Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[PrairieFella]

Years ago in the 1VP A Coy lines in Currie I told D Inf that we should kill off everyone over the rank of Captain in the Infantry as at that point all that was being done was Coy Level Cbt Team attacks, which let’s be honest only needs a Captain to run.

To me the CAF needs to organize as a war fighting entity to justify it existence. The RCN and RCAF mostly seem to be able to do that (though I think the Tac Hel numbers are woeful) While the CA seems to enjoy making farcical formations to the expense of actual capability. Then there are the other commands - that just seem to suck life from everyone.

That is a very silly idea lol

 

[daftandbarmy]

Years ago in the 1VP A Coy lines in Currie I told D Inf that we should kill off everyone over the rank of Captain in the Infantry as at that point all that was being done was Coy Level Cbt Team attacks, which let’s be honest only needs a Captain to run.

To me the CAF needs to organize as a war fighting entity to justify it existence. The RCN and RCAF mostly seem to be able to do that (though I think the Tac Hel numbers are woeful) While the CA seems to enjoy making farcical formations to the expense of actual capability. Then there are the other commands - that just seem to suck life from everyone.

A good Infantry commander will make sure everyone in their unit can do everyone else's job, if required.

For example, I've seen Private soldiers lead pretty good platoon attacks.

 

[KevinB]

A good Infantry commander will make sure everyone in their unit can do everyone else's job, if required.

For example, I've seen Private soldiers lead pretty good platoon attacks.

My point was more that decade saw some significantly poor efforts of the CA (or at least 1 CMBG) to do much more than Coy level work.

Which is not anything sort of reasonable for an Army that is allegedly purposed for LSCO’s

 

[daftandbarmy]

My point was more that decade saw some significantly poor efforts of the CA (or at least 1 CMBG) to do much more than Coy level work.

Which is not anything sort of reasonable for an Army that is allegedly purposed for LSCO’s

Good point... training higher than company level takes a significant investment in time and resources...

 

[KevinB]

Good point... training higher than company level takes a significant investment in time and resources...

True but it’s really embarrassing if all of a sudden you need to plug into an allies Division and no one knows how.

 

[Gunplumber]

Did you tell them they should all be demoted to Colonel or lower?

Yes I did asshat. Especially when I gave up a position back in the Reg force as I was on the project to send Memory Boxes to the family's of our fallen soldiers who died in service and was told that if I didn't accept that I gave up my chance. The Army Sgt Major had a nice talk to them, but I lost my chance as it was a year back logged so why dont you just fuck off. I carried on till the last family got their Memory box. What the fuck have you done?

Im tired of getting shit on. Kick me off here Im ok with that.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Define leading from your perspective.

@Navy_Pete equal rank isn’t so much the issue - a senior Captain can command with a junior Captain [or Lt(N)] as a subordinate, but when one gets into unit commands and higher it isn’t ideal, and in no way should a junior member have command over a senior.
If a junior has command over a senior it’s a terrible thing for multiple reasons not just pay and benefits but it brings to question the entire rank structure. Does it occur at times - yes but usually at much lower levels, and it’s still a corrosive issue.

The GOC should cap the GOFO levels, but they won’t as the love empire building too.

For sure, I don't think it makes sense for a higher rank to work for a lower rank (officer or NCM) on the actual CoC, just giving some examples where it's common for folks to report to someone at the same rank. See the same thing with some LCdr and Cdr jobs, but again getting less uncommon as people tend to get promoted faster due to huge shortages. In my trade anyway, the triangle tends to shrink pretty quickly around 3 ringer.

There are some weird situations on ships, where the officer of the day, who is exercising charge on behalf of the CO, so you can be giving direction to your boss or more senior people, but it's bit more like a temporary tactical command situation (on behalf of someone who is higher ranked) vice normal employment.

Sounds like similar things happen in other elements, but shoudl be the exception if it makes sense temporarily in the context vice the status quo. I'd be a bit insulted if I got posted somewhere where I was reporting to somewhere and my supervisor was a lower rank for sure.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

A good Infantry commander will make sure everyone in their unit can do everyone else's job, if required.

For example, I've seen Private soldiers lead pretty good platoon attacks.

Wasn't that one of the reasons the Wehrmacht in WW2 were so good? NCOs were trained one or two levels of command higher?

 

[daftandbarmy]

Wasn't that one of the reasons the Wehrmacht in WW2 were so good? NCOs were trained one or two levels of command higher?

Battle drills are a good way to ensure that if a commander is knocked off, subordinates can carry on in their absence.

AFAIK, most modern militaries at the time adopted that policy.

As I understand it, the Germans 'Out Generaled' their opponents, until around 1942/3 anyways ...

 

[Good2Golf]

Yes I did asshat. Especially when I gave up a position back in the Reg force as I was on the project to send Memory Boxes to the family's of our fallen soldiers who died in service and was told that if I didn't accept that I gave up my chance. The Army Sgt Major had a nice talk to them, but I lost my chance as it was a year back logged so why dont you just fuck off. I carried on till the last family got their Memory box. What the fuck have you done?

Im tired of getting shit on. Kick me off here Im ok with that.

Asshat? WTF is that?

I asked you a question relevant to your previous chain of posts about how all generals and admirals should be eliminated and Colonel being the highest rank possible and many roles lower rank than that.

Did I ask, “Hey asshat! Did you f’n have the balls to tell them your great idea to cashier them all and you run the show with all your wisdom?”

No, it was a straightforward question asked neutrally. You took offense and answered as you did.

If you’re feeling guilty about yourself behaving like a holier-than-thou know it all and daring the moderators to ban you because the world is so unfair, perhaps you do everyone a favor, man up and ask to have your account permanently deleted?

 

[Remius]

Yes I did asshat. Especially when I gave up a position back in the Reg force as I was on the project to send Memory Boxes to the family's of our fallen soldiers who died in service and was told that if I didn't accept that I gave up my chance. The Army Sgt Major had a nice talk to them, but I lost my chance as it was a year back logged so why dont you just fuck off. I carried on till the last family got their Memory box. What the fuck have you done?

Im tired of getting shit on. Kick me off here Im ok with that.

So first off, you seem to be lashing out at members here who disagree with you. I understand your frustration but they aren’t the cause of the issues you take issue with.

Do we have a lot of GOFOs? Yes. Absolutely. That does not mean that we should downgrade the ranks for “reasons” and maybe understand why they are ranked the way they are.

I’m more in favour of identifying the bloat positions and getting rid of them altogether.

 

[FJAG]

in my Battery of 9 OP Dets we have a whopping 1 FOO, and I can tell you that’s true across all three.

WTF - is that coming from intake issues at the bottom and overall throughput or from course unavailability for the trained lieutenants and captains who are otherwise ready to move up or guys in FOO positions off on other courses?

 

[markppcli]

WTF - is that coming from intake issues at the bottom and overall throughput or from course unavailability for the trained lieutenants and captains who are otherwise ready to move up or guys in FOO positions off on other courses?

Bit of both. Captains hit FOO just as they’ll be getting looked at for IG. We’re seeing FOOs with 1 year in the OPs at most.

 

[FJAG]

Regt/Bn: CO: LCol; Sub-unit OCs: Majs: Unit Staff: Adjt (S1): Capt, IO (S2) Capt, OpsO (S3) Capt, QM (S4) Capt
Bde: Comd: Col; Unit COs: (LCols/Majs); Bde Staff: G1: Capt, G2: Capt, G3: Maj; G4: Maj (FTFY)

Therein lies the difference between the Brit staff model and e.g. the American/European-like one where S3s at bn are Majs and Coy comds capts and at bde the S3 is LCol like the unit COs.

I've got no statistics from anywhere to support this - just a gut feel - but our earlier Brit system meant that orders were thinner and unit COs more relied on to use their initiative (I guess an early version of mission command). Where G3/S3s outrank sub-unit or unit commanders one finds a trend towards "teaching grandmothers to suck eggs" coming from the higher staff.

I'm not sure if this is a thing, but I've seen references to individuals - LCols - being deputy brigade commanders. I do't think we ever had those. I wouldn't know what they would do in combat. To my recollection all op orders designated a given CO to become acting bde commander in the event that the bde comd became a casualty and further that his bn HQ take over as the bde HQ in the event the bde HQ was seriously compromised.

To me the CAF needs to organize as a war fighting entity to justify it existence. The RCN and RCAF mostly seem to be able to do that (though I think the Tac Hel numbers are woeful) While the CA seems to enjoy making farcical formations to the expense of actual capability.

It's kind of strange actually what happened just before we got into Kandahar. The artillery regiments were by directive told they were only a force generating entity deploying composite batteries built from multiple blocks of a tactical gp (BC, FSCC, FOOs) gun troops and STA troops.

Bns didn't have the same restrictions. They formed the core of battle groups. I don't know what the armoured were faced with but engineers worked pretty much like the gunners - creating composite squadrons from engineer troops.

Bdes HQs had both a force generation role and the requirement to be able to generate a bde level HQ (to which gunners had to be able to add an FSCC, STACC and ASCC) Bde's didn't need to employ "their" bde but be able to employ a group of assigned battle groups and other resources. The engineers were smart enough to break the mould in Kandahar and actually formed a mini engineer regiment. Gunners didn't. We had varying staffs at brigade and built gigantic batteries attached to the battle group - basically abandoned doctrine for ad hocery.

That's a way of saying that the CA has spent a few decades for various reasons, including personnel and equipment shortages and lack of funding, contorted itself into what, IMHO, is are unhealthy structures and processes that compromise its ability to generate and field a large force. Even our nascent Latvian brigade will depend in large measure on multinational forces. I shudder when I think of how logistics will function in that brigade.

To me the problem is that what the CA is now is perhaps what the government and the CA leadership, consider to be both the desired end product and the best end product they can get for the billions spent.

Just watching the Olympics on CBC and saw an ad for the CAF. Lots of young civilians lifting sandbags, cycling, rappelling off a cliff, camping with a few seconds at the end of three diverse, unequipped CAF members and some blurry, faint images of a LAV, frigate and C-17 in the distant background and the final message "This is for you - Forces Jobs"

No wonder.

 

[FJAG]

A good Infantry commander will make sure everyone in their unit can do everyone else's job, if required.

For example, I've seen Private soldiers lead pretty good platoon attacks.

C Company, 1st Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment, Operation MEDUSA the days after September 4th, 2006.

 

[FJAG]

Bit of both. Captains hit FOO just as they’ll be getting looked at for IG. We’re seeing FOOs with 1 year in the OPs at most.

That's what happens when you spend four years at university. In the three years you have as a 2ndLt and Lt you still need language school and some other things.

Troop commanders on the gun line are now captains. Terminology has changed. The job performed by a TC now used to be a Gun Position Officers job when we had the two troop structure. The GPO was a lieutenant usually on his first or second year in the regiment - This is why we had staff sergeants in the troop (now WOs) to ensure things didn't run off the rails too badly.

When we created six-gun batteries the GPO title went to the senior officer on the gun line who was still a lieutenant - This is why we had a BK (mid-level Captain and BSM -MWO) supervising the whole battery operation. Nonetheless the GPO lieutenant ran pretty much the entire gun line from recce through deployment and control of firing data. He had two junior Lts with him as well as two WO TSMs.

Then a quick year as a lieutenant in an assistant RHQ job followed by the advanced gunnery course and by the time you finished that you were a captain FOO and trained for brigade staff work. Two years as a FOO/FAC and you were ready for the year long IG course which made you the Regt'l OpsO, RCPO or a BC.

Easy peasy.

I've had a couple of directors artillery tell me that posting and succession planning of the officer and senior NCMs became problematic towards the end and after Afghanistan what with balancing gunline, STA, air defence streams, EREs, courses and a whole lot of other complications.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Therein lies the difference between the Brit staff model and e.g. the American/European-like one where S3s at bn are Majs and Coy comds capts and at bde the S3 is LCol like the unit COs.

I've got no statistics from anywhere to support this - just a gut feel - but our earlier Brit system meant that orders were thinner and unit COs more relied on to use their initiative (I guess an early version of mission command). Where G3/S3s outrank sub-unit or unit commanders one finds a trend towards "teaching grandmothers to suck eggs" coming from the higher staff.

Likely a good example of the differences between the Expeditionary Force model, manned by professional soldiers and designed to fight short wars on foreign soil in support of colonial objectives projected and protected by a powerful Navy, and a Continental Model, manned by conscripts and designed to fight higher intensity conflicts, locally, in service of national survival.

In the former, casualties are relatively light thus the most experienced soldiers can be safely employed at the front to help achieve rapid and decisive victory at low cost. In the latter, casualties will likely be heavy so the most qualified and experienced soldiers are held at the HQ level.

 

[markppcli]

That's what happens when you spend four years at university. In the three years you have as a 2ndLt and Lt you still need language school and some other things.

Troop commanders on the gun line are now captains. Terminology has changed. The job performed by a TC now used to be a Gun Position Officers job when we had the two troop structure. The GPO was a lieutenant usually on his first or second year in the regiment - This is why we had staff sergeants in the troop (now WOs) to ensure things didn't run off the rails too badly.

When we created six-gun batteries the GPO title went to the senior officer on the gun line who was still a lieutenant - This is why we had a BK (mid-level Captain and BSM -MWO) supervising the whole battery operation. Nonetheless the GPO lieutenant ran pretty much the entire gun line from recce through deployment and control of firing data. He had two junior Lts with him as well as two WO TSMs.

Then a quick year as a lieutenant in an assistant RHQ job followed by the advanced gunnery course and by the time you finished that you were a captain FOO and trained for brigade staff work. Two years as a FOO/FAC and you were ready for the year long IG course which made you the Regt'l OpsO, RCPO or a BC.

Easy peasy.

I've had a couple of directors artillery tell me that posting and succession planning of the officer and senior NCMs became problematic towards the end and after Afghanistan what with balancing gunline, STA, air defence streams, EREs, courses and a whole lot of other complications.

The career path and jobs are the same. I don’t know that I blame four years of university, since less that fifty percent seem to come from RMC. I do think they get moved out of the regiment and thrown on IG to quickly, but it’s really outside of my lane.

 

[KevinB]

One might think that language should be part of the University curriculum to ensure that they aren’t pulled after graduation.

 

[Halifax Tar]

It's actually pretty common on ships; the heads of departments (HODs) are two ringers, with two ringers working for them. All the Ops room officers are Lt(N)s and they work for the Cbt Officer who is also a Lt(N). We got rid of LCdr HODs a long time ago and nothing fell apart.

Generally the HODs are more senior and have done the various post OFP quals and positions to get there, and the two ringers working for them are working on the quals, or doing the feeder positions. Usuaully the HODs are close to promotion (sometimes get promoted in the last 6 months), so there is definitely a senior/jr Lt(N) setup, with normal expectations for mentoring and developing folks under you, and based entirely on the position.

Less common now due to how fast promotions are due to shortages but in a lot of trades you can have a QL5 S1 overseeing QL3 S1s. Having 'senior shop killicks' used to be the norm, where a 3-5 year QL5 tech would take on some more active roles under the MS and PO.

Navy does lots of weird things, but having a hierchy based on position or expertise works fine, and gives people a chance to get the experience with some training wheels on, with a more experienced peer they can lean on. Do agree it would be a huge disatisfier having your normal boss being a lower rank then you when in the same trade, but does happen in lots of different evolutions when it makes sense, and is because the person running it has the SME or relevant quals that others don't.

In a particularly weird set of workups, saw a flood party made up of mostly Command staff officers and Command Chiefs building wooden shoring under the direction of a Killick hull tech. It was something like our 4th set in less then six months so the sea trainers decided to leave the crew alone for some of it and let the large section of extra staff get their hands dirty. Took a bit longer because they were rusty, but it worked.

Maybe makes more sense when you are all literally in the same boat, and there is a lot of things that can happen with wildly different expertise required, but if something had to get done, why wouldn't I let the person that knew how to do it run the team?

My rank won't help me out if I screw up running a line or something because I was too proud of my rank to listen to the bosn that did that everyday.

Also happens (or happened) in the EOD/IEDD world. Back in the 90s when the CAF did domestic IED response I was on call. On Friday, at the end of the day an IED call came in. Just myself and the MWO in the office. His qualification had lapsed, but he didn't want to call anyone back in so he came as the No 2. While the call was going on, me, the Cpl, was in charge, otherwise he was.

There were no problems, everyone was professional and did their job. Would it work day to day, nope, but for specific tasks it can. When I told him to lay out the cable for the robot or load weapons, he did. When he said to stop and grab a coffee after the call, I said, "yes sir."

The RCN (Ships anyways) do the SME thing very well.

As a CPO2 I am I/C of Section Base 2, a tactical damage control organization responsible for keeping the ship floating, moving and fighting. I'm also a Logistician so my specialty is not DC. So the RCN gave me 2 MARTECH PO2s.

I have no qualms about gathering them for advice when dealing with a scenario and 99% of the time I am going to listen to them and push that out.

I am not attack team leader qualified. So if I had to go into an attack team there is a near certainty a S1 or MS would be in charge of me. Again, I have no qualms with that. He knows what he's doing and I want to get the fire out and get out alive.

I recently sent a LCdr out as nozzleman for a fire ex and he was directed by a MS as the Attack Team Leader.