Page 1






CEFCOM commander LGen Stuart Beare

Publication Mail Registration Number: 40052410


fp_006108_timberwolf_one_leader_vanguard_00 1

1/23/12 3:27 PM

2 3:27 PM


APRIL/mAY 2012

fEATURES 10 Expeditionary understanding Preparing for the unpredictable An interview with LGen Stuart Beare

14 Integrated system

Networking the dismounted soldier by Chris Thatcher

16 Soldier systems

Technology roadmap closes capability gap by Peter Graham

18 CCV and TAPV


Key petals in a FLICK future by Ian Coutts

24 Special: Innovative solutions From robotics to waste disposal by Stephan Dubowski

30 Buying better

Seeking a defence industrial strategy An interview with Tim Page

34 Agile defence



The need for smart, rapid acquisition by Roger de Montfort

36 Unintended consequences

The problem with single-point accountability by Louise Mercier

38 Targeted attack


Spear phishing for intelligence An interview with Dean Turner

42 Stealth observers

Refitting the Victoria class submarines by Tim Dunne

WWW.VANGUARDCANADA.COm IT’S IN THE ARCHIVES Missed an issue? Misplaced an article? You’ll find them all online: interviews with government, military and industry leaders, and articles on the programs and policies of Canada’s security and defence community.

LETTERS We welcome feedback on articles and story ideas. Email THE FORUM FOR CANADA’S SECURITY AND DEFENCE COMMUNITY





Op Mobile: Breaking new ground

Seeking the ultimate wrecker






CEFCOM commander LGen Stuart Beare

Publication Mail Registration Number: 40052410


COVER STORY Lieutenant Andrew McCuish, Reconnaissance Squadron, 1st Battalion, RCR Battle Group, radios a situation report during a dismounted patrol in the Panjwa’i District of Kandahar Province. Photo: Corporal Shilo Adamson


Perspectives on a complex conflict


Smart defense and the Canadian Forces

APRIL/MAY 2012 3

E editor’s note EDITOR Chris Thatcher CONTRIBUTORS Peter Graham Ian Coutts Stephan Dubowski Roger de Montfort Louise Mercier Tim Dunne Roy Thomas Philippe Lagasse EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD LGen (Ret’d) Bill Leach LGen (Ret’d) George Macdonald VAdm (Ret’d) Greg Maddison LGen (Ret’d) Michel Maisonneuve SALES VICE PRESIDENT PUBLIC SECTOR SALES Terri Pavelic (905) 727-4091 ext. 225 National Account Manager Marcello Sukhdeo (905) 727-4091 ext. 224 MARKETING DIRECTOR Mary Malofy ART & PRODUCTION ART DIRECTOR Elena Pankova SUBSCRIPTIONS AND ADDRESS CHANGES CIRCULATION DIRECTOR James Watson (705) 812-0611 CORPORATE PUBLISHER John R. Jones

Publisher’s Mail Agreement: 40052410 Return undeliverable Canadian addresses to circulation dept. 24-4 Vata Court, Aurora, ON L4G 4B6 Vanguard magazine is published 6 times per year by Promotive Communications Inc. All opinions expressed herein are those of the contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher or any person or organization associated with the magazine. Letters, submissions, comments and suggested topics are welcome, and should be sent to REPRINT INFORMATION: Reproduction or photocopying is prohibited without the publisher’s prior written consent. High quality reprints of articles and additional copies of the magazine are available through PRIVACY POLICY: We do not sell our mailing list or share any confidential information on our subscribers. VANGUARD OFFICE 24-4 Vata Court, Aurora, ON L4G 4B6 Phone: (905) 727-4091 Fax: (905) 727-4428

4 APRIL/MAY 2012

Keeping pace Speaking at a recent summit on military vehicles, Michael Szymczak, the director of science and technology (Land) for Defence R&D Canada, commented on how many defence technologies are following Moore’s law, advancing at increasingly rapid rates. What that might mean for army vehicles remains to be seen. While the current emphasis appears to be on weight and size (driven by the need for protection and survivability), he suggested future vehicles might be lighter, faster and more coordinated, and supported by unmanned ground systems. In keeping with Moore’s law, unmanned systems might be incorporated more swiftly than many expect, he noted. (On the air side, there is an argument to be made that by the time the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter comes into full service, a company will have already fielded a far more advanced unmanned system.) This, of course, poses an incredible challenge for defence procurement. The rate of change is far greater than military systems – and perhaps more importantly, military budgets – can match. How to keep pace? In this issue, we look at the challenge from a number of perspectives. For one, the Integrated Soldier System Project, intended to network the dismounted soldier, is deliberately designed as a three-cycle program to incorporate technological change. More specific to procurement, Roger de Montfort describes the principles behind a PricewaterhouseCoopers report on agile defence. Not only do militaries require adaptability, innovation, collaboration, visibility and velocity to be able to respond to and counter the wide range of security threats, so too do defence procurement systems. He highlights the concept of smart, rapid acquisition. We also feature a special section on innovative technologies, many identified through the Canadian Innovation Commercialization Program. Innovation is at the heart of this larger challenge, perhaps spurring the Moore’s law effect even as it enhances military capability. Much of this, however, can be aided by a comprehensive defence industrial strategy. Tim Page, president of CADSI, discusses the association’s efforts to secure a strategy that would encourage greater investment in innovation and, of course, more effective and efficient procurement. The government has already launched some notable initiatives, though Louise Mercier offers a cautionary note about unintended consequences of such efforts, namely the application of single point of accountability. However, we lead off with an interview with LGen Stu Beare. Given the nature of its missions, Canadian Expeditionary Force Command may be the most in need of smart, rapid procurement, supported by a defence industrial strategy. But as he looks out into the future, LGen Beare’s greatest requirement is preparedness.

Chris Thatcher, Editor


A new generation strengthens the whole family.

As the only company in the world delivering 5th generation fighter engines, Pratt & Whitney’s F135 engine powering the F-35 Lightning II is in production. Our technological advancements ensure the most affordable life cycle solutions to meet the challenges of today’s military – while enhancing the safety and reliability of our entire family of military engines. Learn more at It’s in our power.™

26545_CTOL_Vanguard_F35.indd 1

3/16/12 4:47 PM


op mobile: Breaking new ground If deploying an air wing to Kandahar was a significant step for the Royal Canadian Air Force, Operation Mobile over Libya tested its “readiness and capabilities as never before,” according to LGen André Deschamps, commander of the RCAF. Less than 24 hours after the UN passed resolution 1973, CF-18s were en route to Italy, followed in short order by Polaris air-to-air refuellers and Globemasters carrying personnel and equipment. The air force also employed Aurora long-range patrol aircraft, Hercules refuellers and transport aircraft, as well as a Sea King helicopter from a navy frigate in the Mediterranean. In addition, CF personnel flew on NATO and U.S. AWACS aircraft. And, of course, LGen Charlie Bouchard commanded the entire NATO mission. In a presentation to the annual Air Force Outlook, Deschamps noted several operational “firsts,” including the use of new Joint Direct Attack Munitions systems by CF-18s in a successful attack on a ammunition storage facility (until then, the Hornets had been armed with laser-guided bombs); and Auroras carrying out ground surveillance as well as targeting support. “They provided critical information to coalition forces and clearly demonstrated the exceptional capabilities of the aircraft’s new Overland Equipment Mission Suite,” Deschamps said. “Our operations in Libya also illustrated clearly that the requirement for precision in combat missions continues to grow,” he emphasized. “With the right weapons, intelligence and tactics we are seeking to carry out targeting with pinpoint accuracy, engaging threats while avoiding harming civilians or damaging important civilian infrastructure.” According to Postmedia, Canada dropped 695 bombs during the campaign at a cost of roughly $25 million. Each bomb cost between $34,000 and $43,000, according to DND. Almost all were Paveway II laser-guided smart bombs; 495 were 500-pound bombs while 188 were the larger 2000-pound version.

6 APRIL/MAY 2012

ccV hits another road bump The Close Combat Vehicle program has hit yet another roadblock. In late April, the three companies contending for the program were advised that all bids had been rejected and a new Request for Proposal had been issued. The three contending firms – General Dynamics Land Systems Canada, Nexter and BAE Systems Hagglunds – were summoned to a meeting with procurement officials on March 30, only to have it cancelled at the last minute amid conflicting reports about the reason why. A DND spokesperson said at the time that “the bidders conference was cancelled in order to allow more time to assess the fairness monitor’s advice in the procurement process.” As Ian Coutts explains elsewhere in this issue, the CCV is viewed as a key piece of the army’s future family of land combat vehicles. Contract award was scheduled for 2012 – many expected the announcement this spring or summer – with initial delivery in 2014. All three contending vehicles had completed evaluation in December at the Aberdeen test centre in Maryland. According to media reports, however, the army would like to modify aspects of the statement of requirements. The $2 billion program originally called for a military off-the-shelf acquisition of 108 CCV in two variants, with an option for up to 30 more, plus a through-life in-service support contract. The CCV project was slowed in late 2009 and ramped up again in mid 2010 when officials reject all bids and had to issue a new solicitation.

knowledge transfer: making military skill sets portable It would seem scaling back on Canadian Forces personnel might be an inevitable consequence of the post-Budget 2012 era. But in its search for “efficiencies,” the government would be wise to ensure it does not repeat the mistakes of the 1990s. Dr. Doug Bland, a professor at Queen’s University and the retired chair of the Defence Management Studies program, reminded participants at a recent workshop that slowing recruitment and increasing the rate of retirements through buyouts invariably creates a hole that will drift through the system for years. The workshop was part of a series hosted by the Institute on Governance in partnership with on modernizing the public service. Titled “The Changing Face of the Canadian Forces,” it attempted to initiate a dialogue on some of the CF’s future skill set needs as it adjusts to new missions, and the portability of those skills as service members transition to civilian life. Much attention has been placed on addressing the needs of wounded veterans, but far less has been done to help healthy veterans transfer a wealth of skill and experience into civilian jobs. Departing a culture of “we” for a culture of “I” can be extremely difficult for some, said Randy Plunkett, a former senior master sergeant with the U.S. Air Force and the director of government partnerships for In fact, even the term “vet” can be a barrier, he noted. Although a veteran is defined as anyone who has served honourably in the CF or RCMP, many under the age of 30 are uncomfortable with the label.

sit rep


Re-thinking the Joint Strike Fighter The release of the Auditor General’s 2012 spring report has increased the number of people lining up to oppose the acquisition of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. In April, a former CF-18 fleet manager, Col (Ret’d) Paul Maillet, told a press conference that “Canada should suspend its participation or withdraw from the F-35 consortium until the decision is made on how to proceed.” “When I see the term ‘development’ used in the F-35 procurement, I know the government is facing significant performance risks, headaches and much higher costs than anticipated,” he said. The Auditor General raised a number of red flags about the F-35 program, including his belief that there were “significant weaknesses in the decision-making process used by National Defence in acquiring the F-35.” Both Public Works and DND disagree with the AG’s conclusions. In response, however, the government took some dramatic steps, freezing the funding envelope and establishing a new secretariat within PWGSC, first called the F-35 Secretariat and later amended to the new fighter aircraft secretariat, with a lead coordinating role. Taking a page from the shipbuilding strategy, a committee of deputy ministers was created to provide oversight. The government also ordered DND to provide more frequent updates on the cost and performance schedule of the Joint Strike Fighter pro-

gram, which seem to be changing by the week. It also said Treasury Board Secretariat would commission “an independent review of DND’s acquisition and sustainment project assumptions and potential costs for the F-35” before the project receives approval. Although ministers have since distanced themselves from a firm commitment to the JSF, in the weeks leading up to the AG’s report, Julian Fantino, the Associate Minister of National Defence, told an industry audience the F-35 was “the only aircraft available that meets our requirements.”



the VBCI will ke

eping, bat to peaceke m o c ty si n te n -i ure. From high n safe and sec tio c se y tr n fa n in entire Canadia



APRIL/MAY 2012 7

I INSIDE INDUSTRY Seeking the ultimate wrecker The acquisition of new tactical patrol and close combat vehicles as well as upgraded LAVs has created a little-discussed problem: how to recover them when they break down or are damaged in combat. As the army takes on several fleets of new combat and logistics vehicles, both lightweight and armoured, it also has to plan for their recovery, and the increased weight of all the proposed vehicles as well as the upgraded LAVs is beyond the capability of current systems. “The status quo is not an option,” LCol Tim Hall, project director for Tactical Support Vehicle Systems, told a recent military vehicles summit hosted by IDGA. Unfortunately, nor is there a one-size-fits-all solution, a point underscored by a study conducted for the army in March 2011 at the Prairie Agricultural Machinery Institute in Saskatchewan. Complicating matters even more, the team assigned to the Enhanced Recovery Capability project can’t really begin to define wrecker solutions until it knows exactly what vehicles the army will be acquiring. That’s especially the case with the Close Combat Vehicle. If the winning bid is BAE Systems Hägglunds’ tracked CV90, recovery will be handled by the same system as for the Leopard II tanks. However, if it is Nexter’s VBCI or GDLS-C Piranha 5, both wheeled, then the team may have to find a specific CCV solution or one that can recover the TAPV, LAV and CCV. “If it’s wheeled, it will be a challenge,” Hall admitted. He said the project team has yet to be declared an official project office, but will likely seek to engage with industry in the next six to nine months.

was not a great deal of optimism, even within PWGSC or among the shipyards, due to past history with regional politics. But as Scott Leslie, director general of the Marine Sector Acquisition Branch at PWGSC, recently related to the Ottawa chapter of the Canadian Association of Management Consultants, while some “thought it would go down in flames,” extensive consultation with the yards and the use of outside assessors such as FMI, KPMG and a fairness monitor, as well as oversight from a seven-member deputy minister committee, ensured a well-managed and highly-praised process. Though it was not unique, it was certainly unprecedented, Leslie said. Determining the yards, of course, was just the first step. Proof will be if the Navy and Coast Guard get ships at cost and in timely manner, and we continue to see a thriving shipbuilding industry.

dumping batteries for wearable power

Bidding to be prime The federal government may have determined which shipyards will build its large vessels for the Navy and the Coast Guard under the National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy, but there still remains the open question of who will be the prime contractors on both the combat and non-combat packages. Negotiations are underway with Irving and Seaspan to address the issue and determine the system integrators. With an estimated 65 percent of the value of the ships in the combat suite, some fear things could still get messy. It’s worth remembering that when the NSPS was introduced, there 8 APRIL/MAY 2012

Power generation and storage: it was a common theme throughout the Soldier System Technology Roadmap process in 2010. From a workshop dedicated to the topic to presentations on future sensors, weapons and communications, eventually the discussion always reverted to power. Dismounted soldiers often carry over 50 batteries to power portable devices, disposing of most after using less than half of their life. The added weight and mounting waste and cost must be addressed in future soldier systems. In February, DND took a key step, issuing a call for a wearable integrated power system. The RFP said the department’s vision is “a low-weight, energy-efficient backbone for data and power exchange upon which soldiers can easily plug in mission specific devices.” DND has sponsored R&D efforts in the past, including PowerWalk, an athletic knee brace-like system by Bionic Power, an R&D venture based at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, that generates an average of 12 watts of electricity walking at a average pace. More recently, scientists with BAE Systems demonstrated what they call “structural batteries,” a merger of battery chemistries with composite materials that can be moulded to form the structure of a device. The device can be recharged from conventional or renewable power sources and might eventually be incorporated into fabrics.

Defence_Feb_2012_Layout 1 2012/02/21 11:35 AM Page 1

Inside industry




L O N D O N , O N TA R I O , C A N A D A

Allen-Vanguard and Track24 Defence have developed a new

system for automatically sending near real-time, beyond-lineof-sight, machine-to-machine updates to electronic counter measure signal jamming solutions. General Dynamics Canada has unveiled a new ultra-rugged

Global Military Contractors

SD8000 family of smart display products with a quad-core Intel Core processor for military vehicles.

Highly Skilled and Experienced Workforce Diverse and Mature Supply Chain

Rheinmetall Canada, a teammate of Textron for the TAPV program, signed a MOU with Unsicast Industries of Quebec for possible machine and parts fabrication on the Textron TAPV.

Key Competencies in Land Vehicles & Components for the Army

Montreal-based Ultra Electronics, TCS, received a $3.4 million order for Electronic Warfare equipment from the Defence Avionics Research Establishment in India. The company will supply a shelter-based mobile simulator system to evaluate aircraft EW radar capability. The 16th of 17 CC-130Js landed at CFB Trenton in April. Lockheed Martin says the final J-model Hercules will be delivered in May.

Over 40 defence related industries employing 12,000 + skilled people trained to military spec and QA including: General Dynamics Land Systems Canada Kongsberg Protech Systems Canada Fraunhofer International Composites Research Centre Armatec Survivability Militex Coatings

MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates sent the federal government a strong signal following the March 2012 Budge, saying it believes the “budget does not include the funds required to continue the RADARSAT Constellation Mission as currently envisioned.” MDA said that because of the level of uncertainty, it would accelerate steps to restructure its work force. L-3 MAS received a contract from Boeing to provide technical publication services for the new fleet of CH-147F Chinooks. The contract includes language translation for aircrew technical publications products, as well as data conversion, language translation and development of interactive electronic technical publications.

Since the Canadian Forces School of Electrical and Mechanical Engineering implemented Vancouver-based NGRAIN’s 5KW Power Generator Virtual Task Trainer last February, nearly every student in the Electro-Optics course has passed the generator troubleshooting and maintenance course, which previously had a failure rate of 20-25 percent. Burlington-based L-3 WESCAM will supply the Irish Coast Guard with its MX-15 electro-optical and infrared (EO/IR) imaging systems for installation on S-92 search and rescue (SAR) aircraft.

STRATEGIC LOCATION Midway between three US border crossing 1/2 way between Detroit, MI and Toronto, ON Proximity to US Army’s major development centres London International Airport 24 hr. Canada Customs and Air Cargo


Heather Pilot 1.519.661.4957

APRIL/MAY 2012 9


Preparedness: It’s a word often overshadowed by a more common military term, readiness. But in a world of increasing instability and unpredictability, it is crucial to understand the security environment in which the Canadian Forces might operate, and to create the necessary conditions for their success. Along with conducting 16 current operations around the globe, “preparedness” is now a core function of Canadian Expeditionary Force Command and a key area of investment. CEFCOM commander Lieutenant-General Stuart Beare spoke with editor Chris Thatcher about improving preparedness through understanding and engagement.


UNPREDICTABLE Q You have emphasized “understanding” and “preparedness” in recent presentations: what does that mean to CEFCOM? We are committed to the effective provision of Canadian Forces contributions to multilateral and bilateral interventions. And our interests are really three things. First, that our people performing those missions are safe. Second, that our contribution is keeping pace with the needs and changes of the mission, that we’re evolving with the mission and adapting our structure and our people to it over time. And third, that the mission itself is effective, relevant and credible. To use an illustration, in the Balkans pre-NATO, in two of the three cases we fell short. From 10 APRIL/MAY 2012

the top down the UN mandate wasn’t credible or relevant to the security condition at the time, which meant it was not credible to the factions, which put the mission at risk and then put our people at risk. So we are not just a passive provider of bodies to other people’s ideas; we’re actively engaged in making sure the idea within which they are participating makes sense. And that is a template we can use virtually anywhere. We do not aspire to control the missions we engage in, nor do we have a mandate to do so, but we have an obligation to understand them. So my key leader in theatre has a mandate to understand the mission at large, not just do his day job. Mission command-

ers have the responsibility to provide that understanding of the campaign and be a vehicle for us to shape and influence it where necessary. There is an explicit expression from me to provide us with a lens into the full breadth of the mission so that when we hear or read about the mission from the UN or open sources, we have a more thorough understanding of the mission dynamics. CEFCOM then provides that strategic lens, that understanding to decision makers and stakeholders. They can then use it to put into context the shocks and the setbacks, such as the Koran burning, that we will continue to see in incredibly challenging missions. If you don’t understand, you don’t have context.

Defence D Q Fit the government and military’s Global Engagement Strategy into that. How do you define it? Through defence and military engagement, promote Canadian national interests in the world, within means and within the policy boundaries of the government of Canada: that’s my definition. So, achieve success in Afghanistan through NATO; establish defence relationships and cooperation with Gulf and Middle Eastern partners, new and traditional. Qatar, the UAE – notwithstanding Camp Mirage – and Kuwait are all regional actors and in some cases new partners. We need to understand them; they need to understand us. We invest in regional stability through their development. In places where cooperation may be required in the future, establish the ability to cooperate military to military. Who would have thought that Gulf state air forces would be flying with the RCAF over Libya or maritime forces sailing with western maritime forces? That kind of interoperability is in our national interest. In Africa, continue to invest in the capacity, effectiveness and sustainability of African defence and security forces in those countries where it is in the national interest to do so. And in the Americas, we’re not worried about civil war breaking out, but we have clear national interests as they relate to organized crime and the drug trade. So the strategy is about using defence and military means, but it goes well beyond operations.

Q Are there specific areas of focus? If there are three trends we have seen in the last 18 months across what some characterize as the arc of instability – the band from North Africa through the Middle East to Southwest Asia – instability is on the rise, uncertainty is on the rise and unpredictability is on the rise in many sectors, including security. And everybody is tracking: the Libyan aftermath; Egypt and what comes next; the Sinai on the Arab-Israeli border; Israel and its relationship with the Palestinians and its neighbours; Syria; Turkey and its regional view; the Iranian challenges; Iraq and what might follow; Yemen; Somalia; the Sudan… Where there is unpredictability, we need to enhance our understanding of what’s playing out. Government and its agencies will do that in their lanes, be it economic,

diplomatic, security, crime, terrorism, you name it. They’ll be trying to enhance their understanding. I’m trying to do the same, but from the lens of the region: what are the trends from a defence and security context as they could potentially affect Canada’s national interests? The global engagement strategy helps us understand what they are.

Q Is there a specific nexus between CEFCOM, Defence Intelligence and other intelligence agencies around this? There is more of a unified effort to create understanding because there is more urgency. Syria is incredibly galvanizing right now, not to plan for any contingency but to understand the defence and security dynamics at play – who are the actors within that dynamic, be they rebels, indigenous security forces, governments, proxy actors, international criminal networks, terrorism organizations? We also need to understand the defence and security interests of the regional actors and their defence institutions – what’s their posture? – and the interests of our traditional and new partners. And then which relationships do we want to ensure are established to facilitate that understanding and maintain the capacity to respond to crises or prepare for contingencies? Good relationships before a crisis are never a bad thing.

operations but on the possibility of future conflict or crisis and the potential for response. It’s relations; it’s networks. They help us create military-to-military relationships and raise that floor of understanding. Our other means of engagement is through our liaison officers with our traditional partners. We have LOs in the U.S. combatant commands and with the Permanent Joint Headquarters in the U.K. and the Centre de Planification et de Conduite des Opérations in France. They provide us a lens into the disposition and interests of our friends, military to military. We can also use the footprint of our wholeof-government partners in those regions to keep us smart about interests beyond the military domain, to provide us with context about relationships at large before we engage with our military partners. If I add it all up, it means more understanding and a better engagement network, which equals better preparedness. And preparedness is all about being better positioned to provide that understanding to decision makers. Preparedness is about On patrol in Afghanistan

Q How is CEFCOM accomplishing that? We have become more strategic in how we use attachés. Their focus is not on current

CP 140 Auroras on first mission over Libya. Photo: by Mathieu St-Amour.

APRIL/MAY 2012 11

D DEfENCE The stand up of the operational commands was well timed. It allowed us to design the how-to while we were doing it. having pre-existing relationships and partners so you can operationalize your command and control, your intelligence and sustain the frameworks were you to commit forces. It also means being better positioned to translate a generic contingency plan from non-combatant evacuation into a regional-specific, event-specific action.

Q Has the relationship between the military attaché and the embassy changed? That is exactly it. The defence attaches are part of that network and it is completely transparent to the embassies. Our interests are complimentary to the government of Canada. A good example is Kuwait. The embassy in Kuwait now has an assistant CDA whose secondary duty is oversight of the logistics hub at Ali Al Salem Air Base, which provides us the capacity to sustain our effort in Afghanistan. We have an explicit purpose for that defence engagement. It is creating opportunities for new relationships, including military, that will be explored, chief-to-chief. At the end of the day, I now have the phone number to my counterpart in the Kuwaiti armed forces who, in the case of a crisis, I can call. I wouldn’t have that if I didn’t have that connection into the embassy. Defence attachés and liaison officers are key to this.

Q This obviously requires more than CEFCOM. Do you have the necessary level of inter-departmental cooperation you need to deliver on this? In the missions we are in today, yes. Codifying this idea of preparedness has to be done. It is written into the CEFCOM concept of operations and it will continue through to CF Transformation for operations in the future. It is codified today for domestic ops, if you think about it; our posture is established and reinforced routinely by current law and policy. We have relationships with 12 APRIL/MAY 2012

the provinces, with national security organizations, and we prepare contingencies. That is a well-established whole-of-government framework. It also exists for NORAD in the continental context. But each international engagement may have a unique policy framework. Making preparedness a normal idea with whole-of-government partners is work in progress.

Q Is the intent to explore military-tomilitary assistance along the lines of Canada Command’s recently adopted western hemisphere strategy? We are certainly positioned to understand their ambition for capacity building. If you look at it from the western hemisphere perspective, shared security is probably the first instance with likeminded partners. Plenty of countries are not looking for our help, but are interested in security cooperation that is complimentary, [for example] interoperability and security cooperation exercises with Chile. Where it makes sense and it is within our capacity to do so, we should entertain it. The other is capacity development. You can certainly see that in the Caribbean basin. A lot of the intervention there is about supporting the emerging capacity of sovereign states and their defence forces. Jamaica is a great example. Invest for their benefit and ultimately satisfy Canadian interests in regional security. I want to make sure that as we are building up our capacity to deliver the force, we are generating more understanding of where and why and how to deploy it effectively. Our engagement with Jamaica, helping their joint operational centre for the Jamaican defence forces, that’s a natural hub that we can compliment if Canadian forces are required to respond to a crises or emergency in the Caribbean basin. The more capacity a country has, the less requirement there is for us to intervene on

their behalf. If you look at Africa, the majority of engagement is capacity building. As you swing through to Asia, I don’t think the Chinese are looking at us for capacity development. But perhaps we want better understanding, military to military, from a defence and security cooperation perspective.

Q One of the reasons for the stand up of CEFCOM was to ensure a distinct Canadian footprint on missions. That’s certainly evident in Afghanistan and was true in Libya; is it the case elsewhere? It may not make the news but we are inside the tent, part of the mission discourse and the discourse between the mission and its international headquarters – UN, NATO or otherwise. In Haiti, for example, Col Stephen Charpentier is the chief of staff to MINUSTAH and able to maintain a Canadian understanding of the leadership orientation of that mission at large. That’s also the case with the Multinational Force and Observers in the Sinai and Canada’s contribution to the Office of the United States Security Coordinator in Jerusalem. The stand up of the operational commands in 2005-06 was incredibly well timed. It allowed us to design the how-to while we were actually doing it: how to do operational support while delivering it, how to do effective command and control domestically and continentally while we were doing it at the Olympics, the G8, Haiti. And effective C2 oversight in missions around the world, including interacting at the theatre level with the mission designers and architects while the demand to do that was on the rise. I’ve heard the expression operational tempo is down. I’d say the deployment tempo of the CF baseline is down, but the demand for an understanding, the demand for engagement, the demand for preparedness is not down. If anything it is going up because the uncertainty, the instability, the unpredictability are going up. We don’t measure the load on the operational command in terms of numbers of troops deployed, the load is on how many places do you want to understand better, how many places do you need to invest in relationships, with a view to enhancing our preparedness for crisis and contingency.

S Soldier Systems

Networking the dismounted soldier


hen Jonathan Herbert first encountered the forerunner of the Integrated Soldier System Project (ISSP) he was a skeptic. At the time in the early 2000s, he was a platoon commander leading his team through an exercise in the McKenna MOUT (military operations in urban terrain) site at Ft. Benning, Georgia. Although his platoon received new communications gear, the defence scientists conducting the exercise were less interested in how well the technology worked then in how the soldiers processed information. “We were naysayers,” Major Herbert confesses. “They gave us some rudimentary personal radios for short-range transmission and rudimentary PDAs with GPS embedded, which gave us blue force tracking. But at the end of the four weeks, when the scientists tried to take them back, we didn’t want to give them up. We were so much better with them. To a man, we all said, when is this coming to the army?” That Soldier Information Requirements Technology Demonstration (SIREQ TD) project, which spanned five years and involved laboratory and field studies, simulation, and over 70 scientific studies at the McKenna site, laid the foundation for the ISSP. Herbert, who now serves as ISSP project director within the Directorate of Land Requirements – “I was offered this two years ago and jumped at it” – says the program is intended to provide an integrated suite of equipment to network the dismounted soldier. “We have networked vehicles and operations centres and command posts, but the dismounted solider, once they are out of a vehicle, they are limited to a personal role radio,” he said. “The key is a solution that is truly integrated, however many form factors or boxes that may be. They must truly work together and be driven off a single backbone, a computer that can provide that network for dismounted soldiers.” Like many allies, Canada has been researching its future solider systems for over a decade. But while the army and Defence R&D Canada drew from the experiences of the U.S., U.K., Australia, Germany, France and other NATO partners, they also adopted a unique approach through the SIREQ TD, essentially ensuring that the utility of new technology was empirically validated. While many nations focused on the integration of technological capability, human factors research played a critical role in SIREQ 14 APRIL/MAY 2012

TD, particularly the ability to take in and process information. (Human Systems Inc. of Guelph, Ont., which has worked extensively with the U.S. Marine Corps, was involved with the project from its inception.) The emphasis was not on hardware per se, but on performance parameters. “There was a fear that we would overload the dismounted soldier with information and it would take away from his or her primary job of security and observation,” Herbert explained. “In fact, we see it as enhancing the soldier and SIREQ TD proved it scientifically. We don’t give ourselves enough credit. We can take in a lot of information, park it and transfer it to other people as we see fit.”

Key components Earlier this year, the ISSP went out to tender following a complex four-year definition phase. The request for proposals is expected to close at the end of May, with the first deliverables timed to arrive in 2014 as the army begins its road to high readiness plan for close combat soldiers. Initial operating capability is expected by late 2015. Herbert stressed that the ISSP is a three-cycle project intended to keep pace as best as possible with technology spirals. While the current RFP focuses on the networked dismounted soldier, the second and third cycles will connect with the LCSS backbone, integrate with weapon and targeting systems, and better utilize information from unmanned systems and sensors. Cycle three will also seek innovative and more efficient dismounted portable power solutions. Cycle two will begin as soon as feedback is received on cycle one; cycle three is slated for 2016-17. The individual components of the first cycle will consist of a short-range, software based radio with a modular configuration so that wave forms can be adapted to the radios of allies; an audio display or in-ear solution (which also offers some noise reduction); and a small tactical display with GPS. Key to the software radios will be the ability to form ad hoc networks and a push-totalk device that soldiers can mount in a convenient location, as opposed to a device integrated into their weapon. The backbone to all of this will be a computer with the ability to fuse data from the various systems. Though integrated fire control at the individual soldier level is part of later versions, Herbert noted that commanders will have

SOLDIER SYSTEMS S the capacity to link to the current Coral CR thermal imager/laser range finder combination to better use fire control systems. “As our small arms program moves forward and we establish small arms fire control systems, we will fuse the two,” he said. Two critical factors in any soldier system are power and weight. Though a great deal of research has been conducted on portable renewable energy sources, Herbert said a rechargeable and nonrechargeable battery solution would suffice for cycle one. That likely means a system that will accept the ubiquitous AA battery. “We haven’t prescribed a form factor in our capabilities,” he noted, “we just demand that it be able to power a system for 2448 hours and be proven with a chargeable and non-rechargeable solution.” A concurrent research project driven by DRDC called Advanced Soldier Adaptive Power is examining alternative power solutions. As for weight, the solution cannot exceed legacy C4I soldier systems, which currently consist of a Dagger GPS, personal radio, flashlight and a laser range finder. Herbert said the load carriage requirement was removed from cycle one so that as the new equipment is tested, soldiers will focus their feedback “on the C41 and the network pieces, not the load carriage. Load carriage is almost like boots – it’s a very personal thing. So the DLR load carriage experts are testing the development of a Canadian modular fighting rig. It’s not the end solution but it is a steppingstone.” How all the components come together will be up to industry,

Hebert observed. “Cabling and connectors are the weak link of our integrated system. If you go with a one-piece integrated system, you are still going to have to cable your two displays off of that, and probably some sort of power source if it’s not built in. We’re not prescriptive, but to meet our weight and power budget, we’re most likely going to see a few boxes. All in all, there is a bit of room there for industry to play with.” Because there are so many aspects to the integrated system, Herbert expects bids to come from teams led by a prime rather than individual companies. The ISSP is tied to a larger operating concept known as Army 2021 and the notion of adaptive dispersed operations (ADO), which envisions soldiers dispersed in large or small numbers across a battle space. “We need to challenge industry,” Herbert acknowledged, “but we need to stay fast to our requirements as they relate to ADO. We need to aggregate and segregate, even at the section level, as the mission demands.” At the end of cycle one, the ISSP will deliver a level of information sharing that Herbert says is essential to meet the expectations of tomorrow’s dismounted soldiers. “Not only are we evaluating systems, we will establish a baseline of what we have now and then compare that to the eventual ISS. Thus, we will be able to turn to the commander of the army and say: with an integrated system your dismounted soldiers are now better at lethality or mobility by such and such a percentage over legacy equipment. That’s what we are aiming for.”


To develop innovative solutions that provide the comfort, protection and performance you need, we work backwards. First, we consider the requirements of the end user. Then we assess every element of design and apply the latest technology to develop comfortable, low-burden equipment so wearers can focus on the task at hand. Europe: +44 (0) 1695 727171

North America: +1 800.247.7257

© 2011 Scott Safety ®,®. All Rights Reserved. © Crown Copyright/MOD. Reproduced with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office

APRIL/MAY 2012 15

S Soldier Systems Peter Graham

is the project manager for the Soldier Systems Technology Roadmap.

Technology roadmap fills capability gap


lobal security threats always generate complex situations. These security threats will continue to require Canada to support and act within a coalition of nations, conducting expeditionary activities in diverse locations where failed and failing states have succumbed to insurgent pressure and internal political strife. Canadian soldiers will have to be able to face a future security environment that is highly volatile and uncertain. Adversaries are always working to undermine our efforts to protect international stability, and the threats they pose become even more varied. Future soldier systems research and development should be aligned to deliver integrated capabilities that harness the potential of networked technologies to improve situational awareness, target acquisition, handover and prosecution, as well as to increase the efficiency of command execution, act, shield and sustain activities. The Soldier Systems Technology Roadmap (SSTRM) was initiated in 2008 to support the development of technological advancements for the Canadian soldier of the future. While industry engagement was traditionally focused around the procurement process, the SSTRM improved the dialogue between industry and the Department of National Defence (DND) to discuss current capabilities as well as future requirements and technologies. The outcome created a roadmap for the future to guide the soldier system community of interest over the next 15 years in the areas of power, weapons effects, C4I, sensing, survivability/mobility, and human factors integration. The Soldier Systems Technology Roadmap: Capstone Report and Action Plan, a comprehensive articulation of future soldier capability gaps, related challenges, and potential technology solutions, was published in June 2011. From a government perspective, active engagement in roadmapping processes had a tendency to end once the roadmap and action plan were established. However, in the case of SSTRM, DND is attempting to move beyond planning into actual implementation. An oversight committee comprising government, industry and academic representation has been established to plan and oversee implementation.

Technology networks The continued networking and partnerships established by participants during the development of the capstone report and action plan is key to the future success of the SSTRM. While DND will continue to be actively engaged, the responsibility for Technology Networks (TNs) (formally known as technical sub-committees) has been transferred to the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries. Participation in the TN does not require CADSI membership and is open to large, medium and small enterprises, academia and 16 APRIL/MAY 2012

research organizations. The objective of the TN is to continue knowledge exchange, leading to routine updates of the roadmap. Key activities of the TN include: • providing a tool for the TNs to monitor, provide input and align with evolving future soldier system requirements; • providing a forum for industry, academia and government to discuss issues, challenges and opportunities of mutual interest; • formalizing the ability of government, industry and academia to network, make contacts and develop collaborative projects; and • providing a forum where information on government innovation programs can be discussed.

Research and development R&D is crucial to addressing the long-term capability gaps identified in the capstone report and action plan. One of the objectives of the SSTRM implementation is to assist the soldier system community of interest to access funding available through various innovation funding programs. Significant efforts have been made by the SSTRM Management Office to socialize the SSTRM initiative with relevant government funding programs that cover the innovation spectrum. In addition, DND will provide technical feedback on any research and development proposals received. For those proposals that are deemed by DND to align with SSTRM, a letter of recommendation may be provided to assist in obtaining innovation funding.

Way ahead SSTRM implementation is well underway. The TN structure is established and is operating. The SSTRM Management Office has received 29 proposals, the majority of which were aligned with key future technology requirements outlined in the capstone report and action plan, and were from Technology Readiness Levels 1-7. Several of these proposals have received innovation funding through a number of programs. In addition, initial planning has begun for a Soldier Systems Conference and Trade Show, to be held on December 11 and 12, 2012. The Soldier Systems Technology Roadmap provides an excellent opportunity for industry, academia and government collaboration. It has the potential to align the efforts of the soldier system community of interest towards a common goal of improving capabilities for Canada’s future soldier, through the effective use of R&D funding. For a copy of the capstone report or more information on the SSTRM, including instructions on how to submit an R&D proposal or become involved with a Technology Network, please visit or contact the SSTRM Management Office (

DRS Technologies, with over 40 years of providing solutions to the U.S., Canadian and British militaries, has developed a fully integrated soldier system. A lightweight, ergonomically designed system that provides advanced communications, map displays and GPS positioning. Making sure soldiers know where they are, where their buddies are, and making it easier for commanders to coordinate action. Situational Awareness For Every Soldier. That’s Go To.

For more information please contact

Photo courtesy of The Department of National Defence



is the author of four books, most recently Brew North. His writing has appeared in Toronto Life, Canadian Business, the Globe and Mail, and elsewhere.


Key petals in a FLICK future

It represents the largest peacetime procurement ever for the Canadian Army: by the end of this year, the Land Force hopes to embark on the purchasing phase of a $5 billion “meta-program” to upgrade its armoured vehicle fleets.

Central to the program are two significant new purchases: a Close Combat Vehicle (CCV), intended to carry troops into battle alongside the Leopard 2 tanks, and a new Tactical Armoured Patrol Vehicle, suited for both reconnaissance and transport roles. The army plans to order 108 of the CCV, with a possible second order for thirty more, and 500 of the new TAPV, with an option for another 100. While the CCV program appears to have encountered a major delay, the army should announce its choice for the TAPV before year’s end. With a commitment to purchasing something off-the-shelf, the army has been looking at a number of

choices for both vehicles. Given how imminent these decisions might be, however, it is understandably tight-lipped about the selection – even a recent request for shortlists of the possible choices was refused by army public affairs. Military hardware has its own magic. Watching YouTube videos of a tracked infantry fighting vehicle using its gun to reduce a Volkswagen camper to scrap metal, or an Oshkosh M-ATV becoming airborne as it crests a hill, it’s easy to get caught up in the flash and dazzle, the pure mayhem, of the heavy metal on display. Easy, too, to forget that behind all the boom and flash, there has to be a strategy – the why behind the what.

As Major Jim Gash of the army’s Directorate of Land Concepts and Designs puts it, “as long as it meets the requirements we’ve determined, it really doesn’t matter what the vehicle is.” In other words, his job – and that of LCol Ian Hope, head of the directorate – is to look past the hype and find the vehicle that best meets the army’s needs. Put that way, it seems mundane – almost as mundane as the location of the directorate’s offices on the second floor of a lowrise building in a fairly raw industrial park in suburban Kingston, Ontario. Even once inside this military think tank, apart from a proliferation of flags and the fact that everyone is in uniform, it could be the offices of a mid-size insurance company.

Close Combat Vehicle (CCV)

BAE Systems Hägglunds CV 9035 MkIII 18 APRIL/MAY 2012

General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada Piranha 5

Soldier Systems S In fact, though, there is nothing mundane about Gash’s words. Choosing a vehicle that meets the army’s requirements takes some serious thinking. The CCV and the new TAPV will be serving with the army for the next 25 years. Their selection will reflect not just the culmination of the military’s recent experiences, most notably in Afghanistan, but even more important, where it may go next. The directorate is made up of the people who do that kind of looking ahead, taking the new ideas about equipment, strategy and tactics from conception through to commitment of resources, and fleshing out their ideas in such publications as Toward Land Force Operations 2021 and Designing Canada’s Army of Tomorrow. Talk to Hope and Gash, and you quickly discover that there are other ways to look at these vehicles than in terms of armour, firepower and speed:

Flexibility: Talk of capability leads to the question “capable of what?” The directorate itself sees the army as becoming a “balanced medium-weight, high-tech force optimized for counter-insurgency, but effective across the spectrum of conflict.” That spectrum ranges, says Gash, “from limited interventions – evacuations, that

sort of thing – through peace support and peacekeeping, through stability operations and counter-insurgency to total warfare.” To carry out these roles the directorate talks about the “Family of Land Combat Systems,” or FLICK, often represented as a series of overlapping coloured circles, referred to jokingly as the “flick flower.” The

Capability: A favourite term of the directorate, particularly when yoked with gap. What is a capability gap? Speaking of the Canadian army’s experience in Afghanistan, Hope says, “we quickly learned that certain vehicles were not robust enough for Afghanistan. And by robust I mean in terms of terrain and the IED [improvised explosive device] threat.” The LAVs couldn’t always go where the army wanted them to or withstand the ever more powerful IEDs being used against them. Both the CCV and the TAPV acknowledge these capability gaps, and will help to overcome them in future.

Nexter Systems VBCI

APRIL/MAY 2012 19

S SOLDIER SYSTEMS Tactical Army Patrol Vehicle (TAPV) The combat vehicle contenders Although the Canadian army is saying little about the contenders in both the CCV and TAPV programs or the results of testing at Maryland’s Aberdeen Proving Ground, the following are believe to be the remaining contenders for the two programs.


Close Combat Vehicle (CCV) BAE Systems Hägglunds CV 9035 MkIII Tracked infantry fighting vehicle originally developed for the Norwegian army BAE Land Systems OMC RG-35

Nexter Systems VBCI Two variants of the wheeled 8x8 vehicle, CCV-25 and CCV-30, now in service with the French army General Dynamics Land Systems-Canada Piranha 5 A beefier version of LAV III with 30 mm gun

Tactical Army Patrol Vehicle (TAPV) BAE Land Systems OMC RG-35 Upgraded version of the RG-31 4x4s, currently in use by the Canadian army Force Protection Timberwolf (Cougar 6x6) An updated, six-wheeled version of vehicle already serving in Canadian army Force Protection Timberwolf (Cougar 6x6)

Oshkosh/LMI M-ATV A two variant option done in partnership with General Dynamics Land Systems - Canada Textron TAPV Serves the United States army’s military police as the M-117

Oshkosh/LMI M-ATV

Textron TAPV 20 APRIL/MAY 2012

CCV and the TAPV are two important petals in this flower, useful across a broad range of possible scenarios – the CCV would fare best in all out ground war, the TAPV in peacekeeping, and both would have a place in counter-insurgency. The army can never cover every possibility. “If,” Hope says, “someone had told me in 1985 or 1986 that toward the end of my career I’d be fighting in Afghanistan, I’d have laughed at them.” Nonetheless, when Canada was called in, the army was ready. “We had one of the best equipped units in Afghanistan in 2006 when I was [first] there.” “It’s too late,” says Hope, “when something starts to say, oh, we didn’t think of that one.”

SuSTAinABiliTy: “We’re pragmatic from the beginning,” says Hope. “Although sometimes in the past we have not been. It’s based on what we have been in and what we think we will be in the future, which is not a big army. You may want technologies that don’t exist yet, and at the same time to build an army that’s sustainable and affordable. There’s no point in going out and building an army where you can only have a small proportion of it at high readiness because it’s so bloody expensive.” “We like to think 20 years out,” he adds. “We need to build five years out. And that tension will never go away.”


mastering the seas lock on to mbda solutions

ASTER by MBDA www.mbd

CAP.MER/ASTER_206.4x276.2_Vanguard_uk.indd 1


17/04/12 10:07

B Book shelf

reviewed by Roy Thomas, MSC, CD

Perspectives on a complex conflict Afghanistan: How the West Lost Its Way Tim Bird and Alex Marshall New Haven, 2011, 303 pages, $ 29.96

Written by two British defence academics, Afghanistan discusses the strategy and policy of “America’s longest ever War, NATO’s first major engagement outside Europe and Britain’s most expensive conflict since World War II.” It also duly notes Canada’s higher per capita casualty rate than the U.S. However, Canadians may be dismayed at what was achieved in return for this loss of life in the opinion of the authors. They offer “myriad reasons why Afghanistan is unlikely to develop into a state that bears some resemblance to Western nations.” The authors take issue with the media, in this case for coining the phrase “COIN strategy.” They argue that COIN theory demands “a legitimate and credible local partner.” While they deem the risk of a complete Taliban takeover of Afghanistan to be low – Uzbeks, Hazaras and Tajks will all ferociously resist the establishment of a Taliban national regime – they argue that only one actor, the United States, had the capability to bring coherence to the international effort and “failed to do so.”

The Unravelling: Pakistan in the Age of Jihad John R. Schmidt New York, 2011, 279 pages, $29.95

“Unravelling” is how John Schmidt, a former U.S. Islamabad embassy political counsellor prior to 9/11, sees the state of “governance” in the nuclear-armed state of Pakistan. The feudal politicians and the Pakistan Army, who hitherto have taken turns trying to run this diverse country, are now facing a new challenger for rule – homegrown Pakistani jihadists. Schmidt asserts that the history of Pakistan since partition over 60 years ago is a “story without heroes.” Moreover, it is also a “story about India” and Kashmir since “animus toward India has driven the Pakistanis to use jihadist groups for state ends.” Now there is a question of who controls whom. So while the Pakistani army may combat the so-called Pakistani Taliban, it also maintains a level of neutral tolerance with respect to Afghan Taliban residing in the Tribal areas as long as their activities are directed across the Durand Line where NATO forces serve. One can not read this book without a shiver of apprehension.

22 APRIL/MAY 2012

The Wars of Afghanistan Peter Tomsen New York, 2011, 849 pages, $43.00

Peter Tomsen, George H. Bush’s special envoy, with ambassador status, to the Afghanistan resistance to the Soviets from 1989 to 1992, provides much context to this conflict from his two decades of involvement with the region. There are 17 pages alone dedicated to the cast of characters who provide the backdrop to the alleged “failure” cited by Bird and Marshall. Eleven maps help make sense of the mass of detail. Tomsen believes “it is still possible to achieve an acceptable outcome but only if policies respect Afghan history and culture.” Poor policy, poor process and poor execution are responsible for the challenges we now face. Fresh material from Soviet archives such as Mitrokhin’s work, The KGB in Afghanistan, helps inform this work. There are unexpected surprises such as his allegation that Pakistani regular forces joined the Taliban in their attacks on Masood in 1999. The author suggests Karazi’s feeling for the Pakistani authorities may be shaped by his father’s assassination, which Tomsen suggests could be ISI-inspired or, at minimum, condoned, occurring as it did in Quetta after his father was told to leave Pakistan. This book truly complements the Louis Dupree classic, Afghanistan. Tomsen’s conclusions for the way ahead are directed at American audiences. He assesses President Obma’s struggle to resolve the Pakistan dilemma as one of the signature issues of his presidency.

Come From the Shadows: The Long and Lonely Struggle for Peace in Afghanistan Terry Glavin Vancouver, 2011, 235 pages, $29.95

Afghanistan as metaphor for the Spanish Civil War? Throughout this latest book by journalist Terry Glavin, there is a comparison between the present Afghan conflict and the Spanish civil war, with the Taliban insurgents playing the part of Franco’s Fascist Nationalists. “Canadian soldiers engaged in Afghanistan’s anti-Taliban struggle deserve to be understood as successors of the brave anti-fascists of the 1930s who fought in the Spanish Civil War,” Glavin writes, and he clearly does not want the Western world to abandon Afghanistan to a form of fascist rule as was the case in Spain over 73 years ago.


AEROSPACE & DEFENCE A Business Unit of IMP Group Ltd.

IMP Aerospace & Defence is one of Canada's largest military maintenance operations supporting Air Force, Navy and Army weapon systems as well as space flight systems. Our operations are located across Canada. We are based in Halifax, Nova Scotia with over 1,800 engineering and technical support staff bringing over 60 years of aerospace and defence technology experience with domestic and international programs. Fleet Services • Full In-Service Support • Life Cycle and Integrated Logistics Support • Supply Chain Management Sustainment Services • Maintenance Planning & Support • Engineering Analysis & Repair Development • Modification and Design Support • Technical Publications • Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) • Avionics and Electronic Systems Testing & Repair Support • Component repair & overhaul Manufacturing • 4 and 5–axis Precision Machining • Structural and Composite Assemblies • Electronic Assemblies & Test Equipment • Complex Wire Harness Assemblies • Advanced CAD/CAM Environment • NASA Approved for Spaceflight Products

Come Visit the IMP Booth at CANSEC


Contact: Carl Kumpic | Vice President International Marketing | Aerospace Division P.O. Box 970, Enfield, NS B2T 1L5 Tel: 902 873 2250 | Fax: 902 873 2290



by Stephan Dubowski


It was far from a center piece of the 2012 federal budget, but on March 29 the Conservative government announced $95 million over three years, starting in 2013–14, to make permanent the Canadian Innovation Commercialization Program and to add a military procurement component. Innovation, of course, drives all sectors. The CICP was set up in 2010 as a pilot project to help Canadian companies bridge that pre-commercialization gap by procuring and testing innovations in a range of sectors, including security. Vanguard offers a snapshot of seven technologies identified through the program and two, developed by Paradigm Shift and Pyrognisis, which showcase Canadian ingenuity.

Intelligent underwater laser scanner

uLS 100 2g RoboTICS

24 APRIL/MAY 2012

Underwater imaging usually requires a high-bandwidth connection between the scanning device and the software on the surface, but 2G Robotics in Waterloo, Ont. aims to break away from that standard combination. Instead, the firm has developed the ULS 100, a 360-degree underwater laser scanner capable of creating 3D images without a high-bandwidth connection, which has never been done before. “We’re able to do a lot of the data processing and compression right in the head of the sensor, which allows for easy integration with a wide range of very small underwater robotic equipment,” says

son Gillham, director of operations. Most small underwater robots aren’t outfitted with high-bandwidth cables, he explains, so the company’s solution would enable military organizations to use smaller and more easily deployed vehicles for 3D imaging – for underwater inspections when a potentially dangerous parasitic item has been detected on a ship’s hull, for example. Established in 2007, 2G Robotics initially planned to develop complete robotics systems, but quickly recognized the need for underwater scanners as important elements in the solution. Since then the company has focused primarily on ULS development and has brought three underwater laser scanner models to market.

Innovation Aeryon Scout Aeryon Labs

SMARTBeacon Adventure Lights

Networked lights for identification and co-ordination

Unmanned aerial vehicle When Aeryon Labs sought to bring UAV technology to markets beyond the military, company president and co-founder Dave Kroetsch recalls that one police representative was blunt about requirements: “We’re not that smart. We have fat fingers and we break things.” That isn’t exactly true, of course, but it aptly illustrates the situation: if Aeryon wanted to build a broader market for unmanned surveillance, reconnaissance and intelligence solutions, it would have to deliver a product that is robust and easy to control. A vertical take-off and landing vehicle, the Scout features a modular design, so if a problem occurs, users only need to replace the busted bits instead of the entire device. It


A second skin helps strengthen soldiers Soldiers are expected to be in top physical condition, but imagine how much stronger they would be if they could harness support from an orthopedic structure designed to enhance strength and reduce wear on joints. B-Temia in Quebec City has designed a dermoskeleton worn over clothing. According to company president and CEO Stephane Bedard, it looks like a close-fitting leg brace,

also comes with a touch-screen control system. The user simply points to a place on a map and the Scout makes its way to the destination automatically, allowing the user to work on other tasks. “If at any point the user is focused on the thing in the sky they’ve lost focus on the mission,” Kroetsch says. The Scout can send encrypted video footage to a smartphone, and the accompanying command centre software lets a single user control multiple UAVs. Kroetsch wouldn’t specify which military organizations use the Scout, but researchers at the University of Alaska use the technology for sea lion research. At just 1.4 kg, “it’s really designed for the backpack of the soldier and the trunk of the police car,” he says.

that connects numerous VIPs together, and a handheld device that gives commanders control over all of the lights in the network. Thus commanders can make the lights flash on and off in specific patterns or produce particular colours so forces can

see where their troops are. “It’s more than a light,” says Tim Ford, the company’s president in Beaconsfield, Que. “It’s a communication system.” He says Adventure Lights is one of the first to provide command and control functionality for an illumination network; SMARTBeacon interoperates with information platforms such as other prime contractors’ C4ISR products. The solution also works without the command unit. Users can promote one of the lights in the system to controller status, giving troops in the field the ability to set up networks and identification patterns as needed. Adventure Lights’ innovative housing for the LEDs incorporates antennas and software such that the beacons are compact, robust, light and network-ready.

but with a power pack and artificial intelligence, it actively helps the wearer move. “It complements your muscular strength,” he says. “Your muscles work less. Your joints absorb fewer impacts. You’re healthier at the end of the day and you maintain your combat capability week after week, month after month and year after year.” Military interveners are often required to carry loads exceeding 100 pounds, he points out. Over time, that constant burden reduces the soldier’s mobility and can lead to musculoskeletal injuries, which can put troops out of commission, increasing cost for rehabilitation and replacements. The dermoskeleton includes a sensor network that observes the

biomechanical characteristics of the user’s mobility. It also has movement-recognition software and control software that modulates the system for optimal assistance. It not only strengthens healthy soldiers, but it also gives soldiers experiencing musculoskeletal injuries the opportunity to get back into the field, Bedard says.

Portable lights offer illumination. Adventure Lights says its SMARTBeacon system goes one step further: the lights in this system provide insight. SMARTBeacon is a mesh-networked wearable beacon system that allows commanders to instantly identify friendly forces in contact situations. The solution incorporates Adventure Lights’ VIP signal light, a palm-sized LED orb usually attached to a vest or helmet, plus encrypted networking technology



APRIL/MAY 2012 25



Cicada Cicada Security Technology

Security system for laptop computers Imagine giving computers the wherewithal to detect and protect themselves from attempted theft. That’s the goal of the Cicada security system. It monitors the computer for movement or environmental changes. When certain user-defined triggers are set off (an unplugged network connection, a power disconnection, insertion of a USB drive, etc.), the system emits a high-pitched and loud alarm alerting anyone within earshot of the attempted theft or modification. It also locks the device, prohibiting unauthorized access to data. Cicada can send an alert to the user’s mobile phone or email

address. Company founder Ryk Edelstein explains that the system would help safeguard both the computers and any stored or accessible information in theatre. If a military location is attacked and users have to leave their workstations, Cicada effectively ensures that agents of opposing forces aren’t able to access information on the PCs. “The moment the computer is

tripped the information stored on it or the information it has access to is instantly protected,” Edelstein says. “This is a level of threat that has never been addressed with any active security product to date.” Cicada is working with computer chip maker Intel to integrate Cicada into the hardware-based security features of Intel microprocessors and chip sets.

CICP: Procure, test and evaluate The Canadian Innovation Commercialization Program began life in 2010 as a Public Works and Government Services administered two-year pilot project. With a new commitment in the 2012 Budget of $95 million over three years, plus $40 million per year thereafter, the CICP will help government become a first user of Canadian technology. The program allows participating departments to procure, test and evaluate Canadian goods and services that are not currently available in the marketplace. Over 710 proposals have been submitted since the program began through two rounds of Calls for Proposals (CFP). PWGSC says feedback “suggests that demand exceeds the resources available through the program” and key stakeholders see the program as “filling a critical gap in Canada’s innovation strategy.” Through outreach and a CFP, posted on the government’s electronic tendering service, CICP seeks technologies in the late stages of R&D, between Technology Readiness Levels 7 and 9. Technologies that qualify are ranked on three primary criteria: the level of advancement over current state-of-the-art technology, commercialization strategy of the company, and quality of the proposed testing plan. Proposals are evaluated by the National Research Council’s Industrial Research Assistance Program and validated by an Innovation Selection Committee, currently comprised of mostly private sector experts. Following validation, PWGSC selects the highest ranked proposals based on available funding for that CFP. Bidders are then pre-qualified and can seek out departments to test, evaluate, and provide critical feedback on the innovation.

26 APRIL/MAY 2012

InnovatIon Active Microclimate Cooling System MAWAShI PRoTeCTIve CLoThIng

Wearable cooling technology Personal protective equipment such as ballistics and fragmentation vests help protect soldiers in theatre, but they also contribute to discomfort. A body can roast under the hot sun in certain environments, and with the high degree of physical activity, heat stroke is always a risk. Mawashi Protective Clothing in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Que., developed the Active Microclimate Cooling System, a wearable, light-weight (1.2 kg) device that uses fans and an eight-

electromagnetically enhanced Physical vapor deposition (ePvd) PARAdIgM ShIFT TeChnoLogIeS

technology to enhance weapon system longevity and performance Chromium may well have been the legacy material used to coat interior surfaces in weapons systems for the past 80 years, but that doesn’t mean it’s the best. As Dr. Gennady Yumshtyk, founder, president and CEO of Paradigm Shift Technolo-


hour battery to effectively suction away the perspiration-saturated air that is otherwise trapped against the body, allowing fresh air to come in and aid in the cooling effect. Alain Bujold, the company’s president, explains that Mawashi developed the patented technology initially to help firefighters keep cool and dry, but now the firm is modifying the system to work with sealed frag vests for military applications. Discomfort from heat is an important concern for soldiers who are expected to be alert and focused; it increases their stress levels, affecting their performance. “If you can reduce the stress by five or 10 percent, you’re better able to manage high-stress situations,” says Bujold, a human factors and ergonomics specialist with 17 years of experience in new product development with the security industry.

gies points out, chromium is carcinogenic and it costs governments tens of millions of dollars in environmental cleanups. Toronto-based Paradigm developed its Electromagnetically enhanced Physical Vapor Deposition (EPVD) technology as a superior alternative. EPVD is used to apply a broad range of materials, including metals, alloys and combinations to underlying articles used in defence and industrial applications. The solution gives manufacturers and purchasers a way to increase the longevity of medium- and large-caliber weapons systems while reducing internal erosion and heat impact. “You get longer service life,” Dr. Yumshtyk says. “You get

Dancor is dedicated to growing our Dancor Campus with Defence companies. We specialize in building defence facilities for lease or sale and understand the unique demands of the defence industry.

longer periods between maintenance. In addition, you get performance increase from the perspective of weapons systems firing at higher rates and precision.” Tests performed with the U.S. Department of Defense demonstrated a 250 percent improvement in longevity of weapons systems over the chromium baseline, he says. Paradigm serves the Canadian and U.S. defence departments, as well as foreign governments concerned about the life extension of weapons systems, and is one of the recent recipients of federal government funding for clean technology projects. The company received $1.9 million for its surface coating project.

Visit us at the London Booth at CANSEC 2012! Dancor London Business Park 15825 Robin’s Hill Road, Unit 1 | London, Ontario | N5V 0A5 P. 519.457.2339 | F. 519.457.2293 |

APRIL/MAY 2012 27



Hydra6 Oracle Telecomputing

Air surveillance solution

tems can go on the fritz. To address these shortcomings, multilateration (read: numerous receivers located far away from the airfield) can be used to verify aircraft identification and location. But installing expensive communication gear beyond the airfield’s security perimeter is asking for trouble. “In some places the equipment will disappear within a week,” says Jim Harvey, Oracle’s technology VP. Oracle’s answer: the Hydra6, a low-maintenance, low power sensor that combines ADS-B and another surveillance method, secondary sur-

veillance radar (SSR), into one low-cost product. Hydra6’s sixsectored antenna and single sensor effectively replace the numerous sensors required for traditional multilateration, so it can be situated within the airfield, where it’s secure from theft. Because it can run on a car battery and is light weight, it’s also ideal for mobile applications, Harvey says. Oracle is positioning the product for marine use, too, as a potential replacement for expensive rotating sensors aboard ships.

THE FORUM CANADA’S SECURITY AND DEFENCE COMMUNITY Aircraft identificationFOR and tracking is crucial, but according to the people behind Oracle Telecomputing in Carleton Place, Ont., existing technologies are far from perfect. For instance, one common method, automatic-dependent surveillance— broadcast (ADS-B) is prone to problems: solar flares can disrupt transmissions; GPS satellites can go offline for hours before anyone realizes it; aircraft electrical sys-


Canada’s premier defence and security magazine for the past 16 years is there cal arc and compressed air to produce temPlasma Arc articles Waste Destruction with timely and insightful coverage of issues and events. Technology and near 5,000 degrees Celsius. The System security (PAWDS) issues are anperatures national important focus in the suited for today’s PAWDS solution grinds waste into magazine something akin to lint, which passes over the PyroGenesisand tech oriented society. fast-paced Waste management solution for aircraft carriers Move over, incinerators: plasma has arrived. PyroGenesis of Montreal has developed a system that combines compressed air and electricity to help organizations such as the U.S. Navy dispose of waste on aircraft carriers. The company’s Plasma Arc Waste Destruction System (PAWDS) uses plasma torches – devices incorporating an electri-

plasma torch. In a fraction of a second it’s transformed into a harmless combination of CO2 and water, and a white sand-like substance. PyroGenesis worked with the U.S. Navy to create PAWDS as an alternative to larger conventional incinerators typically used on aircraft carriers. PAWDS is five times smaller, says Gillian Holcroft, the company’s chief operating officer. As you might expect, the USN undertook some serious testing before taking delivery of the first PAWDS system last fall. In the



tests PyroGenesis had to demonstrate that sailors could be trained to operate and repair PAWDS in less than a week. “You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to run it. But it is rocket science,” Holcroft says. PyroGenesis aims to adapt the PAWDS technology for use as a waste destruction and energy recovery system for ground transport.

One Year Subscription (6 Issues) Fax: 905-727-4428 Mail: 24-4 Vata Court, Aurora, ON, L4G 4B6 Email:















SEEKING A DEFENCE INDUSTRIAL GAME PLAN Since it submitted a report in 2009 at the request of the federal government, the Canadian Association of defence and Security Industries (CAdSI) has been advocating forcefully for a defence industrial framework that would leverage the government’s $240 billion, 20-year defence policy to maximize jobs, innovation and economic activity. Though recent initiatives suggest elements of an industrial defence strategy, Canada has yet to create a whole-of-government approach to managing defence spending that links industrial capability and capacity with national sovereignty, security and the economy. tim Page, the association’s president, spoke with Vanguard about what CAdSI views as a generational opportunity to manage new procurement projects. Q How is the health of the industry as a whole? Has it weathered the worst of the recession? I would say that the industry is generally positive, at least up to December 31, 2011. That is our latest data point with the membership. They are very conscious that they operate in a global market and that market is facing turbulent times, due to two fundamental drivers: the prospect of deep cuts to the defence budget in the United States; and, European nations dealing with the sovereign debt crisis of a few countries. On the flip side, some emerging economies have stated their intention to invest heavily in the defence sector over the next 10-15 years, including Brazil, the UAE and India. Canadian defence companies require access to international markets to be competitive, given their relatively small domestic market. They are looking to maintain their relationship with existing customers in the U.S. and Europe while at the same time building new relationships in emerging markets. And they are looking for support from their government in terms of export support and, importantly, for their government to be the “first buyer” of their kit as an indicator to foreign governments of that support. There is also reason to believe that the security market will continue to grow internationally in the coming years, and since there is a fair degree of commonality in the capabilities offered by defence contractors in the security environment, this too should provide good market opportunities. However, for many Canadian companies the domestic market will remain their number one priority. Most companies in the defence 30 APRIL/MAY 2012

sector are small and medium sized enterprises and most produce what we call dual use products and services – technologies and services for both the commercial market as well as, potentially, the defence and security markets. So how do we encourage innovation? How do we encourage commercially focused companies to adapt their capability to meet a national security or defence interest that the Canadian government might have? The answer, for us, is that you need a framework, a game plan. That means, in our view, an industrial strategy for the defence and security of Canada.

Q What would CADSI like the government to introduce that would help those SMEs and others? We’ve said pretty clearly and consistently that the government should identify what sectors of the defence and security industrial base are of strategic national interest. And we’ve offered them some advice on what that might look like. Our domestic market is too small to be all things to all people – as a country we need to pick our spots. So what capabilities hold sovereign or security or economic value? Canada is alone in the industrial world in not having defined such capabilities and in not having established a policy framework at the national level to support them. Defence trade is managed trade specifically because nations protect capabilities that are of national interest to them. Canada should be no different. As a maritime nation, with an expansive common border with the U.S., growing opportunities in the Arctic, and a population centred in urban communities, there are any number of threats to our safety and security that indigenous technology,



Q These in many ways provide the communications piece; products and services should be expected to protect. you’re still the missing much of the rest of the puzzle? So step one is for the government to identify key industrial capabilities that are of sovereign, security or economic interest to Canada. And then, target procurement strategies around the nurIn fairness to different departments and different individuals within turing and development of those key industrial capabilities. Federal those departments, there is an effort being made to come to grips R&D priorities, targeted industrial centres with how to leverage defence procurement Canada needs a game of excellence, whole-of-government export to not just get the kit but also to achieve an strategies and our industrial regional ben- plan that includes both economic return on taxpayers’ investment. I efits program should all be focused around would suggest that to date it is still very much an industrial those key areas. At the same time, a strategy individual driven rather than system-wide. We without the means to implement it through think that a strategic framework would prostrategy...and a efficient and effective procurement processvide that system-wide connection that would commitment to move es and practices risks becoming just a prodimprove the chances of success – that’s missing swiftly on changes to uct on a shelf. So Canada needs a game plan still in our view. Once that strategic framework that includes both an industrial strategy or procurement practices is established, we believe that there needs to a policy framework and a commitment to be a whole-of-government approach taken to and processes. move swiftly on changes to procurement implementing the framework. practices and processes. The Canadian Innovation Commercialization Program is poQ CADSI strongly endorsed the Jenkins report calling for more sitioned to play a key role in supporting Canadian SMEs in the action on innovation. How would you assess innovation in the defence and security sector by being the critical “first buyer” that defence sector? is so important if SMEs are to be successful in penetrating the export markets. Our sector is knowledge-based – lots of engineers, lots of techniQ A recession is sometimes seen as a good opportunity to push through change. Do you see that happening? There is no time like the present for sensible, logical, practical action. The government announced and has carried out with some fanfare its economic action plan. Our argument all along has been that the Canada First Defence Strategy is our sector’s equivalent of Canada’s Economic Action Plan and yet we’re still looking for some structure to be brought around that program from an industrial perspective.

We Can Count On Them . . . They Can Count On Us

Q Do initiatives like the Soldier System Technology Roadmap (SSTRM), Project Accord and the National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy provide the initial steps of a framework? We’ve been very involved in the SSTRM and in the discussions around a capability analysis centre that Canada is nominally calling the Accord project, and we’ve played directly on the NSPS, particularly in regard to the marine industrial piece. We’ve done so because we believe that those are all important component parts of an improved relationship between the customer and the supply base, and that each is an element of the strategic framework we’ve been calling for. These are all good ideas. They all look and sound like a level of interaction that will help the military get the kit that it needs in a timeline that meets its operational needs. And industry at the same time doesn’t feel like it’s playing tennis in a fog – it’s got some visibility into what the government is trying to do and is being respected and trusted.

We Care!

Join The Royal Canadian Legion

APRIL/MAY 2012 31



vocacy priorities today say that if you are able cians. If government is prepared to identify We are going to pick to articulate an industrial strategy or a stratethe key industrial capabilities that hold stragic framework and develop and implement tegic value to Canada, then industry, both our spots, if you practical changes to the way you conduct inside and outside of Canada, can invest in will, with more your procurement, you will have achieved innovation in those areas and Canadian ina great deal. And maybe the government dustry can be better positioned for success targeted attention will achieve a workable governance model when defence projects come to market that on certain key as a consequence. But there is no unanimity require those capabilities and technologies. around this issue as there is around the need We’ve talked a lot recently about the conbuilding blocks of for an industrial strategy and changes to the cept of clusters and centres of excellence. procurement process. We think that if key industrial capabilities an industrial are identified by the government, there are strategy. a lot of tools at the government’s disposal Q Have CADSI’s advocacy priorities to grow global champions from within the changed in anyway for 2012? Canadian economy. For instance, you have government labs doing R&D in these areas, private sector enWe believe that we need to compliment that overall push for terprises that in some instances have grown up around those an industrial strategy with a more targeted focus around the government labs, and larger corporations within Canada focused cluster idea; more work around the IRB program to ensure that on those areas. This creates a certain synergy which can be enit is achieving the outcomes that the government is looking hanced if you take the existing and future industrial and regional for; and ensure we have an export control regime that is not benefits packages that are estimated by some to be as high as $44 disadvantaging Canadian industry when it goes out into the billion dollars and you incentivize the OEMs who have those international market place. We’re also going to contribute in a obligations to foster, enhance and create clusters where innopractical, supportive way to the aerospace review. We are going vation can develop, not only for one corporation that may be to pick our spots, if you will, with more targeted attention on involved, but for that whole group of enterprises, including the certain key building blocks of an industrial strategy without government labs and academia and a lot of SMEs. losing the overarching push for the government’s acceptance of a key industrial capabilities framework in which the rest of this can take shape. Q Is the IRB policy structured to drive that sort of innovation? There are tools within the IRB policy to drive innovation. We believe it should be used more strategically but right now it is being used transactionally. It’s a delivery tool for an industrial strategy, but it comes into the process late. We’ve been suggesting to government that it should be doing more up front thinking early in the procurement cycle to consider Canadian industrial participation in every defence procurement coming through the system. We’ve suggested that government push for a domestic industrial participation plan approved by Cabinet when DND comes to Cabinet with a request for pre-project approval, and that there be rated requirements so that companies responding to the RFP understand where the government is looking for consideration of Canadian capability. If there is early consideration in the RFP process that requires government and industry to think about how to leverage the domestic defence and security industrial base, then the IRB program becomes a more effective tool that has a better chance to achieve meaningful objectives.

Q There has been a lot of discussion about a separate defence procurement agency: from CADSI’s perspective, what would that offer? There are many and competing views on this. And CADSI’s ad32 APRIL/MAY 2012

Q Was there anything specific you’d hoped to see in the 2012 budget? We believe the budget contained many positive elements to encourage innovation and stimulate economic growth that can be good for our sector. Among the announced initiatives that caught the attention of our members were: a $5.2 billion, 11year commitment to rebuild the Canadian Coast Guard as part of the shipbuilding strategy; the addition of a military procurement component to the Canadian Innovation Commercialization Program; the government’s focus on innovative R&D in key industrial capabilities through support to business-led technology networks and centers of excellence; the growth of direct support to SMEs through a doubling of support to the IRAP program; the interest the government is expressing to enable Canada’s aerospace industry to succeed, including with respect to defence acquisitions and sustainment; reference to the streamlining of defence procurement, contracting and the reduction of “back office” redundancy and inefficiency; and, a continuing commitment to the Canada First Defence Strategy with a planned program re-set for later this year. Together, these initiatives illustrate elements of an emerging industrial policy framework that is good for public safety and national security.


ING E NGINEERING UNMANNED SYSTEMS. DELIVERED. ING Engineering is Canada’s leading robotic aircraft systems solution provider and systems integrator. With over 30,000 hours of persistent unmanned systems flight time in Afghanistan with the Canadian Army and now with the Royal Canadian Navy, ING Engineering delivers intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance services more accurately and cost-effectively than traditional methods without risk to life. ING Engineering delivers end-to-end unmanned systems solutions and systems engineering from requirements definition and solution development to ongoing field operations, data exploitation, and comprehensive training. 2011 marked the 10-year anniversary for ING Engineering and we continue to thrive as Canada’s leading robotic aircraft systems solution provider and systems integrator. Over the past decade, ING Engineering has established itself as the Canadian leader in innovation and excellence in the field of unmanned systems. Our approach to providing UAV ISR services in Kandahar saved countless Canadian lives over three years of combat operations. We are honoured to extend that capability with the deployed Royal Canadian Navy in 2012. Today we also bring our unprecedented record of 99.3% mission availability in Afghanistan to the civil and commercial market including supporting critical law enforcement operations. ING Engineering’s ability to meet the specific needs of the customer with one of our UAS systems and platforms and our extraordinary delivery team is what makes ING Engineering stand out from the crowd. From Law Enforcement and Search and Rescue to Forest Fire Detection, Environmental Monitoring and Exploration for Oil, Gas and Mining sectors, ING Engineering has the solution. With offices and team members located across Canada from the Yukon to Atlantic Canada, we are able to provide local support to most operations.



Veritical Take off/landing Range: 3 km ENDURANCE: 25 MINUTES PAYLOAD WEIGHT: Up to 400g

46 Dineen Dr., Suite 323&321, Fredericton, NB, Canada E3B 9W4

UVS Platform Maveric

Hand launched Range: 10 km ENDURANCE: 60 MINUTES PAYLOAD WEIGHT: up to 300g



790 Taylor Creek Dr., Suite 2, Ottawa, ON, Canada K1C 1T1



Catapult Launched Range: 100+ km ENDURANCE: 24+ HOURS PAYLOAD WEIGHT: up to 7KG

UAS services AUV Services Engineering Services Training

1337 rue des Sables, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada J1J 1B6


InDUStRIaL STRATegY Roger de Montfort

is a partner in the Federal government Consulting & deals practice of PwC Canada, where he leads their Sourcing practice.

Agile defence: The need for smart, rapid acquisition


n 2011, PricewaterhouseCoopers published a report, Agile Defence (, which offers insights on the issues facing defence organizations worldwide and views on the most compelling way forward. The research builds on our experience of working with defence organizations around the world as well as specific insights from interviewing senior military and civilian defence leaders and academics. We identify five key building blocks of an agile organization, one of which is smart, rapid acquisition. First, though, what do we mean by agility and why is it important? We define agility as perpetual awareness and the ability to be decisive and take action in an expedient and well-coordinated manner. An agile defence organization retains its core tenets while empowering units to evolve in response to the environment. At an organizational level, agility is the strategic mix of standardization and flexibility. It’s targeted at those organizational pressure points where they are not only needed today, but will most likely be needed tomorrow. Agility matters in today’s environment. Defence organizations not only need to maintain existing operations, at the same time they also need to be constantly prepared for a wide spectrum of ever evolving anticipated (and unanticipated) threats and events.

Five threads of agility We believe there are five characteristics, or threads, of an agile organization. We use the term “threads” because of how they should weave their way through the key processes of an organization in a complementary fashion: 1. Adaptability: the ability to adjust and meet changing mission requirements; 2. Innovation: the ability to generate and utilize new ideas, methodologies and technologies; 3. Collaboration: the ability to leverage internal and external knowledge and resources to enhance the mission; 4. Visibility: the ability to create and maintain transparency to enhance fact-based decision making; and 5. Velocity: the ability to recognize and respond with the requisite tempo to new circumstances and events. Defence organizations around the world recognize the organizational characteristics of agility are critical to countering today’s broad and changing national security challenges. However, valuing agility and achieving it are two separate things. Key building 34 APRIL/MAY 2012

blocks include: transparency and accountability; secure and shareable information; smart, rapid acquisition; adaptable platforms and people; and aligned strategy and leadership.

Smart, rapid acquisition The ability to rapidly and cost effectively acquire defence systems that counter the range of security threats is a critical attribute of an agile defence organization. Not all material and systems require a rapid acquisition process. The development, testing and production of a new fighter jet require disciplined but not necessarily expedient acquisition. However, an upgrade or change to an existing weapon systems platform to counter a new, asymmetric threat is the ideal candidate for smart, rapid acquisition. The challenges with acquisition processes are well recognized and apply in differing degrees to Canada as they do with other countries such as the U.K., U.S. and Australia. These challenges often include lack of flexibility, poor risk-sharing, cost overruns, requirements not being met and length of time to procure. There is a need for a clearly defined alternative process by which an urgent requirement can be met. This balances the public interest in fairness, openness, transparency and value for money, with the need for speed and the potential to save lives. Key elements of an alternative process should include: • A streamlined approach to the definition of requirements, which leverages existing solutions and focuses on outcomes required, as this is an area that typically introduces considerable complexity, time and cost to the overall process; • A more collaborative approach to engaging with industry, to drive the right outcomes and enable innovative solutions; • A relentless focus on the identification and management of risk, including allocation of risk to the most appropriate party to bear it; • Sponsorship and engagement from leadership to drive rapid decision making; and • A continuous improvement mindset through which lessons learned from previous acquisition processes are identified and addressed in future ones. Ultimately, the success of a rapid acquisition process will depend on how these elements are successfully combined. This requires recognition of tradeoffs between speed, value for money, requirements and public accountability, as well as of the interdependencies between the building blocks identified above. Effective leaders must seek simultaneous enhancement of all five of the agility threads that weave through, and characterize, the organization.





It’s an example of how the best keeps getting better. The CC-130J is the bedrock of Canada’s airlift capabilities. With advanced technologies that allow it to perform missions ranging from troop and equipment resupply to search and rescue and humanitarian relief. Day or night. No matter the weather. No matter the conditions on the ground. Providing Canada with the world’s most capable airlifter is all a question of how. And it is the how that Lockheed Martin delivers.


InDUStRIaL STRATegY Louise Mercier

is president of FMJ Solutions and a defence consultant with specific focus on naval and air programs.

The problem with single-point accountability


ecent headlines about the cost and value of new fighter aircraft for the RCAF have captured national attention, generating a broader debate about defence procurement. While media focus has been on the cost of military equipment, many other factors should weigh into to this debate include transparency, long-term support and single point of accountability. For instance, important changes within National Defence’s inservice support contracting framework have reshaped the competitive landscape quietly and without parliamentary oversight and some would argue that unintended consequences to Canadian industrial growth have ensued as a result. In 2005, National Defence began developing a contracting approach for maintenance and repair of new fleets, a policy that evolved into the In-Service Support Contracting Framework (ISSCF) which the assistant deputy minister (ADM) for Materiel has applied since July 2008. In August 2010, it became a departmental directive risking lower Canadian content (and fewer Canadian jobs) despite an Industrial Regional Benefits (IRB) policy. Canadian defence capital spending forecasts exceed $70 billion over the next 15 years across a spectrum of planes, ships and army vehicles. In addition, a similar value will be spent on maintenance and support for an additional 25 years, more than doubling the value of defence spending on the economy. Canadian-based companies and the government are looking to ensure that this investment generates long-term, meaningful work. According to the 2011 Fall Report of the Auditor General, the ISSCF was developed with the intention of furthering changes that began under the Optimized Weapon System Management program. According to ISSCF, there is only one prime contractor per fleet, who is awarded both the acquisition and in-service support (ISS) contracts, to create a single point of accountability (SPA). The original equipment supplier then becomes prime contractor by default. Contracted ISS can extend up to 20 years, and the contract will include many fixed-price elements. Additional responsibilities, such as the ownership and management of spare parts and all subcontractors, are also transferred to the prime contractor. Simply put, the ISSCF puts the prime contractor, or OEM, in a singularly powerful position for an entire program without meaningful incentives to invest in Canadian work share, especially when intellectual property is a factor. From DND’s perspective, the SPA approach was intended to provide the Crown with one key accountable provider while accruing additional benefits.

36 APRIL/MAY 2012

By most accounts, SPA was implemented by DND to solve the debilitating conflicts that can erupt between ISS providers and OEMs on major capital programs. In some high profile instances, none of the key contractors were ultimately held responsible on multi-million dollar contracts, resulting in non-performance of the contract – the Crown was left to pay the lion’s share of additional costs on a failing program. Despite the original intent of SPA to manage risk and cost, problems have been exposed. A strong argument can be made that the ISSCF does not take into account the value of highly skilled jobs, technology advancement, and industrial growth beyond mere build-to-print capability, ultimately short-changing Canadian industry. A review of the trade-offs to Canada’s sovereignty should be examined to determine if this framework is deteriorating Canada’s indigenous ability to support its own defence resources, and if it conflicts with Canada’s IRB policy. Second, capital procurement and in-service support were bundled in part because a “one belly button to push” solution was thought to lower risk. It’s not clear if that has in fact been the case and an examination by the entire stakeholder community is warranted to determine if overall risk reduction has been achieved. One might also ask whether the ISSCF should be solely at the discretion of ADM MAT. At present, this framework lies outside the accountability of Treasury Board despite the fact that it has the potential to affect the “off-shoring” of hundreds of jobs. The challenge with bundling contracts and creating one über prime for both equipment and ISS is that it limits Canadian business creation and growth, and reduces the opportunities to participate in the long-term, high-value engineering associated with 20-year lifecycle support. While the IRB policy does require subcontracting of ISS work to Canadian companies through a competitive process, it does not require that the work be “high tech” or “high value” that can be grown and expanded globally. Ultimately, a review of the current ISSCF framework and an assessment of its impact on business while keeping in mind the demands for accountability by DND would provide at a minimum a roadmap of sorts for technology advancement in the defence sector. A comprehensive defence industrial strategy with improved stakeholder engagement would help the Crown strike a better balance between accountability and the need for improved industrial growth. This would result in higher quality and quantity of work for Canada.


Re su ex se in na pu

Th au ag be




2 Secure your Space. Reserve your exhibit space now at SecureTech 2012. Building on last year’s inaugural success, SecureTech 2012 will feature over 55,000 square feet of Canadian and international exhibits showcasing world-class technologies and products for the public safety and national security markets. Plus, a two-day, multi-track conference program offers delegates the latest in security strategies, best practices and policy insights. The 2012 event will spotlight three nations: Canada, the UK and the US – nations that share many of the same security and public safety concerns. This is your best opportunity to showcase your products and services to an international audience of representatives from federal, provincial and municipal governments and agencies, foreign governments, associations and academic institutions. Exhibit space is being booked up at a record pace, so don’t delay – secure your space today!

Ottawa Convention Centre 10.30.12 - 10.3112

Event Sponsors:


TARGETED ATTACK Spear phishing for intelligence

In early February, James R. Clapper, the u.S. director of national intelligence, told the house Select Intelligence Committee that threats to u.S.-based computer networks are one of the country’s most pressing security problems. The u.S., he said, is losing almost $300 billion annually to cyber-based corporate espionage while responding to a daily barrage of attacks against public systems responsible for everything from military to financial and critical infrastructure. In an environment where new technologies are often introduced before effective security can be established, he urged Congress to pass legislation that would force intelligence sharing between the government and the private sector. Canada has seen its share of attacks on government systems over the past 18 months. Dean turner, director of Symantec’s global Intelligence network and co-author of the company’s Internet Security Threat Report, spoke with Vanguard about the changing nature and challenge of cyber threats.

Q Start with the cyber threat landscape: How would you characterize it today? Seven years ago we talked about network aware worms, mass mailers – the Nimbas, the Code Reds, the Slammers – big pieces of malware that would indiscriminately run through large swaths of IP space around the globe. Then we started to see more targeted types of threats. It was less about big pieces of malware that would scoop up everybody – the drift net approach to phishing for victims – and more like line phishing. Now we are seeing, for lack of a better word, spear phishing. We are seeing threats that maybe only five people will ever see. We have seen a massive increase in the volume of malicious code and threats, but in a sense it is highly unique. From a government and defence standpoint, we are likely to see things that are targeted to a specific government department or branch of the services. And that, in a way, has forced us to evaluate the way we look at things.


Is identification and targeting of individual executives in government defence and security agencies now widespread? Absolutely. But it’s directly correlated to the value of the target and the value of the information the attacker places on the in-

38 APRIL/MAY 2012

formation they are going after. The more classified or sensitive a piece of information, the smaller the pool of individuals to target, which means you have to do more homework and gather more intelligence about that particular environment and those individuals. With Stuxnet, we don’t know the individuals involved or how it took place, all we know is the net result. But we can make certain assumptions based on the type of facility and the type of technology that was targeted. The same goes for the Nitro attacks. Because they were targeting the manufacturers of certain types of chemicals and armour, they had to know certain details about those companies. They sent out spread sheets and those types of things – and that’s all it takes to get someone to click on what they think is a harmless attachment from somebody in the organization they trust.

Q The effort is more sophisticated but the approach is not. Never underestimate the ability to social engineer your way into a situation. Fairly low-tech techniques are still a big component of this. Much of what we associate with this – keystroke loggers and data theft – are usually Trojan horses. Trojans, unlike viruses and worms, cannot propagate on their own; they require some form of user interaction. What has changed is the level of sophistica-

CyBeR SeCuRITY C tion behind these social engineering attempts. So malware threats from a code perspective, and even a process and operational perspective, are incredibly sophisticated; it’s the “I got this from a colleague, please open” approach.

Q If you need an individual to open the door and let you in, that suggests security is less about your firewalls and more about employee education. It’s interesting you should say that. For at least 10 years, we’ve said we had to have lots of intrusion detection systems and firewalls and we had to protect the perimeter. That hasn’t changed in terms of best practices. But the perimeter has changed. It used to be the four walls of the organization, the location of the servers. Now your perimeter is your employees, and your employees go in and out of that secure environment. Individuals should not be working on classified material in their homes, but human nature being what it is people are prone to make mistakes, and in highly classified environments or government departments, all it takes is one little mistake. Education sounds like a relatively simple thing – if we just tell people what the issues are then we can solve the problem – but we’ve been talking about what the issues are for 10 years.

Part of the challenge is that policies need to flow from the top down. We look at things and design our policies from the bottom up. But if policy is not enforced from the top down, whether from key senior departmental or military folks, it’s pretty difficult to get everybody to buy in.

Q After so many years of repeating the message, is it not sinking in, especially for individuals in defence and security environments? When you are dealing with thousands of documents or hundreds of emails a day, it doesn’t have to be that sophisticated. It can be a simple case of volume, letting your guard down in one moment. The attacker only has to find one entry point, and usually the path of least resistance is an individual. We’ve gotten pretty good over the years at hardening our environment. But when you start blurring the lines between private lives and work lives, blurring the technology between work and home with a growing emphasis on a mobile workforce, you increase the number of entry points into your network. That’s difficult to manage. As an industry we spend a lot of time and effort trying to do more with less, especially in the malware field. We try to develop generic signatures that will be able to detect 500 threats. We have



the VBCI will ke

eping, bat to peaceke m o c ty si n te n -i ure. From high n safe and sec tio c se y tr n fa n in entire Canadia



APRIL/MAY 2012 39

C CyBeR SeCuRITY to come up with new ways to respond. It sounds cliché, but there are no silver bullet solutions. We have to accept that there is a certain amount of inherent risk in everything we do. The truth is, not all information is worth protecting. Our default position is always to protect it all, and that’s a losing battle, I’m afraid.

Q Does that mean rethinking the value of information and how it is shared? I think so. Value is contextual. One guy’s classified is another guy’s sensitive but not classified. But even if you can’t come to an agreement on what is sensitive, the fact that you have gone through the exercise of understanding your data and how it is accessed, you can then start talking about putting the appropriate security solutions in the appropriate places.

Q Is cloud computing going to force the matter? Attackers love cloud computing. If an attack comes from site X, it’s one thing to be able to block access to site X. But what if the attacker’s site is housed on a larger cloud service provider? Are you going to block access to the whole thing? Talk about your needles in a pile of needles in a big giant global haystack. We are very eager to adopt technologies that allow us to do more in less time. But we tend to get them out there and then see what the problems are – security is an afterthought. I think that is starting to change, certainly in the military space, and more attention is being paid to that in the government space, especially when you consider specific instances this past year in the Canadian federal government. Sometimes people don’t buy insurance until after the house burns down. Let’s be honest, security is difficult. It’s tough to understand. I think from an education standpoint we need to do a little better and part of it is demystifying security.

Q Government agencies from DND to the RCMP are currently defining their cyber roles. From your standpoint, are there gaps they need to be addressing? Yes, but I don’t think the gaps are unique to those particular organizations. They are common across all organizations. Again, it’s the identification of assets: what are the crown jewels? Who has access to data, when and how? Those three things are huge. And that gap exists in many organizations. In today’s economic environment, where nobody has unlimited IT security budgets, those three things are even more critical, because then you can refine what you are watching. Another significant gap I see: organizations like CSE or Leitrim have responsibility for not only DND but also other areas of the federal government. However, there are huge sections that they are not responsible for. So when you have limited budgets, do you have interagency cooperation? Is everybody talking to each other?

40 APRIL/MAY 2012

Are you sharing information about specific threats? I don’t think that happens nearly as much as it should. Often, information in a government or military sense gets compartmentalized and classified, and then cannot be shared. Timeliness is everything when we are talking about attacks. So when you overburden the system with process, by the time you figure out a response it is too late. Which is why we need to be able to work together, not just within services in the military or between government departments, but between the government and the military and the private sector. How do we share information in a timely manner? That is one of the huge issues we’ve been faced with for a number of years now. For the most part, information travels one way, from the private sector into government, but it doesn’t come back the other way.

Q Espionage is obviously top of mind in Canadian military circles these days. Do we have a better sense of where these attacks are coming from? There is more finger pointing than there has ever been before. You can find bogeymen anywhere you look. There is a tendency to point at a particular nation state and say it is responsible for the majority of cyber attacks. It would be disingenuous to suggest that nation states don’t engage in that type of activity, but I don’t think there is anything new there. All that has changed is the tools. In some instances, information is now easier to get at and the damage done in the short-term is much higher. But the reasons why have not changed. I don’t think it has necessarily brought new state actors into play, but the advances in technology have certainly opened this to a wider group of players – nonnation state actors and the Anonymous of the world – who can theoretically launch a successfully attack against you. There have been numerous reports where various U.S. government officials have accused China of launching attacks against government systems both in Canada and the United States. But I don’t think that’s all that much different than at any point in history. In the classic le Carré spy novel sense, instead of turning a person into an asset – the military attaché or the admin assistant at an embassy – to get information, you just use that person to access their computer. The asset now is the computer as opposed to the individual.

Q How do executives avoid becoming victims? They have to ask the question: how do I handle what I think is sensitive information within this company, department or branch of the service? Taking necessary precautions, using encryption, virtual private networks, all of that stuff. All of that should be hammered home on a daily basis. Unfortunately, this if often a very closed community, so wider awareness is not where it needs to be. It’s not science fiction anymore; it’s real. That’s a challenge we face as an industry. People don’t want to accept the fact that it is as bad as it really is.


n navy tim Dunne

is a retired military public affairs officer and the owner of TJd Communications Consultants in halifax.

STEALTH OBSERVERS Refitting the Victoria class submarines


or 30 years, the Canadian navy operated three Oberon class submarines acquired between 1965 and 1968 and retired from 1998 to 2000. The search for suitable replacements, however, took place at the end of the Cold War, a period mostly governed by Jean Chretien’s Liberals that General Rick Hillier has called a “decade of darkness.” The government’s lack of enthusiasm for this purchase was palpable. Canadian Defence White Papers, beginning with Perrin Beatty’s Challenge and Commitment (1987), broached the subject of acquiring up to 12 nuclear propelled submarines, but that raised the collective ire of peace advocacy groups around the country. Defence Minister Bill McKnight announced its cancellation after Brian Mulroney’s Conservative government was re-elected in 1988. Faced with the imminent obsolescence of the three Oberon submarines, the 1994 Defence White Paper spoke of the need for a replacement submarine and indicated Canadian interest in acquiring the four Upholder class from the Royal Navy. Built by Vickers Shipbuilding and Engineering, HMS Upholder, the first of

42 APRIL/MAY 2012

her class, was ordered in 1983 and completed in June 1990. The three additional boats, Unseen, Ursula and Unicorn, were ordered in 1986 and delivered from 1991 to 1993. Designed as hunter-killers to operate in international waters between Greenland, Iceland and the United Kingdom (the G-I-UK Gap), to track and, if necessary, engage Soviet naval ships and submarines, the British Ministry of Defence originally planned to build a fleet of 12, soon trimmed to 10, then nine and ultimately to just four. As a result of the British decision to use an all-nuclear submarine force, these boats were tied up in 1994 to await a purchaser. On 6 April 1998, the Canadian government announced the Submarine Capability Life Extension Project, in which the four Upholders would replace the three Oberon boats to patrol the three Canadian coastlines, to meet NATO commitments, conduct fisheries protection and carry out anti-drug operations. Leaving the boats tied up and unused for five years took a toll on the vessels, much the same as a car that is left unattended in


navy n The Royal Canadian navy’s (RCn) victoria class submarines stand as the most unappreciated, maligned and misunderstood ships of the fleet: unappreciated by a public that does not recognize the importance of Canada’s maritime domain; maligned by many news media and commentators who do not take the time to educate themselves about their necessity in the Canadian fleet mix; and misunderstood by both.

a garage for several years. This resulted in a “cold handover” to the RCN of “mothballed” submarines, rather than a “hot handover” of working boats, necessitating a work program for the four vessels. In 1999, the British Ministry of Defence placed a contract with Marconi Marine, then the owners of Vickers Shipbuilding and Engineering, for the reactivation of the four boats. HMS Unseen was the first into the Devonshire Dock Hall for a six-month work period to replace some hydraulic system components and install new batteries. The other submarines followed six months apart. What Canada received were four conventionally powered boats with vastly more evolved and effective hydrodynamic features and advanced marine engineering systems, improved habitability and endurance than their predecessors. As part of the transaction, Canada also received a training package, four state-of-the-art shore-based simulators, initial spare parts and a comprehensive technical information package.

The Upholder class also offered other notable improvements over the Oberons: periscopes with integrated range finders that show the exact distances to other vessels; Thales Underwater systems Type 2040 hull mounted sonar, a passive search and intercept sonar operating at medium frequency, installed in the bow; and Submarine Escape and Rescue (Sm E&R) upgrades, including stowage space for escape materials and emergency underwater telephones. When operating on battery power, the Upholders are almost undetectable by passive sonar and are small, therefore difficult to detect by magnetic anomaly or another non-acoustic method. The 22,000 specially designed anecoic, or elastomeric, rubber tiles coating the hulls reduce noise coming from the interior and absorb sonar transmissions (“pings”) from other vessels.

the Canadian “refit” When taken into service, there was an additional refit to “Canadianize” the boats, the equipment and their capabilities. This included: • long-range sonar featuring the Thales Underwater Systems Type 2007 flank array sonar and Thales Underwater Systems Type 2046 towed array sonar, both operating in passive mode and low frequency for long-range detection and location (the Canadian Towed Array (CANTASS) has been integrated into the towed sonar suite); • a navigation suite that includes a global positioning system, a Kelvin Hughes Type 1007 and a Foruno portable navigation radar; • the Northrup Grumman Sperry Marine Mark 49 inertial navigation system, based on ring laser gyro technology; • ultra high frequency (UHF) tactical satellite and Demand Assigned Multiple Access (DAMA) satellite communications; and • adjusted torpedo tubes to accommodate Canada’s Mark 48 heavy torpedo. Onboard weapons systems include: • the Mark 48 heavy torpedo, upgraded from Mod 4 to Mod 7; • Lockheed Martin Librascope Torpedo Fire Control System, upgraded and installed by Lockheed Martin Canada, Lockheed Martin Undersea Systems and Northstar Technical of St. John’s, to the operational specifications of the RCN (some components from the Oberon boats fire control system were installed in the Victoria class); and • six 533 mm (21-inch) bow torpedo tubes equipped with two air turbine pump discharge systems. The U.K. intended that the Oberon boats would be the last conventional submarines in the Royal Navy. Nuclear propelled boats are bigger, faster and have greater endurance. However, smaller and quieter conventional diesel electric boats are more suited to work in coastal shallow waters and their nearly silent operation makes them excellent for “cloak and dagger” surveillance and reconnaissance operations. Their design included advanced noiseattenuation features to minimize noise levels below the already very quiet Oberon class. Since their acceptance into the Canadian fleet, the Victoria class boats have been in refit for five years to install equipment and

APRIL/MAY 2012 43

N Navy sors, and retool to make them interoperable with the Canadian fleet and allied navies, and to meet the national missions assigned to them. The extended work periods to “Canadianize” them has led many to question why Canada made the purchase. “When we accepted these boats, people assumed we would be ready to go as soon as we received them, but there were a lot of improvements we needed to do, including communications and the weapon system,” said Capt (N) Luc Cassivi, director of the Canadian submarine force. HMCS Victoria’s successful torpedo trials at the navy’s Maritime Experimental and Test Ranges in British Columbia’s Nanoose Bay in March 2012 and the undocking of HMCS Windsor in Halifax on 10 April began the long awaited process of integrating the updated submarines into the Canadian fleet mix. However, commentators and media continue to see the series of refits and retrofits as “repairs.” Cassivi notes that the long domestic “refit” was, in part, because the RCN was making the transition to a submarine force that is essentially and exclusively Canadian. The navy took on the responsibility as design authority for this class of submarines. “We had to grow our own indigenous knowledge of the class, much as if you buy a very complex car and you decide to repair it at home. You have the manuals but you have to learn about the vehicle the first time you undertake a repair job, and that takes time. “Any class of submarine would have a significant strategic impact,” he added. “It is important that we have a balanced navy to defend our territory and bring strategic effect to any situation we need. To do that, we need to be able to control the sea or an area of the sea. Submarines are vital tools to accomplish that.”

Maritime challenges Canada calls on its submarines to perform a number of major tasks, but principally, it is to observe without being seen or heard – to monitor activities of other vessels, to provide intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, and to take decisive action when necessary to exercise the full spectrum of anti-surface and antisubmarine warfare as a last resort. Canada faces a range of maritime challenges, from human smuggling, trafficking and illegal migration to drug smuggling (Canada has deployed ships and a submarine to Operation Caribbe, a multinational naval effort to curb the drug trade), resource security triggered by Arctic energy and mineral exploration, maritime security to the sea routes that covey 80 percent of world trade, over-fishing and marine habitat abuse by foreign vessels in our territorial waters, and sovereignty in the Arctic. Their stealth allows submarines, in particular diesel electric submarines, to patrol and observe without betraying their presence. “The observer, particularly a stealthy observer, can choose when, if at all, to reveal its presence in order to influence activities,” Cassivi explained. “The mere presence of a submarine in an area of concern changes the dynamic of how other maritime forces will behave, and even reconsider whether they will be in the area to begin with.” Submarines also contribute to Canadian sovereignty. Canada can issue a Notice of Intent for a submarine deployment into a specific area. This would discourage mariners with less than in44 APRIL/MAY 2012

nocent intentions and open doors with allied nations who wish to use Canadian waters. It also brings nations to enter into waterspace management agreements with Canada, if they wish to bring a submarine into Canadian waters. “We have established agreements with our allies regarding the management and control of waterspace in the same way we manage the control of airspace for aircraft,” Cassivi noted. “We share information among like-minded nations and allies so we can deconflict activities and ensure that incidents do not happen. This is a significant side benefit to operating a submarine fleet, that we have access to that level of information and development of a greater level of understanding. This also opens the door to a level of intelligence sharing we otherwise would not have.”

Benefit to industry The cost to acquire four new diesel electric submarines and their necessary infrastructure is estimated at between $5 and $7 billion. “These four submarines cost Canada shy of $1 billion,” Cassivi said. “For about the cost of one of the boats, we received four boats, training for Canadian submariners, four state-of-the-art simulators and all the technical information material.” When Canada operated the Oberon class, the British had the design authority, and they were operating and exporting them. There were well-established supply lines for spares and the manufacturer retained a large group of engineers who were very efficient at dealing with that platform as it aged. This allowed Canada to get significant life out of the Oberons. The British intended to do the same with the Upholder class, but becoming a nuclear-only submarine force stopped the assembly at four platforms. When Canada agreed to the purchase, we received the entire fleet of Upholders, and there was no expectation that Britain would retain the role of design authority for this class. Nor was there any expectation that the British supply chain for these boats would remain in operation. As Canada is the only nation operating the Upholders, new supply lines have to be established to provide high quality materials for the harsh undersea environment. This has led to the development of an in-service support contract and effective relations with industry through the Canadian Submarine Management Group, based in Esquimalt. Because Canada is the sole user for the Upholder class, Canadian industry is developing a level of knowledge and capability in support to the submarine industry where none existed previously.

Conclusion Since acquiring these four submarines, they have collectively served three years at sea and participated in two serials of Operation Nanook (2007 and 2009) and in Operation Caribbe. Despite the failure of most Canadians to recognize Canada as a maritime nation, having the world’s longest coastline along the Atlantic, Arctic and Pacific oceans requires that we develop continuous situational awareness and the capability to respond to any threat or incident that occurs in our maritime domain. So maritime specialists are asking, not “why do we need submarines?” but “are four enough?”

The world is complex. Your decisions don’t have to be. Efficient troop training? Secure airfield operations?

From part task training to complete team high-fidelity simulation solutions

Our radar solutions enable better management of complex air environments

Maritime inter-agency effectiveness? Our IMIC3 system integrates maritime picture and mission management tools across ships and shore-bases

Naval systems integration? Friend or Foe? Our C4 enabled integrated mobile 3D tactical control radar maximises crew safety and mission success

Total ship electronic systems integration above and below water

Battlefield command and control? Our world-leading suite of C2 software applications provides the Army with complete battlespace situation awareness

Defence, security and world safety responsibilities are becoming increasingly complex for our armed forces. Thales Canada supports our troops with best-in-class technology, electronic systems integration expertise, training systems and dedicated life-cycle service. Whether it’s for army, navy, air force, or joint force operations, we provide communication integration, C2 to C4, radar, uncooled optronics, counter IED, management systems and more. Thales helps DND and the Canadian Coast Guard to decide and act quickly, often in critical situations, and obtain the best outcomes. To find out more, scan the QR code or visit

T The Last Word Philippe Lagassé is an assistant

professor at the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Ottawa.

‘Smart defense’ and the Canadian Forces ated with the military’s expanded command structure, and the Earlier this year the United States Department of Defense released drain on resources caused by the CF’s excessive numbers of bases, a strategic guidance document for the American military. Meant installations and buildings. to reorient American defence policy in light of Afghanistan and Taken together, these costs have left Canada with an unsustainIraq, the document also called upon NATO members to adopt a able set of defence programs and policies. Unless defence expendinew approach to burden-sharing and cooperation. tures are markedly increased (which is an impalpable option until “In this resource-constrained era,” the document states, “we the federal deficit is eliminated), and serious efforts are made to will also work with NATO allies to develop a ‘Smart Defense’ make the defence department and armed forces more efficient, the approach to pool, share, and specialize capabilities as needed to CF will likely experience a gradual reduction in capabilities, and meet 21st century challenges.” the Canadian government will be forced to make difficult choices At a time when NATO members are faced with austerity meaabout what it would like to do with its armed sures and rising defence costs, this pooling of forces and what it can actually afford to do. resources and sharing of capabilities will be Truth be told, even if these challenges are necessary to preserve the Alliance’s overall These costs have surmounted, planned capital expenditures ability to undertake high intensity operations may still be insufficient to recapitalize the in the coming decades. left Canada with an CF’s existing force structure. Accordingly, Underlying the idea of Smart Defense is the reality that many NATO allies are either unsustainable set of the Conservative government and Department of National Defence should take a seriunwilling or unable to spend the money redefence programs ous and sober look at the ‘Smart Defense’ quired to recapitalize their general purpose proposal. forces. and policies. Now is the opportune time to consider this Canada is one of these allies. Notwithstandoption. The process of replacing the miliing the confident rhetoric of the Conservative tary’s major platforms has been slowed by government, current and projected defence various factors, meaning that there is still time to reconsider what expenditures are insufficient to maintain the Canadian Forces’ exequipment a honed CF would require. isting constellation of capabilities. At a minimum, the CF must be able to protect Canadians and The 2008 Canada First Defence Strategy put forth a bold and Canadian sovereignty, and work alongside the United States to ambitious plan to revitalize the CF. CFDS sought to replace the defend North America. Successfully completing these missions CF’s major fleets, as well as augment the military’s capabilities in must be the highest defence policy priorities of the government. key areas, such as Arctic patrol. As well, the strategy pledged to But beyond these domestic and continental missions, defence increase the size of the regular force, while repairing and modernplanners should consider what expeditionary capabilities the CF izing the Canada’s military infrastructures. might focus on in the future as part of a Smart Defense partnership However well intentioned, CFDS quickly proved unrealistic. The with certain close allies, such as the U.S. and United Kingdom. strategy was overly optimistic about the costs of replacing the CF’s Niched forces have long been disavowed by the Canadian demajor fleets and modernizing the military’s existing capabilities. fence community. With the United States making a clear call for its Indeed, as a number of delayed procurements indicates, the allies to embrace Smart Defense for the sake of future NATO opstrategy tended to underestimate the cost of new equipment, parerations, this aversion to greater specialization should be set aside, ticularly when industry is asked to meet the specific needs of the particularly when a period of prolonged austerity looms ahead. Canadian military and defence-specific inflation is taken into acAt the very least, this is a discussion that the Canadian defence count. community should have, whether the government answers the Exacerbating these difficulties are personnel costs that have ‘Smart Defense’ call or not. reached nearly 60 percent of the defence budget, expenses associ-

46 APRIL/MAY 2012



Atl br


One Exp Lea En Foc Joi Tak Me



September 5-7, 2012 Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Cunard Centre - Halifax Waterfront Atlantic Canada is a natural gateway to and bridge between Europe, the United States and the remainder of Canada. Come see why this event continues to grow in size and popularity! One of Canada’s major networking opportunities for business and government: Explore partnership potential with regional and international firms Learn about Canadian Government procurement plans Engage with Government assistance programs Focus on the 2012 theme of Modeling and Simulation (M&S) Join the discussion on the intersection between M&S and the talents of the digital gaming industry Take advantage of the huge potential for business within the Canadian Shipbuilding Program Meet major industry Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) who are focused on supply chain enhancement And do it all in one of Canada’s great business & tourism destinations - Halifax, Nova Scotia...

Canada’s largest Aerospace & Defence companies are already committed to exhibit, including: CAE DRS Technologies General Dynamics Canada IMP Aerospace Irving Shipbuilding L-3 Communications Lockheed Martin Canada Raytheon Canada Limited SNC-Lavalin Plus dozens more companies...

Visit Visit our our web web site site for for more more information: information:

FOR MORE INFORMATION OR TO MAKE A BOOKING, PLEASE CONTACT: Colin Stephenson, Executive Director Mail & Courier: 166 Ingram Drive Fall River, Nova Scotia CANADA B2T 1A4 Office: +1 (902) 465-2725 Fax: +1 (902) 484-3222 Cell: +1 (902) 223-2099 E-Mail:

“Canadian Partnership Potential. Focused Here, Expanding Worldwide...”

Vanguard_Canada_213 x 286.qxp:Nammo Vanguard Canada adv 14.03.12 17.42 Page 1

SECURING THE FUTURE With reliability and accuracy in our technology, processes and business

Ammunition Rocket Motors Shoulder Launched Weapons Demilitarization Hand Grenades Fuzes Warheads Pyrotechnics Gas Generators and Catapults Ballistic Devices Civilian Products Testing and Services

Vanguard April/May 2012  

In this issue of Vanguard Preparing for the unpredictable: LGen Stuart Beare Networking the dismounted solider Special: Innovative solutions...