The Canadian Armed Forces Requirements

[CaptainCrunch]

But you are correct, that's a major hole to me.

that also means that we're very weak on anti-armor capability.

[edslunch]

Lack of AA pretty much rules out fighting a major power doesn't it?

[CroFlames]

@ CC

I'm not even sure if it's plausible or doable, but could you do like a simplistic side by side comparison of Canada's military compared to to let's say the UK, US & Russia?

Essentially list Canada's land vehicles vs UK vs US vs Russia and the number of each vehicle; likewise with airforce and navy? Feel free to expand to Germany, China, India or whatever if you like

I'm really interested to see how Canada stacks up against these guys.

[peter12]

So, essentially, Cap'n, given the last decade of combat stress, the Canadian Forces have virtually no strengths, and have worn through any of the major additions that were added last minute to make up for the myriad deficiencies that presented themselves when fighting a determined enemy in a hostile environment.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

@ CC

I'm not even sure if it's plausible or doable, but could you do like a simplistic side by side comparison of Canada's military compared to to let's say the UK, US & Russia?

Essentially list Canada's land vehicles vs UK vs US vs Russia and the number of each vehicle; likewise with airforce and navy? Feel free to expand to Germany, China, India or whatever if you like

I'm really interested to see how Canada stacks up against these guys.

He took two weeks to write up a single country. Now you want to complicate things by adding more variables!? At that point, you should be paying the man.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by peter12

He took two weeks to write up a single country. Now you want to complicate things by adding more variables!? At that point, you should be paying the man.

Two things I've learned:

1. Asking is always free
2. Better to ask for forgiveness than permission

[peter12]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Two things I've learned:

1. Asking is always free
2. Better to ask for forgiveness than permission

Ayn Rand fan!

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Lack of AA pretty much rules out fighting a major power doesn't it?

Yes it does.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by peter12

So, essentially, Cap'n, given the last decade of combat stress, the Canadian Forces have virtually no strengths, and have worn through any of the major additions that were added last minute to make up for the myriad deficiencies that presented themselves when fighting a determined enemy in a hostile environment.

Pretty much correct, after the decade in Afghanistan Canada warned the rest of NATO that we would be in no shape to deploy ground forces for a few years due to wear down and personal fatigue.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

@ CC

I'm not even sure if it's plausible or doable, but could you do like a simplistic side by side comparison of Canada's military compared to to let's say the UK, US & Russia?

Essentially list Canada's land vehicles vs UK vs US vs Russia and the number of each vehicle; likewise with airforce and navy? Feel free to expand to Germany, China, India or whatever if you like

I'm really interested to see how Canada stacks up against these guys.

that would be tough to do, I could do it, but there are major philosophy differences in the major military groups.

Russia for example has I think 4 military districts with a minimum of one army group each, an army group is self contained, with Infantry, armor, motor rifles, artlllary, frontal aviation, etc. They are basically a kitchen sink approach.

The American's are pretty much the same things originally designed to be able to fight two major conflicts simultaneously while fighting a third holding action.

With Canada its more along the lines of mixing and matching to create a battlegroup.

To Put it in position, the Russian Western Military district would have

7 motor rifle brigades
3 engineering brigades
3 tank divisions
6 artillary brigades
6 anti-aircraft missile brigades
4 specialized headquarters and communications groups
2 brigades of military police and traffic control
3 to 5 airborne divisions
2 Spetznatz divisions and 1 brigade group

They have a whole naval division including naval assault troops
They might attach a reginment of dedicated bombers
A reginment of dedicated escort fighters
a regiment of ground attack multirole planes
1 regiment of helicopters of various types

Etc

Its a self contained kitchen sink theory where they can throw everything at you.

[kerriffic]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I was still showing a few of the Adats in active inventory, my bad, thanks for the correction.

I might have been working from older information.

I now feel shame.

No worries, the government wasn't exactly advertising it..... Just a brief press release and that's it. I know there are a few still floating around but are pretty much all but decommissioned.

It's too bad as the Adats overall was an excellent platform, the Americans had ordered 300 but the deal fell through at the end of the cold war and unfortunately never really received any other interest. They were for a time looking at remounting it onto a lav 3 chassis which would have extended the life but the project got cancelled.

[CaptainCrunch]

Right now outside of some man portable systems like the LAW Rocket (Canada had the Eryx but its retired) and actual Tanks Canada doesn't have much that would scratch a heavily armored vehicle.

As I mentioned, I believe this is a major hole and any upgrading of a vehicle like the LAV 3 should include a serious look at anti-tank capabilities.

Even though a ground war against a group like ISIS is unlikely from a Canadian perspective, every military has to prepare for every contigency, and currently its estimated that ISIS has several dozen T-55 tanks which are obsolete but still heavily armored and at least a dozen T-72 second generation tanks.

[btimbit]

Would something like a TOW system fitted to the LAV's be realistic? Still lightly armoured for an anti-armour role but better than what we have now, which is nothing.

[CaptainCrunch]

That's probably the best solution available.

And the Lav III can be fitted with the Tow system



Canada wouldn't need to upgrade all of the LAV 3's with a Tow missile system, but it would be smart to have some of them upgraded to provide infantry support.

Canada had ordered 33 of the LAV TUA vehicles but cancelled them and had them converted to the infantry carry version which I think is the RWS.

Now with the armor upgrade and repair program happening this would be the idea time to see if they can fix that error.

[CaptainCrunch]

HMCS Athabaskan blows an engine

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-s...ails-1.3258059

third major repair issue in a very short period of time

[btimbit]

Didn't it have some engine failures a few months ago as well? She's gotta be close to joining the rest of the class in retirement sometime soon

[jeffman]

nm

[Kavvy]

Sorry if this is in this thread already, but does anyone have an easy summary of the 3 major parties current platform on future military spending?

Wasn't Harper suppose to spend more when he originally got his majority?

[CaptainCrunch]

Right now, Harper has been spending about 1 to 1.1 percent of GDP, which to me is woeful under spending and has lead me to write this opus. However on the plus side through there are problems with the program right now the Navy Ships program is a step in the right direction. Harper has done a good job in terms of heavy lift and logistics, and in terms of trying to extend the life of some equipment (LAV 3) (Tanks).

But in terms of individual moral and troop levels the conservatives have been weak.

I don't know what Trudeau would do, the stuff that I've read is pretty vague but it sounds like he wouldn't increase military spending at all, and there is little in terms of new initiatives and upgrades in his platform.

Frankly Mulcair would gut the armed forces, probably cut the spending in half to pay for his day care program.

None of the leaders are great in terms of the military, its surprising with Harper, but he's following the path of Mulrooney who made big promises and didn't deliver.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by btimbit

Didn't it have some engine failures a few months ago as well? She's gotta be close to joining the rest of the class in retirement sometime soon

She should have been sunk 10 years ago, they also had a engine room fire not that long ago.

Frankly the problem is without these destroyers the Canadian Navy can't form coherent task forces with proper command and control, that's why the new ships program includes replacements with command and control functionality