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

[FJAG]

If you are cycling your trucks on 10 yrs are you even looking at the engine? I turned my trucks over on 10 yrs stretching to 15 when times were tougher and can only remember working on one truck engine. This was before DEF though

I'm the same way. I'm not one of those new car each year types and plan on my cars for ten years at which point they are still useable - then again I'm not an 18-year-old gunner slamming around the ranges anymore.

What I meant is that if you design a vehicle line to run ten or twenty years then 200 vehicles built in 2026 might have a different engine and related parts than the same truck coming off the line in 2033 because that original 2026 engine isn't being built anymore. You'll have the same chassis but it will have to compensate for engine mounts, a transmission and drive train connection that might be different.

It's not insurmountable but it can lead to a spare parts issue downstream for the older vehicles.

Notwithstanding that, I think that is the only way to go for our vehicle fleets. We need long run, low rate production lines that stay open indefinitely, if necessary as crown corporations or arsenals.

 

[Kirkhill]

Seems like Ukraine is going to get into the international hybrid game seriously..

Ukraine to Develop Foreign Intelligence Service Combat Units for Operations Abroad - Militarnyi

Ukraine will develop units of the Foreign Intelligence Service to carry out operations necessary to protect the country's interests abroad.

militarnyi.com

....

Russian Tanker Carrying 730,000 Barrels Of Oil Drifts Out Of Control In Mediterranean

Marine Insight - The maritime industry guide.

www.marineinsight.com

Same general vicinity as this one the Ukraine claimed in December

Ukraine Strikes Russia’s ‘Shadow Fleet’ Tanker in Mediterranean

Latest Developments First Claimed Strike in International Waters: Ukraine’s SBU intelligence service claimed that Ukrainian drones struck and critically damaged a Russian “shadow fleet” oil tanker...

www.fdd.org

.....

Does Canada need its own "little green men"?

 

[Kirkhill]

New projects bring German 2025 military-equipment spending near $40bn

The Dec. 3 approval includes an expansion of the Bundeswehr’s G95 assault rifle order, additional Joint Strike Missile purchases and new AI systems.

www.defensenews.com

Germany Sets Out $438B Defense Shopping List: Report

Germany has outlined plans for $438 billion in defense acquisitions, according to internal government documents.

thedefensepost.com

Breaking News: Germany negotiates to acquire up to 7,000 combat vehicles from Rheinmetall in historic land forces expansion

Breaking News: Germany negotiates to acquire up to 7,000 combat vehicles from Rheinmetall in historic land forces expansion

armyrecognition.com

Germany’s parliamentary budget committee has approved 11 major defense procurement projects worth more than €2.5 billion ($3 billion), bringing the country’s tally on equipment spending for 2025 to over €33 billion across 73 major projects.

More....faster.

 

[Kirkhill]

This could have gone into the GBAD file but Golden Dome, IAMD seems to be likely to be a bigger issue in the overall defence plan.

Golden Dome is forcing the Pentagon to confront missile defense economics

Golden Dome is forcing the Pentagon to confront missile defense economics Golden Dome is forcing the Pentagon to confront missile defense economics

spacenews.com

“We have the most exquisite capabilities on the planet, with a high probability of kill. They do not miss but they take forever to build. They’re exceptionally expensive, and as a result, I have very small magazine depths, because the cost per kill is so high,” said Guetlein. “I have to flip that equation.”

The “cost per kill” has to come down, said Guetlein.

Current U.S. missile defense interceptors, which were designed for regional or limited homeland defense missions, cost millions of dollars apiece and are used to defeat much lower-cost weapons. Analysts have pointed out that this imbalance invites adversaries to overwhelm defenses through volume.

 

[FJAG]

Germany’s parliamentary budget committee has approved 11 major defense procurement projects worth more than €2.5 billion ($3 billion), bringing the country’s tally on equipment spending for 2025 to over €33 billion across 73 major projects.

More....faster.

It's nice when your navy expenditures can be modest.

 

[Kirkhill]

It's nice when your navy expenditures can be modest.

Overall German defense shopping list - 438 Billion US Dollars

Germany Sets Out $438B Defense Shopping List: Report

Germany has outlined plans for $438 billion in defense acquisitions, according to internal government documents.

thedefensepost.com

 

[Kirkhill]

Norway's Defence Pledge

The Norwegian Defence Pledge

Government.no is to give the general public understanding of the work of the government and the ministries, and to encourage involvement in democratic processes.

www.regjeringen.no

And here is the 2023-2030 Aquisition Plan

https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/595f6354301a4d7b9d63ef1c8e486482/faf-2023-2030-engelsk-versjon.pdf

 

[FJAG]

Overall German defense shopping list - 438 Billion US Dollars

Germany Sets Out $438B Defense Shopping List: Report

Germany has outlined plans for $438 billion in defense acquisitions, according to internal government documents.

thedefensepost.com

The IRIS-T and Skyranger purchases interest me. Typhon is also quite interesting. To the best of my knowledge the US is only planning on five of those for the presence - one per MDTF. - ground launched Tomahawks?

 

[Kirkhill]

The IRIS-T and Skyranger purchases interest me. Typhon is also quite interesting. To the best of my knowledge the US is only planning on five of those for the presence - one per MDTF. - ground launched Tomahawks?

Apparently 400 Vbs JMEWs (Joint Mult Effect Weapon for fixed structures and fortifications at 2000 km)
If they got the Vas MST then they could take out ships at similar ranges. That would go a long way to closing off the Baltic to surface traffic all on its own.

The JMEWS would reduce the IDS load on the Air Force as well.

PS Dresden to Nizhny Novgorod, overflying Moscow, is 2000 km.

 

[FJAG]

Apparently 400 Vbs JMEWs (Joint Mult Effect Weapon for fixed structures and fortifications at 2000 km)
If they got the Vas MST then they could take out ships at similar ranges. That would go a long way to closing off the Baltic to surface traffic all on its own.

The JMEWS would reduce the IDS load on the Air Force as well.

PS Dresden to Nizhny Novgorod, overflying Moscow, is 2000 km.

I've been pondering an issue. Typhon has a 4-cell Mk 41 VLS which has been tested with the SM-6 as well as Tomahawk. SM-6 is dual purpose - surface to surface and surface to air including terminal ballistic missile. The SM-3 works with the Mk 41 as well but to the best of my knowledge hasn't been tested with Typhon. SM-3's got more range but need a good system behind it like Aegis.

 

[suffolkowner]

I'm the same way. I'm not one of those new car each year types and plan on my cars for ten years at which point they are still useable - then again I'm not an 18-year-old gunner slamming around the ranges anymore.

What I meant is that if you design a vehicle line to run ten or twenty years then 200 vehicles built in 2026 might have a different engine and related parts than the same truck coming off the line in 2033 because that original 2026 engine isn't being built anymore. You'll have the same chassis but it will have to compensate for engine mounts, a transmission and drive train connection that might be different.

It's not insurmountable but it can lead to a spare parts issue downstream for the older vehicles.

Notwithstanding that, I think that is the only way to go for our vehicle fleets. We need long run, low rate production lines that stay open indefinitely, if necessary as crown corporations or arsenals.

you can minimize the disruptions by by buying the equipment in lots by type. In this case your light, medium, and heavy fleets. I never found that the trucks were that different. The new stuff is mostly cosmetics. Although its possible we are on the verge of bigger things powertrain wise

 

[Eaglelord17]

In my opinion what needs to happen is first of all a change in the terms of service respecting primary reserve service. I would propose three classes of service "M - mandatory, V - voluntary and C - operational"

Mandatory would be limited by regulation to the completion of DP1 training of two two-month summers (July and August) and a winter session of 10 x 2.5 day weekends (Fri evening to Sunday evening) from September to June. Once DP 1 is completed Class M training is limited to the ten weekends and a 16.5 day summer exercise in August (again Friday evening to Sunday evening) for 41.5 days annually for unit collective training. Schedules for that would need to be posted a year in advance so that proper arrangements with one's employer and family can be made. Units would not be allowed to increase Class M training beyond 41.5 days nor deviate from the schedule. This would be fully funded. Additional voluntary training would also be available for other courses and duties for those who want it.

Individuals would enroll for a set period of years - sufficient to complete DP1 training as well as a minimum of two or three years of obligatory service to pay the government back for the money and effort spent on their training. Thereafter re-enlistment bonuses would be offered for additional terms of obligatory service. No voluntary release is available during this time frame.

S 294 would be removed and s 60(1)(c) would be changed so that any period of Class M training is subject to the CSD so that missing it is subject to a charge under s 90(1) AWOL, in the case of major or multiple or repeat occurrences or as a service infraction under QR&O 120.03(f)

You lose me at the mandatory service portion. You have basically offered the worlds worst part time job.

Being unable to VR and forced to stay in a part time job which would likely kill any full time job opportunities isn’t a attractive feature. This will not lead to good troops, rather the opposite. Most employers will not take on Reservists if that was the case, your basically condemning them to a purgatory.

Reg force contracts make sense because they are providing full time employment (and even then you can still VR before the end of the contract). Reservist contracts would not as 41.5 days a year is nothing to live off of.

If you make a good system people will stay voluntarily. Turnover is to be expected. But expecting Reg force commitment without Reg force benefits doesn’t make sense.

Civilian employers face the same issues with cost of training, however if you can’t retain them voluntarily they leave and you eat the cost. That is the reality of business.

 

[PrairieFella]

Honestly if it was upto me I'd ditch them and sole source GD to add the 6x6 medium platform to LVM. This would then mean our main 3 logistics platforms would all have the similar chassis, 80% parts commonality, and similar training. In the long run it would save the CAF time and money.

Do you even need the retooling? Unimogs do just fine globally as 4x4, LVM might be completely sufficient as a modern Deuce/MLVW.

 

[Kirkhill]

Do you even need the retooling? Unimogs do just fine globally as 4x4, LVM might be completely sufficient as a modern Deuce/MLVW.

The 4x4 LVM for 80% of the situations.

The BvS10 for the other 20% of unarmoured requirements, although at 5 to 8 tonne payload it falls into to MSVS range.

 

[Maxman1]

Do you even need the retooling? Unimogs do just fine globally as 4x4, LVM might be completely sufficient as a modern Deuce/MLVW.

The LVM picks are good for MLVW and HLVW replacements, but we'll still need an MSVS replacement in the 5 to 8 ton range. The Unimog would be great to replace the LSVW.

 

[PrairieFella]

The LVM picks are good for MLVW and HLVW replacements, but we'll still need an MSVS replacement in the 5 to 8 ton range. The Unimog would be great to replace the LSVW.

Fair enough. Something the reserves is severely lacking on the logistics side are A1/A2 ech trucks. MSVS Milcots is generally fine as a cargo but we need desperately need everything else. Fuellers, LHS, HIAB, etc. An LVM fuel pod and LVM LHS for ammo would be a godsend to reserve armour units.

 

[FJAG]

You lose me at the mandatory service portion. You have basically offered the worlds worst part time job.

Being unable to VR and forced to stay in a part time job which would likely kill any full time job opportunities isn’t a attractive feature. This will not lead to good troops, rather the opposite. Most employers will not take on Reservists if that was the case, your basically condemning them to a purgatory.

Reg force contracts make sense because they are providing full time employment (and even then you can still VR before the end of the contract). Reservist contracts would not as 41.5 days a year is nothing to live off of.

If you make a good system people will stay voluntarily. Turnover is to be expected. But expecting Reg force commitment without Reg force benefits doesn’t make sense.

Civilian employers face the same issues with cost of training, however if you can’t retain them voluntarily they leave and you eat the cost. That is the reality of business.

And that attitude pervades the higher ups way of thinking and that's why the army reserve has never amounted to anything since the 1950s and never will.