www.ctvnews.ca
Hanwha just dropped the regional break down of investment if they get the dealLatest from CTV News:
Will the Germans or South Koreans emerge as Canada’s sub deal winner?
Choosing the winning bid for Canada’s next generation submarine fleet is coming down to the wire.
Extract from the article:
Well, when you watch that clip you can clearly see that Hanwha understands how you do business and win contracts in Canada - Quebec has a 3 to 1new job ratio over Ontario. Someone coached them well.
And AB gets more then both ON and Qc. And on a pipeline and AB will be sitting pretty out of this deal.
Erin O'Toole is weighing in for his 1.5 cents.
Why Canada Doesn’t Need Twelve New Submarines | The Walrus
Most Canadians support the military buildup. The harder question is what to buythewalrus.ca
Why Canada Doesn’t Need Twelve New Submarines
We are about to buy twelve designed for the last generation of warfare, to be delivered to Canada between the mid-2030s to the early 2040s. Do we really need twelve? Or should we be buying, say, eight and supplementing them with dozens and dozens of relatively inexpensive autonomous underwater vehicles that can conduct military patrols in the Arctic—gathering intelligence, detecting incursions, protecting critical infrastructure—years before the first submarine arrives?
With the F-35, the Stephen Harper government was planning to buy sixty-five fifth-generation fighter jets, and after some political manoeuvring, former prime minister Justin Trudeau committed to eighty-eight. Should we not consider buying fifty-five and putting the remaining funds toward Autonomous Collaborative Platforms, or ACPs—uncrewed aircraft that fly alongside, or independently of, piloted fighters?
They're not stupid questions but Erin isn't thinking at scale; he's thinking in the usual way of figuring out what is just enough and then subtracting a bunch because he believes everything will be 100% serviceable and DND is exaggerating in the hope they'll get what we really need. I'm not a sailor and don't know the right number of subs needed but 12 to me means 4 in service at any given time. That leaves a lot of room for additional autonomous collaborative systems - air, and sea, and land.Erin O'Toole is weighing in for his 1.5 cents.
Why Canada Doesn’t Need Twelve New Submarines | The Walrus
Most Canadians support the military buildup. The harder question is what to buythewalrus.ca
Why Canada Doesn’t Need Twelve New Submarines
We are about to buy twelve designed for the last generation of warfare, to be delivered to Canada between the mid-2030s to the early 2040s. Do we really need twelve? Or should we be buying, say, eight and supplementing them with dozens and dozens of relatively inexpensive autonomous underwater vehicles that can conduct military patrols in the Arctic—gathering intelligence, detecting incursions, protecting critical infrastructure—years before the first submarine arrives?
With the F-35, the Stephen Harper government was planning to buy sixty-five fifth-generation fighter jets, and after some political manoeuvring, former prime minister Justin Trudeau committed to eighty-eight. Should we not consider buying fifty-five and putting the remaining funds toward Autonomous Collaborative Platforms, or ACPs—uncrewed aircraft that fly alongside, or independently of, piloted fighters?
100% true!
and I keep qualifying that. It isn't the Canadian people who are nickel and diming. I haven't seen a lot of contrary letters to the editor saying that finally bringing our armed forces up to strength is dumb or extravagant. Most comments suggest that it is about time or focus on the question of how did it get so bad? We have been government by a bunch of peaceniks who to paraphrase Trudeau: "leave it alone the defense will fix itself" Defense has always been a low hanging fruit and easy to cut to justify spending the money on almost anything else 'cause no one will notice. I think we are more naive and trusting than we are cheap.
The cheap way.They're not stupid questions but Erin isn't thinking at scale; he's thinking in the usual way of figuring out what is just enough and then subtracting a bunch because he believes everything will be 100% serviceable and DND is exaggerating in the hope they'll get what we really need. I'm not a sailor and don't know the right number of subs needed but 12 to me means 4 in service at any given time. That leaves a lot of room for additional autonomous collaborative systems - air, and sea, and land.
Right questions; wrong time.
Harper didn’t move the needle as well.
