Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I have long said that you could fund the CAF to 4 percent of GDP, but we would still lag behind in NATO and be much the same where we are.

It's never the money, it's politics. It's procedures. It's the pork-barreling in our defence spending that makes us a paper tiger in NATO.

My only hope in all of this for the CAF and the GoC, whatever the political stripe that may be, is that it will rouse them out of the "Peace Dividend" slumber. The world has been unstable since 1945. We have used geography, proximity, and association as a Defence Policy ever since. ICBMs don't care how close to the U.S. or how far from Russia/China we are.

Don't give us a dime more, but let us spend money on defence like it matters. The fact we follow the same rules for purchasing a fighter aircraft as we do for buying office furniture for a Service Canada office is disgraceful. Don't treat defense procurement as a stimulus package for Canadian Industry. There I said it.

We spend so much money, time, and effort trying to get that money to stay in Canada; be it by awarding contracts to companies with no capability to produce items without first "retooling" and"developing the production lines", or by hamstringing perfectly competent and competitive bidders by forcing the project to be made in St. Margaret de Poutain de Champignon, QC because the ruling government either lost the seat in the election, or won it with promises.

We spend so much money and staff hours jumping through TBS regulations that are great for other departments, but are terrible for defence procurement. Some items you have to sole source, because there are technologies and capabilities no one else makes. By doing the bid process, you get companies clamoring for a project they can't deliver on, but because they tick the bright boxes on the score sheet....

I truly and honestly belief we need to split from PSPC and legislate that its not beholden to TBS, only to the PBO/PCO. The guiding principles of this new Defence Procurement department should be "Off the shelf, from somewhere else" if there isn't an industry in Canada.

BOOTFORGEN has demonstrated how well we do when we are able to actually get what we need, instead of lining the pockets of a Canadian company that got lucky.

That, but with tanks, fighters, ships, weapons systems....

 

[Kirkhill]

He's referring to South Korea, not Saskatchewan.

Thanx

 

[Colin Parkinson]

We don't have any training facilities for subs, so a lot of it would be in SK, but it was the delivery within 12 months part that I meant.

The RN had to pay a commercial SK yard to delay delivery of one of their supply ships because they needed time to get the crew ready, so not just an RCN thing. Getting ships is the relatively easy part, compared to training up and expanding to get extra sailors, maintenance facilities, maintainers, and the engineering/supply side, all of which depends on having large numbers of people. Unfortunately you can't put out and RFP and PO for 1000 sailors, and a few thousand support people.

First sub is built and stationed in SK. Crews fly over for training and SK provides support. Meanwhile in Canada, existing facilities here are adapted to support the new subs and maintainers are trained up. When the 2nd sub is launched, it replaces the first, which sails to Canada. Training is shifted to Canada and the 2nd sub spends a year on trials and workup. Then operational duties in the Western Pacific. Repeat as subs come on line.

Recruiting and retention will improve with addition of new subs. Along with all the other stuff we have talked about like housing, etc. Also accept reality that you can't keep the CFP going at the same rate and tie 1 up on each coast. You be able to get a few crew from there and the remaining CFP's get more crew as well.

For the love of god, stick with the South Korean weapon systems and go with their offer to set up production facilities here.

 

[Czech_pivo]

First sub is built and stationed in SK. Crews fly over for training and SK provides support. Meanwhile in Canada, existing facilities here are adapted to support the new subs and maintainers are trained up. When the 2nd sub is launched, it replaces the first, which sails to Canada. Training is shifted to Canada and the 2nd sub spends a year on trials and workup. Then operational duties in the Western Pacific. Repeat as subs come on line.

Recruiting and retention will improve with addition of new subs. Along with all the other stuff we have talked about like housing, etc. Also accept reality that you can't keep the CFP going at the same rate and tie 1 up on each coast. You be able to get a few crew from there and the remaining CFP's get more crew as well.

For the love of god, stick with the South Korean weapon systems and go with their offer to set up production facilities here.

Along these lines.

1) SK provides us with subs
2) SK provides us with the K9
3) US provides us with the 88 F35 (scenario 1)
4) US provides us with 50ish F35 and France provides us with X# of Rafales (scenario 2)
5) US provides us with HIMARS
6) GDLS provides us with X# of new LAV's
7) US provides us with P8's

Wild Cards - unannounced -
8) New Corvettes - in house or offshore?
9) New tanks - SK/Sweden/UK?
10 New AD - ?
11) New AT - ?

What's left that some European country could provide us/partner with us, in order for us to be 'allowed' into the Pan-European Rearmament Programme that is in the final stages of being rolled out? Besides some potential Rafale's from France under #4 above, I don't see anything else that's been announced that could go the way of the Europeans, new tanks, AD, AT? Are those numbers large enough for us to talk our way into the Pan European Rearmament Program?

I still see 3 major items above that may very well still come from the US - F35 and P8 are done deals, the unknown is how many F35's. The HIMARS is a wildcard, but it seems to be the 'best in class' option out there. Regarding the subs, we haven't in the least talked about any option ever coming from the US to fulfill this need.

I don't see a large 'pivot' away from US military procurement coming our way - unless we only commit to 2 squadrons of F35 and another 6 as trainers/spares, so that would cut our number from 88 to 42. If we don't go with the HIMARS in addition, would the 2 of those constitute a 'large pivot' away from US military procurement? We would be left with 42 F35's and the 14-16 P8's and the rest potentially primarily coming from the SK's.

 

[KevinB]

Along these lines.

1) SK provides us with subs
2) SK provides us with the K9
3) US provides us with the 88 F35 (scenario 1)
4) US provides us with 50ish F35 and France provides us with X# of Rafales (scenario 2)
5) US provides us with HIMARS

6) GDLS provides us with X# of new LAV's

If you get into the K-9 for a SPG, I suspect Canada is eventually going to look for a tracked IFV, and tracked log vehicle etc

Either you throw in for the GDLS XM-30 submission, or you look at SK or BAE or RM. SK is my least favorite option, but more likely to let it be built in Canada.

7) US provides us with P8's

Wild Cards - unannounced -
8) New Corvettes - in house or offshore?
9) New tanks - SK/Sweden/UK?

No one is buying a Challenger 3
Options are realistically:
Abrams X / M1A3
KF-51
K-2
Maybe Leo2A8

Canada being Canada may just let the Leo’s you have self divest and return to the ALL LAV Army to me the SPG decisions will be telling.

10 New AD - ?
11) New AT - ?

What's left that some European country could provide us/partner with us, in order for us to be 'allowed' into the Pan-European Rearmament Programme that is in the final stages of being rolled out? Besides some potential Rafale's from France under #4 above,

Never happen.
You’d unnecessarily stress the RCAF for no realistic gain, and just a large net loss.

I don't see anything else that's been announced that could go the way of the Europeans, new tanks, AD, AT?

Are those numbers large enough for us to talk our way into the Pan European Rearmament Program?

No unless you start looking at 3% GDP as a floor.

I still see 3 major items above that may very well still come from the US - F35 and P8 are done deals, the unknown is how many F35's. The HIMARS is a wildcard, but it seems to be the 'best in class' option out there. Regarding the subs, we haven't in the least talked about any option ever coming from the US to fulfill this need.

We only build SSN’s, but the mission systems in nearly every allied Sub is of US origin.

I don't see a large 'pivot' away from US military procurement coming our way - unless we only commit to 2 squadrons of F35 and another 6 as trainers/spares, so that would cut our number from 88 to 42. If we don't go with the HIMARS in addition, would the 2 of those constitute a 'large pivot' away from US military procurement? We would be left with 42 F35's and the 14-16 P8's and the rest potentially primarily coming from the SK's.

It is impossible and colossally stupid to pivot away from America as a Defense supplier unless you want some pretty shabby stuff.

But you can at least try to make a lot more stuff domestically even if it’s grounded in US technology.

 

[PrairieFella]

A bit more on Murray Brewster's trip to SK.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/south-korea-canada-submarines-artillery-defence-1.7523180

20B deal doesn't sound too bad to me.

Scrap the Chunmoo and go for AS21 or K2.

 

[Kirkhill]

Along these lines.

1) SK provides us with subs
2) SK provides us with the K9
3) US provides us with the 88 F35 (scenario 1)
4) US provides us with 50ish F35 and France provides us with X# of Rafales (scenario 2)
5) US provides us with HIMARS
6) GDLS provides us with X# of new LAV's
7) US provides us with P8's

Wild Cards - unannounced -
8) New Corvettes - in house or offshore?
9) New tanks - SK/Sweden/UK?
10 New AD - ?
11) New AT - ?

What's left that some European country could provide us/partner with us, in order for us to be 'allowed' into the Pan-European Rearmament Programme that is in the final stages of being rolled out? Besides some potential Rafale's from France under #4 above, I don't see anything else that's been announced that could go the way of the Europeans, new tanks, AD, AT? Are those numbers large enough for us to talk our way into the Pan European Rearmament Program?

I still see 3 major items above that may very well still come from the US - F35 and P8 are done deals, the unknown is how many F35's. The HIMARS is a wildcard, but it seems to be the 'best in class' option out there. Regarding the subs, we haven't in the least talked about any option ever coming from the US to fulfill this need.

I don't see a large 'pivot' away from US military procurement coming our way - unless we only commit to 2 squadrons of F35 and another 6 as trainers/spares, so that would cut our number from 88 to 42. If we don't go with the HIMARS in addition, would the 2 of those constitute a 'large pivot' away from US military procurement? We would be left with 42 F35's and the 14-16 P8's and the rest potentially primarily coming from the SK's.

I see a major hole in that list.

Low cost, ground/air-launched UAV/LAMs.

L3 Harris Red Wolf.
Anduril
Palantir
Leidos
Shield
Kratos
Malloy
Thales - Belfast
Australia
Ukraine
Israel
Turkey

Not to mention our slate of enemies.

The cost per kill is dropping rapidly, especially when taking into account the logistics tails required.

 

[Halifax Tar]

We only build SSN’s, but the mission systems in nearly every allied Sub is of US origin.

Apparently not SK.

KSS-III Submarine according to Wiki.

It is impossible and colossally stupid to pivot away from America as a Defense supplier unless you want some pretty shabby stuff.

But you can at least try to make a lot more stuff domestically even if it’s grounded in US technology.

I disagree. 6 months ago I would have been deep on your side. But until you folks sort your shit out we should be going elsewhere.

I don't buy the 51st state stuff, but you folks are too unstable right now.

 

[PrairieFella]

I see a major hole in that list.

Low cost, ground/air-launched UAV/LAMs.

L3 Harris Red Wolf.
Anduril
Palantir
Leidos
Shield
Kratos
Thales - Belfast
Australia
Ukraine
Israel
Turkey

Not to mention our slate of enemies.

The cost per kill is dropping rapidly, especially when taking into account the logistics tails required.

Already on their way. MQ9, Switchblade, etc. A bunch of GPUAS are coming too. Doesn't mean we have enough in the pipe but it's a start.

 

[Kirkhill]

Already on their way. MQ9, Switchblade, etc. A bunch of GPUAS are coming too. Doesn't mean we have enough in the pipe but it's a start.

Its a start. But we should anticipate a flood, not a trickle. And we should be looking at domestic innovators.

 

[Stoker]

First sub is built and stationed in SK. Crews fly over for training and SK provides support. Meanwhile in Canada, existing facilities here are adapted to support the new subs and maintainers are trained up. When the 2nd sub is launched, it replaces the first, which sails to Canada. Training is shifted to Canada and the 2nd sub spends a year on trials and workup. Then operational duties in the Western Pacific. Repeat as subs come on line.

Recruiting and retention will improve with addition of new subs. Along with all the other stuff we have talked about like housing, etc. Also accept reality that you can't keep the CFP going at the same rate and tie 1 up on each coast. You be able to get a few crew from there and the remaining CFP's get more crew as well.

For the love of god, stick with the South Korean weapon systems and go with their offer to set up production facilities here.

There's one tied up on each coast essentially and I doubt if any will volunteer for submarines to be perfectly honest.

 

[Czech_pivo]

There's one tied up on each coast essentially and I doubt if any will volunteer for submarines to be perfectly honest.

Curious - volunteer for the current Vic's or volunteer in a few years times for a potential SK sub?

 

[MilEME09]

Canada being Canada may just let the Leo’s you have self divest and return to the ALL LAV Army to me the SPG decisions will be telling.

Canada being Canada, we'll end up with their weird upgrade proposal that puts the Panther turret on the leopard hull. Why? cause its cheaper, and Canadian governments historically love cheaper

 

[Czech_pivo]

If you get into the K-9 for a SPG, I suspect Canada is eventually going to look for a tracked IFV, and tracked log vehicle etc

Either you throw in for the GDLS XM-30 submission, or you look at SK or BAE or RM. SK is my least favorite option, but more likely to let it be built in Canada.




No one is buying a Challenger 3
Options are realistically:
Abrams X / M1A3
KF-51
K-2
Maybe Leo2A8

Canada being Canada may just let the Leo’s you have self divest and return to the ALL LAV Army to me the SPG decisions will be telling.


Never happen.
You’d unnecessarily stress the RCAF for no realistic gain, and just a large net loss.



No unless you start looking at 3% GDP as a floor.


We only build SSN’s, but the mission systems in nearly every allied Sub is of US origin.



It is impossible and colossally stupid to pivot away from America as a Defense supplier unless you want some pretty shabby stuff.

But you can at least try to make a lot more stuff domestically even if it’s grounded in US technology.

I don't see us reducing the F35's or doing anything with the P8's - status quo on both of them.

HIMARS is a wild card if we buy it or not. I don't see us buying a single M1A3.

Otherwise, all the rest that I called out is up for grabs - but I really don't think that any of it was seriously being provided by the US anyways. So, again, I don't see this 'pivot away' from the US happening. I think that its all talk.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

There's one tied up on each coast essentially and I doubt if any will volunteer for submarines to be perfectly honest.

We would get some, working with new advanced equipment, with new capabilities will be a draw for them. Would sure make recruiting new submariners a lot easier.

 

[MilEME09]

We would get some, working with new advanced equipment, with new capabilities will be a draw for them. Would sure make recruiting new submariners a lot easier.

next step, ask the koreans to have a KSS-III do a visit to CFB esquimalt, then use that sub as the backdrop for the announcement of the contract

 

[Stoker]

Curious - volunteer for the current Vic's or volunteer in a few years times for a potential SK sub?

People generally don't want to be on submarines. They may recruit new people who want the life but sailors generally already in the Navy usually don't volunteer. That may change of course when the decision to buy is made. If the Navy was smart they would build a recruiting program highlighting the extra benefits the submariners get, how new the equipment is and so forth and make it a perceived elite force. I would recommend recruiting out of Canada as well and try and attract other navies submariners. That would of course mean a signing bonus etc to truly attract more people.

 

[Stoker]

We would get some, working with new advanced equipment, with new capabilities will be a draw for them. Would sure make recruiting new submariners a lot easier.

Yes you would get a few, however I doubt if you will get the numbers you think are going to want to new equipment or not.

 

[MilEME09]

People generally don't want to be on submarines. They may recruit new people who want the life but sailors generally already in the Navy usually don't volunteer. That may change of course when the decision to buy is made. If the Navy was smart they would build a recruiting program highlighting the extra benefits the submariners get, how new the equipment is and so forth and make it a perceived elite force. I would recommend recruiting out of Canada as well and try and attract other navies submariners. That would of course mean a signing bonus etc to truly attract more people.

That may change if we do go with the KSS-III, it sounds like there is a lot of QOL features in the sub that make it more enjoyable to be on compared to the rest of the fleet, except maybe Astrix.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

People generally don't want to be on submarines. They may recruit new people who want the life but sailors generally already in the Navy usually don't volunteer. That may change of course when the decision to buy is made. If the Navy was smart they would build a recruiting program highlighting the extra benefits the submariners get, how new the equipment is and so forth and make it a perceived elite force. I would recommend recruiting out of Canada as well and try and attract other navies submariners. That would of course mean a signing bonus etc to truly attract more people.

I think new subs would enough to get some trained people to take the plunge (pun intended), particularly if there was a bonus attached to it. Fully agree recruiting will be far easier using the steps you outlined.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

That may change if we do go with the KSS-III, it sounds like there is a lot of QOL features in the sub that make it more enjoyable to be on compared to the rest of the fleet, except maybe Astrix.

Even the best QOL for a sub is unlikely to meet that of a surface ship, but that can be compensated in other ways.