• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Military Wish-list To Be Delivered This Fall

Pencil Tech

Full Member
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
210
From the Globe and Mail 14/09/2005

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050914.wgraham0914/BNStory/National/


By STEPHEN THORNE
Wednesday, September 14, 2005
Canadian Press

Ottawa - Defence Minister Bill Graham will go to cabinet this fall with proposals to buy new equipment for Canada's military, some of which he hopes to have before he sends combat troops to Afghanistan in February.

"I expect this fall some time to be bringing forward to cabinet a proposition which will enable us to acquire the equipment we need to have, not only for this mission, but for other missions like it," Mr. Graham said Wednesday.

"It's unlikely, given the nature of military procurement, we would be able to acquire anything . . . for next February, although we might be able to acquire isolated pieces of equipment. Major purchases take longer."

Such isolated purchases could include new artillery pieces, which a military spokesman said are still before Treasury Board for approval.
The 1,200 combat troops slated to join U.S.-led operations in southern Afghanistan early next year will rely on the Americans or other coalition countries for resources they don't have, such as helicopter transport.

In fact, Mr. Graham's self-described "aggressive" procurement plan is widely expected to be heavy on the transport element - trucks, planes, helicopters, and possibly even ships to transport and maintain troops and equipment.

The government has already committed to spending about $600-million on 66 mobile gun systems - armoured vehicles with 105-mm cannons on top, known as Strykers in the United States. Mr. Graham's plan to go to cabinet comes as a result of the February budget's promise of a $12.8-billion increase in defence spending over five years and April's defence policy statement, which charted the military's new course.

The increases to the $13.5-billion defence budget amount to only $500-million this year and $600-million next year - housekeeping money.

But Mr. Graham and his chief of defence staff, Gen. Rick Hillier, have said in the past that the budget's carefully laid out defence spending plans are not set in stone and can shift if purchasing needs or opportunities arise.

There are currently 250 Canadian troops in Kandahar running a provincial reconstruction team. Later this fall, they will be shored up with armoured troops who are shutting down Canada's military operations in Kabul.

There are also an undisclosed number of Canadian special forces troops operating out of Kandahar, presumably alongside Americans. A 350-member command centre will also move in after New Year's.

Deputy Prime Minister Ann McLellan, who was in Afghanistan on Wednesday, said Canadian troops will likely be there for years.
The combat troops will be deployed hunting Taliban and al-Qaeda insurgents, Mr. Graham confirmed.

"This is a multilateral mission," Mr. Graham said in a teleconference from Berlin, where he is attending a meeting of NATO ministers. "We will have the necessary equipment there so that our troops will be able to do the job.

"But we won't have all the equipment. Heavy helicopters, for example - we don't have any at the moment. They will be furnished either by the Dutch, the British or the Americans, or by other allies.

"Just like in all of our multilateral missions, we don't bring every single element to the party," he added. "Everybody brings different assets."
During the early stages of the war on terror three years ago, Canadian combat troops relied exclusively on U.S. Chinook helicopters to get them in and out of battle zones, as well as to re-supply them.

The arrangement proved unsatisfactory, with the Canucks inevitably shuffled to the bottom of the Americans' overloaded priority lists. On one mission, they began running out of food and water before they were re-supplied.

During NATO operations in Kabul over the past two years, some mountain reconnaissance missions were cancelled or cut short because German helicopters were unavailable.

 
Very good news that some politician types are at least showing that we actually need these assets.
 
Pencil Tech said:
The government has already committed to spending about $600-million on 66 mobile gun systems â ” armoured vehicles with 105-mm cannons on top, known as Strykers in the United States.

<groan> What's the point of getting new money when we do things like this with it.... :brickwall:
 
Infanteer:

Go easy on your new smiley.  Your going to wear out that poor wall.  ;)
 
Kirkhill said:
Infanteer:

Go easy on your new smiley.   Your going to wear out that poor wall.   ;)

My moniter, which used to serve as the wall, likes the new smiley.
 
Come on that walls got to last us until 2008, after which we we re sell that same wall to buy another smaller but more mobile wall...after the resarch of course :dontpanic:
 
Infanteer said:
<groan> What's the point of getting new money when we do things like this with it.... :brickwall:

Why do you say that? I'm not being rhetorical - I'm actually curious since I don't know much about it.
 
Do a search on the MGS - everybody here has pretty much stated the thing is a POS; hell, I don't even think the Americans are going to buy the proposed varient.  And yet I see that we are still committed to buying the Ross RifleMGS.
 
Infanteer said:
Ross RifleMGS.


All too true. Just goes to show you the history the CF has in regards to equipment procurment. What were they thinking? replace the MBT with a WHEELED vehicle? I know the americans have the MGS (Stryker), but they kept the M1 Abrams... Sorry to jack the thread, i know this isnt about the MGS, as it has been discussed to no end previously. Just venting... Off to put another dent in my brick wall.
 
Brilliant Idea that...


I vote we name the "soon to be acquired over damning evidence of unfeasibility" MGS the SAM HUGHES!!!


 
It will be interesting to see what other useful items the Liberals think the CF needs.  Its hard to think of items that are more wasteful than the MSG, when their cheaper items out there to replace the Leo's.. and there actually tanks.  Maybe 24 new heru's to replaces the 32 we have now.  Nothing like buying less of something you need more of and use all time.
 
Hey Radiohead...

  I agree with everything you just said.  Just a quick thought about replacing the Hercs though (And no, I'm not getting off topic, its just relevent to what radiohead had posted).  If the Liberals buy 15 fixed-wing SAR aircraft, and 24 new Hercs - that would actually increase our airlift capacity, would it not? 

I know replacing 32 Hercs with 24 seems like a bit of a shaft, but when you think about how many Hercs are now being used for SAR - that should give us a few more dedicated transport airframes, no?
 
Forget tanks or the MGS, I think we need (By prioirity) for the army is...
...
(1) Heavy lift choppers
(2) Attack Choppers
(3) Speed up CTS
(4) MLVW Replacements and start looking for HLVW replacements
(5) Stronger engines for griffins
(6) 155mm Towed artillery guns
(7) Stryker mortar carrier with 120mm Mortar (Yes their is a US version with 120mm Mortar).
(8) Precision guided munitions for 155mm guns and 120mm mortars
(9) More LAV III TUA than they planned on buying
(10) Speed up the acquisition of ALAAWS and CASW Procurement
(11) More engineering vehicles
(12) Additional LAV III Infantry Carriers
(13) Now I'll place in the MGS or new tanks or rooikat or whatever other armored DFS system we need. It will sit in Canada anyways.
 
I really don't want to turn this thread into another "Everybody Create their own cyber CF" thread, but since we're on the topic of a "Wish-List", this is my two cents.  This is for the Canadian Forces as a whole, not just one branch.

1.  Speed up CTS.
2.  Replace MLVW.
3.  Start looking at replacing HLVW.
4.  Buy all-new Hercs to replace the ones we have.  (24-26, J model would be nice if they could get the bugs worked out).
5.  15 new SAR aircraft.
6.  Upgrade Griffon helicopters with necessary upgrades.  (Stronger engines, and all the modifications that upgrade would require).
7.  Some heavy lift helos for future operations.
8.  A serious look into potential contenders for an attack helo, or an armed-recon helo.  (Very useful if we ever get involved in African problems, for example.)
9.  SCRATCH the MGS idea altogether.  Between attack helos and various other IFV options, the MGS idea should be killed ASAP.

10.  Not an equipment wish-list item, but a possible cost saving item.  An overhaul of the "Whole Fleet Management" system, so vehicles and equipment are housed at more cost-friendly and efficient locations than they are now.

Honestly, thats it.  Pretty down to earth and realistic, I would think.  Given the types of operations we can see ourselves in, in the near and immediate future  (Afghanistan, possibly operations to protect populations from ethnic violence such as Sudan or many other African countries) - I think the above would suit us just fine.  Ofcourse I would love to see some other goodies added to our inventory, but to be perfectly honest and realistic - I would be satisfied with the above.

Speed up the CTS program so our soldiers have the clothing equipment they need.  In relation to this, also speed up the procurement of weapon and personal equipment accessories, such as mounting rails, tactical lights, IF laser aimers, etc.

Replace the MLVW with a vehicle that has more power, yet is still very fuel efficient.  (This is a big issue with fuel costs the way they are now).  There are several vehicles out there that could fulfill this role and still be fuel efficient, while offering more power than the current MLVW.  The sooner the better.

Start looking at replacing the HLVW with a vehicle that is fuel efficient.  There are several production lines from the US and the EU that we could tap into that could bring the cost of this acquisition way down.

Procuring 24-26 new Hercs would drastically improve our airlift situation.  Especially if they are the stretched J models, with all new airframes and avionics.  (As far as I know, the J models still have some bugs to be worked out though.)

Too tired to finish explaining everything in this post, BUT -- did treasury board not just approve the acquisition of 155mm towed howitzers for deployment to Kandahar.  (15 systems to be exact, no?)  Thats an unexpected little treat.
 
You guys are looking for MLVW and even HLVW replacements, where I think an LSVW replacement would be much more of a priority.....or am I missing something?
 
Nope, good call George - totally forgot to include that in the list.  DEFINITELY a priority, good catch.
 
Can I get an AMEN!?

I see no reason why LSVW couldn't be replaced with something like the 5/4 or CUCV - civvie pattern heavy-duty 4X4 pickup adapted to fit the standard LSVW rear boxes. I bet something like the Dodge 3500 series with the Cummins diesel would work just fine. Cheap and easy to do.

As far as MLVW "replacement" goes, I don't see any reason to *replace* the MLVW as a platform. I see plenty of reasons to replace the current fleet, but not much reason to muck with an already proven design. Perhaps use a more modern powerplant, maybe fix a few known issues, but for the most part, just buy more of the same.

Given that it looks liike the LAV family is going to form the backbone of our tactical vehicle fleet, I'd buy a lot of them. Buy enough LAVs to equip all the Reserve Armoured units with their complement of vehicles, pushed out to the units so they can actually train on them. These need not be the fully-optioned, all-singing, all-dancing versions (for example, Reserve LAVs might not be fitted with the up-armour kit) but we need to get the troops exposure to the vehicles that they would be using in-theatre. Even equipping all Reserve Armour units with Bison would be a huge step forward and a big morale booster.

I think we also need a real tracked, gun tank (per the Future Armour thread) but politically, that's probably wish list stuff at the moment, not a realistic expectation.

Updating the helicopter fleet, especially adding (restoring!) heavy-lift capability, is also a very good idea.

DG
 
DG-41 said:
Given that it looks like the LAV family is going to form the backbone of our tactical vehicle fleet, I'd buy a lot of them. Buy enough LAVs to equip all the Reserve Armoured units with their complement of vehicles, pushed out to the units so they can actually train on them. These need not be the fully-optioned, all-singing, all-dancing versions (for example, Reserve LAVs might not be fitted with the up-armour kit) but we need to get the troops exposure to the vehicles that they would be using in-theatre. Even equipping all Reserve Armour units with Bison would be a huge step forward and a big morale booster.

I agree with you to a point.  The LAV III, Bison and Coyote are all different vehicles.  We have to 'clean up' our fleet and have one common platform.  Currently Bison drivers can not drive Coyotes, as they are totally different vehicles mechanically.  LAVs are different again and require the Air Brake Crse.  I would like to see the Bisons and Coyotes replaced in the Regs by LAVs and cascaded down to the Reserves, with the intention of converting totally to LAV from there.  Once the Reserves are on LAV, then they, as you say, will be more likely to be 'usable' by the Regs.  'One type of equipment for all'.
 
DG-41 said:
Can I get an AMEN!?

I see no reason why LSVW couldn't be replaced with something like the 5/4 or CUCV - civvie pattern heavy-duty 4X4 pickup adapted to fit the standard LSVW rear boxes. I bet something like the Dodge 3500 series with the Cummins diesel would work just fine. Cheap and easy to do.

I agree with leaving the MLVW design and upgrading the fleet, and replacing the LSVW. But I'm concerned with what I've heard for the replacement to the LS. From a sigs perspectice, I've heard talk of putting the pod on the back of a MILCOTS, and that things gets stuck EVERYWHERE..As much bad can be said about the LS, she can certainly go some awkwards places...but this is getting off topic...

Yay more money and defence spending plans, boo money getting spent on stupid things....

a plan that everyone will be happy with....non-existent
 
I've heard talk of putting the pod on the back of a MILCOTS, and that things gets stuck EVERYWHERE.

All the times I saw a MILCOT get stuck this summer were solved by the expedient of putting the vehicle into 4WD.... :D

I got a 5/4 ton gasser MRT and a CUCV MRT into some amazing places and through stuff I *never* thought they would go. And Crash and the rest of 1 Hq&Sig Line Troop were masters of getting their 5/4 line trucks through almost everything in the quest to join biv sites with cable laid in (mostly) straight lines.

I've seen civvie pattern puckup based trucks get the job done before, no reason they couldn't do it again. Might maybe require a tire upgrade.

DG
 
Back
Top