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

[ueo]

If your crewing model requires every killick to spend three years ashore before they can step on board then your crewing model is fundamentally flawed.

If you cut to the point where you have one person on board who can perform a task then your crewing model is fundamentally flawed.

A military and all military structures are inherently wasteful. Because "almost survivable" means "not survivable".

Not flawed but screwed!

 

[Halifax Tar]

If your crewing model requires every killick to spend three years ashore before they can step on board then your crewing model is fundamentally flawed.

I think, and I stand to be corrected, that had more to do with over inflating an entitlement to spec/tech pay than actual attempt at output for proficiency.

 

[Czech_pivo]

For those of you in the GTA or willing to travel to downtown Toronto.

Begin Registration

empireclubofcanada.swoogo.com

This speech will occur 3 days after Carney visits the SK' shipyard and thus might be a perfect platform to make a certain announcement.

The price is what I believe to be reason given the location and the crowd.

 

[Maxman1]

Not sure where to put this, maybe thoughts on a new CDC (Continental Defense Corvette) sub page?

Navy commander says he wants a ‘Canadian from the core’ corvette fleet​

Topshee says the navy wants the ships to be “Canadian from the core” and “absolutely built in Canada,” wherever possible.

Navy commander says he wants a ‘Canadian from the core’ corvette fleet

The commander of the Royal Canadian Navy says the service is working to narrow down what it wants from a new fleet of continental defence corvettes it’s hoping to acquire about a decade from now.

www.ctvnews.ca

We have a thread on that.

Thread 'Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)'

26 Nov 2004

What do the MCDV's really do? There's what the recruiting propaganda says, which seems a little different then what I've been told by a few people who have spent time on them. What did your ship(s) do while you were posted in them?

• x-grunt
• Replies: 2,709
• Forum: Ships & Vessels

 

[Eaglelord17]

If your crewing model requires every killick to spend three years ashore before they can step on board then your crewing model is fundamentally flawed.

If you cut to the point where you have one person on board who can perform a task then your crewing model is fundamentally flawed.

A military and all military structures are inherently wasteful. Because "almost survivable" means "not survivable".

Or that technology has advanced to the point that you need years of training to be useful.

As much as I love basic technology (half a year ago I machined a 56,000lbs 28ft long shaft on a clapped out lathe made between 1898 and 1926) that is not how things generally run in the modern era.

Even more of a issue is because of generally how complex technology has gotten and how easy it is to just buy new, people lack basic troubleshooting and maintenance skills to begin with.

So we have more complex technology with a lower starting baseline than say 50 years ago for most recruits.

A simple example, recently my dryer was making banging noises well running. Taking it apart I noticed that one of the rollers the drum rides on had two flat spots. I then turned it round in my 1937 lathe and put it back in. Dryer no longer makes noise and I have proper replacement parts on order.

How many people have that skill set today? How many people would simply order a new dryer than attempt to fix it? That is the standard the CAF has to deal with and because of the lack of training in our schooling systems the CAF ultimately has to be the ones taking up the slack.

 

[childs56]

Or that technology has advanced to the point that you need years of training to be useful.

As much as I love basic technology (half a year ago I machined a 56,000lbs 28ft long shaft on a clapped out lathe made between 1898 and 1926) that is not how things generally run in the modern era.

Even more of a issue is because of generally how complex technology has gotten and how easy it is to just buy new, people lack basic troubleshooting and maintenance skills to begin with.

So we have more complex technology with a lower starting baseline than say 50 years ago for most recruits.

A simple example, recently my dryer was making banging noises well running. Taking it apart I noticed that one of the rollers the drum rides on had two flat spots. I then turned it round in my 1937 lathe and put it back in. Dryer no longer makes noise and I have proper replacement parts on order.

How many people have that skill set today? How many people would simply order a new dryer than attempt to fix it? That is the standard the CAF has to deal with and because of the lack of training in our schooling systems the CAF ultimately has to be the ones taking up the slack.

I don't know about you, but I don't know many around my parts who have a lathe in the garage. Thinking of when I was a kid I didn't know anyone who had a lathe on their garage.
I do know if I showed up at my local Machine shop and asked them to fix my roller they would either laugh and say sorry to busy, or put out some high number that would justify just buying a new dryer.

One thing to remember is many of todays luxuries are not designed to be fixed after a certain point. If you replace all the wear parts usually the costs are close to equal of a new machine.

I think the CFs issues are deeper then this. The training system should be able to teach a person the basics within a few weeks. That even alludes the CF as they were transitioning away from actual hands on tools to digital training.
I was part of a trial where we had touch screens to use. You select your tool, then select the part then select your action, Viola the part is changed with out ever touching anything but a screen. (very helpful when actually trying to figure out how to get that thigamajig out of the blind 90deg inverted hole designed for a person 100lbs and arms 6 feet long). But not very good to train new Technicians on how to use tools to fix things. Not sure where they are with that training, but the CF wanted to go that route. I expressed my concerns at the time, but a lowly Cpl has no say in commonsense practices of the Red, Blue or Navy Blue Machine,.

 

[ytz]

They are not suppose to be competitive. They should be well trained and well equipped. 5-8 years and people move on to the "better paid life jobs" The Military is a generally a single persons job. That has turned into a life long career. Lots of reasons for both parts of this.

Given the country's aging population, all I can say is good luck to anybody who thinks the CAF can continue catering to the delusion you are putting forward here. Indeed, a huge part of why we are in this mess is because we've been pretending it's the 60s till probably about the 2010.

When was the last time you were in and actually talked to a young private?

 

[ytz]

Or that technology has advanced to the point that you need years of training to be useful.

As much as I love basic technology (half a year ago I machined a 56,000lbs 28ft long shaft on a clapped out lathe made between 1898 and 1926) that is not how things generally run in the modern era.

Even more of a issue is because of generally how complex technology has gotten and how easy it is to just buy new, people lack basic troubleshooting and maintenance skills to begin with.

So we have more complex technology with a lower starting baseline than say 50 years ago for most recruits.

A simple example, recently my dryer was making banging noises well running. Taking it apart I noticed that one of the rollers the drum rides on had two flat spots. I then turned it round in my 1937 lathe and put it back in. Dryer no longer makes noise and I have proper replacement parts on order.

How many people have that skill set today? How many people would simply order a new dryer than attempt to fix it? That is the standard the CAF has to deal with and because of the lack of training in our schooling systems the CAF ultimately has to be the ones taking up the slack.

The CAF is downstream of a society. We have to deal with a lot of issues we used to not have. We have an aging population. We have a population that is more computer literate, but also less technically literate. Etc. We also buy much more sophisticated kit that requires a lot more skilled maintenance, not just operators mashing buttons, and a lot more skill. We need to design our training programs for all of that.

There's plus sides too. I am from an era where the CAF actually had computer literacy classes. These days kids come ready to operate drones with like 5 lessons.

 

[childs56]

Given the country's aging population, all I can say is good luck to anybody who thinks the CAF can continue catering to the delusion you are putting forward here. Indeed, a huge part of why we are in this mess is because we've been pretending it's the 60s till probably about the 2010.

Not a delusion at all, what was or is delusional about what I said? Most people now adays have three or four career's. If a agency recruiting does not figure out the prime time to recruit a person for the required skill they require then they have already failed.
Trust me I have watched many companies and organizations fail to attract the proper demographic they require for what they need to perform. The flip side I have watched a few attract the required talent they need right out the gate. Because they are realistic what they need. They pay well, have good training program (or pay better then their competition and snipe the good talent).

When was the last time you were in and actually talked to a young private?

I got out in 2007. Still stay in contact with more then a few people who are still in.
I have quite a few people contact me prior to joining the military and once they have settled in stay in contact about how things are. Still fairly up to date with the day to day happenings of few trades.

The CAF is downstream of a society.

I would disagree, I think they are running a parallelogram being on the far side. I think the expectations of hiring young people to fulfill a life long dream of door kicking and driving tanks around only goes so far when the budget runs out and the doors no longer get repaired to kick in, the tanks are all sitting in the maintenance bay because the parts are not available locally. Kicking the gun box and sweeping the vehicle bay only works for so long.
If I was 20 years old looking to join the CF as a pilot. What choices do I have. Wait a year to get recruited then how ever long it takes waiting for an eternity to get clearance from flight medical and testing. Then have to wait indefinitely for training. Or go somewhere else.
Until the CF get serious about buying lots of new equipment, then getting the training lines up and functioning properly expect to see the same over and over again.
How many people are sitting in PAT platoon across Canada, kicking the box sweeping the floor?

We have to deal with a lot of issues we used to not have. We have an aging population. We have a population that is more computer literate, but also less technically literate. Etc. We also buy much more sophisticated kit that requires a lot more skilled maintenance, not just operators mashing buttons, and a lot more skill. We need to design our training programs for all of that.

I wonder how other agencies and industries are going about their day to day to attract, recruit, train and retain their workers. The word Technical would generally mean more computer literate. Sophisticated equipment means more technical. Which si what this generation is.
What I think we are missing is the person who can wrench on equipment. Not the tech who fixes the internals of the computer board. Most of that gets subbed out anyways. We are missing the hands on experience, we forgot about in the 90, into the 2000s trying to hire the smartest and brightest with degrees to be a Mechanic or Infanteer.
I will say it does take a few years to learn a system properly especially on something like a ship. All we have is a few years, so we need to find away to get the maximum return from that person. That means providing quick and efficient training. No waiting for months between training, to get a person to the Unit/ Fleets. Until that problem is and the equipment problem is fixed we wont solve anything going forward.
When the rank and file are asking Who, what, where, when. why and how, with being told it will all come together. dont worry. Those people were told that 15-20 years ago with less and less support.

There's plus sides too. I am from an era where the CAF actually had computer literacy classes. These days kids come ready to operate drones with like 5 lessons.

Thy can also diagnose a computer problem pretty quick, most I know cant cook worth a crap but that's a entirely different topic.

 

[ytz]

As I've said elsewhere, the government is using defence spending for industrial and technological investment. This is more obvious to those working on a project or at the staff level.

This also means the folks dreaming about minutiae on how brigades will be designed are going to be disappointed. The purchases most likely to be greenlighted and accelerated are the ones with the most spending or tech development at home. Space projects are a good example. Likewise for a lot of shipbuilding.

 

[Furniture]

Even more of a issue is because of generally how complex technology has gotten and how easy it is to just buy new, people lack basic troubleshooting and maintenance skills to begin with.

People used to aquire those skills over several years, why di we think they can aquire those skills in a year or two of classroom time?

Why not give people basic skills with short courses, then get them into the field/fleet apprenticing? That way they can get experience, before trying to dump years worth of knowledge on them.

 

[MilEME09]

As I've said elsewhere, the government is using defence spending for industrial and technological investment. This is more obvious to those working on a project or at the staff level.

This also means the folks dreaming about minutiae on how brigades will be designed are going to be disappointed. The purchases most likely to be greenlighted and accelerated are the ones with the most spending or tech development at home. Space projects are a good example. Likewise for a lot of shipbuilding.

Exactly why south korea offering over 5B of domestic capacity building is something we should go for

 

[Eaglelord17]

People used to aquire those skills over several years, why di we think they can aquire those skills in a year or two of classroom time?

Why not give people basic skills with short courses, then get them into the field/fleet apprenticing? That way they can get experience, before trying to dump years worth of knowledge on them.

Used to be people learned a bit at home fixing the basic equipment that was at home. Then they would get some level of training at highschool/college which either taught the basics formally or reinforced what they figured out at home. Then they started a apprenticeship afterwards and it would take 4-5 years to get fully trained.

Now we just expect people to know when they have less opportunity to learn in the first place. It takes many more years to reinforce these concepts today than it did because of the lack of home and highschool education on the topics.

It took me 10 years once I started to get fully ticketed (mind you I can do two trades successfully it I wish). It took a bit to get these basic concepts into me. Now that I got them I thrive, but when I started it was extremely difficult. The military didn’t help with that as they just threw to the wolves and hoped for the best.

The fleet and field can be a good learning environment only if you dedicate the troops to training. Most aren’t, they are too busy fighting fires and progressing their career to be effective trainers. That means the worker gets a basic training then nothing which is much worse than a long course then nothing.

 

[Furniture]

The fleet and field can be a good learning environment only if you dedicate the troops to training. Most aren’t, they are too busy fighting fires and progressing their career to be effective trainers. That means the worker gets a basic training then nothing which is much worse than a long course then nothing.

My point isn't that people should do a short courses then be expected to learn everything else on the job.

My idea is that people should do a short(ish) course, go get experience in the real world, then go back for follow-on training. With experience, the knowledge gained in the classroom sinks in faster and sticks.

 

[daftandbarmy]

My point isn't that people should do a short courses then be expected to learn everything else on the job.

My idea is that people should do a short(ish) course, go get experience in the real world, then go back for follow-on training. With experience, the knowledge gained in the classroom sinks in faster and sticks.

You mean like 'an apprenticeship'?

What a novel idea

 

[ytz]

My point isn't that people should do a short courses then be expected to learn everything else on the job.

My idea is that people should do a short(ish) course, go get experience in the real world, then go back for follow-on training. With experience, the knowledge gained in the classroom sinks in faster and sticks.

There's a number of angles.

1) Training, especially technical training can be attractive for recruiting. So longer training that gets more civilian recognition actually has a benefit in getting butts in seats.

2) Longer initial training is cheaper. Counterintuitive. But with shorter courses there's more time at PAT platoon waiting for the next course. And then when trained, you're now sending them on TD at a high rank for more training.

Given that the CAF can educate and train continuously, I would love to see a CAF College of Applied Arts and Technology in Borden. You're posted to Borden for 2 years. In that time, you finish Basic Training, get an accelerated 2 yr college diploma and a 3 month trade conversion so your general diploma in electronics teaches you to be an avionics tech for example. In exchange, we get 4 years of service out of you. Start a new class every single 3 months. Programs grouped around broad basic skill sets like mechanical tech, structural repair, admin, electronics, healthcare. Then market the heck out of 6 years in the CAF getting you a college diploma and 4 yrs of work experience.

 

[Kirkhill]

While we debate

Danish acquisition programmes - European Security & Defence

In response to an increasingly challenging international security environment, Denmark has decided to accelerate the modernisation of its armed forces. Efforts are being undertaken both in the short and long term, to strengthen Denmark’s deterrence capabilities and enhance its contribution to NATO.

euro-sd.com

 

[Halifax Tar]

Given that the CAF can educate and train continuously, I would love to see a CAF College of Applied Arts and Technology in Borden. You're posted to Borden for 2 years. In that time, you finish Basic Training, get an accelerated 2 yr college diploma and a 3 month trade conversion so your general diploma in electronics teaches you to be an avionics tech for example. In exchange, we get 4 years of service out of you. Start a new class every single 3 months. Programs grouped around broad basic skill sets like mechanical tech, structural repair, admin, electronics, healthcare. Then market the heck out of 6 years in the CAF getting you a college diploma and 4 yrs of work experience.

That's a brilliant idea!

 

[McG]

with shorter courses there's more time at PAT platoon waiting for the next course.

Time in PAT Pl has little to do with the duration of a course and more to do with frequency of course starts. My experience is that shorter courses have more frequent starts, but that is not an immutable law. The staff responsible for a 2 month course can run 4 or 5 serials (4 or 5 start’s staggered evenish through the year), while the staff of an 8 month course will probably only start one course every year (and probably it starts at the same time every year).

 

[ytz]

That's a brilliant idea!

We send officers to 4 years of university. I was sent on a very expensive Masters degree to get me the skills I needed for a job. I think it's BS how much we try to shaft our NCMs.

We aren't even doing our units any favours. A half trained tech requires so much more mentoring and support. And all the training requires moving them around and waiting on PAT. Put them in one place for two years and organize the courses back to back and you get a pipeline with reduced waiting and a more useful product at the end.

I've actually advocated for this. Unfortunately the feedback I always get is that it's not worthwhile to spend that much on NCMs. Meanwhile we now have to pay bonuses for all these trades or sponsor education at community colleges throughout the country with no control on timing or curriculum.