Future Canadian Airborne Capability and Organisation! Or, is it Redundant? (a merged thread)

[JasonH]

Yea but I think this quote says it best

But the biggest hurdle to overcome might be the unfortunate legacy of the former Airborne Regiment which still looms large in the minds of government leaders, says Maj.-Gen. MacKenzie. "It's possible to sell this idea to the public," he says. "But I don't see any politician taking that risk."

:-\

 

[Scott]

True, it'll be hard selling it to the public, too. I know many were outraged over the Somalia scandal, but, IMHO, more were pissed at the hazing videos and the stories of their behavior at Pet. How the elitist culture rules over them. Public perception of the new Regiment, whatever they call it, is going to make or break it before it gets off the ground.

How much you wanna bet Scott Taylor is wetting himself in anticipation of this one?

 

[Armymedic]

Heres a thought,
Lets call it the 2nd Canadian Parachute Bn/Brigade/Force.

 

[Scott]

I think that whatever the name is that they have to steer clear of "Airborne" lot of bad feelings come with that name, IMHO. I am not on that side of things, just making suggestions.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

And they woudl jump out of what?

 

[NavyGrunt]

Lets call it-

Fighting long onto war, everything regiment.

We'd call them FLOWER for short. That way the public would love them.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

True, it'll be hard selling it to the public, too. I know many were outraged over the Somalia scandal, but, IMHO, more were pissed at the hazing videos and the stories of their behavior at Pet. How the elitist culture rules over them. Public perception of the new Regiment, whatever they call it, is going to make or break it before it gets off the ground.

You don't think any serving soldiers were pissed at the Somalia scandal, or the hazing videos, or the talk of a regiment "out of control"?

I would suggest that any such new unit would need to be founded on the promise that what Canadians - soldiers and civilians allike - saw in the CAR won't be repeated.  I would like as much as anyone to believe that the hazing and atrocities were the result of a few "bad apples."  Fair enough, it can't be allowed to happen again.

Does anyone disagree with that?  The solution is not to stick our heads in the sand or limit our capabilities, but to be exceedingly careful in how we proceed.

Was the CAR/Somalia an aberration, or is it to be expected from any "elite" warfighting unit.  And if it was simply an aberration, how do you prove that to the politicians, the public, and even other soldiers who may be skeptical?

 

[Scott]

Michael, I think to answer your final questions would touch off huge debate. I think we have all read the arguments stating that sending the CAR to Somalia was a mistake because of the unit's mandate. I am sure we have also read that the root of the trouble was just a "few bad apples" I am no expert and I did not serve in the unit. I believe the former argument, but as I said, I was not in the unit nor do I know that much about them other than what I have read and what has been related to me by former members (Incidentally, one of their former CO's is my cousin, PM if you would like his name)

It's been almost 10 years since they have been gone and I hope for their return under whatever name and in whatever place.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Sadly I don't ever see the CF being able to live down the the whole 'somalia' affair. I just don't think the average voting Canadian has the ability to see things for what they are/accept the past.

RE- The new brigade.
I think a major hurdle would be transport for this new airmobile regiment, no?  Right now we have to contract out to civilian pilots so our soldiers can complete their basic parachute course.

Jay Hunter. You can't just snap your fingers, pick 1000 guys out and say preseto. You need stuff like shacks for the troops to live in, vehicles, weapons, equipment, service support (attached medics, cooks, weapons techs etc..)
Also your going to need trained soldiers, NCOs and officers. Your going to have to draw them from the other battalions which will reduce their numbers of experienced soldiers/leaders and just over all numbers.

I saw how much support (Equipment, lodging, service support)  just one infantry company needed and it was a lot. We even had to take weapons out of war stock.

 

[Pencil Tech]

Aren't the 3rd battalions of PPCLI, RCR, and Van Doos the light bns where the jump coys are? Isn't this where the remaining nucleus of a new para bn would come from?

 

[onecat]

"True, it'll be hard selling it to the public, too. I know many were outraged over the Somalia scandal, but, IMHO, more were pissed at the hazing videos and the stories of their behavior at Pet. How the elitist culture rules over them. Public perception of the new Regiment, whatever they call it, is going to make or break it before it gets off the ground."

I would have to disagree, on the Public reaction to a CAR unit.  Yes there was out rage over what happened in Somalia and on teh hazing videos... but it was an over reaction.  The PM and liberals took the oppotutunity to do gut the CF at the when they knew they would look like heros and the public won't look twice at the over reaction.  Even then I remember there was alot of out rage at the disbandment of a proud tradation.  And I believe the Canadian public would be glad to have it returned.  Now the question is would this happen, Marin was in the government at the time, I don't believ for second he cares about the Forces any more than Jean did.  He is more reasonable than Jean so you never know what will happen   The extra money and people would be nice.  But I don't think the Liberals would for a second actually return combat capabilities taht they have removed.  

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Jumping out of planes is different then being a commando reg.  A start but many steps to go. 
I have also heard that near the Somolia time CAR started to get a lot of the rif raf from other units.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

"True, it'll be hard selling it to the public, too. I know many were outraged over the Somalia scandal, but, IMHO, more were pissed at the hazing videos and the stories of their behavior at Pet. How the elitist culture rules over them. Public perception of the new Regiment, whatever they call it, is going to make or break it before it gets off the ground."

I would have to disagree, on the Public reaction to a CAR unit.  Yes there was out rage over what happened in Somalia and on teh hazing videos... but it was an over reaction.  The PM and liberals took the oppotutunity to do gut the CF at the when they knew they would look like heros and the public won't look twice at the over reaction.  Even then I remember there was alot of out rage at the disbandment of a proud tradation.  And I believe the Canadian public would be glad to have it returned.  Now the question is would this happen, Marin was in the government at the time, I don't believ for second he cares about the Forces any more than Jean did.  He is more reasonable than Jean so you never know what will happen  The extra money and people would be nice.  But I don't think the Liberals would for a second actually return combat capabilities taht they have removed. 

So put yourself in the government's shoes - what would YOU have done in the wake of Somalia to ensure the public that the Canadian Army was still a proud institution that could be relied on to fulfil its duties without embarrassing the rest of the country?  You're awfully quick to think the government disbanded an entire regiment just to spite the military.  Name an alternative to their course of action and explain why you think it would have paid political dividends.

 

[Scott]

Very good point, Michael.


CFL, I think that the rumour has long been that while the CAR drew many fine soldiers that it also was a place for a unit to send their "problem children", once again, my commenting for or against this argument would be useless, I was not in. However, I can see how this would happen and I think that it could only be a natural form of thought. I also think that this argument takes away from the men who served. I would think that even if a troop was "off loaded" by his unit into the Airborne that the standards that they kept for themselves (as I understand it) would quickly sort those individuals out.

So, what to do? Should they get rid of the jump companies in the respective unit's if they re-form the CAR in some way? Like CFL said, jumping out of planes is different than being in a commando reg't. Ideas?

 

[pbi]

I agree 100% that we need a rapid reaction capability, probably about battalion group size, but I'm not sure that a knee-jerk resurrection of the CAR, or any all-para unit, is the required response. IMHO confusing this new unit with JTFII is nonsense: they are two different creatures and rightly so. We will damage the JTFII if we try to use it as a "Ranger-type" RRU.

My suggestion is just to carry on the work that has already been started: continue to develop our three Regular Light battalions as true 21st-century light infantry. That is to say SOC (Special Ops Capable), not just "vehicle-deprived" IMHO the Light Bns are on the way already, as proven by 3PPCLI in Afghanistan. The high quality of our soldiers and NCOs is ideally suited to this development, and the Light Bns already incorporate a para capability. I am against starting from scratch-this would be wasteful, confusing, and unnecessary.

As others have pointed out, we need a few more things, too:

-all the assets to make sure that the RRU(s) can execute the combat functions effectively;

-the lift that can RELIABLY and QUICKLY depl the RRU or it won't be very "R";

-the abillity to sustain and protect it (Air and Sea, are you listening....?) and

-the ability to  generate (and then deploy, sustain, protect and recover) the remainder of a Brigade.

I suggest that this RRU capability is not just an Army problem: to do it right we will really have to become a joint force as opposed to just a unified one. 

Cheers.

 

[Spooks]

What do you define as an RRF (or QRF)? If it is a unit that is able to be deplyed in a short period of time, then, in my opinion we do have Neo-taskings which is a 3-hr notice or something. Not sure on that number though.

As for ressurrecting the Airborne Regiment, that is a touchy issue. I believe that you would never be able to bring back the Airborne regiment as a unit designation. In Ottawa that screams controversy and also Minister of Foreign Affairs doesn't like the brutality or negative image that such a unit name would portray onto Canada's international image. You cannot say 'who cares what the minister says' because that's why the PM said there would be an increase of 5000 -peacekeepers- to the forces. Under a different name, perhaps, but they would not be able to be labbelled as trained killers, though ironically the definition of the infantry is to destroy the enemy.

As for needing the para role...in 3VP we're attempting to have the Battallion para-qualified within four years, a 2 year rotation for the para role around the companies. One active para-coy, one in reserve. The jump course in November should put us (if everyone passes) to nearly a full 2 coys out of the 3 rifle coys. We just did an ex in "Leschitown" where friedly forces needed to gain a foothold in a city and dropped in on the outskirts. Did this on a coy level to rescue a 'lost section' and also on company level to 'aide local govt by pushing back militatn forces'. The para role is still vital for light infantry.

As for a SF unit, I'd say work on the regulars beforehand. Compared to nearby neighbors, we are already a more rounded soldier in reagards to training and it is just getting better. Fast roping may be introduced up here soon, and the OBUA training that we are receiving (for the units that have received it already) is some of the most intense and comprehensive in the history of the Canadian Forces (including CAR). Some retired American Rangers have even noted that some of us perform better in OBUA than their Rangers. (you can debate this fact, I'm just stating what was told to us)

My four rubles
-Spooks

 

[McG]

Screw the 5000 man peacekeeping idea.

Give a 1000 men to form a new Airborne reg. and put the rest in to fill out the other brigades. Or you could have two but I'm pretty sure that's on the expensive side.

Group the light battalions into a common new brigade.  Use some of the 5,000 PYs to establish a Bde HQ, Cbt Sp, and CSS elements to that brigade.  Use the rest too beef-up the brigades that already exist.

The new light brigade would give us the option to continue with one parachute company in each light battalion or to stand-up a parachute battalion next to the three light battalions.

 

[pbi]

Spooks: I didn't mean to say that we don't need a para capability: what I meant was that whatever config we choose for the RRU (or whatever we call it) we must not knee-jerk to a conclusion, but instead figure out what we need, including by taking  close look at what is going on in the world. I have no doubt that some degree of para capability will definitely be in the bn, as you have pointed out.

I agree with you on the right course of action to develop an RRU(s): build on the high quality Light Infantry we have now. You also raised an interesting point: maybe RRU should remain a rotating task rather than a permanent one? Cheers.

 

[George Wallace]

If one wants to lump all these troops into the "new' Brigade, there is another option to truly make it a Rapid Reaction Force and that would be to rebuild an Airborne capability of Bn strength and place it in a Bde that was also responsible for our "SEA HORSE" capabilities.  Chris Wattie wrote an accompanying article to the reserection of the Airborne in the Ottawa Citizen's Saturday Observer under the byline 'BY LAND, BY SEA' about "SEA HORSE'  and its' ability to make Canada's military able to intervene just about anywhere in the world.  This would be a Bn to Bde Gp that would deploy by sea in the 'new' Joint Support Ships (JSS) and combine Naval, Air and Land units in a common task. 

A Bde combining the Airborne and Sea Horse capabilities would be a solution that would be effective in filling all our needs.  It would be a Bde like that of 4 CMBG, in that one would have to prove themselves to earn a posting there and then be limited to a three or four year posting before returning to their previous units.  Rotating people in this fashion would work in the same way that our three year cycle is 'supposed' to work now, except that it would call for an actual posting into a "Tour Bound Unit" for a fixed period of time.  That may remedy some of the problems faced now with Battle Groups currently prepping and then having "add ons" arrive in theatre.

I know this was very concise, but it opens the floor for development.

GW

 

[Genetk44]

I guess I'm a bit late in this thread but what the heck. As a civilian who was working overseas at the time of the Somalia affair I was very disappointed at the behaviour of the troops in question. I was even more disappointed in our governments' reaction to it. To disband the entire unit was,in my humble opinion, a complete and inappro priate solution. I don't know how useful a para unit is in todays' world but I personally would like to see it reformed....but I'm a traditionalist ;D
Cheers
Gene