• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Canadian Special Operations Regiment (CSOR)

com'on we cant lose alberta rednecks in power! They have and always will do whatever they can for the military.
 
.... Oh... OK... so if the PC lose a confidence vote in the future, they can blame it on the Liberals, the NDP and the BQ for not wanting to "make it work".... and try to get a majority the next time around.
 
What does this mean:

F. FOR CAT 1 PERS - APPLICANTS MUST NOT HAVE
PHOBIAS TO HEIGHTS, WATER OR CONFINED SPACES. APPLICANTS MUST BE BASIC PARA
QUALIFIED OR VOL FOR BASIC PARA TRAINING IF NOT QUALIFIED.


Does it mean you have to be basic para, or that you would be willing to take basic para if it ever popped up?
 
You either must already have your wings, or be willing to go on the course.
 
can anybody give me a link where I could find a detailed info sheet about the creation of CSOR. So far I've goggled it and Nada. Real interested any link would be greatly appreciated.

UBIQUE!!!!
 
C/ M.Bdr. Banks said:
can anybody give me a link where I could find a detailed info sheet about the creation of CSOR. So far I've goggled it and Nada. Real interested any link would be greatly appreciated.

UBIQUE!!!!
That would be an OPSEC issue and I'm pretty sure you aren't going to get access to it on a public medium. I'd have to wager that what you find in this forum is probably as much as you're going to get.
 
yoman said:
Or someone who is interested in this and is seeking more information.

Pretty sure I can give you this one without endangering OPSEC...It wasn't on the CANFORGEN, so it's juicy....Here Goes:

CSOR isn't taking apps from cadets at this point in time >:D
 
I learned a new word today:

Constraints

want me to use an example?

CLS Constraints

1. TFs in 2006 are Quarantined.  CF members belonging to the 2006 TF’s will not be allowed to volunteer for JATF selection training until that 2006 TF unit is no longer at high readiness.  The potential leadership / personnel drain is too great a risk to be allowed.
2. Strategic Reserve 06.  Those remnants of the 2006 Strategic Reserve not committed already to Op Archer will be quarantined for the same reasons as above.
3. Base Petawawa.  Personnel from CFB Petawawa (not including personnel from 3 RCR, 2 CER, 2 RCHA) will not be allowed to volunteer for the selection phase of 2006.  There will be opportunities for selection during the remainder of the JATF build process.
4. Specific Ranks and Trades.  The Army’s Managed Readiness plan has previously identified specific ranks and trades that are stressed and therefore currently unable to sustain the present Op Tempo (only one international deployment every three years).  Restrictions will be placed on these endangered trades (at the specific ranks) over the complete period of the JATF build.  These restrictions are intended to allow the Army to continue to FG the two lines of MSTFs with the least amount of risk while supporting CF expansion and the JATF build process.
5. 50% cap on both HQ and Admin Coy.  Due to the high Op Tempo of the CF, the Army will only accept 50% of the HQ and Admin Coy positions.  Exceeding this percentage will stress the under manned leadership ranks which are required for MSTF and Army expansion.
6. Units Quarantined for 2007.  CF members in 2007 TFs will not be allowed to volunteer for the 2007 sustainment process.  There will be additional opportunities for selection during the remainder of the JATF build process.  The strategic reserve TF(-) will also be quarantined in 2007.

I also learned a new phase today too:

Commanding Officer's Discretion

In combination these two things may be bad for any applicants.
Particularly if you are in a unit such as mine which is underborne and anticipating operations in the next 5 months.
 
kick in a 160th SOAR style airlift capability? Something to consider when purchasing new helicopters, maybe over the top in terms of budget though.
 
kick in a 160th SOAR style airlift capability? Something to consider when purchasing new helicopters, maybe over the top in terms of budget though
where have you been?  We've had this capability since the early 90's.
 
short final said:
where have you been?  We've had this capability since the early 90's.
I wasn't aware that we had a Canadian equivalent to the, AH/MH-6 Little Bird,  MH-60 Pave Hawk, and  MH-47E Chinook.
When did this come about?
Edited to add:

http://www.army.mil/calltoduty/
Click "skip intro"
Bottom right click on "open" in the "Warriors Corner" box
Then click on the
"CW5 Byron C. Edmonds and
CW5 Don Tabron
160th Special Operations Aviation Reg
Ft Campbell
"Special Operations Aviation in Afghanistan""
Video/PPT link for more 16oth capabilities.

 
Blakey said:
I wasn't aware that we had a Canadian equivalent to the, AH/MH-6 Little Bird,  MH-60 Pave Hawk, and  MH-47E Chinook.
When did this come about?

CH-135 and CH146-based "mid-size" (MH-60-ish equivalent) SOA since 1990.  I and many others have flown along side 160th SOAR(A) folks on exercises down South.  There have also been other opportunities to work with and discuss SOA issues with 160th pers.

Cheers,
Duey
 
Duey said:
I and many others have flown along side 160th SOAR(A) folks on exercises down South.  There have also been other opportunities to work with and discuss SOA issues with 160th pers.

Cheers,
Duey
With all due respect sir, flying with and "having the same capabilities" are to diffrent animals.
Ive trained 10 SFGP (ABN) and 5th SFGP, doesn't mean that the Canadian military has the same capabilities.
CH-135 and CH146-based "mid-size" (MH-60-ish equivalent)
I find that hard to believe.
 
Well, let me add more detail then...

1) Up until recently, we have had a capability closer to the FBI HRT Special Operation Aviation Unit...both using the CH135 and the CH146...in fact...the CH146 is close to being 100% similar aircraft type used by the FBI, let alone the very similar Dom CT role supported,

2) when I said MH-60-ish (note the -ish), my intention was to indicate where our SOA capability roughly sat.  The MH-60 Pavehawk is considered a mission-specific variant of the US Army UTTH (utility tactical transport helicopter) which, interestingly, happens to be exactly what the CH146 Griffon is to the CF, the CFUTTH.  I neither said explicitly nor implied that the CH135 or the CH146 had the "same capability" as the MH-60, and

3) By "flown along side", I meant that I have trained with the unit and have a good understanding of its operators, capabilities and procedures -- understanding where similarities exist, how we can best ensure interoperability or coordination of operations, or at the very least, learn from their experiences to apply to our own operations.  Nowhere did I say that we either: a) "trained" the 160th SOAR(A) [as in them learning from us], or b) "have the same capabilities" as the entire 160th SOAR(A), both of which you most recent post seems to imply I said.

Any other stuff that I should pick out of the pepper?  ???

Regards,
Duey

 
This issue has come up numerous times among many - resentfulness is bound to rear its ugly head knowing that some members had to do more to get the tan beret than others.
But think about what you're upset about.  Are you mad because someone else is going to be wearing a tan beret, and people will think that he went through all of this training to earn it, but in fact he didn't?  If that's the case, well, its too bad that you're wasting your energy thinking about what complete strangers thinks of OTHER complete strangers.  You and your peers know what you did to earn the beret, and that's all that should matter.  Who cares what Joe Blow down at 427 did to earn his?  Everyone who works for CANSOFCOM has a contribution to make towards the mission - and everyone will be recognized for it in the form of the tan beret.  If your pride is hurt because of someone elses' apparent lack of contribution, then you have bigger problems.

On a different subject - as far as Cdn. Aviation vs 160th - Duey summed it up pretty well.  I didn't say the Griffon could pull the same numbers as a 60, 147, or whatever.  All I'm saying is that there has been a Special Operations Aviation capability since the early 90's with 450 Sqn supporting the RCMP SERT, which later evolved to JTF2 support.  While the focus was more on domestic counter terrorism, there is a small out of area capability, and its about to get a lot bigger with the standing up of 427 Special Operations Aviation Squadron on Feb 1.
 
short final said:
This issue has come up numerous times among many - resentfulness is bound to rear its ugly head knowing that some members had to do more to get the tan beret than others.
But think about what you're upset about.  Are you mad because someone else is going to be wearing a tan beret, and people will think that he went through all of this training to earn it, but in fact he didn't?  If that's the case, well, its too bad that you're wasting your energy thinking about what complete strangers thinks of OTHER complete strangers.  You and your peers know what you did to earn the beret, and that's all that should matter.  Who cares what Joe Blow down at 427 did to earn his?  Everyone who works for CANSOFCOM has a contribution to make towards the mission - and everyone will be recognized for it in the form of the tan beret.  If your pride is hurt because of someone elses' apparent lack of contribution, then you have bigger problems.

On a different subject - as far as Cdn. Aviation vs 160th - Duey summed it up pretty well.  I didn't say the Griffon could pull the same numbers as a 60, 147, or whatever.  All I'm saying is that there has been a Special Operations Aviation capability since the early 90's with 450 Sqn supporting the RCMP SERT, which later evolved to JTF2 support.  While the focus was more on domestic counter terrorism, there is a small out of area capability, and its about to get a lot bigger with the standing up of 427 Special Operations Aviation Squadron on Feb 1.


TOO BAD? This unit may get spec pay. And some fat lazy will get the same pay. I think all have to do the testing. The American and Brit pilots have to do the same test as the ground fellas if they fly DELTA/SAS. WHY CAN'T OURS.
 
Recce, I'll be the first to agree with you about the PT thing - I'm a huge advocate of that.  But someone upstairs decided it wasn't necessary - so don't blame the flyers and hold resentment towards them on that sole basis.

The spec pay issue was raised at BGen Barr's brief, but has not yet been considered, so I would drop that arguement.  As far as being fat and lazy, I would take that up with the individual.  Considering the company they'll be working with, I would consider it to be a matter of professionalism to maintain a level of physical fitness, even if they don't NEED to meet the same standard.  If one doesn't, that's their personal, unfortunate issue.
 
Back
Top