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

Replacing the Subs

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
1,192
Points
1,090
I’d love to see them
You say that now… 😅

Dimsum has the right idea with the popcorn.


Is GDP even a thing in Canada anymore? I mean, you have to have one if you're going to use it as a metric, right? A percentage of zero is still zero. :LOL:
Between vowing not to support any oil & gas industry development…

failing to build a pipeline from Alberta to the BC coast (even though a majority of it is simply twinning a pipeline that already exists, and enhancing both with more effective/modern safety features)…

Failing to approve the Tekk project, which was the most environmentally friendly and efficient oil & gas project in the world…

Failing to approve a LNG pipeline throughout southern Ontario and Quebec…

Allowing factories and facilities to close in Ontario…

Failing to secure a ‘made-in-Canada’ vaccine product, and the capability to actually produce it…

Allowing a few medical research companies to pack up and head to the US, because they can’t get some of the funding they need to finalize their work & make potential breakthroughs… (yet will throw money at anything covid related, no questions asked)

Introducing a carbon tax which makes everything more expensive, the most notable for me has been fuel — implemented during the same time period as all of the jobs above have been disappearing…


I’d say if our goal was zero GDP, he’s done an amazing job of helping us get there! 😅
 

Spencer100

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
650
Points
1,040
You say that now… 😅

Dimsum has the right idea with the popcorn.



Between vowing not to support any oil & gas industry development…

failing to build a pipeline from Alberta to the BC coast (even though a majority of it is simply twinning a pipeline that already exists, and enhancing both with more effective/modern safety features)…

Failing to approve the Tekk project, which was the most environmentally friendly and efficient oil & gas project in the world…

Failing to approve a LNG pipeline throughout southern Ontario and Quebec…

Allowing factories and facilities to close in Ontario…

Failing to secure a ‘made-in-Canada’ vaccine product, and the capability to actually produce it…

Allowing a few medical research companies to pack up and head to the US, because they can’t get some of the funding they need to finalize their work & make potential breakthroughs… (yet will throw money at anything covid related, no questions asked)

Introducing a carbon tax which makes everything more expensive, the most notable for me has been fuel — implemented during the same time period as all of the jobs above have been disappearing…


I’d say if our goal was zero GDP, he’s done an amazing job of helping us get there! 😅
It's like they have a plan or something.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,134
Points
1,140
The popcorn is for the dinosaurs (not rank-specific) who will go off on this. I am 1000000% behind the changes.
I think it's stupid:
My 1 Hair standard would have been - #1 on sides and back - #3 on top, with a second option for bald.
My 1 Earring standard would have been: NONE.

There everyone is uniform.


I wonder how much money could be saved from not publishing idiot CANFORGENS over the years.
Probably enough to buy 12 SSN's...
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
1,192
Points
1,090
I think it's stupid:
My 1 Hair standard would have been - #1 on sides and back - #3 on top, with a second option for bald.
My 1 Earring standard would have been: NONE.

There everyone is uniform.


I wonder how much money could be saved from not publishing idiot CANFORGENS over the years.
Probably enough to buy 12 SSN's...
I agree mostly. Keep it simple.

I don’t mind if someone has longer hair, as long as it looks professional and isn’t a mop. But overall, agreed - stay clean cut and professional looking.

I also don’t mind beards if a member so desires, and it doesn’t interfere with potential safety issues.

No earrings for males. Period.

Yes, I want to be inclusive of everybody, etc etc. (Standard disclosure, not a bigot.)

But in many cases it will get ripped out during training or ops when putting on helmets, HAZMAT kit, perhaps the flame-resistant hoods the Navy guys wear, etc.


The military needs to maintain an image. Heck, looking ‘Operator as F**k’ is like 80% of being SOF, isn’t it? 😈😉

But it does need to maintain an image, and be a place of professional and personal growth. And while I do want everybody to feel welcome, and bring their skill sets - the military for a long time has been a place where young people can go, and come out well seasoned.

I joined the Army Reserve when I was 16yo. I had ‘longer hair’ on top, scrawny, had an earring, and was beyond naive. It also took me significantly longer to say things than it does now. It toughened me up, realized how much could get done in a day when I wake up early and stay focused, and how to push through physical exhaustion.

The best thing the Army ever did was introduce me to what real leadership looked like, as you until then I had only ever had ‘managers.’ Own up to mistakes and use them as a learning point, take care of your troops first, lead by example, be the first person willing to go do something you’d ask a subordinate to do, etc.

If I went in with an earring and long hair, and was annoyingly chatty — and came out of QL2 the same way? I wouldn’t want that for myself.

Bottom line - just look professional, and stop whining that X don’t feel included because we aren’t accepting of pink hair and nail polish on male members. Nobody f**king cares… just be pleasant to be around and competent at your job. Period. Dress standards exist for a reason.


Anyways. Sorry. Crack cocaine fingers here is done with his bathroom break, back to work.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
4,061
Points
1,260
But in many cases it will get ripped out during training or ops when putting on helmets, HAZMAT kit, perhaps the flame-resistant hoods the Navy guys wear, etc.
I wouldn't wear an earring either way but why not prohibit it when on training/ops where it's possible to get them ripped off? There is little chance that the HRA/FSA going into work at the Orderly Room will have that issue on a standard workday.

Dress standards exist for a reason.
Except they aren't even "standard". Pictures prior to WWI had soldiers in muttonchops and longer hair than what's allowed now.
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,975
Points
1,060
The popcorn is for the dinosaurs (not rank-specific) who will go off on this. I am 1000000% behind the changes.
There's going to be a LOT of this I am sure!

David Cross No GIF
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,134
Points
1,140
I wouldn't wear an earring either way but why not prohibit it when on training/ops where it's possible to get them ripped off? There is little chance that the HRA/FSA going into work at the Orderly Room will have that issue on a standard workday.


Except they aren't even "standard". Pictures prior to WWI had soldiers in muttonchops and longer hair than what's allowed now.
Which was changed due to lessons in personal hygiene.

So the new standard will cause issues in the field force or those deployed without the ability to bath regularity -- thus it creates a medical issue.

The fact that someone in the CF GOFO level thought this mades sense makes me shake my head.
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,975
Points
1,060
My opinion on dress regs still lines up with this post....I'll enforce whatever comes down. With all the other changes the past....5 years, nothing surprises me at this point.

However...I don't think the CAF changes in recent years are winning us respect internationally. That doesn't seem to matter, though.
 

Weinie

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,554
Points
1,110
My opinion on dress regs still lines up with this post....I'll enforce whatever comes down. With all the other changes the past....5 years, nothing surprises me at this point.

However...I don't think the CAF changes in recent years are winning us respect internationally. That doesn't seem to matter, though.
EITS,

Our international respect has little to do with dress regs, and more with the fact that we have done ^&*$ all to be regarded as a credible fighting force, with a well thought out Defence strategy, and bringing real stuff to the table. Couple that with a milquetoast foreign policy < respect.
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,975
Points
1,060
I've had some discussions with Allies on deployments in the past....5 years. Since "pot was a thing" and beards etc. Actually beards came out on one of them. I know what some of the thoughts are/were having heard them directly from them (USN, USCG, RAAF, RNZAF, RAF).

I'll politely disagree, because to some Forces, appearance still is important...along with the other things you mentioned above, of course. But, like it or not, some books are judged by their cover.
 
Last edited:

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
1,192
Points
1,090
EITS,

Our international respect has little to do with dress regs, and more with the fact that we have done ^&*$ all to be regarded as a credible fighting force, with a well thought out Defence strategy, and bringing real stuff to the table. Couple that with a milquetoast foreign policy < respect.
I am genuinely curious about this. Not in an ‘anticipated defensive’ way for myself, but out of curiosity as to how the CAF are viewed by the average person/troop outside of Canada’s borders.

1000 troops in Iraq training Iraqi security forces, CANSOF doing their things in Syria and northern Iraq, 450-ish troops in Latvian RCAF fighters conducting air policing missions over Romania and Iceland, and RCN vessels either contributing to, or commanding, the NATO standing fleet concept.

In addition to responding very quickly, and reliably, to any NORAD incursion/concern.


Now I’m biased for obvious reasons. I’m curious (for anybody who has recent or somewhat recent experience to answer) - how is the CAF viewed by our allies??

And by that, I mean the average service person, not the upper echelons of intelligence agencies/governments, etc
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,306
Points
1,160
You say that now… 😅

Dimsum has the right idea with the popcorn.



Between vowing not to support any oil & gas industry development…

failing to build a pipeline from Alberta to the BC coast (even though a majority of it is simply twinning a pipeline that already exists, and enhancing both with more effective/modern safety features)…

Failing to approve the Tekk project, which was the most environmentally friendly and efficient oil & gas project in the world…

Failing to approve a LNG pipeline throughout southern Ontario and Quebec…

Allowing factories and facilities to close in Ontario…

Failing to secure a ‘made-in-Canada’ vaccine product, and the capability to actually produce it…

Allowing a few medical research companies to pack up and head to the US, because they can’t get some of the funding they need to finalize their work & make potential breakthroughs… (yet will throw money at anything covid related, no questions asked)

Introducing a carbon tax which makes everything more expensive, the most notable for me has been fuel — implemented during the same time period as all of the jobs above have been disappearing…


I’d say if our goal was zero GDP, he’s done an amazing job of helping us get there! 😅


And then there's the railways. Our trade dealers are writing cheques our national infrastructure can't cash.

From 2019....

Canadian railways ration space as congestion problems worsen​


Canada‘s two major railways are rationing space on trains traveling to the country’s biggest port and recently prioritized some commodities over others to deal with congestion, the latest indication of their struggle to meet demand from new trade deals.

That move prompted Canada‘s transport regulator last week to start an investigation into rail services around Port Metro Vancouver, after shippers complained of “discriminatory treatment of certain commodities” by Canadian National Railway (CN) and Canadian Pacific Railway (CP).

Canada is a top shipper of crops, fertilizer, oil and pulp, but has in recent years needed government intervention to keep commodities moving, from ordering railways to clear grain backlogs to Alberta’s crude oil curtailments this month due to full pipelines.

Free-trade deals with the European Union and Pacific Nations are boosting demand for commodities, adding further strain to Canada‘s transportation infrastructure. Currently, the United States and Mexico account for at least 75 percent of Canadian exports.


 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
1,192
Points
1,090
We’ve veered so far off of ‘Replacing Canada’s Submarines’ at this point 😂


But I think we can all agree:

  • 4 to 6 submarines would be ideal
  • Conventionally powered, as nuclear power is completely off the table for now
  • Partner onto another country’s buy to significantly reduce risk
  • If possible/able, procure a class that requires a small crew.


And then there's the railways. Our trade dealers are writing cheques our national infrastructure can't cash.

From 2019....

Canadian railways ration space as congestion problems worsen​


So what exactly is the problem here? And what would the solution be?

Is it that there aren’t enough trains to move the commodities? Not enough tracks? Not enough operators?
 

JMCanada

Member
Reaction score
60
Points
380
Well, i don't think 4-6 boats would be ideal, and probably i'm not alone on this.
  • IIRC there was a parliament recommendation for twelve, which i admit may be too much in terms of costs (purchasing and operating) and manning.
  • would be nice to have at least 10: three per ocean and one under extensive works/repairs/upgrades.
  • eight would, at least, allow to keep one sailing at any time (hopefully) on each coast.
  • six should be the bare minimun target.
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
1,192
Points
1,090
Well, i don't think 4-6 boats would be ideal, and probably i'm not alone on this.
  • IIRC there was a parliament recommendation for twelve, which i admit may be too much in terms of costs (purchasing and operating) and manning.
  • would be nice to have at least 10: three per ocean and one under extensive works/repairs/upgrades.
  • eight would, at least, allow to keep one sailing at any time (hopefully) on each coast.
  • six should be the bare minimun target.
We would have to fix recruiting before even attempting to operate that many subs! And enhance fleet support services somewhere along the way.

One of the problems with having such a large country and yet such a small population (in my opinion anyway) is that not many Canadians feel ‘connected’ to the coasts, hence challenges in recruiting for the RCN.

Realistically, I’d be surprised if we even get 6. I’m betting that when/if this ever happens, it will be a 1 for 1 replacement with a newer class.


0.02
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,975
Points
1,060
I’d be surprised if we even get 6.

I tend to agree with this position. Historically, we usually do not even replace 1 for 1. Leo 1/Leo 2 tanks, Argus and Aurora, CF18s with unicorns....I remember the Iltis/radio replacement in the PRes Zipperhead world...not even CLOSE to 1 for 1.

As for crewing issues....should the RCN/CAF be looking to increase financial compensation for sub duty? This isn't a huge amount of $ out of the overall budget and $475 isn't much, really, after taxes. After having been inside one of our boats....this service is a unique kind of hardship.
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,975
Points
1,060
I’m curious (for anybody who has recent or somewhat recent experience to answer) - how is the CAF viewed by our allies??

And by that, I mean the average service person, not the upper echelons of intelligence agencies/governments, etc

- We're well-liked, respected as professionals but...we do 'drive-by deployments', we let our kit lag behind what is needed, we're willing to go places and do things but don't necessarily have the funding to play with others properly. Example, Link 16 is sort of "yesterday" now....

- It was interesting talking to American pers when the Liberals decided "bombs are bad, m'kay?" in Iraq. Was a little harder to hold your head up high...

- Showing up and showing up able and ready to play....2 different things. We might show up, and we might be able to play.

That is my summary after working with/talking to folks from the US, UK, Norway, Australia, New Zealand in locations including North and Central America, Asia, the UK, Norway, the Middle East....only my experience and perspective, of course.
 
Last edited:

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,306
Points
1,160
So what exactly is the problem here? And what would the solution be?

Is it that there aren’t enough trains to move the commodities? Not enough tracks? Not enough operators?

Pretty much all of that. The slow downs becasue of COVID have taken the heat and light off of the huge, underlying issues for awhile but we've got eyes bigger than our stomach, basically:

Transportation in Canada 2019​

 
Top