Cougars to Armoured Recce

[12alfa]

Quote: 12Alfa
I also belive that the reg force never had a formal recce cource and was learnt OJT, correct me if I'm wrong on this one.

Quote;Strat
The regular force has been conducting recce courses throughout the last 24 yrs

I stand corrected! :-*

Quote;recceguy
As a new commander I was handed the Recce Tp Ldrs (guide to the galaxy) pam and told I would pick up the rest by osmosis. That was the training back then

I stand ..er,un, don't know where i stand now.... :-\

Quote Recce41
ALL CO's of the Res wanted to go Recce. Yes 12A they did!

Thats proof enough for me! LOL ???

 

[Fishbone Jones]

RE; res's not qualified........

First off they are not qualified and don't have the proper taining in "Misfire Drills", operation of the Hydraulics, Submersion Hydraulics, Gunnery etc. as applicable. They don't have knowledge of Safety in regard to Gun Drills. On a whole there is a lot that we allow Reservists to do for familiarization that is WRONG. You now have the impression from your experience Crewcommanding that you can do the job. You may be totally out of touch with reality. That is a fault that the Regs are compounding everytime they allow a unqualified person fill a position.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

12Alpha,

I'm not quite sure of where you're coming from here, but I'm not getting a fuzzy feeling about it. So, to clarify, I was speaking of my time in the Reg force. There was none of that at the time. A large amount of my CC recce time was Reg. As far as crew commanding an Iltis or the like, alll your hydraulics, etc is not required, and Reservists are more than capable to doing the job. As far as being out of touch with reality, I don't know what rope your smokin, but you better get to know me better than you do before you start taking cheap shots at me. If you don't want to be part of the solution, your part of the problem. Grow up. Personal attacks only lead to you being ignored. Oh, sorry to burst your bubble there buckwheat.

 

[Recce41]

Damn
I remember being a one hook Trooper and crew commanding in Recce. I was told just F$%^ing follow and do what your told and know. CCing is no big deal, just doing it right is the big deal. Even now, in the regs. If your qusl Coyote gunner, you show for the CC postion. If your CC qual, you show for tactics. Not like on my 6A. You were there for if all, except if you were Adv D+M.

 

[Lance Wiebe]

Even after we received the Coyote, when some of us raised the topic of a CC course, we were told that the regular force never required a recce CC course or patrol cmdr course before, and why would we need one now?  Of course, the reserves had the courses, we ran RESO Recce and NC6A Recce courses for years.  But none of our people were qualified!  As Dave said, we learnt by osmosis, back in the day when I was a new driver!

I keep going back to this.  We (the reg force we) simply dropped the ball.  No leadership, no direction, just keep the blinders on, and forge ahead.

12A's comment was when 12A made a comment about commanding a tank, and George took him to town on it.  Now, 12A has found out that none of us were qualified Lynx/Recce commander or patrol commander.  He's simply turning the tables on us.  And of course, our token Strat said that we have been conducting recce courses for 24 years.  True, but not for the regs.......Ya gotta watch what ya say round heah!

 

[Recce41]

Lance
Remember in 89, the two course that ran in Petawawa.
1. The Cougar CC course
2. The Ptl Commander course.
We jr MCpls didnot get the 6A qual, the top MCpls did.

 

[12alfa]

12Alpha,

I'm not quite sure of where you're coming from here, but I'm not getting a fuzzy feeling about it.

This was not directed to you, sry if i worded that way.

It was directed to a person (full of hot air), at the time I did not respond to his comment, for not sure of the facts. But as many of you have pointed out I was correct (again, heheheh) in my original statement.

But where is he now? Most likely hiding under some road wheel.... :crybaby:

I have stated my opinions here, but most times people tend to put, or rather want to put me in my place as they see it.

But given time and some research we now find out the facts.

I'm not posting here to rub you all the wrong way, i have my views, and you yours. Some (GW)  think they are correct no matter what they post, generally I'll respond , but I'm growing tied of this and his views. Most here have a open mind and generally can see where I'm coming from and will search out data to see any point of view.

While it is true I'm no expert on subs, and helo's, i conside myself a somewhat expert on the reserves having seen so much from 1971 till today, hell some of my troops weren't even born when i joined.

But some continue to set me straight, and well it's all good, till i find the facts, then I'm putting them in there place, GW is , or was on my short list.

On the school/corps dropping the ball:

Yes I think thats a given, as we see the end result unfolding now. But not all is lost. Recce that we all learnt long ago has not changed all that much, although some would disagree i tend to think they are justifying their job/posting.

The re-writing of the manual to me is a waste of time and money, a simple additional pam could serve us just as well, we are not talking a giant leap in recce here.

I'm looking forward to returning to my roots so to speak. I entered this army as a recce trooper and I will end it there, the highlight been armoured for 20 years in more than just a recce veh.Although I'll miss being rolled (twice) in the cougar, being chased around the simnet by those pesky Commie's.

It was fun, but now it's all downhill, in more ways than one as most of you know.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Gen Leslie talked to us prior to us sending a BG to Afghanistan and Bosnia and stated that we would be a Recce Regiment when we came back; but he had no info as to new equipment with which to do that, even though we were losing our tanks.  

But surely you have now been briefed on what the way ahead is for the Transitional Surveillance Squadron ORBAT?  Received updates on the Recce Rationalization Study?  Someone in the chain of command must have briefed the outline plan?

Now we have men and no equipment and no equipment purchases in sight.

 

By this I assume that you are speaking of the impact of Whole Fleet Management.  This is a challenge facing the entire Army, not just the Armoured Corps - and I admit that it will take a huge change in Army Culture in order to make it work.  I had heard that the Regiment was speaking of two squadrons, and one without equipment.  Is that the way that it is being characterized on the hangar floor?  If so, we may be missing the point...

There is no "true" Recce Vehicle for any of us to practice our craft.

.  

Because the decision has been made that Recce will be conducted by the 9 Inf Recce Pls, and the 24 Res Armd Sqns - and not by the 6 Transitional Surveillance Squadrons.

 

[Recce41]

Note
There is three levels of Recce.
1. BG/Regt, made up of 60 or a Tp/Sqn from a Recce Regt. note will/maybe taken up by the Res. ( mud Recce)
2. Bde, made up of a Recce Sqn+ from a Recce Regt note can be a Surv or none Surv Sqn/Regt. (ether mud or surv)
3. Div Recce made up of 3 X Regts. Surv or none Surv. (mud or surv)

 

[strat0]

For all those interested, If you have access to Documentum, (I know it's slow to those farther out west) the Recce TTP's are in this folder:
documentum\Docbases\AITISDMS\1- Course Material - Matériel de cours\1- Armour - Blindé\7 - Recce TTP's.

I hope this helps out. The general tactics haven't changed from what was in the Tp Ldrs Manual and Recce Sqn in Battle. The TTP's are a collminculmination two with a whole lot of missing procedures added and clarification on others. This isn't the be all end all manual yet as it is still in draft form but it's a start to a better manual than we had before.

We made a Recce Tp Ldr manual supplement in 1998 or so but it didn't cover all the missing procedures that were handed down by osmosis, which a lot of the recce stuff was.

Again, I hope this helps. WO [Name Removed] at Gagetown local 2273 is the Recce Standards WO now. He is also of course on the DIN for email. Just remember we Snr NCO's at the school are guided by higher authorities and there is only so much we are allowed to do without permission. There is lot's we'd like to do however and we are endevering to do it.

 

[Recce41]

STRATO
YOU SHOULD NOT POST ANYONE'S NAME HERE.! HE DOES NOT POST, HERE LEAVE HIM OFF. YOU SHOULD KNOW WHO I AM, COME AND SEE ME!

 

[George Wallace]

But surely you have now been briefed on what the way ahead is for the Transitional Surveillance Squadron ORBAT? Received updates on the Recce Rationalization Study? Someone in the chain of command must have briefed the outline plan?

Passage of info in this IT age is not filtering down to everyone.   Some of these doctrines are developed in the Mess and then assumed to be implemented.  

By this I assume that you are speaking of the impact of Whole Fleet Management. This is a challenge facing the entire Army, not just the Armoured Corps - and I admit that it will take a huge change in Army Culture in order to make it work. I had heard that the Regiment was speaking of two squadrons, and one without equipment. Is that the way that it is being characterized on the hangar floor? If so, we may be missing the point...

You are not missing the point.   Vehicles are now being sent to the MTC in Wainwright to fill up their demands.   Vehicles are tasked overseas on Tours.   Vehicles are VORed.   No new vehicles are being purchased.   No new Surv Suites are being purchased to at least double the new requirements (of three times the numbers of Surv Suites) in the newly reroled Sqns.  

Because the decision has been made that Recce will be conducted by the 9 Inf Recce Pls, and the 24 Res Armd Sqns - and not by the 6 Transitional Surveillance Squadrons.

This sentence makes no sense to me.   Armour Recce and that conducted by the Inf Recce Pls are greatly different in scope.   The "Surv" Sqns, as you call them, are still doing Recce and will continue to do so, even if their vehicle is not suited for it.   Even if all the Coyotes were stripped from the Inf Bns, there would not be enough to fill the establishments of the 'new' Recce Regiments.

GW

 

[PPCLI Guy]

By this I assume that you are speaking of the impact of Whole Fleet Management. This is a challenge facing the entire Army, not just the Armoured Corps - and I admit that it will take a huge change in Army Culture in order to make it work. I had heard that the Regiment was speaking of two squadrons, and one without equipment. Is that the way that it is being characterized on the hangar floor? If so, we may be missing the point...

You are not missing the point.   Vehicles are now being sent to the CMTC in Wainwright to fill up their demands.   Vehicles are tasked overseas on Tours.   Vehicles are VORed.   No new vehicles are being purchased.   No new Surv Suites are being purchased to at least double the new requirements (of three times the numbers of Surv Suites) in the newly reroled Sqns.

 

Not what I meant at all.   We need to get over it, and truly change our culture.   The fact is that we will only have 1.5 Sqns worth of eqpt for the three Sqns in the RCD.   There are no more Coyotes coming.   That is all that we will have.   That means we have to move away from the old "equipment husbandry - one man one kit" way of doing things, and figure out how we are going to train at Level 4 with less vehicles in the hangars. So if we characterise things as two squadrons, and one without equipment, we are merely avoiding the inevitable, and quite frankly wallowing in our comfort zones.   Am I happy with the results of   Whole Fleet Management? No.   Do I wish it was otherwise?   Absolutely.   Have I thought long and hard as to how you make that work on the "shop floor"?   You betcha.   But you have to play the cards that you have been dealt...

Quote
Because the decision has been made that Recce will be conducted by the 9 Inf Recce Pls, and the 24 Res Armd Sqns - and not by the 6 Transitional Surveillance Squadrons.

This sentence makes no sense to me.   Armour Recce and that conducted by the Inf Recce Pls are greatly different in scope.

 

Agreed.

The "Surv" Sqns, as you call them,

It is not me George - that is the proper nomenclature assigned by the Army...

are still doing Recce and will continue to do so, even if their vehicle is not suited for it.

I realise that - and in some ways I wish it wasn't so

Even if all the Coyotes were stripped from the Inf Bns, there would not be enough to fill the establishments of the 'new' Recce Regiments.

Correct.   There will be enough for CMTC, 2 Sqns in the Op Stock, and about 1.5 per Transitional Surveillance Regiment (the RCD and 12 RBC).

I am not a "Hooray Henry" blindly following the latest diktat from on high - nor am I waiting for a deus ex machina to save us.   We have a finite number of vehicles.   We have entered (rightly or wrongly) into a very proscriptive contract with CMTC, essentially putting all our eggs in one basket.   Now we have to figure out how best to make it work.

 

[George Wallace]

This is beginning to sound like our Defence Policy and the New Army is being written by the screen writers of 'Enemy at the Gates'.   Are we to start running our Army like a Soviet Punishment Bn at Stalingrad?   Will we soon be down to three infanteers and one rifle?  

GW

 

[PPCLI Guy]

This is beginning to sound like our Defence Policy and the New Army is being written by the screen writers of 'Enemy at the Gates'.   Are we to start running our Army like a Soviet Punishment Bn at Stallengrad?   Will we soon be down to three infanteers and one rifle?  

Or that it is being written in uncertain times, with an increasing demand for operational deployments, and increasing costs for new capabilities, all within the tight confines of an unchanging fiscal evelope...

 

[strat0]

STRATO
YOU SHOULD NOT POST ANYONE'S NAME HERE.! HE DOES NOT POST, HERE LEAVE HIM OFF. YOU SHOULD KNOW WHO I AM, COME AND SEE ME!

Point Taken! But you can come and see me !

 

[Recce41]

No we'll meet half way in the canteen. HAHA

 

[12alfa]

Not what I meant at all.   We need to get over it, and truly change our culture.  

Please, Please , don't take this the wrong way!

My previous posts have wound pers up badly I think.

re: (the above statement) We need to get over it, etc.

This is not helping to keep good people in, and will not get good people to join.
This do more with less, has , if we really look at it, has turned most people off. This "suckin it up" will only go so far, and I think we have seen it run it's course.Every time I hear this my blood temp starts to climb, and I'm not along I would think.

But then again I may be wrong.....

 

[George Wallace]

re: (the above statement) We need to get over it, etc.

This is not helping to keep good people in, and will not get good people to join.
This do more with less, has , if we really look at it, has turned most people off. This "suckin it up" will only go so far, and I think we have seen it run it's course.Every time I hear this my blood temp starts to climb, and I'm not along I would think.

But then again I may be wrong.....

No, you are not wrong.  This is a problem that has grown over time in the Reserves since the late 1950s, as the Armour Reserve units slowly lost their Shermans and the Infantry Reserve lost their 106 Recoilless Rifles, etc.  Now, everything has swung the other way and the Regs are in the same boat.  When will this madness end.

Senior officers who want to put a "Happy Face" on this situation and try to maintain the impression of high Morale are wrong.  I think of them as being "Defeatist" and look at the current situation as they are just rolling over and dying at the whims of our political masters.  Few have the moral courage to stand up and fight for the CF.

GW

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Senior officers who want to put a "Happy Face" on this situation and try to maintain the impression of high Morale are wrong.   I think of them as being "Defeatist" and look at the current situation as they are just rolling over and dying at the whims of our political masters.  

None of these decisions were made by our "political masters" - save the one that limits our budget.  It is the responsibility of the senior leadership to figure out how best to allocate resources within the fiscal envelope that has been allocated by the government (and by extension the people) in order to fulfill the mandate of the Army as stated (in general terms) in the Defence Policy and (in specific terms) to meet our Defence Tasks.

I realise that sounds dry and bureaucratic, but it really does come down to doing the best that you can with the resources that you have.  Given the existing budget, we could buy more Coyotes, but then we would have to find the savings from somwhere.  What Army capability would you give up?  How big a pay cut or manpower reduction would be sensible in order to buy more Coyotes?  Which of the modernisation initiatives would you cancel?

Few have the moral courage to stand up and fight for the CF.

Tell me you are not from the reactionary "more Generals should fall on their swords" school?  However - if that was a more pointed comment, no offence taken.

 

[George Wallace]

Then the point has to be drive home to Treasury Board that the Budget has to be 'Fixed".   This is where I figure they have given up and don't fight for more.   A job has to be done and it requires the support necessary to do it.   If the hierarchy can't point that out to the Government then they are not doing their jobs.   They are accepting defeat.

GW