Canada's tanks

[Swampbuggy]

Whyizzit South Korea, a country twice the size of Nova Scotia, with 50,000,000 people, no noticeable resource base, that was flattened 70 years ago, is still actively militarily engaged is becoming / has become the free world's arsenal?

155mm shells. Its own fleet of home grown rockets and missiles. Cannons and Mortars. Tanks and IFVs. Cars. Fighters. Ships. Submarines. Drones for every environment. Computers. Radios. Chips. Lasers. Radars. TVs. Consumer goods. Industrial equipment. Pumps. Tanks (vessels). Reactors.

Whyizzit Poland, a country the size of Newfoundland and Labrador, with 36,000,000 people, that was flattened by war 80 years ago, subjugated for 40 years, emerged with a third world level of GDP, is now on track to overtake the UK for GDP, is buying S. Korean designs and building them faster in their thousands, along with new ships, homegrown missiles..... I could go on?

And Canada?

Lacks will. Lacks initiative. Lacks incentive. Slack. Idle. Wanting In Military Proficiency. I find myself hard pressed NOT to see Canada in those terms. This land and its resources are wasted on us.

Hostile existential threat on their respective borders. We have 3 oceans and a “allied” superpower as a buffer between similar threats. So, we romanced the pug while the world turned and failed to recognize our own existential threats might be right on our doorstep. If, IF, we come out the other side of this as a sovereign nation, we have to elect people that are realistic about the ways of the world, our place in it and how to stand on our own feet.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Hostile existential threat on their respective borders. We have 3 oceans and a “allied” superpower as a buffer between similar threats. So, we romanced the pug while the world turned and failed to recognize our own existential threats might be right on our doorstep. If, IF, we come out the other side of this as a sovereign nation, we have to elect people that are realistic about the ways of the world, our place in it and how to stand on our own feet.

Canadians and our politicians need to shift the thinking from what the country can do for them, to what they can do for the country.

I always loved that quote from JFK.

 

[PrairieFella]

Canadians and our politicians need to shift the thinking from what the country can do for them, to what they can do for the country.

I always loved that quote from JFK.

I personally think we've been watching this shift in real time across the political spectrum.

 

[KevinB]

Whyizzit South Korea, a country twice the size of Nova Scotia, with 50,000,000 people, no noticeable resource base, that was flattened 70 years ago, is still actively militarily engaged is becoming / has become the free world's arsenal?

155mm shells. Its own fleet of home grown rockets and missiles. Cannons and Mortars. Tanks and IFVs. Cars. Fighters. Ships. Submarines. Drones for every environment. Computers. Radios. Chips. Lasers. Radars. TVs. Consumer goods. Industrial equipment. Pumps. Tanks (vessels). Reactors.

Keep in mind that the vast majority of 155mm shells in SK came from the US.
Home Grown is a huge misnomer for most of their items as well, as nearly everything was based on a US system that was then co-developed between SK and US Defense Companies.
You will find a lot of the SK Mil items could be limited by the US as well.
*now if SK cares? I think that would remain to see if the US withdraws from SK, if they did, I suspect SK wouldn't give two shits that the US say no on exports or licensing.

Whyizzit Poland, a country the size of Newfoundland and Labrador, with 36,000,000 people, that was flattened by war 80 years ago, subjugated for 40 years, emerged with a third world level of GDP, is now on track to overtake the UK for GDP, is buying S. Korean designs and building them faster in their thousands, along with new ships, homegrown missiles..... I could go on?

And Canada?

Lacks will. Lacks initiative. Lacks incentive. Slack. Idle. Wanting In Military Proficiency. I find myself hard pressed NOT to see Canada in those terms. This land and its resources are wasted on us.

Hard Times Makes Hard People...

A lot of the West is soft due to the hard work of our forefathers (and foremothers).

The rebound hangover is quite a bitch.

 

[Kirkhill]

Canadians and our politicians need to shift the thinking from what the country can do for them, to what they can do for the country.

I always loved that quote from JFK.

I'd be happy if Canadians did for themselves let alone did for their country. I'm guessing that government failure in Korea and Poland did a lot to convince the locals to do it for themselves.

1990 - Poles go to Germany and buy two suitcases of shampoo and return to Poland to sell them there, or sell them into Belarus.
1992 - Poles buy vans to move shampoo and cosmetics
1995 - Poles start a shipping company.

etc.

And there was no government telling they couldn't do it.

 

[Kirkhill]

Keep in mind that the vast majority of 155mm shells in SK came from the US.
Home Grown is a huge misnomer for most of their items as well, as nearly everything was based on a US system that was then co-developed between SK and US Defense Companies.
You will find a lot of the SK Mil items could be limited by the US as well.
*now if SK cares? I think that would remain to see if the US withdraws from SK, if they did, I suspect SK wouldn't give two shits that the US say no on exports or licensing.

Hard Times Makes Hard People...

A lot of the West is soft due to the hard work of our forefathers (and foremothers).

The rebound hangover is quite a bitch.

They would probably care exactly as much as the SMLE/AK47 armourers of Kabul.

And at what point does a modified patent become a completely new patent?

 

[KevinB]

They would probably care exactly as much as the SMLE/AK47 armourers of Kabul.

LOL

And at what point does a modified patent become a completely new patent?

The base issue is where did the technology originate from. It has nothing to do with patents - but the IP that went into the formulation of the design. Washington has never made a big deal about SK exports, and encouraged a lot of them due to either (or a combo of) US production limits, and the desire not to have American kit somewhere.
The K1, K2, and K9 for instance, where all made with JV support from US designs, as were a lot of the missiles, and their torpedo and guidance system.

That said, I think the SK items are a fantastic value for the money. I think a JV with Canadian production of the K2, K21 and K9 would be a massive boost for Canada.

 

[Kirkhill]

LOL

The base issue is where did the technology originate from. It has nothing to do with patents - but the IP that went into the formulation of the design. Washington has never made a big deal about SK exports, and encouraged a lot of them due to either (or a combo of) US production limits, and the desire not to have American kit somewhere.
The K1, K2, and K9 for instance, where all made with JV support from US designs, as were a lot of the missiles, and their torpedo and guidance system.

That said, I think the SK items are a fantastic value for the money. I think a JV with Canadian production of the K2, K21 and K9 would be a massive boost for Canada.

Having been involved in crafting and defending patents internationally I can say that source matters not. You can't even properly defend IP/Patents in Canada or the EU, let alone the rest of the OECD. And there are a hundred other countries out there outside of the OECD.

As I've said before, companies I have worked for came to the conclusion that registering IP was a mug's game. The only answers were to keep your cards close to your chest and run faster than the other guys. As soon as you launched a new product the reverse engineering by competitors started. Once upon a time an innovation could dominate a market for a decade. Now you are lucky if you get a couple of years.

 

[KevinB]

Having been involved in crafting and defending patents internationally I can say that source matters not. You can't even properly defend IP/Patents in Canada or the EU, let alone the rest of the OECD. And there are a hundred other countries out there outside of the OECD.

As I've said before, companies I have worked for came to the conclusion that registering IP was a mug's game. The only answers were to keep your cards close to your chest and run faster than the other guys. As soon as you launched a new product the reverse engineering by competitors started. Once upon a time an innovation could dominate a market for a decade. Now you are lucky if you get a couple of years.

I don't mean to be rude but you have zero experience in ITAR, EUC's, and the Armaments Industry, I however do.
That's said, sometimes it can be more profitable for a US Defense Corporation to take the royalty and not tell the USG anything (and suffer the fines if caught).

 

[Kirkhill]

I don't mean to be rude but you have zero experience in ITAR, EUC's, and the Armaments Industry, I however do.
That's said, sometimes it can be more profitable for a US Defense Corporation to take the royalty and not tell the USG anything (and suffer the fines if caught).

Not rude. Statement of fact. Accepted as such.

However my opinion is people are much the same regardless of which industry they are in. And laws are exactly as valid as the intent of the people required to honour them.

Just ask your POTUS.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I suspect that South Korea is seen as much of a threat to Germany as Russia is. Germany can no longer take for granted that it is the tank builder of choice.

MaxDefense Philippines​

osStpdnreog0484g5i6g2362001f55i1f1fa780089125cgtuhm5965l6m43 ·
As Germany starts re-arming itself as US security guarantees have become uncertain, companies involved in the automotive industry are now quietly moving to re-tool and retrain their staff to support defense manufacturing industry.
This is a smart move by Germany as their auto industry is in a slowdown due to increased competition from China, and have laid-off or scheduled to lay-off thousands of their employees.
This move could allow the German economy to revive its manufacturing and heavy industries to support its slowing economy.
The following are among the examples:
Continental AG (known more for their tires) and Rheinmetall signed an agreement to retrain laid-off workers to shift from the automotive to defense industry.
Rheinmetall will also retool two of its automotive-related factories to produce for the defense industry.
German-French venture KNDS acquired a rail car factory from train manufacturer Alstom, which will be re-tooled to produce parts for the Leopard 2 tanks and Puma armored vehicles.
German sensors specialist Hensoldt (same company that supplied ship radars for the Jose Rizal-class frigates) will be re-training and absorbing staff from Continental AG and Bosch.
Volkswagen has expressed its desire to "re-join" the defense industry,
Automotive supplier ZF Friedrichshafen is exploring workforce transfers to defence companies.
Renk, formerly part of Volkswagen, is also considering re-tooling its manufacturing facilities to procure products for military application.

 

[MJP]

2A4 parts are going to remain a problem?

I do think we need tanks urgently. Our leopard 2 fleet owes us nothing but man is it spent. Partsare real hard to come by and the juice probably won't be worth the squeeze for much longer.

I've been involved with the tank fleet for years, primarily in a tertiary support role. Parts have always been a challenge, but I haven't seen the issue quantified in some time. Since my RCEME colleagues often attribute problems to missing parts—when the real bottleneck might be a lack of facilities or personnel—I decided to take a deeper dive. Without getting into specifics, I reviewed work orders for the domestic fleet and analyzed some up-to-date briefs. Broadly speaking, the primary issue isn’t parts availability, but rather personnel shortages and limited time.


That’s not to say we aren’t missing parts, that sourcing them isn’t difficult, or that we always have enough on hand. However, the fleet’s current serviceability appears to be more closely tied to a lack of personnel and facilities. With the Leo facility in Nisku coming online to handle resource-intensive inspections, this could relieve pressure on overstretched 2nd (and 1st) line maintainers. In turn, this may free up time to address the minor corrective and preventative maintenance issues that are currently dragging down tank serviceability.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I've been involved with the tank fleet for years, primarily in a tertiary support role. Parts have always been a challenge, but I haven't seen the issue quantified in some time. Since my RCEME colleagues often attribute problems to missing parts—when the real bottleneck might be a lack of facilities or personnel—I decided to take a deeper dive. Without getting into specifics, I reviewed work orders for the domestic fleet and analyzed some up-to-date briefs. Broadly speaking, the primary issue isn’t parts availability, but rather personnel shortages and limited time.


That’s not to say we aren’t missing parts, that sourcing them isn’t difficult, or that we always have enough on hand. However, the fleet’s current serviceability appears to be more closely tied to a lack of personnel and facilities. With the Leo facility in Nisku coming online to handle resource-intensive inspections, this could relieve pressure on overstretched 2nd (and 1st) line maintainers. In turn, this may free up time to address the minor corrective and preventative maintenance issues that are currently dragging down tank serviceability.

How much TRANREQing does the Army do ?

If you guys don't use that parlance, that's basically cannibalizing 1 platform for parts to be sent to another. Usually our down ships are TRANREQ'd heavily for parts to keep the high tempo ship(s) going.

I would like to see the stats but I would suspect at least 2/3rds our HPRs end up being TRANREQs.

I suspect this would be similar in the tank world ?

And it's interesting that your data is telling you it's not a material problem.

 

[MilEME09]

I've been involved with the tank fleet for years, primarily in a tertiary support role. Parts have always been a challenge, but I haven't seen the issue quantified in some time. Since my RCEME colleagues often attribute problems to missing parts—when the real bottleneck might be a lack of facilities or personnel—I decided to take a deeper dive. Without getting into specifics, I reviewed work orders for the domestic fleet and analyzed some up-to-date briefs. Broadly speaking, the primary issue isn’t parts availability, but rather personnel shortages and limited time.


That’s not to say we aren’t missing parts, that sourcing them isn’t difficult, or that we always have enough on hand. However, the fleet’s current serviceability appears to be more closely tied to a lack of personnel and facilities. With the Leo facility in Nisku coming online to handle resource-intensive inspections, this could relieve pressure on overstretched 2nd (and 1st) line maintainers. In turn, this may free up time to address the minor corrective and preventative maintenance issues that are currently dragging down tank serviceability.

Hopefully the personal issue can be solved, I know they are willing to give reservists the courses for leopard maint if we are deploying with the strats which can help short term, atleast for the deployed fleet.

 

[GR66]

How much TRANREQing does the Army do ?

Why do you spell TRAINWRECKing so weird? And I'm sure the Army does just as much of it as the RCN and RCAF do!

 

[MJP]

How much TRANREQing does the Army do ?

If you guys don't use that parlance, that's basically cannibalizing 1 platform for parts to be sent to another. Usually our down ships are TRANREQ'd heavily for parts to keep the high tempo ship(s) going.

I would like to see the stats but I would suspect at least 2/3rds our HPRs end up being TRANREQs.

I suspect this would be similar in the tank world ?

And it's interesting that your data is telling you it's not a material problem.

In the Army for Land Maintenance the concepts are called robbing & cannibalization. There is an entire manual for any nerds out there POLICY/MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES ROBBING, CANNIBALIZATION AND DENIAL OF EQUIPMENT C-04-005-001/AG-B04

Robbing is removing a part to get another platform running with the intent of replacing that part and eventually getting the "robbed" vehicle back in service. It is tactical in nature and of short duration. Authority is technically the workshop commander but often you will see in exercise or operations that authority is held at a higher level like CO 1 Svc Bn, G4 Maint or G4. If you rob, a work order has to be raised for the veh and part that was robbed explaining why.

Cannibalization is the removal of parts without the intent of replacing. Essentially you are saying the vehicle will never be brought back in service. This is usually done when we know the vehicle is going to be disposed of. For example in late 2010s and early 2020s when we parked much of the ML/LS & HL fleet we also cannibalized those vehs to keep the remaining vehs serviceable. The LCMM is generally the authority but on operations it can be delegated to theater J4 staff.

Generally in the CA we don't use robbing as a tool to get veh fleets serviceable especially in garrison, although it it does happen from time to time in controlled and uncontrolled ways. If it is used it is more often to get a low density veh like an ARV or AEV up and running over more plentiful platforms, but for exercise or for Ops it does happen more often.

 

[Czech_pivo]

You are 110% spot on!!

I remember riding the train home from work in Prague to the suburbs back in 1994-96 and if I took the train around 5:30 in the afternoon it would be the train going on to Krakow, which then become the train going on to Moscow. There were would ALOT of young Polish/Ukrainian women (18-25yrs old) and each of them would have 2 of these massive massive plastic/vinyl bags stuffed with goods that they had bought in Prague and were taking back further east to sell.

I was like 25, 26yrs at the time and before I had meet my girlfriend there (and now my wife), I would attempt to strike up conversations with the more attractive ones. It was a glorious time to be a young CDN male with a well paying job in that part of the world.

On another similar note. I have a Romanian friend who immigrated here back in 1999 and around 2002 I had asked him how he had managed to save up the 10,000$ CAD needed at that time to come here as an unsponsored individual. He told me of one (and there were a number) of the ways he managed to save the money......he used to load up a car, that he'd rent for 2 days at a time, with 1 litre plastic coke bottles filled with gasoline in Romania and drive it into Novi Sad in Serbia. He bribe the Serbian border guards with cartons of Marlboro cigarettes to let him in and then he'd set up shop near the main city square in Novi Sad and sell this gas. Serbia at that time 1998, was under UN sanctions because of Kosovo. He'd only take Deutschmarks or USD.

I'd be happy if Canadians did for themselves let alone did for their country. I'm guessing that government failure in Korea and Poland did a lot to convince the locals to do it for themselves.

1990 - Poles go to Germany and buy two suitcases of shampoo and return to Poland to sell them there, or sell them into Belarus.
1992 - Poles buy vans to move shampoo and cosmetics
1995 - Poles start a shipping company.

etc.

And there was no government telling they couldn't do it.

 

[MilEME09]

In the Army for Land Maintenance the concepts are called robbing & cannibalization. There is an entire manual for any nerds out there POLICY/MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES ROBBING, CANNIBALIZATION AND DENIAL OF EQUIPMENT C-04-005-001/AG-B04

Robbing is removing a part to get another platform running with the intent of replacing that part and eventually getting the "robbed" vehicle back in service. It is tactical in nature and of short duration. Authority is technically the workshop commander but often you will see in exercise or operations that authority is held at a higher level like CO 1 Svc Bn, G4 Maint or G4. If you rob, a work order has to be raised for the veh and part that was robbed explaining why.

Cannibalization is the removal of parts without the intent of replacing. Essentially you are saying the vehicle will never be brought back in service. This is usually done when we know the vehicle is going to be disposed of. For example in late 2010s and early 2020s when we parked much of the ML/LS & HL fleet we also cannibalized those vehs to keep the remaining vehs serviceable. The LCMM is generally the authority but on operations it can be delegated to theater J4 staff.

Generally in the CA we don't use robbing as a tool to get veh fleets serviceable especially in garrison, although it it does happen from time to time in controlled and uncontrolled ways. If it is used it is more often to get a low density veh like an ARV or AEV up and running over more plentiful platforms, but for exercise or for Ops it does happen more often.

Spot on, Robbing and reclamation are the two i see most, robbing more on the weapons side on major Ex's or gun camps for a course to temporarily keep things running to ensure a course gets qualified, usually permission is given if I have the ability to quickly bring back into service once back at the first line shop. Reclamation I have had to get authorization for before, one summer i used the PCC lot in wainwright to keep 14 courses rolling, especially G-wagons. Access is tightly controlled but authorization is usually easy and quick to obtain, in my case about 24h and a few phone calls. It can be a useful tool to reclaim serviceable parts and put them pack into the system. One thing to remember Cannibalization usually is taking from an otherwise serviceable vehicle, while Reclamation(outlined in the same document) is reclaiming serviceable parts from an unserviceable vehicle, such as condemned, write offs due to accidents or severely battle damaged.

 

[MJP]

Spot on, Robbing and reclamation are the two i see most, robbing more on the weapons side on major Ex's or gun camps for a course to temporarily keep things running to ensure a course gets qualified, usually permission is given if I have the ability to quickly bring back into service once back at the first line shop. Reclamation I have had to get authorization for before, one summer i used the PCC lot in wainwright to keep 14 courses rolling, especially G-wagons. Access is tightly controlled but authorization is usually easy and quick to obtain, in my case about 24h and a few phone calls. It can be a useful tool to reclaim serviceable parts and put them pack into the system. One thing to remember Cannibalization usually is taking from an otherwise serviceable vehicle, while Reclamation(outlined in the same document) is reclaiming serviceable parts from an unserviceable vehicle, such as condemned, write offs due to accidents or severely battle damaged.

Meh, parts reclamation is cannibalization (para 19 of the ref) and typically done at 3rd/4th line typically (para 30) to bring parts back into service. If you go pick a part from the parked Gwagons to get other vehs running at 1st/2nd line that is cannibalization. In any case it is mere nuance and only Log/RCEME nerds will really care about the differences (just to be clear I put myself in that nerd category).

 

[Halifax Tar]

In the Army for Land Maintenance the concepts are called robbing & cannibalization. There is an entire manual for any nerds out there POLICY/MANAGEMENT PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES ROBBING, CANNIBALIZATION AND DENIAL OF EQUIPMENT C-04-005-001/AG-B04

Robbing is removing a part to get another platform running with the intent of replacing that part and eventually getting the "robbed" vehicle back in service. It is tactical in nature and of short duration. Authority is technically the workshop commander but often you will see in exercise or operations that authority is held at a higher level like CO 1 Svc Bn, G4 Maint or G4. If you rob, a work order has to be raised for the veh and part that was robbed explaining why.

Cannibalization is the removal of parts without the intent of replacing. Essentially you are saying the vehicle will never be brought back in service. This is usually done when we know the vehicle is going to be disposed of. For example in late 2010s and early 2020s when we parked much of the ML/LS & HL fleet we also cannibalized those vehs to keep the remaining vehs serviceable. The LCMM is generally the authority but on operations it can be delegated to theater J4 staff.

Generally in the CA we don't use robbing as a tool to get veh fleets serviceable especially in garrison, although it it does happen from time to time in controlled and uncontrolled ways. If it is used it is more often to get a low density veh like an ARV or AEV up and running over more plentiful platforms, but for exercise or for Ops it does happen more often.

Interesting. I appreciate the look into your world. What we do is probably closer to what you call robbing.

Incidentally, in the RCN the TRANREQ process is initialized by FER (Formation Engineering) but the CO of the losing ship needs to approve the removal of the material.

We have NAVORDs around this, if you really want to get nerdy lol.