Canadian Military News

[peter12]

Staff pay, vastly expensive procurement projects, inflation.

[CaptainCrunch]

Add on increased costs to maintain and operate equipment a lot of which is way past its half life or worse.

For example the CF-18's are about 40 years old, they're getting another life extension, they're becoming worn out birds so every hour they fly becomes more and more expensive so it has a massive impact on a static budget.

Even on the procurement. Trudeau screwed around on the F-35 decision and ended up paying more per plane then the original deal. The out of control next generation warship project means that we're going to spend a lot more per boat then the boat is actually capable of or worth.

Staff pay yes, but also because the failure of the recruiting, we're paying more and more for diminishing results there.

Also administrative pay especially for non forces personal. DND is bloated both in terms of rear echelon fat bodies, but civillian workers, and they increase the numbers every year with a static budget.

The War on Ukraine hasn't helped either, that money being sent over seas isn't coming out of the foreign affairs budget.

Frankly we have a rusted out, poorly lead military, with a massive need for capital equipment replacement and recruiting, that has serious readiness problems, with expanding maintenance and inflationary factors on a static budget.

so in the last few years.

2018 22.73B 2019 22.39b 2020 23.28B, 2021 26.45B. Now before we get excited about 2021, a lot of the increased money that was allocated to defense was returned unspent. Now the budget calls for 27B spent this year, but that's going to be a decrease to the operational spending of the forces because of Ukraine donations from the Military.

And I'm not just blaming the Liberals for the destruction of the Forces, though Harper had to do some nifty defense spending because of the utter junk that he inherited from Chretien, he didn't address the dying patient that is the forces, and instead cut actual defense spending.

Before we can actually look at this terminal patient and think about a cure that to save it means a huge amount of capital, equipment replacement, improved training, proper recruiting and interest, we need a govt that's not only going to do it, but not put in a terrible defense minister like the last 2 have been. We need a defense minister hat understands the needs and the mission and actually has some vision and fight in him to make the unpopular arguments. I'm actually surprised, I was bullish on Anaud, I thought, she understands procurement, she'll cut through the BS and streamline it. But she's gotten very little done except stand by and watch the flaming wreck of the Navy Build. But she takes good pictures of soldiers.


We also need to go through the command ranks with a fricken flame thrower. Make no mistake, the CDS over the last few years have been occupied by awful leadership, and moral has been crushed because of it.

But I honestly think its too late anyways without an emergency crash rebuild the forces program. With the way this government works, and the Canadian people care, we might slow down the death of the Forces, but we won't stop it, or fix it, and we'll end up with a non functional constabulary, that can't live up to its NATO, North American or main mission of the defending of Canada.

[CroFlames]

OK so lets say NATO was able to pressure the government today to commit to the 2% target for say, the next 5 years.

What do we do, and were do we begin? New planes? New ships?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

OK so lets say NATO was able to pressure the government today to commit to the 2% target for say, the next 5 years.

What do we do, and were do we begin? New planes? New ships?

Well the new planes are going to come, so are the new ships, though don't get me into the ship they decided on, or the out of control costs of that program.



But everything needs to be looked at. Vehicles, personal kit.



If they show an Ernest desire to upgrade to a somewhat modern standard, recruiting might get easier.


There are things that we need, that we don't have. like in field air defense, an update on NBC equipment. The arctic defense has to be looked at hard.



Our submarines need a serious replacement.



The problem now budget wise is it goes beyond the 2% budget. The Capital costs to fix the crushing problems goes beyond the 2% you need a multi year boost in equipment replacement.



Also in terms of procurement, like leadership needs to be fixed with a sledge hammer and flame thrower.

[JohnnyB]

Can't we just commit to robot warfare already? Put that money into drones and high quality gaming chairs, then drive recruitment through the promise of being paid to play CS.

[CaptainCrunch]

Why are we having trouble with recruiting?


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/canad...tion-1.6463424

An email encouraging members of the Canadian Armed Forces to consider contacting Habitat for Humanity if they can't find affordable housing is casting a spotlight on a growing challenge facing military personnel and their families.
The email was sent by a senior officer at 19 Wing Comox to other members at the Royal Canadian Air Force base on northern Vancouver Island, which is home to the military's search-and-rescue school as well as several squadrons of aircraft.
"Further to our discussion this morning, one potential housing option for our folks is Habitat for Humanity," said the email dated May 5. "Should this be of interest to any of your personnel, please have them review the information located here."
The email, confirmed as authentic by the Department of National Defence, included a link and contact information for the charity's northern Vancouver Island chapter along with a list of criteria to apply for a home.

[Monahammer]

That is tremendously embarrassing.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

That is tremendously embarrassing.

I know right.


There is probably a #### tonne of Modular tenting moulding away in some warehouse......

[CaptainCrunch]

I was talking, arguing, debating with a friend who got snotty with me. "We'll they're buying F-35's and building those ships".


Me - "Nobody will be there to operate them"


Him - "Sure they will"


Me - "Nope, a military that doesn't take care of its people will have no people. Plus its two things out of literally hundreds of pieces of equipment and kit that need to be replaced"

[Lubicon]

I don't think it's new that we were replacing the CC150's but I do believe this is an increase in the order/plans that may have been previously announced. 4 new and 5 refurbished A330's which is an increase in the number compared to the current fleet IIRC. Also interesting that they will not all be based in a single location. Logically that may mean Cold Lake or Comox could see some.

https://globalnews.ca/news/9855195/c...planes-airbus/

[Baron von Kriterium]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cab...deau-1.6916367

Oh, God, no! Billy Blair as MND.

[Baron von Kriterium]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

Also interesting that they will not all be based in a single location. Logically that may mean Cold Lake or Comox could see some.

https://globalnews.ca/news/9855195/c...planes-airbus/

I think Comox is already bursting at the seams; there isn't room for what they have there now. Cold Lake will be busy building infrastructure for F35s. Besides, no one wants to be posted there.

For the operational "base" in the West, I'd speculate on Edmonton or Winnipeg. Calgary even.

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by Baron von Kriterium

I think Comox is already bursting at the seams; there isn't room for what they have there now. Cold Lake will be busy building infrastructure for F35s. Besides, no one wants to be posted there.

For the operational "base" in the West, I'd speculate on Edmonton or Winnipeg. Calgary even.

Yeah, Edmonton would also make sense. Close to both Cold Lake and the Edmonton garrison to support both bases and their needs.

[speede5]

Winnipeg is your only option. Edmonton and Calgary have no air bases any more

[btimbit]

Could always recommission the old runways at cfb Edmonton

Or build and pay for a few hangers at De Havilland Field when that gets built, that'd be cool

But yeah, realistically, they just cram them into a corner at cold lake or winnipeg

[Whynotnow]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Could always recommission the old runways at cfb Edmonton

Or build and pay for a few hangers at De Havilland Field when that gets built, that'd be cool

But yeah, realistically, they just cram them into a corner at cold lake or winnipeg

The army put buildings on the runway at Edmonton so that’s not happening. Realistically these could be stationed anywhere, doesn’t likely need an RCAF base there. The helo squadron in Victoria is at the Victoria airport, Winnipeg training is at he Winnipeg airport. so you could put them at virtually any civvie airport. I imagine the liberals are going to figure out the most politically expedient place and then put them there, logistics and common sense be damned.

[Baron von Kriterium]

Originally Posted by speede5

Winnipeg is your only option. Edmonton and Calgary have no air bases any more

You don't need a CFB a la Cold Lake. As Whynotnow points out, you operate out of civilian airports. For an example, look at the Yellowknife airport, which will probably be the Northern operating base. An advantage of using a civilian airport is you can leverage pilots who are in the RCAF Reserve but fly for, for example, Air Canada.

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by Whynotnow

The army put buildings on the runway at Edmonton so that’s not happening.

Both of them? Huh, thought they only did the one for some reason

[Mr.Coffee]

Canadas underinvestment in its armed forces is so going to eventually bite this country in the ass one day.

[CaptainCrunch]

Well the senate confirmation for the new head of Norad had a specific Canadian Flavor. Where they talked about hard discussions needed with Canada in terms of funding.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/norad-...ding-1.6918975

A senior U.S. military figure has agreed to have tough conversations with Canada about defence spending when he takes over a binational military body.
Lt.-Gen. Gregory Guillot was speaking during a U.S. Senate hearing Wednesday to confirm his nomination as the next head of North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD).
His comments came after a Republican senator chastised, at length, what he called Canada's insufficient military spending and said he hoped there were Canadians watching the hearing.
"Can you commit to us to having those tough conversations with your Canadian counterparts?" Sen. Dan Sullivan of Alaska asked the nominee.
"Yes, senator, you can count on me to do that," Guillot replied.

"I hope the Canadians are watching your confirmation hearing. … Can you commit to this committee that you can have discussions with the Canadians and say, 'Hey, look, when you're not supporting NATO, when you're not supporting missile defence for North America, it's actually harmful to the alliance'?
"Americans get frustrated when our allies don't pull their weight. And with regard to NATO, Canada's not even close to pulling its weight."