[Newsbot]

<strong>Title: </strong> <a href="/link.php?id=7534" target="_blank">Expert floats idea of Canadian aircraft carrier</a> (click to view)

<strong>Category:</strong> <a href="/modules.php?name=News_Links&file=category&catid=13" target="_blank">Military</a>
<strong>Posted By: </strong> <a href="/modules.php?name=Your_Account&op=userinfo&username=Scape" target="_blank">Scape</a>
<strong>Date: </strong> 2006-06-16 07:38:17
<strong>Canadian</strong>

[-Mario-]

It would be nice, but the Canadian's armed forces are not an attack strike force.

[Robair]

Helicopter carriers, yea, we could make use of that. This guy thinks Canada should get a full blown aircraft carrier? To carry what? A hornet and a sea king?

[Wullu]

And who would sail her? Every ship that deploys from either coast now has to steal trained bodies from other ships to meet the manning requirements. Any carrier is going to require at least 1500 to 2000 sailors to put to sea, roughly the same number of folks currently posted to ALL of east coast ships atm.

[Robair]

Another good point.

This guy is just off his rocker methinks.

[Knoss]

I think that the lack of personnelle and costs are importaint to consider but I think as a nation whoes role in foreign opperations is offten that of offensive assult, there is a concern we will be unable to find a nearby airfield for our hornets.

[MrMarch]

Good luck. The recommendations of the Canadian military have fallen on deaf ears for decades. Even if they were to obtain a carrier, current military spending suggests that our government could never hope to maintain the vessel, let alone refit and replace it in decades to come. Then there is the staffing of such a vessel that others have already noted.

On the plus side, the great need for an aircraft carrier could act as the catalyst for a proposal to increase funding for the Canadian Armed Forces and MARCOM in particular.

[bootlegga]

As much as I'd love to have a carrier (or helicopter assault ship), Canada does not really need one these days. We have very little need for power projection forces. That's why we don't have long-range bombers and/or a Marine Corps, like many other large nations (like USA, UK, France, Italy, Russia, China).

We don't have former colonies to help out, we don't have to attack enemies at long distances, and we already can control the sea apporaches to our nation (although US support far extends our range in this regard). Yes, a carrier (big or small) would have helped us dole out humanitarian aid after the 2004 tsunami or Hurricane Katrina, but that shouldn't be the reason we are buying them.

Personally, if the military wants something like this, I say stretch the Joint Support Ship they want to build and let them operate a half a dozen choppers (the current plans allow for a deck capable of two choppers). We get the best of both worlds that way. The only problem is that the JSS is already over-burdened with roles and this might add too much...

[Tricks]

WDHIII WDHIII:

Great..... ANOTHER thing for one of our Sea Kings to fall on and break....

ROTFL

[Hester]

Norman Friedman Norman Friedman:

"But if you’re going to operate expeditionary (forces), independently, I’m talking about a carrier."

Why would we operate independently? Why would we want to? We have NEVER done that.

[Hester]

Even the US doesn't like to go it alone. In the history of the world have we ever needed to go alone? Or never went somewhere because no one would go with us? I think this is idiocy.

NATO and the UN with the "collective defense" and "attack against one is perceived as an attack against all" were supposed to have made this type of thinking obsolete.

[Tman1]

Good luck on that. While the prospect sounds fine, Harper seems to have caught his foot in his mouth on military expenditures, much to my dismay. Getting icebreakers seems near to impossible now as well as asserting arctic sovereignty, a major platform promise of his. The Coast Guard needs overhauling, talks of buying new transport planes, choppers....the list is endless.

The question is, do Canadians want to cough up the dough to pay for a better military? Canadians seem to keep changing their minds on the matter and if polls are correct, now Canadians want troops OUT of Afghanistan or if not that, waffling on the issue in parliament as opposed to them wanting them in there a few months ago.

[-Mario-]

Robair Robair:

Helicopter carriers, yea, we could make use of that. This guy thinks Canada should get a full blown aircraft carrier? To carry what? A hornet and a sea king?

Actually this is a very good Idea Robair. Sort of a USS Taranawa Class.

[bootlegga]

-Mario- -Mario-:

Robair Robair:

Helicopter carriers, yea, we could make use of that. This guy thinks Canada should get a full blown aircraft carrier? To carry what? A hornet and a sea king?

Actually this is a very good Idea Robair. Sort of a USS Taranawa Class.

Sadly, even that is too much ship for us these days...the government won't even buy one of the USN's surplus San Antonio class LPDs. Even this ship is likely too much for us to handle.

[Arrow]

Why da fock do we need an aircraft carrier? Do these things operate in isolation with no defense? Not bloody likely. These so-called "experts" are so full of it