Armoured Light Recce Vehicle for PRes Armd? (Merged splits from LAV III MGS and from TAPV)

[daftandbarmy]

Why can't the PRes Amd use BV206s?

We've already got them in our inventory, and the bloody things go anywhere and can carry or drag just about anything. I remember trying to 'stalk' a platoon of Norwegians on a winter ex, them on BV206s and us on skis, and there was no way we could follow them up the slopes they effortlessly cruised up (but they had to sleep sometime!).

We used them in Afghanistan on earlier tours. The Royal Marines have even armoured their BV206s, which they call the Viking, and are using them in Afghanistan.

 

[McG]

Pres Armour does not want or need complex surveillance suites or ...

Unfortunately, the question cannot be just about what the PRes Armour wants.  Force Structure & capability design must be based on answering the question of what the Army needs.  Within the answer to that question we can determine who wants to do what.  I do not see the "no frills" reserve vehicle addressing any military needs.  In our current operational climate, such a vehicle will never deploy and in the unlikely event that we find ourselves in the middle of another global mass mobilization war, our large peer enemy will have the sensor capabilities to detect and destroy such vehicles before they have had a chance to influence the battle. 

To be relevant integrated night vision & thermal are not options; Ground Moving Target Radar is not an option; and integrated digital communications are not an option.  All this costs money (which the CLS has stated he will not invest into a vehicle for the reserves), additional techs, and more training time.

.... and at the same time, I am not sure that such a unique PRes vehicle is what the reserve units want either (though I'm open to be told otherwise).  There has been a significant amount of complaint from the Armd Res on these forums that the only operational jobs open to them are the gate guards & Combat Arms Any.  Burdening them with a unique non-deployable vehicle will only entrench that dynamic further into the future.  If the reserves want a hope of keeping the training delta small enough for individual augmentation within trade, then the tools of the trade need to be mostly the same.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Colin,

With respect- keeping 6 C1 Howitzers, some 5/4 tonne trucks and (then) new MLVWs serviceable with 10 guys is not even in the same league as contemplating penny-packeting armoured vehicles with complex surveillance and fire control systems around the countryside.

Try ancient Deuce's and M38's, M141's along with the 5/4. Not to mention everybodies crappy radios and other kit. Actually the hardest part was fending off a jealous Brigade headquarters eager to get their hands onto the "extra kit".

Please enlighten me. Other than exercising the recoil system, lubricating, cleaning and boresighting what other frontline service would a unit do to the main gun?
Civy street uses tracks as well, including old M4 hulls with drills on them in some pretty nasty and remote country and worksites. While I agree that the FCS & surveillance suite is beyond a normal militia units ability to maintain, components would have to be swapped out on a regular basis. The rest of the vehicle is not that horribly complicated, perhaps a pain to work on. One benefit of the reserves is they can often draw upon some some very talented people. Also the vehicle could be equipped with a simplified FCS & surveillance suite just on the cost basis alone, as long as it can equipped with the more complex version as required. 

No matter what vehicle placement you have it will be imperfect, however having AFV at certain Militia units will improve knowledge of the vehicles, improve recruiting and give a sense of mission to the troops. Although I have to admit that unless you have close by training areas, you need wheeled armour for the Reserves.

Lets face the real reason you need AFV's at reserve units is: "Who else are the reg force going to steal them from?"  ;D  (Now off to my bunker to await incoming fire)

 

[tango22a]

Colin P:

As I said in PM: thank you,thank you, thank you,for saying what my aging brain and typing skills were unable to do!

tango22a

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Unfortunately, the question cannot be just about what the PRes Armour wants.  Force Structure & capability design must be based on answering the question of what the Army needs.  Within the answer to that question we can determine who wants to do what.  I do not see the "no frills" reserve vehicle addressing any military needs.  In our current operational climate, such a vehicle will never deploy and in the unlikely event that we find ourselves in the middle of another global mass mobilization war, our large peer enemy will have the sensor capabilities to detect and destroy such vehicles before they have had a chance to influence the battle. 

To be relevant integrated night vision & thermal are not options; Ground Moving Target Radar is not an option; and integrated digital communications are not an option.  All this costs money (which the CLS has stated he will not invest into a vehicle for the reserves), additional techs, and more training time.

.... and at the same time, I am not sure that such a unique PRes vehicle is what the reserve units want either (though I'm open to be told otherwise).  There has been a significant amount of complaint from the Armd Res on these forums that the only operational jobs open to them are the gate guards & Combat Arms Any.  Burdening them with a unique non-deployable vehicle will only entrench that dynamic further into the future.  If the reserves want a hope of keeping the training delta small enough for individual augmentation within trade, then the tools of the trade need to be mostly the same.

Make up your fucking mind. We say we want the same equipment and reduce the delta, you argue we can't have them, and have to come up with something else.

We make a suggestion, tongue in cheek or not, and you come back with, nope equipment has to be the same.

Shit or get off the pot. It's dealing with attitude like this that's put the PRes in the situation they are in now.

 

[TCBF]

- Give the PRes Armd Recce regts a role: Soveriegnty Patrol - South.
- Surv Ops on the longest undefended border in the world!
- Yanks have Preds to spare on the 49th - we don't, so mud recce and NVGs!

 

[Fishbone Jones]

- Give the PRes Armd Recce regts a role: Soveriegnty Patrol - South.
- Surv Ops on the longest undefended border in the world!
- Yanks have Preds to spare on the 49th - we don't, so mud recce and NVGs!

TCBF,

We floated that idea to the RCD when they got the Coyote and a few of us got the Surv Op course. That contact lasted about 30 incredulous seconds  :

 

[tango22a]

TCBF:

If the Coyote (or its replacement) was used for Border Surveillance we would get nothing but Flak from the media and various civil rights organizations. Especially if the ARMY did it!

Can't you just imagine the s**tstorm if the Coyotes were used to monitor the border around Akweswasne? We would be accused of exposing people to harmful radiation and denying them their civil rights to sneak around, plus invading their privacy!

Cheers,

tango22a

 

[Infanteer]

The problem with giving the Reserve armoured units, or any reserve unit for that matter, some unique task is that the system is built around individual augmentation and mass mobilization.  Give it a role like sovereignty ops or whatever, and the Army finds itself backfilling that role with regular soldiers because planning capabilities off of how many guys are going to fill in the class A/B sheets is a crap shoot at best.

The reserves role is to plug holes in the Reg Force manning chart - that's it, that's all.  Let's quit tapdancing around it.  Until the system itself is changed, there is no scope for anything else because you cannot reliably plan around it.  That being said, the Reserve units role should be IBTS training and low level BTS training (Level 4 - maybe 5).

So, to get a role and a vehicle, lets think about the low level training a reserve unit conducts.  Since reserve Brigades are paper brigades and actually form a rough Battalion, have the Reserve Armoured become "DFS" for these "Light Battalions".  Reserve Armoured regiments keep their jeeps and get M2s, Mk19s and an ATGM when we get one.  They can form something similar to the CAAT that USMC Battalions have.  They can also do the Mud Recce stuff that Infantry Regular Force Recce Platoons do.  Whenever the Reserve Rifle Companies go out for an exercise, the Recce and CAAT teams can support them.

May not fit a capbadge (if I had my way, all reserve regiments would be 0 strength with 9-10 new ones to replace the Reserve Brigades) but who cares.  These soldiers have a few skills sets (GMR and/or shooting the heavy weapons) that they can take to the Reg Force when they augment a Task Force.

 

[McG]

... having AFV at certain Militia units will improve knowledge of the vehicles, improve recruiting and give a sense of mission to the troops.

Providing troops a warm & fuzzy feeling is a wonderful tertiary argument for spending resources.  However, all the primary & secondary arguments toward buying an AFV need to be about creating an operational capability.  There are calls to spend money to provide the reservists with some light armour patrol vehicle like the old Ferret or the Panhard VBL.  Why?  If the vehicle will never be used operationally (as its supporters have suggested in this thread), then why spend the money for something armoured when a Jeep or GWagon can provide all the same training opportunity?

Make up your fucking mind.

Hello Pot, this is Kettle!

You have complained about a lack of doctrine & relevant role, and now you want to pour effort into a vehicle that will do nothing significantly different from what you've done before. You have complained about the limited operational employment available to the Armd PRes, and now you want to pour money into a vehicle that will continue that dynamic.  I have accepted your initial suppositions, and I believe what you are now asking for flies in the face of fixing the problems that you have raised.

If you want a non-operational toy to beat-around in the country side, then be happy in the G-Wagon C&R.  However, don't ask for the government to take our limited resources out of operational capital projects so you can have a sexier vehicle, and do not whine & complain when the only operational deployments open to you are gate security and Force Protection Pl.

Shit or get off the pot.

Indeed.

It's dealing with attitude like this that's put the PRes in the situation they are in now.

The PRes, or the Armd PRes?  It seems the other three combat arms have plenty of opportunities for operational employment within occupation.

I have not provided any solutions in this thread.  That is because I do not have them.  However, I have been describing the criteria that a solution would have to meet.  I think that there are enough intelligent people in this thread that we could start hammering together a skeleton of what a solution might look like.  This might require letting go some sacred cows, or maybe it does not.  It absolutely must involve identifying the Army's needs and then seeing how those can be met while accommodating unit 'wants' (which may differ from unit to unit) 

May not fit a capbadge

and some beret colours may have to change too.

 

[Infanteer]

and some beret colours may have to change too.

...definately - something implied in my "all regiments to 0 strength" remark.

I use 4th Marine Division (the Marine Reserve) as a good example to follow.  The entire US Marine Reserve has 1 Armoured Battalion and one LAV Recce Battalion, dispersed across the country.  If we applied this model, most Armoured Reserve units would be folded into new reserve battalions as part of Combat Support Companies (...and thus wearing a green beret) with a few reserve Armoured units being folded into 1 or 2 Regiments (spread across Canada) and somehow linked into their Reg Force counterparts.  A much smaller footprint like this could be a much more realistic approach to a Reserve Armoured capability, whether it be tanks or LAV-cavalry.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I'm willing for a role change and TO&E. The post for the ferret (type vehicle) was made because everyone was insisting on maintaining the status quo. If you can't beat em........

As far as what we do and how we do it, most Armoured recce, Reg and Res, can attest to the well known fact, that on exercise and elsewhere, very few outside the corps, if any, know what we do, how we do it or how to employ us. Somehow though, this thread is just packed full of experts for some reason.

I can see this going nowhere, let alone fast and it's not worth the aggravation to me trying to bore a hole in a cement wall by pissing against. It may be possible, but I just don't have that many years left in me

 

[TCBF]

TCBF:

If the Coyote (or its replacement) was used for Border Surveillance we would get nothing but Flak from the media and various civil rights organizations. Especially if the ARMY did it!

Can't you just imagine the s**tstorm if the Coyotes were used to monitor the border around Akweswasne? We would be accused of exposing people to harmful radiation and denying them their civil rights to sneak around, plus invading their privacy!

Cheers,

tango22a

- Nobody is complaining about the Preds, why would they complain about the Coyotes?

- Get Mayor Miller of Toronto on board by explaining to him that the Border units will stop handgun smuggling...

;D

 

[Infanteer]

As far as what we do and how we do it, most Armoured recce, Reg and Res, can attest to the well known fact, that on exercise and elsewhere, very few outside the corps, if any, know what we do, how we do it or how to employ us. Somehow though, this thread is just packed full of experts for some reason.

Well, I've seen alot of this on this thread - "nobody knows how to use us but us" as if getting in a vehicle and finding stuff is some black magic art.  Since many have made reference to this black art, please let the rest of us unwashed masses know the secret to the center of the caramel bar (ie: armoured reconnaisance).

I may not be an expert on Ground Maneuver Reconnaisance (I have the PAM and I have stayed in a Holiday Inn Express) but I have worked with these guys.  I know that Armoured Recce can keep up with the LAVs, isn't afraid to get out in front, bypass badguys, or go off an set up a decent OP, and has enough "umph" to form a good firebase while we get on an objective.  What am I missing?

Give me this Rosetta Stone and maybe this discussion can move on.  Better yet, I'd be interested in hearing what the SMEs have in mind.  Hint - a proposal should be able to answer critical questions posed of it rather than stating "you don't know how we operate" when a hole is poked.

 

[dapaterson]

(I have the PAM and I have stayed in a Holiday Inn Express)

Isn't that evidence of knowledge of Air Operations, vice Armoured operations?

 

[The Bread Guy]

- Nobody is complaining about the Preds, why would they complain about the Coyotes?

I'm going with T22A on this one re:  info-ops potential....

If the Coyote (or its replacement) was used for Border Surveillance we would get nothing but Flak from the media and various civil rights organizations. Especially if the ARMY did it!

Can't you just imagine the s**tstorm if the Coyotes were used to monitor the border around Akweswasne? We would be accused of exposing people to harmful radiation and denying them their civil rights to sneak around, plus invading their privacy!

It's not lots now, but it's not zero, either...
Globe & Mail
Mohawk Nation News

 

[Infanteer]

So it's settled then - we are giving the Armoured Reserve units Predators to patrol the border between the United States and Canada.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

So it's settled then - we are giving the Armoured Reserve units Predators to patrol the border between the United States and Canada.

Yup, just one big fucking joke. This whole thread has reminded me why it's so onerus to get something done from within, never mind outside.

Toodles.

 

[George Wallace]

This topic has friggin expired.......demised.......

 

[dapaterson]

This does perhaps point to a cleavage within the Armd Corps: Sense vs Act.

Do we want an Armd Res that augments both capabilities, or only one?  What skillsets are viable to train, maintain and hone in a part-time construct?

Our current road to war (for both Reg and Res) is flawed - kit is delivered for training a few months in advance; operators are trained but not experienced when they deploy.  We need to look beyond Afghanistan and try to find a model that works - not just for the Armd Corps, but for the rest as well.