jdobbin Posted November 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2007 Do not take my last as personel, I understand full you train of thought..... I understand. I just replied. It is probably quite true that your branch of the service wanted a different aircraft for the job. I have no doubt that they did. It is DND that sorts out the requests and makes the overall proposals for what to buy to the Defence minister. The top brass at DND may have thought that the Griffins was all they could afford and blame the Liberals for that. I don't know. However, choosing the aircraft in the first place is not made by a Defence minister. Unfortunately, there is always second guessing about military purchases. I have seen similar discussions for Australia, Britain and the U.S. about what they buy for equipment and service. In some cases, it just isn't what the branch of service wanted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weaponeer Posted November 30, 2007 Report Share Posted November 30, 2007 Hey weaponeer,I should have been more specific. It was DND that put in the request for Griffins. I don't know what the individual branches of the military wanted but the top brass in procurement put the request in. Eugene Lang, former chief of staff for two Defence ministers, has written extensively in the National Post about the wish lists that came from DND. The Griffin was requested because it was thought at the time that it would better serve domestic needs. Our subs at the moment are impossible to detect in the water. They were saying on CBC that if we are lucky, one sub may be in operation in 2008. The Navy begged for those subs. They were not thrust upon them. The result is four subs with huge issues in terms of repairs. I have no idea about the trucks. Decisions on what to buy are made by the military based on the budgets they are given. As for upgrades, the Aurora upgrade was to keep the aircraft flying. That upgrade is cancelled now. There will be no Aurora flights for the rest of this year that last time I heard. Not exactly good in terms of maintaining our northern security. Even if the Tories sole source, it will mean many months before patrols resume. You have heard me here say the the Forces should receive the best equipment to do the job. However, the decisions to buy Griffins wasn't made by a Defence minister going over specs of the Griffins and thinking they'd be nice to have. DND makes those choices. There are Auroras coming here to North Bay next week to do some NORAD training with us. They have slowed down the flying but are still at it. The current high tempo ops in the high arctic are a priority these days for the Air Force. As for subs, there is one avail for ops at all times..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Doors Posted November 30, 2007 Report Share Posted November 30, 2007 There are Auroras coming here to North Bay next week to do some NORAD training with us. They have slowed down the flying but are still at it. The current high tempo ops in the high arctic are a priority these days for the Air Force.As for subs, there is one avail for ops at all times..... They should have gotten nuclear powered subs for the arctic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted November 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2007 There are Auroras coming here to North Bay next week to do some NORAD training with us. They have slowed down the flying but are still at it. The current high tempo ops in the high arctic are a priority these days for the Air Force.As for subs, there is one avail for ops at all times..... Do you have a cite that Aurora flights in the north have resumed? Last news story said they were being cancelled due to lack of aircraft. This story appeared in the paper yesterday. http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonis...cb12e36&p=2 In November, the air force cancelled Aurora surveillance flights in the North for several months because of long-term maintenance issues in the aircraft fleet. The military requested the maintenance to keep the Auroras flying for some time. Now, they have changed their mind and figure that with the Tories, they should get new aircraft, probably sole sourced. They are saying no other aircraft will do except the Poseidon. The PMO has been so unimpressed with the fact that subs that they have considered ordering new subs. http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingn...p-4674049c.html wide-ranging discussion about the future of Canada's troubled submarine fleet is taking place at the highest levels of the Conservative government, say political and defence sources.The Privy Council Office and the Prime Minister's Office are examining whether to "scrap them altogether, upgrade the existing boats or buy new," said a political source. The debate has been taking place largely above the heads of senior naval commanders and Defence Minister Peter MacKay, all of whom support the Victoria-class submarines. The Globe and Mail reported last week that none of the subs is sailing. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...PStory/National Defence Minister Peter MacKay, who comes from Nova Scotia, praised the fleet of submarines earlier this month, even though none are actually sailing these days."We need to have those boats in the water for all kinds of reasons - Arctic sovereignty, protecting our coastal waters - and these are good subs, in spite of some of the problems and some of the setbacks," he said. HMCS Chicoutimi still hasn't been repaired after catching fire on its maiden voyage under a Canadian flag in 2004. HMCS Windsor and HMCS Victoria are undergoing maintenance until 2010. HMCS Corner Brook will be back at sea in the coming months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted November 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2007 They should have gotten nuclear powered subs for the arctic. Maybe that is what the PMO wants since they are contemplating scrapping the Victoria-class ships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fortunata Posted November 30, 2007 Report Share Posted November 30, 2007 As for the libs support to the military, it is and was not there!! I am in the military, 19 years, I was around for the nightmare of the 1990's. Everybody was cut and hurting in the 90's. You make is sound like it was just the military; ask educational facilities, health care facilities, etc. how they fared while the books were being balanced. It's easy for Steve to pump up the military with the record surpluses the government is enjoying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted November 30, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 30, 2007 Everybody was cut and hurting in the 90's. You make is sound like it was just the military; ask educational facilities, health care facilities, etc. how they fared while the books were being balanced. I think you have that right about everyone getting cut. And if I recall, despite the grumbling, there was support for Martin to take harsh measures on a fairly wide scale. I hope we never have to go through that again. It would help if we make sure that we get competitive bids on major contracts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.