You don't need a CFB a la Cold Lake. As Whynotnow points out, you operate out of civilian airports. For an example, look at the Yellowknife airport, which will probably be the Northern operating base. An advantage of using a civilian airport is you can leverage pilots who are in the RCAF Reserve but fly for, for example, Air Canada.
Winnipeg and Yellowknife are bases. It's not that easy to just base your aircraft at a random civilian airport. You also have to consider support staff, maintenance, equipment etc. It's one thing to deploy short term and another to actually be stationed somewhere.
Winnipeg and Yellowknife are bases. It's not that easy to just base your aircraft at a random civilian airport. You also have to consider support staff, maintenance, equipment etc. It's one thing to deploy short term and another to actually be stationed somewhere.
Even though there is a military presence in Yellowknife, Yellowknife is not a CFB. Just like Calgary is not a CFB, even though there is a military presence here.
__________________
"If you do not know what you are doing, neither does your enemy."
- - Joe Tzu
Even though there is a military presence in Yellowknife, Yellowknife is not a CFB. Just like Calgary is not a CFB, even though there is a military presence here.
Oh for crying out loud. My point is it is a full time unit with support staff and is not just a couple airplanes parked on a ramp. DND is not going to station planes in Calgary or Edmonton when they have a operational base in Winnipeg already.
DND is in the midst of rebuilding Cold Lake to house F-35, MJ and Southport are about to go through a transition with lots of new infra, it doesn't make any sense that they would open a new base, detachment, whatever you want to call it in a city they left years ago.
There's good news and bad news in terms of using a civillian air field as a rally point or armed forces base.
The good news, its cheap and simplifies a lot of logistics questions.
With the direction security is going these days it is probably going to get more and more complicated to do this. We had to replace the entire perimeter fencing here in MJ just to meet DND requirements, and it's a open base you can drive right ont. Cold Lake has to build an entirely new perimeter fence just to meet the requirements of the F-35, it's getting really comlicsted, that's just one small piece of the puzzle.
With the direction security is going these days it is probably going to get more and more complicated to do this. We had to replace the entire perimeter fencing here in MJ just to meet DND requirements, and it's a open base you can drive right ont. Cold Lake has to build an entirely new perimeter fence just to meet the requirements of the F-35, it's getting really comlicsted, that's just one small piece of the puzzle.
I think the difference is the aircraft we are talking about here is basically a commercial aircraft painted grey. Cold Lake already has retention issues but if you want to fly fast planes you go there. I think trying to keep airbus crews there is going to be a tough time when they can live anywhere and do that,
The model of having military units at civvie airports is pretty strong as you know in the US . Tulsa has F16’s, MSP the Hercs, both national guard of course. I think it should be a consideration here, if you are building new infrastructure there may be some good considerations to Edmonton(closer to the army base, it’s already the departure point for Garrison). Calgary is probably not going to happen, already a pretty congested field.
the basic concern with using a civilian base for fighters is you cannot scramble fast enough, the reality is there will always be 3 or 4 commercial jets taking off or landing and it would take 10 or 15 minutes to get them out of the way in an emergency, probably fine for transport though
The Following User Says Thank You to afc wimbledon For This Useful Post:
Last year in a Global interview Rick Hillier stated that he believed that the DND was misleading Canadians in terms of the number of Canadians in the Armed Forces when the CDS said that Canada was down from 70,000 to 60,000 in the combined regular and reserve forces.
The rumor going around is that while the government is reporting that we have about 68,000 members, the truth is that by September the forces will be down to a combined 31,000 members in the combined regular and reserve forces.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
The rumor going around is that while the government is reporting that we have about 68,000 members, the truth is that by September the forces will be down to a combined 31,000 members in the combined regular and reserve forces.
Context matters in these numbers games and I think LCol (Retd) Redman might be referring to operationally ready personnel. If the context is 31,000 total personnel, that's complete BS.
The RCN, Army and RCAF are Level 1 organizations and they make up half of the organizations at Level 1. The Reg F is at about 68,000 members and approximately half are RCN, Army and RCAF and those people are "operational". Redman cites 34,000 as the current number which is about right for "operational".
The official line is we're short 16,000 across the Reg F and Primary Reserve, but it's actually more than that when you factor in people who are on medical categories and employment limitations. In many Army units, the effective strength is 50%.
__________________
"If you do not know what you are doing, neither does your enemy."
- - Joe Tzu
We need to change our strategy entirely. Less combatants and more force multipliers. We need massive canadian drone fleets and vehicles that control/ launch them.
We need to change our strategy entirely. Less combatants and more force multipliers. We need massive canadian drone fleets and vehicles that control/ launch them.
Can we get less combatants?
How many affective Reg Force Infantry does Canada really have?
3 Regiments with 3 Battalions with 3 Companies + 1 Combat Support Company
edit; that's on paper, most Reg Force Battalions don't have the people to fill all those companies.
That's pretty lean.
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
Corporal Jean-Marc H. BECHARD, 6 Aug 1993
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sliver
Just ignore me...I'm in a mood today.
Last edited by undercoverbrother; 09-07-2023 at 10:34 AM.
I think the Government needs to call a stop to the new ship program and do an audit of the entire thing. The over runs and costs are completely out of control. We're suddenly paying to do a refit for Irving's ship yard even though they were suppossed to have facilities to build them and any costs to upgrade should have been covered by Irving.
Its ludicrous that we're paying more for a frigate then a modern generation British Aircraft carrier.
There are still questions around the safety and performance of these boats as well.
In a day and age where our Military is trying to find a billion in cuts, this program seems to have a lot of pigs at the trough.
Honest question, since we do it for planes and tanks already:
Why can't we just add on to the British order of ships (or american), or just straight up purchase one of our own off their lines? Is this Irving getting the extra $4 billion somehow?
Honest question, since we do it for planes and tanks already:
Why can't we just add on to the British order of ships (or american), or just straight up purchase one of our own off their lines? Is this Irving getting the extra $4 billion somehow?
Because we insist on the Canadianization of almost everything.
And that's fine to me in certain situations, but when we're talking about what should be a somewhat competent design for a general purpose frigate, we should just be able to buy off of the shelf.
Also Irving kind of lied here. They stated that they had shipyard capability to build these ships. It was in the contract from my understanding that Irving would pay the costs for any upgrades to their own yards. Now it turns out that the Feds are sinking money into these ship yards.
I'm actually terrified of what's going to happen with the F-35's I mean we know they're going to be built stateside, but Canadian companies and the government are going to have their hands all over facilities upgrades and maintenance, and I'm sure the same bad actors are going to bloat the costs.
Its the running joke that in a defense contract a hammer will cost a thousand dollars by the time all of the contracters get their way. It happens in Canada way to much.
Look at the boondoggle of the Iltis jeeps. Bombardier was selling them to Canada for $32,000 each while selling the same jeeps to the Belgiums for 20,000 dollars per jeep. The fact that we bought the Iltis for 32,000 a jeep is a joke in itself. But a lot of Bombardier execs got rich off of Canada defense contracts.
Going back to Canada's future ships, even the stupidly bloated costs aside. the UK government has been sharply critical of the Type 26 program and its costs. The Australian Government has said that the vessels will be slower and have less range then they were originally told and there are concerns about the safety of the vessel.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
You have to be careful citing the two costs in the NP article because the Canadian per/unit cost is over the entire life of the system. The US cost is the actual cost of the ship. That is, the Canadian cost includes all of the logistics, maintenance, ammunition, salaries, facilities upgrades, new facilities, software upgrades, etc, etc. Divide the number of ships by that total cost over the project's lifetime and you arrive at the Canadian unit cost. That's how Treasury Board accounts for these capital projects, which is not the same way the Americans do it.
There's a lot of blame to throw around and all parties deserve it. But I think it's the RCN that has to shoulder a lot of the blame because they keep adding to the wish list. The Government chose the 7000 tonne Type 26 design but the RCN wants the US 9000 tonne DDG-51 design. So RCN has managed to swap out many of the components from the original bid and seems to be successful (PSPC isn't saying "no") in swapping for components you will find on the DDG-51. The RCN is driving these changes, not Irving. Irving will build (perhaps poorly) whatever you tell them.
But BAE can't design, PSPC can't contract and Irving can't build while the RCN spends years treating ship architecture like an a la carte menu at a billion dollar restaurant.
__________________
"If you do not know what you are doing, neither does your enemy."
- - Joe Tzu
The Following User Says Thank You to Baron von Kriterium For This Useful Post:
I'm actually terrified of what's going to happen with the F-35's I mean we know they're going to be built stateside, but Canadian companies and the government are going to have their hands all over facilities upgrades and maintenance, and I'm sure the same bad actors are going to bloat the costs.
Lockheed/USG dictate everything, the entire (new) perimeter fence in Cold Lake is being replaced for not meeting their specs. The hangars will be all new, they are already being built. The security level required to work on it will exclude most civilians from even touching the aircraft, I don't know how DND is going to manage that as there is civilian maintenance in almost every program. Thanks to ITAR a lot of money will be going south from this program.
Interesting podcast interview of Billy Flynn who is the former commander of 441 Tactical Squadron, and spend 23 years in the Canadian Airforce before going on to be the lead test pilot on the F-35. They look at the Canadian Air Force and class it as in crisis.
Its a sobering look at things like the P8 program that's now being messed with by Bombardier, the current state of the Canadian Air Force, the mess that was the purchase of the F-35 and more.
Its pretty sobering, even if we get the 88 f-35's which won't be completed until sometime in the next decade. Billy currently classes the situation with the air force as dire and non capable, and laments with the fact that the Air force now has less then 50 combat rated pilots and its getting worse as moral crashes in the pilot community.
The Boeing story is really interesting as our former defense minister made up a capability gap story at the time so the PM could sole source I think 18 SuperHornets, and Boeing put the boots to us on the price tag. (333 million per jet).
Its a sad story of general incompetence, terrible leadership, crashing moral, a ridiculous procurement process, bungling by the Harper and Trudeau governments, and being left with a broken airforce.
I thought I would put this up after watching this tonight and following the story from Wayne Eyre that the Pacific Fleet is pretty non existent capability wise with the Halifax Frigates at end of life and in desperate need of maintenance, Our maritime patrol aircraft are at below 50% capability, and our subs, well its a good day if they can do anything.
Anyways lots to unpack in this podcast, the host isn't that interesting but Flynn certainly is.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CaptainCrunch For This Useful Post:
Canada’s understaffed and resource-stretched navy is in “a critical state” and might not be able to carry out its basic duties next year, the top admiral said in a YouTube video released this week. The comments by Vice-Admiral Angus Topshee are an unusually blunt expression of unhappiness from the military over the state of the armed forces. Canada only spends about 1.3% of its annual gross domestic product on defence, much less than the North Atlantic Treaty Organization target of 2%. In the video, which runs just under six minutes, Topshee said the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) had not hit its recruitment targets for more than a decade.
Quote:
“The situation is serious but our problems are not unique and I know that the air force and army are facing similar challenges,” he continued.
The West Coast fleet is “beset with a shortage of qualified techs” which means ships cannot meet operation and maintenance targets, he said.
Quote:
The navy relies on its 12 Halifax class frigates, which are approaching the end of their 30-year operational life but must stay in service for another 15 years because their replacements are behind schedule and over budget.
“This is a very considerable challenge. … I wish it was not so but I am afraid there is simply no other choice,” said Topshee, who took over as Canada’s top sailor in May 2022.
The video was released on Monday without any publicity.
In response, the office of Defence Minister Bill Blair said the government was making significant new investments in the navy, including plans to build more than 20 new ships of various kinds.
“This will be the largest Canadian shipbuilding initiative since World War II,” spokeswoman Diana Ebadi said via email on Tuesday, adding that Ottawa was working to recruit and retain more sailors.
First of all Admiral Topshee has likely ended his career.
Second of all the ship building program isn't exactly going well, along with the massive over runs in cost, design flaws on the ship that area cause for concern and the fact that we are now paying for ship yard upgrades that were not agreed to in the original contract.
We know the Airforce is now not all that capable with a shortage of pilots and personal and our creaky F-18 are under capable and beyond end of life.
Now we see that we have a navy that's pretty much at rust out.
And we have a bumbling dishonest Minister of National Defense.
What a mess.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
The comments by Vice-Admiral Angus Topshee are an unusually blunt expression of unhappiness from the military over the state of the 