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

[Navy_Pete]

When I hear they are surprised piping and hulls are paper thin, surprised that corrosion, rust and or wear was found unexpectedly. I doubt much NDT is being done except alongside. Only in easily accessible areas. During the maintenance period and or the reports are being ignored completely until almost failure.
Yes I have friends who work in the yards who have not seen some of the NDT I mentioned performed. But maybe they were not aware of all the happenings. Hopefully they will figure things out for the better.
Now to start up a company to inspect the hulls, piping and structure of the ship while at sea. For reports as they come alongside. Mmmmmm Need a Quebec and or Nova Scotia address.

There is the occasional article in the MEJ, but there is a lot more being tried and used that doesn't make articles. It's done during the operational cycle as it's too late to do it in the DWP to plan the work, so once in a while they go onto the synchrolift for pre-docking surveys.

https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/dnd-mdn/documents/mej/44-088-maritimeJournal-109.pdf#page=9

Everyone on the ships, and people who regularly do work on the ships, but the photo of the hammer through the hull made it pretty hard for the BGHs to ignore that they are in really bad shape. That defect was actually found from NDT scanning with a little robot, then was verified by a DND SME.

 

[Czech_pivo]

There is the occasional article in the MEJ, but there is a lot more being tried and used that doesn't make articles. It's done during the operational cycle as it's too late to do it in the DWP to plan the work, so once in a while they go onto the synchrolift for pre-docking surveys.

https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/dnd-mdn/documents/mej/44-088-maritimeJournal-109.pdf#page=9

Everyone on the ships, and people who regularly do work on the ships, but the photo of the hammer through the hull made it pretty hard for the BGHs to ignore that they are in really bad shape. That defect was actually found from NDT scanning with a little robot, then was verified by a DND SME.

What is sad is that this sort of information is not picked up by the media and the opposition parties to hammering the government on ensuring that repairs are properly funded and accommodated.

 

[Kirkhill]

That works in some cases, but not when you need a certain level of skills to be going along with a platform.

The reduced crewing model on warships and subs actually demands either more individual skills, or acceptance that you're more likely to lose a multi billion dollar strategic asset by expediting your training.

We've already cut heavily into the baseline level of combat recoverability on the CPFs by not maintaining it a lot, as well as trimming training, getting rid of consolidation time, and generally having a lot less real experience in the crew (at the institutional level, not with the crew), we just pretend that stuff away (even when the ships are sailing below SOLAS standards, which you should legally meet to sail a cargo ship or fishing trawler, and has zero combat recoverability).

I'm sure if I poked into the army and air force would figure out the same thing, but at the end of the day sticking in the fight can matter a lot more than getting to the fight if you are just a glass cannon or target practice.

I am a big fan of the reduced crewing model. Not because I have anything against sailors but because it seems to me that all ships, merchant and naval, around the world are having difficulty recruiting sailors.

Having said that it makes no sense to me to try and reduce the crew in an old ship. The designers of those ships made a bunch of assumptions on materials, maintenance, access and a bunch of other stuff. One of those sets of assumptions would have related to crew size and skills.

Another would have been life expectancy.

And midlife refits are as likely to create problems as solve them. Lipstick and sow's ears and some such.

....

Ships with reduced crews need to be designed from the keel up with that in mind (first assumption - does it need a keel).

And if, regardless of efforts, smaller crews mean shorter ship lifes then we need to plan to replace the ship more often. And perhaps that means cheaper ships.

Perhaps that means treating the fighting systems as cargo that can be moved from ship to ship or that can be replaced with more modern or more relevant systems.

And that, to me, sounds like the direction of travel for modern ships.

Lego concepts, like Stanflex, Mission Bays and Meko, all seem to be inherent in the current builds.

....

The best thing Canada could do is get patrol ships in the water, regardless of fighting ability and speed up delivery of the Rivers so that the CPFs can be retired.

And modularize the old Hfx systems so that they can be cross decked to the patrol ships.

 

[YZT580]

What is sad is that this sort of information is not picked up by the media and the opposition parties to hammering the government on ensuring that repairs are properly funded and accommodated.

that would be treading on eggs as the opposition, and I write as a confirmed conservative, were just as complicit in limiting the budget for maintenance and avoiding necessary acquisitions.

 

[Czech_pivo]

that would be treading on eggs as the opposition, and I write as a confirmed conservative, were just as complicit in limiting the budget for maintenance and avoiding necessary acquisitions.

Both sets of ba$tards need to be held accountable.
The 30yrs of rot are squarely on both of them.

 

[PrairieFella]

Im betting GM will win LUV phase 1 with Milcot 2.0, Roshel will likely get phase 2 with the senator. Both would then be built in canada, be manufactured quickly, and if we buy at significant scale we can replace our crippled fleets fast

Exactly.

 

[Eaglelord17]

that would be treading on eggs as the opposition, and I write as a confirmed conservative, were just as complicit in limiting the budget for maintenance and avoiding necessary acquisitions.

Both sets of ba$tards need to be held accountable.
The 30yrs of rot are squarely on both of them.

Remember we haven't been at 2% GDP for defence since 1986. That 2% is supposed to be maintenance of a capable force, not the top end. You have to spend a lot more than 2% to get to the point that 2% is a worthy maintenance point.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Remember we haven't been at 2% GDP for defence since 1986. That 2% is supposed to be maintenance of a capable force, not the top end. You have to spend a lot more than 2% to get to the point that 2% is a worthy maintenance point.

True about 1986.
Have to wonder if Mulroney had pulled off us getting the nuc subs back in the early 1990s and the EH101 if things would have been any different.
I mean right off the bat we would not have had the entire Victoria class struggles and the current ongoing CH148 Cyclone issues.
Not saying that all would well, but those are 2 large millstones that we would have dodged.

 

[MilEME09]

True about 1986.
Have to wonder if Mulroney had pulled off us getting the nuc subs back in the early 1990s and the EH101 if things would have been any different.
I mean right off the bat we would not have had the entire Victoria class struggles and the current ongoing CH148 Cyclone issues.
Not saying that all would well, but those are 2 large millstones that we would have dodged.

We also wouldn't have the LAV3, his gov was working with the Germans and Karlheinz Schreiber on the TH-495 program. Which might of just happened if he stayed in power

 

[ytz]

Have to wonder if Mulroney had pulled off us getting the nuc subs back in the early 1990s and the EH101 if things would have been any different.

Doubtful. Don't forget the deficit and the fight to end it in the 90s. Defence was the easiest cut to make back then.

We're about to see who has the stomach to make the hard choice now. We need to fight the deficit like the 90s again. But defence is needed this time. The most obvious cut to make? OAS. Harper tried this. Trudeau reversed it. Without changes, OAS will be 3% of GDP by the end of the decade. It's the program that is basically swallowing the entire federal budget.

Or maybe they cut defence again. Who knows. Notice how even the supposedly pro-defence folks here don't want to give up their pogey, even with their pensions.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Doubtful. Don't forget the deficit and the fight to end it in the 90s. Defence was the easiest cut to make back then.

We're about to see who has the stomach to make the hard choice now. We need to fight the deficit like the 90s again. But defence is needed this time. The most obvious cut to make? OAS. Harper tried this. Trudeau reversed it. Without changes, OAS will be 3% of GDP by the end of the decade. It's the program that is basically swallowing the entire federal budget.

OAS kind of reminds me of the awards they now give out in sporting events in primary school - here’s an award for showing up, whether you put any effort into it or not.
OAS is like an award for sticking with Canada for 40yrs between your best earning years of 18-58 and not going somewhere else.

 

[Eaglelord17]

True about 1986.
Have to wonder if Mulroney had pulled off us getting the nuc subs back in the early 1990s and the EH101 if things would have been any different.
I mean right off the bat we would not have had the entire Victoria class struggles and the current ongoing CH148 Cyclone issues.
Not saying that all would well, but those are 2 large millstones that we would have dodged.

The Victoria class was a great buy, the issue wasn’t the subs themselves it is the fact we decided to not use them as supplied and instead modified them. If we had left them as is and not himmed and hawed for a while before buying they would have done much better than they did. That one is on us as a military.

 

[MilEME09]

The Victoria class was a great buy, the issue wasn’t the subs themselves it is the fact we decided to not use them as supplied and instead modified them. If we had left them as is and not himmed and hawed for a while before buying they would have done much better than they did. That one is on us as a military.

Part of the issue as well is the UK refused to pay for maintenance while the deal was being negotiated and up till we picked them up. So when we got them, they hadn't been maintained in awhile fron what I heard. Almost would of been safer to have had a super large transport them across the ocean

 

[ytz]

OAS kind of reminds me of the awards they now give out in sporting events in primary school - here’s an award for showing up, whether you put any effort into it or not.
OAS is like an award for sticking with Canada for 40yrs between your best earning years of 18-58 and not going somewhere else.

People whine about DEI and climate change initiatives. Whenever you're political opinion on those, they are pennies on the dollar compared to OAS. There's no way to fund the CAF, build the infrastructure needed for the 21st century, solve the housing and healthcare shortage and improve the fiscal standing when OAS is 3% of GDP. It's that simple.

I agree with not wanting seniors to live in poverty. I agree that women who stayed at home to raise kids shouldn't end up dependent on their husbands. That doesn't mean a blanket payment system where OAS doesn't even get scaled back till someone is over $80k per year. There are retired Colonels and Generals collecting OAS. It needs to be transformed into a minimum basic income program that ensures no senior is below the low income cut off for their area.

I give it about 10 posts before somebody responds that the real problem is the tens of thousands of public servants working on GBA+ or the tampons in men's bathrooms in federal buildings.

 

[Czech_pivo]

People whine about DEI and climate change initiatives. Whenever you're political opinion on those, they are pennies on the dollar compared to OAS. There's no way to fund the CAF, build the infrastructure needed for the 21st century, solve the housing and healthcare shortage and improve the fiscal standing when OAS is 3% of GDP. It's that simple.

I agree with not wanting seniors to live in poverty. I agree that women who stayed at home to raise kids shouldn't end up dependent on their husbands. That doesn't mean a blanket payment system where OAS doesn't even get scaled back till someone is over $80k per year. There are retired Colonels and Generals collecting OAS. It needs to be transformed into a minimum basic income program that ensures no senior is below the low income cut off for their area.

I give it about 10 posts before somebody responds that the real problem is the tens of thousands of public servants working on GBA+ or the tampons in men's bathrooms in federal buildings.

Sooner or later the ‘argument’ of stay at home Mom’s is no longer going to hold water.
With the average CDN family having less than 2 kids now, these Mom’s are working.

 

[MilEME09]

Sooner or later the ‘argument’ of stay at home Mom’s is no longer going to hold water.
With the average CDN family having less than 2 kids now, these Mom’s are working.

And maybe for them sure, I have three kids, and the math works out that atleast until my wife is done her schooling and gets a job in her field of study, if she worked it pretty much all would just go to child care programs. It just isnt worth it for larger families.

 

[Brad Sallows]

I give it about 10 posts before somebody responds that the real problem is the tens of thousands of public servants working on GBA+ or the tampons in men's bathrooms in federal buildings.

Why wait that long? It's not THE problem, but it's A problem.

All frivolous expenditures ought to be ended AND all transfers to individuals ought to be more strictly means-tested.