NATO’s North American Regional Office of the Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic (DIANA)

[OceanBonfire]

DIANA will comprise a network of innovation hubs, with technology accelerator sites and test centres across Europe and North America. This will serve to foster and protect Allied innovation, including Canadian innovation. DIANA will bring defence personnel together with the Alliance’s best and brightest start-ups, scientific researchers, and technology companies to remain competitive as well as to solve critical defence and security challenges.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1542554440863039494

https://pm.gc.ca/en/news/news-releases/2022/06/30/prime-minister-and-nato-leaders-strengthen-transatlantic-security

 

[OceanBonfire]

Halifax proposed as new home for NATO's North American innovation hub: minister

Defence Minister Anita Anand announced Friday a proposal to establish an innovation hub in Halifax for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

atlantic.ctvnews.ca

Halifax proposed as new home for NATO’s North American innovation hub: minister | Globalnews.ca

If accepted, the regional office in Halifax would be part of a NATO network known as the Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic, or DIANA.

globalnews.ca

Government of Canada proposes Halifax as North American location for NATO’s Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic - Canada.ca

Minister of National Defence, Anita Anand, announced today that Canada is proposing the Halifax Regional Municipality, Nova Scotia, to host the North American Regional Office of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic (DIANA). DIANA...

www.canada.ca

 

[daftandbarmy]

Because the Government is so good at innovating...

 

[Rifleman62]

Innovation for this gov't would be efficient procurement.​

 

[CBH99]

Innovation for this gov't would be efficient procurement.​

C’mon guys…this government has been plenty innovative guys! Like actually, no joke.

Over the years, they have truly innovated new ways to be blatantly corrupt & incompetent. Mind bogglingly so. But innovative, even if not totally intentional.

Let’s look at the ArriveCAN app…

I feel like even $250,000 is pretty damn expensive for an app, but I’m also an entirely different generation that doesn’t know squat about how to make an app.

Now take that $250,000 price tag - and double it. That’s incompetence. Triple it, that’s so bloody incompetent, any other sitting government would be demanding an investigation.

$54 million?

Gotta admit. If innovation is finding ‘new ways of accomplishing something, in a more efficient manner’… they are pretty innovative at becoming more & more of a joke.

 

[Furniture]

Along with the climate change centre in Montreal this looks like virtue signaling to NATO so we don't get pushed to spend more on real defence capabilities.

It's a win-win for the LPC if it works, as we get to take pressure off from NATO, while not seeming too "American*" at home.

* American, as in taking defence seriously, like serious countries do.

 

[brihard]

Reads to me like they want to access private sector talent and knowledge, probably with research and innovation funding tied to specific defense needs. If so, it’s potentially a good approach, as opposed to siccing the government’s own scientists - hindered by the government’s bureaucracy - on problems.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Reads to me like they want to access private sector talent and knowledge, probably with research and innovation funding tied to specific defense needs. If so, it’s potentially a good approach, as opposed to siccing the government’s own scientists - hindered by the government’s bureaucracy - on problems.

There are umpteen studies on why public sector 'innovation' fails e.g.,

The Dark Side of Public Innovation​

This article has identified a broad range of perverse effects of public innovation and stresses that these perverse effects do not occur by coincidence but result from fundamental features of these innovation processes: the relaxation of public control and the uncertainty of public value outcomes. One could conclude that these perverse effects are so threatening to core values of public administration such as legality, efficiency, economy and effectiveness that public innovation should be limited if not avoided.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15309576.2020.1782954

 

[CBH99]

Along with the climate change centre in Montreal this looks like virtue signaling to NATO so we don't get pushed to spend more on real defence capabilities.

It's a win-win for the LPC if it works, as we get to take pressure off from NATO, while not seeming too "American*" at home.

* American, as in taking defence seriously, like serious countries do.

What does this climate change centre in Montreal actually do? (Like for real…?)

 

[YZT580]

What does this climate change centre in Montreal actually do? (Like for real…?)

how do they explain it when NATO says no. As far as I can tell this is not a given, nor has NATO asked if we would host it. It is our proposal, for public consumption of how we propose wheedling out of actually spending money on defense,

 

[Furniture]

What does this climate change centre in Montreal actually do? (Like for real…?)

It will be a central point for collecting and sharing climate data, as well as potentially the lead for further research, as far as I can tell. It's being done through DRDC, rather than D Met Oc, as DRDC is better suited to the task.

how do they explain it when NATO says no. As far as I can tell this is not a given, nor has NATO asked if we would host it. It is our proposal, for public consumption of how we propose wheedling out of actually spending money on defense,

NATO is very interested in climate data, and analysis of what impact it will have on current and future threats. Since Canada has the largest NATO slice of the arctic, and has been studying it for decades, it makes sense for Canada to be the lead nation on the topic.

NATO's interest isn't in the politics of the topic, it's in measured data. As an example, more open leads in the ice leads to more IFR conditions in the arctic near water. IFR conditions cause problems for flight operations.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

It will be a central point for collecting and sharing climate data, as well as potentially the lead for further research, as far as I can tell. It's being done through DRDC, rather than D Met Oc, as DRDC is better suited to the task.

NATO is very interested in climate data, and analysis of what impact it will have on current and future threats. Since Canada has the largest NATO slice of the arctic, and has been studying it for decades, it makes sense for Canada to be the lead nation on the topic.

NATO's interest isn't in the politics of the topic, it's in measured data. As an example, more open leads in the ice leads to more IFR conditions in the arctic near water. IFR conditions cause problems for flight operations.

I think he meant the proposed Innovation Centre in Halifax…

 

[Navy_Pete]

I would feel better about 'Innovation' if we didn't have open projects from the mid 2000s that were last generations innovations that are still in the initial stages. Things that we were looking at that would have been innovative on ships are now industry standard on commercial marine side.

 

[Lumber]

DRDC has produced some amazing innovations (and some utterly useless ones). Unfortunately, Canadian procurement rules and IP/ownership issues have prevents some of those innovations from being quickly and easily adopted by the military, even when it was apparently easy and cheap to do so.

If instead we had a center that was staffed and funded by a consortium of NATO partners, as opposed to just Canada, then I believe it might be quicker and easier to actually get useful innovations into the hands of front line troops.

 

[Navy_Pete]

DRDC has produced some amazing innovations (and some utterly useless ones). Unfortunately, Canadian procurement rules and IP/ownership issues have prevents some of those innovations from being quickly and easily adopted by the military, even when it was apparently easy and cheap to do so.

If instead we had a center that was staffed and funded by a consortium of NATO partners, as opposed to just Canada, then I believe it might be quicker and easier to actually get useful innovations into the hands of front line troops.

Only if Canada allows sole sourcing from any developed product; there are 7 key checks you have to look at and that kills us everytime.

Working on something now though with some kind of ISED/GoC grant program that apparently allows us to sole source something up to $8M for the product that comes out of it. Still early days, but that would be sweet. Once you get the initial cataloging etc it's a lot easier to buy things under routine NICP, and unless someone else can provide a fit/form/function replacement of the same NSN you are just buying a replacement part so sole source rules don't apply.

 

[Lumber]

Only if Canada allows sole sourcing from any developed product; there are 7 key checks you have to look at and that kills us everytime.

Working on something now though with some kind of ISED/GoC grant program that apparently allows us to sole source something up to $8M for the product that comes out of it. Still early days, but that would be sweet. Once you get the initial cataloging etc it's a lot easier to buy things under routine NICP, and unless someone else can provide a fit/form/function replacement of the same NSN you are just buying a replacement part so sole source rules don't apply.

That's be amazing. I won't talk pecifics for security reasons, but they once developed an amazing system that was proven to work on operations that required only about $10k worth of off-the-shelf PC parts and could easily have been installed on every ship, but DRDC's mandate was not to actually equip ships with anything so it had to go out to tender and cost millions instead.

 

[stoker dave]

About a decade ago I was involved in a DRDC 'innovation' project. The folks at DRDC were several decades behind industry in knowledge, understanding and technology. I was unimpressed.

My efforts to introduce defence folks to industry practices have led to naught.

 

[daftandbarmy]

About a decade ago I was involved in a DRDC 'innovation' project. The folks at DRDC were several decades behind industry in knowledge, understanding and technology. I was unimpressed.

My efforts to introduce defence folks to industry practices have led to naught.

The Natural Resources Sector has been pretty good at the Innovation stuff.

When you offer a reduced stumpage rate, you get alot of interest from industry in trying different thigns that can then be rolled out across the sector as new policy/ practises.

 

[Lumber]

About a decade ago I was involved in a DRDC 'innovation' project. The folks at DRDC were several decades behind industry in knowledge, understanding and technology. I was unimpressed.

My efforts to introduce defence folks to industry practices have led to naught.

Sadly, that's not that different from the military writ large. There are industry standards for project management, for example, that are completely unknown to CAF project managers. It probably doesn't help that the CAF doesn't call people "project managers" until they are very senior and managing large projects; much more junior folk would benefit greatly from formal project management training.

 

[Furniture]

Sadly, that's not that different from the military writ large. There are industry standards for project management, for example, that are completely unknown to CAF project managers. It probably doesn't help that the CAF doesn't call people "project managers" until they are very senior and managing large projects; much more junior folk would benefit greatly from formal project management training.

You mean the current system of "expert by posting message" isn't effective, or efficient? Blasphemer!