Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Not sure if this belongs here or not - but another case of us shooting ourselves in the foot?

Canadian Army says new military sleeping bags not suitable for 'typical Canadian winter'​

'I wonder if they should have just gone to Canadian Tire,' says defence expert​

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/army-sleeping-bags-arctic-1.7321680

 

[dimsum]

Not sure if this belongs here or not - but another case of us shooting ourselves in the foot?

Canadian Army says new military sleeping bags not suitable for 'typical Canadian winter'​

'I wonder if they should have just gone to Canadian Tire,' says defence expert​

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/army-sleeping-bags-arctic-1.7321680

If anything is labelled “General Purpose”, I take it to mean “will never work in the extreme ends of the spectrum” like the tropics or the Arctic.

I’d like to see the specs of the bag, to be honest. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was only rated to -20 (or higher).

 

[KevinB]

Not sure if this belongs here or not - but another case of us shooting ourselves in the foot?

Canadian Army says new military sleeping bags not suitable for 'typical Canadian winter'​

'I wonder if they should have just gone to Canadian Tire,' says defence expert​

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/army-sleeping-bags-arctic-1.7321680

Once again the made in Canada bites the CAF in the ass.
One of the rules I think that should be put in place in any Requirement for the CAF is ‘what does the US Military use, and let’s test that first to see if it makes sense for the CAF’

Down here there is a Combat Development rule that says ‘one cannot make a new requirement of another fielded system fills that role’ - the ideal is based on having common systems for all services when possible - now some services end up gaming the system, by adding additional KPP to the requirements so the in service system of another isn’t adopted. Sometimes that makes sense, but often it’s simply because one service has a desired system, and it’s just designed to ensure that system is adopted — as opposed to adopting the other services system that would work just as well (if not better). If the HASC and SASC were savvy enough their staffers would see through this and come down to ensure those frivolous programs were not funded.

Don’t get me wrong, some service systems are not viable for others, but the ‘work arounds’ should be a fair and open competition. Not just a BS JNA or back door shady buy using O&M funds to get a new system (looking at you there USASOC).

 

[KevinB]

If anything is labelled “General Purpose”, I take it to mean “will never work in the extreme ends of the spectrum” like the tropics or the Arctic.

I’d like to see the specs of the bag, to be honest. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was only rated to -20 (or higher).

Or how it was rated.

Quite often a lot of the sleeping bag ratings require use of a cot and 2” thermarest to be enough insulation for a -40 rating.

Which isn’t exactly practical for a Light Infantry soldier.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Once again the made in Canada bites the CAF in the ass.
One of the rules I think that should be put in place in any Requirement for the CAF is ‘what does the US Military use, and let’s test that first to see if it makes sense for the CAF’

Down here there is a Combat Development rule that says ‘one cannot make a new requirement of another fielded system fills that role’ - the ideal is based on having common systems for all services when possible - now some services end up gaming the system, by adding additional KPP to the requirements so the in service system of another isn’t adopted. Sometimes that makes sense, but often it’s simply because one service has a desired system, and it’s just designed to ensure that system is adopted — as opposed to adopting the other services system that would work just as well (if not better). If the HASC and SASC were savvy enough their staffers would see through this and come down to ensure those frivolous programs were not funded.

Don’t get me wrong, some service systems are not viable for others, but the ‘work arounds’ should be a fair and open competition. Not just a BS JNA or back door shady buy using O&M funds to get a new system (looking at you there USASOC).

Many many years ago my father-in-law worked in Natick at the NSSC (Natick Soldier Systems Center) (he ended his career there) and was involved in alot of testing/development for the US Army back in the day. The rigors of the testing, retesting and retesting again that he told me about was quite fascinating.

 

[lenaitch]

When I flew around northern Ontario we had to use a Woods Five Star. It's discontinued now but if I recall was rated to -50*F (degrees F back then). To 'sleep rough' you still needed a ground sheet or pad to keep cold and moisture from wicking up from below. It was over 20lb and I certainly would want to hump that around a lot. I see Woods newer product is their Yukon 10. Still 23lb and it looks like you still need a ground pad.

I'm not surprised a "general purpose" anything wouldn't be suitable for northern Canada in the winter.