By: David Pugliese, The Ottawa Citizen
The Royal Canadian Air Force has extended the contract for the NATO Flying Training in Canada program until 2023.
CAE provides ground-school classroom and simulator training, and supports the live flying training of military pilots in Moose Jaw and Cold Lake. In addition, CAE will also add new capabilities and perform a range of upgrades and updates to the overall NFTC training system and aircraft over the next several years, the firm noted in a news release. The modified operating period of the NFTC contract includes a one-year option for government to extend the contract through 2024 if it wants.
The original NFTC 20-year contract was scheduled to expire in 2021. The extension allows the Canadian government the time it needs to evaluate how it will provide aircrew training in the future.
“Since acquiring the NFTC program in October 2015, CAE has worked closely with the Royal Canadian Air Force on a range of initiatives to help improve the quality and efficiency of training,” Joe Armstrong, Vice President and General Manager, CAE Canada, said in a statement. “As the training systems integrator on the NFTC program, we will now continue to make enhancements and improvements that will sustain NATO Flying Training in Canada well into the next decade.”
In addition to modifying the operating period and extending the NFTC contract through 2023, CAE will also add new capabilities and perform a range of upgrades and updates to the overall NFTC training system and aircraft over the next several years, the firm noted. According to CAE, the new capabilities as well as upgrades and updates include:
Upgrades to the two existing CT-155 Hawk flight training devices (FTDs);
Upgrades to the three existing CT-156 Harvard FTDs;
Minor upgrades, ongoing maintenance and obsolescence management for the fleet of CT-155 Hawk aircraft;
Minor upgrades, ongoing maintenance and obsolescence management for the fleet of CT-156 Harvard aircraft.
As the prime contractor for the NFTC program, CAE pointed out that it operates the NFTC base facilities, delivers the ground-school classroom and simulator training, and supports the live flying training on a fleet of Beechcraft T-6 (CT-156 Harvard) and BAE Systems Hawk (CT-155 Hawk) aircraft.
The NFTC program combines basic, advanced, and lead-in fighter training as part of the comprehensive military pilot training program, the firm noted.
Friday, January 13, 2017
CAF looking to replace Second World War-era pistols
By; David Pugliese, The National Post
The Canadian military is looking to replace its Second World War-era handguns but it could take up to 10 years for all of the new pistols to be distributed to the troops.
Replacing the 1940s-era Browning handguns has been on the Department of National Defence’s procurement list for years.
But now the purchase of new guns appears to be moving ahead.
Still the Canadian Forces figures if the purchase is approved – and there are no delays – it won’t have all the new pistols in hand and being used until 2026.
The military plans to conduct a survey later this year to determine what the role of handguns might be in the future Canadian Forces.
Last year army procurement officers briefed industry representatives about their quest for a new pistol. Industry officials were told that between 15,000 and 25,000 handguns are needed and the military estimated the project would cost around $50 million, according to documents recently obtained by the Ottawa Citizen.
That price-tag would include extra parts and related equipment.
Canadian ForcesThe Canadian military wants to replace its 1940s-era Browning handguns, shown in this 2015 photo being used by Canadian troops in the Middle East, but first will conduct a survey on whether there is still a need for pistols.
Canada’s general service pistol is currently the 9mm Browning Hi-Power, which came into service in the later part of the Second World War, according to the Canadian Army documents prepared for industry. The guns have been refurbished over the years.
A smaller number of SIG P225 pistols were acquired in 1991 and are in the hands of military police and Royal Canadian Navy boarding teams.
The wear and tear on the Brownings have whittled numbers down to 13,981; of those 1,243 are in the process of disassembled for spare parts, in order to keep the other guns going until a replacement can be found, army spokeswoman Capt. Valérie Lanouette explained to the Ottawa Citizen in an email in November.
“The operations in Afghanistan have only accelerated the rate of non-serviceable pistols,” she added.
Production on the SIG P225 ended in 2009 so some of those existing firearms will have to be cannibalized for parts as well, the army noted.
Later this year or sometime early next year a nation-wide survey will be conducted in the Canadian Forces about the future of pistols and “to define the general concept of employment,” the military says.
Sometime in 2019 or 2020 the requirements for a new gun will be defined and then by 2022 the military will seek approval from the federal government to proceed with a purchase of a new general service pistol or GSP.
“If the project timeline is not delayed, the delivery of the GSP could start in fiscal year 2022-2023 and full operational capability could be reached by 2026,” Lanouette pointed out.
Industry representatives have privately questioned why Canada would take so long to buy a new pistol, noting that the process could be completed in about a year or two at most.
The Browning Hi-Power is one of the most widely used military pistols and is still in service in other countries.
Civilian gun stores sell a new version of the gun for a little over $1,000 each. Some dealers who specialize in military collectibles are charging $4,200 for a 1940s-era Browning Hi-Power in excellent condition.
“The Canadian Army is committed to supporting an efficient, cost effective and transparent procurement process in order to have the right tools in the right hands at the right time,” Lanouette noted in her email.
Canadian special forces use another model of the Sig pistol but there are also problems with finding certain spare parts because those components are no longer being manufactured, according to the Canadian Forces.
The Canadian military is looking to replace its Second World War-era handguns but it could take up to 10 years for all of the new pistols to be distributed to the troops.
Replacing the 1940s-era Browning handguns has been on the Department of National Defence’s procurement list for years.
But now the purchase of new guns appears to be moving ahead.
Still the Canadian Forces figures if the purchase is approved – and there are no delays – it won’t have all the new pistols in hand and being used until 2026.
The military plans to conduct a survey later this year to determine what the role of handguns might be in the future Canadian Forces.
Last year army procurement officers briefed industry representatives about their quest for a new pistol. Industry officials were told that between 15,000 and 25,000 handguns are needed and the military estimated the project would cost around $50 million, according to documents recently obtained by the Ottawa Citizen.
That price-tag would include extra parts and related equipment.
Canada’s general service pistol is currently the 9mm Browning Hi-Power, which came into service in the later part of the Second World War, according to the Canadian Army documents prepared for industry. The guns have been refurbished over the years.
A smaller number of SIG P225 pistols were acquired in 1991 and are in the hands of military police and Royal Canadian Navy boarding teams.
The wear and tear on the Brownings have whittled numbers down to 13,981; of those 1,243 are in the process of disassembled for spare parts, in order to keep the other guns going until a replacement can be found, army spokeswoman Capt. Valérie Lanouette explained to the Ottawa Citizen in an email in November.
“The operations in Afghanistan have only accelerated the rate of non-serviceable pistols,” she added.
Production on the SIG P225 ended in 2009 so some of those existing firearms will have to be cannibalized for parts as well, the army noted.
Later this year or sometime early next year a nation-wide survey will be conducted in the Canadian Forces about the future of pistols and “to define the general concept of employment,” the military says.
Sometime in 2019 or 2020 the requirements for a new gun will be defined and then by 2022 the military will seek approval from the federal government to proceed with a purchase of a new general service pistol or GSP.
“If the project timeline is not delayed, the delivery of the GSP could start in fiscal year 2022-2023 and full operational capability could be reached by 2026,” Lanouette pointed out.
Industry representatives have privately questioned why Canada would take so long to buy a new pistol, noting that the process could be completed in about a year or two at most.
The Browning Hi-Power is one of the most widely used military pistols and is still in service in other countries.
Civilian gun stores sell a new version of the gun for a little over $1,000 each. Some dealers who specialize in military collectibles are charging $4,200 for a 1940s-era Browning Hi-Power in excellent condition.
“The Canadian Army is committed to supporting an efficient, cost effective and transparent procurement process in order to have the right tools in the right hands at the right time,” Lanouette noted in her email.
Canadian special forces use another model of the Sig pistol but there are also problems with finding certain spare parts because those components are no longer being manufactured, according to the Canadian Forces.
Wednesday, January 11, 2017
The myth of one-party support for the Canadian Armed Forces
By: Tony Keene, CBC News
There is a myth widely accepted by many in the military, by veterans and by the civilian public that the Conservatives are the party of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). This idea holds that while the Tories have traditionally supported and increased funding to the CAF, the Liberals are constantly looking for opportunities to cut costs. It's a prevalent notion, but a fallacious one nonetheless, and one that's being repeated as we look ahead to the Liberals' plans for 2017.
Back in 2006, a year from retirement as a reservist, I stood beside General Rick Hillier — then chief of the defence staff — as he was scrummed by the media on a visit to Halifax. The new Conservative defence minister had just announced a massive multi-billion-dollar plan to upgrade the military, especially the navy.
A 'decade of darkness'
Hillier, the burly Newfoundlander who had captivated the public with his down-home folksiness, could not resist slipping into political vernacular as he told the newsies that under the Stephen Harper government, the "decade of darkness" under the Liberals was over, and the navy was going to get "big honkin' ships."
As a lifelong Tory supporter, I was thrilled. Not only did it seem like Canada's men and women in uniform would finally get the respect they were due, but as a veteran (I was set to retire the following year), I was certain I would be looked after by the Harper government.
My optimism didn't last.
The Harper government began closing Veterans Affairs offices across the country, ending the face-to-face service we expected. The relationship between veterans affairs minister Julian Fantino and the men and women whose interests he was supposed to represent became combative, with sides trading barbs at a news conference. Under the New Veterans Charter, the government ended lifetime support for wounded soldiers and instead offered lump-sum payments, which many of us took to be "shut up and go away" payoffs.
As for military spending, there were no new ships — big, honking or otherwise — after nine years, and precious little of anything else. Defence spending fell to 0.99 per cent of GDP.
Training and recruiting were cut, and our last destroyer — HMCS Athabaskan — became so clapped out that there is doubt she will even make it to her planned retirement date later this year. There are no support ships. Canada's aged Sea Kings are still flying (barely), as are the CF-18s.
What Harper did do was restore the "royal" designation of the navy and air force, and officers had their British-style rank insignia returned: shades of prime minister Brian Mulroney, who in 1985 gave us three coloured uniforms, and then sent us to the Gulf War without, from what we saw, a single penny of additional spending. Napoleon said men would die for scraps of ribbon. He was probably right.
Defence spending lore
Recently, in a military mess, I spoke with young officers who were convinced we were about to enter another "decade of darkness" under the Liberal government. These guys, all young enough to be my grandchildren, were adamant that Stephen Harper had increased defence spending every year, and that Justin Trudeau was now going to cut it again.
Facts and figures meant nothing. They were absolutely certain: Conservatives good, Liberals bad. End of story.
The argument can be made that defence spending in Canada rises and falls no matter who is in power. My personal experience, which includes four decades of service, was that almost all significant improvements in equipment, pay and allowances and family support came under Liberal regimes. But then again, the Liberals were in power for most of that period.
Liberals to buy 18 Boeing Super Hornet fighter jets
In the year Canada's new government has taken the reins, some improvements have been made: the Liberals have re-opened many of Veterans Affairs offices closed under the Conservative government. Interim measures have been taken to back up the CF-18s and provide support vessels for the navy, and a decorated soldier is serving as defence minister. But the Grits are still struggling to nail down the procurement process, and have taken up the former government's lawsuit over the Veterans Charter, among other things.
Nevertheless, the myth of one-party support for the CAF still remains, and as long as military personnel and veterans continue to believe it, it will continue to skew how they vote, and how we, as a people, think. That tired way of thinking needs a reality check.
There is a myth widely accepted by many in the military, by veterans and by the civilian public that the Conservatives are the party of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). This idea holds that while the Tories have traditionally supported and increased funding to the CAF, the Liberals are constantly looking for opportunities to cut costs. It's a prevalent notion, but a fallacious one nonetheless, and one that's being repeated as we look ahead to the Liberals' plans for 2017.
Back in 2006, a year from retirement as a reservist, I stood beside General Rick Hillier — then chief of the defence staff — as he was scrummed by the media on a visit to Halifax. The new Conservative defence minister had just announced a massive multi-billion-dollar plan to upgrade the military, especially the navy.
A 'decade of darkness'
Hillier, the burly Newfoundlander who had captivated the public with his down-home folksiness, could not resist slipping into political vernacular as he told the newsies that under the Stephen Harper government, the "decade of darkness" under the Liberals was over, and the navy was going to get "big honkin' ships."
As a lifelong Tory supporter, I was thrilled. Not only did it seem like Canada's men and women in uniform would finally get the respect they were due, but as a veteran (I was set to retire the following year), I was certain I would be looked after by the Harper government.
My optimism didn't last.
The Harper government began closing Veterans Affairs offices across the country, ending the face-to-face service we expected. The relationship between veterans affairs minister Julian Fantino and the men and women whose interests he was supposed to represent became combative, with sides trading barbs at a news conference. Under the New Veterans Charter, the government ended lifetime support for wounded soldiers and instead offered lump-sum payments, which many of us took to be "shut up and go away" payoffs.
As for military spending, there were no new ships — big, honking or otherwise — after nine years, and precious little of anything else. Defence spending fell to 0.99 per cent of GDP.
 |
| HMCS Athabaskan might not make it to her planned retirement. (Andrew Vaughan/Canadian Press) |
What Harper did do was restore the "royal" designation of the navy and air force, and officers had their British-style rank insignia returned: shades of prime minister Brian Mulroney, who in 1985 gave us three coloured uniforms, and then sent us to the Gulf War without, from what we saw, a single penny of additional spending. Napoleon said men would die for scraps of ribbon. He was probably right.
Defence spending lore
Recently, in a military mess, I spoke with young officers who were convinced we were about to enter another "decade of darkness" under the Liberal government. These guys, all young enough to be my grandchildren, were adamant that Stephen Harper had increased defence spending every year, and that Justin Trudeau was now going to cut it again.
Facts and figures meant nothing. They were absolutely certain: Conservatives good, Liberals bad. End of story.
The argument can be made that defence spending in Canada rises and falls no matter who is in power. My personal experience, which includes four decades of service, was that almost all significant improvements in equipment, pay and allowances and family support came under Liberal regimes. But then again, the Liberals were in power for most of that period.
Liberals to buy 18 Boeing Super Hornet fighter jets
In the year Canada's new government has taken the reins, some improvements have been made: the Liberals have re-opened many of Veterans Affairs offices closed under the Conservative government. Interim measures have been taken to back up the CF-18s and provide support vessels for the navy, and a decorated soldier is serving as defence minister. But the Grits are still struggling to nail down the procurement process, and have taken up the former government's lawsuit over the Veterans Charter, among other things.
Nevertheless, the myth of one-party support for the CAF still remains, and as long as military personnel and veterans continue to believe it, it will continue to skew how they vote, and how we, as a people, think. That tired way of thinking needs a reality check.
---
Tony Keene was a reservist in the Canadian Armed Forces for 40 years and completed multiple overseas tours of duty. He has worked as a journalist in newspapers and broadcasting.
This column is part of CBC's Opinion section. For more information about this section, please read this editor's blog and our FAQ.
This column is part of CBC's Opinion section. For more information about this section, please read this editor's blog and our FAQ.
The war doesn’t end when soldiers return home
By: Lt. Gen (Ret.) Romeo Dallair, Special Contributor to the Globe and Mail
When I learned the news last week about the Canadian veteran suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder who unsuccessfully sought help and then, overcome by his operational injury, apparently killed his family and himself – I was beyond distraught. The catastrophic case of Lionel Desmond could not serve as a more powerful warning to the senior policy-makers in our country. But will it be enough?
I have spent decades fighting for injured veterans, including myself, as we continue to destroy ourselves and too many others in our wake. The wars that soldiers fight do not end when we return home; they stay alive within us, and without urgent treatment our injury – PTSD – will destroy us. Just like an injury to the body will become gangrenous, fester, and infect, so too does this injury to our brains and moral centre. But unlike most other injuries, PTSD deeply affects the entire family as well; in this case, fatally.
The scale of the damage and the depth of the destruction that deployment in today’s complex conflicts can wreak is almost incomprehensible. Lionel Desmond’s actions were reprehensible; but, so too was the lack of care he and his family received when he returned from his mission. This was a soldier lost in a system that is grievously inadequate to handle the load and complexity of these injuries or to provide the urgent support required for vets and their families. With a chain of command out of the picture, and an underfunded veterans department strangled by regulations, our system is wholly unprepared for this postwar demand. As a result, injured vets, both in and out of service, continue to be shunted aside, falling into the support cracks, flailing for help.
This is an urgent message that must be heeded: The casualties of past wars continue to mount even as we are preparing for the next conflict. Military-weapons upgrades, the introduction of new tactics, and preparations of troops to face the next threat are all getting a heavy dose of essential funding and priority. However, penny-pinching resource allocations and prohibitive restrictions around support to casualties of the last fight clearly have devastating effects. Care for our current injured members sets the start line for the total commitment of our soldiers and their families for the next round in the defence of peace and human rights.
Nova Scotia – where Lionel Desmond lived and where I am now based with the Roméo Dallaire Child Soldiers Initiative – is home to a disproportionate number of veterans. To utilize the strengths and skills of injured vets, while giving them a second chance to serve, the Dallaire Initiative has instituted a training program – through which Canadian military veterans assist in the dissemination of a new doctrine to reduce battle casualties and help eradicate the use of child soldiers globally.
The Canadian government would do well to follow suit: to seek out injured veterans and provide them whatever tools they require to rejoin society after their missions, for all our sakes.
As I wrote in my last book:
“I find myself empty now, at a loss for words. Over the past two years, I mustered what I had left to share the details of my own struggles with PTSD. I turn to those pages now.
It was not easy for me to share my vulnerabilities so candidly, but the dark side of living with PTSD has to come out. If it does not, the world will continue to hear of us only when we commit suicide. … Courageous soldiers serving in today’s difficult and ethically ambiguous missions can and should be treated for PTSD at its first signs; the Forces should anticipate the need for treatment in order to head the damage off, not just wait until a soldier is desperate enough to seek help. And we – meaning all of us – need to shoulder our share of the burden and recognize the contribution made by our soldiers when they undertake such missions on behalf of humanity. We need to insist that they are supported when they come home.
The brain is as vital to life as any organ in the human body. To treat an injury to the brain as less urgent, less in need of care and compassion than other, more obvious types of injury is misguided and ignorant. Our efforts to treat our veterans with PTSD must be comparable to our efforts to repair damaged hearts, provide timely kidney transplants, avoid amputations or restore eyesight. … Only when we truly understand the injury and take action to mitigate its impact will we be able to say that we recognize the real costs of peacekeeping, peacemaking and war.”
---
Lieutenant-General (ret) Roméo Dallaire is the founder of the Roméo Dallaire Child Soldiers Initiative at Dalhousie University, and author of Waiting for First Light: My Ongoing Battle with PTSD.
When I learned the news last week about the Canadian veteran suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder who unsuccessfully sought help and then, overcome by his operational injury, apparently killed his family and himself – I was beyond distraught. The catastrophic case of Lionel Desmond could not serve as a more powerful warning to the senior policy-makers in our country. But will it be enough?
I have spent decades fighting for injured veterans, including myself, as we continue to destroy ourselves and too many others in our wake. The wars that soldiers fight do not end when we return home; they stay alive within us, and without urgent treatment our injury – PTSD – will destroy us. Just like an injury to the body will become gangrenous, fester, and infect, so too does this injury to our brains and moral centre. But unlike most other injuries, PTSD deeply affects the entire family as well; in this case, fatally.
The scale of the damage and the depth of the destruction that deployment in today’s complex conflicts can wreak is almost incomprehensible. Lionel Desmond’s actions were reprehensible; but, so too was the lack of care he and his family received when he returned from his mission. This was a soldier lost in a system that is grievously inadequate to handle the load and complexity of these injuries or to provide the urgent support required for vets and their families. With a chain of command out of the picture, and an underfunded veterans department strangled by regulations, our system is wholly unprepared for this postwar demand. As a result, injured vets, both in and out of service, continue to be shunted aside, falling into the support cracks, flailing for help.
This is an urgent message that must be heeded: The casualties of past wars continue to mount even as we are preparing for the next conflict. Military-weapons upgrades, the introduction of new tactics, and preparations of troops to face the next threat are all getting a heavy dose of essential funding and priority. However, penny-pinching resource allocations and prohibitive restrictions around support to casualties of the last fight clearly have devastating effects. Care for our current injured members sets the start line for the total commitment of our soldiers and their families for the next round in the defence of peace and human rights.
Nova Scotia – where Lionel Desmond lived and where I am now based with the Roméo Dallaire Child Soldiers Initiative – is home to a disproportionate number of veterans. To utilize the strengths and skills of injured vets, while giving them a second chance to serve, the Dallaire Initiative has instituted a training program – through which Canadian military veterans assist in the dissemination of a new doctrine to reduce battle casualties and help eradicate the use of child soldiers globally.
The Canadian government would do well to follow suit: to seek out injured veterans and provide them whatever tools they require to rejoin society after their missions, for all our sakes.
As I wrote in my last book:
“I find myself empty now, at a loss for words. Over the past two years, I mustered what I had left to share the details of my own struggles with PTSD. I turn to those pages now.
It was not easy for me to share my vulnerabilities so candidly, but the dark side of living with PTSD has to come out. If it does not, the world will continue to hear of us only when we commit suicide. … Courageous soldiers serving in today’s difficult and ethically ambiguous missions can and should be treated for PTSD at its first signs; the Forces should anticipate the need for treatment in order to head the damage off, not just wait until a soldier is desperate enough to seek help. And we – meaning all of us – need to shoulder our share of the burden and recognize the contribution made by our soldiers when they undertake such missions on behalf of humanity. We need to insist that they are supported when they come home.
The brain is as vital to life as any organ in the human body. To treat an injury to the brain as less urgent, less in need of care and compassion than other, more obvious types of injury is misguided and ignorant. Our efforts to treat our veterans with PTSD must be comparable to our efforts to repair damaged hearts, provide timely kidney transplants, avoid amputations or restore eyesight. … Only when we truly understand the injury and take action to mitigate its impact will we be able to say that we recognize the real costs of peacekeeping, peacemaking and war.”
---
Lieutenant-General (ret) Roméo Dallaire is the founder of the Roméo Dallaire Child Soldiers Initiative at Dalhousie University, and author of Waiting for First Light: My Ongoing Battle with PTSD.
Halifax to get new Armoury for Reserves
By: David Pugliese, Ottawa Citizen
To meet the current operational requirements of the Army Reserve in Halifax, the federal government has announced it will construct a new armoury at Willow Park.
The cost is $66 million and construction is expected to be completed by the fall of 2018.
The new armoury will support 36 Service Battalion, 36 Signal Regiment, and 33 Field Ambulance by bringing them together into one facility, according to a news release from the Department of National Defence.
In addition, another $21 million will be spent on the next phase of the rehabilitation of the North Park Armoury in Halifax, upgrades to various naval jetties at the Halifax Dockyard, as well as pavement work at the Department of National Defence’s Shearwater airfield, according to the news release.
To meet the current operational requirements of the Army Reserve in Halifax, the federal government has announced it will construct a new armoury at Willow Park.
The cost is $66 million and construction is expected to be completed by the fall of 2018.
The new armoury will support 36 Service Battalion, 36 Signal Regiment, and 33 Field Ambulance by bringing them together into one facility, according to a news release from the Department of National Defence.
In addition, another $21 million will be spent on the next phase of the rehabilitation of the North Park Armoury in Halifax, upgrades to various naval jetties at the Halifax Dockyard, as well as pavement work at the Department of National Defence’s Shearwater airfield, according to the news release.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)