I'll believe it when I see it.
Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending
- Thread starter Maxman1
- Start date
Interesting news. I wonder who all got paid off in this situation?
mil.in.ua
Russian Company Supplied Untested Armor Plates for Oshkosh Vehicles for Two Years
For about two years, employees at Evraz North America Inc., a Russian-owned steel plant operator in the US, falsified quality control test results on some armored plating for the vehicle’s manufacturer.
mil.in.ua
- Reaction score
- 9,573
- Points
- 1,160
So, I am a fan of the Senator.
But. If true. $464,650 per unit. That is a bit steep for me.
A utility vehicle for domestic service should be somewhere around the $50-60,000 mark. Some variant of the F250-350, Ram 2500-3500, Silverado 2500-3500.
The Swedes have opted for this runabout - initial order of 400 with an intent to purchase a fleet of 3000.
Myself I would be looking for an interior something like this - a more utilitarian, dual function vehicle for both troops and cargo.
Basically a sturdy, weatherproof runabout that can carry a section to a training area on the highway and follow a forestry reserve road to a cutline. And maybe even manage the cutline, as well as perform as both a CQ and Coy CP.
If we are going to splash out 500,000 for a vehicle then might as well go whole hog and put that money toward Bandvagns and LAV IIs.
The IFVs should be purchased along with the tanks as a matched set.
But. If true. $464,650 per unit. That is a bit steep for me.
A utility vehicle for domestic service should be somewhere around the $50-60,000 mark. Some variant of the F250-350, Ram 2500-3500, Silverado 2500-3500.
The Swedes have opted for this runabout - initial order of 400 with an intent to purchase a fleet of 3000.
Myself I would be looking for an interior something like this - a more utilitarian, dual function vehicle for both troops and cargo.
Basically a sturdy, weatherproof runabout that can carry a section to a training area on the highway and follow a forestry reserve road to a cutline. And maybe even manage the cutline, as well as perform as both a CQ and Coy CP.
If we are going to splash out 500,000 for a vehicle then might as well go whole hog and put that money toward Bandvagns and LAV IIs.
The IFVs should be purchased along with the tanks as a matched set.
Czech_pivo
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,905
- Points
- 1,260
Biden, Sleepy Joe got paid. According to Trump's Republicans its always Sleepy Joe.Interesting news. I wonder who all got paid off in this situation?
Russian Company Supplied Untested Armor Plates for Oshkosh Vehicles for Two Years
For about two years, employees at Evraz North America Inc., a Russian-owned steel plant operator in the US, falsified quality control test results on some armored plating for the vehicle’s manufacturer.
McG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,830
- Points
- 1,260
That is the modern generation of LSVW from the original design owner.
MilEME09
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,691
- Points
- 1,210
It aint perfect but its a infantry mobility vehicle, not an infantry fighting vehicle. What I see great promise with is the senator truck.
With the right modifications I bet we could mount various systems into the back such as RBS-70, or Spike
- Reaction score
- 9,573
- Points
- 1,160
Yep.
Keep Western Star out of it. In fairness IVECO has sold a lot of vehicles over the years so they must have been doing more right than wrong.
On the other hand IVECO's original LSVW was pretty much a bog standard production line vehicle commonly found on the streets of Europe. Slightly militarized.
In Canada we tend to go for military exotics and buy them once a generation when that last bearing has seized.
Czech_pivo
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,905
- Points
- 1,260
Not sure if anyone has read this article yet. Its on 'increased' military spending in the Arctic.
cabinradio.ca
Our old friend - accounting - enters into the room, looks around, sizes things up and then walks into the middle of the room drops its pants and takes a nice smelly deuce and then walks out smiling.
Asked by Cabin Radio about the $218 million and the smaller figure for the next five years, Blair replied: “I’ll be announcing a substantially increased investment in the northern operational support hubs today. It’s about $2.67 billion and it’s our intent to move quickly so that could be done over the next five years.”
According to DND, what actually happened is the department decided to switch the type of accounting it was using to get its figures, without telling anyone. (Whether even the minister knew or fully understood this is unclear, based on his statements.)
There are two types of accounting going on here. One is cash-basis accounting and the other is accrual accounting.
Let’s say you receive $20,000 from a particularly nice aunt to make your yard nicer. Your aunt expects you to gradually spend it over 20 years.
Cash-basis accounting would mean entering $20,000 in the column for the year that you got the money. Job done, thanks for coming, the end.
Accrual accounting would be more likely to mean entering $1,000 for each of the 20 years that form the expected life of the yard project. It still equals $20,000, but it’s spread over time.
We could spend a lifetime discussing which system accountants might pick in a given situation and why.
For the purposes of this article: the federal government picked the accrual system when it first announced the money in April 2024, then magically and silently changed to the cash-basis system last week. When asked about it, the minister responsible said it was an increase instead of explaining the accounting change.
De Casanove said the federal government switched to the cash-basis figure because $2.67 billion “more accurately captures the broader financial commitment being made to strengthen Arctic infrastructure and operations.”
According to the Library of Parliament, the Canadian government has used full accrual accounting for its budget since 2003.
DND walks back entirety of minister’s ‘substantial increase’ pledge
Last week, Canada's defence minister announced a "substantially increased investment" in northern military hubs. DND now says there's no new money at all.
cabinradio.ca
Our old friend - accounting - enters into the room, looks around, sizes things up and then walks into the middle of the room drops its pants and takes a nice smelly deuce and then walks out smiling.
DND walks back entirety of minister’s ‘substantial increase’ pledge
Canada’s defence minister last week pledged a “substantially increased investment” in new northern military hubs, suggesting the figure had increased more than ten-fold. But it wasn’t true.
In 2024, the federal government had said $218 million would be available to build those hubs – but only $18 million in the opening five years, a low sum for infrastructure in the North.Asked by Cabin Radio about the $218 million and the smaller figure for the next five years, Blair replied: “I’ll be announcing a substantially increased investment in the northern operational support hubs today. It’s about $2.67 billion and it’s our intent to move quickly so that could be done over the next five years.”
According to DND, what actually happened is the department decided to switch the type of accounting it was using to get its figures, without telling anyone. (Whether even the minister knew or fully understood this is unclear, based on his statements.)
There are two types of accounting going on here. One is cash-basis accounting and the other is accrual accounting.
Let’s say you receive $20,000 from a particularly nice aunt to make your yard nicer. Your aunt expects you to gradually spend it over 20 years.
Cash-basis accounting would mean entering $20,000 in the column for the year that you got the money. Job done, thanks for coming, the end.
Accrual accounting would be more likely to mean entering $1,000 for each of the 20 years that form the expected life of the yard project. It still equals $20,000, but it’s spread over time.
We could spend a lifetime discussing which system accountants might pick in a given situation and why.
For the purposes of this article: the federal government picked the accrual system when it first announced the money in April 2024, then magically and silently changed to the cash-basis system last week. When asked about it, the minister responsible said it was an increase instead of explaining the accounting change.
De Casanove said the federal government switched to the cash-basis figure because $2.67 billion “more accurately captures the broader financial commitment being made to strengthen Arctic infrastructure and operations.”
According to the Library of Parliament, the Canadian government has used full accrual accounting for its budget since 2003.
Similar threads
- Article
