Readiness and reliability my soapbox. My working theory is that we keep buying the minimally viable fleet size and then act surprised when readiness struggles. Case in point, our EH-101s have some of the highest flying hours anywhere. When the fleet is that tight, the machines get run hard and parts start “donating themselves” to keep the rest flying.
If we’re serious about serviceability and reliability, the math isn’t complicated. A larger NEW fleet (not used kit). deeper spares, and steady investment in upgrades, repair, and overhaul would take a lot of pressure off the system. You can’t run a national defence posture on just-in-time logistics and crossed fingers.
Speaking as an industrial engineer from the commercial aviation world, those were table stakes for keeping aircraft safe and dependable. And the final piece is people. You can buy all the hardware you want, but if you don’t invest in maintainers, training, and proper resourcing, you’re still going to struggle. Our techs are the cornerstone of readiness, and they need to be backed accordingly.
In the famous words of James Montgomery Scott: “I’ve giv’n her all she’s got, Captain, an’ I canna give her no more.” At some point, even the best crews hit the limits of what the equipment and the fleet size can sustain.
We didn’t have a strategy at all before, and now we do. So thats good for a start. Getting military procurement as far away as possible from PSPC might even mean we will no longer be a complete laughing stock even among our most badly managed allies…… yay!
Is it Canadian or not? This super sleuthing article by the Globe and Mail from 2017 has helped me understand where David Shipbuilding sits. Various articles talking about icebreaker contracts accredited ownership of designs and construction to different ownership nationalities. BTW, the LMC CMC-330 is subject to ITAR export restrictions so don’t tell Donald. Anyway, here’s the G&M article:
Forgive an avidly interested outsider for not knowing the terminology, but when you talk about incentivizing direct investment, you talked about multipliers a lot, and how they could work... What is a multiplier? What is multiplying what? And how does it incenivize something? I'm pretty sure I got the rest of it, but I was stumped there.
Say I want you to buy an X. You don't want to buy an X. But maybe I say "I'll pay $5, will you then spend $10 on buying X". That would be a multiplier of 3, since I am spending $5 but getting you to invest $10, for a total investment of $15. I incentivize you with the $5, because you weren't going to spend $15 on X.
Ok, I think I got it. In the case of the DIS, the government will agree to buy from foreign owned companies as long as they invest x in Canadian operations, and the value of the purchase plus the value of the investment all divided by the value of the purchase is the multiplier? It's not super intuitive math, but I can see how it can be beneficial to Canada.
Readiness and reliability my soapbox. My working theory is that we keep buying the minimally viable fleet size and then act surprised when readiness struggles. Case in point, our EH-101s have some of the highest flying hours anywhere. When the fleet is that tight, the machines get run hard and parts start “donating themselves” to keep the rest flying.
If we’re serious about serviceability and reliability, the math isn’t complicated. A larger NEW fleet (not used kit). deeper spares, and steady investment in upgrades, repair, and overhaul would take a lot of pressure off the system. You can’t run a national defence posture on just-in-time logistics and crossed fingers.
Speaking as an industrial engineer from the commercial aviation world, those were table stakes for keeping aircraft safe and dependable. And the final piece is people. You can buy all the hardware you want, but if you don’t invest in maintainers, training, and proper resourcing, you’re still going to struggle. Our techs are the cornerstone of readiness, and they need to be backed accordingly.
In the famous words of James Montgomery Scott: “I’ve giv’n her all she’s got, Captain, an’ I canna give her no more.” At some point, even the best crews hit the limits of what the equipment and the fleet size can sustain.
We didn’t have a strategy at all before, and now we do. So thats good for a start. Getting military procurement as far away as possible from PSPC might even mean we will no longer be a complete laughing stock even among our most badly managed allies…… yay!
Is it Canadian or not? This super sleuthing article by the Globe and Mail from 2017 has helped me understand where David Shipbuilding sits. Various articles talking about icebreaker contracts accredited ownership of designs and construction to different ownership nationalities. BTW, the LMC CMC-330 is subject to ITAR export restrictions so don’t tell Donald. Anyway, here’s the G&M article:
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/globe-investigation-of-davie-shipyard-finds-complex-web-ofownership/article34857698/
Davie vice David
Forgive an avidly interested outsider for not knowing the terminology, but when you talk about incentivizing direct investment, you talked about multipliers a lot, and how they could work... What is a multiplier? What is multiplying what? And how does it incenivize something? I'm pretty sure I got the rest of it, but I was stumped there.
Say I want you to buy an X. You don't want to buy an X. But maybe I say "I'll pay $5, will you then spend $10 on buying X". That would be a multiplier of 3, since I am spending $5 but getting you to invest $10, for a total investment of $15. I incentivize you with the $5, because you weren't going to spend $15 on X.
Ok, I think I got it. In the case of the DIS, the government will agree to buy from foreign owned companies as long as they invest x in Canadian operations, and the value of the purchase plus the value of the investment all divided by the value of the purchase is the multiplier? It's not super intuitive math, but I can see how it can be beneficial to Canada.
That would be an appropriate understanding, although the incentive may also be money that has been ear marked to invest in defence industry.
New defence strategy when?