PDA

View Full Version : Canada Plans To Improve Light Infantry Units



Bluezoo
05-23-2005, 11:16 AM
Canada Plans To Improve Light Infantry Units
By DAVID PUGLIESE, OTTAWA


Experiences in Afghanistan and the battle against terrorism are spurring Canada’s Army to upgrade its three light infantry battalions so they can better support the country’s growing special operations force, in addition to providing troops to form the backbone for a new rapid-deployment unit.

The enhanced light units, along with the Army’s contribution to the rapid-deployment Standing Contingency Task Force, complement the service’s goal to become a medium-weight force capable of reacting quickly on the battlefield and using the latest technology for reconnaissance and surveillance.

Gen. Rick Hillier, chief of the Defence Staff, envisions the Standing Contingency Task Force as a high-readiness, rapid-deployment unit that could be pre-positioned near trouble spots using an amphibious assault ship the government plans to purchase. The Standing Contingency Task Force would be made up of infantry, special operations forces such as Joint Task Force Two (JTF2) and maritime and air assets.

Canadian military officials declined to give a detailed breakdown of costs. However, the government has committed 12.8 billion Canadian dollars ($10.2 billion) to revamp the Canadian Forces by 2010, including the purchase of an amphibious assault ship and aircraft, in addition to new equipment to support JTF2 and the light infantry battalions.

Hillier said improving the capability of the light infantry by creating what is known as Tier 2 forces will give the Army-dominated JTF2 the added muscle it needs. He said the Tier 2 light infantry will be well-trained, but not to the level of JTF2. Canadian officers use the example of U.S. Army Rangers to illustrate what they want to create. The U.S. Army has three light infantry battalions, each about 600 strong and with a small component capable of parachute operations. Hillier said he sees Canada’s light infantry as “enablers” to support JTF2 in its job.

Improvements in communications, mobility, firepower and support capabilities of the light forces will allow them to better integrate with a newly created Special Operations Group that includes JTF2. Among the new equipment to be purchased will be anti-armor missiles and automatic grenade launchers. A fleet of medium- to heavy-lift helicopters also will be acquired for troop transport, available both to regular Army units and special operations forces.

It will take several years to fully stand up the Special Operations Group and the Standing Contingency Task Force. Work is ongoing in designing the new structure for those groups as well as the enhancement of the light infantry battalions. Army officials did not respond to a request for more details on how the light infantry battalions would be upgraded or structured.

The size of JTF2 is classified but is generally believed to be around 600 personnel, including support troops. Hillier said he did not believe that Canada’s increased emphasis on special operations will drain units of their best troops.

“What we want to do is keep the special ops piece at the right size [so] that we’re not draining from units across the country, but we can actually generate sufficient numbers of those incredibly capable young men or women to do the job in special operations,” he said. “We think we’re pretty close to it right now.”

Hillier, who commanded NATO troops in Afghanistan in 2004, said the special operations capability is needed now more than ever for Canada to conduct missions around the world. “The missions are much more complex than ever, and for that you need a level of professionalism and expertise in operations that has never been demanded before in many cases here,” he said.

According to the government’s Defence Policy Statement, released April 19, the Army also will receive the bulk of 5,000 new recruits expected to be brought into the military over the next five years. That will allow the 19,000-strong Army to effectively support the Special Operations Group as well as the Standing Contingency Task Force, according to the 38-page document.

The plan is an about-face for the Army, whose commander last year said he wanted equipment improved for the light infantry battalions but did not see those units being used for special operations.

“We have plans to improve those aspects of the light infantry battalions, but we will not transform those as special forces,” Maj. Gen. Marc Caron, then acting commander of the Army, said last March. “The three light infantry battalions are part of the 12 maneuver units that we require for the rotation of sustaining at least two battlegroups outside of the country.”

Howie Marsh, a retired Army colonel, said Hillier’s plan to upgrade the light infantry units makes sense in that the 60,000-strong Canadian Forces can only produce about 300 “black” special operations troops, those soldiers who conduct counterterrorism and direct action missions. Because of that, there is a need for additional support from Ranger-type units, added Marsh, the Army’s former command inspector and now an analyst with the Conference of Defence Associations.

The Army is progressing on a plan to transform itself into a more agile force by the end of the decade. It is moving to almost an all-wheeled fleet, including replacing its Leopard tanks with the Mobile Gun System. It also will transfer its Air Defence Anti-Tank System, now on M113 carriers, to a light armored vehicle chassis....

For the full text, go to:
http://defensenews.com/story.php?F=832017&C=america

johnnu
05-23-2005, 03:17 PM
sounds great, too bad none of it will ever happen. more broken promises to the canadian army.

jedisponge
05-23-2005, 05:55 PM
I don't understand why Canada doesn't use a smaller but highly trained Active Duty Army.

Brozozo
05-23-2005, 06:00 PM
I don't understand why Canada doesn't use a smaller but highly trained Active Duty Army.

*blink* What?

abncougar
05-23-2005, 06:08 PM
I don't understand why Canada doesn't use a smaller but highly trained Active Duty Army.


size does matter..... :|

DANJANOU
05-23-2005, 07:10 PM
I don't understand why Canada doesn't use a smaller but highly trained Active Duty Army.

Ok I'll play, smaller than what?

Regular Army -3x Brigade Groups each of 2x Mech & 1 Lt Inf Bns, 1 Light Armoured Regt (3 Armour units now being reconfigured into 1x DFS Med Regiment, & 2x Recce) , 1 Arty Regt/Bn,, 1 Combat Engineer Regiment/Bn and assorted Combat service support units.

Basically we have a single Medium Mech Div, and probably enough Reservists to amn another 2-3 Brigades although without much of the heavy equip, AFVs etc.

Higher trained that what?

Not going to get into that one, as I don't want to be responsible for starting another international flame war here.

EvanL
05-23-2005, 07:14 PM
I don't understand why Canada doesn't use a smaller but highly trained Active Duty Army.

Ok I'll play, smaller than what?

Regular Army -3x Brigade Groups each of 2x Mech & 1 Lt Inf Bns, 1 Light Armoured Regt (3 Armour units now being reconfigured into 1x DFS Med Regiment, & 2x Recce) , 1 Arty Regt/Bn,, 1 Combat Engineer Regiment/Bn and assorted Combat service support units.

Basically we have a single Medium Mech Div, and probably enough Reservists to amn another 2-3 Brigades although without much of the heavy equip, AFVs etc.

Higher trained that what?

Not going to get into that one, as I don't want to be responsible for starting another international flame war here.
Can i buy you a beer?

memphiz
05-23-2005, 08:01 PM
I don't understand why Canada doesn't use a smaller but highly trained Active Duty Army.

Ok I'll play, smaller than what?

Regular Army -3x Brigade Groups each of 2x Mech & 1 Lt Inf Bns, 1 Light Armoured Regt (3 Armour units now being reconfigured into 1x DFS Med Regiment, & 2x Recce) , 1 Arty Regt/Bn,, 1 Combat Engineer Regiment/Bn and assorted Combat service support units.

Basically we have a single Medium Mech Div, and probably enough Reservists to amn another 2-3 Brigades although without much of the heavy equip, AFVs etc.

Higher trained that what?

Not going to get into that one, as I don't want to be responsible for starting another international flame war here.
Can i buy you a beer?
Or a pitcher

jedisponge
05-23-2005, 08:04 PM
Alright let me explain.

I don't mean to cut half the army out and pour the remaining money into what's left. And I did not at all mean that the Canadian Army is not well trained.

I don't know everything about the happenings of whats going up north, but from what I've observed is repeated cuts in manpower and funding for the military. I just don't understand why both are being cut; I was just thinking if man power was cut, to keep the funding at the same level and use it to increase training operations, supplies, equipment etc.

And besides if what the article describes comes to fruitation it's good news.

DANJANOU
05-23-2005, 08:45 PM
Mephiz, Evan a pitcher, or even a pint of Kieth’s IPA sounds good as long as you guys help me down em.

Jedisponge, cuts in numbers, equipment purchases, and replacement (leading to rust out) are simply a part of the fact that the Government who have been in power for the past decade now do not like the military per say, or at best don’t understand it and/or ignore it. Therefore when something in the national budget needs funds, guess where they take it from.

Conversely this same Government has been responsibly for an unprecedented number and intensity of overseas operations and deployments as our various leaders try to curry favour on the world stage, Somalia, Croatia, Bosnia, Kosovo, Cambodia, East Timor, Haiti, Eritrea, Rwanda, Congo, Sierra Leone, Iraq, Afghanistan etc.

During my day (1977-1994) odds are you got 1 maybe 2 overseas deployments (either Germany or maybe Cypress/Middle East). Since the early 1990’s it’s been the norm to go, not the exception.

Now while all this high tempo stuff may have been good in providing realistic operational experience it’s come at a high cost. Training and career development have suffered, attrition especially among senior members burned out is bad and there’s the social costs too.

While this report looks interesting and I have the highest respect for our new CDS, trust me anyone who’s every worn the uniform, takes any promises from this Government with a large grain of salt.

Resevoir Hogs
05-23-2005, 09:21 PM
Danjanou are there really 2 mech batts per inf regiment. I thought it was 1 light, 1 mech and the other one was training?

This proposition by the CDS is really good though in my opinion. I just hope it comes to pass.

DANJANOU
05-23-2005, 09:44 PM
Res

Last I heard, read, saw, was told 1st and 2nd Bn were LAV3s (mech, well let's say light mech) and the 3rd is Lt ( with one Airborne coy). Mind all units are understrength.

Resevoir Hogs
05-23-2005, 09:50 PM
yea true, I just don't hear very much about 2 RCR since they're way the hell out in Gagetown. I suppose them being the only reg force infantry on the East coast they must have some capability beyond just training.

But I wonder what the RCD and the blinde regiments are using now. I thought they had given up their Leopards. SO what are they doing in the meantime before the MGS comes in?

Proud_Canuck
05-23-2005, 09:53 PM
sounds great, too bad none of it will ever happen. more broken promises to the canadian army.

Another "profound" comment from Johnnu. Typical that he always bashes the Canadian Forces, but never provides constructive criticism and/or solutions. He should over throw the government of a "banana republic", and form his own army.

California Joe
05-23-2005, 10:10 PM
Yeah, pretty much everyone else ignored him. What's your point?

Resevoir Hogs
05-24-2005, 12:02 PM
I'm not sure if someone has asked this already. But does this mean there will be one formed "ranger" regiment with three battalions? Or are the light inf batts in each of the regiments just going to be changed slightly?

I think it would probaby be a good idea to have it formed as its own unit at its own base. That way there wouldn't be any slice and dicing of regiments when a deployment comes along. Keeping forces that train together deployed together.

DANJANOU
05-24-2005, 12:13 PM
… But I wonder what the RCD and the blinde regiments are using now. I thought they had given up their Leopards. SO what are they doing in the meantime before the MGS comes in?

From what my Black Hat friends tell me both the RCD and 12e RBC are converting to straight armoured recce. I presume that would be with Coyotes, G- Wagons and/or perhaps some new recce vehicle to come down the pipe.


I'm not sure if someone has asked this already. But does this mean there will be one formed "ranger" regiment with three battalions? Or are the light inf batts in each of the regiments just going to be changed slightly?

I think it would probaby be a good idea to have it formed as its own unit at its own base. That way there wouldn't be any slice and dicing of regiments when a deployment comes along. Keeping forces that train together deployed together.

A lot of debate over this (check out the various threads on army.ca for example). Obviously pooling the 3 light Bn into a single Brigade with approprioate HQ and sp elements would be the best bet. better training and the development of a new Light Infantry doctrine as opposed to the present "dismounted inf."

However does that mean we covert one of the CMBGs into this new Brigade and if so which one? Do we stand up a new Bde HQ with all the costs/problems that entails? If we do that does that mean the remaining 3 CMBGs will stay 1 Bn short?

I also wonder re the choice of “Ranger” if we go to a new unit. While definitely appropriate and we could use the same historical connotations as our cousins to the south, some may look on it as too American. Besides we already have the Canadian Rangers, and two reserve units with ranger in their title ( Rocky Mountain Rangers & Queens York Rangers ). I doubt for obvious reasons we’ll see them called the CAR again. However “Canadian Commando Regiment", or "Canadian Parachute Regiment" sound good to me, Canadian Airmobile Regiment just doesn’t roll of the tongue, and the damn slip ons would look ridiculous.

This one is going to be interesting.

Resevoir Hogs
05-24-2005, 12:30 PM
Yea I would guess adding 5000 (hopefully) to the regular force might be enough to form another brigade while keeping the existing CMBGs at full strength. Of course the new brigade wouldn't have to be as large as the mechanized ones.

As for a name I'd choose Canadian Rapid Reaction Force, so an abreviation of CRRF, Or simply RRF. (Yea I know I like killzone tooo much)

This is a bit away from the current topic.
If I were the CDS, which I'm obviously not. I'd have two levels of mechanized units. The light and medium armoured. Maybe have one CMBG kitted with the LAV 3s and MGS and Stryker TOW and all that good stuff. So that it could be deployed by air relatively quickly.
Then the other two CMBGs would have CV90s with 105 and 120 main guns, IFVs, TOW, and all the support vehicles.

That way we could still have a force that could stand up in conventional fights, but have the interchangabilty of parts that is so important with the smaller budget the CF has for spare parts.

And then of coruse there'd be the light infantry RRF brigade that could be airdroped or lifted by helicopter.

That way we'd have the Fast and light units required for the war on terror, as well as the slower but more powerful units so as to not compromise our ability to defend against aggressors with conventional armies.

Those changes though would require moneh and personnel. Plus getting newer transport planes and helicopters for the Air force. But a man can dream.

Oh ya and I think I'll go check out army.ca, haven't posted there in a while since I kept accidentally posting vehicle posts someone else already had started. :bash:

GrimmyRX
05-24-2005, 08:06 PM
1rst Canadian Airborne Brigade would be my pick.

"Having Trouble? Just call the CAB." :D

expat007
05-24-2005, 10:07 PM
How does the pay and allowances of the Canadian forces stand up to the US side of the fence?

Pandy
05-24-2005, 11:38 PM
Good read, can I get you a beer, pitcher or a cag Danjanou?

Panzer laid
05-25-2005, 12:11 AM
I want a Smirnoff !

and don't u guys say that is a chick's drink ! :fork:

EvanL
05-25-2005, 12:16 AM
I want a Smirnoff !

and don't u guys say that is a chick's drink ! :fork:
thats a bitch drink
;)

GrimmyRX
05-25-2005, 03:04 AM
Just figure that if you both have it, she'll be drunk, and you'll still be stone cold sober, ;)

Pete031
05-28-2005, 06:43 PM
2 RCR is doing just fine up here in Gagetown, Resevior Hogs... In the Past two years we have sent a company group to Afghanistan, to open the theatre and then another 2 company groups to Haiti.... We have another Company group leaving to Afghanistan in August, and then our Battlion rotation is in Jan 2007. Between all the deployments we have been training up north and doing MOUT down in the States.