Canadian Military

[politika]

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...eath051125.html

I'll try and make this quick and simple. But today I read about the death of a private in the Canadian military as well as 4 other soldiers being injured when their land vehicle LAVIII rolled over on them. This is anothing reason why I think are military should be fixed.

Instead of buying those Hercules aircraft when I read in an article that some Canadian soldiers said the ones they had were fine. I think we should have started with are vehicles and weaponry thats's in worst shape and move on from their instead of replacing whats "oldest"

Agree?

[Leafless]

politica

While I don't want to sound unsympathetic concerning this whole situation I feel there is something definitely wrong with the operators of these vehicles and in fact possibly the training these military personnel receive. Maybe they are simply over confident.

Military equpipment is not made for general safety but rather to suit the needs of the enviroment or operation to get the job done.

This is the seventh roll over the military has experienced and most have been blamed on DRIVER ERROR.

[politika]

politica

While I don't want to sound unsympathetic concerning this whole situation I feel  there is something definitely wrong with the operators of these vehicles and in fact possibly the training these military personnel receive. Maybe they are simply over confident.

Military equpipment is not made for general safety but rather  to suit the needs of the enviroment or operation to get the job done.

This is the seventh roll over the military has experienced and most have been blamed on DRIVER ERROR.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

ONE of those 7 incidents was probably a human error. But come on do you possibly believe 7 highly trained military officials were NOT signifacantly trained or was at fault for this? Or would most of these have to do with vehicle safety?

[FTA Lawyer]

politica

While I don't want to sound unsympathetic concerning this whole situation I feel  there is something definitely wrong with the operators of these vehicles and in fact possibly the training these military personnel receive. Maybe they are simply over confident.

Military equpipment is not made for general safety but rather  to suit the needs of the enviroment or operation to get the job done.

This is the seventh roll over the military has experienced and most have been blamed on DRIVER ERROR.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

ONE of those 7 incidents was probably a human error. But come on do you possibly believe 7 highly trained military officials were NOT signifacantly trained or was at fault for this? Or would most of these have to do with vehicle safety?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

politika,

Sorry, but you're wrong on this one. The LAVIII is apparently one of the things we actually have that is modern in the Canadian military.

And I too have seen the story that the roll-overs were due to driver error or, in at least a couple of cases "driving too close to the edge" of an embankment (a.k.a. driver error).

The fact is the cause of this death and the other injuries is job safety NOT vehicle safety. There is nothing safe about having to drive over uneven terrain at night in a place where you need to be in an armoured vehicle to block bullets, RPG's and land mines.

It would be like revamping an entire line of American automobiles when a car crashes at night on a back road in freezing rain and terrible wind. It's unsafe conditions, not unsafe equipment.

Unfortunately, while you and I stay home on stormy nights to avoid these unsafe conditions, it is our soldier's duty to actually head into such conditions every day. As Canadians we take this for granted, and we have an unrealistic expectation that we can send soldiers into war-zones and not have any of them be killed.

The safest equipment driven by the most skilled soldier might still roll over when it is ordered to be driven through a treacherous situation to complete its objective.

This story is tragic, yes, but probably entirely unavoidable if we want to participate in operations like those in Afghanistan.

FTA

[kimmy]

Documents obtained through Access to Information laws show the army was warned in May 2004 that "speed and driver inexperience" were frequent causes of rollovers involving the LAV III.

A two-page briefing memo prepared for military leaders said the armoured vehicle is limited in the type of terrain it can handle.

    * RELATED: Briefing note from May 2004 (PDF)

The note said it is especially prone to tipping on ground with an angle of 30 degrees or greater, and should be driven in the centre of roads in countries with poor highway systems, where edges of roads tend to be prone to breaking away under heavy weights.

In the six years the LAV III has been in use, two other Canadian soldiers have died in 10 rollover accidents. As recently as September, a 24-year-old Quebec soldier died when one of the vehicles rolled into a river during a nighttime training exercise in Alberta.

Last year in Bosnia, two Canadians were injured when their LAV III rolled into a ravine.

Despite the briefing note's warnings about the LAV III, retired major general Lewis MacKenzie called the LAV III "an outstanding armoured personnel carrier" that has saved "a multitude of lives" because of the protection it offers from landmines and enemy fire in combat zones.

The briefing note identifies speed and driver inexperience as contributing factors and specifies safe operating conditions-- notably, specifying a maximum 30 degree side-slope. One could easily envision this figure being exceeded in a number of driving conditions, such as in hilly terrain, driving over obstacles, making turns when travelling rapidly, pulling into the ditch, and so on. One can tell just from the picture that the vehicle has a high center of gravity-- big armored turret and weapon on top, big armored body in the middle, and rubber tires and 18 inches of ground clearance on the bottom. Like SUVs, Jeeps, and ATVs, the design looks like a recipe for rollovers. I tend to suspect that a replacement would probably have the same configuration, and therefore also likely be susceptible to rollovers.

If the vehicles are new and well-suited to the purpose for which we've purchased them, then I don't see buying replacements as very likely. However, perhaps some modifications could be made to make them more stable-- perhaps the wheels could be moved out farther, perhaps it needn't have so much ground clearance, perhaps the suspension could be stiffer to make it less prone to body roll.

-k

[Army Guy]

I just want to dispel a few rumours. The Lav III was just purchased in 1999 taking in account distribution which took over 2 years to complete this veh is the one of the newest in DND's inventory. And is ranked among the best wheeled AFV in the world and in service with dozens of countries.

Replacing the C-130 earlier models is DND top priority because of thier extreme age. There are no other C-130's in the world that have more hours than Canada's. Thats quite a feat considering there are serveral thousand flying today.

Next rumour is driver error, it's easy to boil everything down to driver error, This was an un avoidable accident plain and simply, the driver of the LAV was driving on his side of the road and served to avoid hitting a oncoming veh driving in the center of the road that was driving with no lights on(a common pratice in the arab world)

Driving over in Afgan or any Arab country is something that only experiance could describe, ( try toronto on it's worst day, 6 lanes of traffic on a 2 lane road and yes lets not forget the occasional machine gun fire. and would test the mettle of any indy car driver. If you asked Soldiers what Veh they would perfer to be on patrol with they would answer the LAV.

This was an accident that happen to kill one of our young soldiers, lets concentrate on that not modifying or changing the equipment.

[politika]

But hasn't their been reports of problems with the LAVIII by the DND?

[Army Guy]

None that were major, the problem of a few roll overs has been noted, but solving this problem will leave the veh without turrent, and with out many of it's other postive attributes. The main reason a wheeled AFV veh was choosen was it was cheaper in price, cheaper to maintain, weight considerations for transport on aircraft,ship, and it's speed.

Is it the the perfect AFV, no, But todays DND cannot afford to field an AFV for every situtation like the US army has.

[daniel]

As I understand it, the death was not combat related. For obvious reasons, safety features that would normally appear in civilian vehicles might not appear in military vehicles, but would seat belts and an air bag have saved his life?

[Army Guy]

Although thier are seat belts in armour vehs they are not much good, Lap belts only, as passengers do not sit as they do in cars (across, width wise) but lined downed the sides of the veh to allow for quick mounting and dismounting.

That being said the rear sentry (his postion) requires him to stand-up through a hatch in the rear of the veh there is no way to secure him with a seat belt.

As for airbags, won't work, remember these vehs are designed to stay within a certain weight, you add something you need to take something off. the only thing that gets considered is armour protection( the skin of the veh plus all of it's add on's, the main wpns, fire control systems,) every thing else is made as light weight as possable, or left off the list...it's not meant as a civilian veh but a wpn of war.

[crazymf]

I do not believe there's a need to politicise this young mans death. While it is tragic and sad and ALL accidents are preventable, this falls well within the statistics of traffic deaths that occur everywhere.

The military can look inwards to study whether procedures and protocols were being followed and whether the safety of the vehicle design is adequate, but past that, let's not try to make something out of nothing.

[tml12]

I do not believe there's a need to politicise this young mans death. While it is tragic and sad and ALL accidents are preventable, this falls well within the statistics of traffic deaths that occur everywhere.

The military can look inwards to study whether procedures and protocols were being followed and whether the safety of the vehicle design is adequate, but past that, let's not try to make something out of nothing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Agreed. However, no one should now be saying Canada's army is in good position because it isn't.

Friends of mine who wanted to join the armed forces either left for the States or went to Europe.

[Army Guy]

TML12:

Agreed. However, no one should now be saying Canada's army is in good position because it isn't.

Canada's military is in the exact postion that it's people wants it to be in. The goverment is not going to change that anytime soon. ( buying a few airplanes does'nt even scratch the surface. Only the people of Canada can change the state of our military by making it one of it's priorities. By demanding our government take postive action now and by demanding more of DND's leadership.

Friends of mine who wanted to join the armed forces either left for the States or went to Europe.

Thats unfortunate, and alright if you want to settle for second best, Because Canada's military is still one of the best in the world, despite the damage our goverment has inflicted upon it. Regardless of what equipment it has, it's members are second to none.

[daniel]

...Canada's military is still one of the best in the world, despite the damage our goverment has inflicted upon it. Regardless of what equipment it has, it's members are second to none.

That's efficiency. Something the business community has been preaching for decades as they layoff employees.

[politika]

I do not believe there's a need to politicise this young mans death. While it is tragic and sad and ALL accidents are preventable, this falls well within the statistics of traffic deaths that occur everywhere.

The military can look inwards to study whether procedures and protocols were being followed and whether the safety of the vehicle design is adequate, but past that, let's not try to make something out of nothing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Agreed. However, no one should now be saying Canada's army is in good position because it isn't.

Friends of mine who wanted to join the armed forces either left for the States or went to Europe.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is unfortunate. Are military can be in better shape if our LIBERAL government did more to fund it. But what can make it better is, if people like your "freinds" didn't go off and join US armed forces or some in Europe and join the Canadian force's than maybe we would have enough military personal. and are government would haev to fund it better. agree?

[Army Guy]

That's efficiency. Something the business community has been preaching for decades as they layoff employees.

Is that what they call it, it's not a word i would apply to government but sure. Its is a sad fact that this damage was carried out with the people of Canada's blessing.

That is unfortunate. Are military can be in better shape if our LIBERAL government did more to fund it. But what can make it better is, if people like your "freinds" didn't go off and join US armed forces or some in Europe and join the Canadian force's than maybe we would have enough military personal. and are government would haev to fund it better. agree?

Yes and No, the government controls everything within the military including it's numbers. DND has plenty of people banging on the doors, trying to join. Lack of funding has all but wiped out it's training enviroment and facilities. They simply could not train the numbers it would take to improve or even maintain our current levels.

Something most people don't fully understand, is the average age in DND is between 34 and 36 years old with the average retirement age of 40. just in manpower terms alone DND is in critical condition. Massive recruitment will only delute the quality of the soldiers,and produce leaqdership that are not fully trained as it take upto 4 years to fully train a soldier, plus another 2 to 3 to train them in the leadership skills they need.

And we have not even talked about equipment yet.

Once these soldiers retire in mass numbers it will be to late for Canada's Armed Forces...There exhausted from doing deployment after deployment, thier tired of being beaten by government, and the people of Canada, they've done everything Canada asked of them and have recieved nothing in return. Do you think they will remain until Canada's government gets it's act together or do you think they'll say we told you so, and remain in retirement.

[Black Dog]

Only the people of Canada can change the state of our military by making it one of it's priorities.

Here's why Canadians don't consider the military a priority: it isn't. Health care, education, taxes, jobs: these are the day-to-day things that occupy people's minds. I doubt the state of the armed forces is even a top 10 concern for most people. Canada's military tradition is of answering the bell when called; unlike our southern neighbours, we don't get our rocks off on a strong standing military force.

Frankly, I don't think the problem is one of funding (Canada is one of the highest military spenders in the world), but of the mismanagement and lack of priorities of the military. Millions of dollars have been squandered already on useless aquisitions like the submarines: I'd hate to see us throw good money after bad.

[Army Guy]

Black dog:

Here's why Canadians don't consider the military a priority: it isn't. Health care, education, taxes, jobs: these are the day-to-day things that occupy people's minds. I doubt the state of the armed forces is even a top 10 concern for most people. Canada's military tradition is of answering the bell when called; unlike our southern neighbours, we don't get our rocks off on a strong standing military force.

I must have hit some chord judging by your remarks, Thats not what the polls show, over 80 % agree that our military is in poor condition, roughly the same agree more funding is required. So someone out there has it on thier priority list.

yes health care, education and taxes is on everyone minds, these depts are not even close to the disarray that DND is in. Every government has thrown monies at these problems at yet we are still faced with them every year. As for Jobs go

since when did it become the feds job to create jobs.

""Canada's military tradition is of answering the bell when called;"" your dating yourself Black dog, those years are long gone when some drill instructor gave you a rifle,blanket and some training and shipped you off to war. Nothing in the military can be produced over night, or for that matter in months. All future conflicts are come as you are. or in our case as your dressed because that will all we will have.

"we don't get our rocks off on a strong standing military force" Who is talking about a strong military force, is that what you call what we have now. We are talking about a military force that can fullfill all our mandates issued by our government. Not taking over a small country in the tropics.

Frankly, I don't think the problem is one of funding (Canada is one of the highest military spenders in the world), but of the mismanagement and lack of priorities of the military. Millions of dollars have been squandered already on useless aquisitions like the submarines: I'd hate to see us throw good money after bad.

Bullshit...Don't be fooled by what our government classifies as military spending.

if you do some research you'll find DND 's budget is not so large and over the years our goverment has made DND responsable for other depts and spending as well.

"but of the mismanagement and lack of priorities of the military."

Now your sounding like a liberal...teflon, nothing sticks to the government piont to the military they did it....When was the last time we had a white paper, oh wait DND's fault. and why is that (so they don't have to fallow through with any promises) Stop making excuses for a poorly lead government...i'm not saying DND is perfect but when it stands next to the liberals it's god like...

Millions of dollars have been squandered already on useless aquisitions like the submarines: I'd hate to see us throw good money after bad.

DND did not push that purchase through, the goverment did...Subs were not even on the list of things to buy at that time. some polition seen them with a for sale sign on them and said this would be great....even the navy shook their heads in disbelieve....but when you starve someone for long enough they'll eat shit if you feed it to them...

The problem with our country is goverment does not want to spend on the military, there is nothing in it for them and yet no one has the balls to tell those in uniform the games over. because that is really all we want, fund us let us do our job , or tell us to go home...not starve us to death over along period.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Army Guy,

I must admit that I am quite impressed by your candor. Your spelling and punctuation are suspect, but you still make a lot of sense.

because that is really all we want, fund us let us do our job , or tell us to go home...not starve us to death over along period.

Does Canada need a military? I think that this may be what Black Dog is indicating. We don't use our military as a 'foriegn policy tool' like the US, nor does ours threaten anyone in a defensive manner (nor did it ever, really), though as Black Dog points out, if the bell gets rung, we'll show up. We'll put up a damn good fight, too.

The actual scenarios for Canada to 'do war' upon someone are few and far between, and at least for now, even a mighty military has been proven to be ineffective against far less capable foes.

[August1991]

Canada is 17th in the world by total dollar expenditure.

Link.

Given Canadian wages, the territory to cover, and our GDP, that does not make us a big spender.

[Army Guy]

Flea bag:

I must admit that I am quite impressed by your candor. Your spelling and punctuation are suspect, but you still make a lot of sense

It is easy to be candor when you are very passionate about your chosen station in life. As for my punctution and spelling i apologize and will take more time on my posts.

"Does Canada need a military?" this is the question that really needs to be answered. I strongly believe we do, based on my experiances here in Canada and overseas. Who will the people of Canada call upon in time of crisses be it a flood, ice storm, major forest fire... and Who will the people call when things escalate beyond the capacity of the police to handle such OKA, FLQ etc...And who will assist other countries in need, be it disaster relief, or just peace keeping. And who will patrol our coast, our air space, enforcing our sovereignty and protecting everything we as Canadians like to call ours such as our fishing grounds, our Islands. But a few things todays Military gives our country on a daily basis.

Countries are kept in check because they know there are consquences, and using military force is an option. Without that option would Denmark have not siezed Hans Island and worried about world opinon later.

Sure you can give those responsabilites to other existing depts but in the end you'll still have the same problems of funding...

I think that this may be what Black Dog is indicating. We don't use our military as a 'foriegn policy tool' like the US, nor does ours threaten anyone in a defensive manner (nor did it ever, really),

This is what i get out of Black dogs comments, Nobody gives a shit about our military, nor do they want to spend any of thier hard earned dollars on an department that he thinks is redundant or serves no purpose . And DND is run by a bunch of financial challenged irrisponsiable war mongers.

I will agree we don't use it like the US does, not many nations do.. but they still use it like every country with a military does, it is still used as a foriegn policy tool. And Canada has used it in an offensive manner, when they agreed to join in on the War on terror, Canada agreed to send combat troops over to Afgan not only for the sole purpose of engaging the terrorist in combat, but to give this nation a chance at peace.

though as Black Dog points out, if the bell gets rung, we'll show up. We'll put up a damn good fight, too.

As i pionted out show up with what, todays warfare requires equipment that takes years to build.

The actual scenarios for Canada to 'do war' upon someone are few and far between, and at least for now, even a mighty military has been proven to be ineffective against far less capable foes.

There are dozen of cases where Canadian soldiers have been involved in a shooting war Perhaps not in the traditional sense as history has shown...but what do you call it when to forces exchange heavy gun fire in anger. I'll give you a good example last year sometime the PPCLI was finally recongized by the GG for engaging serbian forces carrying out ethinic cleansing. and yes Canadian soldiers took the lives of over 30 bad guys. nothing was reported in Canada even today people know little about the Medac pocket. My piont is we do war every time we are sent on a peace keeping mission. This is why we are known as great peace keepers because we are impartial and will kick your ass if you cross the line.

As for a mighty military proving ineffective again'st a bunch of insurgents. That is up to interpution. Ask a Iraqi insurgent, who controls his country, and he will say the US. He can plant bombs until the sun sets or raises but the next day it's the US that is still there in full control of his country.

Canada's military will never reach the mighty catagory, and it is not the goal of DND. As a serving member all we want is the chance to continue serving our country, and to do that in the safest manner possiable. Something our country is failing at. DND is not a department that is in alittle bit of trouble it is one near death.

[Black Dog]

I must have hit some chord judging by your remarks, Thats not what the polls show, over 80 % agree that our military is in poor condition, roughly the same agree more funding is required. So someone out there has it on thier priority list.

That doesn't indicate to me that it's a top priority, though. That just tells me that, if asked, people tend to believe that Canada's forces are an underfunded shambles. But I've yet to see a poll that puts military funding in the top 10.

For example...

yes health care, education and taxes is on everyone minds, these depts are not even close to the disarray that DND is in. Every government has thrown monies at these problems at yet we are still faced with them every year. As for Jobs go since when did it become the feds job to create jobs

The vast majority of people worry about health care, education and the economy because those things have a real affect on their daily lives in ways in ways the military does not. That's all I'm getting at.

""Canada's military tradition is of answering the bell when called;"" your dating yourself Black dog, those years are long gone when some drill instructor gave you a rifle,blanket and some training and shipped you off to war. Nothing in the military can be produced over night, or for that matter in months. All future conflicts are come as you are. or in our case as your dressed because that will all we will have.

You're taking umbrage here without disproving my point. You complained that the military is not a priority. I'm just telling you why that is.

"we don't get our rocks off on a strong standing military force" Who is talking about a strong military force, is that what you call what we have now. We are talking about a military force that can fullfill all our mandates issued by our government. Not taking over a small country in the tropics.

Again, all I'm saying is that its no wonder the military is in disarray when it seems like no one has any idea what its mandate and needs actually are.

Bullshit...Don't be fooled by what our government classifies as military spending.

if you do some research you'll find DND 's budget is not so large and over the years our goverment has made DND responsable for other depts and spending as well.

"but of the mismanagement and lack of priorities of the military."

Now your sounding like a liberal...teflon, nothing sticks to the government piont to the military they did it....When was the last time we had a white paper, oh wait DND's fault. and why is that (so they don't have to fallow through with any promises) Stop making excuses for a poorly lead government...i'm not saying DND is perfect but when it stands next to the liberals it's god like...

Cool down. I'm sure you are aware that the politicization of the DND is part of the problem, right? There's a lack of leadership from all levels.

By the way, when was the last White Paper? 1994?

DND did not push that purchase through, the goverment did...Subs were not even on the list of things to buy at that time. some polition seen them with a for sale sign on them and said this would be great....even the navy shook their heads in disbelieve....but when you starve someone for long enough they'll eat shit if you feed it to them...

Which is exactly what I was saying. Jeez.

Here's an interesting (but partisan) look at defence: Breaking Rank. The segement on wasteful spending and white elephant programs is pretty illuminating.

[tml12]

I do not believe there's a need to politicise this young mans death. While it is tragic and sad and ALL accidents are preventable, this falls well within the statistics of traffic deaths that occur everywhere.

The military can look inwards to study whether procedures and protocols were being followed and whether the safety of the vehicle design is adequate, but past that, let's not try to make something out of nothing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Agreed. However, no one should now be saying Canada's army is in good position because it isn't.

Friends of mine who wanted to join the armed forces either left for the States or went to Europe.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That is unfortunate. Are military can be in better shape if our LIBERAL government did more to fund it. But what can make it better is, if people like your "freinds" didn't go off and join US armed forces or some in Europe and join the Canadian force's than maybe we would have enough military personal. and are government would haev to fund it better. agree?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Curt,

We can talk endlessly about this. I understand your point about people joining the armies of other countries, but if I joined the Army I would want to make sure I was working with state of the art modern equipment, not secondhand submarines Britain dumped off.

I have nothing but the greatest deal of respect for the members of this country's armed forces. But it is unfortunate that the Liberal government does not.

As for the state of this country's armed forces, Army Guy is correct. It is in the state that the people in this country want it to be in. Yet, because the socialist NDP bribed the Liberals into denying this country a role in missile defence, we have to rely on the U.S. to defend us.

Our great enemy the U.S. who we take so much time dissing defends us.

You have got to love it.

[Black Dog]

As for the state of this country's armed forces, Army Guy is correct. It is in the state that the people in this country want it to be in. Yet, because the socialist NDP bribed the Liberals into denying this country a role in missile defence, we have to rely on the U.S. to defend us.

Missile Defence (which Canada is deeply involved with, despite the "official" position to the contrary) is a perfect example of the type of militarily useless and financially wasteful project that has led Canada's armed force sto such a sorry state. The only poissible winners are the aerospace companies and other military contracters whose bottom lines are subsidized by such a white elephant. It's the 21st Centiry equivalent of the Ross rifle.

Our great enemy the U.S. who we take so much time dissing defends us.

From who?

[tml12]

As for the state of this country's armed forces, Army Guy is correct. It is in the state that the people in this country want it to be in. Yet, because the socialist NDP bribed the Liberals into denying this country a role in missile defence, we have to rely on the U.S. to defend us.

Missile Defence (which Canada is deeply involved with, despite the "official" position to the contrary) is a perfect example of a militarily useless and financially wasteful project that has led Canada's armed force sto such a sorry state. The onluy poissible winners are the aerospace companies and other military contracters whose bottom lines are subsidized by such a white elephant. It's the 21st Centiry equivalent of the Ross rifle.

Our great enemy the U.S. who we take so much time dissing defends us.

From who?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

BD,

The official position was only at the request of the NDP. Because Canadian soil and Canadian cities and Canadian citizens are involved, Canada has to participate to a degree.

Missile defence as Bush's government proposes is an inherently flawed program. My military contacts tell me that anyone with an undergraduate physics degree can find flaws in it. Yet, in principle Canada must be involved. Doing otherwise would constitute a loss of sovereignty.

Who does the U.S. defend us from? Anyone who might want to screw with us, including al-Qaeda. When you live next to the world's only superpower, they have at least some control over your foreign policy. Even Trudeau realized that.