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

The Coming DND Budget Cut

Ostrozac

Sr. Member
Reaction score
121
Points
430
Remius said:
Until that one time when we went to to war and realized we need tanks and indirect fire support after someone thought we wouldn’t need them.

And we bought just enough for the war, and then sidelined them as soon as the war was over.

By the way, which war are we talking about? Because we followed that exact pattern in 1914-1918, 1939-1945 and 2001-2011. Korea was the only exception, but it was only half way. We started with next to nothing (the Lord Strathcona's Horse's tanks were acquired, at the last minute, in theatre, from the USMC). We kept a combined arms force after the war, with a focus on Germany, but that was the only time it happened in our history. Based on the penny-packeting and small numbers of our Leopard 2 and M777 fleets, we certainly aren't positioning ourselves as a modern mechanized force nowadays.

 

Stoker

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
88
Points
530
I predict no cuts, but no new money. The CSC, fighter jets will etc will still be procured. The current government just don't care how much they spend.
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
448
Points
1,010
Retired RCN said:
I predict no cuts, but no new money. The CSC, fighter jets will etc will still be procured. The current government just don't care how much they spend.

I think defence contractors have managed to include enough provisions over the years to make canceling contracts really expensive, and it's also something govts like to do to ensure delivery if there is a change of party in an election.

Jets are still in the RFP stage, but there are a lot of guarantees in NSS to make canceling any of the big contracts fairly painful. We could scale back on how many CSC we get, but cutting spending that is 15 years down the road doesn't really do anything against the short term deficits over the next year or so, and they won't really spend much on CSC for a while.
 

Stoker

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
88
Points
530
Navy_Pete said:
I think defence contractors have managed to include enough provisions over the years to make canceling contracts really expensive, and it's also something govts like to do to ensure delivery if there is a change of party in an election.

Jets are still in the RFP stage, but there are a lot of guarantees in NSS to make canceling any of the big contracts fairly painful. We could scale back on how many CSC we get, but cutting spending that is 15 years down the road doesn't really do anything against the short term deficits over the next year or so, and they won't really spend much on CSC for a while.

I think we'll get jets but more than likely the cheapest ones they can get. I still think we'll get 15 as the crazy ass price we're paying more than likely will go up when we lose economy of scale or that's what Irving will say. I think the likely hood of any new submarines in the near future is pretty much done.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,304
Points
940
I'll only throw in one prediction.

Whatever happens, Ottawa will not be divested of even one civilian or military full-time position. A few Class B's maybe.

:pop:
 

Cloud Cover

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
30
Points
530
Navy_Pete said:
I think defence contractors have managed to include enough provisions over the years to make canceling contracts really expensive, and it's also something govts like to do to ensure delivery if there is a change of party in an election.

Jets are still in the RFP stage, but there are a lot of guarantees in NSS to make canceling any of the big contracts fairly painful. We could scale back on how many CSC we get, but cutting spending that is 15 years down the road doesn't really do anything against the short term deficits over the next year or so, and they won't really spend much on CSC for a while.

I think the NS government is also a party to the shipyard rehab development project. That being said, no contracting party can hold Parliament to specific performance if the decision is taken to reduce numbers of ships, but as you correctly point out the financial penalties could be significant if they are built into the contract itself.  OTOH it makes me want to throw up thinking that taxpayers somehow are obligated to pay the Irving family a fucking profit. Tax the bastards into purgatory.
 

Halifax Tar

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
361
Points
880
CloudCover said:
I think the NS government is also a party to the shipyard rehab development project. That being said, no contracting party can hold Parliament to specific performance if the decision is taken to reduce numbers of ships, but as you correctly point out the financial penalties could be significant if they are built into the contract itself.  OTOH it makes me want to throw up thinking that taxpayers somehow are obligated to pay the Irving family Maritime Czar a ******* profit. Tax the bastards into purgatory.

FTFY
 

dimsum

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
981
Points
940
Colin P said:
The CSC may be running around with empty VLS for quite sometime.

Ah, the ol' "fitted for, but not with"...
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Fixture
Donor
Reaction score
1,292
Points
910
Dimsum said:
Ah, the ol' "fitted for, but not with"...

Honestly, running around in peacetime with 15 awesome ships that have installed, but empty, mk41 VLS cells is the least worst of the “fitted for, but not with” scenarios.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
3,039
Points
1,060
Dimsum said:
Ah, the ol' "fitted for, but not with"...

The Infantry Battalion equivalent would be the 'missing' Combat Support Companies, I would guess :)
 

blacktriangle

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
170
Points
630
Regardless of what cuts may or may not come, I'm fairly certain you all will find a way to make it work - even if it's not pretty. That aspect of the CAF always impressed me. So even if there is a fair bit of dead weight, there's also tons of capable folks that know how to "grind it out".

As someone that recently transitioned to civilian life, I'm just hoping for one last retro pay raise to put towards a post-COVID trip or something like climbing, skydiving etc. Live while we can. Here's hoping for all of you as well...  :cheers:
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
3,039
Points
1,060
reveng said:
Regardless of what cuts may or may not come, I'm fairly certain you all will find a way to make it work - even if it's not pretty. That aspect of the CAF always impressed me. So even if there is a fair bit of dead weight, there's also tons of capable folks that know how to "grind it out".

As someone that recently transitioned to civilian life, I'm just hoping for one last retro pay raise to put towards a post-COVID trip or something like climbing, skydiving etc. Live while we can. Here's hoping for all of you as well...  :cheers:

Fun fact: You know that you can combine 'climbing and skydiving' into one trip, right?

It's called BASE jumping ;)
 

AlDazz

New Member
Reaction score
1
Points
80
If I was a member of of any of the Regiments 3rd Battalions I might be getting a little restless. As the Reg Force is short troops due to Covid recruiting restrictions someone is going to looking for a quick fix.
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
508
Points
890
Quick fix, long term problems. I very much doubt they’ll be disbanding any battalions anytime soon. (Although with this government, it would be far from the dumbest defence decision they’ve made.)

it doesn’t fix anything other than relocate troops from one battalion to top up the others. It doesn’t generate numbers or add new capabilities.
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
525
Points
940
Quick fix, long term problems. I very much doubt they’ll be disbanding any battalions anytime soon. (Although with this government, it would be far from the dumbest defence decision they’ve made.)

it doesn’t fix anything other than relocate troops from one battalion to top up the others. It doesn’t generate numbers or add new capabilities.
Not to mention it would hurt our ability to rotate troops through workup/deployment, and rest/reconstitution cycles. If we shank the forces, we would burn our people out. If anything we need to cut our bureaucratic tail and trade it for military teeth. Our bureaucracy has expanded exponentially without a correlation to defense output, infsct our output has gone down id argue.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
3,039
Points
1,060
Quick fix, long term problems. I very much doubt they’ll be disbanding any battalions anytime soon. (Although with this government, it would be far from the dumbest defence decision they’ve made.)

it doesn’t fix anything other than relocate troops from one battalion to top up the others. It doesn’t generate numbers or add new capabilities.

If there's one thing that has impressed me about the CAF it's that we have kept the nine Infantry battalions intact for several decades.

In contrast, over the same period, the British Army has gone through a cyclone of regimental mergers and amalgamations bordering on the frenetic, and which just comes off looking like bad planning/ leadership.
 

MilEME09

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
525
Points
940
If there's one thing that has impressed me about the CAF it's that we have kept the nine Infantry battalions intact for several decades.

In contrast, over the same period, the British Army has gone through a cyclone of regimental mergers and amalgamations bordering on the frenetic, and which just comes off looking like bad planning/ leadership.
Yes, but last I checked not one battalion was at close to full strength, if we had to deploy a battlegroup again no one battalion could go on its own with significant augmentation from the ARes and other units.
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
559
Points
910
In contrast, over the same period, the British Army has gone through a cyclone of regimental mergers and amalgamations bordering on the frenetic, and which just comes off looking like bad planning/ leadership.
Maybe the "Leading Change" bubble on a Brit PER is worth more than on a CAF one?
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
3,039
Points
1,060
Maybe the "Leading Change" bubble on a Brit PER is worth more than on a CAF one?

Never underestimate the levels of self-interest, and political manoeuvring, involved when Generals start cutting head counts.

There's a reason there are still 5 x Guards (Infantry) Regiments in the UK :)
 
Top