Post New Topic  
Edit Profile | Register | Search | FAQ | Forum Home
    next newest topic
» The War Diary   » General Discussions   » General   » Armour and Recce

UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Armour and Recce
Bill Green
Recruit
Member # 249

Member Rated:

posted 29 July 2021 01:23      Profile for Bill Green   Email Bill Green   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Here are several points to consider when looking at the armour and recce role.

First to armour..., in nearly every Nato and UN mission that Canada has been involved in the antagonists have all had some tracked armour. While it would be easy to say that just because others have armour doesn't neccesarily mean the CF needs armour, the reality is that a heavily armoured mobile large gun platform Ie greater than a chaingun brings a real asset to the Battle Group. I think we are many years away from even coming close with wheeled technolgy. Our Leopard tanks do outstanding work and provide authority on Balkan missions or in combat team work with the Inf. Descaling the armour corps to a LAV violates our tactical doctrine and leaves us only open for police actions---not quite the general purpose combat capability we would need in time of crisis.

On the recce side of the house if reservists can gain access to reg f courses they will succeed. However the real issue is how do they hone these newly aquired skills? It seems to me we have two choices one we issue the same platform to both reg and reserve. Although costly initially this would solve the maintenace isssues that arise when trying to maintain dissimilar fleets of veh and we would have standardized training. Or second we go to different or specialized roles. Personally I would not want to be on a battlefield as Bde recce in a Lav. It is not designed to be a mobile stealthy veh and it doesn't have the armour or gun to fight for information. LUUVW should be designed and trialed on its stealth and mobility.

In conclusion, I would hate to see the demise of the armour corps because I believe it brings a relevant and powerful resource to the battlefield whatever we invision that battlefield to be.


Posts: 10 | From: Caronport,Sk. | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
recceguy
Veteran
Member # 256

Member Rated:

posted 29 July 2021 08:30      Profile for recceguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Bill Green:

On the recce side of the house if reservists can gain access to reg f courses they will succeed. However the real issue is how do they hone these newly aquired skills? It seems to me we have two choices one we issue the same platform to both reg and reserve. Although costly initially this would solve the maintenace isssues that arise when trying to maintain dissimilar fleets of veh and we would have standardized training. Or second we go to different or specialized roles. Personally I would not want to be on a battlefield as Bde recce in a Lav. It is not designed to be a mobile stealthy veh and it doesn't have the armour or gun to fight for information. LUUVW should be designed and trialed on its stealth and mobility.


I'm wondering which reg force recce crse you are referring to. So far as I know the only thing that comes close to a recce course in the regs is the Coyote surviellence crse, which is avail to reserves, I've taken it. As to the learning of recce, in the regs it's a learn by the seat of your pants gig. It was like that when I commanded ferrets and lynx and it's still like that. They take some classroom lectures on the reg force 6A armoured crse for famailiarization, but that's it." Mornin' 41. Here's your Troop Leader's Guide to the Galaxy, it's completely outdated and has been since the late '70's, but it will give you the basics" the Battle Capt said with a grin. The reserves are the ones that have been developing the QL4 recce package (it's being fine tuned within all areas, feedback sent up, checked, refined, yada yada yada). The out of date QL4 Recce CTP shows reg force crse loads but I've never heard of one being run, I might be wrong, but I don't think so. By giving the reserve recce units priority to the Command & Control version of the LUVW, we are being put into the unique position to define and train for a role that is our's, no more poor cousin. Being able to go out on wknds to do recce, in hometown areas, in Luvw's provides for more viable local trg than travelling to some distant ARTC to use and train on Coyote or LAV. Most recce situations are present and can be trained on in local hometown areas. The regs took all the Bisons slated for only reserve use, bought and payed for with reserve dollars, under the Total Force credo. Now they have the Coyote and LAV that they don't want to share, (what about Total Force now?) They don't need our lowly jeeps also, just cause it's a new toy and they want it. Want to kill the reserves? Give us one more piece of nice gear and then take it away, saying we're not capable, don't deserve it, can't maintain it, or IT"S NOT YOUR JOB! Mud recce is being defined as a unique role and it looks like it is going to be ours. The regs don't do it anymore. Doing lateral drills in a coyote surv veh is not mud recce (recce in force, light armoured or arm cav role maybe?). Let's give it an honest try, with all the support available to give us a fighting chance to prove ourselves capable before giving up and selling the farm. With the proper equipment and resources and LOCAL training, we can do this role without taking a back seat to the regs.
Oh, and don't discount the chain gun. While not a tank gun, it'll still rip up most stuff that's out there.


Posts: 118 | From: Ontario | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Bill Green
Recruit
Member # 249

Member Rated:

posted 30 July 2021 01:48      Profile for Bill Green   Email Bill Green   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The Reg f course I was referring to was the coyote courses. As a unit we have only had 2 soldiers qualified. What was of greater interest to me was that we sent two patrols from our 38 bde recce unit to work with the LdSH RC and the Iltis truely out performed the Lav in getting close information and being able to move through the ex area (Battlefield). On a side note the PPCLI recce platoon was on the same ex and they were very interested in the stowage of kit and the unit manufactured c6 mount as well as the mud recce tactics. So of a certainty mud recce in a wheeled veh is an area of expertise that we already have the basics of.

I have heard rumours that our new veh will be a Gelandewagen from Mercedes at 175000$ per veh. Last year each unit was asked to respond with some features that a recce veh should have if it could be purchased off the shelf. I never heard of what features were trialed in the veh selection and am very interested in knowing if you have run into anyone who worked on the trials. Maybe they could give us an update.

Last point in this letter. We have received our allocation of the new TCCCS radios. Unfortunately we didn't get a one for one trade with the 524s. and as a result are short a troops worth of radios. Can you integrate the old 524 radios with the new TCCCS veh mtd radio system and if so how. If possible we were thinking of the Tp Ldr and Ptl Comd having Tcccs while other c/s in the troop had the older system. While our CP has TCCCS could it talk to everyone on the two systems. Appreciate your resonses.

Cheers


Posts: 10 | From: Caronport,Sk. | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Gunner
Artillery Forum Moderator
Member # 39

Member Rated:

posted 30 July 2021 21:17      Profile for Gunner   Email Gunner   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Bill, the old 524 family is not easily compatable with TCCCS (analog vs frequency hopping digital). Secondly, not to be rude but can your unit field more than a recce troop on a consistent basis? Finally, instead of two trps/sqn of TCCCS eqpt sitting on a shelf in your armoury for the majority of the year, why doesn't your unit borrow from another unit in Sask or req additional radios for specific training weekends.

The trouble with the army (reg and res) is an abundance of equipment that is squirrelled away in each sub unit/unit's QM. Eqpt pooling anyone? Everyone knows it doesn't exist if its not on the shelf. We've waited so long to get TCCCS let's wait a couple of months before the whining and complaining starts.

Cheers,


Posts: 150 | From: Army of the West | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Bill Green
Recruit
Member # 249

Member Rated:

posted 31 July 2021 00:51      Profile for Bill Green   Email Bill Green   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
For Gunner..., Two tps,SHQ and an A ech minus rad tech and the unit is increasing in strength by Feb 02 will be over a hundred.

Yesterday the CP crew and BC attempted to work with mixed systems (analoque and digital). The comms were intermittant. Is there a way to sort this out?

I don't know on the arty side of the house but in the 70's and 80's we pooled our jeeps in Dundurn for all Sask units. The problem from the armour perspective is that the equipment becomes a bit of an orphan and nobody maintains it. We went back to an age old commandment of "one person one kit".The closer the kit is to an individual or unit the better it is maintained. It is also part of the training of new troopers to get them to look after and maintain their kit and we extend this to crew kit like vehs, wpns and comms. It increases the soldiers responsibility and that is a good thing.

I am very pleased with the new TCCCs equipment and the training that is being offered. If you want to hear me whine get me going on recruiting functions, budgeting and lack of decentralized decision making to the lowest command level.

Back to the comms issue is there a SME I could approach on this. Tried the closest comm sqn but everyone is on course or unsure if this can be done. Would appreciate your responses.

Reconnaissance with Courage and Integrity


Posts: 10 | From: Caronport,Sk. | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
RCA
Veteran
Member # 74

Member Rated:

posted 31 July 2021 18:36      Profile for RCA     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
There is apparenly ways of modifiying a 524 to talk to TCCCS. It has something to do with reseting/readjusting the squelch. (This has to be an internal mod to the radio done by a tech). The Comms Sdr quys should know how to do it. However after the conversion, I don't know if the 524's can talk to each other. As for 77 sets the do talk to TCCCS.

As for scale of issue. again we lose. Our arty CPs now only have two rad sets and with the new scale of LSVW CPs it is obvious the res arty are not eqpt to field more than a bty. Only our CPs and a couple of Iltis were converted so basicly we have CP to OP comms but nothing with recce or the ech. However our Reg F brethen have now made up their shortfall for CPs (theirs are in Bosnia, and will probably never be replaced) and every gun (tracked btys)or gun tractor (for the light btys) are now TCCCS eqpt.


Ubique


Posts: 188 | From: Army of the West | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged
Gunner
Artillery Forum Moderator
Member # 39

Member Rated:

posted 31 July 2021 20:37      Profile for Gunner   Email Gunner   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Bill, didn't have time to check out your units strength (actual vs paper) today and will give you the benefit of the doubt.

Your problems with pooled equipment came from incompetence not an unsound concept. Instead of fixing the problem, you (generic not personally) allowed a problem to destroy the solution, hence you still don't have enough kit. By the way the concept of "one soldier, one kit" is valid ... for the personal gear/wpns in which it was intended. Currently, there is more than enough kit for some of it to be on the armoury floor (which is a must, I agree). I'm not sure if having kit sitting on a shelf or a vehicle compound for the vast majority of it's life is a wise way to spend tax dollars. Res F recce units need about a tps worth on the ground and the flexibility to surge to a sqn strength as reqr. Easily accomplished by proper planning and coordination.

By the way, if you want to whine...start another thread, I'll enjoy the discussion.

Cheers,

Gunner


Posts: 150 | From: Army of the West | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Bill Green
Recruit
Member # 249

Member Rated:

posted 01 August 2021 02:41      Profile for Bill Green   Email Bill Green   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Thanks for the radio tip Gunners! Are their Comms people that monitor this means? Our unit ARE is 85 pers our current strength with the 3 troopers I am swearing in tomorrow will be just over 80.

We are running a QL2/3 high school 30 level credit course that we have 40 positions for and we have 200 pers who have expressed an interest. AT the current loss rate of 4 to 1 through the recruting process we should reach our 40 candidate level in FEB.

The course was an initiative launched in our BDE by Thunder Bay Garrison and we are piloting it in SK. If anyone is interested I could give you the name of a BDE or TB contact person.


Posts: 10 | From: Caronport,Sk. | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Another Recce Guy
Veteran
Member # 279

Member Rated:

posted 01 August 2021 05:52      Profile for Another Recce Guy   Author's Homepage   Email Another Recce Guy   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Well, getting back to Recce... I just returned from the ARTC course in Gagetown on Saturday. We could argue the pros and cons of the wheels/tracks issue. The bottom line is that the Iltis is great for road recce but off road can get you stuck and in a little trouble. And don't forget the those fans that will start up in the least opportune time. The idea of "fighting for information" in an Iltis leaves me feeling a little uneasy. There are a few vehicles out there that are small enough and moble enough to do the job but if the reserves are to be equipped with the same vehicle, then there is the track wrecking city streets problem. What's the answer?


A.R.G.


Posts: 36 | From: Windsor, Ontario | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Doug
Veteran
Member # 27

Member Rated:

posted 01 August 2021 07:44      Profile for Doug     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The Legacy equipment(524's and 841's) are compatable with the TCCCS only after a squelch mod is made by a tech. Generally, after the mod, the modified Legacy radios will still work with unmodified ones, but this is not always the case. Radios that have not been upgraded with the squeltch mod will not work with the TCCCS system. That is if it's a perfectly functioning radio to begin with. If it's on the fritz it just might work!
Posts: 62 | From: Bosnia | Registered: Jun 2000  |  IP: Logged
Another Recce Guy
Veteran
Member # 279

Member Rated:

posted 06 August 2021 06:07      Profile for Another Recce Guy   Author's Homepage   Email Another Recce Guy   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
OK. First off, I thought there was a question about Recce. Second, how about a little security? Don't forget that this is NOT a secure means. I you guys want to discuss the TCCS system and any short falls, do it some where that the whole friggin' world won't hear you.


A.R.G.


Posts: 36 | From: Windsor, Ontario | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
RCA
Veteran
Member # 74

Member Rated:

posted 06 August 2021 10:11      Profile for RCA     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Don't anyone start getting parinoid now. If you check the posts you will note there isn't any sensative info there. No TCCCS info has been divulged (got to watch out for the Grovanian hordes). All that is being discussed is compatablity so we can use the old system. About as sensative as say, discussing armour thickness on a LAV III.


Ubique


Posts: 188 | From: Army of the West | Registered: Aug 2000  |  IP: Logged
Recce41
Armour Forum Moderator
Member # 415

Member Rated:

posted 10 August 2021 14:44      Profile for Recce41   Email Recce41   Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
As a hardcore Recce guy, In todays Army the Leo C2 turret is old and the Coyote/lav is new. Most yng
tankers or coyote. Ive C/c the Ferret, lynx, coyote, and even the cougar in Recce. A Recce soldier is a special breed. He has to Patrol like the inf., C/c like a tanker, be able to callin a firer mission, and to be able to under stand basic eng.
tasks. that is just for the Scout troops. For Asslt
troop he has heavy wepons, some hard inf. and eng. tasks. that is the differents between a tanker own is one thing a tanker, ie gunner, driver, loader, and as C/c all three. So you chose!.
Bold and Swift

Posts: 22 | From: Petawawa | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are ET  

Post New Topic   Close Topic    Move Topic      next newest topic
Jump To:

Contact Us | CdnArmy.ca | Privacy Statement

2001 CdnArmy.ca. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin BoardTM 6.1.0 Public Beta 1.5-pre2