BeaverFever Posted August 28, 2024 Author Report Posted August 28, 2024 (edited) On 8/21/2024 at 2:39 PM, Dougie93 said: Light Infantry is only useful in certain situations like if you have to fight in the Central Highlands of Vietnam or on the Falkland islands but on a flat open plain like Latvia against the Russian 6th Combined Arms Army ? I don't see any useful role for Light Infantry They’ve been effective in Ukraine which is far more flat amd open than the Baltic states. Urban warfare, Trench warfare and an almost guerilla warfare by dispersed light infantry units HOW UKRAINE’S ROVING TEAMS OF LIGHT INFANTRY HELPED WIN THE BATTLE OF SUMY: LESSONS FOR THE US ARMY When Russian forces invaded neighboring Ukraine on February 24, one of the first places they crossed into was the northeastern Sumy oblast. Thirty-nine days later, after intense fighting across the province, Sumy’s governor announced that all Russian forces had withdrawn from Sumy. Ukraine had won the battle. How? Ukraine’s military had mounted a noncontiguous strongpoint defense of Sumy oblast. While static defense forces held strongpoints that centered on urban and other key terrain, light infantry roamed the gaps between these strongpoints. This combination—particularly the contributions made by the mobile light infantry—first delayed, then disrupted, and finally turned back key Russian supporting efforts along critical ground lines of communication. This effort, in both Sumy and the adjacent Chernihiv oblast, denied consolidation, resupply, and mass for Russia’s main effort to encircle Kyiv. …Ukrainian resistance in Sumy oblast, particularly in late March, used small, mobile light infantry forces to disrupt Russian logistics elements, which were vital both to support the movement toward Kyiv and to sustain deliberate fire and maneuver efforts to encircle and reduce the strongpoints. These light infantry forces were equipped with strong and extensive antiarmor capabilities and worked in the gaps between the deliberate defensive strongpoints, conducting raids on Russian lines of communication and hit-and-run spoiling attacks on concentrating forces and convoys. These teams managed to limit Russian operational reach by interrupting their tempo and demoralizing Russian forces, particularly sustainment forces. The Ukrainian resistance, largely local Territorial Defense Forces, with advanced antitank guided munitions provided by the West, contributed to an ideal economy-of-force concept built on overlapping and mutually supporting strongpoints. The days between March 21 and March 24 represented a particularly high-intensity period of Ukraine’s hedgehog defense and the activity of its mobile light infantry. The combination of determined resistance denying the Russians control over cities and key terrain that Ukrainian forces defended as strongpoints and the roving light forces disrupting the Russian attempts to mass combat power and support any encircling forces was decisive in the fight for Sumy. On March 29 the Sumy axis saw a significant reduction in Russian offensive efforts due to the successful Ukrainian tactical disruption, leading to a lessening of Russian pressure on the key strongpoints. Russia’s inability to exploit the gaps in the Ukrainian noncontiguous defensive front seems to be largely because of the efforts of the mobile, light infantry forces. The overall effect of this—as well as the defense of Chernihiv, Kharkiv, and other areas east of Kyiv—was the dis-integration of the Russian offensiveoperational effort in the first week of April and the abandonment of the Kyiv axis and a complete withdrawal from northeast Ukraine…. https://mwi.westpoint.edu/how-ukraines-roving-teams-of-light-infantry-helped-win-the-battle-of-sumy-lessons-for-the-us-army/ The Queen of Battle A Case for True Light Infantry Capability …The war in Ukraine also highlights how light infantry can also serve a critical role as first lines of contact to defend against enemy unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). Light infantry units excel in distributed environments that allow them to operate in densities and mass small enough to diminish the likelihood of targeting.34 The use of man-portable stinger missile systems has played a decisive role in defending Ukrainian critical assets from attacks by Russian close air support.35 Man-portable air defense systems will become especially effective against enemy close air support and drones once the U.S. Army develops man-portable air defense systems that can integrate into mobile radars.36 Light infantry thrives in severely restricted terrain, and the modern battlefield is likely to be dominated by cities or among mountains and jungles. Even muddy farm fields can plague mounted operations, as the Russians discovered during the early invasion of Ukraine. Motorized Russian forces quickly found themselves bottlenecked on roads following the thaw in February 2022 as farm fields thawed in Ukraine’s Rasputitsa (mud season).37 Tracked vehicles equally struggled across the inundated fields of Europe. Consequently, on the outskirts of battlefields like Bakhmut, one can find where enemy “armored vehicles hurtled along a single, narrow access road, [and passed by] … hulks of blown-up and burned trucks that didn’t make it.”38 Russia’s challenges with mobility serve as a cautionary tale for U.S. Army infantry units that have become too reliant and beholden to their motorized fleets. Transitioning back to light infantry will best prepare them to fight in restrictive terrain. One of the most interesting observations to come out of the Ukraine conflict is the dichotomy between Russian and Ukrainian logistics and sustainment systems. RUSI’s study assessed, “Ukrainian war stocks survived because they could be rapidly displaced and dispersed. Russian materiel has remained highly vulnerable to long-range fires.”39The lighter the unit, the less logistics required at the operational level to sustain that fighting element. The study concluded, “The reduction in the logistical tail and therefore reduced vulnerability of precision systems is perhaps as important as their effect in terms of their superiority to non-precision fires.”40Ukraine’s reliance on disaggregated lighter units has shown promise for light infantry sustainment being an important factor in future conflict.41 … https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Journals/Military-Review/English-Edition-Archives/July-August-2024/The-Queen-of-Battle/#:~:text=The war in Ukraine also,unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). Ukrainian army launches new light infantry brigade Ukraine’s Armed Forces have reformatted the reserve 61st Motorized Infantry Brigade into their first specific light infantry brigade created for warfare on forested and swampy terrain. The new unit, now called the 61st Jager Infantry Brigade, was formally recognized as a full-fledged active combat formation in an April 25 joint decree of Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense and the General Staff of the Armed Forces. The unit’s title comes from the German word “Jäger” (literally “hunter”), a term that in the German military tradition usually applies to light and highly-mobile rifled infantry units well-suited for scouting and engaging the enemy in small squads. The unit’s primary mission is to bolster the defenses of the country’s northern border, according to a May 12 post on the unit’s newly created Facebook page. This likely indicates the swampy and forested region of Polisia, which roughly stretches from the city of Lutsk (400 kilometers to the west of Kyiv) to the eastern city of Sumy (333 kilometers to the east of Kyiv) along the Ukrainian border with Belarus and Russia. … https://www.kyivpost.com/post/9630 Edited August 28, 2024 by BeaverFever Quote
Dougie93 Posted August 28, 2024 Report Posted August 28, 2024 4 hours ago, BeaverFever said: They’ve been effective in Ukraine which is far more flat amd open than the Baltic states. Urban warfare, Trench warfare and an almost guerilla warfare by dispersed light infantry units here's a video of the 101st Airborne ISV's in use a new model Recce Platoon called "Hunter - Killer" half the platoon is Recce & Snipers, the other half is UAS/CUAS Quote
Army Guy Posted August 28, 2024 Report Posted August 28, 2024 On 8/26/2024 at 11:35 PM, BeaverFever said: Our Chinooks, which will be a permanent part of the Latvia brigade can sling one underneath or even carry one internally (but apparently not both simultaneously for safety/stability reasons even though it has the lift and power to do so). When slinging a vehicle it still has ample power and stability left over to carry troops and gear internally Also Latvia being a multinational brigade presumably coalition aircraft are also available. Yeah I don’t disagree but I think this vehicle is another of those decent buys that were “Urgent Operational Requirements” like C-17, C-130J, Chinooks, Leopard 2s, Cougar MRAP, Buffalo MRAP, M777 howitzers for Afghanistan. All were decent buys, if limited in quantity. All were procured under the expedited “urgent operational requirement” protocol same as this LTV and the Spike ATGMs. MAYBE the RBS-70 NG MANPAD which is also a UOR I believe will also be a good buy, but I’m not so certain or knowledgeable about it. If anything UOR seems to be sign that the procurement won’t be screwed up by politicians and bureaucrats. I dunno, the experience out of Ukraine suggests airborne/ air assault is severely hampered if not dead. I’m sure they’ve considered nap-of-the-earth flying…even though much of Ukraine is flat prairie… It’s not 100km to the enemy’s rear that they’re worried about. It’s the fact that the enemy can now theoretically effectively defend airspace up to 100km to their FRONT and FLANKS. So no matter where you approach from, the last stretch, possibly up to 100k, is on the ground. No way they’re flying choppers within 10k of sophisticated air defences. How far they go into enemy territory will depend upon mission and threat environment but the general overarching principle is soldiers dismount well before entering any are with elevated threats. Look in many missions involving light forces there’s a component where they are en route via foot or crammed into civilian vehicles or school buses and this simply gives them a better alternative From the sounds of everything officially communicated, they certainly seem to expect some soldiers will need to be conducting “dismounted” operations one way or the other…whether that’s by mech infantry being assigned to dismounted tasks as needed or just light forces being flown in remains to be seen I expect that the mission requires a flexible force that run the spectrum of operations as needed under the circumstances be it mounted or dismounted 4 chinooks once in a while.....and 4 griffons will be sent to latvia, Not enough to move troops and equipment needed to sustain more than a platoon...These helos are going to be used in a mech Brigade format, mostly for logistics/ vip .... https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/canada-will-send-helicopters-to-latvia-next-year-defence-minister-says-1.6688666 Everything that was purchased for Afghanistan conflict, was not an Urgent buy by no means, when enough soldiers had died thats when our government took action, and only then...Military was screaming for these assets for years, before they came into service...exception being was C-17 because they were sexy... x 20 Leo IIA6M ( 15 for Afghanistan, and 5 for training in Canada) which the were originally loaned from the Germanys government , new ones where going to be purchased at the end of the conflict.... The same thing is going to happen with all this new equipment...purchased low numbers just for the mission and nothing to maintain that capability....soldiers trained on this new gear will only see it in theater, maybe every 3 or 4 years....go back to Canada and use the same old and outdated equipment as everyone else in Canada is using... Ukraine does not possess or use the same equipment as NATO, nor does it use NATO tactics....Such as EW, sam suppression, attack helo as escorts, it is truly a combine operation using many army and airforce assets... I remember doing air mobile ops , and looking down at the skids of a twin huey with branches hanging off of them, thats how low we were...not many radars can pick up targets that low... you talk like this air defense thing is a new thing, the airforce and army aviation have been destroying enemy air defenses for decades now and are pretty good at it...once an air defense radar is turned on it's a target... I have never heard of any light forces in airborne or air mobile ops using any ground transport once dropped off...unless you have an example....99 % of the time they landed 10 to 15 kms from the objective , then humped in by foot, to avoid detection...the reason for that is pathfinders/ Recce have already marked the route, and have traveled the route many times, they will lead the main element in almost to the objective...arriving by school bus or civy car sounds like a russian or ukrainian tactic...Not a NATO one... I think your confused on what dismounted operations are, and how they are conducted ..Mechanized troops as with any Infantry unit does dismounted ops...anything done outside a IFV is dismounted...we did regular dismounted patrols (on foot)in Afghanistan, or for that matter on any op or exercise ...The difference between Mech or Light forces is one uses IFV or APC's for transport, light forces normally use trucks, jeeps, BV-206 etc...and in the case of Afghanistan were cross trained on the LAV and they were used as Mechanized forces...even though we eventually had helo's near the end...they remained mounted..Mech forces are going to be used in a high intensity near peer conflict....Mech/ Armored vs Mech/ Armored... Lt forces are used in specialized ops like seizing an objective like airfield, bridge, etc for a very short time until mech forces arrive...They are rarely built into the same formation...As mechanized forces can also be used as Air mobile...when needed... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Dougie93 Posted August 30, 2024 Report Posted August 30, 2024 (edited) On 8/28/2024 at 4:47 PM, Army Guy said: 4 chinooks once in a while.....and 4 griffons will be sent to latvia, Not enough to move troops and equipment needed to sustain more than a platoon...These helos are going to be used in a mech Brigade format, mostly for logistics/ vip .... https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/canada-will-send-helicopters-to-latvia-next-year-defence-minister-says-1.6688666 Everything that was purchased for Afghanistan conflict, was not an Urgent buy by no means, when enough soldiers had died thats when our government took action, and only then...Military was screaming for these assets for years, before they came into service...exception being was C-17 because they were sexy... x 20 Leo IIA6M ( 15 for Afghanistan, and 5 for training in Canada) which the were originally loaned from the Germanys government , new ones where going to be purchased at the end of the conflict.... The same thing is going to happen with all this new equipment...purchased low numbers just for the mission and nothing to maintain that capability....soldiers trained on this new gear will only see it in theater, maybe every 3 or 4 years....go back to Canada and use the same old and outdated equipment as everyone else in Canada is using... Ukraine does not possess or use the same equipment as NATO, nor does it use NATO tactics....Such as EW, sam suppression, attack helo as escorts, it is truly a combine operation using many army and airforce assets... I remember doing air mobile ops , and looking down at the skids of a twin huey with branches hanging off of them, thats how low we were...not many radars can pick up targets that low... you talk like this air defense thing is a new thing, the airforce and army aviation have been destroying enemy air defenses for decades now and are pretty good at it...once an air defense radar is turned on it's a target... I have never heard of any light forces in airborne or air mobile ops using any ground transport once dropped off...unless you have an example....99 % of the time they landed 10 to 15 kms from the objective , then humped in by foot, to avoid detection...the reason for that is pathfinders/ Recce have already marked the route, and have traveled the route many times, they will lead the main element in almost to the objective...arriving by school bus or civy car sounds like a russian or ukrainian tactic...Not a NATO one... I think your confused on what dismounted operations are, and how they are conducted ..Mechanized troops as with any Infantry unit does dismounted ops...anything done outside a IFV is dismounted...we did regular dismounted patrols (on foot)in Afghanistan, or for that matter on any op or exercise ...The difference between Mech or Light forces is one uses IFV or APC's for transport, light forces normally use trucks, jeeps, BV-206 etc...and in the case of Afghanistan were cross trained on the LAV and they were used as Mechanized forces...even though we eventually had helo's near the end...they remained mounted..Mech forces are going to be used in a high intensity near peer conflict....Mech/ Armored vs Mech/ Armored... Lt forces are used in specialized ops like seizing an objective like airfield, bridge, etc for a very short time until mech forces arrive...They are rarely built into the same formation...As mechanized forces can also be used as Air mobile...when needed... the confusion comes from the fact that the 3rd Battalions are not actually Light in a doctrinal sense they are simply Mechanized Battalions which the government is too cheap to provide vehicles for with a Parachute Company Group attached in the event of war, there is zero chance that these Battalions would actually be employed in the Light role rather they would simply be rotated into theatre, mounting in LAV's already positioned there because to deploy in the Light role, the Battalion has to be restructured for example you need Support Weapons Platoons in every Rifle Coy, like the Airborne Regiment it would be more accurate therein to describe the 3rd Battalions as Reserve Battalions their role is to relieve in place one of the 1st or 2nd Battalions as necessary Edited August 30, 2024 by Dougie93 Quote
Army Guy Posted August 31, 2024 Report Posted August 31, 2024 Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Army Guy Posted September 4, 2024 Report Posted September 4, 2024 Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
BeaverFever Posted September 12, 2024 Author Report Posted September 12, 2024 On 8/28/2024 at 3:12 PM, Dougie93 said: here's a video of the 101st Airborne ISV's in use a new model Recce Platoon called "Hunter - Killer" half the platoon is Recce & Snipers, the other half is UAS/CUAS See? Not so horrible is it? Quote
BeaverFever Posted September 12, 2024 Author Report Posted September 12, 2024 On 8/28/2024 at 4:47 PM, Army Guy said: 4 chinooks once in a while.....and 4 griffons will be sent to latvia, Not enough to move troops and equipment needed to sustain more than a platoon...These helos are going to be used in a mech Brigade format, mostly for logistics/ vip .... I never said the ISV was exclusive for helo use and don’t forget allies have helos too. On 8/28/2024 at 4:47 PM, Army Guy said: Everything that was purchased for Afghanistan conflict, was not an Urgent buy by no means, when enough soldiers had died thats when our government took action, and only then...Military was screaming for these assets for years, before they came into service...exception being was C-17 because they were sexy... x 20 Leo IIA6M ( 15 for Afghanistan, and 5 for training in Canada) which the were originally loaned from the Germanys government , new ones where going to be purchased at the end of the.. Pretty sure all of those were no-bid “Immediate Operational Requirement” procurements, they weren’t just ongoing projects that happened to all mature within the same time frame. CAF/DND have slow moving projects going on all the time, many which never come to fruition. Just because there was a slow/moving Leo1 replacement project already open and possibly going nowhere doesn’t mean the leo2s weren’t acquired on an urgent basis for Afghanistan On 8/28/2024 at 4:47 PM, Army Guy said: The same thing is going to happen with all this new equipment...purchased low numbers just for the mission and nothing to maintain that capability....soldiers trained on this new gear will only see it in theater, maybe every 3 or 4 years....go back to Canada and use the same old and outdated equipment as everyone else in Canada is using... Yep I will say it again they have been very clear that this is a temporary vehicle for immediate use in Latvia. It is intended to be replaced by another vehicle to be selected under the LFE project. On 8/28/2024 at 4:47 PM, Army Guy said: sam suppression, attack helo as escorts, Canada doesn’t have those capabilities either. And attack helos might be of limited use these days. On 8/28/2024 at 4:47 PM, Army Guy said: you talk like this air defense thing is a new thing, the airforce and army aviation have been destroying enemy air defenses for decades now and are pretty good at it...once an air defense radar is turned on it's a target... The reason why allies are increasingly resorting to stand-off munitions and platforms is because air defence in peer countries has evolved. US military is replacing nearly all if it’s lower flying propeller aircraft with higher faster jet platforms because enemy air defence has evolved On 8/28/2024 at 4:47 PM, Army Guy said: I have never heard of any light forces in airborne or air mobile ops using any ground transport once dropped off...unless you have an example....99 % of the time they landed 10 to 15 kms from the objective , then humped in by foot, to avoid detection...the reason for that is pathfinders/ Recce have already marked the route, and have traveled the route many times, they will lead the main element in almost to the objective...arriving by school bus or civy car sounds like a russian or ukrainian tactic...Not a NATO one... Things have apparently changed since you last served. I have posted several articles and videos mentioning these changes to doctrine and threats. I encourage to check some of them out. Even Douggie just posted one from 101st airborne using this vehicle in hunter-killer teams. On 8/28/2024 at 4:47 PM, Army Guy said: think your confused on what dismounted operations are, and how they are conducted ..Mechanized troops as with any Infantry unit does dismounted ops...anything done outside a IFV is dismounted...we did regular dismounted patrols (on foot)in Afghanistan, or for that matter on any op or exercise ...The difference between Mech or Light forces is one uses IFV or APC's for transport, light forces normally use trucks, jeeps, BV-206 etc...and in the case of Afghanistan were cross trained on the LAV and they were used as Mechanized forces...even though we eventually had helo's near the end...they remained mounted..Mech forces are going to be used in a high intensity near peer conflict....Mech/ Armored vs Mech/ Armored... Lt forces are used in specialized ops like seizing an objective like airfield, bridge, etc for a very short time until mech forces arrive...They are rarely built into the same formation...As mechanized forces can also be used as Air mobile...when needed... I understand what they are. Light forces also fight in terrain that can’t be accessed by mech forces or where the heavy fuel and logistics demand of mechanized forces can’t be supplied. Regardless of whether it’s mech troops in dismounted tasks or light forces, clearly NATO forces feel there’s a need for a light vehicle to support those tasks and in the case of USA and Canada they want that vehicle to be able to carry an entire infantry squad/section On 8/28/2024 at 4:47 PM, Army Guy said: They are rarely built into the same formation But sometimes they are. Doctrine evolves On 8/30/2024 at 1:34 PM, Dougie93 said: the confusion comes from the fact that the 3rd Battalions are not actually Light in a doctrinal sense they are simply Mechanized Battalions which the government is too cheap to provide vehicles for with a Parachute Company Group attached in the event of war, there is zero chance that these Battalions would actually be employed in the Light role rather they would simply be rotated into theatre, mounting in LAV's already positioned there because to deploy in the Light role, the Battalion has to be restructured for example you need Support Weapons Platoons in every Rifle Coy, like the Airborne Regiment it would be more accurate therein to describe the 3rd Battalions as Reserve Battalions their role is to relieve in place one of the 1st or 2nd Battalions as necessary Apparently there’s been an initiative to evolve the light battalions for some time, Light Forces Initiative aims for higher responsiveness By Steven Fouchard, Army Public Affairs Gagetown, New Brunswick — In response to the evolving international security environment, the Canadian Army (CA) is putting greater emphasis on light forces. Responsive and nimble, even on the most difficult terrain or in urban environments, light forces are more necessary than ever to meet today’s military challenges. While the CA has ably demonstrated the capability to field light forces, such as those that fought in the mountains of Afghanistan, it does not have units specifically designed for light force missions. The Light Forces Initiating Directive, issued in July 2016 by the CA’s Commander, Lieutenant-General Paul Wynnyk, will change that…. https://www.espritdecorps.ca/light-forces-initiative-aims-for-higher-responsiveness Light forces by Captain Richard Masson The current Light Infantry Battalions (LIB) represents the foundation upon which the Canadian Army will build a Light Forces (Lt Forces) capability. These units, however, are not currently designed, equipped, nor purpose-built to deliver this capability. Also, the affiliated combat support, combat service support and command support elements are not fully mandated, trained, equipped or doctrinally prepared to conduct operations in support of Lt Forces. Key characteristics of Lt Forces development are: a purpose-built, scalable and agile organization; the capability to generate fighting power without dependency on armoured fighting vehicles; increased strategic and operational responsiveness; and a force structure that ensures the tactical mobility required to operate in selected unique environments. In 2015, Commander Canadian Army directed that this capability gap be deliberately addressed through Force and Capability development, with an initial operational capability target as early as 2017-2018, understanding that certain limitations would exist due the obvious lack of dedicated specialized vehicles and equipment in the near-term. To meet today’s security threat, the Light Forces will be postured to provide enhanced readiness and responsiveness to the CAF and to the government in the form of a capability that will sit between the highly responsive Special Operations Forces that can but should not be used for less than high risk complex tasks, and medium forces which require several months to deploy.… https://canadianarmytoday.com/light-forces/ Quote
BeaverFever Posted September 12, 2024 Author Report Posted September 12, 2024 On 8/31/2024 at 6:45 PM, Army Guy said: Yeah I like this guy I already follow him on YouTube and have seen this video before. Note he doesn’t say light infantry is obsolete he says everything has its time and place which the point I’ve been trying to emphasize this entire time Quote
Army Guy Posted September 13, 2024 Report Posted September 13, 2024 22 hours ago, BeaverFever said: I never said the ISV was exclusive for helo use and don’t forget allies have helos too. Pretty sure all of those were no-bid “Immediate Operational Requirement” procurements, they weren’t just ongoing projects that happened to all mature within the same time frame. CAF/DND have slow moving projects going on all the time, many which never come to fruition. Just because there was a slow/moving Leo1 replacement project already open and possibly going nowhere doesn’t mean the leo2s weren’t acquired on an urgent basis for Afghanistan Yep I will say it again they have been very clear that this is a temporary vehicle for immediate use in Latvia. It is intended to be replaced by another vehicle to be selected under the LFE project. Canada doesn’t have those capabilities either. And attack helos might be of limited use these days. The reason why allies are increasingly resorting to stand-off munitions and platforms is because air defence in peer countries has evolved. US military is replacing nearly all if it’s lower flying propeller aircraft with higher faster jet platforms because enemy air defence has evolved Things have apparently changed since you last served. I have posted several articles and videos mentioning these changes to doctrine and threats. I encourage to check some of them out. Even Douggie just posted one from 101st airborne using this vehicle in hunter-killer teams. I understand what they are. Light forces also fight in terrain that can’t be accessed by mech forces or where the heavy fuel and logistics demand of mechanized forces can’t be supplied. Regardless of whether it’s mech troops in dismounted tasks or light forces, clearly NATO forces feel there’s a need for a light vehicle to support those tasks and in the case of USA and Canada they want that vehicle to be able to carry an entire infantry squad/section But sometimes they are. Doctrine evolves Apparently there’s been an initiative to evolve the light battalions for some time, Light Forces Initiative aims for higher responsiveness By Steven Fouchard, Army Public Affairs Gagetown, New Brunswick — In response to the evolving international security environment, the Canadian Army (CA) is putting greater emphasis on light forces. Responsive and nimble, even on the most difficult terrain or in urban environments, light forces are more necessary than ever to meet today’s military challenges. While the CA has ably demonstrated the capability to field light forces, such as those that fought in the mountains of Afghanistan, it does not have units specifically designed for light force missions. The Light Forces Initiating Directive, issued in July 2016 by the CA’s Commander, Lieutenant-General Paul Wynnyk, will change that…. https://www.espritdecorps.ca/light-forces-initiative-aims-for-higher-responsiveness Light forces by Captain Richard Masson The current Light Infantry Battalions (LIB) represents the foundation upon which the Canadian Army will build a Light Forces (Lt Forces) capability. These units, however, are not currently designed, equipped, nor purpose-built to deliver this capability. Also, the affiliated combat support, combat service support and command support elements are not fully mandated, trained, equipped or doctrinally prepared to conduct operations in support of Lt Forces. Key characteristics of Lt Forces development are: a purpose-built, scalable and agile organization; the capability to generate fighting power without dependency on armoured fighting vehicles; increased strategic and operational responsiveness; and a force structure that ensures the tactical mobility required to operate in selected unique environments. In 2015, Commander Canadian Army directed that this capability gap be deliberately addressed through Force and Capability development, with an initial operational capability target as early as 2017-2018, understanding that certain limitations would exist due the obvious lack of dedicated specialized vehicles and equipment in the near-term. To meet today’s security threat, the Light Forces will be postured to provide enhanced readiness and responsiveness to the CAF and to the government in the form of a capability that will sit between the highly responsive Special Operations Forces that can but should not be used for less than high risk complex tasks, and medium forces which require several months to deploy.… https://canadianarmytoday.com/light-forces/ Yes there will be other helos in theater, just like there was in Afghanistan, literally thousands of them, and yet not always available to other nations or units...made available if the host nation was not using them then there was the list or priority of your task... Your right it does not mean that 20 leopardIIa6m were borrowed from Germany becasue the LEO I were not up to the task be it with air-conditioning, weak armor, older than dirt meaning extensive maintenance was required all the time...troops were getting injured operating them....So the government did not really speed up the purchase of replacement....they did however buy some 60 old LeoIIa4, only upgraded 20 into LeoIIA4M, leaving the remaining 40 for training tanks.... which sat in a warehouse for 2 plus years waiting for a contract to upgrade them....thats not an urgent buy....Check out all the rest of the equipment purchased for Afghanistan, only after a certain amount of troops had died did they take any urgent buy, and then only the minimum amount that was required for Afghanistan and a few samples to train with in Canada... Yes you did , and all i said was it was a poor choice... Yes Canada does have those capabilities, F-18 for SAM suppression, And Armed Griffons like they used in AFghanistan... Military equipment is always evolving when air defenses evolve so do there counter measures...like F-35, glide munitions, Anti radiation missiles etc...And the US air force is replacing legacy aircraft, but unlikely they will replace the C-130, even some of the ISTAR aircraft or SOF support aircraft are prop.... Look things never change fast in the CF...That includes doctrine, Light Infantry units that we do have are becasue we were to cheap to buy the vehicles and equipment they needed....Are they looking at new jobs for the Light Infantry...sure they are....Is it the new wave of doing things no it is not....Our military masters are always looking at new ways to fight the last conflict...Insurgent warfare is not the future..Just look at the threats to the world right now...we have Russia and China...The rest of the world is not gearing up to fight another insurgent conflict...they are gearing up for high intensity war fare with a near peer...And while Lt mech forces have a role to play....it is not in Latvia, not facing Russian mech and armored forces...one does not really mix lt and mech forces unless it is a blue moon, and they are bumming a ride...besides a mech battle group needs mech equipment and the manpower to fight in it...hence why you really don't see mixed forces....what good would a company of lt infantry be in a mechanized battle group...two separate missions... Clearly this is a pet project for someone anyone in the military could tell you this vehicle is not very well suited for arctic countries such as latvia, or canada...there are thousands of vehicles out there that can do the same job....hence why most of our vehicles have an enclosed cab with a heated, with exception of a ski doo..Also why we purchased the BV206 for light bns....it goes anywhere that any other vehicle can go... Your doctrine changes are from 2014/2016 once again they are planning to fight the last conflict. It is never a good idea to have Lt forces face off against mech forces, they are heavily outgunned, and can be out maneuvered very quickly, meaning easily destroyed with not much effort.... We don't have a full division of airborne or airmobile that have mechanized and armored forces attached to them, shit even the Marines have armored forces attached with them...We don't even have enough tanks for a one full brigade, let alone arty, air defenses, armored engineer assets, enough Armored recce assets, the list just gets worse as you go... Not all of this is the military fault,although sometimes it is all their fault, they act like starving kids and know for 30 to 40 years before they will get another one, so they cram it with all the bells ands whistles they can get.... it takes decades to buy anything and when it comes on line it is already to old...then there is the political aspect where they have the final say on what you can buy and how many....along with all the other political interference that comes into play with other departments wanting in on this fat government contracts.... The writing is on the wall, take a look at other militaries, take the US marines getting rid of their tanks...because they predict the china threat is going to be a island hoping campaign...In Europe most countries are scrambling to by Armored equipment, more tanks , more IFV, more Air defenses,like shorad, or long range stuff...waiting lines to get this stuff is well into the not before the 5 year mark...or more... As for readiness, yes lt forces can get out the door quicker, for good reason they don't have all the fancy gear to haul around....but once they get on the ground then what...how do they move around, what is their mission...They developed the preposition equipment for this very reason....Mechanized troops fly over, with basic weapons, and equipment, and jump into equipment that was stored just for this task.... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Army Guy Posted September 13, 2024 Report Posted September 13, 2024 22 hours ago, BeaverFever said: Yeah I like this guy I already follow him on YouTube and have seen this video before. Note he doesn’t say light infantry is obsolete he says everything has its time and place which the point I’ve been trying to emphasize this entire time Never obsolete, just have a much different task or mission set, want a raid or sieze a bridge or something like that Lt infantry are the guys....but Mechanized guys train for those roles as well, like air mobile ops, dis mounted ops all the time... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Army Guy Posted September 14, 2024 Report Posted September 14, 2024 Lets be frank, it was not just the liberals thats responsible for the current state of our forces, But they have been in power for more than a decade and could have reversed it or stopped it... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Dougie93 Posted September 16, 2024 Report Posted September 16, 2024 On 9/13/2024 at 8:13 PM, Army Guy said: Lets be frank, it was not just the liberals thats responsible for the current state of our forces, But they have been in power for more than a decade and could have reversed it or stopped it... outstanding report by Aaron Gunn 1 Quote
BeaverFever Posted September 16, 2024 Author Report Posted September 16, 2024 (edited) I can’t stomach that partisan propaganda. Yes Trudeau hasn’t been a friend of the military but neither have conservatives. Harper cut the military to the bone. Trudeau might not have reversed decades of damage inflicted by both parties but FWIW he has increased rather than decreased budget. Meanwhile Poilievre still refuses to commit to increased funding. Edited September 16, 2024 by BeaverFever Quote
Dougie93 Posted September 16, 2024 Report Posted September 16, 2024 included in that report was PPCLI Sergeant ( ret. ) Randal "Randy" Turner Joint Task Force 2 Special Operations Assaulter Head Coach at Direct Action Combat Performance https://www.youtube.com/@direct_action_combat/videos Victoria Patricia Quote
Dougie93 Posted September 16, 2024 Report Posted September 16, 2024 (edited) 34 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: I can’t stomach that partisan propaganda. Yes Trudeau hasn’t been a friend of the military but neither have conservatives. Harper cut the military to the bone. Trudeau might not have reversed decades of damage inflicted by both parties but FWIW he has increased rather than decreased budget. Meanwhile Poilievre still refuses to commit to increased funding. but Leftenant General ( ret. ) Andrew Leslie, CMM, MSC, MSM, CD is the former Chief Whip of the Liberal Party of Canada and he is the fiercest critic of all in that report Vice Admiral ( ret. ) Mark Norman, CMM, CD, was appointed VCDS by the Liberals the Liberals only turned on him when he became a whistleblower as to their corruption so it is a bipartisan report it's only leftist ideologues like you, who never served, whom are the partisan hacks in that your Conservative party derangement syndrome is so obvious you obviously didn't even watch the video before you went partisan Edited September 16, 2024 by Dougie93 Quote
herbie Posted September 16, 2024 Report Posted September 16, 2024 23 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: Trudeau might not have reversed decades of damage inflicted by both parties but FWIW he has increased rather than decreased budget. He didn't increase it to what these people wanted so therefore he must have cut it. Screw reality, it's what you want to believe that's real. Don't sweat it, when the North Korean landing craft hit the beaches of Vancouver Island, the Port Alberni High football team will save us. Quote
Dougie93 Posted September 16, 2024 Report Posted September 16, 2024 (edited) 16 minutes ago, herbie said: He didn't increase it to what these people wanted so therefore he must have cut it. Screw reality, it's what you want to believe that's real. Don't sweat it, when the North Korean landing craft hit the beaches of Vancouver Island, the Port Alberni High football team will save us. tampons in the male washrooms in all military bases and severe punishment for any troop which tried to remove that has destroyed the credibility of you leftist lunatics with the Canadian military and public go woke, go broke, in real time Edited September 16, 2024 by Dougie93 Quote
CdnFox Posted September 16, 2024 Report Posted September 16, 2024 1 hour ago, BeaverFever said: I can’t stomach that partisan propaganda. Yes Trudeau hasn’t been a friend of the military but neither have conservatives. Harper cut the military to the bone. Trudeau might not have reversed decades of damage inflicted by both parties but FWIW he has increased rather than decreased budget. Meanwhile Poilievre still refuses to commit to increased funding. He didn't actually increase the budget that much. He increased the money spent on independent consultants to write reports and to send gear to Ukraine. Seriously what new gear did the military get? New lavs? nope they're gone. New planes? Nope that was cancelled. New boats? not really. Harper actually did increase spending for most of his time in office dramatically and slashed when forced to by the recession recovery in 2011 after 5 years of increases, and intended to restore it and buy planes and new gear after the recovery in 2015. Trudeau cancelled the planes and then let spending fall behind gdp, and most of it did not go to gear or improvements. The CPC could have been better for sure, but at the end of the day trudeau works hard to make sure it LOOKS like he's spending... but he's really not. Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
BeaverFever Posted September 16, 2024 Author Report Posted September 16, 2024 1 hour ago, Dougie93 said: tampons in the male washrooms in all military bases and severe punishment for any troop which tried to remove that has destroyed the credibility of you leftist lunatics with the Canadian military and public go woke, go broke, in real time Tampons have not affected military readiness Quote
Dougie93 Posted September 16, 2024 Report Posted September 16, 2024 4 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: Tampons have not affected military readiness esprit de corps is everything you are want to humiliate your own troops destroying the warrior culture in favour of Woke culture lunatic social engineering I honestly don't care anymore, mind you, Canada deserves its comeuppance,therein burn in a fire of your own making Quote
BeaverFever Posted September 16, 2024 Author Report Posted September 16, 2024 41 minutes ago, CdnFox said: He didn't actually increase the budget that much. He increased the money spent on independent consultants to write reports and to send gear to Ukraine. Seriously what new gear did the military get? New lavs? nope they're gone. New planes? Nope that was cancelled. New boats? not really. Harper actually did increase spending for most of his time in office dramatically and slashed when forced to by the recession recovery in 2011 after 5 years of increases, and intended to restore it and buy planes and new gear after the recovery in 2015. Trudeau cancelled the planes and then let spending fall behind gdp, and most of it did not go to gear or improvements. The CPC could have been better for sure, but at the end of the day trudeau works hard to make sure it LOOKS like he's spending... but he's really not. New Lavs are not gone they are actually already in service. 3 different types of new planes were ordered by Trudeau including more F-35s than Harper was prepared to buy - plus new drones, new air defence (a capability that Harper decommissioned) new anti-tank missiles, new trucks, new over the horizon arctic radar and satellite stations, 2 extra AOPS ships and more. The military is in such rough shape it’s not nearly enough to turn things around. And to be fair most of what Trudeau bought was only after Russia officially invaded Ukraine in 2022 and Biden really started twisting JT’s arm. Plus, a lot of it won’t be available for 6-10 years Harper cut the budget because like all conservatives he was obsessed with tax cuts and desperate to run a balanced budget after years of deficits Canadas recession was brief and mild, lasting only 3 quarters from Q4 2008 through Q2 2009 so that doesn’t add up to your claim. Harper’s defence spending peaked at 1.3% of gdp before being cut to 1% 10 minutes ago, Dougie93 said: esprit de corps is everything you are want to humiliate your own troops destroying the warrior culture in favour of Woke culture lunatic social engineering I honestly don't care anymore, mind you, Canada deserves its comeuppance,therein burn in a fire of your own making I doubt any troops were humiliated. Most probably thought it was hilarious. Quote
Dougie93 Posted September 16, 2024 Report Posted September 16, 2024 5 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: I doubt any troops were humiliated. Most probably thought it was hilarious. Canada is indeed an international laughing stock it's sad that the troops would participate in their own humiliation therein Quote
CdnFox Posted September 17, 2024 Report Posted September 17, 2024 50 minutes ago, BeaverFever said: New Lavs are not gone they are actually already in service. I'm pretty sure most of htem were given to ukrane. Not many new ones for our boys Quote 3 different types of new planes were ordered by Trudeau including more F-35s than Harper was prepared to buy But not actually bought yet. Thanks He's been in power for 10 years and cancelled the ones harper was ordering. Quote The military is in such rough shape it’s not nearly enough to turn things around. And to be fair most of what Trudeau bought was only after Russia officially invaded Ukraine in 2022 and Biden really started twisting JT’s arm. Plus, a lot of it won’t be available for 6-10 years Then he's done basically nothing. Quote Harper cut the budget because like all conservatives he was obsessed with tax cuts and desperate to run a balanced budget after years of deficits Canadas recession was brief and mild, lasting only 3 quarters from Q4 2008 through Q2 2009 so that doesn’t add up to your claim. Sigh. the recession was shallow in canada compared to much of the world, but it was still very significant. And while the recession itself lasted only about a year the RECOVERY lasts a lot longer than that. The recovery continued until about 2014. Until then gov't revenues are still repressed and expenditures are still high and deficits are larger. And yes - curse the cpc for being fiscally responsible. Look around you - the devistation we see now where 20 percent of people have to use the food bank, nobody can afford a place to live and there's no gov't services available is what happens when you DON'T do that. So yep. Quote Harper’s defence spending peaked at 1.3% of gdp before being cut to 1% Harpers peaked at 1.4, which is about justin's peak. And more or less they have about the same spending. THe difference is Harper faced a recession 2 years after taking office, and spent the majority of the rest of his time recovering. As a result, trudeau inherited a strong economy for his first 5 years, and aside from 3 years of covid has had lots of revenue thanks to massive immigration. Canada Military Spending/Defense Budget 1960-2024 | MacroTrends Quote I doubt any troops were humiliated. Most probably thought it was hilarious. Sure. Nothing says "we respect you as warriors and men" like saying "we heard you needed tampons. " Quote There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data
Dougie93 Posted September 17, 2024 Report Posted September 17, 2024 16 minutes ago, CdnFox said: Sure. Nothing says "we respect you as warriors and men" like saying "we heard you needed tampons. " but that's Canada in a nutshell denigrating & humiliating its own armed forces since "Mike" Pearson was PM the Natural Governing Party has been dismantling its own armed forces for decades now it's not incompetence, it's by design Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.