Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Fwd assist is so amateur…

100,000psi chamber pressure is the way of the future!
View attachment 92768

No, no, no….that is just smart firearms design…

 

[daftandbarmy]

Fwd assist is so amateur…

100,000psi chamber pressure is the way of the future!
View attachment 92768

Or just something like....

 

[Harris]

CAF schools do partner with colleges. There are many examples. This is not a new idea. If one’s mind is boggled, perhaps it is because they don’t know current the system they are criticizing.

There are advantages and disadvantages to outsourcing training, and some things just can’t be outsourced. This fact was already noted by one earlier reply.

I’ve seen some posts that suggest such relationships should exist wherever a college is near a base. Proximity to a base is irrelevant. Bases are not resources to provide oversight of random trades training. CAF schools establish and manage partnerships with colleges. But here again, proximity does not matter, as was noted in another earlier reply that described a Gagetown school partnered with a Nova Scotia college … the CAF can & does partner over great distances as it makes sense.

Veh Tech trg was ran at NSCC in Dartmouth last summer. I believe the intent is to do so this summer.

 

[KevinB]

If you want an exercise in futility of people trying to reinvent the wheel, look at the NGSW program, specifically what Textron offered. The fact someone thought it was a good idea mechanically blows my mind

The Textron/AAI LSAT 5.56mm and 7.62mm CTA guns were mechanically both more reliable and accurate than anything submitted for NGSW.
I think they screwed up with the 6.8 gun - but also the Army seemed to have significant problems with the manual of arms with the CTA guns (mentality wise not actual physical performance)


Ammunition changes require changes to the host weapon.

You can’t expect a gun designed to run 55-60kpsi all of a sudden run 80-120kpsi.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

The Textron/AAI LSAT 5.56mm and 7.62mm CTA guns were mechanically both more reliable and accurate than anything submitted for NGSW.
I think they screwed up with the 6.8 gun - but also the Army seemed to have significant problems with the manual of arms with the CTA guns (mentality wise not actual physical performance)


Ammunition changes require changes to the host weapon.

You can’t expect a gun designed to run 55-60kpsi all of a sudden run 80-120kpsi.

Pffft. What would YOU know about chamber pressure….

 

[MilEME09]

The Textron/AAI LSAT 5.56mm and 7.62mm CTA guns were mechanically both more reliable and accurate than anything submitted for NGSW.
I think they screwed up with the 6.8 gun - but also the Army seemed to have significant problems with the manual of arms with the CTA guns (mentality wise not actual physical performance)


Ammunition changes require changes to the host weapon.

You can’t expect a gun designed to run 55-60kpsi all of a sudden run 80-120kpsi.

Their SAW design was over complicated for no reason. Having a piston push out from the breech face to push the round into the chamber was wholey over complicated for a loading mechanism.

 

[Underway]

unfortunately with this trade war, we may end up with Global eye

L3 and Raytheon have Bombardier based AEW offerings as well. Libs have promised that AEW will be built in Canada in the election platform.

 

[KevinB]

Their SAW design was over complicated for no reason. Having a piston push out from the breech face to push the round into the chamber was wholey over complicated for a loading mechanism.

The Army didn’t like the original flipper mechanism in the early LSAT LMG’s. The action was modified to make it more ‘Army friendly - but technically unsound)
Unfortunately much in the same way the Hk G11 K2 mechanism was deemed unsafe as one couldn’t physically eyeball the chamber (and apparently cycling the action three times and running a cleaning rod in to verify if needed was too difficult) the Army didn’t trust a mechanism that wouldn’t let an optical verification of it being clear.

The LSAT guns were not exactly ergonomically either - I’d argue non of the NSGW weapons were/are.
Part of the problem is with 38 years of familiarity with the M16/M4/C7/C8 I’m of course biased towards it from a manual of arms stand point (and @daftandbarmy
I don’t use the forward assist).

 

[Cloud Cover]

L3 and Raytheon have Bombardier based AEW offerings as well. Libs have promised that AEW will be built in Canada in the election platform.

L3 appears to have a fair bit of Israeli tech in their offering, which I suspect is a non starter for a Liberal government.

 

[Underway]

L3 appears to have a fair bit of Israeli tech in their offering, which I suspect is a non starter for a Liberal government.

None of those aircraft have air to air refueling AFAIK. If I had my druthers, the A220-300 (old name C Series) built in Mirabel would be the baseline for some else's sensors. Lots of work to make that a possibility I think but its completely doable. Needs refueling and design of a sensor on it but its plenty big enough and long range enough, and there are plenty built out there.

 

[suffolkowner]

L3 appears to have a fair bit of Israeli tech in their offering, which I suspect is a non starter for a Liberal government.

we'll see if that changes. Seems like Carney has tried to walk the line. Its not like we gave the Spikes back or the counter battery radars or whatever else we have

None of those aircraft have air to air refueling AFAIK. If I had my druthers, the A220-300 (old name C Series) built in Mirabel would be the baseline for some else's sensors. Lots of work to make that a possibility I think but its completely doable. Needs refueling and design of a sensor on it but its plenty big enough and long range enough, and there are plenty built out there.

i think it was investigated at least for the Italian G550 CAEW

 

[daftandbarmy]

The LSAT guns were not exactly ergonomically either - I’d argue non of the NSGW weapons were/are.
Part of the problem is with 38 years of familiarity with the M16/M4/C7/C8 I’m of course biased towards it from a manual of arms stand point (and @daftandbarmy
I don’t use the forward assist).

Just like training wheels, right?

 

[KevinB]

Meanwhile in Spain...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1914687549408227365

 

[OldSolduer]

Meanwhile in Spain...

https://twitter.com/x/status/1914687549408227365

Include the cost of an Inquisition??

 

[Rainbow1910]

L3 appears to have a fair bit of Israeli tech in their offering, which I suspect is a non starter for a Liberal government.

L3 is the primary contractor there, so between them smoke screening Israeli involvement and the big boon to Bombardier regarding domestic production, I can't see it being an issue. Canada already purchased Israeli radars and recently Spike ATGM's, so I don't think Israeli pushes it off the table, especially when their option seems so much better than the Saab offering.

 

[Underway]

L3 is the primary contractor there, so between them smoke screening Israeli involvement and the big boon to Bombardier regarding domestic production, I can't see it being an issue. Canada already purchased Israeli radars and recently Spike ATGM's, so I don't think Israeli pushes it off the table, especially when their option seems so much better than the Saab offering.

I don't really think the airframe is the problem, the sensor is. I don't know the sensor specs on any of those aircraft unfortunately and that is to me the most important aspect that is different from the other offerings. We know the Wedgetail is designed for long endurance, long ranges and large airsearch. The Euro/Korean systems are designed for smaller ranges in all aspects.

I think that Canada might have a market if we used a larger aircraft and made a direct competitor to the Wedgetail. NATO is looking for new AEW aircraft. Airbus aircraft, made in Canada with a Euro (or Israeli) sensor system would probably work.

 

[MilEME09]

Include the cost of an Inquisition??

you're not supposed to expect that cost