Well, not every old armoury is loved. There is the mentaly with some to let it catch on fire, rescue the colours and be done with it. Reserve Armouries are also a lot busier than some people would think, especially now that summer DP 1's and other training are occurring in Armouries (with whatever can't be done there being done on base). I think this started as a covid measure, but I could see it carrying on.
Jerry Amernic: The downfall of Canada’s military
- Thread starter daftandbarmy
- Start date
Not much has changed there. I know before they put the fences up they had problems with homeless people wondering into the armoury (they aren't the only armoury that has that problem). Last time I was there someone came up and wrote a bunch of different conspiracy theories on the front door in permanent marker, I guess the gate had been left open. Leave there after a parade night must be an interesting experience.
I remember the unit in Lethbridge, Alta had a pretty slick armoury.
Just outside of town, plenty of parking, located at regional airport.
A fairly modern building that was HUGE inside with plenty of classrooms & offices, a SAT system, a large parade square for prepping/maintaining their C3’s, a properly fenced off motor pool in the back with a garage/repair building, etc.
It was an absolute luxury for the one small reserve unit that used the place. I was quite jealous when I first saw it & was given the grand tour!
I know military units do dearly value their lineage & heritage, as they should.
But would it really be as hard to convince a unit to move to a newer/better armoury as we think it is?
Most members now are young enough that they don’t have real personal connection to World War II like we did.
Having a comfortable modern workspace does feed into the morale factor - we can’t blame people for wanting to eventually go work elsewhere, when some of those old armouries feel heavy & dead inside.
(Especially if they are in a municipality that has a fetish for everything parking related - looking at you Calgary…)
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 15,350
- Points
- 1,260
Who was the local MP when it was built? Call me cynical…
Not a bloody clue.
But I swear it be true mister! I seen it, I seen it with ma’ own two eyes!
There's something to be said about conserving heritage. For example, one CoA could be to retain one armoury as a historical museum and move all the other armouries' "museums" into it, while getting rid of the other ones and building a new "mega-armoury" to accommodate. But that leads to a few problems: deciding which armoury to retain, and many units (just like the reg force), don't like sharing. So there would be some time to acclimatise to that sort of change. Also keep in mind, people don't like change, i.e. it's been like this for 70+ years, who are you from Ottawa to dictate how we work?
As I mentioned before, it is a particular problem for occupants of the older historical armouries, and not those who are in "armouries" that date from the 70s or so. As for convincing... there's been a report on "rationalizing" the armouries in a certain city produced for the CCA at least 4 years ago, which would involve closing at least one armoury. The fact that nothing has been done (in fairness I haven't been following lately), would indicate that there is no appetite to do so.
- Reaction score
- 7,024
- Points
- 1,310
Museums are a lot of money to maintain for very little operational output. The problem is we receive no funding to preserve the heritage buildings and the problem compounds on itself.
Some buildings on CFB Kingston proper pre-date WWII. The building I run a data centre out of was constructed prior to the development of computers. There are any number of infrastructure and support issues we face to provide the needs of 2022 in a building designed in 1933.
If we were to actually open up other coffers than just O & M, we might be able to upgrade and maintain them so we retain the heritage while increasing function as well.
Until we get enough money and effort put into both, we continue with kicking the can down the road.
I was limiting my responses to just reserve armouries because to discuss all of CAF infrastructure is a whole different set of issues.
Yes, I was in RP Ops and I'm well aware of the decades of neglect that the infrastructure has had, but things aren't going to be solved overnight with centralization in 2016. We could easily meet our 2.0% GDP spending goal by dumping cash into infrastructure except for a few things: lack of capacity (public thinks that we can just give money and somehow new projects get actioned thinking that workers aren't already overwhelmed), project time (takes time for design/contracting/building), and lack of visibility (all politicians love ribbon cutting ceremonies, no such thing as upgrade/modernization ceremonies unless we're talking about some green initiative).
foresterab
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 309
- Points
- 760
One comment on armories and this is not applicable for all as some are definitely best bulldozed and burnt while others are excellent...
They are also a key focal point, in my mind (as a civilian dealing with wildfire situations), to become a spot to organize in the event of disaster. In rural communities we often use hockey rinks/legions/schools as assembly points when dealing with natural disasters because they are a) known locations and b) have the ability to be used as a command center and c) tend to be in central locations that allow for things such as bathrooms and parking needed to support operations. Try to grab the high school rather than an elementary though...seats are much better
Personally if I was king for a day I'd be flagging each Armory and military facility and then working with provincial emergency response centers to have them also flagged in their systems as secondary command post/evacuation check-in/ supply point so that WHEN a major emergency occurs that parade square /hanger/ office space can be utilized for another task. Folding tables, coffee, bathrooms, and wi-fi internet goes a long ways to getting things going. Note that there are no staff, no infrastructure, and no usage unless you're dealing with domestic response situations/drills in which case often the units themselves may be involved anyways.
They are also a key focal point, in my mind (as a civilian dealing with wildfire situations), to become a spot to organize in the event of disaster. In rural communities we often use hockey rinks/legions/schools as assembly points when dealing with natural disasters because they are a) known locations and b) have the ability to be used as a command center and c) tend to be in central locations that allow for things such as bathrooms and parking needed to support operations. Try to grab the high school rather than an elementary though...seats are much better
Personally if I was king for a day I'd be flagging each Armory and military facility and then working with provincial emergency response centers to have them also flagged in their systems as secondary command post/evacuation check-in/ supply point so that WHEN a major emergency occurs that parade square /hanger/ office space can be utilized for another task. Folding tables, coffee, bathrooms, and wi-fi internet goes a long ways to getting things going. Note that there are no staff, no infrastructure, and no usage unless you're dealing with domestic response situations/drills in which case often the units themselves may be involved anyways.
- Reaction score
- 7,024
- Points
- 1,310
Yet another issue we have with burecracy and vanity impeding progress. Procurement, infrastructure, HR policies; I wouldn't invest in DND if it were a private enterprise. A lot of People would be fired, or the company would go under very quickly
I wouldn't necessarily agree that it is bureaucracy, it all depends on the leadership. If we're willing to take risks and assume slippage, we can definitely spend our allocation. The problem is if you are risk averse, then you can't take advantage of funds due to slippages. It's a fine balance to predict how much you anticipate spending vs going over your budget allocation and subsequently violating the FAA.
Keep in mind a lot of the policies are because the general public will latch onto one instance of a problem (i.e. we paid too much for a particular item, we need to tighten up our finances), or don't understand what the price tag entails (i.e., seeing us pay double COTS prices for an item, without understanding that it includes 20 years of spares, maintenance, services and possible mid-life refit).
- Reaction score
- 27,185
- Points
- 1,090
For infra projects, DND competes with other organizations for the same tradespeople. In many cases, secure facilities drive increased cost; you don't need a security clearance to build a car dealership, but you do to work on a SCIF. Those requirements drive increased cost and delays.
In some instances, DND pours money into multiple initiatives in one location at the same time. If local capacity is exceeded, then more expensive, out if town tradespeople are brought in in order to meet timelines.
In some instances, DND pours money into multiple initiatives in one location at the same time. If local capacity is exceeded, then more expensive, out if town tradespeople are brought in in order to meet timelines.
Small problem, armouries are federal property. Not a small detail as these types of situations come up often, along with requests to use them as homeless shelters during cold snaps. While you certainly could have MOUs in place to do so, these agreements need to be established ahead of time and trying to do so during an emergency isn't ideal. It's not a bad idea, and I've thought about it, particularly since some HQs would have some sort of TBG HQ established for that usage. One issue would be that the network is all DWAN so useless for anyone not DND.
- Reaction score
- 7,024
- Points
- 1,310
Slight derail, but that is easily reversed with enough planning and sigs voodoo. Inside network is DWAN, but depending on the demarc/bearer network, it's easy enough to turn drops into raw internet.
I would say kind of, and really need some forethought or planning as you said. For example, if we were to build a new armoury from scratch, and there is a need to have an emergency management center for this type of purpose, you could have a room that is GPNet or equivalent so that inter-operability wouldn't be an issue. But it isn't as simple as just pulling out desks and computers on an as needed basis.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 31,889
- Points
- 1,160
Do you think that having wifi, or any other communications infrastructure that isn't restricted to DND/DWAN, or resembles anything introduced to the wider civilian marketplace since the 1980s, might be an adavantge in an emergency? If so, you can discount about 80% of those armouries from the get go.
Ironically, all the ones built of brick in the '19 teens' will likely fall down in a moderate earthquake, so that might solve an infrastructure problem or two
You have to remember, with the exception of major cities, most armouries are not very close together. There are also a number of Armouries that are new within the last 30 years or so. It feels like we hear of one or two new ones opening somewhere across the country every year.
foresterab
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 309
- Points
- 760
100% agree the MOU's need to be established, including both access limitations (I should not have access to weapon systems for example) and cost payment for wear and tear at minimum. The fact it is federal property can be dealt with, and must be dealt with, in advance but currently we have MOU's to deal with fires at CFB Cold Lake, National Parks (fringe until MOU gets activated or they ask), Indian Reserves (each reserve is separate agreements) and dealing with various sites ranging from meteorological stations to air traffic radars.
Contracts signed on the fly can be done...but it's a whole level of stress that should not be occurring for both responding agencies, DND, and local populace. Both the federal gov't and insurance industry have been placing increased pressure on all provinces to have the contingency planning in place in part to have the training and more importantly - timely effective response to a disaster - based upon some hard lessons learned. While there is no "local" units for me I can see the Armory of the Calgary Highlanders working as a backup ICP if the City of Calgary site is compromised for example under another 2013 High River Flood situation.
Again, rationalization doesn't necessarily mean that we close all armouries and only have mega armouries. Though that approach can work for the big cities. However, sometimes it is worth reviewing where armouries are located. Having armouries in places with low population growth and away from good population catchment areas isn't that cost effective. So that armoury that is in some small town with an aging population may not be ideal. Maybe the unit needs to move to a different growing town to get recruits. Or as posted, why are we spending $160M to refurbish an old Halifax armoury (housing 2 units) when we could possibly get a new one for $50M as in St-Hubert (housing 3 units and CBG HQ)?
I don't think there are that many new armouries openning up, so I'm kind of curious where you get that impression.
Similar threads
