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

[daftandbarmy]

I initially agreed with this but in hindsight, no, that's bullshit. Clearly, not literally everyone needs it, but basic load carriage and sleeping gear should be available to most/all members if for nothing else than dom ops, or being tasked out last minute for something where you may not be staying in proper accommodations. These are such cheap and durable items it's easy to ensure everyone has it available.

I've also experienced nothing but stock shortages for 20 years. I did my basic in 2005 with my pockets stuffed full of magazines, canteen, odds and sods, bayonet part of the time (partway through course, after the bayonet scabbard ate through a couple cargo pockets I was permitted to leave my bayonet in the barracks box). Other members on that course were likewise missing load carriage kit (webbing or tac vest), rucksacks, sleeping bags, boots even though they did some issues shortly after.

We were running courses with temp issue sleeping gear and load carriage ten years ago consistently, it's only gotten worse. While members holding kit they shouldn't is doubtless part of the problem, it's one that we've had a decade to address. We've disposed of enough old equipment that half the time the solution has been members buying surplus rucksacks for themselves or more senior members loaning out theirs, which is fine for one off situations but not as a matter of routine. This is some of the lowest hanging fruit, and we've consistently dropped the ball on it both from an equipment management standpoint (why is kit not being collected upon transfer out of field units if that's what we're doing, it's not like we haven't had shortages forever) and never buying/retaining enough. During COVID we had most of two courses worth of DP1 candidates given 13 broken 82 pattern rucks to share, we cannibalized like 5 working ones and a sixth that was kinda dangerous due to metal pokey bits but a staff member taped it up and rolled with it. Probably half? the troops didn't have sleeping kit, for the nights the temps dropped they slept in rain or ICE gear. Interesting intro to the infantry but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a sleeping bag for the garrison portion.

Either just buy a bunch for right now until we sort out the permanent solution, or make some funding available for members or units to make some purchases to patch things over.

I’ll assume we could adopt more modern resource management processes where the people who don’t n ed ‘stuff’ right now don’t get it until they do.

E.g., Right before I retired ‘they’ made me get a fitted out ballistic vest. I never wore it and handed it back within 6 months of issue.

 

[Good2Golf]

We cancelled the Avro Arrow, signed up for Bomarc, American fighters and radar lines and got access to the US market, protection from invaders and an Autopact.

That’s a take. You’re welcome to keep it.

My dad was in aerospace engineering. There was an unquestionable American presence throughout Canadian aerospace academic and production, surveying/reconnoitering (American astronaut Gus Grissom attended several of my dad’s PhD classes at UofT as an example), influencing and pressuring Canadian talent towards an America nexus. Colleagues of my dad moved to the U.S. in droves following Arrow’s cancellation. Friends at Orenda working on the Iroquois becoming senior engineers at Pratt on the J58 program (for the SR-71). Other friends emigrating and working on Gemini, Mercury and Apollo, Other leaving Avro and off to McDonnell, North American, Convair. Your view is that Canada chose to hobble its own aerospace capacity and America was its saviour with Bomarcs, Voodoos and the like. Some, quite reasonably informed, know it was a deliberate act of interference and deliberate action by America to debilitate another nation’s capability and capture the stranded talent to its own benefit. Sorry, you won’t change my mind.

 

[Furniture]

Pay raises and new barracks increase the budget. Taking on responsibility for veterans pensions likewise.

Those funds, as the article title says, don't stop missiles.

Nor do they put bullets in rifles or rifles in hands. In those areas we are slow off the mark.

True, but they keep experienced people around so they can train new people, and they keep the staff in uniform long enough to get projects rolling so we can stop missiles and put rifles in the new troops hands.

 

[Kirkhill]

That’s a take. You’re welcome to keep it.

My dad was in aerospace engineering. There was an unquestionable American presence throughout Canadian aerospace academic and production, surveying/reconnoitering (American astronaut Gus Grissom attended several of my dad’s PhD classes at UofT as an example), influencing and pressuring Canadian talent towards an America nexus. Colleagues of my dad moved to the U.S. in droves following Arrow’s cancellation. Friends at Orenda working on the Iroquois becoming senior engineers at Pratt on the J58 program (for the SR-71). Other friends emigrating and working on Gemini, Mercury and Apollo, Other leaving Avro and off to McDonnell, North American, Convair. Your view is that Canada chose to hobble its own aerospace capacity and America was its saviour with Bomarcs, Voodoos and the like. Some, quite reasonably informed, know it was a deliberate act of interference and deliberate action by America to debilitate another nation’s capability and capture the stranded talent to its own benefit. Sorry, you won’t change my mind.

Not a saviour. Unless you see the Corleones as saviours.

Strictly business. The Yanks came out of the Depression and decided that war was good business. It wasn't just Avro Canada they targeted. The TSR2 was another casualty.

I like Americans and America but they epitomise the observation that nations have no friends, just interests.

Too many Canadians forgot that and failed to rely on themselves.

 

[Good2Golf]

Not a saviour. Unless you see the Corleones as saviours.

Strictly business. The Yanks came out of the Depression and decided that war was good business. It wasn't just Avro Canada they targeted. The TSR2 was another casualty.

I like Americans and America but they epitomise the observation that nations have no friends, just interests.

Too many Canadians forgot that and failed to rely on themselves.

This is a totally different time than your previous post. If Canada should be blamed for anything, it is trusting America, or at least believing they wouldn’t be ‘America’s interests’ed again in the free trade era after the ‘neighborly technological and human skills’ pillaging of the 50s/60s. That Canada is now appreciating a GWesque awakening about America looking out only for America, is not something that should be held against it now…

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

E.g., Right before I retired ‘they’ made me get a fitted out ballistic vest. I never wore it and handed it back within 6 months of issue.

But there is also this counterpoint:

 

[ueo]

True, but they keep experienced people around so they can train new people, and they keep the staff in uniform long enough to get projects rolling so we can stop missiles and put rifles in the new troops hands.

Sorry I'm old. How's the govt dealing with Vets and associated pensions?

 

[Kirkhill]

This is a totally different time than your previous post. If Canada should be blamed for anything, it is trusting America, or at least believing they wouldn’t be ‘America’s interests’ed again in the free trade era after the ‘neighborly technological and human skills’ pillaging of the 50s/60s. That Canada is now appreciating a GWesque awakening about America looking out only for America, is not something that should be held against it now…
View attachment 100421

And I am not holding anything against Canada or Canadians. I do think we have got it wrong for a long time. And I am hoping this awakening lasts.

 

[Kirkhill]

"the supply chain challenge ... the pace of change in defence procurement was accelerating. “The expectations are changing rapidly. We need to deliver faster, we need to deliver better, and we need to deliver more cost-effectively, all while maintaining the same uncompromising standards of quality. Lead times that were once measured in months or even years need to be measured in weeks.”

BAE Systems sets out how SMEs can break into defence

BAE Systems told Scottish SMEs at #DPRTE that much of the cost of a warship flows through the supply chain, as the company set out exactly how smaller firms can get involved. #SDS26

ukdefencejournal.org.uk

"a real opportunity for SMEs able to move at pace."

"specific areas where BAE Systems Naval Ships was actively seeking SME support, including marine autonomy, modularity, DevOps, complement platform evaluation, process and analysis, commodities, and advanced tools and coatings. “These are the areas that we’re asking for assistance for now and today. If you have any interest or expertise in these areas, I’d be great to speak to you after this.”"

But, if you want to get onboard....

"the baseline compliance requirements any supplier needed to meet. ISO 9001 quality accreditation was non-negotiable, flowing down from BAE Systems’ own customer requirements. Public and product liability insurance of £10 million was the standard expectation, though lower levels could be considered on a case by case basis for smaller companies that struggled to obtain cover above £5 million. Counterfeit avoidance, cyber security to DEFSTAN 05-138, a robust business continuity plan, and full compliance with the Health and Safety at Work Act were all cited as requirements. Export control compliance was also flagged as essential given the nature of defence work."

....

"The first step for any company wanting to work with BAE Systems, Justice said, was to use the company’s SME supplier landing page rather than attempting to contact individuals directly. “If you’re not an approved supplier, we cannot contract you. It’s as simple as that. I might love your product, I might go, I want that — if you’re not an approved supplier, I cannot release a contract.” He said he received at least two or three unsolicited calls a week from companies trying to reach him directly, and that going through the proper route gave companies the best chance of being seen and assessed properly.

"The quality of the initial approach mattered significantly, he said. “Be specific, avoid generic statements. Try and understand what we do. Don’t just tell us you want to work with BAE Systems, tell us which part of the business. More importantly, why? Take time to understand where your capabilities genuinely align, where you fit within the supply chain, what value you can bring.” He added that opportunities existed at every level, from nuts and bolts through to gas turbines and gearboxes, and that companies should be clear about where they sat in that ecosystem."

....

I presume a lot of Canadian companies are trying to figure their way through similar, if not the same systems, and not just in navy oriented solutions. Especially given that BAE strides all domains on both sides of the Atlantic. Rheinmetall, LockMart and General Dynamics, and Hanwha will all be looking at the same situation.

 

[YZT580]

"the supply chain challenge ... the pace of change in defence procurement was accelerating. “The expectations are changing rapidly. We need to deliver faster, we need to deliver better, and we need to deliver more cost-effectively, all while maintaining the same uncompromising standards of quality. Lead times that were once measured in months or even years need to be measured in weeks.”


[

Funny you should mention this. A little historical note: it took the British 6 years to construct, launch, and fit out HMS Victory. The shipyards in Kingston using local carpenters, smiths and labourers finished HMS. St. Lawrence in 10 months and she was larger in every aspect. The Americans built the first liberty ship in just 150 days whilst a ship yard in Oregon built one in under 5 days using farmers, housewives and secretaries as a labour force. Granted there is no comparison between ships then and now but it is that kind of emphasis on product we need if we are ever going to finish playing catch-up. We are decades behind.

 

[dapaterson]

They assembled the ship in five days.

Do not underestimate the supply chain necessary to get the machinery and tooling in place needed to let the Lego blocks be assembled in five days.

 

[Kirkhill]

This is precisely the reason for the interest in simple vessels with modular cargoes/weapons. With or without autonomy.

I believe that part of the reason the MCDVs were so popular with the Admirals was that they had higher readiness and that came from having less stuff on board to break down.

Looking at our fleet and our allies fleets it strikes me that Patrol Boats have higher readiness ratings than Destroyers. There is less to go wrong. The same thing applies to OPVs vs Frigates.

So how do you build a simple OPV and make it fighting ship like a Frigate and maintain high readiness. One method is to take all the stuff that is constantly breaking and put it into a module that can be swayed on to the dock like a malfunctioning RHIB and bring another on board. The Kingtons used Seacans. The Brits are using PODS. The Danes used Stanflex modules.

Concurrently you can aspire to make driving a boat as simple as driving a car. Most drivers haven't a clue about their magic carpet. They just get in, turn it on and use it to get it where they want to be. I would like to see autonomy bring that level of ease to piloting an OSV onto which Seacans with cargoes, sensors, weapons, and when necessary, additional qualified crew can be loaded.

...

Ships need to be able to go to sea safely with 80% solutions if the 100% isn't available.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Sorry I'm old. How's the govt dealing with Vets and associated pensions?

I have had way better service from Veteran Affairs, than the ClusterF*ck that is ESDC and OAS. I elected not to get OAS till 70 and after a year of badgering them to stop it, they still can't and now we got CRA involved and soon a letter to two Ministers and a MP to tell them to unf*ck themselves. Just to add my wife as someone who can deal with my file will take them 180 days upon receipt of the official form.

 

[foresterab]

That’s a take. You’re welcome to keep it.

My dad was in aerospace engineering. There was an unquestionable American presence throughout Canadian aerospace academic and production, surveying/reconnoitering (American astronaut Gus Grissom attended several of my dad’s PhD classes at UofT as an example), influencing and pressuring Canadian talent towards an America nexus. Colleagues of my dad moved to the U.S. in droves following Arrow’s cancellation. Friends at Orenda working on the Iroquois becoming senior engineers at Pratt on the J58 program (for the SR-71). Other friends emigrating and working on Gemini, Mercury and Apollo, Other leaving Avro and off to McDonnell, North American, Convair. Your view is that Canada chose to hobble its own aerospace capacity and America was its saviour with Bomarcs, Voodoos and the like. Some, quite reasonably informed, know it was a deliberate act of interference and deliberate action by America to debilitate another nation’s capability and capture the stranded talent to its own benefit. Sorry, you won’t change my mind.

Grandparents used to talk about the day the Avro was cancelled. They couldn't pick up the Canadian radio stations due to the American stations overpowering them all and a large majority of it was job ads offering immediate starts for any of the American aerospace companies.

 

[Brad Sallows]

They assembled the ship in five days.

Do not underestimate the supply chain necessary to get the machinery and tooling in place needed to let the Lego blocks be assembled in five days.

Also do not underestimate the importance of deliberate simplicity, pre-war industrial planning, delegation of authority to "make things happen" to private captains of industry, focus on a few proven systems, etc. The factors which account for the war production differences between the US, Germany, Russia, and Japan aren't hard to pin down.

 

[YZT580]

They assembled the ship in five days.

Do not underestimate the supply chain necessary to get the machinery and tooling in place needed to let the Lego blocks be assembled in five days.

I don't. But consider that the first one built in America was less than a year from initiation to completion. But it isn't so much the time required to put it all together as the drive to get it all together with no excuses.

 

[KevinB]

That’s a take. You’re welcome to keep it.

My dad was in aerospace engineering. There was an unquestionable American presence throughout Canadian aerospace academic and production, surveying/reconnoitering (American astronaut Gus Grissom attended several of my dad’s PhD classes at UofT as an example), influencing and pressuring Canadian talent towards an America nexus. Colleagues of my dad moved to the U.S. in droves following Arrow’s cancellation. Friends at Orenda working on the Iroquois becoming senior engineers at Pratt on the J58 program (for the SR-71). Other friends emigrating and working on Gemini, Mercury and Apollo, Other leaving Avro and off to McDonnell, North American, Convair. Your view is that Canada chose to hobble its own aerospace capacity and America was its saviour with Bomarcs, Voodoos and the like. Some, quite reasonably informed, know it was a deliberate act of interference and deliberate action by America to debilitate another nation’s capability and capture the stranded talent to its own benefit. Sorry, you won’t change my mind.

The Arrow is an interesting piece of the puzzle. But even the most staunch defender of the program has to admit there where a lot of ‘fitted for not with’ aspects to the Arrow that tend to get glossed over.

Canada made a decision at that time to hobble itself. Rather than either invest into the radar and fire control needed for it - or encourage a JV with an American partner like Raytheon to work the side of things Canada didn’t have for it.

Looking back in time, it is a fairly Canadian tragedy that basically sold out the defense sector to America. There is a lot of he said she said about pressures applied to the Avro Arrow cancellation, of which I have no doubt occurred — but the end of the day aspect is it was not a viable platform in a sole Canadian environment.

Canada to had three options, and honestly chose the worst IMHO.

COA 1: Dump a pile of GoC effort and money into radar, missiles and fire control for the Arrow. All of which had little domestic infrastructure at the time, and a relatively high risk for the program.

COA 2: Stand up a true North American consortium to deliver the entire program.

COA 3: Fold the tent and take an American umbrella.

COA 3 was picked, and as one can see the brain drain that occurred in those fields.

To me as I said above I think that was the worse option available, and I think COA 1 was the riskiest, and given the situation likely to be a dry hole with immense economic investment for zero return. It may have resulted in an Airframe that was either not viable - or required a huge American effort resulting in loss of control. I believe it would have been however preferable in hindsight than the fold the tent.

I try to be a realist in my looking back as a CAN/AM dual citizen. I think had Canada pushed the COA 2 that the relationship between both Canada and America would be vastly different and much more of a partnership that what it has unfortunately become.

My lenses have colored a bit recently as an American tax payer, as well as a former CAF member. For years the CAF was neglected by Canada (not just the GoC) that neglect also drained in Defence Infrastructure.

@Good2Golf when one talked about the US Defense Budget and how much goes to NATO, I know you are annoyed at America currently (and our current Administration certainly deserves a lot of anger). One need to understand that what placing an American soldier in Europe does. While POTUS and his clowns may talk about leaving (and have a history of poor decisions) Congress decides what really occurs in DoD, and as long as one American soldier sits in Europe it means that the entire weight of the US Military might will rein fire and brimstone on anyone that fucks with that.

Historically we have a bad habit of showing up late - those forward deployed troops ensure that we won’t do that again.

 

[Underway]

Cheap, fast, good. You can have two of the above.

Liberty ships were the first two. They were disposable. Many barely survived their first voyages due to shoddy workmanship. They took a ton of risks in building them. Their life cycle was expected to be 5 years max before the breakers yard. That's a blink of an eye for a ship. But they were built for an attrition war. They were the right tool at the right time.

If the government today were to do the equivalent of Liberty Ships for projects, many of the same people above who are swooning over their amazingness would be screaming about crappy gov't contracting or corruption. You at least wouldn't need a maintenance contract as essentially all our armoured vehicles would be disposable.

The current problem is we need to get out of the slow, expensive and adequate lane. CPSP is an example to point to where we up until now have demonstrated the correct speed, and quality. CANSOF is another place where things move quickly.

 

[FJAG]

This is a totally different time than your previous post. If Canada should be blamed for anything, it is trusting America, or at least believing they wouldn’t be ‘America’s interests’ed again in the free trade era after the ‘neighborly technological and human skills’ pillaging of the 50s/60s. That Canada is now appreciating a GWesque awakening about America looking out only for America, is not something that should be held against it now…
View attachment 100421

There's a difference in trusting America and America acting in its own self interest.

I think we all knew that America would always work to promote its own self interest. Concurrently, though, we trusted that America always knew and respected the fact that its own self interest relied on, or at least included, a solid understanding that for the most part it needed to rely on partners, allies and cordial relationships. America exerted pressure, but, for the most part, did so in ways that preserved those relationships. In the defence sphere, Mattis's 2018 National Defence Strategy on behalf of Trump included three priorities the second of which was to "strengthen alliances and attract new partners." Compare that to the current NDS which creates a Trump Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine promising to "restore American military dominance in the Western Hemisphere." I think one can conclude that the current administration has a much different - and IMHO twisted - view of how to effect what is in America's self interest than past ones.

Grandparents used to talk about the day the Avro was cancelled. They couldn't pick up the Canadian radio stations due to the American stations overpowering them all and a large majority of it was job ads offering immediate starts for any of the American aerospace companies.

I think that's an urban myth. I grew up in Toronto at that time. There was one TV station in Buffalo whose signal made it across the lake (WKBW an ABC station) and only a few weak radio stations. Toronto's communication channels were dominated by its single CBC station (CBLT) and a few AM radio stations (CHUM and CKEY). In most of Canada no over-the-air US signals reached them until much, much later.

About the only thing that stood out from WKBW was the extraordinary number of housefires each day in Buffalo at the time (tarpaper covered wooden houses burn fiercely).

It's true though that the aerospace industry was booming in the US, both civil and defence. Canada wasn't a slouch though. Canadair built over 1,800 CL-13/F-86 Sabre jets and 200 CF-104 Starfighters and even 240 CF-5/CF-116 Freedom Fighters albeit these were under licence from their American parent companies.

 

[KevinB]

Cheap, fast, good. You can have two of the above.

Liberty ships were the first two. They were disposable. Many barely survived their first voyages due to shoddy workmanship. They took a ton of risks in building them. Their life cycle was expected to be 5 years max before the breakers yard. That's a blink of an eye for a ship. But they were built for an attrition war. They were the right tool at the right time.

If the government today were to do the equivalent of Liberty Ships for projects, many of the same people above who are swooning over their amazingness would be screaming about crappy gov't contracting or corruption. You at least wouldn't need a maintenance contract as essentially all our armoured vehicles would be disposable.

The current problem is we need to get out of the slow, expensive and adequate lane. CPSP is an example to point to where we up until now have demonstrated the correct speed, and quality. CANSOF is another place where things move quickly.

The other wrinkle I would say on top of your cheap, good, fast triangular matrix is also Domestic production.

My response about the Arrow above tries into this as well.

I am a firm believer that Canada with its relatively low needs, is often better suited buying into Allied programs. Initially fielding items manufactured by allies, and standing up domestic production of the items and their consumables (parts, munitions etc).

It won’t necessarily be the cheapest method — but it will ensure domestic depth at a strategic level to support the CAF in times of conflict.