• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

Justin Trudeau hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

Canada says it will look at increasing its defence spending and tacked on 10 more Russian names to an ever growing sanctions list.

By Tonda MacCharles
Ottawa Bureau
Mon., March 7, 2022

Riga, LATVIA—On the 13th day of the brutal Russian bid to claim Ukraine as its own, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is showing up at the Latvian battle group led by Canadian soldiers, waving the Maple Leaf and a vague hint at more money for the military.

Canada has been waving the NATO flag for nearly seven years in Latvia as a bulwark against Russia’s further incursions in Eastern Europe.

Canada stepped up to lead one of NATO’s four battle groups in 2015 — part of the defensive alliance’s display of strength and solidarity with weaker member states after Russia invaded Ukraine and seized the Crimean peninsula in 2014. Trudeau arrived in the Latvian capital late Monday after meetings in the U.K. with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte.

Earlier Monday, faced with a seemingly unstoppable war in Ukraine, Trudeau said he will look at increasing Canada’s defence spending. Given world events, he said there are “certainly reflections to have.”

And Canada tacked on 10 more Russian names to an ever-growing sanctions list.

The latest round of sanctions includes names Trudeau said were identified by jailed Russian opposition leader and Putin nemesis Alexei Navalny.

However, on a day when Trudeau cited the new sanctions, and Johnson touted new measures meant to expose Russian property owners in his country, Rutte admitted sanctions are not working.

Yet they all called for more concerted international efforts over the long haul, including more economic measures and more humanitarian aid, with Johnson and Rutte divided over how quickly countries need to get off Russian oil and gas.

The 10 latest names on Canada’s target list do not include Roman Abramovich — a Russian billionaire Navalny has been flagging to Canada since at least 2017. Canada appears to have sanctioned about 20 of the 35 names on Navalny’s list.

The Conservative opposition says the Liberal government is not yet exerting maximum pressure on Putin, and should do more to bolster Canadian Forces, including by finally approving the purchase of fighter jets.

Foreign affairs critic Michael Chong said in an interview that Ottawa must still sanction “additional oligarchs close to President Putin who have significant assets in Canada.”

Abramovich owns more than a quarter of the public shares in steelmaking giant Evraz, which has operations in Alberta and Saskatchewan and has supplied most of the steel for the government-owned Trans Mountain pipeline project.

Evraz’s board of directors also includes two more Russians the U.S. government identified as “oligarchs” in 2019 — Aleksandr Abramov and Aleksandr Frolov — and its Canadian operations have received significant support from the federal government.

That includes at least $27 million in emergency wage subsidies during the pandemic, as well as $7 million through a fund meant to help heavy-polluters reduce emissions that cause climate change, according to the company’s most recent annual report.

In addition to upping defence spending, the Conservatives want NORAD’s early warning system upgraded, naval shipbuilding ramped up and Arctic security bolstered.

In London, Johnson sat down with Trudeau and Rutte at the Northolt airbase. Their morning meetings had a rushed feel, with Johnson starting to usher press out before Trudeau spoke. His office said later that the British PM couldn’t squeeze the full meeting in at 10 Downing Street because Johnson’s “diary” was so busy that day. The three leaders held an afternoon news conference at 10 Downing.

But before that Trudeau met with the Queen, saying she was “insightful” and they had a “useful, for me anyway, conversation about global affairs.”

Trudeau meets with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg Tuesday in Latvia.

The prime minister will also meet with three Baltic leaders, the prime ministers of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, in the Latvian capital of Riga.

The Liberals announced they would increase the 500 Canadian Forces in Latvia by another 460 troops. The Canadians are leading a multinational battle group, one of four that are part of NATO’s deployments in the region.

Another 3,400 Canadians could be deployed to the region in the months to come, on standby for NATO orders.

But Canada’s shipments of lethal aid to Ukraine were slow to come in the view of the Conservatives, and the Ukrainian Canadian community.

And suddenly Western allies are eyeing each other’s defence commitments.

At the Downing Street news conference, Rutte noted the Netherlands will increase its defence budget to close to two per cent of GDP. Germany has led the G7, and doubled its defence budget in the face of Putin’s invasion and threats. Johnson said the U.K. defence spending is about 2.4 per cent and declined to comment on Canada’s defence spending which is 1.4 per cent of GDP.

But Johnson didn’t hold back.

“What we can’t do, post the invasion of Ukraine is assume that we go back to a kind of status quo ante, a kind of new normalization in the way that we did after the … seizure of Crimea and the Donbas area,” Johnson said. “We’ve got to recognize that things have changed and that we need a new focus on security and I think that that is kind of increasingly understood by everybody.”

Trudeau stood by his British and Dutch counterparts and pledged Canada would do more.

He defended his government’s record, saying Ottawa is gradually increasing spending over the next decade by 70 per cent. Then Trudeau admitted more might be necessary.

“We also recognize that context is changing rapidly around the world and we need to make sure that women and men have certainty and our forces have all the equipment necessary to be able to stand strongly as we always have. As members of NATO. We will continue to look at what more we can do.”

The three leaders — Johnson, a conservative and Trudeau and Rutte, progressive liberals — in a joint statement said they “will continue to impose severe costs on Russia.”

Arriving for the news conference from Windsor Castle, Trudeau had to detour to enter Downing Street as loud so-called Freedom Convoy protesters bellowed from outside the gate. They carried signs marked “Tuck Frudeau” and “Free Tamara” (Lich).

Protester Jeff Wyatt who said he has no Canadian ties told the Star he came to stand up for Lich and others who were leading a “peaceful protest” worldwide against government “lies” about COVID-19 and what he called Trudeau’s “tyranny.”

Elsewhere in London, outside the Russian embassy, other protesters and passersby reflected on what they said was real tyranny — the Russian attack on Ukraine. “I think we should be as tough as possible to get this stopped, as tough as possible,” said protester Clive Martinez.
 
Tough question to answer. There’s design features of T72 and T80 that seem to be making k kills more likely, but there’s also some horrific tactical decisions being made that play into the hands of the Ukranians.
Talking to a few people, it seems the Russian Active protection systems cannot recognize a top attack munition as a threat so they aren't engaging. Meaning weapons like Javelin are scoring kills left, right and center.

Weather also is a big factor, it's still muddy as heck in Ukraine so they are limited to roads, easy pickings for Ukraine.

Third factor is piss poor training, recent videos show when hit by artillery, they are abandoning their vehicles and scattering, and Ukrainian forces are all to happy to make sure there is no vehicle to return to.
 
Amid all the videos of Russian tanks being destroyed and talk of Bayraktars, Javelins and NLAWs there has been occasional reference to Ukrainian artillery and its role in eliminating columns of vehicles. But when looking at the videos and images it has been remarkable to me how little evidence there is of "misses" by the artillery, how few shell holes there are in the engagement area.

Apparently the Ukrainians have their own indigenous laser guided 152mm artillery shells. And may have 122mm shells as well. Laser designators are available for ground units and UAVs.

 
Talking to a few people, it seems the Russian Active protection systems cannot recognize a top attack munition as a threat so they aren't engaging. Meaning weapons like Javelin are scoring kills left, right and center.
APS is a misnomer for Russian tanks. It is active in terms of a dazzler type emitter, but all it does is attempt to confuse a seeker head.
So they can confuse a direct laser guided munition, but that’s it.
Javelin isn’t that type of munition…
The Russian APS is effectively two generations behind the threat.

Weather also is a big factor, it's still muddy as heck in Ukraine so they are limited to roads, easy pickings for Ukraine.
Agreed
Third factor is piss poor training, recent videos show when hit by artillery, they are abandoning their vehicles and scattering, and Ukrainian forces are all to happy to make sure there is no vehicle to return to.
 

1649775944210.png
Kvitnik-E
Guided artillery shell
The Kvitnik guided artillery projectile is a high-precision high-precision fragmentation munition with a laser semi-active homing head (type 9E421)

1649775994384.png
Karasuk
Guided artillery shell
High-precision artillery shell with laser semi-active homing 122 mm caliber "Karasuk" is a sample of "smart weapon", which provides the maximum probability of destruction of the target with the first shot at a range of up to 12 km


Other indigenous Ukrainian PGMs

Betting that Ukrain is looking for NATO weapons because the have eaten up their stocks and the Russians have destroyed their production facilities.
 
APS is a misnomer for Russian tanks. It is active in terms of a dazzler type emitter, but all it does is attempt to confuse a seeker head.
So they can confuse a direct laser guided munition, but that’s it.

So that would explain the occasional "miss" by Ukraine's LGMs. The Russian dazzlers work sometimes.
 
So that would explain the occasional "miss" by Ukraine's LGMs. The Russian dazzlers work sometimes.
I’m not really familiar with those, but anything using a Direct ‘In Band’ TDL would be affected, as well as some LRF’s.
I’d love to do a deep dive into the how and why if things, but aspects of that are still classified.

What isn’t classified is that Javelin is effectively a smaller version of the MMW Hellfire and Maverick and isn’t bothered one lick by laser dazzling spam. If you lock it, it dies.
 
Speaking of MMW munitions - an idea ahead of its time killed on account of expense and the fall of the USSR (Peace Dividend).


81mm. Same HEAT band as the CG84 and the AT4 but top attack. Similar to the larger 120mm Strix.


Anti-tank with mortar, British Merlin 81mm anti-tank mortar shell​

2022-04-12 23:31 HKT

In the 1980s, Europe was shrouded by war clouds. In the face of the huge Soviet steel torrent, NATO worked hard to develop anti-tank equipment and corresponding tactics, but it seemed impossible to be foolproof in the face of numbers. How about it without using nuclear weapons? Can the anti-tank capabilities of combat units at all levels be cheaply improved? The British thought of a good way to use cheap mortars to perform anti-tank operations. For this purpose, they deliberately developed 81mm Merlin precision-guided anti-tank mortar shells.
Anti-tank with mortar, British Merlin 81mm anti-tank mortar shell


The Merlin shells are equipment used with the L-16 81mm mortar. The L-16 is a British equipment developed in the 1960s. It replaces the old 3-inch mortar and is widely used in grassroots land combat units. As a fire support weapon, each battalion is generally equipped with 6 to 8 guns, and each mortar has a three-man artillery group. The artillery weighs 35.6 kg and has a maximum range of 5650 meters.

Anti-tank with mortar, British Merlin 81mm anti-tank mortar shell


In terms of the density of L-16 equipment, if it is given a reliable anti-tank capability, it will bring a qualitative improvement to the combat capability of the entire army. It is actually very easy to simply install the armor-piercing warhead for the ammunition. The difficult part is how to make the shells hit the moving tank. Fortunately, advances in electronic technology at that time made it possible to miniaturize many precision equipment.
The development of Merlin shells was from 1981 to 1989. Although we already have a variety of similar guided shells in service today, they were still new in that era and it was not easy to develop them.

Anti-tank with mortar, British Merlin 81mm anti-tank mortar shell

The Merlin shell is 900 mm long, which is much longer than ordinary 81 mm shells. It looks like a small missile with a range of 1.5 to 4 kilometers. The armor-piercing warhead can penetrate 360 mm homogeneous steel armor. The weak top armor is sufficient.


Anti-tank with mortar, British Merlin 81mm anti-tank mortar shell

The shell has a miniature millimeter-wave radar, which is activated when the shell enters the stage of diving and falling. At first it searches a range of 300×300 meters. At this stage, it searches for a moving target. If it is not found, it will switch to the second scene mode. When the shells fall further, the radar will search an area of 100×100 meters and analyze possible stationary targets.
Anti-tank with mortar, British Merlin 81mm anti-tank mortar shell

No matter at which stage the target is found, the projectile can simply adjust its trajectory by adjusting the aerodynamic control surface that pops up after launch. It is unrealistic to kill a tank with one projectile. The designer said that it takes 2 to destroy a tank. ~3 shells. Not only that, because Merlin ammunition has unique ballistic characteristics and different combat needs, the gun crew will be equipped with a portable computer to calculate shooting data, so that the shells fly to the tank at the best angle.

The development direction of the Merlin precision-guided anti-tank mortar shell is undoubtedly correct. The service of many types of shells of this type can prove it, but the relevant equipment must be reduced and integrated into an 81mm shell even today. For this technical challenge, everyone still prefers larger 120mm projectiles, such as Sweden's 120mm guided projectiles.
Anti-tank with mortar, British Merlin 81mm anti-tank mortar shell

It is said that the British officially entered service with the Merlin shells in 1993. In addition, Australia also has a strong interest in this shell. However, the number of Merlin shells seems to be very small. On the one hand, it is because the Soviet army, the biggest opponent, disappeared. On the other hand, this type of shell is too expensive and economically uneconomical. Later, Britain planned to expand the Merlin shell to 120 mm caliber.
 
Rumours and rumours and rumours.....


But if the attack is genuine and there is no response to yet another red line crossed then the future is back to the past. Alliances are degraded and are only as good as your own defences. Defence, like charity, begins at home. You can't rely on others to do what you won't do yourself.
 
APS is a misnomer for Russian tanks. It is active in terms of a dazzler type emitter, but all it does is attempt to confuse a seeker head.
So they can confuse a direct laser guided munition, but that’s it.
Javelin isn’t that type of munition…
The Russian APS is effectively two generations behind the threat.


Agreed
Shtora is also designed to spoof the firing post 9f SACLOS missiles by providing alternative missile beacons. Of course your beacon has to emit in the same frequency at the same rate as Shtora for your firing post care. There are relatively few LBR ATGMs made by the west kicking around; SKIF, older Hellfire, Maverick- add in Starstreak. The Russians like them, Kornet, Chrysanthemum, some of air launched stuff- oh, and Shershen from Belarus.
As Kevin said radar, radio, eo/ir homing doesn't care about things like Shtora. A lot don't care about flares. A DIRCM might mess with an EO/IR, but they seem to be restricted to AC (for now). The other thing about systems like Shtora is they take control from the humans on the turret to bring the CM on its target. I wonder if a lot of crews turn it off because they don't want their turrets slewing all over the place.
 

View attachment 70036
Kvitnik-E
Guided artillery shell
The Kvitnik guided artillery projectile is a high-precision high-precision fragmentation munition with a laser semi-active homing head (type 9E421)

View attachment 70037
Karasuk
Guided artillery shell
High-precision artillery shell with laser semi-active homing 122 mm caliber "Karasuk" is a sample of "smart weapon", which provides the maximum probability of destruction of the target with the first shot at a range of up to 12 km


Other indigenous Ukrainian PGMs

Betting that Ukrain is looking for NATO weapons because the have eaten up their stocks and the Russians have destroyed their production facilities.
So they are M712 Copperhead for soviet caliber howitzers?
 
But if the attack is genuine and there is no response to yet another red line crossed then the future is back to the past. Alliances are degraded and are only as good as your own defences. Defence, like charity, begins at home. You can't rely on others to do what you won't do yourself.

This is why virtue signaling and convening Level 10 experts in Canada need a serious ass whopping for a wake up call.
 
Talking to a few people, it seems the Russian Active protection systems cannot recognize a top attack munition as a threat so they aren't engaging. Meaning weapons like Javelin are scoring kills left, right and center.

Weather also is a big factor, it's still muddy as heck in Ukraine so they are limited to roads, easy pickings for Ukraine.

Third factor is piss poor training, recent videos show when hit by artillery, they are abandoning their vehicles and scattering, and Ukrainian forces are all to happy to make sure there is no vehicle to return to.
Seems more likely the APS isn’t fitted
 
Easy question to answer.
NATO tanks (Abrams, Leo and Challenger current variants) have 1) better armor (composite and extremely dense materials), 2) Insensitivity munitions, so with a significant impact they don’t detonate (unlike the T series turret launching munitions) 3) Have venting ammo storage so even a ammo detonation of the ammo rack won’t K kill the tank
4) Better VAS and FCS to allow targets to be viewed and selected at longer ranges.
Is not Trophy really good? Wikipedia says so lol
The other thing about systems like Shtora is they take control from the humans on the turret to bring the CM on its target. I wonder if a lot of crews turn it off because they don't want their turrets slewing all over the place.
Thats what I thought too but again that would only be true for laser designated?
 
Is not Trophy really good? Wikipedia says so lol

Thats what I thought too but again that would only be true for laser designated?
Trophy is an hard kill APS so not comparable to Shtora, more equivalent to Arena (very limited use), Drozd (obsolete), and Afghanit (T14 only).

Yeah, you need something to cue the system to react and that's normally a laser hitting the target. You can see some videos where the SKIF gunner is aiming off the target until the last minute, probably to avoid activating a LWS.
 
Rob Huebert on Chrystia Freeland's budget speech


The entire final section of her speech — pages 5-6 if you are old school and print it out — is dedicated to the impact of the Russian attack on Ukraine. She begins with the observation that “The world we woke up to on February 24 was different from the one that had existed when we turned off the lights the night before.” Then she goes on to to her most powerful statement of the speech:

“Putin’s assault has been so vicious that we all now understand that the world’s democracies — including our own — can be safe only once the Russian tyrant and his armies are entirely vanquished.”

We need to put this in context. This is an official statement of the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance in an official speech to Parliament outlining the core policy and spendings of the government. This is not some innocuous musing of a government official responding to the terrible death and destruction that has been unleashed on the Ukrainian people. This is the second-most powerful person in the Canadian government very publicly calling for the vanquishing of Russian President Vladimir Putin a.k.a. “the Russian tyrant.”

When does Chrystia kick Justin upstairs?
 
Back
Top