Great to see a decision and an advance of the anticipated delivery date. Interesting to note that the press release quoted the August.2024 Defence Policy Update from the "old" government. There's really no shame in the Carney government carrying the DPU forward: no need to re-invent the wheel. And for those who ask of the Carney's government spending promises, "where are the government's plans?", they now have the answer, if in fact it was needed in the first place as the continued relevance of the DPU was pretty obvious, government re-affirmation of it or not. The issue with HIMARs, and indeed all of the long-range fires plans for the air force and navy, concerns guaranteed Canadian access to continued missile supply in the event of conflict. That would have to mean Canadian manufacture of the missiles themselves, which in the age of hypersonic missiles and long-range drones, would increase supply redundancy, very much in the US interest. One would have thought that the Munitions Supply Program (MSP) and the recently announced Canadian Defence Industry Resilience Program would apply to all military consumables, including missiles., There is no mention in the HIMARS announcement of local manufacture being offered as an ITB. Lockheed Martin, we should note, is spending $9.5 million on engine overhauls for Air Inuit as an ITB. Money for a good cause I suppose, but as an ITB, pretty far from any defence or industrial policy objective. On the assumption that Lockheed Martin and other US defence firms (e.g. RTX) are not inclined to offer local manufacture, then it will only be prudent for the Government to look to non-US suppliers for its other missile needs from the likes of MBDA, Kongsberg, Rheinmetall and Hanwha Aerospace.
This will be a great capability... Though I can't fathom what took so long for the official announcement. The only thing I am salty about is yet another heavy truck platform being added to the CAF. IIRC the French are putting M270 dual-pod launchers on a ueavy truck... So it would've been fun to see us do the same to a ZETROS chassis. ... Given the distances & support/survival requirements up North, I remain 99% certain that CC-130 transportability is a gimmick that will not actually be useful up North.
I think it's a great purchase. The prsm is a game changer and the duo use is great. Yeah we have to have these types of weapons to support NATO forces if are ever needed. That's alot of firepower and getting a good amount means we can keep the Artic covered and send them to our forces abroad. It'd go perfect in Latvia to support the NATO forces there. Canada already has a fair amount of ma6 Leopard 2 tanks and everyone got the new kit of top of the line military clothing for winter and summer. It's great to see our men and women of the armed forces get all the kit they need.
Great to see a decision and an advance of the anticipated delivery date. Interesting to note that the press release quoted the August.2024 Defence Policy Update from the "old" government. There's really no shame in the Carney government carrying the DPU forward: no need to re-invent the wheel. And for those who ask of the Carney's government spending promises, "where are the government's plans?", they now have the answer, if in fact it was needed in the first place as the continued relevance of the DPU was pretty obvious, government re-affirmation of it or not. The issue with HIMARs, and indeed all of the long-range fires plans for the air force and navy, concerns guaranteed Canadian access to continued missile supply in the event of conflict. That would have to mean Canadian manufacture of the missiles themselves, which in the age of hypersonic missiles and long-range drones, would increase supply redundancy, very much in the US interest. One would have thought that the Munitions Supply Program (MSP) and the recently announced Canadian Defence Industry Resilience Program would apply to all military consumables, including missiles., There is no mention in the HIMARS announcement of local manufacture being offered as an ITB. Lockheed Martin, we should note, is spending $9.5 million on engine overhauls for Air Inuit as an ITB. Money for a good cause I suppose, but as an ITB, pretty far from any defence or industrial policy objective. On the assumption that Lockheed Martin and other US defence firms (e.g. RTX) are not inclined to offer local manufacture, then it will only be prudent for the Government to look to non-US suppliers for its other missile needs from the likes of MBDA, Kongsberg, Rheinmetall and Hanwha Aerospace.
This will be a great capability... Though I can't fathom what took so long for the official announcement. The only thing I am salty about is yet another heavy truck platform being added to the CAF. IIRC the French are putting M270 dual-pod launchers on a ueavy truck... So it would've been fun to see us do the same to a ZETROS chassis. ... Given the distances & support/survival requirements up North, I remain 99% certain that CC-130 transportability is a gimmick that will not actually be useful up North.
Facebook reel from the CA, showing Canadian troops working on HIMARS https://www.facebook.com/reel/964032526619229
I think it's a great purchase. The prsm is a game changer and the duo use is great. Yeah we have to have these types of weapons to support NATO forces if are ever needed. That's alot of firepower and getting a good amount means we can keep the Artic covered and send them to our forces abroad. It'd go perfect in Latvia to support the NATO forces there. Canada already has a fair amount of ma6 Leopard 2 tanks and everyone got the new kit of top of the line military clothing for winter and summer. It's great to see our men and women of the armed forces get all the kit they need.