# Canada (still) seeks Headquarter Shelter Systems (HQSS)



## The Bread Guy (21 Apr 2014)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> ".... The Department of National DEFENCE (DND) is seeking to obtain costing data, timing, production and logistical support data for a Headquarters Shelter System (HQSS).  This Price and Availability enquiry is required for planning purposes only. A contract will not be placed and stock or production facilities relative to the material itemized herein should not be earmarked ...."





			
				milnews.ca said:
			
		

> "…. _The Department of National Defence (DND) has identified a requirement for tactical Headquarter Shelter Systems (HQSS). The HQSS project emphasizes the need for a modular, spacious and environmentally protective shelter from which unit and brigade headquarters can command. The project will provide a new System of tactical soft-walled shelters and ancillary equipment to support the functions of digitized headquarters command posts, accommodations and field hospitals.  Upon completion, the project will provide a common, CF-wide capability of a scalable, tactically mobile, shelter system providing full environmental protection and control in a wide range of climatic conditions ….”_ – more in an extract from the bid document here.


The latest:  let's go back to square one?


> .... The Department of National Defence (DND) has identified a requirement for Headquarter Shelter Systems (HQSS). The HQSS project emphasizes the need for a modular, spacious and environmentally protective shelter from which unit and brigade headquarters can command.  The project will provide a new system of tactical soft-walled shelters and ancillary equipment to support the functions of digitized headquarters command posts, accommodations and field hospitals.
> 
> Upon completion, the project will provide a common, CF-wide capability of a scalable, tactically mobile, shelter system providing full environmental protection and control in a wide range of climatic conditions.
> 
> ...


More details in the LOI documentation attached.


----------



## Tibbson (21 Apr 2014)

Looks like "industry" has finely gotten smart and realized there is no point in dealing with the government in regards to military projects since it takes so darn long and never really gets off the ground before another government cuts the projects, cost go so high the deal needs to be rewritten or the technology becomes obsolete.


----------



## PuckChaser (21 Apr 2014)

Glad this is still going on. I've been denied by PWGSC twice from buying another DRASH because HQSS is "coming in 2015". 2 years ago I built my unit's requirements for it in a pretty spreadsheet. Maybe I'll be a MWO before we see this get off the ground.  :


----------



## PPCLI Guy (21 Apr 2014)

The only stakeholder that is NOT being asked for input is the actual units and brigades themselves.  Despite repeated invites, the project people have refused to visit 1 CMBG, which is at the cutting edge of HQ mobility, to the point that their approach has been forced on the other two brigades.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (21 Apr 2014)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Glad this is still going on. I've been denied by PWGSC twice from buying another DRASH because HQSS is "coming in 2015". 2 years ago I built my unit's requirements for it in a pretty spreadsheet. Maybe I'll be a MWO before we see this get off the ground.  :



Good.  DRASH is crap.  It is not robust enough for multiple moves, and is close to useless in the snow.


----------



## George Wallace (21 Apr 2014)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Glad this is still going on. I've been denied by PWGSC twice from buying another DRASH because HQSS is "coming in 2015". 2 years ago I built my unit's requirements for it in a pretty spreadsheet. Maybe I'll be Retired before we see this get off the ground.  :



FTFY


----------



## 63 Delta (21 Apr 2014)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> The only stakeholder that is NOT being asked for input is the actual units and brigades themselves.  Despite repeated invites, the project people have refused to visit 1 CMBG, which is at the cutting edge of HQ mobility, to the point that their approach has been forced on the other two brigades.



Can you comment on how 1 CMBG is doing it?

When I was with the Dragoon HQ's, we were forced to setup the Carfor (SP?) with 2 sections of mod on all four sides. That is a huge pain in the arse, especially when you have to tear it down the next day and move again. And its painful for the command element when it takes 2+ hours to fully setup. It took 8 months of trying to explain how useless the Carfor was until they decided it would be faster just to use a couple mods out the back of a bison.


----------



## McG (21 Apr 2014)

With the HQSS also being asked to also fill the roles of hospital and accommodations, this sounds like Mod Tent replacement project.



			
				Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> Looks like "industry" has finely gotten smart and realized there is no point in dealing with the government in regards to military projects since it takes so darn long and never really gets off the ground before another government cuts the projects, cost go so high the deal needs to be rewritten or the technology becomes obsolete.


Where do you draw this conclusion from what was in this thread?


----------



## PuckChaser (21 Apr 2014)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Good.  DRASH is crap.  It is not robust enough for multiple moves, and is close to useless in the snow.



Its not robust like mod but if you don't drop it from the back deck of a HLVW it works perfectly fine. I've only ever seen one break because some morons decided to take the thing down with kit underneath and the weather straps still attached to pegs in the ground.

I haven't set it up in a 1CMBG winter, so I can't comment on that level of snow.


----------



## MilEME09 (21 Apr 2014)

Maybe industry is finally saying enough is enough get your shit together Canada


----------



## PPCLI Guy (21 Apr 2014)

HULK_011 said:
			
		

> Can you comment on how 1 CMBG is doing it?
> 
> When I was with the Dragoon HQ's, we were forced to setup the Carfor (SP?) with 2 sections of mod on all four sides. That is a huge pain in the arse, especially when you have to tear it down the next day and move again. And its painful for the command element when it takes 2+ hours to fully setup. It took 8 months of trying to explain how useless the Carfor was until they decided it would be faster just to use a couple mods out the back of a bison.



They have two carrefours, and multiple mod extensions.  It comes down in 2 hours (packed on the truck) and they can put it up and have full connectivity including CSNI in less than 4 hours.  The Bde HQ just returned from an ex with the 82nd AB in Ft Bragg (with the full set up including Bisons and cams nets) and the Americans were very impressed.  They hate their DRASH....


----------



## Ludoc (21 Apr 2014)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> They have two carrefours, and multiple mod extensions.  It comes down in 2 hours (packed on the truck) and they can put it up and have full connectivity including CSNI in less than 4 hours.  The Bde HQ just returned from an ex with the 82nd AB in Ft Bragg (with the full set up including Bisons and cams nets) and the Americans were very impressed.  They hate their DRASH....



While I thank you for the vote of confidence, we aren't quite that good. Our record for a setup in the field is under four hours but to expect that every time is unreasonable. As a planning figure, plan for about five and a half hours from when the first packet rolls into the area until LCSS is fully operational. There is still a lot of work to do after that but is all background Sigs stuff and should be transparent to the CP staff.

Tear down, almost always, takes the same amount of time as set up. There are a number of reasons for that including: being tied to notice to move states; packing things in a manner that facilitates a quick setup on the other end of a move; and concurrent remediation of the area we are set up in. 

The Yanks liked Mod so much that on the last day of ex a couple of them were tasked to come over and get NSNs so they could look into ordering it for themselves.

Hulk: Our Forward CP is currently a Carrefour with a couple sections of Mod tacked on. It can be setup, covered in cam (draped, not yet propped), surrounded by razor wire and have full data comms in about an hour and a half (terrain, weather, light conditions, etc dependent). Eight sections of mod with a carrefour seems way too big but I don`t know what type of enablers you are pushing into your CP.


----------



## chrisf (8 Jul 2014)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Its not robust like mod but if you don't drop it from the back deck of a HLVW it works perfectly fine. I've only ever seen one break because some morons decided to take the thing down with kit underneath and the weather straps still attached to pegs in the ground.
> 
> I haven't set it up in a 1CMBG winter, so I can't comment on that level of snow.



Basex is a competitor to drash, does everything drash does without the fragility (it *can* survive a drop from an nl when packed)

Reality is, when you buy green kit, you've got the plan for the lowest denominator, hopefully it means they'll buy something decent.


----------

