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

Garrison / Dockyard / Wing area security concept


Reaction score
Given the recent and tragic shootings at the Washington Naval dockyard it does raise the issue of area security within our own military installations.  A common thought process we in the CF often fall into is, "We are the Canadian military!  Stuff like that doesn't happen here.  We aren't that big or important."  It is a way of thinking shared by many until sadly events happen to them which "shock" them out of their denial.  Take for example the espionage of SLt Desilets in Trinity at the CFB Halifax dockyards.  Events like this DO happen here!

Now security often comes at a cost.  In terms of procedures the burden of success often falls on the shoulders of everyday soldiers, sailors and airmen, often making simple tasks clumbersome and unyielding.  To a certain extent this is an unavoidable consequence but when the burden outweighs the perceived benefit typically the process fails despite the best intentions of its designers.  Processes are simply not followed.  The other cost is the dreaded financial cost which as with so many well intentioned initiatives whittles down the original concept to a skeleton which merely casts a shadow of its intent without actually achieving it objective.

So where am I going with all of this?  Is there a way that we can improve the area security of our CF installations while minimizing the costs both in terms of additional burden and fiscal?  I'm going to say yes.

The simplest and cheapest method to increase area security is to better use the resources already at our disposal.  In this case it is us, the soldiers, sailors and airmen of the CF which can help achieve this.  To do so is a relatively simple three step process.  But to be successful must be adopted by ALL of the CF / DND.

First step:  Every building, room, muster area, ...etc, operated by DND/CF is assigned a colour coded designation.  My suggestion would be:
    -Green: open access areas.  Accommodations, Messes, fitness facilities, lobby's...etc.
    -Yellow: controlled access areas.  Some office spaces, general muster locations, vehicle pools, OR's, classrooms...etc,  Some form of positive identification is required to gain access to these areas.
    -Orange: operations zones.  Higher level of access control due to sensitivity of materiel and/or nature of tasks being performed.  Unit ops room, command post, classified terminal access...etc.
    -Red:  high security zones.  Intelligence offices, weapons/munitions areas, ready duty aircraft hangers...etc.
    -Black:  special high security zones.  Areas which do to their nature require special access regulations.
    -White:  misc low security areas.

Second step:  once assigned each of these areas is physically marked with its corresponding colour.  This could simply be a coloured boarder along the top or mid point of walls, painted trusses in hangers/indoor, floor colour, weaved strips into chainlink fence....etc.  Doors are marked with colour coded chevrons indicating the security colour of of the area the door gives access to.The most important aspect is that colour coaxing is readily visible in a consistent manner.  Other stipulations could be made such as higher security zones access points must open into the next lower security colour.  Eg: a orange zone would only be accessible via a yellow area, otherwise other steps need to be taken.

Third and last step:  A common security identification pass is issued to each DND/CF member and worn in visible locations on all uniforms / civilian dress.  The pass itself would identify the individual, parent garrison, naval yard, Wing and other relevant information.  In addition it would be coded in the colour to which them member has been granted access.  Thus an orange pass would give the ability of a member to access orange areas unescorted.  Red and black passes due to their higher security could be kept in orange zones to provide further protection.

In total to implement a strategy such as this would be the cost/time to develop and assign a classification colour to all pertinent areas (mostly time), paint (pretty cheap in $$$, and some time to paint), and finally a common security pass format which is already being given out but lacks universality across DND/CF.

Once in place ANY CF/ DND member would be able to quickly and accurately identify individuals who do not belong in specific areas/zones.  Minimal burden on the member and minimal financial cost, yet each member is further empowered to assist in maintaining physical security.  If implemented right from basic training through to op units and HQ's, it would quickly become just a normal way of doing business.

This concept could be taken further if combined with electronic proximity technology such as proximity  cards which if constructed correctly could provide passive electronic monitoring to ensure areas are only access by individuals in possession of a security pass which grants the access to that area.

Long post I know but I just wanted to get the ideas out there to see what conversations might pop up from it. :cdn:
Too complicated.  And the colours just advertise targets.  We already have signs on a lot of nice targets, I don't think we should paint them distinctive colours now.

Have you compared your proposal to the Government of Canada Security Policy?

We already have access control to those areas that have access control.

Prox cards are already in use where required and control a person's access to where they are allowed to go.  Your "access all orange areas because you have an orange pass" flies in the face of all security procedures.

Wearing ID cards that show what you have access to at all times is a very bad security process.  Too easy for someone  to snap a picture of it.

The person who carried out the attack had access to the area he attacked.  Given that you are putting forward this proposal because of the recent attack how would any one of your proposals stop such an attack?

Security costs money, requires infrastructure, and needs people, preferably with guns, to ensure it.
All of what you mentioned is already in place in some other way, shape or form. 
Don't worry, the Commissionaires will protect us.
While much is done on the prevention side, what are you doing on the response side (I know that you can't fully answer that). The problem with most military bases is that they are the perfect place to attack, as they have a very thin hard shell and loft of soft targets inside. Current laws, regs and cultural bias within the forces about the issuing of firearms and ammo. Unit's within a base are going to have to take a stronger role in everyday base defense. This will be a culture change, as it's been a long time since we have had internal threats to military bases If I was charged with designing such, the first thing I would try and do is seek advice from the IDF on what they do and adapt from there. In most places in the world, you drive by a army base and you see bunkers built for defense of the base. Last time I saw this at a Canadian base was in Germany in 1984.