Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Brad Sallows]

But the order of the day was the same as that reiterated to me and my generation 35 years later - keep moving forwards, the medics will pick them up.

Which is essentially an example of one of the factors of my assessment. In most cases the fight ought to be won, or moved further on, before risking the assets that are bringing resupply and evacuating casualties. Sure, I've read innumerable anecdotes of company medics taking risks under fire, and there are times resupply is needed while the fight is still on and someone has to bring forward cases of ammo. But mostly what I'm talking about happens during a more secure window in time and space than winning a firefight or clearing the trenches. That's what experience has taught; that's what doctrine says; that's what the equipment choices should be based on.

 

[Kirkhill]

Dozens of lay offs from London’s General Dynamics Land Systems

Dozens of salaried workers have been let go from London’s General Dynamics Land Systems.

www.ctvnews.ca

There is a common trend on display within this article posted earlier. In the last year we have seen Colt Canada, GDLS Canada, SeaSpan all expressing the same concern. They all needed firm commitments and contracts to maintain their current capacity and capabilities.

If Canada wants a domestic defence industry it needs to pay for it. There needs to be consistent R&D program money, continuous build programs and routine rebuild/upgrade programs.

Buying everything from C6s to Ships once every 30 years is not compatible with maintaining a domestic defence industry.

If anything the lessons of UKR is likely that industrial capacity and R&D ability is as important if not much much more so than the exact weapons and vehicles your army is equipped with year to year during peacetime.

The other lesson of the Ukraine war, it seems to me, is that engineers are actively engaged at all levels, all the way back to the Roshel factory in Canada, updating and modifying to counter changed situations in the field. Nothing is static.

 

[PrairieFella]

I have done both. What we can do with screens is outpacing advancements of the human eyeball.

Which is fine, but an independent commander sight doesn't come close to the SA that one gets from having your head up in the commanders hatch, especially on the move. As you know, sights are used in conjunction with your eyes and to zoom, but scanning tends to be more effective with your eyes.

 

[Kirkhill]

It takes a lot of drones to achieve the videos we see, so an armoured vehicle with countermeasures gives you a chance against Drones, Artillery shrapnel and small arms. Ambulances are going to be very expendable.

The problem with that one though, is that, apparently, there are a lot of drones - some as low cost as 1000 dollars, some costing 1000 dollars but dropping 100 dollar HEAT rounds.

Having said that, I stick by having ambulances made from the same carriers the CQ uses to feed the front lines. Commonly that would be a variant of the F Echelon vehicles involved in the fight.

 

[KevinB]

Which is fine, but an independent commander sight doesn't come close to the SA that one gets from having your head up in the commanders hatch, especially on the move. As you know, sights are used in conjunction with your eyes and to zoom, but scanning tends to be more effective with your eyes.

Trust me you have not seen anything like what the CSAM offer --for commander and gunner there are "VR" headsets as well that will give you a full 360 degree in X and Y axis imagery.
You can use the ITV to zoom etc.

 

[PrairieFella]

Trust me you have not seen anything like what the CSAM offer --for commander and gunner there are "VR" headsets as well that will give you a full 360 degree in X and Y axis imagery.
You can use the ITV to zoom etc.

Like what's in the Apaches? I heard about that a few years ago but thought that was abandoned as it was too expensive/fragile for a tank?

Edit: took a look through some of the open source stuff on M1A2 SEPv3, couldn't find that. Is it new?

 

[Kirkhill]

Like what's in the Apaches? I heard about that a few years ago but thought that was abandoned as it was too expensive/fragile for a tank?

Probably just too expensive for Canada.

Is there an element of trust here? Pilots have to be taught to rely on their instruments. Do people have to be taught to rely on their screens?
One advantage of the screen I can see is that I can put all of the inputs from all of my sensors, 360 degrees worth of coverage, onto one screen within my field of view. I don't have to keep pivoting my head to see behind me.

 

[Underway]

So after everyone posts their spot observations, I still lean in the direction of "lightly-armoured, wheeled" is good enough for forward logistical platforms. We could buy, maintain, and employ more of them more widely, for less cost than heavier and/or tracked alternatives.

Wasn't making a comment on the overarching viability or survivability, just commenting that its a cool video.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

or how about a full on mini-turret.

TC hated them and the ultra crappy MG that went into them. Plus if hit with APDS would shear off and take half the TC with it. The idea might not be bad, but that version not so much.

 

[Castus]

The problem with that is screens don't give you the 360° SA that an open hatch and the Mk1 eyeball gives you. Hence why most tankers are hatches up when possible.

I wonder if we could experiment with a VR headset? I'm generally reticent to rely on electronics like that though, which will absolutely be N/S within a few days of being in theatre, but an interesting thought experiment never the less.

 

[Castus]

Wasn't making a comment on the overarching viability or survivability, just commenting that its a cool video.

Do you have a link?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Wasn't making a comment on the overarching viability or survivability, just commenting that its a cool video.

I think a lot of the videos out of Ukraine have verified the design approaches of 1980's Western AFV's over the Warsaw Pact ones, particularly in the APC/IFV category.

 

[McG]

Which is fine, but an independent commander sight doesn't come close to the SA that one gets from having your head up in the commanders hatch, especially on the move. As you know, sights are used in conjunction with your eyes and to zoom, but scanning tends to be more effective with your eyes.

View attachment 93718

I think you underestimate what can already be integrated into a turret. VR headset is not even the cutting edge.

 

[PrairieFella]

I think you underestimate what can already be integrated into a turret. VR headset is not even the cutting edge.

Can be, but we're talking in Canadian service haha.

 

[KevinB]

Like what's in the Apaches? I heard about that a few years ago but thought that was abandoned as it was too expensive/fragile for a tank?

No not really - that sort of thing was for RWS gunners.

Edit: took a look through some of the open source stuff on M1A2 SEPv3, couldn't find that. Is it new?

The Abrams isn't even close to what is possible at this point.
Nearly every new hull has many EO sensors on them - in addition to being used for AP systems, they are also used to assist with navigation, collision avoidance, old school laser detection, etc -- but they can be integrated to give a full 3D view of the vehicle and it's surroundings.
Which in turn can be put on displays - either HUD's, VR goggle, or crew information screens, or a all of the above.

 

[AmmoTech90]

No not really - that sort of thing was for RWS gunners.

The Abrams isn't even close to what is possible at this point.
Nearly every new hull has many EO sensors on them - in addition to being used for AP systems, they are also used to assist with navigation, collision avoidance, old school laser detection, etc -- but they can be integrated to give a full 3D view of the vehicle and it's surroundings.
Which in turn can be put on displays - either HUD's, VR goggle, or crew information screens, or a all of the above.

And this is why troops will start to be stagging on with weapons 24/7 in vehicle compounds and hangers in 5, 15, 25, or 50 years. Already, outdoor storage of A vehicles is a bad idea, better start building hangers that can hold 70 ton vehicles.
The sensors from F35 and similar platforms are trickling down. Don't think of F35 as a 5th gen fighter; it's a 5th gen sensor and networking platform and eventually that tech will move elsewhere or everywhere.

 

[Underway]

All that electronics and we wonder why the availability rates are low.

 

[McG]

All that electronics and we wonder why the availability rates are low.

Why? Does your car typically fail due to mechanical or electronic faults? Does your household have a problem with the availability rate of smart phones or the home entertainment system?

 

[KevinB]

Swedish MoD

https://twitter.com/x/status/1930580097431478439

Canada may want to think about that...

 

[Brad Sallows]

Why? Does your car typically fail due to mechanical or electronic faults? Does your household have a problem with the availability rate of smart phones or the home entertainment system?

I don't drive my car or home cross-country very often. There's little vibration involved.