Canada moves to 2% GDP end of FY25/26 - PMMC

[Cloud Cover]

The upgrade of the C1 howitzer to the C3 was done by a company in the Netherlands called RDM. The process and many of the parts were patented by RDM. Around 2004 RDM went bankrupt. Their intellectual property and tools, spares and service contracts were bought up by a company called Nedefco . . . who promptly went bankrupt not long after. By 2006 we were having several problems, particulalry in the recoil cylinder which was a different and heavier duty one than the original. The IP was by this point in time in complete limbo. By that time roughly 1/3 of our fleet was non operational. Still good for dry training but not live firing.

A roughly concurrent problem was that around this time there was the introduction of the C132 105mm HEER (HE extended range) round. The previous rounds had used a copper-bronze driving band; the new ones had a driving band made of sintered iron. Unfortunately this round's propellant also played havoc on both the LG1 and the C3's progressive rifling wearing barrels out very quickly (as quickly as 600 rds of Zone 2 (high zone) on the LG1). Tests showed the accuracy of the C3 with C132 rounds was dropping fast. Long story short, just as we were getting ready to go to Kandahar we were in a world of hurt for guns.

Interesting,
Well, European law sets out 20 years for the life of a patent, provided everything is done on an annual basis during that time to maintain the patent. Theres little reason a Canadian company couldn’t, right now, start working towards developing the required remedies for the weapon. Even if the patent holder for the insolvent company attempts to assert some rights, the associated IP is likely already in the public domain or about to be. And given this is a munition issue under patent law, nothing from an IP perspective really prevents Canada (the Crown) from proceeding accordingly. DRDC or a similar agency could issue contracts to draw up plans and then associate Crown documentation and subsequently own whatever 2025 improvements to the guns are required. It sounds to me that it’s more likely DND was using IP as a lame excuse for the government to choose some other path rather than fix the guns. Just my 0.02…

 

[FJAG]

Interesting,
Well, European law sets out 20 years for the life of a patent, provided everything is done on an annual basis during that time to maintain the patent. Theres little reason a Canadian company couldn’t, right now, start working towards developing the required remedies for the weapon. Even if the patent holder for the insolvent company attempts to assert some rights, the associated IP is likely already in the public domain or about to be. And given this is a munition issue under patent law, nothing from an IP perspective really prevents Canada (the Crown) from proceeding accordingly. DRDC or a similar agency could issue contracts to draw up plans and then associate Crown documentation and subsequently own whatever 2025 improvements to the guns are required. It sounds to me that it’s more likely DND was using IP as a lame excuse for the government to choose some other path rather than fix the guns. Just my 0.02…

When these issues raised their head the conversion was less than 10 years old. I talked to the 105mm LCMM about all this stuff over three interviews over about six hours and a bunch of lengthy emails. Same with folks higher up in the CAF. I'm pretty sure this was never an issue that hit the government but stayed internal to the CAF - even more it stayed internal to the army.

At the time the C3s were already over 50 years old and no one was going to spend a lot (read that as any) money on them. The M777 came on line in 2005 and by 2006 everyone was pretty sure it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. They wanted more triple 7s and we quickly got up to 12 and then more slowly to 37.

As Afghanistan progressed the C3 (and the LG1) all became more a Militia gun and not high on anyone's priority except internal to the arty. Remember with only a dozen M777s until Afghanistan was over, (6 in theatre; 6 at home) even the RegF had to use the 105mm for a lot of their training. There was a brief moment (I think in 2009 or 10) where the 105s were relegated for divestment although that was quickly reversed since there was zero replacement on the horizon. It hasn't been considered an "operational" gun for well over 15 years. The plan is to replace the 105s with something modern but that's been a plan for a long time. IFM is looking at 155mm SPs (to replace the M777) and mortars so take a guess which way this is heading for the reserves.

I'll give you my personal opinion. I think we should keep the M777s (maybe some LG1s as well). We should give about 2/3s of the M777s, the SPs and the HIMARS to the reserves. Cut each RegF regiment to one battery and make the 2nd and 3rd batteries ARes. The 600 PYs that are saved should all be converted to air defence. The four or five ARes arty units that are left over become loitering munition launcher batteries. The C3s will then be given a nice retirement ceremony and then be relegated to saluting troops. (Maybe let the 400,000 look after that)

 

[Kirkhill]

85% is good enough to get started.

https://www.washingtontechnology.com/companies/2025/11/militarys-acquisition-reform-push-means-85-ready-tech-good-enough-first/409632/

 

[Cloud Cover]

When these issues raised their head the conversion was less than 10 years old. I talked to the 105mm LCMM about all this stuff over three interviews over about six hours and a bunch of lengthy emails. Same with folks higher up in the CAF. I'm pretty sure this was never an issue that hit the government but stayed internal to the CAF - even more it stayed internal to the army.

At the time the C3s were already over 50 years old and no one was going to spend a lot (read that as any) money on them. The M777 came on line in 2005 and by 2006 everyone was pretty sure it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. They wanted more triple 7s and we quickly got up to 12 and then more slowly to 37.

As Afghanistan progressed the C3 (and the LG1) all became more a Militia gun and not high on anyone's priority except internal to the arty. Remember with only a dozen M777s until Afghanistan was over, (6 in theatre; 6 at home) even the RegF had to use the 105mm for a lot of their training. There was a brief moment (I think in 2009 or 10) where the 105s were relegated for divestment although that was quickly reversed since there was zero replacement on the horizon. It hasn't been considered an "operational" gun for well over 15 years. The plan is to replace the 105s with something modern but that's been a plan for a long time. IFM is looking at 155mm SPs (to replace the M777) and mortars so take a guess which way this is heading for the reserves.

I'll give you my personal opinion. I think we should keep the M777s (maybe some LG1s as well). We should give about 2/3s of the M777s, the SPs and the HIMARS to the reserves. Cut each RegF regiment to one battery and make the 2nd and 3rd batteries ARes. The 600 PYs that are saved should all be converted to air defence. The four or five ARes arty units that are left over become loitering munition launcher batteries. The C3s will then be given a nice retirement ceremony and then be relegated to saluting troops. (Maybe let the 400,000 look after that)

I know! I’ve read all of your books!

 

[MilEME09]

Good read if you have a Jane's subscription

FAVS 2025: Canada outlines military priorities

Colonel Daniel Fontaine, the Canadian Armed Forces' (CAF's) director of Armoured Vehicle Program Management, outlined his country's military priorities on the second day...

www.janes.com

 

[FJAG]

Good read if you have a Jane's subscription

FAVS 2025: Canada outlines military priorities

Colonel Daniel Fontaine, the Canadian Armed Forces' (CAF's) director of Armoured Vehicle Program Management, outlined his country's military priorities on the second day...

www.janes.com

Damn paywall.

 

[MilEME09]

Damn paywall.

let me help ya

FAVS 2025: Canada outlines military priorities​

Colonel Daniel Fontaine, the Canadian Armed Forces' (CAF's) director of Armoured Vehicle Program Management, outlined his country's military priorities on the second day of SAE Media Group's Future Armoured Vehicles Survivability (FAVS) 2025 conference held in London from 17 to 19 November.


He said Canada requires an army with divisions for the first time in decades, one assigned to defending Canada, as well as manoeuvre, support, and training divisions, with enhanced fighting forces, lethality at range, and persistence at scale. Speaking of procurement in batches and reducing delivery times and increasing capabilities, Col Fontaine outlined a structure with long-range precision fires, manoeuvrable indirect fires, air defence, Arctic mobility, and integrated command-and-control (C2). He listed the CAF's priorities as short-range air defence, anti-tank guided missiles, counter-unmanned aircraft systems, loitering munitions, electronic warfare, integrated C2, as well as mobility and protection. Regarding mobility, Col Fontaine spoke of the CAF's Tactical Armoured Patrol Vehicle (TAPV) receiving a new powerpack.


Asked by Janes at the end of his presentation how soon Canada would decide on its High-Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) procurement, Col Fontaine noted that it had been approved by the United States. He also spoke of Saab promoting the Gripen combat aircraft in Canada as an alternative to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.


The US Department of State approved the possible Foreign Military Sale (FMS) of M142 HIMARS and related equipment worth up to USD1.75 billion to Canada, the US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) announced in a press release on 1 October.


The Canadian government has requested 26 M142 HIMARSs, 132 M31A2 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS) Unitary pods with the Insensitive Munitions Propulsion System (IMPS), 132 M30A2 GMLRS Alternative Warhead (AW) pods with IMPS, 32 M403 Extended Range (ER) GMLRS AW pods with IMPS, 32 M404 ER GMLRS Unitary pods with IMPS, and 64 M57 Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) pods. It also requested Low Cost Reduced Range Practice Rocket pods; interactive electronic technical manuals; integration support services; spare parts; tool kits; test equipment; contractor logistics support; training; training equipment; technical assistance; technical publications; transportation; Type 1 radios (AN/PRC-160 and AN/PRC-167); 7800I intercom equipment; Simple Key Loaders; US government and contractor technical, engineering, and logistics personnel services; and other related elements of logistics and programme support.


The proposed FMS will support US foreign policy goals and national security objectives by improving NATO ally Canada's security, according to the DSCA. The agency added that the proposed sale would improve Canada's capabilities to meet current and future threats by providing the HIMARS long-range precision strike system and munitions, a capability that would protect the country by improving its contribution to collective hemispheric defence and to NATO plans for defence and deterrence in Europe


The principal contractor is Lockheed Martin, with any offset agreement to be defined in negotiations between Canada and the company, according to the DSCA.


Col Fontaine gave his presentation at FAVS 2025 the day after BAE Systems and General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) announced on 17 November that they had signed a teaming agreement to offer the BvS10 Beowulf all-terrain vehicle (ATV) for the Canadian Army's Domestic Arctic Mobility Enhancement (DAME) project. The companies said the agreement combines BAE Systems Hägglunds ATV design experience with GDLS's in-service support in Canada.

 

[Czech_pivo]

.

 

[Czech_pivo]

FYI

4yrs out -

Canada not expected to get U.S. artillery rocket system until late 2029​

The Canadian Army will not receive High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) approved for sale by the United States until at least 2029, defence officials confirm. ...... 'is not expected until late 2029 “

Canada not expected to get U.S. artillery rocket system until late 2029

The Canadian Army will not receive High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) approved for sale by the United States until at least 2029, defence officials confirm.

www.ctvnews.ca

 

[MilEME09]

FYI

4yrs out -

Canada not expected to get U.S. artillery rocket system until late 2029​

The Canadian Army will not receive High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) approved for sale by the United States until at least 2029, defence officials confirm. ...... 'is not expected until late 2029 “

Canada not expected to get U.S. artillery rocket system until late 2029

The Canadian Army will not receive High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) approved for sale by the United States until at least 2029, defence officials confirm.

www.ctvnews.ca

sounds about right as 1 RCHA will need to start conversion training, likely in the US, and 3 RCHA will need to be stood up to take the guns from 1

 

[KevinB]

FYI

4yrs out -

Canada not expected to get U.S. artillery rocket system until late 2029​

The Canadian Army will not receive High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) approved for sale by the United States until at least 2029, defence officials confirm. ...... 'is not expected until late 2029 “

Canada not expected to get U.S. artillery rocket system until late 2029

The Canadian Army will not receive High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems (HIMARS) approved for sale by the United States until at least 2029, defence officials confirm.

www.ctvnews.ca

Well if you keep pissing of LocMart on the F-35...

 

[Remius]

Well if you keep pissing of LocMart on the F-35...

Then they’ll cancel other purchases ?

 

[Czech_pivo]

Well if you keep pissing of LocMart on the F-35...

Considering how much coin we are spending with them, they should be quite happy to take our money.

 

[MilEME09]

Considering how much coin we are spending with them, they should be quite happy to take our money.

Given how many countries are scaling back on buying Us equipment, they are probably more worried of sales collapsing because of US foreign policy

 

[KevinB]

Then they’ll cancel other purchases ?

Maybe. There is a long line of customers for their products. I have zero knowledge of their business plans or thoughts on this. I know several other Defense companies who view the CAF as a bad partner due to limited buying and various Canadianization policies. To the point one VP has said with CA GO’s around that the juice isn’t worth the squeeze with Canada.

Considering how much coin we are spending with them, they should be quite happy to take our money.

Perhaps, but it’s a sellers market for the vast majority of their products, and with the F-35 being a flagship product, one never knows how companies will react to threats to those.

I see the Gripen as a farcical joke with Canada appearing ready to cut off its nose to spite its face.
We all got 3 more years of 47, I think it’s foolish to act in a shortsighted manner with long term equipment.

 

[Remius]

Maybe. There is a long line of customers for their products. I have zero knowledge of their business plans or thoughts on this. I know several other Defense companies who view the CAF as a bad partner due to limited buying and various Canadianization policies. To the point one VP has said with CA GO’s around that the juice isn’t worth the squeeze with Canada.

That just opens the door to competitors which is already happening.

Perhaps, but it’s a sellers market for the vast majority of their products, and with the F-35 being a flagship product, one never knows how companies will react to threats to those.

I see the Gripen as a farcical joke with Canada appearing ready to cut off its nose to spite its face.
We all got 3 more years of 47, I think it’s foolish to act in a shortsighted manner with long term equipment.

So here is the thing. Look at the upending that 47 has done in less than a year. Then look at what is on the horizon. CUSMA will not be renewed. I suspect Carmey knows this. While we look at our bi lateral relationship the rest of the world is realigning its supply chains and trade systems because of one year of 47.

The effects of 47 will go on far longer than 47s tenure because once the world settles into a new alignment they will be reticent to go back. After 47, we could have another MAGA leader as the US has shown that having a guy like trump is ok with them so much so they did it twice. I doubt the republicans will have another Ronald Reagan in our lifetime on offer. And the Democrats were never the party of free trade and free world markets. They will be happy to keep the protectionism.

It will mean short term pain yes, but if we are structured to a new way of doing things the long term will be better than hoping and grovelling to an unwilling partner who offers nothing in return.