[EyeBrock]

I agree re the TSR2 Matt. Just in case you were not aware the Canadians had their own "TSR2" in the Avro Arrow. Much the same arguments about development etc happened with both aircraft.

While is was in the RAF I worked at JATE, a Tri-Force unit that tested equipment in the procurement process for airportability on RAF AT assets. I could tell you a few biggies if the Official Secrets Act wasn't so wide ranging.

I kind of agree with some of what Bart is saying but I don't think whatever the CF get makes much difference without the strategic sea and air assets being available to deploy any air support. The Canadians have neglected more or less every aspect of the Forces.

In reality the CF has no expeditionary capability anymore. It cannot deploy itself, nor support itself on even a limited operation like the NATO tasking in Afghanistan.

I have worked with the CF on many exercises and I was in CFB Goose Bay for 3 years. The CF troops are some of the best trained and despite their plight, continue to be pretty well motivated.

Unfortunately they lack the things I have mentioned, but the list goes on.

No real dedicated medevac capability to support anything more than a small deployment.
Very basic air-to-air refuelling a/c (the Airbus is hardly dedicated to that role).
No heavy lift, no rotary heavy lift.
Nil amphibious assault capability.
Minimal ground based anti aircraft capability.
No heavy armour deployable.
Limited dedicated Combat engineer abilities and next to no bridging/fording equipment.
No deployable air support.
Little air support experience with Army units or proven capability.
No dedicated arctic warfare battalion , save the minimally equipped and home defence only, Rangers.
No arctic equipment in decent numbers to support much more than a Coy.
No arctic capable naval support.

This list is not comprehensive by no means.

[-Mario-]

The Avro Arrow was built before the TSR-2. It was rumored that some Engineers from the Arrow program switch to the TSR-2.

[maritimematt]

Avro-Canada certainly had tons of moxie - don't forget the Avro Car!

[Knoss]

I think that new fighters is a priority, We should have planned on upgrading the sea kings so that we had the budget for new fiughters in 10 years.

[bootlegga]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Unfortunately they lack the things I have mentioned, but the list goes on.

No real dedicated medevac capability to support anything more than a small deployment.
Very basic air-to-air refuelling a/c (the Airbus is hardly dedicated to that role).
No heavy lift, no rotary heavy lift.
Nil amphibious assault capability.
Minimal ground based anti aircraft capability.
No heavy armour deployable.
Limited dedicated Combat engineer abilities and next to no bridging/fording equipment.
No deployable air support.
Little air support experience with Army units or proven capability.
No dedicated arctic warfare battalion , save the minimally equipped and home defence only, Rangers.
No arctic equipment in decent numbers to support much more than a Coy.
No arctic capable naval support.

This list is not comprehensive by no means.

Fortunately, most of this list can be crossed off if the Cons keep their election promises and last long enough. The Libs already set-up a $5 Billion dollar tactical airlift/helicopter replacement and created that new Special Ops battalion. With the Cons, we're also supposed to get armed icebreakers, strategic airlift, the JSS, and more boots on the ground.

As for ground-based AA, I thought we still had ADATS. I also thought our Combat engineers were keeping the special Leopard variants, even though the A1s were going to be phased out after the Strykers were built. As for heavy armour, I'd rather have a squadron of Apaches than heavy tanks.

I also agree that Canada should have at least one unit trained specifically in Arctic warfare.

This is the only promise I care if Harper keeps, but hopefully I'm not too naive. I voted for Mulroney in 1988 because he promised big bucks for our boys and then turned around and torpedoed the idea of nuclear subs and sold our Chinooks to the Dutch. That pissed me off more than the GST!

[bootlegga]

Knoss Knoss:

I think that new fighters is a priority, We should have planned on upgrading the sea kings so that we had the budget for new fiughters in 10 years.

We already should have replaced the Sea Kings with EH-101s (starting in 1995), but Chretien cancelled that contract and they fiddled while Rome was burning trying to pick something other than the EH-101 the second time around...

[Wullu]

Scape Scape:

Thematic-Device Thematic-Device:

I somehow don't see the benefit in paying 22.5 million per aircraft to upgrade the F-18 to the outdated c/d level when the marginal cost of getting a fleet of JSFs is only 13 million each.

Problem I see is that we wouldn't get them for that price. Also we would have to retrain and retool for the new aircraft. We already have the training and replacement parts for the Hornets now and the upgrade program is already underway. Stealth is a great advantage for the next generation fighters but I don't see it being worth the cost when that money could be put towards strat airlift and long range AWAC that we will also need as well.

The price of a new system is always more than the unit price times the number of units. The CPF program for example got us 12 frigates at about 500 million a copy. The actual program was budgeted at almost 7 billion. You have to factor in spares, trainers, initial training and raft of other stuff.

I just hope the Air Force is smarter than the navy was with the frigates. We trained all our senior rates (PO1/PO2) first then the Master Seamen and then finaly after we had most of the fleet the Leading Seamen that actually do the maintenace. I got posted off my 3rd frigate to go on my frigate course. Was kinda reduntant at that point, I spent 14 months learning how to work on gear I had already been working on for 2 years.

If we don't replace them soon, military soon not real people soon, we will wind up in the Sea King saga we are in now. The money spent on maintenace in the last 12 years and the penaltys we paid for the initial cancelation would have paid for most of the fleet we still won't start seeing until 2008.

[Wullu]

Knoss Knoss:

I think that new fighters is a priority, We should have planned on upgrading the sea kings so that we had the budget for new fiughters in 10 years.

There is just no more upgrading left in the Sea Kings Knoss. Any meaningful upgrade would probably cost almost as much as a new airframe and we would still be sitting there in 10 years with a 50 year old airframe.

[Knoss]

The British put new digital equipment i their sea kings and recommisioned them until 2020

[EyeBrock]

Bootlegger wrote:

$1:

As for ground-based AA, I thought we still had ADATS. I also thought our Combat engineers were keeping the special Leopard variants, even though the A1s were going to be phased out after the Strykers were built. As for heavy armour, I'd rather have a squadron of Apaches than heavy tanks.

I agree the 36 ADATS bought in the early 1990's are AA as well as anti-tank but correct me if I’m wrong I don’t think they can fit in a Herk?
If that’s correct its not deployable with any haste.
Also the US and UK (as well as those feisty Aussies) have a mix of SAMS and AAA.
The Brits found that the ‘liberated’ Argie AAA guns that brought down a couple of Harriers worked well at low level. The Rapier, tracked and towed variants fit in a Charlie 130 providing rapid AA cover for our grunt type brethren.

Unfortunately the CF hasn’t really signed on to the ‘layer’ approach to AD.
The Army does have the Leopards, but again, old, near rust out and not air portable. The Brit Army has the CET (Combat Engineering Tractor) which again fits in a Herk.

Apaches are great but you need air superiority and armour on the ground to work in concert to be really effective.

As I said the Canadian Army has little or no expeditionary capability which really, is embarrassing.

I’d like to see our guys fly out in a RCAF CC17 sat next to a Leopard tank, escorted by CF18’s.
Once they get in theatre they should be ferried by Chinooks that can carry field artillery pieces and defended by SAM’s and AAA with a CAP running around at 20,000 feet ready to drop some serious iron on bad guys called in by a forward air controller.

Casualties should be medevaced by our choppers to a proper hospital, maybe ship board.

All supported logistically by tactical AT that isn’t 40 years old and goes u/s every half hour.

Simple stuff really!

Oh and the Brit Seakings were up until recently produced under licence by Westland. They are pretty new by CF standards! No comparison.

[bootlegga]

That sounds awesome! Now let's hope the government forks out the dough to make it a reality...

[Wullu]

Knoss Knoss:

The British put new digital equipment i their sea kings and recommisioned them until 2020

The British air frames are much younger than our own, 80's vintage I believe. If the Sea Thing replacement was pushed back again I think you would see wholesale releases from the squadrons. The Cpls and MCpls are getting tired of pulling rabbits out of their hats.

[bootlegga]

Wullu Wullu:

I just hope the Air Force is smarter than the navy was with the frigates. We trained all our senior rates (PO1/PO2) first then the Master Seamen and then finaly after we had most of the fleet the Leading Seamen that actually do the maintenace. I got posted off my 3rd frigate to go on my frigate course. Was kinda reduntant at that point, I spent 14 months learning how to work on gear I had already been working on for 2 years.

I don't know if they are smarter now, but Air Command tried to send my father on the Herc maintenance course in 1975, even though he'd spent the past decade repairing them! The idea was every unit had to send a rep and my dad was the low man on the totem pole here at Namao.

Some things never change I guess...

[-Mario-]

Wullu Wullu:

Knoss Knoss:

I think that new fighters is a priority, We should have planned on upgrading the sea kings so that we had the budget for new fiughters in 10 years.

There is just no more upgrading left in the Sea Kings Knoss. Any meaningful upgrade would probably cost almost as much as a new airframe and we would still be sitting there in 10 years with a 50 year old airframe.

Upgrade a 46 year old bird so we can replace a barely 25 year old jet....

I will agree the Canada should replace the F-18, but Seaking should be first.

[-Mario-]

Knoss Knoss:

The British put new digital equipment i their sea kings and recommisioned them until 2020

How old are the Brit's Seaking??? the production line was still open in the 80ies.