Our North - SSE Policy Update Megathread

[Colin Parkinson]

Arguably that is just starting now with the MRTT, as the C-17 and C-130 fleets aren’t large. Especially given the size of Canada, and the domestic needs on the Herc’s.

We are doing well in this particular field. I think the Liberals are quietly thankfully for Harper acquiring C17 and C130J. The MRTT's are a uniquely Liberal acquisition and I give them full credit for that one. Going by Wiki with the MRTT acquisition we will have 28 Transport aircraft of all types.

 

[KevinB]

We are doing well in this particular field. I think the Liberals are quietly thankfully for Harper acquiring C17 and C130J. The MRTT's are a uniquely Liberal acquisition and I give them full credit for that one. Going by Wiki with the MRTT acquisition we will have 28 Transport aircraft of all types.

So a small fleet. As you basically described an Air Guard station.

 

[PrairieFella]

So a small fleet. As you basically described an Air Guard station.

Not sure what you expect from Canada? We're a tenth the size of the USA by population and GDP and we have some commitments to our citizens the American government has no qualms in ignoring. I'm sure we're all in agreement we want Canada to reach 2% of GDP but it's a little silly to expect we some how mirror the US military in all its excess. It's unrealistic to try and do so and frankly stupid in the Canadian context.

 

[MilEME09]

Realistically if we cared about defense we could mandate by law a target of 0.5% of the population be the size of the CAF. At current population that would be about 380k, however our budget would need to double or mire to make that even workable.

 

[IKnowNothing]

Having similar equipment doesn’t bind yourself like a vassal, Canada can still chose its own directions.

I tend to believe having more US kit would actually strengthen Canadian independence as you would be looked as valuable partner, instead of that pesky freeloader.

If customer A is 90% of your sales and owns the IP, Customer B with 10% and complete dependence is along for the ride.

Canada made its decision after WW2 to be an ostrich, now you just rarely raise your heads out of the sand.

The best time to plant a tree was 50 (now 70) years ago, the 2nd best....

 

[IKnowNothing]

What would a South Korean alignment look like?

The username says it all, but in my opinion:
an interesting option that provides the expediency/one stop shop MOTS aspect of the American path, with the added benefit of a more even power dynamic, but the huge drawback of loss of commonality with NATO allies (sans Poland). None of the geopolitical benefits of convening (heh) with the Scandics.

 

[dimsum]

So a small fleet. As you basically described an Air Guard station.

I’m not sure anyone other than China or maybe Russia can (or should) compare their fleets to the US.

 

[GR66]

This is an extract from Our North, Strong and Free:

Similarly, the Canadian Army’s light armoured vehicle fleet is central to ensuring Canada can maintain its operational commitments, including to NATO, while maintaining a robust fleet at home for training and domestic operations. Canada will explore establishing a light armoured vehicle production program to replenish our fleet while also enabling industry to invest in a sustainable defence production capacity to support Canada and our NATO allies.

Canada has a world-class AFV production capacity at GDLS in London. We can overuse the word "strategic", but it is a such an asset. It is very useful to be able to produce our own major equipment. So we are actually in a pretty good place to make good on this. Simply having more LAVs would allow us to have additional vehicles for operational stocks. This has to include the funds for support so that what we have is operational.

I am not a defence economist, but it might be beneficial to have a steady-state production line for LAVs rather than big episodic purchases.

Regarding our LAVs, it has been a few years since I was a crew commander (LAV 3 and Coyote not LAV 6), but in terms of capabilities I think they are just fine. We could talk about adding a missile and what that would cost.

With a new engine, a modern 30mm or bigger and a missile system (which implies a new turret), I think the LAV as an IFV would be sufficient for the Canadian reality. What we're really lacking with the LAV is the ancillary, non logistic stuff. If we want a LAV heavy army, we need a LAV AD. A LAV mortar. A LAV Cavalry. Etc etc. We also need to square the circle that is the thought process of pairing LAVs (wheeled) with tanks (tracked). A medium brigade with tanks isn't a heavy brigade and should not fight as such.

Perhaps LAVs should form the crux of medium brigades centered on 5CMBG and most of the reserves. Heavy brigades can be formed by 1 and 2 CMBG with augmentation from the remaining Reserve units not assigned to LAV brigades.

To be realistic all our talk of alignment with US vs European (or Korean) tracked AFV fleets falls pretty far down the priority list. While the LAV may not be the ideal vehicle for combined operations in all terrains, the fact is that its shortcomings are significantly less important than the many other missing capabilities in the CAF.

Sorting out our many missing CS and CSS capabilities should take priority over replacing the 80% vehicle that we already have (and have the capability to produce domestically). As @FJAG has noted many times previously we need to work with what we have first. Strive first for a properly equipped and supported LAV force (similarly for our Light force) and THEN look at where we need to invest in different fleets.

 

[DBNSG]

We are doing well in this particular field. I think the Liberals are quietly thankfully for Harper acquiring C17 and C130J. The MRTT's are a uniquely Liberal acquisition and I give them full credit for that one. Going by Wiki with the MRTT acquisition we will have 28 Transport aircraft of all types.

Actually we will have 31 airlifters with 9 MRRT's, 5 C-17's and 17 C130-30J's.

 

[FJAG]

We are doing well in this particular field. I think the Liberals are quietly thankfully for Harper acquiring C17 and C130J. The MRTT's are a uniquely Liberal acquisition and I give them full credit for that one. Going by Wiki with the MRTT acquisition we will have 28 Transport aircraft of all types.

I'm chuffed about the MRTT purchase. I know from an RCAF point of view that the refueling capability is a big deal but from an army view the passenger transport capability is terrific. The air force calls it a 250+ pax aircraft, I've seen specs on configurations that carry over 300.

Regardless, 3 planes could lift an entire battalion onto prepositioned equipment (probably 2 considering manpower shortages.) Lifting an entire brigade in a single lift is not out of the realm of the possible for the RCAF's transport fleet.

 

[daftandbarmy]

I'm chuffed about the MRTT purchase. I know from an RCAF point of view that the refueling capability is a big deal but from an army view the passenger transport capability is terrific. The air force calls it a 250+ pax aircraft, I've seen specs on configurations that carry over 300.

Regardless, 3 planes could lift an entire battalion onto prepositioned equipment (probably 2 considering manpower shortages.) Lifting an entire brigade in a single lift is not out of the realm of the possible for the RCAF's transport fleet.

Exactly 'how ready' do we need to be?

I assume this is a key existential component of a well thought out strategy that continues to elude us in some way.

I also know that I've probably just dissed the hard work of legions of Staff Officers who've already worked all this out

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Exactly 'how ready' do we need to be?

I assume this is a key existential component of a well thought out strategy that continues to elude us in some way.

I also know that I've probably just dissed the hard work of legions of Staff Officers who've already worked all this out

Well, there is a Managed Readiness Plan and the Army Operating Plan has chapters on readiness along with an associated Enhanced Warfighting Proficiency Directive. We look at readiness through a lens of personnel, equipment, training and sustainment.

"How ready" forces have to be depends on the task that they are assigned. There is a discussion between the force employer and the force generator that drives "how ready" those elements have to be.

 

[KevinB]

To be realistic all our talk of alignment with US vs European (or Korean) tracked AFV fleets falls pretty far down the priority list. While the LAV may not be the ideal vehicle for combined operations in all terrains, the fact is that its shortcomings are significantly less important than the many other missing capabilities in the CAF.

Sorting out our many missing CS and CSS capabilities should take priority over replacing the 80% vehicle that we already have (and have the capability to produce domestically). As @FJAG has noted many times previously we need to work with what we have first. Strive first for a properly equipped and supported LAV force (similarly for our Light force) and THEN look at where we need to invest in different fleets.

I view that in some ways as throwing good money after bad.

A lot of the systems that are missing from a ‘properly equipped and supported LAV force’ are things you don’t want to be using a LAV force for.

 

[FJAG]

Exactly 'how ready' do we need to be?

I assume this is a key existential component of a well thought out strategy that continues to elude us in some way.

I also know that I've probably just dissed the hard work of legions of Staff Officers who've already worked all this out

Back when the earth was still cooling, I was the unit emplaning officer for 2 RCHA for a year with the responsibility of keeping our emplaning plans up to date. That included the ones for the chalks needed to lift the AMF(L) Bty (which was used regularly) as well as for the regiment as a whole (which, since we only had one battery at the time meant regimental headquarters - which we never used)

Our lift, in those days, was a bunch of older hercs and Boeing 707. It took quite a few chalks to move us and our gear. The battery was a tracked L5 battery. Prepositioning in Norway didn't happen until later. The war load of ammo was a never resolved bug bear.

 

[Kirkhill]

What would a South Korean alignment look like?

Like this?

Time to create a new quad for the Arctic Pacific to counter China and Russia - Breaking Defense

The US and Canada should turn to Japan and South Korea, two pivotal treaty allies with strategic interests and unique capabilities that could bolster Arctic security, according to analysts Chan Mo Ku and Jinwan Park.

breakingdefense.com

 

[Kirkhill]

Just like the CAST brigade of the 70s and 80s we would likely need to seize commercial airlines in a time of war in order to get our troops to europe quickly.

And why is that a bad thing?

As I've suggested before we could do something unusual and plan. In this instance plan to subsidize surplus capacity in Canada's civilian fleets.

 

[KevinB]

Like this?

Time to create a new quad for the Arctic Pacific to counter China and Russia - Breaking Defense

The US and Canada should turn to Japan and South Korea, two pivotal treaty allies with strategic interests and unique capabilities that could bolster Arctic security, according to analysts Chan Mo Ku and Jinwan Park.

breakingdefense.com

Can he read a map?

I’m doubtful.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Can he read a map?

I’m doubtful.

Well SK is a "Near Arctic Nation"

 

[KevinB]

Well SK is a "Near Arctic Nation"

Over 4,500NM away from the Arctic.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

but closer by sea than China