Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[PrairieFella]

Agreed there's a role, but is there a necessity?

Are all the squadron A1 vehicles currently tracked, or do we make do with some wheeled LAVs? Or is "fast pack" (a new term to me) a special subset of the A1 that absolutely must be and is already tracked?

At the moment, it's a mix. The wrecker is obviously tracked, the SSM used to be in a TLAV primarily for the tank squadrons but that's becoming less common as they phase out, so you'll see more TAPVs or LAVs. I've also heard of a TLAV amb beingused, but I have no clue if they still use them, could just be Bisons/ACSV now. Any supplies that need to go out will be on MSVS. Ideally, everything except the trucks would be tracked.

 

[KevinB]

Agreed there's a role, but is there a necessity?

Only if you care about Armoured casualties…

Pretty sure the Dragoons and 12Blind guys don’t care about tracks as they don’t have them.

Now personally I question the competency of an Army that doesn’t have tracked medical evacuation vehicles, but I’m also questioning so much about the CA already that this sort of idiocy would simply be par for the course.

Potentially the only way it could get worse is if you had a Russian asset controlling it.

 

[PrairieFella]

Only if you care about Armoured casualties…

Pretty sure the Dragoons and 12Blind guys don’t care about tracks as they don’t have them.

Now personally I question the competency of an Army that doesn’t have tracked medical evacuation vehicles, but I’m also questioning so much about the CA already that this sort of idiocy would simply be par for the course.

Potentially the only way it could get worse is if you had a Russian asset controlling it.

And we will take A LOT of casualties in the next war. That's just the nature of the beast, always have been with tank warfare when fighting a peer force.

 

[MilEME09]

sadly only six

https://twitter.com/x/status/1930636391903281421

Edmonton alone probably needs 10x this

 

[Czech_pivo]

sadly only six

https://twitter.com/x/status/1930636391903281421

Edmonton alone probably needs 10x this

How many condos/apartments per building?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Only if you care about Armoured casualties…

Pretty sure the Dragoons and 12Blind guys don’t care about tracks as they don’t have them.

Now personally I question the competency of an Army that doesn’t have tracked medical evacuation vehicles, but I’m also questioning so much about the CA already that this sort of idiocy would simply be par for the course.

Potentially the only way it could get worse is if you had a Russian asset controlling it.

The Ukrainians have driven this point home many times with both M113 and Bradley's retrieving wounded under fire. You just have to look at the state of the roads in a peer conflict to know that you are not having a speed advantage with wheels right at the front.

 

[Brad Sallows]

The Ukrainians have driven this point home many times with both M113 and Bradley's retrieving wounded under fire. You just have to look at the state of the roads in a peer conflict to know that you are not having a speed advantage with wheels right at the front.

What kind of "under fire"? If you're describing efforts to remove casualties in the middle of a firefight, ambs aren't intended to retrieve wounded under fire. I'd expect the F Ech to use its F Ech vehicles to do so. They're already at risk.

If doctrinal guidelines and terrain studies show tracks are needed, then fine: tracks. If the same for heavy armour, then also fine. The discussion should be very clear, though, about where ambulances (or recovery vehicles, or replenishment vehicles) actually should be going and how secure that area should be. If schools are teaching that these vehicles should expect to join a firing line during a mad minute in order to perform their functions, things have changed.

If, however, the supporting vehicles are expected to come forward into a relatively secure situation/location (eg. during consolidation), then it might not be necessary to buy IFVs to move people and combat supplies.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

What kind of "under fire"? If you're describing efforts to remove casualties in the middle of a firefight, ambs aren't intended to retrieve wounded under fire. I'd expect the F Ech to use its F Ech vehicles to do so. They're already at risk.

If doctrinal guidelines and terrain studies show tracks are needed, then fine: tracks. If the same for heavy armour, then also fine. The discussion should be very clear, though, about where ambulances (or recovery vehicles, or replenishment vehicles) actually should be going and how secure that area should be. If schools are teaching that these vehicles should expect to join a firing line during a mad minute in order to perform their functions, things have changed.

If, however, the supporting vehicles are expected to come forward into a relatively secure situation/location (eg. during consolidation), then it might not be necessary to buy IFVs to move people and combat supplies.

From what I have seen the Bradley's sticking their nose right into the fight, suppressing enemy infantry and shrugging off mortar bursts, while evacuating people.

The M113's seem to stay away from the direct fight and use LOS cover to avoid ATGM's, but are under some small arms fire and lots of artillery fire.

 

[PuckChaser]

How many condos/apartments per building?

Looks like 12 and it's a joke of an announcement.

All the major bases need their barracks ripped down and replaced with modern 1 bdrm apartments to be used as single quarters. Transients stay in Yukon lodges.

 

[MilEME09]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1930558921367843153

Transit van shooting loitering munitions, and if we got them, there would still be an argument that the ARes could not maintain them

 

[FJAG]

What kind of "under fire"? If you're describing efforts to remove casualties in the middle of a firefight, ambs aren't intended to retrieve wounded under fire. I'd expect the F Ech to use its F Ech vehicles to do so. They're already at risk.

If doctrinal guidelines and terrain studies show tracks are needed, then fine: tracks. If the same for heavy armour, then also fine. The discussion should be very clear, though, about where ambulances (or recovery vehicles, or replenishment vehicles) actually should be going and how secure that area should be. If schools are teaching that these vehicles should expect to join a firing line during a mad minute in order to perform their functions, things have changed.

If, however, the supporting vehicles are expected to come forward into a relatively secure situation/location (eg. during consolidation), then it might not be necessary to buy IFVs to move people and combat supplies.

Just thought I'd stick my nose into this fight where I have really no dogs in the hunt.

If you look at the CBO establishments for the ABCT you'll find that with the exception of the artillery and engineer battalions that the medical platoons of the CABs, Cav regt, and even the medical coy in the bde support bn re all tracked armoured AMPVs. And there are plenty of them.

In the SBCT its the same where the majority of ambulances are M1133 Strykers with the exception that the Med Coy in the SBCT has a mix of 6 Stryker ambulances and nine wheeled ones.

I'd say the Americans are folks who are serious about the medical evacuation of their personnel have done the studies about terrain and combat conditions and come down heavily in favour of armoured ambulances. I've seen videos of US medevacs crews putting their lives at risk picking up casualties from hot zones right from Vietnam to Afghanistan. Why would we consider land-based medics and ambulances be any less prepared to push far forward in order to give a casualty that little advantage in time that may mean the difference between life and death. I expect our medics would be just as prepared if given the right tools for the job. I don't think we are that dogmatically risk averse. If we are then its about time to break up Health Services and reform the RAMC.

$0.02

 

[Brad Sallows]

I'd say the Americans are folks who are serious about the medical evacuation of their personnel have done the studies about terrain and combat conditions and come down heavily in favour of armoured ambulances.

I'm not trying to rewrite the book on armoured ambulance where bullets and splinters are flying.

Wheels vs tracks.

Non- vs lightly- vs heavily-armoured.

6 possible combinations. Where is each required? In particular, it is really necessary to spend the money on logistical variants of IFVs?

If a lightly armoured box on tracks like the M113 is needed and an 8-wheel lightly armoured box just can't do the job, then find some way to buy lightly armoured boxes on tracks.

If doctrine calls for logistical vehicles to come forward while a combat team is in the middle of rooting out a dug-in BMP platoon which has called in FPFs, then, sure, heavily armoured boxes on tracks.

 

[MilEME09]

I'm not trying to rewrite the book on armoured ambulance where bullets and splinters are flying.

Wheels vs tracks.

Non- vs lightly- vs heavily-armoured.

6 possible combinations. Where is each required? In particular, it is really necessary to spend the money on logistical variants of IFVs?

If a lightly armoured box on tracks like the M113 is needed and an 8-wheel lightly armoured box just can't do the job, then find some way to buy lightly armoured boxes on tracks.

If doctrine calls for logistical vehicles to come forward while a combat team is in the middle of rooting out a dug-in BMP platoon which has called in FPFs, then, sure, heavily armoured boxes on tracks.

another aspect we cant over look, hows our airborne medievac capabilities looking? also probably not good

 

[Fabius]

Dozens of lay offs from London’s General Dynamics Land Systems

Dozens of salaried workers have been let go from London’s General Dynamics Land Systems.

www.ctvnews.ca

There is a common trend on display within this article posted earlier. In the last year we have seen Colt Canada, GDLS Canada, SeaSpan all expressing the same concern. They all needed firm commitments and contracts to maintain their current capacity and capabilities.

If Canada wants a domestic defence industry it needs to pay for it. There needs to be consistent R&D program money, continuous build programs and routine rebuild/upgrade programs.

Buying everything from C6s to Ships once every 30 years is not compatible with maintaining a domestic defence industry.

If anything the lessons of UKR is likely that industrial capacity and R&D ability is as important if not much much more so than the exact weapons and vehicles your army is equipped with year to year during peacetime.

 

[Fabius]

another aspect we cant over look, hows our airborne medievac capabilities looking? also probably not good

The CAF has CMERT. It’s a good MEDEVAC capability but realistically very small.

Good background here:

Casualty evacuation: Fine-tuning the RCAF’s CMERT capability - Skies Mag

After developing and deploying aeromedical evacuation to Mali, the Canadian Armed Forces is training to make it an enduring capability.

skiesmag.com

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Given that the drone interdiction area is some 40km behind the frontline, you need the heavier stuff up at the front and then they transfer to lighter stuff like the Roshel products, we could likley buy 2 or more of them for the cost of one LAV ambulance.

 

[Brad Sallows]

another aspect we cant over look, hows our airborne medievac capabilities looking? also probably not good

We may not have enough of them, but I suppose we already have at least one platform that is good enough.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Given that the drone interdiction area is some 40km behind the frontline, you need the heavier stuff up at the front and then they transfer to lighter stuff like the Roshel products, we could likley buy 2 or more of them for the cost of one LAV ambulance.

Given that drones are knocking out tanks, for this threat it may not matter how heavily we armour the logistical vehicles.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Given that drones are knocking out tanks, for this threat it may not matter how heavily we armour the logistical vehicles.

It takes a lot of drones to achieve the videos we see, so an armoured vehicle with countermeasures gives you a chance against Drones, Artillery shrapnel and small arms. Ambulances are going to be very expendable.

 

[markppcli]

another aspect we cant over look, hows our airborne medievac capabilities looking? also probably not good

Getting a medical evacuation by air in LSCO is simply not happening.