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

Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

Status
Not open for further replies.
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....
 
Talking to a few people, it seems the Russian Active protection systems cannot recognize a top attack munition as a threat so they aren't engaging. Meaning weapons like Javelin are scoring kills left, right and center.
APS is a misnomer for Russian tanks. It is active in terms of a dazzler type emitter, but all it does is attempt to confuse a seeker head.
So they can confuse a direct laser guided munition, but that’s it.
Javelin isn’t that type of munition…
The Russian APS is effectively two generations behind the threat.

Weather also is a big factor, it's still muddy as heck in Ukraine so they are limited to roads, easy pickings for Ukraine.
Agreed
Third factor is piss poor training, recent videos show when hit by artillery, they are abandoning their vehicles and scattering, and Ukrainian forces are all to happy to make sure there is no vehicle to return to.
 

1649775944210.png
Kvitnik-E
Guided artillery shell
The Kvitnik guided artillery projectile is a high-precision high-precision fragmentation munition with a laser semi-active homing head (type 9E421)

1649775994384.png
Karasuk
Guided artillery shell
High-precision artillery shell with laser semi-active homing 122 mm caliber "Karasuk" is a sample of "smart weapon", which provides the maximum probability of destruction of the target with the first shot at a range of up to 12 km


Other indigenous Ukrainian PGMs

Betting that Ukrain is looking for NATO weapons because the have eaten up their stocks and the Russians have destroyed their production facilities.
 
APS is a misnomer for Russian tanks. It is active in terms of a dazzler type emitter, but all it does is attempt to confuse a seeker head.
So they can confuse a direct laser guided munition, but that’s it.

So that would explain the occasional "miss" by Ukraine's LGMs. The Russian dazzlers work sometimes.
 
So that would explain the occasional "miss" by Ukraine's LGMs. The Russian dazzlers work sometimes.
I’m not really familiar with those, but anything using a Direct ‘In Band’ TDL would be affected, as well as some LRF’s.
I’d love to do a deep dive into the how and why if things, but aspects of that are still classified.

What isn’t classified is that Javelin is effectively a smaller version of the MMW Hellfire and Maverick and isn’t bothered one lick by laser dazzling spam. If you lock it, it dies.
 
Speaking of MMW munitions - an idea ahead of its time killed on account of expense and the fall of the USSR (Peace Dividend).


81mm. Same HEAT band as the CG84 and the AT4 but top attack. Similar to the larger 120mm Strix.


Anti-tank with mortar, British Merlin 81mm anti-tank mortar shell​

2022-04-12 23:31 HKT

In the 1980s, Europe was shrouded by war clouds. In the face of the huge Soviet steel torrent, NATO worked hard to develop anti-tank equipment and corresponding tactics, but it seemed impossible to be foolproof in the face of numbers. How about it without using nuclear weapons? Can the anti-tank capabilities of combat units at all levels be cheaply improved? The British thought of a good way to use cheap mortars to perform anti-tank operations. For this purpose, they deliberately developed 81mm Merlin precision-guided anti-tank mortar shells.
Anti-tank with mortar, British Merlin 81mm anti-tank mortar shell


The Merlin shells are equipment used with the L-16 81mm mortar. The L-16 is a British equipment developed in the 1960s. It replaces the old 3-inch mortar and is widely used in grassroots land combat units. As a fire support weapon, each battalion is generally equipped with 6 to 8 guns, and each mortar has a three-man artillery group. The artillery weighs 35.6 kg and has a maximum range of 5650 meters.

Anti-tank with mortar, British Merlin 81mm anti-tank mortar shell


In terms of the density of L-16 equipment, if it is given a reliable anti-tank capability, it will bring a qualitative improvement to the combat capability of the entire army. It is actually very easy to simply install the armor-piercing warhead for the ammunition. The difficult part is how to make the shells hit the moving tank. Fortunately, advances in electronic technology at that time made it possible to miniaturize many precision equipment.
The development of Merlin shells was from 1981 to 1989. Although we already have a variety of similar guided shells in service today, they were still new in that era and it was not easy to develop them.

Anti-tank with mortar, British Merlin 81mm anti-tank mortar shell

The Merlin shell is 900 mm long, which is much longer than ordinary 81 mm shells. It looks like a small missile with a range of 1.5 to 4 kilometers. The armor-piercing warhead can penetrate 360 mm homogeneous steel armor. The weak top armor is sufficient.


Anti-tank with mortar, British Merlin 81mm anti-tank mortar shell

The shell has a miniature millimeter-wave radar, which is activated when the shell enters the stage of diving and falling. At first it searches a range of 300×300 meters. At this stage, it searches for a moving target. If it is not found, it will switch to the second scene mode. When the shells fall further, the radar will search an area of 100×100 meters and analyze possible stationary targets.
Anti-tank with mortar, British Merlin 81mm anti-tank mortar shell

No matter at which stage the target is found, the projectile can simply adjust its trajectory by adjusting the aerodynamic control surface that pops up after launch. It is unrealistic to kill a tank with one projectile. The designer said that it takes 2 to destroy a tank. ~3 shells. Not only that, because Merlin ammunition has unique ballistic characteristics and different combat needs, the gun crew will be equipped with a portable computer to calculate shooting data, so that the shells fly to the tank at the best angle.

The development direction of the Merlin precision-guided anti-tank mortar shell is undoubtedly correct. The service of many types of shells of this type can prove it, but the relevant equipment must be reduced and integrated into an 81mm shell even today. For this technical challenge, everyone still prefers larger 120mm projectiles, such as Sweden's 120mm guided projectiles.
Anti-tank with mortar, British Merlin 81mm anti-tank mortar shell

It is said that the British officially entered service with the Merlin shells in 1993. In addition, Australia also has a strong interest in this shell. However, the number of Merlin shells seems to be very small. On the one hand, it is because the Soviet army, the biggest opponent, disappeared. On the other hand, this type of shell is too expensive and economically uneconomical. Later, Britain planned to expand the Merlin shell to 120 mm caliber.
 
Rumours and rumours and rumours.....


But if the attack is genuine and there is no response to yet another red line crossed then the future is back to the past. Alliances are degraded and are only as good as your own defences. Defence, like charity, begins at home. You can't rely on others to do what you won't do yourself.
 
APS is a misnomer for Russian tanks. It is active in terms of a dazzler type emitter, but all it does is attempt to confuse a seeker head.
So they can confuse a direct laser guided munition, but that’s it.
Javelin isn’t that type of munition…
The Russian APS is effectively two generations behind the threat.


Agreed
Shtora is also designed to spoof the firing post 9f SACLOS missiles by providing alternative missile beacons. Of course your beacon has to emit in the same frequency at the same rate as Shtora for your firing post care. There are relatively few LBR ATGMs made by the west kicking around; SKIF, older Hellfire, Maverick- add in Starstreak. The Russians like them, Kornet, Chrysanthemum, some of air launched stuff- oh, and Shershen from Belarus.
As Kevin said radar, radio, eo/ir homing doesn't care about things like Shtora. A lot don't care about flares. A DIRCM might mess with an EO/IR, but they seem to be restricted to AC (for now). The other thing about systems like Shtora is they take control from the humans on the turret to bring the CM on its target. I wonder if a lot of crews turn it off because they don't want their turrets slewing all over the place.
 

View attachment 70036
Kvitnik-E
Guided artillery shell
The Kvitnik guided artillery projectile is a high-precision high-precision fragmentation munition with a laser semi-active homing head (type 9E421)

View attachment 70037
Karasuk
Guided artillery shell
High-precision artillery shell with laser semi-active homing 122 mm caliber "Karasuk" is a sample of "smart weapon", which provides the maximum probability of destruction of the target with the first shot at a range of up to 12 km


Other indigenous Ukrainian PGMs

Betting that Ukrain is looking for NATO weapons because the have eaten up their stocks and the Russians have destroyed their production facilities.
So they are M712 Copperhead for soviet caliber howitzers?
 
But if the attack is genuine and there is no response to yet another red line crossed then the future is back to the past. Alliances are degraded and are only as good as your own defences. Defence, like charity, begins at home. You can't rely on others to do what you won't do yourself.

This is why virtue signaling and convening Level 10 experts in Canada need a serious ass whopping for a wake up call.
 
Talking to a few people, it seems the Russian Active protection systems cannot recognize a top attack munition as a threat so they aren't engaging. Meaning weapons like Javelin are scoring kills left, right and center.

Weather also is a big factor, it's still muddy as heck in Ukraine so they are limited to roads, easy pickings for Ukraine.

Third factor is piss poor training, recent videos show when hit by artillery, they are abandoning their vehicles and scattering, and Ukrainian forces are all to happy to make sure there is no vehicle to return to.
Seems more likely the APS isn’t fitted
 
Easy question to answer.
NATO tanks (Abrams, Leo and Challenger current variants) have 1) better armor (composite and extremely dense materials), 2) Insensitivity munitions, so with a significant impact they don’t detonate (unlike the T series turret launching munitions) 3) Have venting ammo storage so even a ammo detonation of the ammo rack won’t K kill the tank
4) Better VAS and FCS to allow targets to be viewed and selected at longer ranges.
Is not Trophy really good? Wikipedia says so lol
The other thing about systems like Shtora is they take control from the humans on the turret to bring the CM on its target. I wonder if a lot of crews turn it off because they don't want their turrets slewing all over the place.
Thats what I thought too but again that would only be true for laser designated?
 
Is not Trophy really good? Wikipedia says so lol

Thats what I thought too but again that would only be true for laser designated?
Trophy is an hard kill APS so not comparable to Shtora, more equivalent to Arena (very limited use), Drozd (obsolete), and Afghanit (T14 only).

Yeah, you need something to cue the system to react and that's normally a laser hitting the target. You can see some videos where the SKIF gunner is aiming off the target until the last minute, probably to avoid activating a LWS.
 
Rob Huebert on Chrystia Freeland's budget speech


The entire final section of her speech — pages 5-6 if you are old school and print it out — is dedicated to the impact of the Russian attack on Ukraine. She begins with the observation that “The world we woke up to on February 24 was different from the one that had existed when we turned off the lights the night before.” Then she goes on to to her most powerful statement of the speech:

“Putin’s assault has been so vicious that we all now understand that the world’s democracies — including our own — can be safe only once the Russian tyrant and his armies are entirely vanquished.”

We need to put this in context. This is an official statement of the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance in an official speech to Parliament outlining the core policy and spendings of the government. This is not some innocuous musing of a government official responding to the terrible death and destruction that has been unleashed on the Ukrainian people. This is the second-most powerful person in the Canadian government very publicly calling for the vanquishing of Russian President Vladimir Putin a.k.a. “the Russian tyrant.”

When does Chrystia kick Justin upstairs?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top