Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[FJAG]

As you noted there are lots of vehicles required but I'm willing to bet that with all the other MASSIVE spending commitments the CAF has (NORAD modernization, River-Class, P-8's, F-35's, submarines, HIMARS, SP Artillery, AD, multi-mission corvettes, AT, comms upgrades, satellites, tanks, munitions, not to mention infrastructure upgrades and spending to resolve recruiting and retention issues) that replacing the LAVs with a tracked vehicle will be far, far, FAR down the list.

The issue here isn't filling a need that the army has but filling a need that Canada has with keep a key defence industry viable. That's worth sacrificing something else for.

 

[GR66]

The issue here isn't filling a need that the army has but filling a need that Canada has with keep a key defence industry viable. That's worth sacrificing something else for.

As you noted there are plenty of LAV-based vehicles that could keep GDLS-C busy and viable. However if you want to go all in and create a whole new tracked fleet of 4 x Battalions then what other programs would you be willing to sacrifice to get that?

 

[FJAG]

As you noted there are plenty of LAV-based vehicles that could keep GDLS-C busy and viable. However if you want to go all in and create a whole new tracked fleet of 4 x Battalions then what other programs would you be willing to sacrifice to get that?

I'm not getting tricky here, but we've got six LAV mounted and three light RegF battalions and a herd of unmounted ResF ones. My thought is simply that we've got enough LAVs but really need tracked IFV so if we want to keep GDLS producing then - there you go - build an IFV family.

I know, I know. It boggles the CF brain to have two lines of armoured infantry vehicles but - sometimes you feel like a nut and sometimes you don't. IMHO, the LAV is not an armoured all-singing and all-dancing Swiss Army knife. For what we are facing in Latvia I'm all in for a tracked IFV. For other roles a LAV is just fine. GDLS can build both. We've already got the one, let's start working on the other once ACSV runs its course.

 

[MilEME09]

I'm not getting tricky here, but we've got six LAV mounted and three light RegF battalions and a herd of unmounted ResF ones. My thought is simply that we've got enough LAVs but really need tracked IFV so if we want to keep GDLS producing then - there you go - build an IFV family.

I know, I know. It boggles the CF brain to have two lines of armoured infantry vehicles but - sometimes you feel like a nut and sometimes you don't. IMHO, the LAV is not an armoured all-singing and all-dancing Swiss Army knife. For what we are facing in Latvia I'm all in for a tracked IFV. For other roles a LAV is just fine. GDLS can build both. We've already got the one, let's start working on the other once ACSV runs its course.

Ajax here we come.....

 

[Cloud Cover]

Ajax here we come.....

I think we were very close to CV90 for the CCV project before a certain guy put a bullet into it …

 

[Maxman1]

Just thinking as well - technically, there was a ground attack package for the Tutors - they're much like the BAC Strikemasters, without their machine guns/cannons. They could I suppose keep the airframe/make newer ones, add updated avionics and a weapons package, boom, newer low level ground attack plane. This obviously is early am, low caffeine brain talking, but hey...

Well its a good start. Almost like we need our version of an A 10 or a helicopter with a big cannon and missiles......

Saab and Boeing have that ne T-7 Red Hawk that would be excellent to replace both the Tutor and Hawk, and they have the option of an armed version.

And Airbus has the Eurocopter Tiger, that could be built in their Fort Erie factory.

 

[OldSolduer]

Saab and Boeing have that ne T-7 Red Hawk that would be excellent to replace both the Tutor and Hawk, and they have the option of an armed version.

And Airbus has the Eurocopter Tiger, that could be built in their Fort Erie factory.

Why have a jet trainer that doesn't fire stuff. Arm the shit out of them.

 

[Maxman1]

General Dynamics to Ottawa: We need more military orders or risk layoffs

London’s military armoured vehicle maker is lobbying the federal government for orders, citing layoffs without new work.

lfpress.com

 

[Maxman1]

This is also the same noise comming from Seaspan. "If we don't get a new ship design project in the next 18-24mo we'll have to lay off the hard won design expertise we developed over the last 10 years".

I suspect that there will be an order for both GDLS and Seaspan.

Maybe we could have them design a submarine rescue ship.

 

[OldSolduer]

Maybe we could have them design a submarine rescue ship.

I like this.

 

[Maxman1]

Why have a jet trainer that doesn't fire stuff. Arm the shit out of them.

The armed version will be called the F-7, and is aimed at replacing older F-5s and F-16s.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Why have a jet trainer that doesn't fire stuff. Arm the shit out of them.

Sorry, misread that.

 

[Maxman1]

LAV700 incoming?

Some of the RegF's LAVs are pretty haggard atm anyways. We'd all much rather something tracked at that weight class but if that's what it takes to get AFVs with more modern armour, more power and integrated missiles, better than nothing. I wish we had Lynx or CV90 as much as the next crewman but we have to be realists here.

Have they delivered the replacement ACSVs yet? And we really do need more than 500 HLVW and 1,000 LSVW replacements. Plus other specialized vehicles like mortar carriers.

 

[YZT580]

Maybe we could have them design a submarine rescue ship.

or maybe future needs? How about 2 more JSS updated for delivery in a decade? Not to soon to start that. Or maybe an auxiliary fleet to be operated by CSS or Algoma but available when needed. Seaway sized vessels would be more than adequate and would/could enhance seakeeping training for future officers. There is also a thing called free enterprise as in, hej Seaspan, we rebuilt your shipyard now go out and find some business elsewhere to keep you busy.

 

[ueo]

I would think that every officer should be an OCdt UNTIL hitting OFP.
The same way the NCM trade should be PTE(R) then PTE(B) and when hitting OFP PTE(T)
Since Recruit and Basic aren’t separated anymore, I guess one doesn’t need a middle pay grade - but the point stands that the CAF inflates ranks during the training pipeline as pay increases - which has caused issues down the pipe.



2Lt’s should be able to fly…

sergeants?

 

[Underway]

There is also a thing called free enterprise as in, hej Seaspan, we rebuilt your shipyard now go out and find some business elsewhere to keep you busy.

Their repair/refit yard in Vancouver fixed 28 vessels this year.

Besides competing with Korea, China and Romania on shipbuilding doesn't work to well internationally given Purchasing Power Parity is very much stacked against us Seaspan has done an amazing job considering the challenges. They are full on hitting their stride right now.

 

[Maxman1]

or maybe future needs? How about 2 more JSS updated for delivery in a decade? Not to soon to start that.

A total of four JSS would be incredible capability and should absolutely be pursued.

 

[medicineman]

Saab and Boeing have that ne T-7 Red Hawk that would be excellent to replace both the Tutor and Hawk, and they have the option of an armed version.

And Airbus has the Eurocopter Tiger, that could be built in their Fort Erie factory.

Forgot about the Hawk...which also had a ground attack package on the original iteration...

Maybe we could have them design a submarine rescue ship.

Yup...or better yet, just commission one of the already pretty decent ones that any number of countries already have - Korea, Japan, Singapore, etc...

ISMERLO's site has good resources of who's who and what's available in the world - ISMERLO | NATO ISMERLO

 

[YZT580]

Their repair/refit yard in Vancouver fixed 28 vessels this year.

Besides competing with Korea, China and Romania on shipbuilding doesn't work to well internationally given Purchasing Power Parity is very much stacked against us Seaspan has done an amazing job considering the challenges. They are full on hitting their stride right now.

Do they have a competent design team put together? I would assume so. Put them to work designing ships for countries such as NZ that don't have a domestic resource. There are always options

 

[YZT580]

Their repair/refit yard in Vancouver fixed 28 vessels this year.

Besides competing with Korea, China and Romania on shipbuilding doesn't work to well internationally given Purchasing Power Parity is very much stacked against us Seaspan has done an amazing job considering the challenges. They are full on hitting their stride right now.

If the news is calling attention to any area, it is towards our Arctic and one glaring gap in capability is in ice capable logistics vessels which are well within the purview of Seaspan's mandate. In particular I am thinking of a smaller version of the JSS capable of supplying northern bases with the necessary fuelsm supplies and primary health care.