Artillery Logistics Lessons.

[daftandbarmy]

I would encourage folks to read the article that @FJAG posted above - as well as @NavyShooter 's post above.

Right now the West isn't at war, it is at the mall, and is indulging on way too much butter, when some thought should be taken to guns...

Coincidentally, we are seeing Israel withdraw reservists from Gaza because of the adverse economic impact from extracting productive members of society from the economy.

A great example of the 'guns vs. butter' dichotomy...

Israel withdrawing some units from Gaza​

The move is in part to mitigate damage to Israel’s economy from the war which began on Oct. 7 with surprise attacks by Hamas.

Israel withdrawing some units from Gaza

The move is in part to mitigate damage to Israel’s economy from the war which began on Oct. 7 with surprise attacks by Hamas.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[FJAG]

Coincidentally, we are seeing Israel withdraw reservists from Gaza because of the adverse economic impact from extracting productive members of society from the economy.

Israel has a population of 9.4 million of which 2.9 million are fit for military service and 465,000 reservists (plus 169,500 active service). That makes 22% of the fit for service population actually serving.

The US has a population of 332 million of which 119 million are fit for military service and 800,000 reservists (plus 1,328,000 on active service). That makes 1.7% of the fit for service population actually serving.

Canada has a population of 38 million and an estimated 13 million fit for military service with 27,000 reservists (plus 68,000 on active service). That makes 0.7% of the fit for service population actually serving.

The ratios are astounding and reflect the reality of the military threat. For both the US or Canada, going to war would have minimal threat to the industrial base. Canada's mobilizable reserve force isn't even a rounding error. We're a long way from WW2 when roughly 10% of the population was in uniform. Israel has over twice that every day of the year.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Israel has a population of 9.4 million of which 2.9 million are fit for military service and 465,000 reservists (plus 169,500 active service). That makes 22% of the fit for service population actually serving.

The US has a population of 332 million of which 119 million are fit for military service and 800,000 reservists (plus 1,328,000 on active service). That makes 1.7% of the fit for service population actually serving.

Canada has a population of 38 million and an estimated 13 million fit for military service with 27,000 reservists (plus 68,000 on active service). That makes 0.7% of the fit for service population actually serving.

The ratios are astounding and reflect the reality of the military threat. For both the US or Canada, going to war would have minimal threat to the industrial base. Canada's mobilizable reserve force isn't even a rounding error. We're a long way from WW2 when roughly 10% of the population was in uniform. Israel has over twice that every day of the year.

And is heavily subsidized by the US to the point where some might argue that it’s a US proxy force in the Middle East.

 

[KevinB]

And is heavily subsidized by the US to the point where some might argue that it’s a US proxy force in the Middle East.

Well we subsidize several ME countries…

Realistically Isreal is more a flame for the months, and we want to keep the flame burning bright.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Well we subsidize several ME countries…

Realistically Isreal is more a flame for the months, and we want to keep the flame burning bright.

But Israel has always been Uncle Sam's 'favourite nephew'


Since the 1960s, the United States has been a very strong supporter of Israel. It has played a key role in the promotion of good relations between Israel and its neighbouring Arab states—namely Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, along with several others in the 2020 Abraham Accords—while also holding off hostility from other Middle Eastern countries such as Syria and Iran. Relations with Israel are a very important factor in the U.S. government's overall foreign policy in the Middle East, and the U.S. Congress has likewise placed considerable importance on the maintenance of a close and supportive relationship.

Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign aid: until February 2022, the United States had provided Israel US$150 billion (non-inflation-adjusted) in bilateral assistance.[2] In 1999, the US government signed a Memorandum of Understanding through which it committed to providing Israel with at least US$2.67 billion in military aid annually, for the following ten years; in 2009, the annual amount was raised to US$3 billion; and in 2019, the amount was raised again, now standing at a minimum of US$3.8 billion that the US is committed to providing Israel each year.[2]

Israel–United States relations - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Brad Sallows]

Military aid to Israel would be more effective if the US weren't simultaneously finding ways to release Iranian assets back to Iran.

 

[Fabius]

There are some interesting historical examples from the build up to the US joining WW2 that might be of interest.

Starting in 1924 the US Army created the Army Industrial College, one of their main duties was the creation and maintenance of an industrial mobilization plan build upon a constantly refreshed survey of US Industry. Based on the survey the US Army knew better than anyone else in the government, who could make what, how well and how quickly.
Between 1938 and 1940 the US Army via the Industrial College placed a number of "Educational Orders" with 250 factories for various key systems that were valuable in war but hard to make with the needed precision, ie pack howitzers. These orders and the results gave the US Army a detailed understanding of the problems involved in quickly converting civilian manufacturing to military manufacturing.
The US Army via the Industrial Survey also strived to understood who all delivered what in terms of parts and sub assemblies, and the mobilization plan included not just prime contractors but also a huge number of sub contractors.

This work in the background by the US Army was one of the main reasons the US could quickly ramp up production during 1940-42.
Interestingly during the same period of the 1920-30s the US Military worked out that the country could mobilize at most 10% of its population without wrecking the industrial mobilization base that the armed forces would rely upon and the services put effort into dividing that total of 10% out to each service in accordance with the probable requirements.

They also worked out that it would require two years to both train, equip and deploy that 10% of the nation.

Its interesting how very accurate the US Military was in their planning of a strategic mobilization of US power. It was not seamless and there were glaring errors and tactical miscalculations ( the US Army weighted to much of their force structure initially to Tank Destroy units and formations) but overall it was highly impressive.

So what?
Does Canada have anything similar? Does the US or any of our allies? Should we?
If we think its useful we need to spend our time and money and personnel to do so. Interestingly the US experience above stemmed from the utter failure of US industry in supporting the US expeditionary forces in WW1. The US Army in the 1920s vowed to not have to beg for weapons and equipment from their allies again.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Starting in 1924 the US Army created the Army Industrial College, one of their main duties was the creation and maintenance of an industrial mobilization plan build upon a constantly refreshed survey of US Industry.

Oh my.

So what?
Does Canada have anything similar? Does the US or any of our allies? Should we?

Only if we're a serious people.

 

[daftandbarmy]

There are some interesting historical examples from the build up to the US joining WW2 that might be of interest.

Starting in 1924 the US Army created the Army Industrial College, one of their main duties was the creation and maintenance of an industrial mobilization plan build upon a constantly refreshed survey of US Industry. Based on the survey the US Army knew better than anyone else in the government, who could make what, how well and how quickly.
Between 1938 and 1940 the US Army via the Industrial College placed a number of "Educational Orders" with 250 factories for various key systems that were valuable in war but hard to make with the needed precision, ie pack howitzers. These orders and the results gave the US Army a detailed understanding of the problems involved in quickly converting civilian manufacturing to military manufacturing.
The US Army via the Industrial Survey also strived to understood who all delivered what in terms of parts and sub assemblies, and the mobilization plan included not just prime contractors but also a huge number of sub contractors.

This work in the background by the US Army was one of the main reasons the US could quickly ramp up production during 1940-42.
Interestingly during the same period of the 1920-30s the US Military worked out that the country could mobilize at most 10% of its population without wrecking the industrial mobilization base that the armed forces would rely upon and the services put effort into dividing that total of 10% out to each service in accordance with the probable requirements.

They also worked out that it would require two years to both train, equip and deploy that 10% of the nation.

Its interesting how very accurate the US Military was in their planning of a strategic mobilization of US power. It was not seamless and there were glaring errors and tactical miscalculations ( the US Army weighted to much of their force structure initially to Tank Destroy units and formations) but overall it was highly impressive.

So what?
Does Canada have anything similar? Does the US or any of our allies? Should we?
If we think its useful we need to spend our time and money and personnel to do so. Interestingly the US experience above stemmed from the utter failure of US industry in supporting the US expeditionary forces in WW1. The US Army in the 1920s vowed to not have to beg for weapons and equipment from their allies again.

Dayum....

That's exactly what a staff should be doing, IMHO.


History of the Industrial College of the Armed Forces

Before World War II the Army Industrial College, with its emphasis on the economic aspects of national security was a unique military college with no counterpart in other nations. World War II brought new recognition of the important role of the Industrial College. When the College was reconstituted as a joint-service institution after World War II, graduate level instruction was provided in economic mobilization, but emphasis soon shifted to the management of defense resources. The Industrial College of the Armed Forces was designated by its charter as an institution at the highest educational level in the Defense Establishment. The Alumni Association of the Industrial College of the Armed Forces undertook the preparation of this history to meet a long-recognized need for a comprehensive account of the development of the College. This project is especially timely in view of the 60-year anniversary of the Industrial College on 25 February 1984. The present study emphasizes changes in mission and the evolution of the instructional program. Extensive use was made of the annual reports submitted by the Commandants of the Industrial College to the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

History of the Industrial College of the Armed Forces,

Before World War II the Army Industrial College, with its emphasis on the economic aspects of national security was a unique military college with no counterpart in other nations. World War II brought new recognition of the important role of the Industrial College. When the College was...

apps.dtic.mil

 

[FJAG]

Does Canada have anything similar?

 

[Brad Sallows]

Does Canada have anything similar?

On further reflection, I suppose it's one of those capabilities provided by a coalition ally.

 

[KevinB]

On further reflection, I suppose it's one of those capabilities provided by a coalition ally.

One would assume that the CADATC with it's 3,200 PY's probably has some staff that should be doing that (amongst other longer range plans).

Part of the issue with the CA, is it generally ensures all it's better officers are streaming for command and operational Staff jobs - so Kingston gets the not so bright and lazier ones.

 

[Brad Sallows]

One would assume that the CADATC with it's 3,200 PY's probably has some staff that should be doing that (amongst other longer range plans).

Part of the issue with the CA, is it generally ensures all it's better officers are streaming for command and operational Staff jobs - so Kingston gets the not so bright and lazier ones.

I wouldn't expect such an organization to be part of CAF. It'd be civvy-side DND, or even multi-departmental, but probably best confined to DND to prevent too much mission creep.

I also wouldn't expect it to be staffed wholly or even mostly by uniforms. Half-facetiously: a few military history academics of an operations analysis bent to track a century of military developments and conflicts and shine some light on myths vs truths from the lowest to highest echelons; some economists specializing in mobilization and war economies; a bunch of engineers from the various engineering domains; a cadre of uniforms to track contemporary military developments and requirements. Their first task would be understanding how all the major players handled various mobilizations since 1918; their second task would be producing a set of "briefing books" summarizing all the important bullet points to allow rapid onboarding in the event of churn; their third task would be to set a plan for expanding their own capacity in the event of war; their fourth task would be to start writing guidance and plans to get from status quo to some mobilization target. I suppose there has to be 3.5 in there to establish what the reasonable target is.

 

[Brad Sallows]

the not so bright and lazier ones.

According to German doctrine, aren't those supposed to be limited to regimental duties?

 

[Fabius]

I wouldn't expect such an organization to be part of CAF. It'd be civvy-side DND, or even multi-departmental, but probably best confined to DND to prevent too much mission creep.

I also wouldn't expect it to be staffed wholly or even mostly by uniforms. Half-facetiously: a few military history academics of an operations analysis bent to track a century of military developments and conflicts and shine some light on myths vs truths from the lowest to highest echelons; some economists specializing in mobilization and war economies; a bunch of engineers from the various engineering domains; a cadre of uniforms to track contemporary military developments and requirements. Their first task would be understanding how all the major players handled various mobilizations since 1918; their second task would be producing a set of "briefing books" summarizing all the important bullet points to allow rapid onboarding in the event of churn; their third task would be to set a plan for expanding their own capacity in the event of war; their fourth task would be to start writing guidance and plans to get from status quo to some mobilization target. I suppose there has to be 3.5 in there to establish what the reasonable target is.

A mixed civilian and military organization was how the original US Army Industrial College was set up.

In Canada agreed that the best fit might be somewhere in Adm Mat etc.

I think that a key factor in the success of the US mobilization in early WW2 was the educational orders. This is likely where we would struggle if we attempted this. With out those both the military and industry would have a less robust understanding of the requirements, timelines and dependencies leading to less complete planning.

An example of an educational order for something simple could be providing the TDP for the C6 from Colt Canada to BCL, Kodiak, and asking them to build 100 each.

 

[Blackadder1916]

So what?
Does Canada have anything similar? Does the US or any of our allies? Should we?
If we think its useful we need to spend our time and money and personnel to do so. Interestingly the US experience above stemmed from the utter failure of US industry in supporting the US expeditionary forces in WW1. The US Army in the 1920s vowed to not have to beg for weapons and equipment from their allies again.

If the question relates solely to a top tier, masters degree granting "staff college" predominantly for senior logisticians, procurement types and fellow travelers, no, Canada doesn't have such an organization, but we apparently do send some of our pers down there.

A couple of familiar looking uniforms among a group photo on the Eisenhower School (the current name of ICAF) website.



Though I couldn't find any Canadian uniforms from the 2023 class photo.

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

But from the faculty page. Though one wonders about attention to detail if they can't get his organization's title correct.

COL Jean-Francois Simard, CAF

Colonel (Col) Simard joined the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) in January 1997 under the Reserve Entry Scheme Officer Program in Quebec City, Quebec Canada. As a logistics officer, he started his career

es.ndu.edu

As to whether we have (or had) any similar undertakings to develop either formal or informal relationships with (or knowledge of) Canadian industry with a view to "mobilization", perhaps. Back when the earth was cooling and before the realization that the Cold War no longer was justification for a buying spree, some of the offshoots of the 1987 White Paper were projects falling under ALMS (ACE Logistics and Medical Support) that in addition to bumping up NATO support also looked at some aspects of general mobilization. Though the fall of the rusted out Iron Curtain put those projects back on the shelf, during those couple of years there was a fair bit of "collaboration" (there was a formal name for DND and industry agreements, but I can't remember it - damn aluminum mess tins) between the department and Canadian (and some American) industries that would have been the primary go to manufacturers of equipment should we have to expand on mobilization.

 

[Skysix]

.

 

[Skysix]

A mixed civilian and military organization was how the original US Army Industrial College was set up.

In Canada agreed that the best fit might be somewhere in Adm Mat etc.

I think that a key factor in the success of the US mobilization in early WW2 was the educational orders. This is likely where we would struggle if we attempted this. With out those both the military and industry would have a less robust understanding of the requirements, timelines and dependencies leading to less complete planning.

An example of an educational order for something simple could be providing the TDP for the C6 from Colt Canada to BCL, Kodiak, and asking them to build 100 each.

Sounds like a perfect match for Perun to do some consulting...

 

[Skysix]

Ukrainian reporting, but likely fairly close to reality. Who would have thought that recruiting and pardoning criminals could possibly go wrong?

 

[Skysix]

Bravo Zulu