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

Best Base/Training Area for Tanks/Combined Arms

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
960
Points
910
As much as possible, it should be. The likelihood of an administrative burden being posted into a Res F unit should in the first place be very small; when it somehow happens, the problem should be moved out to be dealt with by full-timers.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,818
Points
1,040
One way this is addressed is in the US Marine Corps where an active service officer or NCO is posted to a reserve unit. Note that the reserve units are largely fully manned and equipped and have a much higher number of active service individuals in them. In any event, a posting to a reserve unit counts as an equivalent command or staff posting for career service and progression as it would for a posting to an active service unit.

🍻
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
586
Points
910
Air Force person here. Given we are largely a contributor to warfare with allies/alliances leading the main effort, why are we obstinate at trying to keep a general purpose force when it is clear we cannot be « good enough » to be credible in all aspects of warfare (very slow and limited increase in capabilities, no tangible increase in strenght, more domains, etc)? While we have to maintain a force to defend Canada and North America, why don’t we look at capabilities within alliances/of close allies and aim at filling gaps in their capabilities so that we are a true enabler when we deploy?
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
960
Points
910
The next question being, what obvious gaps are there, and who has them? If our most likely partners have few to no gaps, what next?
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
586
Points
910
The next question being, what obvious gaps are there, and who has them? If our most likely partners have few to no gaps, what next?
You really think the US has no gaps in capabilities? It may have all capabilities but there are many shortfalls.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
712
Points
1,060
You really think the US has no gaps in capabilities? It may have all capabilities but there are many shortfalls.

The biggest gaps are in weapons that have never seen the light of day previously. Hypersonics. Long Range UAVs and Precision Fires. Space. Cyber. Electronics. Their own assymetric weapons systems. Not just using traditional weapons in a novel way but finding novel weapons to permit novel attacks.
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
586
Points
910
The biggest gaps are in weapons that have never seen the light of day previously. Hypersonics. Long Range UAVs and Precision Fires. Space. Cyber. Electronics. Their own assymetric weapons systems. Not just using traditional weapons in a novel way but finding novel weapons to permit novel attacks.
They also have gaps in traditional capabilities. They are short in stand off precision weapons, SEAD platforms, AAR and many more (just on the air side). Many of our allies are short in Strategic Transport (we lent the French our C-17s when they deployed to Mali). I really think that if we want to invited to the show, we need to bring more than what is already available in large numbers.
 

dapaterson

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
2,302
Points
890
The LPC platform promised more strat and tactical lift. Good news is that we can bring across qualified civilian pilots (with minor CAF / platform conversion) to fly those A/C, rather than clutter up the RCAF's failed pilot training system.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
960
Points
910
You really think the US has no gaps in capabilities?

If everything is on the table, I'm sure it has gaps. Doesn't seem very sensible to give up trying to maintain balanced forces in order to fill any of the hyper-specialized niches.
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
586
Points
910
If everything is on the table, I'm sure it has gaps. Doesn't seem very sensible to give up trying to maintain balanced forces in order to fill any of the hyper-specialized niches.
Why? (And I don’t agree they are hyper specialized niche but rather, extensions to existing capabilities)
 

Ostrozac

Sr. Member
Reaction score
178
Points
430
Suffield has many characteristics that point to it as the training area of the future. It is eminently suitable for armoured warfare training, so polluted that we can’t really ever give it up, and is currently operated by a British Army that seems less enthusiastic about the facility than it used to be. Training area does not necessarily have to equal garrison location — but Medicine Hat seems to have reasonable housing costs. Is Suffield the place where we should double down as an army? Or does it too, have deep flaws?
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,818
Points
1,040
Suffield has many characteristics that point to it as the training area of the future. It is eminently suitable for armoured warfare training, so polluted that we can’t really ever give it up, and is currently operated by a British Army that seems less enthusiastic about the facility than it used to be. Training area does not necessarily have to equal garrison location — but Medicine Hat seems to have reasonable housing costs. Is Suffield the place where we should double down as an army? Or does it too, have deep flaws?
It has excellent uses. Just as an aside, the training facilities for the Idaho and Montana National Guard's 116th Cavalry BCT (basically a heavy combined arms ABCT) are about one quarter of the size of Suffield. - Just saying.

🍻
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
4,414
Points
1,060
It has excellent uses. Just as an aside, the training facilities for the Idaho and Montana National Guard's 116th Cavalry BCT (basically a heavy combined arms ABCT) are about one quarter of the size of Suffield. - Just saying.

🍻

It's not how big, it's how you use it (as the Actress said to the Bishop) :)
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
960
Points
910
Doesn't seem very sensible to give up trying to maintain balanced forces in order to fill any of the hyper-specialized niches.

Expensive toys that don't get taken out of the closet very often will be difficult to sell the politicians on.
 

suffolkowner

Sr. Member
Reaction score
117
Points
430
The main gaps/shortfalls in capabilities on the NATO end as I have understood over the years are

AAR-buy the 5/6 Airbus 330mrtt
RAS-procure another Protecteur class ship and call it Provider
MPA- buy the requisite number of P8's (15?)
ISR- globaleye?
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
335
Points
1,010
The main gaps/shortfalls in capabilities on the NATO end as I have understood over the years are

AAR-buy the 5/6 Airbus 330mrtt
RAS-procure another Protecteur class ship and call it Provider
MPA- buy the requisite number of P8's (15?)
ISR- globaleye?
Air Defence
Artillery
Counter Battery
EW
 
Top