Canadian Military Thread

[Optimist Prime]

2 hours ago, Bob Long said:

@Optimist Prime just having fun, I'm actually in awe of what you guys do. 

For every hour of cool sounding bits there were 24 hours of sitting on hot airport tarmac, like Aviano Italy, or Brize Norton in England, smoking cigarrettes and drinking coffee waiting while the adrenaline rush cooled off and ultimately 9 times out of ten going home after being stood down early. Then for every hour of cool sounding bits there was another probably 10 minutes of shitting your pants stuff. But they never put the bathroom stuff in the movies, just the guy in the pizza van telling Tom Cruise what is what. 

 

OOO in fact I just remembered one of my favourite movies of the genre, Will Smith and Jason Lee... Enemy of the State. 

I highly recommend anyone interested to watch that movie, it is fantastical, like the bond flicks, but it sort of nails down what the NSA and CSE and CFIOG can do..in a way. The tech side is the cool shit, the door kicker operators usually just have a communicator in their ear so the guy in the pizza van can tell them what is up in real time. 

[Bob Long]

3 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

For every hour of cool sounding bits there were 24 hours of sitting on hot airport tarmac, like Aviano Italy, or Brize Norton in England, smoking cigarrettes and drinking coffee waiting while the adrenaline rush cooled off and ultimately 9 times out of ten going home after being stood down early. Then for every hour of cool sounding bits there was another probably 10 minutes of shitting your pants stuff. But they never put the bathroom stuff in the movies, just the guy in the pizza van telling Tom Cruise what is what. 

 

I actually had a neighbour when I was a kid, who was part of CSIS. I remember him saying some similar stuff to this, the long stretches of waiting. Before that he was undercover RCMP. Super nice fellow, looked scary as hell but took time to talk to an awkward teen (thats me) and tell me cool things. 

 

[Kootenay Gold]

[Warhippy]

14 hours ago, Kootenay Gold said:

As much as I malign the insane costs of the shipbuilding program.  Our docks on both coasts desperately needed these contracts and the upgrades made to them and experience the labour force is given making these vessels will undoubtedly allow for more building in the future.  Being ableto build and maintain our own fleet is kind of a big deal

[Kootenay Gold]

25 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

As much as I malign the insane costs of the shipbuilding program.  Our docks on both coasts desperately needed these contracts and the upgrades made to them and experience the labour force is given making these vessels will undoubtedly allow for more building in the future.  Being ableto build and maintain our own fleet is kind of a big deal

While it is expensive the gained employment and knowledge to be had, plus it is being made here in Canada are benefits that are very hard to measure. IMO; well worth the expense.

[MattJVD]

28 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

As much as I malign the insane costs of the shipbuilding program.  Our docks on both coasts desperately needed these contracts and the upgrades made to them and experience the labour force is given making these vessels will undoubtedly allow for more building in the future.  Being ableto build and maintain our own fleet is kind of a big deal

It had been so long since we built ships this large, the industry kinda had to learn to do it all over again (contributing to the high costs). Ship 5 from that picture went from cutting of the first steel to launching a full 12 months faster than ship 1 did. It was a bumpy start as they tried to scale up and re-learn how to build big ships, but they are humming along nicely now.

[MattJVD]

Good news on the recruiting issues: General Erye told a Senate Hearing that:

 

"We are entering this fiscal year with more recruits in the processing pipeline than we have for the last three. February had the greatest number of monthly applicants in the last five years."

 

Also that there have been 21,000 applications by permanent residents since the rule was changed to allow them to serve. But they are very slow to process as they have additional security screening requirements than citizens do. DND and Immigration finalized an information sharing agreement that is intended to speed things up a bit.

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/bill-blair-nato-defence-spending-eyre-recruitment-1.7168748

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

On 4/8/2024 at 2:19 PM, Optimist Prime said:

Hope i don't sound like a know it all,

 

This will likely be my only post in this thread (because I'm more of a lurker ITT than a participant due to my lack of knowledge in this area), but I can assure you that you're nowhere close to coming across as a "know it all", unlike some posters who aim to show their prowess of "knowing it all" in other threads.  

 

...anyways, back to lurking in this thread for me.  

[The Arrogant Worms]

New-era naval ship arrives at CFB Esquimalt on Monday

https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/new-era-naval-ship-arrives-at-cfb-esquimalt-on-monday-8598032

 

 

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

7 hours ago, The Arrogant Worms said:

New-era naval ship arrives at CFB Esquimalt on Monday

https://www.timescolonist.com/local-news/new-era-naval-ship-arrives-at-cfb-esquimalt-on-monday-8598032

 

 

 

Sorry, but it really begs the question - if it's Arctic class, why is it taking the Panama Canal when it'd be a much shorter distance to just circumnavigate Canada's northern coast?

 

...whoops, posted in this thread again.  Back to lurking for me.  

[The Arrogant Worms]

3 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

Sorry, but it really begs the question - if it's Arctic class, why is it taking the Panama Canal when it'd be a much shorter distance to just circumnavigate Canada's northern coast?

 

...whoops, posted in this thread again.  Back to lurking for me.  

Ask someone in power.

[Gurn]

58 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

Sorry, but it really begs the question - if it's Arctic class, why is it taking the Panama Canal when it'd be a much shorter distance to just circumnavigate Canada's northern coast?

 

...whoops, posted in this thread again.  Back to lurking for me.  

I just tried a quick measurement, by Google earth, and found the distance surprisingly close.

The first ship, in this class, The Harry Dewolfe did the roughly 10,500 km North route a couple years back. Did some sonar towed sonar testing along the way.

https://www.navalreview.ca/2021/10/hmcs-harry-dewolf-transits-northwest-passage-tests-asw-towed-sonar/

 

 

 

[MattJVD]

1 hour ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

Sorry, but it really begs the question - if it's Arctic class, why is it taking the Panama Canal when it'd be a much shorter distance to just circumnavigate Canada's northern coast?

 

...whoops, posted in this thread again.  Back to lurking for me.  

Because they cruise at 12 knots in open water and 3 knots in ice. Going 400% faster more than makes up the 30% longer trip.

[MattJVD]

The Max Bernays had it's commissioning cerimony on the 3rd and is now an official part of the Pacific Fleet, based in Vctoria:

 

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/news/2024/05/hmcs-max-bernays-commissioned-today-in-vancouver-bc.html

[Gurn]

Another hit piece by the national Post-no mention of the Patrol ships, the supply ships, the new frigates, the new cargo planes, the new surveillance planes or the new F-35s.

no mention of any of the new equipment

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/our-nato-allies-are-despairing-retired-general-says-trudeau-government-failing-on-defence/ar-BB1mfD2l?ocid=00000000&pc=U531&cvid=99ae65f60d0148ac83854b0b02af308f&ei=5

 

[Bob Long]

14 minutes ago, Gurn said:

Another hit piece by the national Post-no mention of the Patrol ships, the supply ships, the new frigates, the new cargo planes, the new surveillance planes or the new F-35s.

no mention of any of the new equipment

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/our-nato-allies-are-despairing-retired-general-says-trudeau-government-failing-on-defence/ar-BB1mfD2l?ocid=00000000&pc=U531&cvid=99ae65f60d0148ac83854b0b02af308f&ei=5

 

 

funniest part is the right wing likes Leslie if he says something negative about Trudeau.

 

 

[Boudrias]

1 hour ago, Bob Long said:

 

funniest part is the right wing likes Leslie if he says something negative about Trudeau.

 

 

You are so anxious to defend the Liberals that you won't even acknowledge the serious national security issue posed by an extremely weak Canadian military. Whether it is Leslie or any number of military people and CSIS the concern is widespread. The standard refrain is that this situation predated Trudeau and it did. That said this administration has had over 8 years to make a difference and has not. I don't understand the thinking. At one point Anan was told to cut $1 billion from the current military budget and a few weeks later there is a news article of a $4 billion military spend. A nice thought of where we might be in 10 - 20 years but Canada is currently at 1.22% of GDP. As a Canadian I am not comfortable with this. 

 

The country's security should be a apolitical exercise in securing our self defense. If the CPC forms government I am not sure if they will be any better. Politically parties have been more willing to buy votes and military sending doesn't sell well. It is a serious weakness in the Canadian public's view of the world. There is a willingness to have Big Daddy down south take care of our security. A country that hands off this vital aspect of national identity allows others to make decisions on our behalf. It is happening already. We know that American interest in Canada is qualified. 

[Bob Long]

2 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

You are so anxious to defend the Liberals that you won't even acknowledge the serious national security issue posed by an extremely weak Canadian military. Whether it is Leslie or any number of military people and CSIS the concern is widespread. The standard refrain is that this situation predated Trudeau and it did. That said this administration has had over 8 years to make a difference and has not. I don't understand the thinking. At one point Anan was told to cut $1 billion from the current military budget and a few weeks later there is a news article of a $4 billion military spend. A nice thought of where we might be in 10 - 20 years but Canada is currently at 1.22% of GDP. As a Canadian I am not comfortable with this. 

 

The country's security should be a apolitical exercise in securing our self defense. If the CPC forms government I am not sure if they will be any better. Politically parties have been more willing to buy votes and military sending doesn't sell well. It is a serious weakness in the Canadian public's view of the world. There is a willingness to have Big Daddy down south take care of our security. A country that hands off this vital aspect of national identity allows others to make decisions on our behalf. It is happening already. We know that American interest in Canada is qualified. 

 

its a standard refrain, because its true. Ask the serving members on here like @Optimist Prime what it was like under Harper.

 

And no I'm not anxious to defend the Libs, I have said many times on here how I want far more put into our military. 

 

Edited May 12 by Bob Long

[Boudrias]

3 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

its a standard refrain, because its true. Ask the serving members on here like @Optimist Prime what it was like under Harper.

 

And no I'm not anxious to defend the Libs, I have said many times on here how I want far more put into our military. 

 

I don't know how we can make that happen? It is almost like there is a thought process that we will have years to upgrade our military as it was prior to WW2. If nothing else the war in Ukraine should be a serious wake up call. Many European countries are now hitting and even exceeding their 2% spending. 

[Bob Long]

1 minute ago, Boudrias said:

I don't know how we can make that happen? It is almost like there is a thought process that we will have years to upgrade our military as it was prior to WW2. If nothing else the war in Ukraine should be a serious wake up call. Many European countries are now hitting and even exceeding their 2% spending. 

 

IMO it should be a big investment in drone tech, that we build ourselves. Its going to take a tech startup that just wants to be in that game, and whatever government that happens to be in power sees it as an easy win. It won't come from any party as an initiative. 

 

 

[Boudrias]

3 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

IMO it should be a big investment in drone tech, that we build ourselves. Its going to take a tech startup that just wants to be in that game, and whatever government that happens to be in power sees it as an easy win. It won't come from any party as an initiative. 

 

 

I think Canada is already a world leader in drone tech, both, military and civil. Military tactics have been upended by drone warfare in Ukraine. Much equipment will be outdated. 

[MattJVD]

Yes, it is a long standing issue that both parties are guitly of. I think the frustration from some close observes (maybe I shouldn't speak for them, but for me at least) at these recent articles is that the last few years have seen a nearly unprecidented (in peace time) re-capitalization of the Air Force and Navy. The Army could use for more love for sure, but the current gov't is actually doing a lot to buy new hardware.

 

We have had 2 deliveries and have 7 more on order for new strategic airlift and air-to-air refueling aircraft, we have ordered long-range surveilance and strike drones, we have ordered new fighter jets, we have ordered new anti-submarine warfare/ISR aircraft. These aren't press releases, these are signed contracts. That's all since 2020 and just for the Air Force.

 

The Navy is doing just as well, we have comissioned 3 new ships since 2021, and have 3 more Ice breakers and 2 at sea replenishment ships under construction at Canadian ship yards. As soon as the ice breakers are done, the frigates go into production. That contract is signed.

 

Crewing all the new equipment will be a challenge, no doubt. Recruitment is up in 2024, but not enough to make up the losses from 2018-2022.

 

So it's frustrating to read the 'same old story' of no investments into the Military be repeated when the facts have actually changed over the last couple of years.

 

and re: the bolded, yes they cut about $1 billion from travel and casual employees then added about $4 billion in investments in new capital.

18 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

You are so anxious to defend the Liberals that you won't even acknowledge the serious national security issue posed by an extremely weak Canadian military. Whether it is Leslie or any number of military people and CSIS the concern is widespread. The standard refrain is that this situation predated Trudeau and it did. That said this administration has had over 8 years to make a difference and has not. I don't understand the thinking. At one point Anan was told to cut $1 billion from the current military budget and a few weeks later there is a news article of a $4 billion military spend. A nice thought of where we might be in 10 - 20 years but Canada is currently at 1.22% of GDP. As a Canadian I am not comfortable with this. 

 

The country's security should be a apolitical exercise in securing our self defense. If the CPC forms government I am not sure if they will be any better. Politically parties have been more willing to buy votes and military sending doesn't sell well. It is a serious weakness in the Canadian public's view of the world. There is a willingness to have Big Daddy down south take care of our security. A country that hands off this vital aspect of national identity allows others to make decisions on our behalf. It is happening already. We know that American interest in Canada is qualified. 

 

[Boudrias]

2 minutes ago, MattJVD said:

Yes, it is a long standing issue that both parties are guitly of. I think the frustration from some close observes (maybe I shouldn't speak for them, but for me at least) at these recent articles is that the last few years have seen a nearly unprecidented (in peace time) re-capitalization of the Air Force and Navy. The Army could use for more love for sure, but the current gov't is actually doing a lot to buy new hardware.

 

We have had 2 deliveries and have 7 more on order for new strategic airlift and air-to-air refueling aircraft, we have ordered long-range surveilance and strike drones, we have ordered new fighter jets, we have ordered new anti-submarine warfare/ISR aircraft. These aren't press releases, these are signed contracts. That's all since 2020 and just for the Air Force.

 

The Navy is doing just as well, we have comissioned 3 new ships since 2021, and have 3 more Ice breakers and 2 at sea replenishment ships under construction at Canadian ship yards. As soon as the ice breakers are done, the frigates go into production. That contract is signed.

 

Crewing all the new equipment will be a challenge, no doubt. Recruitment is up in 2024, but not enough to make up the losses from 2018-2022.

 

So it's frustrating to read the 'same old story' of no investments into the Military be repeated when the facts have actually changed over the last couple of years.

 

and re: the bolded, yes they cut about $1 billion from travel and casual employees then added about $4 billion in investments in new capital.

Thanks for this.

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

Just for shits and giggles, here's some data from https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/CAN/canada/military-spending-defense-budget that shows the % of GDP of Canada's military spending.  Some very interesting and identifiable trends below, especially how Mulroney started a trend that Chretien decided to continue with great vigour, followed by a Harper "look at me ma!  no hands!" post-election bump of defense spending and then quietly doing a 180, decimating the military funding to under 1% of GDP.

 

 

I don't think we'll ever get back to early '60 military spending, though.  

 

 

Edited May 12 by 6of1_halfdozenofother

[Gurn]

government of Canada- from 1958 to current

from wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_federal_parliaments

	24th Canadian Parliament Elected 1958 5 sessions	Apr 30, 1958 – Apr 19, 1962	Progressive Conservative Party John Diefenbaker—18th Ministry	208 of 265 House seats	Liberal Party Lester B. Pearson	none
	25th Canadian Parliament Elected 1962 1 session	Jul 18, 1962 – Feb 6, 1963	Progressive Conservative Party John Diefenbaker—18th Ministry	116 of 265 House seats (minority)	Liberal Party Lester B. Pearson	Social Credit Party New Democratic Party
	26th Canadian Parliament Elected 1963 3 sessions	May 8, 1963 – Sep 8, 1965	Liberal Party Lester B. Pearson—19th Ministry	128 of 265 House seats (minority)[nb 13]	Progressive Conservative Party John Diefenbaker	Social Credit Party New Democratic Party
	27th Canadian Parliament Elected 1965 2 sessions	Dec 9, 1965 – Apr 23, 1968	Liberal Party Lester B. Pearson—19th Ministry Pierre Trudeau—20th Ministry	131 of 265 House seats (minority)[nb 14]	Progressive Conservative Party John Diefenbaker Michael Starr Robert Stanfield	New Democratic Party
	28th Canadian Parliament Elected 1968 4 sessions	Jul 25, 1968 – Sep 1, 1972	Liberal Party Pierre Trudeau—20th Ministry	154 of 264 House seats	Progressive Conservative Party Robert Stanfield	New Democratic Party Ralliement créditiste
	29th Canadian Parliament Elected 1972 2 sessions	Nov 20, 1972 – May 9, 1974	Liberal Party Pierre Trudeau—20th Ministry	109 of 264 House seats (minority)	Progressive Conservative Party Robert Stanfield	New Democratic Party Social Credit Party
	30th Canadian Parliament Elected 1974 4 sessions	Jul 31, 1974 – Mar 26, 1979	Liberal Party Pierre Trudeau—20th Ministry	141 of 264 House seats 76 of 102 Senate seats	Progressive Conservative Party Robert Stanfield Joe Clark	New Democratic Party
	31st Canadian Parliament Elected 1979 1 session	Jun 11, 1979 – Dec 14, 1979	Progressive Conservative Party Joe Clark—21st Ministry	136 of 282 House seats (minority) 18 of 104 Senate seats	Liberal Party Pierre Trudeau	New Democratic Party
	32nd Canadian Parliament Elected 1980 2 sessions	Mar 10, 1980 – Jul 9, 1984	Liberal Party Pierre Trudeau—22nd Ministry John Turner—23rd Ministry	147 of 282 House seats 71 of 104 Senate seats	Progressive Conservative Party Joe Clark Brian Mulroney	New Democratic Party
	33rd Canadian Parliament Elected 1984 2 sessions	Sep 24, 1984 – Oct 1, 1988	Progressive Conservative Party Brian Mulroney—24th Ministry	211 of 282 House seats 23 of 104 Senate seats	Liberal Party John Turner	New Democratic Party
	34th Canadian Parliament Elected 1988 3 sessions	Dec 12, 1988 – Sep 8, 1993	Progressive Conservative Party Brian Mulroney—24th Ministry Kim Campbell—25th Ministry	169 of 295 House seats 36 of 104 Senate seats[nb 15]	Liberal Party John Turner Herb Gray Jean Chrétien	New Democratic Party
	35th Canadian Parliament Elected 1993 2 sessions	Nov 15, 1993 – Apr 27, 1997	Liberal Party Jean Chrétien—26th Ministry	177 of 295 House seats 41 of 104 Senate seats	Bloc Québécois Lucien Bouchard Gilles Duceppe Michel Gauthier	Reform Party
	36th Canadian Parliament Elected 1997 2 sessions	Jun 23, 1997 – Oct 22, 2000	Liberal Party Jean Chrétien—26th Ministry	155 of 301 House seats 51 of 104 Senate seats	Reform Party (1997–2000) Preston Manning	Bloc Québécois New Democratic Party Progressive Conservative Party
					Canadian Alliance (2000) Deborah Grey Stockwell Day
	37th Canadian Parliament Elected 2000 3 sessions	Dec 18, 2000 – Aug 23, 2004	Liberal Party Jean Chrétien—26th Ministry Paul Martin—27th Ministry	172 of 301 House seats 55 of 105 Senate seats	Canadian Alliance (2000–2004) Stockwell Day John Reynolds Stephen Harper Grant Hill	Bloc Québécois New Democratic Party Progressive Conservative Party
					Conservative Party (2004) Grant Hill Stephen Harper	Bloc Québécois New Democratic Party
	38th Canadian Parliament Elected 2004 1 session	Oct 19, 2004 – Nov 29, 2005	Liberal Party Paul Martin—27th Ministry	135 of 308 House seats (minority)[nb 16] 64 of 105 Senate seats	Conservative Party Stephen Harper	Bloc Québécois New Democratic Party
	39th Canadian Parliament Elected 2006 2 sessions	Feb 13, 2006 – Sep 7, 2008	Conservative Party Stephen Harper—28th Ministry	124 of 308 House seats (minority) 23 of 105 Senate seats	Liberal Party Bill Graham Stéphane Dion	Bloc Québécois New Democratic Party
	40th Canadian Parliament Elected 2008 3 sessions	Nov 4, 2008 – Mar 26, 2011	Conservative Party Stephen Harper—28th Ministry	143 of 308 House seats (minority) 21 of 105 Senate seats	Liberal Party Stéphane Dion Michael Ignatieff	Bloc Québécois New Democratic Party
	41st Canadian Parliament Elected 2011 2 sessions	May 23, 2011 – Aug 2, 2015	Conservative Party Stephen Harper—28th Ministry	166 of 308 House seats 52 of 105 Senate seats	New Democratic Party Jack Layton Nycole Turmel Thomas Mulcair	Liberal Party Senate Liberal Caucus
	42nd Canadian Parliament Elected 2015 1 session	Dec 3, 2015 – Sep 11, 2019	Liberal Party Justin Trudeau—29th Ministry	184 of 338 House seats 0 of 105 Senate seats	Conservative Party Rona Ambrose Andrew Scheer	New Democratic Party Independent Senators Group Senate Liberal Caucus
	43rd Canadian Parliament Elected 2019 2 sessions	Dec 5, 2019 – Aug 15, 2021	Liberal Party Justin Trudeau—29th Ministry	157 of 338 House seats (minority) 0 of 105 Senate seats	Conservative Party Andrew Scheer Erin O'Toole	Bloc Québécois New Democratic Party Independent Senators Group Canadian Senators Group Progressive Senate Group
	44th Canadian Parliament Elected 2021	Nov 22, 2021 – present	Liberal Party Justin Trudeau—29th Ministry

Edited May 12 by Gurn