Canadian Defence News

[BeaverFever]

2 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

the so called "Canadians" living here have no particular loyalty to their Crown

Nothing so-called about it. Otherwise this is the only statement in your post I agree with. Most of us couldn’t care less about the crown. 

[Dougie93]

8 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

Nothing so-called about it. Otherwise this is the only statement in your post I agree with. Most of us couldn’t care less about the crown. 

you have nothing to replace it with

hence why "Canada" is ceasing to exist in the face of America overwhelming your ramparts

young people in Canada already live in America, by way of their smartphones

and all they know about Canada

is that it is a "White Supremacist Racist Misogynist colony committing Genocide"

you foolish leftists have brought yourselves down,

you conquered yourselves, on behalf of American ideology, which you imported to Canada

[CdnFox]

57 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

I don’t see that being a lie, she is saying excluding them from combat arms limits and ignores their contribution  

 

Nonsense. First off that's not what she's saying and second off it would be a silly thing to say.

 

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

And it’s not a legit concern anywhere except in the regressive conservative mind.  Even in the USA women have been in combat arms for a decade now. 

Is legitimate concern, and women have not had unrestricted access to all combat roles until very recently. 

And  many military people including left leaning ones have concerns about it. 

You would have to be the biggest liar in the world to pretend that the average woman is just as capable in melee combat as the average male, all else being equal. And while a 220 lb male might be able to carry a 150 lb woman to safety on the battlefeild, generally speaking it's not true the other way around. 

And to pretend otherwise is just woke nonsense.  

So it's a legit issue. 

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

And at any rate size and strength don’t matter as much in modern war as they once did

they absolutely do in front line infantry roles. Sorry. 

Being a pilot? no.  Drone operator? I doubt it. tank driver? Probably not.   But infantry soldier who closes with and fights with the enemy? For sure. 

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

BTW if size and strength matter then you would just exclude any male or female who doesn’t meet the size and strength requirements

But that is never what happens.  The same lunatics such as yourself who claim there should be no difference between women and men inevitably demand the physical standards be lowered so that women can pass, not that only women who can pass be admitted. 

Army approves reduced physical fitness standards for women, older soldiers

As soon as women (about 44 percent of them) started to fail, the army lowered the standards. 

So there's your argument up in smoke. 

[Army Guy]

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

I don’t see that being a lie, she is saying excluding them from combat arms limits and ignores their contribution  

And it’s not a legit concern anywhere except in the regressive conservative mind.  Even in the USA women have been in combat arms for a decade now. 
 

And at any rate size and strength don’t matter as much in modern war as they once did especially artillery or armour which is where republicans troglodytes also want to ban women. Small size can actually be an advantage in many situations including armour where space is limited. Plus Women often meet or exceed men in physical endurance and pain tolerance. 
 

BTW if size and strength matter then you would just exclude any male or female who doesn’t meet the size and strength requirements rather than banning 50% of the population based on gender even if they meet the size and strength requirements.  Western armies already have recruiting challenges and shortfalls it would be moronic to ban women from the most important trades and purge the thousands already there. 

I have seen a few women that have meet or exceeded the standards laid out by the military..I've seen a few women that should have earned medals of bravery under fire, but to be honest those are rare...Standards have been lowered to the point they are almost dangerous... for example when i joined 60 % of our class failed to meet standards, all were recoursed...to try again...that was basic training, now today very few fail or get recoursed as they have to maintain numbers, or quotas, so many women, color, creed, etc...I mean it is on our own recruiting web site preference will be given to and a long list of requirements...I mean today anyone can walk off the street and pass the PT test...which really is not that high...Standards' could not be pushed any lower, the fact they have a fat camp, is telling these people can not even pass the very very low pt standards', and are kept on until they do, through diet and PT...in some case for a year or more...

The one area the military has refused to lower standards is Special forces....here JTF and CSOR have tough standards, and if you would note there are NO female operators...there are females in the support roles of these units, but no operator's... Recently in the US there were Females that passed the Army Ranger course, but the standards were lowered...

Standards for all war fighters should be high...and if a women can meet those same standards as the men do, then i'm good with them serving along with the men...Why they would want to do that is beyond me, Men in those roles are normally A type personalities, and for the most part if your not at the same standard they can be a$$holes...And i agree 100 %, not many professions that life's depend on be physically/ mentally fit.

My ruck sack in Afghanistan ranged in at about 120 to 140 lbs...with others weighing in at much more...take a look at the C-6 gunner or 84 team, radio man, ....we rucked every where days on end in the mountains and low lands....with day time temps reaching plus 55 celsius...Some women can do this, and i've seen them struggle, sh!t i struggled, and i was 6'3 and 200 lbs......but the average women could not even last a day...Troops on the ground move at the same pace as the slowest person....we don't leave anyone behind, If you pose a danger to the group your find yourself be flown out...back to Canada... 

Edited November 24, 2024 by Army Guy

[Army Guy]

2 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

And at any rate size and strength don’t matter as much in modern war as they once did especially artillery or armour which is where republicans troglodytes also want to ban women. Small size can actually be an advantage in many situations including armour where space is limited. Plus Women often meet or exceed men in physical endurance and pain tolerance. 
 

BTW if size and strength matter then you would just exclude any male or female who doesn’t meet the size and strength requirements rather than banning 50% of the population based on gender even if they meet the size and strength requirements.  Western armies already have recruiting challenges and shortfalls it would be moronic to ban women from the most important trades and purge the thousands already there. 

Have you picked up a 155MM arty round, it's F*cking heavy, and do that over and over again...even a 120mm ROUNDS TAKES over 40 per tank...change track for a day and tell me some 140 lb chick is going to be all in....normally females will take other roles in a tank or gun ,Don't get me wrong there are women doing these roles as we speak, and very well...but they are not the majority, they are the exception....I've also seen guys like 6,6 pop out of a tank...along with some 280 lbs that squeezed into the hatch...Trust me i seen much bigger in the air force or navy...in the navy they take it to a whole new level....

I've never seen a women exceed a mans physical endurance with the majority of men, NEVER...i've seen one or two give a man a run for their money, but the majority or often...not once...

What would be moronic would be to enlist a man or women that could not meet standards regardless of shortfalls...and i don't think being short or tall has any bearing on job requirements, the standards need to be toughen up, and if you pass them your in...there is a saying in the army one man one kit....meaning if you brought it you carry it....if you can't do that then you don't belong...

Now being an officer is a much different story....they do not carry as much as the enlisted, nor are they humping arty rounds or tank ammo...Another topic that was not discussed is SEX, having one or two women in a platoon changes the dynamics 100 % and not for the good....

Do we need to ban women, NO, do standards need to be toughened up YES, does everyone need to pass one standard YES

[BeaverFever]

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Nonsense. First off that's not what she's saying and second off it would be a silly thing to say.

Its not a silly thing to say. When a highly decorated female with 4-decades as combat arms officer is told that no women can properly serve in the combat arms he is effectively calling her a fraud and belittling her career of service and her contributions. If a person can meet the standards their gender shouldn’t matter. And it doesn’t matter to anyone except these ass-backward conservatives. 
 

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Is legitimate concern, and women have not had unrestricted access to all combat roles until very recently. 

Since the 90s in Canada and since 2015 in USA.  That’s long enough to judge the results for themselves. 
 

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

And  many military people including left leaning ones have concerns about it. 

Which “left leaning ones”?

 

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

You would have to be the biggest liar in the world to pretend that the average woman is just as capable in melee combat as the average male, all else being equal. And while a 220 lb male might be able to carry a 150 lb woman to safety on the battlefeild, generally speaking it's not true the other way around. 

And to pretend otherwise is just woke nonsense.  

NOBODY said the AVERAGE woman.  Notice there’s no conservatives trying to ban 150 lb men. There are plenty of small men in the military. If a person can meet the standards their gender shouldn’t matter.

 

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

they absolutely do in front line infantry roles. Sorry. 

Being a pilot? no.  Drone operator? I doubt it. tank driver? Probably not.   But infantry soldier who closes with and fights with the enemy? For sure. 

They don’t fight with swords and axes. Im sure the infantry corps around the world are full of men who wouldn’t last 20 seconds if they had to fight hand to hand and survive on upper body strength alone. Im not saying strength is irrelevant but strength requirements are well within the range of what the females body can achieve. If a person can meet the standards their gender shouldn’t matter.

 

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

But that is never what happens.  The same lunatics such as yourself who claim there should be no difference between women and men inevitably demand the physical standards be lowered so that women can pass, not that only women who can pass be admitted. 

Army approves reduced physical fitness standards for women, older soldiers

As soon as women (about 44 percent of them) started to fail, the army lowered the standards. 

So there's your argument up in smoke. 

The thing is when you go to war you’re not doing pushups and deadlifts on the battlefield so saying to be an effective soldier you need to x number of reps of certain exercises is totally arbitrary. Is a soldier who can do more sit-ups than you necessarily going to be more effective in combat?  I don’t think so. I guarantee you that in the middle of a firefight you will do zero sit-ups. 
 

The standard should be being able to do the tasks required for the job. If they can’t complete a field march or carry their weapon and normal load, or the other regular everyday tasks expected of them, that’s what matters

 

If a person can meet the standards their gender shouldn’t matter.

Edited November 24, 2024 by BeaverFever

[CdnFox]

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Its not a silly thing to say.

It's entirely silly. Nobody's asking for anybody to justify any previous contribution. People are asking a very legitimate question of of moving forward is that the best idea possible to safeguard our country?

It would be as stupid as claiming that when they decided to consider allowing women to fight on the front lines that somehow that meant men had to justify all of their contributions to date.

3 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Since the 90s in Canada and since 2015 in USA

Us is interesting, Canada is not. So we have about 9 years where it was allowed in the US and probably not a lot of female Frontline service troops in the Infantry I would bet. Versus the 3,000 years of military history the mankind is a developed prior to that.

It is a valid question whether you like it or not. Your ideology and and loyalty to your echo chamber instead of your fellow man is going to get people killed.

It may be that after the question is asked and considered in its depth that for some reason it should still be allowed but as I posted they dropped the requirements because women couldn't hack what was expected of the men. So no matter how you slice it we are settling for second best putting women in Frontline positions on average.

When a highly decorated female with 4-decades as combat arms officer is told that no women can properly serve in the combat arms he is effectively calling her a fraud and belittling her career of service and her contributions. If a person can meet the standards their gender shouldn’t matter. And it doesn’t matter to anyone except these ass-backward conservatives. 
 

Since the 90s in Canada and since 2015 in USA.  That’s long enough to judge the results for themselves. 
 

Which “left leaning ones”?

 

NOBODY said the AVERAGE woman.  Notice there’s no conservatives trying to ban 150 lb men. There are plenty of small men in the military. If a person can meet the standards their gender shouldn’t matter.

 

They don’t fight with swords and axes. Im sure the infantry corps around the world are full of men who wouldn’t last 20 seconds if they had to fight hand to hand and survive on upper body strength alone. Im not saying strength is irrelevant but strength requirements are well within the range of what the females body can achieve. If a person can meet the standards their gender shouldn’t matter.

 

Quote

The thing is when you go to war you’re not doing pushups and deadlifts on the battlefield so saying to be an effective soldier you need to x number of reps of certain exercises is totally arbitrary.

What a load of bullshit. Are you telling me that in the modern world soldiers don't lift things on the battlefield? Are you telling me that in a grapple or melee physical strength size and weight have no bearing? Are you trying to suggest that in this day and age soldiers will not have to carry fallen comrades or wounded comrades from the battlefield?

I'm happy to have a reasonable conversation but you're being a complete tard with this crap.  If strength wasn't relevant why have any push-ups at all? Why do any strengths training? Clearly it doesn't matter according to you modern soldiers don't need to be physically fit 🙄🙄🙄

 

Quote

The standard should be being able to do the tasks required for the job. If they can’t complete a field march or carry their weapon and normal load, or the other regular everyday tasks expected of them, that’s what matters

Oh look at who's changing his tune as soon as he realizes women can't live up to the standards.

The army sat down and decided after considering everything relatively recently that this is what would be necessary to demonstrate enough physical strength to really do the job. And when they realized women couldn't hack it, they lowered it. So your argument is out the window. We are accepting a lower standard by including women and that is absolutely the way it is. So now the question is should we or should we not? Is the purpose of a combat infantry unit to win fights or spread diversity?

Quote

If a person can meet the standards their gender shouldn’t matter.

But they can't and they're letting them in anyway. I just posted proof.

On average, by and large, all else being equal, men are significantly stronger than women. For any given level of training on average men will wind up coming away stronger. Strength matters on the battlefield, you don't have to be a soldier with 20 years of experience to figure that out. So by lowering the standard and accepting weaker people in the name of diversity you are weakening your front line infantry units.

That's really undeniable. So the question becomes is there some benefit that justifies that? Is there a reason that that would be a good thing or that having women there would be a good thing such that it would offset that reality? And that is a perfectly valid question to ask

[BeaverFever]

Canadian military trying to fast-track delivery of air defence systems to troops in Latvia

DND has not said when the short range air defence battery would be acquired or delivered to Latvia.

Get the latest from David Pugliese, Ottawa Citizen straight to your inbox 

Published Nov 28, 2024  •  Last updated 19 hours ago  •  3 minute read

The Canadian military is revamping its purchase of ground-based air defence systems to focus on trying to get such equipment to troops in Latvia as quickly as possible.

Originally, the Canadian Forces had a project office to back the purchase of a future air defence system, estimated to cost at least $1 billion.

But the procurement team will now concentrate its efforts on the more urgent purchase of a short-range air defence battery that can be sent to support Canadian troops in Latvia as soon as possible, according to an Oct. 10 update to defence companies.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Canadian soldiers are in Latvia as part of the Canadian-led NATO enhanced Forward Presence Battle Group. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced in July 2023 that, as part of a major commitment to NATO, Canada would spend an additional $2.6 billion to double the number of troops it stationed in Latvia. The government’s plan would see up to 2,200 troops deployed for what is being called Operation Reassurance.

In the face of continued Russian aggression in Ukraine, Canada intends to address Operation Reassurance’s urgent need for a short-range air defence system that will be able to deal with incoming rockets, artillery and mortar rounds, according to the Oct. 10 notice to defence firms. It will continue to work with companies on the technical details for the new equipment. “The intention is to procure a nearly Military Off The Shelf system with very little Canada specific modifications and changes,” added the government message to companies.

Canada has already acquired man-portable surface-to-air missiles for the Latvia mission.

Once the purchase of the short-range air defence battery for Latvia is completed, the procurement team will then turn its attention to the purchase of more extensive ground-based air defence systems for the rest of the military.

Evening Update

The Ottawa Citizen’s best journalism, delivered directly to your inbox by 7 p.m. on weekdays.

By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

DND spokesperson Nick Drescher Brown said in an email to the Ottawa Citizen that dividing the projects into different phases was necessary.

“Breaking the project into phases and accelerating the (Latvian mission) procurement will result in a better alignment with the army’s immediate priorities,” he added.

DND did not provide information on when the short range air defence battery would be acquired or delivered to Latvia.

Drescher Brown said that the budget of the air defence system for the Latvian mission can’t be disclosed at this time.

In February 2023, the Ottawa Citizen reportedthat the Canadian Army was fast-tracking its purchase of anti-tank weapons as well as air defence systems for troops stationed in Latvia, fueled by the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

The equipment was being classified as an Urgent Operational Requirement, the same process used during the Afghanistan war to speedily obtain gear without going through the slower traditional procurement procedures.

Lt.-Col. Eric Hardy, of the army’s equipment procurement team, briefed industry officials Feb. 3, 2023 about the initiatives to fast-track the purchases. Hardy noted in his briefing that the army’s new air defence system would “counter the assessed air threat from within the Baltic region.”

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The new anti-tank weapons for the Latvia mission have already been ordered.

But the National Post reported on Nov. 26 that there are problems with those missiles and concerns they are not performing as required. The National Post noted that DND is considering cancelling the contract.

DND did not provide comment to the National Post by deadline.

The Canadian Army has been without an air defence capability since 2012 and has tried over the last decade to convince governments to purchase such equipment.

The army was outfitted in 1989 with a then state-of-the art air defence anti-tank system known as ADATS. It was purchased to protect bases in Germany against attack by the Russians, but, shortly after ADATS was delivered, the Cold War ended and the systems were shipped back to Canada. Faced with budget cuts ordered by the Conservative government of the time, the army announced it was removing ADATS from service in 2012.

 

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/canadian-military-air-defence-system-latvia

[BeaverFever]

John Ivison: Canadian troops sit in Putin’s crosshairs without the defensive weapons they were promised

Among the 1,600 Canadians supporting Operation Reassurance, morale is flat, with many feeling exposed, under-equipped and forgotten

Get the latest from John Ivison straight to your inbox 

Published Nov 26, 2024  •  4 minute read

Vladimir Putin made it clear that NATO’s bases in Eastern Europe are on his radar, when he said last week that Russia reserves the right to strike the alliance’s military installations.

The words must have chilled the 1,600 or so Canadians based in Latvia supporting Operation Reassurance, the biggest reinforcement of NATO’s collective defence in a generation.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

According to people familiar with the mission, morale is flat, with many of the troops feeling exposed, under-equipped and forgotten by the Canadian public. The black humour in Camp Adazi has it that the Canadians would be a “speedbump” if the Russians attacked.

Comparisons have been made to Hong Kong in 1941, when 2,000 under-equipped Canadian troops were sent on a hopeless mission to defend the territory from Japanese attack and suffered a 50-per-cent casualty rate.

The Department of National Defence (DND) has been attempting to rectify a situation where the initial force was sent to Latvia without air or anti-tank defences.

DND has since deployed helicopters and 15 Leopard 2 tanks.

In March 2023, then defence minister Anita Anand said that Canada would be acquiring a portable anti-tank missile system; anti-drone capability and a short-range, shoulder-wielded air defence system. She categorized them as “urgent operational requirements,” which invokes national security exemptions from competitive tendering and which, in theory, speeds up the procurement process.

Platformed

This newsletter tackles hot topics with boldness, verve and wit. (Subscriber-exclusive edition on Fridays)

By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The $227-million MANPADS system (man portable air defence system) — rebranded as SPADS (soldier portable air defence system) in the inclusive Canadian military — was ordered from Saab Canada and is slowly being deployed.

The first phase of the anti-drone capability has also been completed. DND awarded a $25-million contract to the U.K.’s Leonardo for its Falcon Shield fixed-site system and a $19-million contract for CACI Inc.’s portable BEAM drone-detection system.

But sources suggest the progress of acquiring the Portable Anti-X missile system (PAXM), with its capacity to destroy main battle tanks, has proven more fraught — and, that due diligence has been sacrificed by the need for speed.

DND awarded a $44-million contract to Israel’s Rafael for its SPIKE LR2 system, but is now said to be having doubts about its capability and is considering cancelling the contract.

At a defence committee meeting in November 2023, Conservative defence critic James Bezan questioned the department’s then assistant deputy minister Troy Crosby about the PAXM contract, which had not yet been awarded.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Bezan asked whether the contract was sole-sourced and how the department planned to test the systems to ensure they were the best on offer.

Crosby said all three urgent operational requests were subject to competitive processes.

But he sidestepped the question about testing. “What we’re aiming to do is bring the service proven capabilities that our allies have in service,” he said.

Crosby added that when the Canadian Armed Forces identifies an urgent need, the department applies itself to that requirement. “I think we can demonstrate that we are able to deliver that need quite quickly,” he said.

Yet 18 months after publicly announcing the intention to expedite its introduction, there is still no anti-tank system in Latvia.

The curse of DND — that it can offer either diligence or dispatch, but not both — appears to have struck again.

Defence watchers familiar with the file and process say that it would be normal practice to hold a “shoot off” to test the top two or three contenders before awarding the contract.

Sources say that did not happen and that the SPIKE LR2 was only tested for promised capabilities after the successful bid was made public.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The Forces are said to have been underwhelmed by the results, prompting speculation that DND may restart the competition.

I asked the department whether a “shoot off’ was held with all qualified bidders; whether the SPIKE LR2 system met all accuracy requirements; and whether there are plans to cancel the contract.

That should be information that is immediately accessible. But DND replied that it would not be able to supply it before my deadline — 72 hours from the time the question was posed.

Rafael was also asked to provide comment but also did not respond before the deadline.

It may well be that the process is proceeding smoothly and that Canadian soldiers will be in receipt of the promised anti-tank missile system in short order.

But DND could easily have clarified that.

It seems more likely that Canadian troops holding the line in Latvia won’t have one of the most basic weapons they need to defend themselves for many months to come — just as the situation in Eastern Europe grows more and more precarious.

 

 

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/john-ivison-canadian-troops-sit-in-putins-crosshairs-without-the-defensive-weapons-they-were-promised?_gl=1*3o6cow*_ga*MTg1Njg0NTE5NC4xNzMyMDY3NjA5*_ga_72QH41ZTMR*MTczMjg5NTc3OC42LjEuMTczMjg5NjI1Mi41OC4wLjA.*_gcl_au*MTUxNjgxNDI0NS4xNzMyMDY3NjA5*_ga_GNYBFF106Q*MTczMjg5NTc3OC42LjEuMTczMjg5NjI1OC4wLjAuMA..*_ga_9H6VPHFHKG*MTczMjg5NTc3OC42LjEuMTczMjg5NjI1Mi41Ni4wLjA.

[BeaverFever]

Just now, BeaverFever said:

 

John Ivison: Canadian troops sit in Putin’s crosshairs without the defensive weapons they were promised

Among the 1,600 Canadians supporting Operation Reassurance, morale is flat, with many feeling exposed, under-equipped and forgotten

Get the latest from John Ivison straight to your inbox 

Published Nov 26, 2024  •  4 minute read

Vladimir Putin made it clear that NATO’s bases in Eastern Europe are on his radar, when he said last week that Russia reserves the right to strike the alliance’s military installations.

The words must have chilled the 1,600 or so Canadians based in Latvia supporting Operation Reassurance, the biggest reinforcement of NATO’s collective defence in a generation.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

According to people familiar with the mission, morale is flat, with many of the troops feeling exposed, under-equipped and forgotten by the Canadian public. The black humour in Camp Adazi has it that the Canadians would be a “speedbump” if the Russians attacked.

Comparisons have been made to Hong Kong in 1941, when 2,000 under-equipped Canadian troops were sent on a hopeless mission to defend the territory from Japanese attack and suffered a 50-per-cent casualty rate.

The Department of National Defence (DND) has been attempting to rectify a situation where the initial force was sent to Latvia without air or anti-tank defences.

DND has since deployed helicopters and 15 Leopard 2 tanks.

In March 2023, then defence minister Anita Anand said that Canada would be acquiring a portable anti-tank missile system; anti-drone capability and a short-range, shoulder-wielded air defence system. She categorized them as “urgent operational requirements,” which invokes national security exemptions from competitive tendering and which, in theory, speeds up the procurement process.

Platformed

This newsletter tackles hot topics with boldness, verve and wit. (Subscriber-exclusive edition on Fridays)

By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The $227-million MANPADS system (man portable air defence system) — rebranded as SPADS (soldier portable air defence system) in the inclusive Canadian military — was ordered from Saab Canada and is slowly being deployed.

The first phase of the anti-drone capability has also been completed. DND awarded a $25-million contract to the U.K.’s Leonardo for its Falcon Shield fixed-site system and a $19-million contract for CACI Inc.’s portable BEAM drone-detection system.

But sources suggest the progress of acquiring the Portable Anti-X missile system (PAXM), with its capacity to destroy main battle tanks, has proven more fraught — and, that due diligence has been sacrificed by the need for speed.

DND awarded a $44-million contract to Israel’s Rafael for its SPIKE LR2 system, but is now said to be having doubts about its capability and is considering cancelling the contract.

At a defence committee meeting in November 2023, Conservative defence critic James Bezan questioned the department’s then assistant deputy minister Troy Crosby about the PAXM contract, which had not yet been awarded.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Bezan asked whether the contract was sole-sourced and how the department planned to test the systems to ensure they were the best on offer.

Crosby said all three urgent operational requests were subject to competitive processes.

But he sidestepped the question about testing. “What we’re aiming to do is bring the service proven capabilities that our allies have in service,” he said.

Crosby added that when the Canadian Armed Forces identifies an urgent need, the department applies itself to that requirement. “I think we can demonstrate that we are able to deliver that need quite quickly,” he said.

Yet 18 months after publicly announcing the intention to expedite its introduction, there is still no anti-tank system in Latvia.

The curse of DND — that it can offer either diligence or dispatch, but not both — appears to have struck again.

Defence watchers familiar with the file and process say that it would be normal practice to hold a “shoot off” to test the top two or three contenders before awarding the contract.

Sources say that did not happen and that the SPIKE LR2 was only tested for promised capabilities after the successful bid was made public.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

The Forces are said to have been underwhelmed by the results, prompting speculation that DND may restart the competition.

I asked the department whether a “shoot off’ was held with all qualified bidders; whether the SPIKE LR2 system met all accuracy requirements; and whether there are plans to cancel the contract.

That should be information that is immediately accessible. But DND replied that it would not be able to supply it before my deadline — 72 hours from the time the question was posed.

Rafael was also asked to provide comment but also did not respond before the deadline.

It may well be that the process is proceeding smoothly and that Canadian soldiers will be in receipt of the promised anti-tank missile system in short order.

But DND could easily have clarified that.

It seems more likely that Canadian troops holding the line in Latvia won’t have one of the most basic weapons they need to defend themselves for many months to come — just as the situation in Eastern Europe grows more and more precarious.

 

 

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/john-ivison-canadian-troops-sit-in-putins-crosshairs-without-the-defensive-weapons-they-were-promised?_gl=1*3o6cow*_ga*MTg1Njg0NTE5NC4xNzMyMDY3NjA5*_ga_72QH41ZTMR*MTczMjg5NTc3OC42LjEuMTczMjg5NjI1Mi41OC4wLjA.*_gcl_au*MTUxNjgxNDI0NS4xNzMyMDY3NjA5*_ga_GNYBFF106Q*MTczMjg5NTc3OC42LjEuMTczMjg5NjI1OC4wLjAuMA..*_ga_9H6VPHFHKG*MTczMjg5NTc3OC42LjEuMTczMjg5NjI1Mi41Ni4wLjA.

I was surprised to learn that the Spike LR2 is underperforming, given all the positive hype about it. I guess that’s the defence industry for you, lots of exaggerated claims and propaganda. 

[BeaverFever]

No plans to buy first-person drones for Canadian Armed Forces

The systems are being widely used in the Russia-Ukraine war as well as in fighting in Gaza and Lebanon.

Get the latest from David Pugliese, Ottawa Citizen straight to your inbox 

Published Nov 22, 2024  •  Last updated 5 days ago  •  3 minute read

First-person-view drones have transformed the modern battlefield, but the Canadian military has confirmed it has no plans to buy the low-cost aerial vehicles.

The first person view (FPV) drones allow the pilot to see from the drone’s perspective in real-time, usually through a headset.

The systems, which can cost less than $500, are currently being widely used in the Russia-Ukraine war as well as in fighting in Gaza and Lebanon.

The U.S. Army has been conducting experiments with FPVs with a plan to have a program in place next year and the first units equipped with the systems by 2026.

But the Canadian Armed Forces says it won’t be embracing FPV technology at this point.

“At this time, the Department of National Defence/Canadian Armed Forces does not have any current or planned procurements for First Person View drones for operational use,” department spokesperson Alex Tétreault said in an email. “However, in Our North Strong and Free (strategy) we committed to exploring options for acquiring a suite of surveillance and strike drones as well as counter-drone capabilities, sometime in the future.”

Intelligence analyst Wesley Wark noted in an Oct. 3 article for the Centre for International Governance Innovation that such drone technology was “transforming warfare in real time.”

Ukraine uses FPV drones to drop munitions down Russian tank hatches and chase individual soldiers and small units on the battlefield, he wrote.

Hezbollah, on Israel’s northern flank, has utilized Iranian technology to challenge Israeli air defence systems on a daily basis, Wark added.

Future drone systems will increasingly rely on artificial intelligence to become truly autonomous weapons and will be used in swarm attacks to overwhelm defences, Wark has argued.

In the meantime, the Canadian Forces has received an order of smaller drones which are controlled by a handheld system equipped with a screen. The federal government bought 50 of the U.S.-built Teal 2 drones at a cost of $4 million, according to a DND briefing document obtained by the Ottawa Citizen.

The small aerial vehicles arrived in March and have been distributed to the Canadian Army and Royal Canadian Navy.

The Teal 2 drones can be used for limited surveillance and acquiring targets among other duties, according to the briefing. The Teal 2, equipped with a high-resolution camera, weighs 1.25 kilograms and has a range of five kilometres. It can operate for 30 minutes.

The Canadian Forces noted in the briefing that it wants to put in place a standing offer to buy additional smaller drones that have been approved for use by the U.S. military.

The larger strike drones that Tétreault referred to in his email are General Atomics MQ-9B Reapers built in the U.S.

The federal government announced on Dec. 19, 2023, that Canada would buy 11 of the remotely piloted aircraft for $2.5 billion.

The new drones will be stationed at 14 Wing Greenwood, N.S., and 19 Wing Comox, B.C.

The drones were originally expected to be delivered in 2025, but that will be delayed until 2028 as modifications are made to the aircraft to deal with Arctic conditions.

“The need to operate at high northern latitudes, including in the Arctic, requires the use of satellites and aircraft antennas and communication components not previously integrated on the MQ-9,” DND spokesperson Andrée-Anne Poulin explained in a previous email. “Similarly, additional testing and qualification work will be required to ensure the (drones) can be operated and maintained in Canadian climatic conditions.”

Poulin said extra time was also needed so Canadian-made systems could be integrated into the aircraft.

Uplands will also be the site for a new $65-million military facility to control the drone fleet.

The Ottawa installation, to be ready by 2028, will be around 6,000 square metres in size. It will be home to almost 200 military personnel whose job will be to operate and control the drones flying from the bases in British Columbia and Nova Scotia as well as Arctic locations.
 

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/no-first-person-drones-for-canadian-forces

Edited November 29, 2024 by BeaverFever

[BeaverFever]

7 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

First-person-view drones have transformed the modern battlefield, but the Canadian military has confirmed it has no plans to buy the low-cost aerial vehicles.

This is Canada why would we buy something that is essential and low cost?  We prefer to but things that are useless and high cost. The drone makers need to jack up the price by a multiple of 3 or 4, reduce the capability by a similar degree and have a Canadian company with zero experience who will blow past the delivery date by 10-15 years. Then we will be interested in buying them!

Edited November 29, 2024 by BeaverFever

[Dougie93]

On 11/29/2024 at 2:10 PM, BeaverFever said:

This is Canada why would we buy something that is essential and low cost?  We prefer to but things that are useless and high cost. The drone makers need to jack up the price by a multiple of 3 or 4, reduce the capability by a similar degree and have a Canadian company with zero experience who will blow past the delivery date by 10-15 years. Then we will be interested in buying them!

in fairness, FPV drones are rather ad hoc battlefield expedients

not sure who DND could even source those from in terms of a GoC contract

not to mention that taking a civilian OTS drone and strapping explosives to it by hand

is not likely to meet Canadian military safety requirements

the closest NATO STANAG drone being produced in America is the Teledyne FLIR Rogue 1

which is not technically FPV, but rather a grade or two above that

Edited December 4, 2024 by Dougie93

[BeaverFever]

On 12/4/2024 at 12:19 PM, Dougie93 said:

in fairness, FPV drones are rather ad hoc battlefield expedients

not sure who DND could even source those from in terms of a GoC contract

not to mention that taking a civilian OTS drone and strapping explosives to it by hand

is not likely to meet Canadian military safety requirements

the closest NATO STANAG drone being produced in America is the Teledyne FLIR Rogue 1

which is not technically FPV, but rather a grade or two above that

I think switchblade would fall into this category. Poland has something called Warmate. There are a few others, depending on how you define it. 

On 11/29/2024 at 11:14 AM, BeaverFever said:

I was surprised to learn that the Spike LR2 is underperforming, given all the positive hype about it. I guess that’s the defence industry for you, lots of exaggerated claims and propaganda. 

More details… So reading between the lines, maybe a quality control issue rather than a faulty design issue?

 

DND confirms malfunction of new anti-tank missiles heading to Latvia

There were problems with five out of eight of the new Canadian Forces anti-tank missiles.

Get the latest from David Pugliese, Ottawa Citizen straight to your inbox 

Published Dec 05, 2024  •  Last updated 5 hours ago  •  3 minute read

More than half of the new anti-tank missiles received by the Canadian military didn’t function properly during testing, the Department of National Defence has confirmed.

The federal government spent U.S. $32 million ($45 million Canadian) to purchase Spike anti-tank missiles for use by Canadian Forces personnel in Latvia.

But the National Post reported on Nov. 26 that there were problems with those missiles and concerns they were not performing as required. The National Post noted that DND was considering cancelling the contract.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

DND spokesperson Nick Drescher Brown said there are no plans to cancel the Spike missile contract with Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, an Israeli company.

But the department did acknowledge ongoing problems with the Spike LR2 missiles.

“During Initial Cadre Training conducted by the company on July 15-16, 2024, five out of eight missiles experienced functionality issues,” Drescher Brown confirmed to the Ottawa Citizen. “We continue to work closely with the equipment manufacturer to identify and address the root cause of these issues.”

Drescher Brown did not go into detail about the specific problems affecting the missiles. But he noted that no one was injured nor were there any safety concerns associated with the firings. “All safety protocols built into the equipment performed exactly as expected,” he added.

Rafael did not respond to a request for comment.

In February 2023, the Ottawa Citizen reported that the Canadian Army was fast-tracking its purchase of the anti-tank weapons as well as air defence systems for troops stationed in Latvia. The equipment was classified as an Urgent Operational Requirement, the same process used during the Afghanistan war to quickly obtain gear without going through the slower traditional procurement procedures.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Drescher Brown said in the interest of getting the new missiles quickly for the Latvia mission, no live-fire tests or demonstrations were performed during the selection process. “This technical risk was assessed and deemed acceptable as all of the potential bidders had delivered thousands of units of this product to other customers by that point in time,” he said.

The ongoing issues affect both the missiles and launchers.

“While deliveries of these new systems for deployed Canadian Battle Group members in Latvia has been delayed slightly, until the equipment manufacturer implements the required changes to ensure that these systems function as intended, full operational capability remains on schedule for January 2026,”  Drescher Brown added.

No details were provided by DND on when the needed changes for the Spike systems are expected to be completed.

Canadian soldiers are in Latvia as part of the Canadian-led NATO enhanced Forward Presence Battle Group to deter Russian aggression in the region. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced in July 2023 that, as part of a major commitment to NATO, Canada would spend an additional $2.6 billion to double the number of troops it stationed in Latvia. The government’s plan would see up to 2,200 troops deployed for what is being called Operation Reassurance.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

This is not the first time the Canadian military examined the purchase of modern anti-tank weapons. In 2005 the then-Liberal government had approved $194 million for the purchase of either the Israeli-made Spike missile or the American-build Javelin system. Companies put their bids in to provide 840 missiles and more than 100 firing systems. Test firings of both weapons were conducted.

But a year later the bids were rejected as the Canadian Army determined it didn’t have enough information to figure out whether the weapons would be effective on the battlefield. The project then went by the wayside.

Both Spike and Javelin missiles are in service with multiple nations. Javelin has been used extensively in Ukraine while Spike variants have been used in conflicts in Gaza, Iraq, Lebanon and during the second Nagorno-Karabakh war.
 

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/dnd-canadian-forces-anti-tank-missiles-latvia

Edited December 8, 2024 by BeaverFever

[Dougie93]

5 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

I think switchblade would fall into this category. Poland has something called Warmate. There are a few others, depending on how you define it.

FPV means you wear the goggles to fly the drone in VR, neither Switchblade nor Warmate is that

[BeaverFever]

5 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

FPV means you wear the goggles to fly the drone in VR, neither Switchblade nor Warmate is that

AFAIK the visual display doesn’t have to be via VR googles to be considered FPV, it can be a traditional screen 

[Dougie93]

23 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

AFAIK the visual display doesn’t have to be via VR googles to be considered FPV, it can be a traditional screen 

FPV Drone vs. Switchblade: Is It the Same Thing and What's the Difference

https://en.defence-ua.com/weapon_and_tech/fpv_drone_vs_switchblade_is_it_the_same_thing_and_whats_the_difference-7340.html

[Army Guy]

On 11/29/2024 at 3:10 PM, BeaverFever said:

This is Canada why would we buy something that is essential and low cost?  We prefer to but things that are useless and high cost. The drone makers need to jack up the price by a multiple of 3 or 4, reduce the capability by a similar degree and have a Canadian company with zero experience who will blow past the delivery date by 10-15 years. Then we will be interested in buying them!

My son , who is in 2 RCR tells me they have been using small drones to develop a requirement for them, while it is still an experiment and they are in very limited numbers they have proven useful... maybe the right hand is not talking to the left hand or they are just teasing the troops...

[Army Guy]

Quote

 

But a year later the bids were rejected as the Canadian Army determined it didn’t have enough information to figure out whether the weapons would be effective on the battlefield. The project then went by the wayside.

Both Spike and Javelin missiles are in service with multiple nations. Javelin has been used extensively in Ukraine while Spike variants have been used in conflicts in Gaza, Iraq, Lebanon and during the second Nagorno-Karabakh war.

 

I think that is Army speak for we don't have the funding....any one that went to Afghanistan and seen the americans use their Javelins could tell you they work and work well, Americans used them on everything, including lone foot mobiles, cars, trucks, buildings snipers...... The spike is what surprised me maybe we got a bad back....the list of users is long...almost every european IFV has Spike of some sort....nobody has had the same problems we have... 

[BeaverFever]

Canadian military drones enter production, though Arctic modifications will be required

One of Canada's first MQ-9B drones under construction at the General Atomics assembly plant in San Diego, Calif. (Assistant deputy minister of materiel, Department of National Defence)

Canada's first combat drones have now entered production, though the remotely piloted aircraft will require years of testing and significant modifications before the first units are delivered in 2028.

The federal government announced last December it would acquire 11 of the MQ-9B drones from manufacturer General Atomics at a cost of $2.49 billion.

The first two Canadian drones are currently on the company's production line in San Diego, Calif., and will be used as test vehicles starting in 2026, National Defence spokesperson Andrée-Anne Poulin confirmed in an email to CTV News.

Those tests will be critical to proving the MQ-9B's suitability for northern environments, as the drones will be deployed as needed from forward operating locations in and around the Arctic, where the harsh climate and lack of technical infrastructure will present unique challenges for the aircraft and its operators.

"The need to operate at high northern latitudes, including in the Arctic, requires the use of satellites and aircraft antennas, and communication components not previously integrated on the MQ-9B," Poulin said, describing the modifications needed to address the difficult conditions.

"The Canadian RPAS (remotely piloted aircraft system) will require significant development work to address Royal Canadian Air Force requirements which differ from Allies' requirements," she added.

Arctic operations

The drone fleet is not expected to reach full operating capacity until 2033, with eight of the aircraft based at 14 Wing Greenwood, N.S., and the remaining three based at 19 Wing Comox, B.C.

Arctic operations will be staged from existing forward operating locations located in Yellowknife, Inuvik, Iqaluit and Goose Bay, N.L., where Canada's $39-billion NORAD modernization program promises to construct new and upgraded hangar facilities over the coming decade, Poulin said.

In the meantime, construction work is set to begin on the B.C. and Nova Scotia drone bases, as well as a new ground control centre in Ottawa, where all of the drone pilots will be stationed.

Drone base construction

Pomerleau was awarded a $4.65-million contract to design the Greenwood site in February 2023, with construction forecast to begin next year. The military expects the base to house four drones for operations and four others in storage, with a total base development cost in the vicinity of $100 million.

Maple Reinders Constructors won the design-build contract for the Comox site this past November, where the remaining three MQ-9Bs are expected to be fully assembled and ready for missions.

The Comox facility, with a projected cost of $53 million, will house 25 personnel inside a 5,700-square-metre space with an additional 11,000 square metres of outdoor apron and parking.

Related: Canadian military expects to secure contract for B.C. drone base by end of 2024 

The Ottawa drone headquarters, where 198 personnel, six drone cockpits and two simulators will be located, is currently nearing the end of the planning phase after the design-build contract went to Bird Construction in May 2023.

Poulin said some preliminary construction work has begun on the Ottawa site, with construction of the main facility to begin next year.

All the infrastructure to support the drone program is expected to be complete by 2028.

Last year, the U.S. State Department approved the sale of munitions to outfit the Canadian drones, including Hellfire air-to-ground missiles and Mk82 500-pound bombs.

The drones are expected to be deployed on Canadian Armed Forces operations abroad, while also serving a domestic role monitoring coastlines and providing civilian aid in wildfire and flood situations, according to National Defence.

Sections of Canada's first MQ-9B drones under construction at the General Atomics assembly plant in San Diego, Calif. (Assistant deputy minister of materiel, Department of National Defence)
 

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/canadian-military-drones-enter-production-though-arctic-modifications-will-be-required-1.7132202

[BeaverFever]

‘Remote warfare’ honour created to recognize Canadians who fight from afar
 

 

A new bar called DISTANTIA in recognition for remote warfare announced. The Special Service Medal was expanded in 2014 to make eligible Department of National Defence (DND) civilian employees and contractors, as well as allied military personnel serving under the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). Eligibility is now being broadened, similar to the Operational Service Medal.
 

 

Ottawa has established a “remote warfare” recognition to honour the Canadian Armed Forces personnel or civilians who take part in overseas missions from afar, reflecting the evolving nature of military operations.

This honour, announced earlier this month, includes drone pilots; analysts who pore over imagery, videos, signals intelligence or other data; linguists; and cyber defence operators.

According to the Department of National Defence, the recognition is for people “who directly contribute to mission success in overseas operations by having a direct impact in deployed theatres through the use of remote technology from Canada or other locations.”

The honour will be available not only for soldiers, sailors and aviators, but also contractors and public servants. Once formal arrangements are secured with Canadian Security Intelligence Service and the Communications Security Establishment, employees at these organizations should also be eligible.

The recognition represents a new way to earn Canada’s Special Service Medal, which under this variation will feature a silver-coloured bar on the attached ribbon inscribed with “Distantia,” from a Latin word for distance.

Lieutenant-Colonel Carl Gauthier, director of honours and recognition at the Department of National Defence, said this new award accounts for the fact many people now work on operations from afar.

“Stuff is blowing up, or lights are turning off, or something like that in theatre – but that is being done from another location,” he said.

He said studies have shown that, while remote warfare doesn’t place operators in physical harm, it can still bring them psychological distress. He said this research has shown drone pilots who are flying machines remotely “were affected psychologically at much the same rate as people like pilots who were deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan to fly actual planes in the air.”

Technology has the ability to bring remote operators close to the battlefield, as they study possible targets through imagery and intercepted communications: “They will learn what they call the pattern of life, you know, and they will debate with other people whether this is a suitable target and all that,” Lt.-Col. Gauthier said.

“And eventually, a decision will be made to strike the target, and then they’ll have to confirm if the objective had been met.”

He added that “there’s a proximity to the action, to the target that somebody is dropping bombs from 20,000 feet doesn’t get to see. That’s also the very specific challenge that we’re trying to acknowledge with the creation of this bar,” referring to the new recognition.

 

The Canadian Armed Forces already have drones for surveillance, but it’s soon adding combat drones to its military arsenal. The military plans to acquire combat drones by 2028 for use by 2033.

Various branches of the U.S. military have created similar honours. For instance, the U.S. Air Force in 2017 created the Remote Combat Effects Medal, which recognizes air force members who play critical roles in military operations conducted remotely, such as cyber warfare and drone operations.

David Perry, president of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute, said the Canadian military is trying to embrace technological advances such as remotely piloted vehicles, “so formalizing an award and recognition for people working in these areas is a good step to recognizing they’ll be part of a future operational team.”

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-remote-warfare-honour-created-to-recognize-canadians-who-fight-from/?utm_source=flipboard&utm_content=topic%2Fcanadianarmedforces

 

 

[BeaverFever]

Seaspan launches HMCS Protecteur, Canada's longest naval ship

A celebration in North Vancouver Friday marked the launch of the 173-metre vessel that will resupply Canadian and allied warships at sea
 

North Vancouver’s Seaspan has launched the longest naval ship ever built in Canada, complete with a bottle of sparkling B.C. wine smashed on the bow.

Dignitaries, elected officials, naval leadership and the company's massive staff gathered at Seaspan's Pemberton Avenue shipyard Friday for the official naming and launch of HMCS Protecteur.

When it is completed and turned over to the Royal Canadian Navy in 2025, the 173.7-metre joint support ship will be tasked with resupplying Canadian and allied warships at sea with fuel, food, spare parts, and ammunition. The ship will contain helicopter maintenance repair equipment, exercise and gym facilities, medical and dental care centres, a barber shop and a library, among other amenities.

“With our investment in joint support ships, Canadian workers are building the fleet of the future and equipping the Royal Canadian Navy with modern and versatile ships. Today’s naming of the HMCS Protecteur – the longest naval vessel ever constructed in Canada – is yet another stride in cutting-edge Canadian defence innovation. We’re creating more jobs, ramping up defence spending, and keeping our coastlines safe,” said Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in a press release Friday.

Navy Vice-Admiral Angus Topshee welcomed the impending arrival of Protecteur to Canada’s fleet, saying it will be put to good use in humanitarian operations and multinational exercises around the globe.

“Today is an exciting day for the Royal Canadian Navy as we move another step closer to delivering the future fleet our sailors need to protect Canada in all three of our oceans and support Canadian interests around the world,” he said.

HMCS Protecteur is the fifth ship launched by Seaspan since the company was one of two shortlisted by the federal government in 2010 to replace the Royal Canadian Navy and Canadian Coast Guard ships over 30 years under the national shipbuilding strategy. Modernizing the shipyard and staffing up for the work has made Seaspan the largest employer on the North Shore, contributing $5.7 billion to Canada’s GDP since 2012, while also creating or sustaining more than 7,000 jobs annually, a 2023 report found.

“The shipbuilders at Seaspan are second-to-none. For the thousands of Seaspan designers, engineers, shipbuilders and partners involved in the JSS program, today’s ceremony marks an unforgettable highlight in our ongoing journey under the National Shipbuilding Strategy,” said John McCarthy, Seaspan Shipyards CEO. “Today’s achievement gives us an immense feeling of pride, and I commend all the men and women who rose to the challenge of constructing a complex first-in-class vessel.”

The maritime megaproject has been subject to now-familiar cost overruns seen in other industries and public works. When the federal government awarded Seaspan the contract for the two joint support ships in June 2020, the cost was quoted at $2.448 billion. In August 2024, the federal government confirmed it had increased the value of the contract by $951 million, citing pandemic-related delays, supply chain disruptions, inflation, foreign exchange rate changes and rising labour costs.

The second joint support ship in Seaspan’s work order, HMCS Preserver, is on schedule to be launched in 2027, which the company has said should come in at a lower cost thanks to lessons learned and efficiencies gained for from building the Protecteur.

In a release, North Vancouver MP and Minister of Energy and Natural Resource Jonathan Wilkinson noted Seaspan’s economic importance to the area and thanked the crews who made Protecteur.

“I congratulate the hundreds of designers and shipbuilders responsible for bringing us to this tremendous milestone, which will support Canadian naval operations along Canada’s west coast and around the world. Your dedication and skill are a vital pillar for the North Shore community, and for the safety and economic prosperity of our country,” he said.

https://www.nsnews.com/local-news/seaspan-launches-hmcs-protecteur-canadas-longest-naval-ship-9952322

Edited December 16, 2024 by BeaverFever

[BeaverFever]

On 12/8/2024 at 8:36 AM, Dougie93 said:

 

FPV Drone vs. Switchblade: Is It the Same Thing and What's the Difference

https://en.defence-ua.com/weapon_and_tech/fpv_drone_vs_switchblade_is_it_the_same_thing_and_whats_the_difference-7340.html

This article seems to be using FPV drone to refer to only homemade/civilian drones but I don’t think it’s quite that clearcut. ChatGpt anyway tells me they’re both considered FPV

[BeaverFever]

Canadian military plans to boost ranks to 86,000 personnel

The Canadian Armed Forces' plan depends on a government promise to increase defence spending.

Get the latest from David Pugliese, Ottawa Citizen straight to your inbox 

Published Dec 16, 2024  •  Last updated 3 hours ago  •  4 minute read
 

The Canadian military has an ambitious plan to increase its regular force ranks to 86,000, according to a briefing for senior leaders.

The boost in numbers, from the current 63,000 to between 84,500 and 86,000 will take decades to accomplish, according to the document obtained by the Ottawa Citizen.

The plan would see a steady climb in numbers, hitting 75,000 around 2032 and 84,500 around 2040, according to the October briefing produced for Lt. Gen. Lise Bourgon, the chief of military personnel. The ultimate goal would be approximately 86,000.

The plan relies on the additional funding promised by the Liberal government which would see two per cent of GDP spent on defence by 2032. That would finance an intake of more than 7,150 new regular force personnel annually, the briefing noted.

There is no mention of an increase in reserve force troops. That level has been authorized at 30,000.

The document noted that in the past, military personnel have not been considered a core capability; instead the Canadian Armed Forces or CAF has focused its main efforts on getting new equipment.

Overall applications for the military have improved recently but the rate those individuals are being brought into the ranks is actually lower than before, the briefing noted.

The current authorized strength of the Canadian Forces regular ranks is 71,500, said Department of National Defence spokesman Kened Sadiku. But as of November 15, 2024, the total strength of its regular force was actually at 63,940, he confirmed.

Sadiku said from April 1, 2024, to November 15, 2024, the Canadian Armed Forces enrolled 3,357 recruits into the regular force. “The CAF is committed to achieving its recruiting objective of enrolling 6,496 members into the Regular Force for fiscal year 2024-25, which ends on March 31, 2025,” he added.

Asked about plans to go beyond the 71,500 in regular force personnel, Sadiku noted that the military is “focused on increasing the number of trained CAF personnel by concentrating on recruiting, retention and modernizing the military personnel management system.”

He stated in an email the military is in the midst of its “reconstitution efforts” which involves “our immediate and long-term plan to grow the CAF to achieve the end strength directed by the government, and continue to deliver the desired strategic effects for Canada on all assigned operations.”
 

As of December, 2024 the military had launched trial programs to speed up the application process, Sadiku added. It has also improved recruiting advertising and introduced new measures to shorten medical and security screenings, he said.

But it remains to be seen whether the Canadian Forces can boost the numbers to 86,000.

In April 2024 a top advisor to the chief of the defence staff warned that Canada’s soldiers were leaving the ranks because of toxic military leadership.

Canadian Forces Chief Warrant Officer Bob McCann flagged his concerns during an April 23 meeting in which he appealed for changes in how leaders dealt with lower ranks.

Job dissatisfaction and repeated moves to new locations across the country have been cited in past military reports as the top reasons that Canadian Forces personnel leave.

But McCann, who advises the chief of the defence staff on issues relating to non-commissioned members, said personnel weren’t just quitting because they were being moved to locations they did not want to be.

“A lot of our members leave this organization not necessarily because they are not going where they want to be,” he explained to the audience of officers during a virtual town hall. “They leave because of toxic leadership or bad leadership. This is one aspect that we need to address if we are going to support our members better as they serve.”

Various reports done for the Canadian Forces have cited a desire for “geographic stability” and “job dissatisfaction” as reasons that personnel leave the ranks. Others include the need for more pay and benefits as well as military personnel having issues with senior or unit-level leadership.

In October 2024, the Ottawa Citizen reportedthat there had been a slight increase in morale in the Canadian military, but a growing workload, lack of housing and shortages of equipment continue to affect the rank and file.

Morale had been earlier assessed as “mixed to low” by military chaplains, but that is now ranked as “mixed,” according to an Oct. 29 briefing for Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Jennie Carignan. The briefing outlines a summary of assessments by military chaplains about the current welfare of the Canadian Armed Forces.
 

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/canadian-military-to-boost-ranks

[BeaverFever]

Just now, BeaverFever said:

 

Canadian military plans to boost ranks to 86,000 personnel

The Canadian Armed Forces' plan depends on a government promise to increase defence spending.

Get the latest from David Pugliese, Ottawa Citizen straight to your inbox 

Published Dec 16, 2024  •  Last updated 3 hours ago  •  4 minute read
 

 

The Canadian military has an ambitious plan to increase its regular force ranks to 86,000, according to a briefing for senior leaders.

The boost in numbers, from the current 63,000 to between 84,500 and 86,000 will take decades to accomplish, according to the document obtained by the Ottawa Citizen.

The plan would see a steady climb in numbers, hitting 75,000 around 2032 and 84,500 around 2040, according to the October briefing produced for Lt. Gen. Lise Bourgon, the chief of military personnel. The ultimate goal would be approximately 86,000.

The plan relies on the additional funding promised by the Liberal government which would see two per cent of GDP spent on defence by 2032. That would finance an intake of more than 7,150 new regular force personnel annually, the briefing noted.

There is no mention of an increase in reserve force troops. That level has been authorized at 30,000.

The document noted that in the past, military personnel have not been considered a core capability; instead the Canadian Armed Forces or CAF has focused its main efforts on getting new equipment.

Overall applications for the military have improved recently but the rate those individuals are being brought into the ranks is actually lower than before, the briefing noted.

The current authorized strength of the Canadian Forces regular ranks is 71,500, said Department of National Defence spokesman Kened Sadiku. But as of November 15, 2024, the total strength of its regular force was actually at 63,940, he confirmed.

Sadiku said from April 1, 2024, to November 15, 2024, the Canadian Armed Forces enrolled 3,357 recruits into the regular force. “The CAF is committed to achieving its recruiting objective of enrolling 6,496 members into the Regular Force for fiscal year 2024-25, which ends on March 31, 2025,” he added.

Asked about plans to go beyond the 71,500 in regular force personnel, Sadiku noted that the military is “focused on increasing the number of trained CAF personnel by concentrating on recruiting, retention and modernizing the military personnel management system.”

He stated in an email the military is in the midst of its “reconstitution efforts” which involves “our immediate and long-term plan to grow the CAF to achieve the end strength directed by the government, and continue to deliver the desired strategic effects for Canada on all assigned operations.”
 

 

As of December, 2024 the military had launched trial programs to speed up the application process, Sadiku added. It has also improved recruiting advertising and introduced new measures to shorten medical and security screenings, he said.

But it remains to be seen whether the Canadian Forces can boost the numbers to 86,000.

In April 2024 a top advisor to the chief of the defence staff warned that Canada’s soldiers were leaving the ranks because of toxic military leadership.

Canadian Forces Chief Warrant Officer Bob McCann flagged his concerns during an April 23 meeting in which he appealed for changes in how leaders dealt with lower ranks.

Job dissatisfaction and repeated moves to new locations across the country have been cited in past military reports as the top reasons that Canadian Forces personnel leave.

But McCann, who advises the chief of the defence staff on issues relating to non-commissioned members, said personnel weren’t just quitting because they were being moved to locations they did not want to be.

“A lot of our members leave this organization not necessarily because they are not going where they want to be,” he explained to the audience of officers during a virtual town hall. “They leave because of toxic leadership or bad leadership. This is one aspect that we need to address if we are going to support our members better as they serve.”

Various reports done for the Canadian Forces have cited a desire for “geographic stability” and “job dissatisfaction” as reasons that personnel leave the ranks. Others include the need for more pay and benefits as well as military personnel having issues with senior or unit-level leadership.

In October 2024, the Ottawa Citizen reportedthat there had been a slight increase in morale in the Canadian military, but a growing workload, lack of housing and shortages of equipment continue to affect the rank and file.

Morale had been earlier assessed as “mixed to low” by military chaplains, but that is now ranked as “mixed,” according to an Oct. 29 briefing for Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Jennie Carignan. The briefing outlines a summary of assessments by military chaplains about the current welfare of the Canadian Armed Forces.
 

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/canadian-military-to-boost-ranks

Too little too late. We needed these personnel yesterday and they’re going to phase them in over 15 years????

Meanwhile we will have new ships and new aircraft supposedly coming online in the late 2020s and early 2030s, in many/most cases they will require more crew than what they’re replacing and will be larger fleets also. Plus supposedly we are buying “up to” 12 submarines who is going to man all that stuff?

 

The personnel shortage is arguably the most severe and pressing problem the CAF and they’re slow-rolling it.