• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

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

I’m curious about the 26 number.
3x8 Batteries, 1 Ref gun and 1 OpStock?

Or 3x6 Batteries with 8 to be split to schools etc?

So CDN Div Arty is back being a player, after a multi decade break.
I have no inside knowledge, but the 26 number looks to me like 3 x 6 batteries; 6 to the RCAS; 1 to RCEME School ; 1 as Tech Ref.
 
I have no inside knowledge, but the 26 number looks to me like 3 x 6 batteries; 6 to the RCAS; 1 to RCEME School ; 1 as Tech Ref.
Honestly, I think having any at the school is a waste of resources. I see a single 18 launcher regiment and six preposition in Latvia with 2 for RCEME and tech reference. What use are launchers at the school if only one regiment has them. The school could have a mini-det (an IG and AIG) in Shilo for training and doctrine development.

🍻
 
Honestly, I think having any at the school is a waste of resources. I see a single 18 launcher regiment and six preposition in Latvia with 2 for RCEME and tech reference. What use are launchers at the school if only one regiment has them. The school could have a mini-det (an IG and AIG) in Shilo for training and doctrine development.

🍻
Who are we going to HIMARS in Canada? Shouldn’t most of them be in Latvia with only a few back in Canada for training?
 
Also, looking at that ammo order it’s what? About 10 minutes of firing for 18 units?
I don’t know if this is valid, but my guess is that if we’re firing HIMARS war shots, odds are we’re all the way into a bad scenario and NATO’s mutually providing munitions from any and all stocks?
 
Who are we going to HIMARS in Canada? Shouldn’t most of them be in Latvia with only a few back in Canada for training?
We're not the only HIMARS users there. HIMARS is a div level system. Currently we only have a rump brigade in Latvia so six launchers to add to the pool is adequate.

🍻
 
Honestly, I think having any at the school is a waste of resources. I see a single 18 launcher regiment and six preposition in Latvia with 2 for RCEME and tech reference. What use are launchers at the school if only one regiment has them. The school could have a mini-det (an IG and AIG) in Shilo for training and doctrine development.

🍻
That works for me, too.
 
That works for me, too.
Honestly, If I had my druthers, I'd want 38 launchers in total.

I'd use two for RCEME and reference.

I'd have one regiment with 18 launchers in the manoeuvre div. I'd give it two RegF batteries and 12 launchers in Canada (Sat Shilo) with two additional ARes batteries (10 Fd Regina and 26 Fd Brandon) to train on the Shilo equipment. The remaining six launcher I'd preposition in Latvia with a troop rotating through on six month rotos with the other troop a surge flyover.

I'd have a second regiment of 18 launchers with the DoC div and equipped with advanced anti-ship PrSMs. I'd put a battery of six on each coast with a troop of RegF each and at least one battery of ARes each (15 Fd Vanc and 3 Fd Regt St John). Their roles are A2AD of the eastern and western passages in a joint TF in conjunction with the RCN and RCAF. The last six launchers I'd put into Petawawa with a RegF troop and an ARes battery (42 Fd Pembroke) Their role too would be A2AD as part of a quick reaction force for the north, in conjunction with the RegF light regiment/CSOR in Pet. These batteries would also provide peacetime rotations to Latvia (as required) and, to an extent, make up pers and equip loses in Latvia if and when Shilo's resources are exhausted.

If I were King.

🍻
 
I'd have a second regiment of 18 launchers with the DoC div and equipped with advanced anti-ship PrSMs. I'd put a battery of six on each coast with a troop of RegF each and at least one battery of ARes each (15 Fd Vanc and 3 Fd Regt St John). Their roles are A2AD of the eastern and western passages in a joint TF in conjunction with the RCN and RCAF.

Out of curiosity, why would this be something we’d use army artillery for versus air launched ASM?
 
Out of curiosity, why would this be something we’d use army artillery for versus air launched ASM?
Not versus - in addition to. Airplanes frequently do not fly or need a long time to get on station. Ships frequently have to be elsewhere and we have darn few of them. This is a relatively persistent capability that can react at any time in any weather.

For over a half a century we have stopped thinking of coastal defence and of air defence of coastal defence infrastructure and key industrial facilities. It's not a sexy enough mission for the RegF to get excited about until its too late.

🍻
 
I don’t know if this is valid, but my guess is that if we’re firing HIMARS war shots, odds are we’re all the way into a bad scenario and NATO’s mutually providing munitions from any and all stocks?
Are we contributing to those stocks? Or are we relying on others to supply the ammo and the replacement launchers?

Also, wrt DoC, although we didn't buy any PrSM missiles, those missiles are being developed for anti-ship roles and their range is being lengthened to 1500 km by 2027 or so.
 

Canada announces Defence Investment Agency to manage purchase, delivery of military equipment​

Agency mandated to work more closely with allies including U.K., Australia and France​


The new organization will be expected to consolidate procurement processes by removing duplicative approvals and red tape. It is also intended to provide the defence industry with greater clarity and certainty on the government's plans.

Significantly, the new agency will have a mandate to work "more closely with partners such as the United Kingdom, Australia and France, who already have dedicated procurement bodies, making joint defence purchases and partnerships easier and more efficient."
 

Canada announces Defence Investment Agency to manage purchase, delivery of military equipment​

Agency mandated to work more closely with allies including U.K., Australia and France​


The new organization will be expected to consolidate procurement processes by removing duplicative approvals and red tape. It is also intended to provide the defence industry with greater clarity and certainty on the government's plans.

Significantly, the new agency will have a mandate to work "more closely with partners such as the United Kingdom, Australia and France, who already have dedicated procurement bodies, making joint defence purchases and partnerships easier and more efficient."

I hope this works, but I suspect it's just different bureaucracy.
 
Back
Top