career route they take in the CF, they will be able to defend themselves and contribute effectively to the protection of their co-workers, their job site and equipment.  To re-role Trained Sailors, Airmen, or any other Trade, including Armd and Arty, is foolhardy.  To re-role a percentage of capable Recruits would be the most logical step to take.

 

[GAP]

I think a lot of confusion is occurring in what is being said.  All Recruits should be trained as 'Basic' Infantry so that in whatever Career route they take in the CF, they will be able to defend themselves and contribute effectively to the protection of their co-workers, their job site and equipment.  To re-role Trained Sailors, Airmen, or any other Trade, including Armd and Arty, is foolhardy.  To re-role a percentage of capable Recruits would be the most logical step to take.

As one who belonged to an Armed Force who's credo is "Everybody is a Grunt First", and being trained as a ground Radio Tech, they did not want me outside the wire. It was a constant game of attaching myself (there were a few of us) to patrols as radio operators and hoped no higher-highers noticed until we got outside the wire. We were constantly repremanded verbally about the cost of training us, the OpSec aspect, etc., etc..

Those personnel that are gungho and want to take a crack at being a grunt, should be allowed to (within reason) be able to trainup and do a tour, especially if they are new to the CF and the exposure will help them in their trade by giving them a wider exposure. This should be a volunteer only option.

Everybody, I mean everybody, should be able to handle basic weapons and elementry tactics, because bases do get attacked and sometimes overrun. Not likely in this particular case, but there are other situations where the thinking should apply (eg: convoys, etc).
This basic skillset (rifle) should be a requalifier on at least an annual basis. In addition to ensuring people are capable of defending themselves and others, it reminds them of the fact that they are in the ARMED FORCES,  not CUPE, PSAC, etc.

 

[dapaterson]

"If Bigmac thinks that you can pick up an ill-trained, unwilling group of support people, toss them into theatre as infantry and have them succeed, ..."

- We have Military Cemetaries in Europe full of headstones with maple leaves on them as proof that this has been tried once to often.

Sadly, much more than once too often...

 

[1feral1]

      The Canadian Forces are militarily small compared to other countries. Presently we are approx. 62,000 pers. We do not have a large resource of infanteers within that number. Obviously in our present mission the infanteer is a hot commodity that will continue as the mission in Afghanistan goes on. My opinion is that we are heading back to a triforce concept to draw on other pers so the fulltime infanteers don't burn out. This to me becomes a triforce concept as we will have to draw from other environments as well to achieve this goal.       

I am off on a tasking, just going out the door, but I could not resist to respond to this.....

Hey BM, I hope I am not too harsh here, but what have you been smoking? In your view of tri-service, I find your opinion confusing and ill informed. "So that the full time 031s don't burn out???" Where and the helll are you getting such ideas or information to guide you in such a bizarre direction? 

Anyways, distancing myself from your unrealistic views, from its original defination as tri-service in the post 1968 CF world, I don't think the government would EVER make that mistake again (at least the Torries - put the lefty limp wristed Libs in there anything is possible). It totally stripped and demoralised the entire CF for many years. I was in from 1976 to 1995.

In comparison, Australia has a similar sized Defence Force with three distinct services, the RAN, RAAF and Army. All are strong, well and fine, plus full of esprit du corps to the maximus. It works, so why spend millions to change it again.


Regards,


Wes

 

[rifleman]

      With the CDS statement of rerolling various military trade pers into Infantry roles I ask the following questions:
   1.    Are we going back full circle and returning to the Triforce concept?
    2.    How do you feel about going back to one uniform for all which would be "Army" ?

1. No, we are finally getting on with unification and becoming a truly joint force.
2. We never wore an army green uniform. It was CF Green.
(although I suspect it was tailored after Rifle Regiment Green)