Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[ytz]

For all that talk about bricking the F-35, here's level headed analysis from Prof. Justin Bronk of RUSI (I pulled out tweets from a thread):

On F-35 fears, I get it - there is real dependency.
But if all your targeting capacity, BLOS comms, penetrating/orbital ISR and the munitions you assume you’d fight with in a war are US-provided; then dependency on the US for MDFs and ALIS/ODIN for F-35 isn’t your main problem.

The F-35’s capabilities vs Russian air defences also cannot currently be replaced or replicated with other platforms.

For Germany it’s also worth remembering that the F-35 was bought for nuclear DCA role with US supplied B61 Mod 12 so 100% dependent on US whatever the aircraft.

Against the Russian IADS, the gap is very significant. Rafale, Typhoon, Gripen really weren't designed to operate against those systems. They complement the F-35 well and vice-versa against mixed threats. US hostility isn't a contingency that was previously planned for...

If the US is on Russia’s side, a credible plan B force for that scenario would take a decade and vast investment to generate. Uncomfortable but true

Not saying it shouldn’t or can’t be done, but we need a thorough capability audit and honesty about the results as a first step…

https://twitter.com/x/status/1899040201894154459

So I hope we can get past the superficial idea that we can simply swap the F-35 for a Eurocanard and be fine. Mostly an idea usually from non-blue suiters.....

Planning for less dependency on the US will take time. And there's no better time to start than today.

 

[ytz]

Will also add this thread....

https://twitter.com/x/status/1899051031675150681

 

[Kirkhill]

Churchill. Bristal Aerospace (Winnipeg) launched Black Bart rockets. Saw one launch in the 70's while on a Winter FTX.

Fort Churchill: Historic Sites of Manitoba: Fort Churchill (Churchill)

HMCS Churchill: Historic Sites of Manitoba: HMCS Churchill / CFS Churchill / Churchill Naval Base (Kelsey Boulevard, Churchill)

Magellan Aerospace, as the company is now known, is still in the rocket business for BAE.

Black Brant - Magellan Aerospace

One of the most popular sounding rockets ever built, the Magellan-designed family of Black Brants have played a leading role in scientific exploration since 1962. More than 1,000 Black Brants have been launched with a vehicle success rate above 98%. Designed and developed at Magellan Aerospace...

magellan.aero

https://magellan.aero/wp-content/uploads/CRV7%20Rotary%20Wing%20-%20Web%20Version.pdf

https://magellan.aero/wp-content/uploads/CRV7%20Fixed%20Wing%20-%20Web%20Version.pdf

The Winnipeg shop is still open apparently.

I would really like to see it activated as a Canadian Centre of Excellence for rockets - starting with a big order to replace the CRV-7s shipped from Dundurn to Ukraine. Apparently they make useful C-UAS weapons when combined with the BAE APKWS system.

 

[Kirkhill]

For all that talk about bricking the F-35, here's level headed analysis from Prof. Justin Bronk of RUSI (I pulled out tweets from a thread):

https://twitter.com/x/status/1899040201894154459

So I hope we can get past the superficial idea that we can simply swap the F-35 for a Eurocanard and be fine. Mostly an idea usually from non-blue suiters.....

Planning for less dependency on the US will take time. And there's no better time to start than today.

Britain is dependent on US weapons. We now face a terrible choice

Donald Trump’s detente with Russia risks pushing Keir Starmer toward the Continent

www.telegraph.co.uk

The year is 2028 and masked Russian “little green men” start crossing the border of an eastern European country.

Nato’s Article 5 is invoked. In London, officials want to quickly deploy Britain’s F-35 stealth jets to the frontier – but there is a problem.

The US, unwilling to clash with Vladimir Putin, says it won’t support the deployment and refuses to provide communications support, logistics, or even spare parts.

Within a matter of weeks, the Royal Air Force’s most advanced aircraft risks being rendered inoperable along with other American platforms operated by the alliance.

This is the grim scenario that experts say Britain must now plan for as it grapples with the increasingly volatile whims of Donald Trump.

It has been made chillingly plausible by recent American decisions to cut off support to Ukraine, including both intelligence sharing and jamming software updates for Kyiv’s fleet of donated F-16 fighters.

In Germany, officials are wondering aloud about whether dozens of F-35 jets the country has purchased will also be vulnerable to a “kill switch”.

“The chances of a US government suddenly pulling the plug on US-supplied capabilities to Britain have gone from ‘don’t be ridiculous’ to ‘you’ve got to consider it’s a possibility’. That’s a sea change,” says Francis Tusa, an independent defence analyst.

“If you go back to the 1998 defence review and all the reviews since, the absolute assumption has always been that the UK’s defence fits into a US-led alliance.

“Now we face the possibility that the US is walking away and may no longer even be an ally.

“So the entire underlying assumption for UK defence has been destroyed, in about three weeks.”

Not everyone is quite so pessimistic. But there is a widespread feeling that something important has shifted.

“It’s definitely not a fuss about nothing,” agrees Professor Justin Bronk, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi).

“I think it’s fair to say that in recent weeks, there has been a seismic shift in perceptions of America’s reliability as an ally.”

Despite the jets having been in service for more than a decade, Britain’s fleet is still only cleared to carry Paveway laser-guided bombs and medium and short-range air-to-air missiles made by US defence manufacturer Raytheon.

Testing to equip the aircraft with longer-range Meteor missiles – made by pan-European missile maker MBDA – are not expected to be complete until the late 2020s.

“When you want to put an American missile on there, it happens really quickly,” the source adds.

“Want to put a British missile like the Meteor on though? It is always slow-peddled.”

Perhaps they should talk to the Israelis.

Another example is the RAF’s decision to replace its Hawker Siddeley Nimrod R1 signals intelligence-gathering aircraft with three American-made RC-135 Rivet Joint planes in the early 2010s.

There was no real alternative available at the time, Tusa says, but the decision has left the UK “dependent on the US Air Force”.

“The US has all of the systems to exploit the intelligence – we don’t,” he explains. “So Rivet Joint comes back from a mission and we have to hand the data over to a US team for processing.

“If the US really wants to stop an F-35 operator from using those aircraft, without spares the fleet will be degraded and close to useless within a small number of weeks,” Tusa says.

The Trump administration is thought to have taken similar steps recently by abruptly cutting off support for Ukraine’s donated fleet of F-16 fighter jets, a key pillar of Kyiv’s air defences.

Without needing to remotely disable the aircraft, Washington is said to have dented their usefulness by refusing to provide updates to onboard radar jammers that protect the aircraft from Russian air defence systems.

Since Sir Keir Starmer announced defence spending would rise to 2.5pc of GDP by 2027, Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, has been keen to stress that they want the money to flow into British defence businesses – rather than foreign ones.

“Our security should never be at the mercy of shifting US politics,” says Grant Shapps, the former Conservative defence secretary. “This has been a long time coming, but the situation is clearly urgent today.

“To secure our future, Britain needs greater sovereign capability—from fighter jets to missile systems, we should be developing and building more at home.”

James Cartlidge, the shadow defence secretary, is more cautious, arguing that people should “not get carried away with arguments about how the US might somehow decouple our deep defence ties”.

But he adds: “It’s clear we should be increasing our sovereign capability to give us industrial resilience and technological autonomy.

“In particular, this would enable us to maximise the economic upside of higher defence spending – delivering prosperity through rearmament.”

 

[KevinB]

Britain is dependent on US weapons. We now face a terrible choice

Donald Trump’s detente with Russia risks pushing Keir Starmer toward the Continent

www.telegraph.co.uk

A lot of that argument is baseless. The UK was the only customer wanting Meteor integration, as so it is low down the totem pole. The UK MoD is free to pay LockMart more money to speed up integration -- they aren't shy and would take the money. But since the US DoD is paying for the upgrades directly - everyone else needs to stand in line, unless they want to go off script and fund a upgrade themselves.

Any F-35 customer is free to not update the software if they don't want to - but while the updates could theoretically brick the system - they also have useful data for various systems. It was noted in several comments from Ukraine than the F-16's aren't being updated anymore - which is limiting their countermeasures - as all the data on Russian AD systems is analyzed to provide better counters in terms of the onboard defensive systems - both electronic and physical countermeasures (chaff and flares)

Perhaps they should talk to the Israelis.

The Israelis are uber dependent on America - they require munitions from us, other than being able to produce the Merkava and Namer systems for the Army, the rest of their Military is all American stuff. It has been suggested by several sources that the Israelis have coded out any lockout attempts - but at the end of the day, they still need stuff to shoot, or drop from the F-35 and F-16's etc.

 

[ytz]

A lot of that argument is baseless.

Lots of 5 yr qualified epidemiologists are experts on fighter ops these days.....

 

[KevinB]

There are a lot of things Canada should do domestically - not just because 47 is a wackjob, but from a global security rationale.
Space, Communications backbone, and Cyber would be my primary effort -- expensive yes - but necessary.
Munitions for Air Defense, and Aircraft (both AA, and ATG), as well as Naval vessels would be also in my top list.

 

[JLB50]

A lot of that argument is baseless. The UK was the only customer wanting Meteor integration, as so it is low down the totem pole. The UK MoD is free to pay LockMart more money to speed up integration -- they aren't shy and would take the money. But since the US DoD is paying for the upgrades directly - everyone else needs to stand in line, unless they want to go off script and fund a upgrade themselves.

Any F-35 customer is free to not update the software if they don't want to - but while the updates could theoretically brick the system - they also have useful data for various systems. It was noted in several comments from Ukraine than the F-16's aren't being updated anymore - which is limiting their countermeasures - as all the data on Russian AD systems is analyzed to provide better counters in terms of the onboard defensive systems - both electronic and physical countermeasures (chaff and flares)

The Israelis are uber dependent on America - they require munitions from us, other than being able to produce the Merkava and Namer systems for the Army, the rest of their Military is all American stuff. It has been suggested by several sources that the Israelis have coded out any lockout attempts - but at the end of the day, they still need stuff to shoot, or drop from the F-35 and F-16's etc.

The mere fact that the question is even being considered at the highest circles suggests that the NATO alliance is in serious trouble. With America having been the free world’s “leader” for many decades, the lack of European and Canadian confidence due to Trump is surely something Putin is planning to take advantage of.

 

[ytz]

The mere fact that the question is even being considered at the highest circles suggests that the NATO alliance is in serious trouble. With America having been the free world’s “leader” for many decades, the lack of European and Canadian confidence due to Trump is surely something Putin is planning to take advantage of.

It's all but certain Putin will test NATO resolve. The only question is whether it happens before or after a pause in Ukraine.

Long term, this is basically the peaking of American defence exports. Nobody can trust the US after this. It will take decades. But alternatives will be built and deployed.

 

[Kirkhill]

It's all but certain Putin will test NATO resolve. The only question is whether it happens before or after a pause in Ukraine.

Long term, this is basically the peaking of American defence exports. Nobody can trust the US after this. It will take decades. But alternatives will be built and deployed.

I'm a Canadian. But I'm a Brit in blood and bone.

Britain’s naval power can stop Putin. It has always been our best safeguard

Before Trafalgar, invasion was a constant threat. We must become an effective maritime force once again

www.telegraph.co.uk

We must not be distracted into building up land forces to send to the far side of Europe. Tanks cannot protect pipelines and wind farms. Nor will a regiment of Challengers in Ukraine frighten Putin. We cannot help allies when we are so vulnerable.

At worst, brave soldiers sent to do the impossible lose life and limb to no purpose, and have to be rescued, as at Basra and Helmand. But naval power can support European security and deter aggressors. A navy is expensive, but in a dangerous world it is indispensable to Britain’s prosperity and safety: the Russians are – and the Chinese soon will be – sailing round our coasts.

Let us be honest. The only thing we can usefully do is provide money, training and arms to Ukraine as long as they resist, and encourage other countries to do the same. We have never been able to intervene in central and Eastern Europe: this was as true in 1849 (when we felt sorry for the Hungarians) and 1945 (when we felt sorry for the Poles) as it is today.

If we are serious we must aim urgently to make ourselves as invulnerable as possible, so that we might be able to play an effective part in European or global affairs. A crucial aspect of Britain’s historic strength has been such invulnerability, despite its small population, its long coastline and its tiny Army.

Invulnerability was hard won, and only finally achieved after Trafalgar. Previously, invasion was a constant danger. But Napoleon, the Kaiser and Hitler all realised it was no longer feasible. So they tried to cut off our commerce, food and raw materials. As early as the 1840s, enemies were anticipating the day when Britain would starve.

...

We can make ourselves "invulnerable". If Switzerland has been able to do it surrounded by enemies then why not us? We only have one inconstant and inconsistent neighbour to worry about. With lots of resources, seas to protect 2 or 3 flanks and lots of space to buy time if necessary.

 

[KevinB]

I'm a Canadian. But I'm a Brit in blood and bone.

Britain’s naval power can stop Putin. It has always been our best safeguard

Before Trafalgar, invasion was a constant threat. We must become an effective maritime force once again

www.telegraph.co.uk

That is honestly a garbage take.
I felt my brain turning to mush while reading it. WTF is the RN going to do to Russia? Have another failed Trident launch? Shell North Korea so they can't send any more munitions or equipment to Russia? Is the author back in the 1800's where aircraft and missiles don't exist? Or is he just like Elon and stoned out on ketamine?

...

We can make ourselves "invulnerable". If Switzerland has been able to do it surrounded by enemies then why not us? We only have one inconstant and inconsistent neighbour to worry about. With lots of resources, seas to protect 2 or 3 flanks and lots of space to buy time if necessary.

You have no space as 80%+ of your population lives in Artillery range of the Border, the article is crap and has zero bearing in the 2020's especially to Canada.

 

[Kirkhill]

That is honestly a garbage take.
I felt my brain turning to mush while reading it. WTF is the RN going to do to Russia? Have another failed Trident launch? Shell North Korea so they can't send any more munitions or equipment to Russia? Is the author back in the 1800's where aircraft and missiles don't exist? Or is he just like Elon and stoned out on ketamine?


You have no space as 80%+ of your population lives in Artillery range of the Border, the article is crap and has zero bearing in the 2020's especially to Canada.

First things first. Will.

 

[ytz]

That is honestly a garbage take.

Standard tough guy take from journalists who have never served and historians. They get so anchored in historical examples that that will torture every modern context to fit their historical example. Or they'll ignore modern developments entirely, when inconvenient.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Meanwhile, about that Royal Navy thing ...

Royal Navy is 'pathetically weak', says former First Sea Lord who calls for a fleet which could 'make someone's eyes water if they cross us at sea'​

• MOD figures showed of the 12 Type 23 frigates, three didn't go to sea last year
• Type 45 destroyer, HMS Daring, spent no days at sea while undergoing a refit

The former head of the Royal Navy has launched a blistering attack on the state of the fleet, following the revelation that a quarter of the country's frigates never spent a day at sea last year.

Admiral Lord West said Britain needed a Navy which would 'make someone's eyes water if they crossed us at sea'.

Instead, the former First Sea Lord said, the number of operational vessels was 'pathetically low' and questioned whether these were enough to keep Britain safe at a time when Russia is targeting pipelines and Beijing is flexing its muscles in the South China Sea.

Royal Navy is 'pathetically weak', says former First Sea Lord

The former head of the Royal Navy has launched a blistering attack on the state of the fleet, following the revelation that a quarter of the country's frigates never spent a day at sea last year.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

What was that rallying cry of all British admirals from even before the days of Nelson again? Oh! Yeah! "I need more frigates!!!!!"

 

[GR66]

A lot of that argument is baseless. The UK was the only customer wanting Meteor integration, as so it is low down the totem pole. The UK MoD is free to pay LockMart more money to speed up integration -- they aren't shy and would take the money. But since the US DoD is paying for the upgrades directly - everyone else needs to stand in line, unless they want to go off script and fund a upgrade themselves.

Any F-35 customer is free to not update the software if they don't want to - but while the updates could theoretically brick the system - they also have useful data for various systems. It was noted in several comments from Ukraine than the F-16's aren't being updated anymore - which is limiting their countermeasures - as all the data on Russian AD systems is analyzed to provide better counters in terms of the onboard defensive systems - both electronic and physical countermeasures (chaff and flares)

The Israelis are uber dependent on America - they require munitions from us, other than being able to produce the Merkava and Namer systems for the Army, the rest of their Military is all American stuff. It has been suggested by several sources that the Israelis have coded out any lockout attempts - but at the end of the day, they still need stuff to shoot, or drop from the F-35 and F-16's etc.

Re: the Meteor missile...seems like things are moving forward:

Breaking News: British Navy tests F-35B fighter jet armed with Meteor missile for first time to improve naval air operations

Breaking News: British Navy tests F-35B fighter jet armed with Meteor missile for first time to improve naval air operations

armyrecognition.com

 

[Cloud Cover]

Auto plants are huge and have considerable land around them for vehicle marshalling and parking (as well as railheads). If they are closed/closing then possible locations for re-development into the urban bases we might want?

St. Thomas to Meaford is 3-1/4 hrs.
Oshawa to Meaford is 2-3/4 hrs.
Oshawa to Petawawa is 4 hrs.
Edmonton to Wainwright is 2-1/4 hrs

The Ford plant in St Thomas was demolished and sold. It is now an Amazon sorting mill.

I wonder if there’s any room across the road from GDLS in London to buy up and assemble tanks.

 

[FJAG]

The Ford plant in St Thomas was demolished and sold. It is now an Amazon sorting mill.

I wonder if there’s any room across the road from GDLS in London to buy up and assemble tanks.

No but its not that far away. GDLS is out by London Airport which is bounded to the east by lots of farmland. Pricey farm land.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

No but its not that far away. GDLS is out by London Airport which is bounded to the east by lots of farmland. Pricey farm land.

Didn't stop us buying all that farm acerage in Trenton, then not doing anything with it.

 

[NearingZenith]

• MOD figures showed of the 12 Type 23 frigates, three didn't go to sea last year
• Type 45 destroyer, HMS Daring, spent no days at sea while undergoing a refit

The former head of the Royal Navy has launched a blistering attack on the state of the fleet, following the revelation that a quarter of the country's frigates never spent a day at sea last year.

I thought the normal lifecycle of warships involved spending a third of their time in refit (ie. not at sea)? The RN does need more warships, but those at sea figures don’t seem unusual.