I'll believe it when I see it.
Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending
- Thread starter Maxman1
- Start date
KevinB
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 25,491
- Points
- 1,260
McG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 4,151
- Points
- 1,260
Defence spending is going to be defence spending tomorrow. This is effectively the defence spending mega thread. Why kill this to start something that is just going to be the same?
- Reaction score
- 5,948
- Points
- 1,190
We'll probably wait until whoever forms government to throw their empty promises in an official budget sometime next month before we start fresh just to focus the discussion before it moves back to PRes restructure, Toronto EMS seques and how we can replace everything we own with UAVs that wear toques with no gloves in the summer.
- Reaction score
- 5,948
- Points
- 1,190
And to frame the problems we're looking at, here's a short video from The National that gives a BLUF on how difficult this road will be:
MilEME09
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 4,597
- Points
- 1,210
FTFY
Maxman1
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,033
- Points
- 1,160
- Reaction score
- 7,101
- Points
- 1,040
That's pretty funny, given that we don't have enough crews to sail half of our current 4 subs, or enough people to do the shore/technical support side of things.
MilEME09
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 4,597
- Points
- 1,210
I doubt we would sit by and not recruit and train more crews over the next ten years. While these get built and delivered.
- Reaction score
- 7,101
- Points
- 1,040
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.
Ludoc
Member
- Reaction score
- 114
- Points
- 580
They didn't say they would deliver the subs 12 months. It was the self propelled guns that could be delivered in that time. The timeline for subs was 4 by 2035. The video also said they had proposed crew training to go along with that.
That means 10 years to transition from our current subs to new ones. I am not a Navy guy, so I don't understand the complexities of ships, let alone subs, but as an amateur that sounds doable.
That means 10 years to transition from our current subs to new ones. I am not a Navy guy, so I don't understand the complexities of ships, let alone subs, but as an amateur that sounds doable.
MilEME09
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 4,597
- Points
- 1,210
12 months was the spg timeline, subs would be 5 to 6 years for the first one, with one every year after that. Which gives ample time to scale up recruiting and training.
Czech_pivo
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,349
- Points
- 1,260
Sounds like 100-300 people should be off to SK for some extended training if we sign contracts with them.
When the SK’s built the new car battery facilities in Windsor for Stellantis’s vehicle factory, the SK’s sent over dozens and dozens of their own people (and families) to Windsor to help train the new employees and ramp with the facility.
It’s something that we should be looking into.
Czech_pivo
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,349
- Points
- 1,260
In all seriousness, if we had the crews to man all 4 subs at the same time, would they actually be in a state to sail? Would we able to muster 3 of them in the next 5-6 months if we had the crews?
MilEME09
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 4,597
- Points
- 1,210
Victoria needs 59 crew, KSS-III needs 50, and the Koreans say a skeleton crew of 30 is min needed. So we would need 200 training for the first 4 boats, and would have 6 years to graduate the first 50.
- Reaction score
- 7,101
- Points
- 1,040
Training where though? All that requires new infrastructure which is a 10 year timeline, and ADM(IE) is already struggling to catch up to the requirements for supporting things like northern bases and things for all the incoming planes (SAR, P8s, etc) as well as all the old buildings that need replaced.
- Reaction score
- 7,101
- Points
- 1,040
We don't have crews for 3 subs so somewhat irrelevant. The fact that some are in EDWP or turning into parts bins just saves us from admitting that, and similarly the fact that some CPFs docking work periods are changing from 6M (on paper, realistically 2 years) to 4-5 years similarly save us from lack of CPF crews.
People can't walk in off the streets to do all the positions, for a lot of them you need 10 years or more to FG someone with experience and training.
We haven't even got it figured out for the ships we have on the books, so while inconvenient to keep mentioning, ignoring it for more hulls isn't going to make it better.
Oldgateboatdriver
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 3,104
- Points
- 1,010
No. But at the same time, we have to stop saying that we need new ships/boats - especially to attract and retain personnel - but we can't get them because we need time to recruit and train people and build the attendant facilities. Its an unsolvable never ending problem when you put it that way. You have no choice in reconstruction but to start all of these things simultaneously, and its an expensive effort, and yes, for a while there will be a lowering of standard and reduced capacity. But if you want to replace gear and expand the fleet and personnel, it has to be done. It also means that, in the meantime, the GoC has to stop dispatching the few trained personnel that could be used as trainers on operations all over the damn planet.
Better to do it in peace time than in war time. WWII should have taught that to the RCN.
Better to do it in peace time than in war time. WWII should have taught that to the RCN.
- Reaction score
- 9,893
- Points
- 1,160
So you are proposing training facilities in Saskatchewan? HMCS Unicorn would be an appropriate location.
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 13,782
- Points
- 1,160
South Korea pushing hard to equip Canada
Similar threads
