I'll believe it when I see it.
Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending
- Thread starter Maxman1
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 21,839
- Points
- 1,360
OS, the priority is Net-Zero by 2050, so I’m thinking it should be resolved some time after 2050…
McG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,079
- Points
- 1,160
Too bad that we are bad at arctic infrastructure:
www.theglobeandmail.com
Long-delayed naval facility in the High Arctic now postponed to 2023
Department of National Defence said it will now be 2023 before the Nanisivik Naval Facility is operational – 16 years after it was first announced. It was originally supposed to be up and running by 2013
www.theglobeandmail.com
- Reaction score
- 1,800
- Points
- 1,260
Why am I not surprised.Too bad that we are bad at arctic infrastructure:
Long-delayed naval facility in the High Arctic now postponed to 2023
Department of National Defence said it will now be 2023 before the Nanisivik Naval Facility is operational – 16 years after it was first announced. It was originally supposed to be up and running by 2013
It's the end of March and this facility is now completely inaccessible to us, has been for a number of months now due to the weather and it won't be accessible for a number of months into the future. So, with this being the case, why is this article just coming out now?
When they wrapped up work on the facility back in, say early-mid October of 2021 wouldn't they know right then and there that the facility was not finished? They would have have a very good understanding of what needed to be completed and the timelines to complete the work because, I'm assuming, they had a project plan, with milestones, delivery dates, dependencies, risks, etc - it would have been known.
What a load of crap. Cover up - and another push of funding not being spent in one fiscal year and pushed into another.
- Reaction score
- 5,862
- Points
- 1,090
Its not a cover up. I took the train to work with one of the DND projects engineers regularly. We used to chat about once a week. His frustration with getting work done in the Arctic was palpable because of all the engineering challenges. That was before COVID.
However, the lack of political will makes it much harder.
Also comparing to Russia is a terribly stupid comparison. No first nations discussions needed, no environmental assessment required, no care about waste management, being able to drive to their bases is nice as their arctic isn't an archipelago etc...
However, the lack of political will makes it much harder.
Also comparing to Russia is a terribly stupid comparison. No first nations discussions needed, no environmental assessment required, no care about waste management, being able to drive to their bases is nice as their arctic isn't an archipelago etc...
- Reaction score
- 1,800
- Points
- 1,260
Why is the story coming out now at the end of March and not the end of say October, when the latest work would have wrapped up?
Was it the author of the article who sat on the story for the last 5 months? Or was it a gov't department who sat on it for the last 5 months before actually coming clean and informing their bosses that, whoops, we didn't complete the project plan and wrap up the project by our project end date of summer 2021 and we need net new funding that was not budgeted for this fiscal year?
Either way it should have been obvious to all who worked on it that the work was not completed by 2021 and that more funding and money would be required for yet another building season. It would not take 5 months for this to be known.
- Reaction score
- 21,698
- Points
- 1,260
Commitment challenge.
It isn’t an engineering challenge, it’s been done before and there is a lot of information out there on how design requirements differ, as such it is just a different environment that most are not used to working with. I suspect most of the project staff where not exceptionally familiar with the the design requirements of buildings etc that far north, then toss in COVID and room temperature government support and you have a mess as it’s massively under resourced.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,158
- Points
- 1,260
I'm pretty sure this was a Harper project as well. Have to wonder if that had an effect ?
You know like a certain fighter plane replacement thing-a-ma-jig.
- Reaction score
- 21,698
- Points
- 1,260
It was a Harperism, but I suspect he had already lost interest by the time JT took over.
- Reaction score
- 1,800
- Points
- 1,260
Is that why we'll keep Pearson breaking ice until its 60yrs old before Dief touches water?
FJAG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 13,662
- Points
- 1,160
There's nothing wrong with the majority of your dream. It's this part that evoked the laughter.
I think it would be very doable to have those systems on a Canadian LAV which is pretty much a Stryker in the first place. My guess we could use a TLAV for some of that as well. My guess is that the LAV will most likely be the GBAD vehicle chassis of choice.
It was the issue of whether there is any chance we could do it "fast" that was the kicker.
We've done things quickly through Unforecasted Operational Requirements during Afghanistan but there is currently no need for that and more importantly, a UOR does not create an in-service system, just a temporary system for a specific operational requirement. GBAD right now is targeted for inservice (as it should be) that means slow and deliberate. As far as I understand we have just been given approval for the definition stage. That means that there is a long road ahead before this gets done.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 15,342
- Points
- 1,260
Yes of course - the lives of FN people are still back burner like clean drinking water for all FN.OS, the priority is Net-Zero by 2050, so I’m thinking it should be resolved some time after 2050…
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 31,874
- Points
- 1,160
I'm still wondering why the base isn't planned to be built in Iqaluit, but I'm no sailor so....
- Reaction score
- 21,698
- Points
- 1,260
How hard is it to look down South as say.
TTHAD
MEADS
MSHORAD
STINGER
I mean I could have written a capability requirement and SOW for GBAD in about 2hrs from scratch.
TacticalTea
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,485
- Points
- 1,160
If I were to guess, I'd say because there's already a naval (civilian) infrastructure project in Iqaluit, and it's also close enough to Nuuk and Newfoundland that building the facility there wouldn't provide much added value.
Whereas Nanisivik is right in the middle of the Canadian Arctic.
- Reaction score
- 5,862
- Points
- 1,090
I don't know much about GBAD but I used to work with one of the few surviving AD Artillery Sgt's years back. Those folks deploy far out from the formation in interlocking layers of coverage. But that was in the days of ADAT's and I assume GBAD for the Stykers is a different animal. The ADATs had a 10km range. The Stinger is around 4-5km in range.There's nothing wrong with the majority of your dream. It's this part that evoked the laughter.
I think it would be very doable to have those systems on a Canadian LAV which is pretty much a Stryker in the first place. My guess we could use a TLAV for some of that as well. My guess is that the LAV will most likely be the GBAD vehicle chassis of choice.
It was the issue of whether there is any chance we could do it "fast" that was the kicker.
We've done things quickly through Unforecasted Operational Requirements during Afghanistan but there is currently no need for that and more importantly, a UOR does not create an in-service system, just a temporary system for a specific operational requirement. GBAD right now is targeted for inservice (as it should be) that means slow and deliberate. As far as I understand we have just been given approval for the definition stage. That means that there is a long road ahead before this gets done.
A SHORAD LAV would likely be using the Reconfigurable Integrated Weapons platform and would provide tactical AD for the army, but something else is needed I think for the longer range punch.
I'll go with what I know and that's the Sky Sabre. It's replacing the Sky Rapier in the UK inventory. It uses the Giraffe AMB radar (a large amount of commonality to the SG-AMB on the frigates and JSS) and the CAMM which is selected as the CIAD missile for the CSC. 25km range with 100km range radar.
I don't think we need LRAD as a military, the Short and Medium RAD would go a long way to being able to do local protection of our own units.
McG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,079
- Points
- 1,160
So are Resolute and Arctic Bay, and an infrastructure project in either of these locations could have dual-use benefits for the local communities.
I know Nanisivik and Arctic Bay look real close on a map, but they are substantially isolated from eachother through most of the year.
McG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,079
- Points
- 1,160
Right. Not dual-use and no local benefits.
The Nanisivik airport does not exist any more.
On a good day, but that is not an all season road and the article notes it is prone to wash-out.
QV
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,144
- Points
- 1,010
Tsk tsk... that's not how the CAF does things. See pistol project for example and timelines.
FJAG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 13,662
- Points
- 1,160
Wouldn't it be fun if all one had to do was walk down the aisles of Destruction R Us and pick things off the shelves?
You could probably lay off about 5,000 civil servants.
Similar threads
- Article
