Wanted: More intelligence gathering, less ball hockey
IRAQ: Canadian military relied on U.S. for help
Canada’s much-vaunted surveillance planes operating over Iraq were so limited in the information they could collect and share with allies, Canadian military personnel planning CF-18 attacks had to rely on the U.S. for data, according to documents obtained by the Ottawa Citizen.
The briefing, produced last year on lessons learned from operations in Iraq in 2014, also pointed out efforts to set up ball hockey facilities and a Tim Hortons for personnel at a base in Kuwait should take a back seat to getting key components of the mission in place.
Canada initially contributed special forces, Aurora surveillance aircraft, a refuelling plane and CF-18 fighter jets to the international coalition battling Islamic extremists.
The Liberal government withdrew the jets, but expanded the number of special forces and kept the refuelling planes and Auroras.
Canadian military officers have claimed from the beginning of the mission the upgraded CP-140 Auroras are among the most advanced surveillance aircraft in the world.
But the “lessons learned” document, obtained through the Access to Information law, tells a different story.
“The CP140 deployed without the organic capability to share their data with coalition partners,” it notes.
In addition, the software needed to process some CP-140 surveillance data was not available and the aircrews needed “greater experience operating over land.”
The Aurora is primarily a maritime surveillance plane, but the upgrades allow it to collect data on ground targets.
The problems didn’t stop with the Auroras. There were concerns about the overall lack of ability to share information Canada collected from various sources with its allies. In addition, the Canadian Forces had problems accessing coalition intelligence data without having to go through a U.S. military intermediary.
Gathering information about targets the CF-18s were to attack proved difficult. Problems with the planes’ targeting pods “severely” limited some information gathering, although the details were censored.
“Poor information” was provided to those deciding on targets. There is a need to increase the capability to “contribute to target discovery,” other comments in the briefing point out.