I'll believe it when I see it.
Link is no longer workingCarney just announced the creation of a DPA, and defence spending "well above" 2% of GPD. No timeline though.
Unless DPA has direct purchase authority, they're still going to have to go to bat with PWGSC.Yes... like what is their relationship going to be with PWGSC?
Hopefully zero - a completely separate entity for DND.
and TBUnless DPA has direct purchase authority, they're still going to have to go to bat with PWGSC.
Unless DPA has direct purchase authority, they're still going to have to go to bat with PWGSC.
That would be the point of creating that entity I would assume. Otherwise you’re just spinning your wheels.Unless DPA has direct purchase authority, they're still going to have to go to bat with PWGSC.
I don’t see how you can get around the TB in Canada.and TB
So what you are saying is that he will add to the bureaucracy and cause even further delays to the procurement of major defense initiatives.That would take some creative legislative maneuvering and empire breaking.
So what you are saying is that he will add to the bureaucracy and cause even further delays to the procurement of major defense initiatives.
Way i would see it is TB authorizes DPA's total budget and thats it, DPA then doesn't need authority to spend itThat would be the point of creating that entity I would assume. Otherwise you’re just spinning your wheels.
I don’t see how you can get around the TB in Canada.
But if you had an actual Defense Procurement Agency, it would at least be able to navigate programs to the proper gates.
Not my kids school. They all know about Vimy Ridge.If anything you could imagine them thinking "why are we doing this here? this guy died over a 100 years ago WTF?"
They have no sense of Canadian military history because it has been glossed over in many schools. Unless its "Peacekeeping"
Yes... like what is their relationship going to be with PWGSC?
Hopefully zero - a completely separate entity for DND.
then they shouldn't be standing for office.If anything you could imagine them thinking "why are we doing this here? this guy died over a 100 years ago WTF?"
They have no sense of Canadian military history because it has been glossed over in many schools. Unless its "Peacekeeping"
Tell me you don’t understand mechanical interfaces without telling me…
The Sig P320 has a fully cocked striker, and the only part blocking it is a small rounded bar. It is a bad design.
I’ll encourage you to watch this video.
What's wrong with our political leadership, seriously at least one of them at least remembered our glorious invasion of Norway during the the last great unpleasantness...Vietnam... wasn't it.?If anything you could imagine them thinking "why are we doing this here? this guy died over a 100 years ago WTF?"
They have no sense of Canadian military history because it has been glossed over in many schools. Unless its "Peacekeeping"
Clearly impossible (snicker snicker snicker).
I don’t see how you can get around the TB in Canada.
But if you had an actual Defense Procurement Agency, it would at least be able to navigate programs to the proper gates.
Quick search has 200 recorded incidents with the P320, with over 2.5 million units sold since 2014. That's a incident rate of 0.008% over all for the model. With that low of incident rate that's not even a QC failure. It's all about optics, is it bad or are enough people amplifying the incidents to give it a worse reputation then it is?Clearly impossible (snicker snicker snicker).
Sig put out a a good video on the mechanism.
Unfortunately tolerance stacking, wear of parts of certain materials and questionable QC compound some engineering issues.