Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch
You require a whole different infrastructure to take care of the reactors on a submarines, and a whole different class of sailors to run and maintain them. instead of diesel mechanics you need people with a masters level in nuclear engineering. You would also need to create a whole new training and safety system.
You can use the f18/f35, but they are far more expensive to transport and maintain in a battle area. In Afghanistan Canada rented drones to provide over head security and intelligence gathering, however it would have been nice to put a maverick on some schmuck burying a roadside bomb.
Canada used Artillary to great effect in Afghanistan and Artillary is the great battlefield equalizer. but modern artillary is far more mobile and accurate and thats important.
In terms of the AA support. Eventually Canada is going to eventually be deployed again to a mission that involves a nation state that have either advanced missiles or aircraft on call, we need to update our systems to create a safe mobile bubble over our troops in the field.
|
Seriously, the article talked about Canada needing to stop relying on friends to transport our military to places that it is needed. A lack of big helicopters and ships hinders us in a big way. And if we cannot transport our guys to the north ourselves no one else will. On thing the military could use are those huge hover/landing crafts that the US marines use. In the disaster here in Japan 18 thousand marines kept 100's of thousands alive because they could transport 100's of tonnes of supplies to them directly even though roads and airports were non-existent.
That of course means the navy would need a craft to carry these. This craft would be the one carrying the helicopters, artillery, etc....
Dreaming I know....but why not.
