Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[ytz]

Because they have ~60 Chinooks, second largest Hook fleet after the US Army.

Exactly why I said we should buy more Chinooks. At minimum for a separate OTU and training support squadron in Gagetown. But preferably a second Chinook line squadron out west too.

 

[GR66]

Can they do all of that simultaneously? What happens if they get crowded all along the line? There is no need to push to Moscow. Moscow would get perturbed if they lost the Kola, Kaliningrad and St Petersburg. Concurrent loss of access to Crimea through Euro-Turkic domination of the Black Sea. The job for the Poles, with the Brits and the French, then becomes to hold in the centre - which is what a Schiltron (oops sorry, porcupine) is optimized for.

I wouldn't think they would do any of this simultaneously. Why would they choose to overextend themselves? And there will be no push to Moscow or St. Petersburg or the Kola Peninsula. Russia would definitely use nuclear weapons if there was any risk of their losing key portions of their territory or a general breakthrough of their front.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Yes.



No.

Simple and straight to the point, lol.

 

[dapaterson]

Exactly why I said we should buy more Chinooks. At minimum for a separate OTU and training support squadron in Gagetown. But preferably a second Chinook line squadron out west too.

So three sqns total plus OTU, so about 55 or so for the total fleet size?

 

[Good2Golf]

Exactly why I said we should buy more Chinooks. At minimum for a separate OTU and training support squadron in Gagetown. But preferably a second Chinook line squadron out west too.

Two squadrons is just fine, keeping the OTF at 450. Let 403 keeping its thing with the Griffons. Just because it’s the 146 OTU, doesn’t make it the be all to end all. All the training facilities and terrain needed is at Pet. Reactivate 447 in Namao with the additional Hooks.

 

[Kirkhill]

I’m just spit balling here.
I’d say the odds of Poland getting nucs has gone up substantially over the last month.
Same with Taiwan, South Korea and even the Baltics.

Ukraine?

 

[Czech_pivo]

Carney, defence minister and military chief in Iqaluit for sovereignty announcement

Prime Minister Mark Carney will be in Iqaluit today in a bid to reassert Canada’s sovereignty in the Arctic.

www.ctvnews.ca

Carney, defence minister and military chief in Iqaluit for sovereignty announcement​

Alright - let's hear your bets on what going to be announced, go!

1) Canada to build new Maginot Line across the Arctic staffed jointly with Canadian/French troops.

 

[Remius]

Carney, defence minister and military chief in Iqaluit for sovereignty announcement

Prime Minister Mark Carney will be in Iqaluit today in a bid to reassert Canada’s sovereignty in the Arctic.

www.ctvnews.ca

Carney, defence minister and military chief in Iqaluit for sovereignty announcement​

Alright - let's hear your bets on what going to be announced, go!

1) Canada to build new Maginot Line across the Arctic staffed jointly with Canadian/French troops.

New subs?

 

[ytz]

So three sqns total plus OTU, so about 55 or so for the total fleet size?

More like two line squadrons (12x each) + OTU (6x) + attrition (10-15% = 3-5x). 35 frames is enough to provide a Chinook squadron in Pet and Edmonton and an OTU and training support unit (for the CTC) in Gagetown.

The dreams here of 250 Blackhawks and 55 Chinooks are impossible. It would literally take two decades to produce enough pilots and techs to support that. This should also be part of the consideration. This is why a bigger helicopter for the baseline utility bird helps. Reduces the pilot seat count. And it's exactly what the UK did with the mix of 101s and Chinooks.

 

[KevinB]

New subs?

2 VP posted from Shilo to Iqaluit…

 

[GR66]

2 VP posted from Shilo to Iqaluit…

So an improvement to Quality of Life?

 

[KevinB]

More like two line squadrons (12x each) + OTU (6x) + attrition (10-15% = 3-5x). 35 frames is enough to provide a Chinook squadron in Pet and Edmonton and an OTU and training support unit (for the CTC) in Gagetown.

It really depends on what the CA is planning for the Light Bde, plus what CANSOF and the RCAF needs from the fleet.

I’d rather see you guys with 80 Hooks in 6 Operational Squadrons of 12/, and the OTU and spares.

1 Squadron for SOF
3 Squadrons for the Lt Bde
2 Squadrons for the rest of the CA
1 Squadron for the RCAF to do various non formation supporting tasks.
8 other airframes.

- if you went with a different (significantly more capable) UH, then those numbers could lower.

 

[ytz]

Let 403 keeping its thing with the Griffons. Just because it’s the 146 OTU, doesn’t make it the be all to end all.

If the fleet wants to support and coordinate with the army, they need to be where the army does a lot of its training. Not just the OTU. But to provide training support at the CTC itself.

 

[Good2Golf]

If the fleet wants to support and coordinate with the army, they need to be where the army does a lot of its training. Not just the OTU. But to provide training support at the CTC itself.

Schoolhouse mentality.

 

[ytz]

It really depends on what the CA is planning for the Light Bde, plus what CANSOF and the RCAF needs from the fleet.

I’d rather see you guys with 80 Hooks in 6 Operational Squadrons of 12/, and the OTU and spares.

1 Squadron for SOF
3 Squadrons for the Lt Bde
2 Squadrons for the rest of the CA
1 Squadron for the RCAF to do various non formation supporting tasks.
8 other airframes.

- if you went with a different (significantly more capable) UH, then those numbers could lower.

Few points.

There is substantial debate inside the RCAF and even inside 1 Wing whether 450 Sqn should be inside 1 Wg or directly controlled by 1 CAD given it's importance to air mobility in general. Very possible that if the Chinook force was to grow to the 2 + OTU I am suggesting, they'd be spun off as a separate wing.

80 Hooks is never, ever going to happen. This is more than the British who are Chinook heavy. Another reason, it'll never happen is because the training and maintenance requirements for readiness are so much higher. As it is, suggesting a medium-heavy helicopter like the 149 or 101 would be demanding. Going to a predominantly Chinook force would be very over the top.

The backbone of Land Aviation is never going to be the Chinook fleet. It's always going to be the light/medium helicopter. And this is not all that different from what most other countries do. American CABs have only one Chinook battalion of 12 frames per brigade. So we'd be pretty close to that ratio if we had two line squadrons of 12 frames. SOF, light brigade, rest of the CA, etc. aren't all big enough to demand a squadron each.

 

[ytz]

Schoolhouse mentality.

You're not wrong. But sometimes, you need to do that just to build that cooperation. What would happen if our MH OTU wasn't wear the Fleet School is? Or our transport OTU wasn't where the jump school is? Etc.

 

[Good2Golf]

You're not wrong.

I know. That’s why the OTF is where it is.

But sometimes, you need to do that just to build that cooperation.

Don’t mistake initial conversion training (that can happen anywhere) with tactical joint training.

Your logic actually support the Chinook OTF at 447 Sqn in Edmonton, so it’s a short hop to CMTC Wainright for Level 4, T, 6 training. Not section attacks in Gagetown.

It also supports training with CANSOF, which is all very close to where 450 is.

What would happen if our MH OTU wasn't wear the Fleet School is?

They’d travel for a bit of TD to conduct joint training as required. TD’s cheap.

Or our transport OTU wasn't where the jump school is? Etc.

Why is the Army’s jump school on an RCAF base?

 

[KevinB]

Few points.

There is substantial debate inside the RCAF and even inside 1 Wing whether 450 Sqn should be inside 1 Wg or directly controlled by 1 CAD given it's importance to air mobility in general. Very possible that if the Chinook force was to grow to the 2 + OTU I am suggesting, they'd be spun off as a separate wing.

80 Hooks is never, ever going to happen. This is more than the British who are Chinook heavy. Another reason, it'll never happen is because the training and maintenance requirements for readiness are so much higher. As it is, suggesting a medium-heavy helicopter like the 149 or 101 would be demanding. Going to a predominantly Chinook force would be very over the top.

The backbone of Land Aviation is never going to be the Chinook fleet. It's always going to be the light/medium helicopter. And this is not all that different from what most other countries do. American CABs have only one Chinook battalion of 12 frames per brigade. So we'd be pretty close to that ratio if we had two line squadrons of 12 frames. SOF, light brigade, rest of the CA, etc. aren't all big enough to demand a squadron each.

Don’t get me wrong I don’t think it would come to pass —

But the Griffon is a terrible UH, as it can’t effectively transport a combat loaded section. It can’t sling pretty much anything.
Its main job I’ve always figured was to be available for CasPara drops.

It irks the F out of me that Bell won’t do Military choppers out of Mirabel, as with the UH-1Y you’d have a much more powerful machine that is externally near identical to the Griffon and you’d have 80% part commonality with the AH-1Z.

The Venom still wouldn’t get 777’s slung loaded, or Light Vehicles lifted - but you’d be able to lift a 10 person section, and better speed/altitude performance.

The Viper would give true AH capabilities and be a true escort bird able to prosecute attacks on positions with greater density and staying power in a fight.

-
That said, that ship sailed, I think Bell should have pulled a ‘Super Hornet’ upgrade with the GLLE into the 1Y then everyone could have watched 427 gradually assemble a AH-1Z from parts and a few ‘accidental spares’ shipped from Texas.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Meanwhile, no one is quite sure what the new frigates will cost it seems...

Why is the naval destroyer program wrapped in secrecy? The F-35 saga offers insights​

Experts say politics is getting in the way of informing taxpayers​

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/naval-destroyer-contract-cost-secrecy-1.7486101?cmp=newsletter_Morning%20Headlines%20from%20CBC%20News_1613_1875176

 

[FSTO]

new frigates

Destroyers