Pages

05 December 2005

Corporal Taylor - give all the facts

Left - Mobile Gun System

Not much surprise in the return of former Corporal Scott Taylor as an expert military commentator. His comments on the new transport aircraft purchase and the army's proposed mobile gun system are linked from Bourque, but here is the Taylor piece.

Taylor criticizes the proposed transport purchase by calling the J Herc a new version of the aircraft currently ins service. He's right - except that Taylor doesn't point out that there are no other aircraft currently flying that can meet the requirement.

Taylor talks about strategic airlifters. Again, there are no plans to purchase them but Taylor neglects to point out that Canada does not have a requirement for a fleet of heavy-lift aircraft that would justify the operating costs. Nor does he note that heavy lift is readily available in all foreseeable cases.

Taylor also criticizes the army's mobile gun system (MGS), essentially a version of the light armoured vehicle with a big gun on it. He notes comments by General Rick Hillier that the MGS was vulnerable to rocket propelled grenades. Note the use of the word "was" there.

The MGS and its LAV cousins were vulnerable to rocket propelled grenades. This was painfully obvious from operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

What Taylor didn't say was that a simple, add-on armour system corrects that flaw. The Department of National Defence has already called a tender for the add-on armour for its fleet of wheeled armoured vehicles. Problem solved.

Left - LAV III with add-on armour defeats rocket propelled grenades.

Yes, the LAV family with add-ons is now too heavy to be carried by a Hercules - but other airlift and sealift is readily available. As it is, even without the add-on armour, the Canadian Herc fleet couldn't transport enough LAVs in a short time frame anywhere in the world to make much of a difference.

In the old days, Taylor's criticisms were well-founded, largely due to the inept Department of National Defence. His job was easy - he didn't have to know much to point to really obvious problems. Taylor built a name for himself among news media as a result.

These days Taylor's criticisms are based on not providing information that is already in the public domain which contradicts his conclusions.

Way to go, Scott.