While I'm glad this is done, I don't see them being enough to protect our arctic sovereignty which is a concern given Russia's expansionist tendencies. We need long-range drones with anti-ship missiles though I'm guessing that's not a thing. Seriously though drones with long loiter times seem ideal for remote coastal use.
While I'm glad this is done, I don't see them being enough to protect our arctic sovereignty which is a concern given Russia's expansionist tendencies. We need long-range drones with anti-ship missiles though I'm guessing that's not a thing. Seriously though drones with long loiter times seem ideal for remote coastal use.
You know what do have long 'loiter' times...?
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a Fire Exit. - Mitch Hedberg
The Following User Says Thank You to Locke For This Useful Post:
While I'm glad this is done, I don't see them being enough to protect our arctic sovereignty which is a concern given Russia's expansionist tendencies. We need long-range drones with anti-ship missiles though I'm guessing that's not a thing. Seriously though drones with long loiter times seem ideal for remote coastal use.
Air power alone whether its drone or manned aircraft isn't enough to ensure arctic sovereignty.
Realistically submarines are the best anti-ship platform out there. Unless you're going to buy bombers that can carry large amounts of anti-ship missiles in numbers enough to overwhelm a ships defense.
However the F-35 has some nice antiship capability.
The AGM-158C Standoff low observable missile, its a long range stealthy cruise missile, with autonomous targeting is considered to be a brilliant missile with a 1000 pound warhead.
The Future Spear-3 which is designed around the Block 4 F-35 is out there, as is.
There's also the NSM which is an advanced ground and anti-ship future capable strike missile, which has a range of nearly 200 miles, is a stealthy sea skimmer that can maneuver around obstacles.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
While I'm glad this is done, I don't see them being enough to protect our arctic sovereignty which is a concern given Russia's expansionist tendencies. We need long-range drones with anti-ship missiles though I'm guessing that's not a thing. Seriously though drones with long loiter times seem ideal for remote coastal use.
They could make good missile trucks datalinked to F35s.
Yup the Superhornet E is designed for that. The F-35 sneaks into highly contested areas with advanced anti-air and advanced airborne fighters, and basically sniffs out and targets opportunity, then sends the targetting data to the 18E's in the backfield who then attack from long range.
Because the F-35 is so good at mapping threats, the F-18's can then maneuver into the best positions and safest positions to attack the enemy from over the horizon.
Basically the F-18E Block III was designed specifically to work with the F-35.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
The Following User Says Thank You to CaptainCrunch For This Useful Post:
Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
I'm not saying Locke is right, but you could carry a lot of drones on a zeppelin, and stay on station a long long time since it doesn't require fuel to remain in the air. Although something more like a small unmanned blimp would be a more adaptable and cheaper platform to extend the range of your drones.
There are already radar blimps, although I think they are tethered.
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
I'm not saying Locke is right, but you could carry a lot of drones on a zeppelin, and stay on station a long long time since it doesn't require fuel to remain in the air. Although something more like a small unmanned blimp would be a more adaptable and cheaper platform to extend the range of your drones.
There are already radar blimps, although I think they are tethered.
Come on...say it! You know you want to!!
__________________ The Beatings Shall Continue Until Morale Improves!
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
If you are flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a Fire Exit. - Mitch Hedberg
Defence industry officials were briefed about the project April 7 in Ottawa by Royal Canadian Air Force officers.
The radar system would be built in southern Canada, according to the briefing. But the system would keep watch on Arctic airspace to detect threats against major U.S. or Canadian cities.
The Arctic Over-the-Horizon Radar would “provide long-range surveillance of northern approaches to the major population centers in North America by establishing a northward-aimed high frequency over-the-horizon radar system in southern Canada,” according to the briefing provided to this newspaper.
The radar would start operating in 2028. The preliminary cost estimate for the system is $1 billion, but military officials say that could go higher.
It makes sense to do this in conjunction with the decision to purchase the F-35, as it allows a maximum use of digital links between the ground and the F-35. In other words, all of the F-35's in the air can see what the ground controllers see, and can be vectored that way.
If you've got Arctic patrol vessels and this radar system it can create a nearly 3d representation of the North.
I still think that Canada needs a proper sub surface precence in the arctic waters. Submarines that can in theory work under the ice and a sub surface censor net more like Sosus.
However what's interesting in the light of whats happening in Ukraine. Canada's arctic integrity could be seen as a nuclear issue for the States.
Quote:
In addition, defence analysts with ties to DND have raised warnings about the potential for the Russians to attack Canada’s Arctic or challenge its sovereignty in the North. That includes the suggestion the Russians might launch a missile attack on the Arctic to send a warning to Canada and the U.S.
DND insiders privately admit such a scenario is highly unlikely; for instance if Russia fired a missile at the Arctic, the U.S. would probably respond to that with their own nuclear-tipped missiles, setting off World War Three. But the insiders noted that such discussions are effective in convincing the Canadian public of the need to spend billions of dollars more on continental defence.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Nah, Aegis is a little more then that it combines a really good Radar in the AN/SPY 1 with a fire control system in layers. So a Radar, a fire control Radar, and a Command and Control system that works in layers. So on a navy ship, long range SAMS, Short Range SAMS, and a CIWS. Basically you turn a key to enable it. The SPY Radar looks for targets, the MK99, creates target solutions on everything the SPY see's. Then the Command and Control system selects the weapons, and fires them.
Basically the person running the AEGIS system, turns a key to enable from I think Hold, and the system does the decision making and firing.
The SPY 1 is a really good radar, but the issue with it, well not issue is its range is a 200 mile circle, so you'd need a lot of them. But the real benefit is the amount of power it puts out, so it can literally burn through any attempts at jamming. The other disadvantage would be its very short range in detecting things like cruise missiles, and in a rough terrain like the arctic, it would be shorter ranged then that.
So while the SPY 1 could see a ballistic inbound out to 200 miles, it probably would only be able to detect a cruise missile over flat terrain out to about 45 miles.
I would think that the idea here is to find the longest range and most powerful radar, and data link them to a ground station, and build enough radars for support and overlap in case radar stations get taken out.
It'd be kind of cool if Canada invested in some airborne Radar systems to work in conjunction with ground based radar as airborne radar gets around the terrain issues that handicap ground Radars.
Basically the Boeing E-3G Sentry. the problem is that they cost a quarter of a billion per copy, and you would need multiples of them as the detection range of the AN/APY 1 passive radar is about 500 kms.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
The Following User Says Thank You to CaptainCrunch For This Useful Post:
Could Canada buy America's Ohio class subs since they are being replaced soon?
Why would we want to. First of all Canada doesn't have a nuclear navy, and building the infrastructure and re training the Sailors on Nuclear Submarine operations would cost in the 10's of billions of dollars.
Also SSBN's are notoriously poor in terms of the role of a Hunter Killer which is what our Navy needs. The Ohio is slow with a submerged speed of 25 knots. Its also not exactly maneuverable. Its main mission is to hide with pride. To dive deep and basically use its ultra quieting technology, which is very good. Ohio's have rarely been tracked in deep water. and radiate less noise then the ocean around them.
If Canada is going to replace our current class of Victoria Class submarines, which was a good concept badly executed. It combined the sensors and weapons systems of a SSN with a decently quiet Diesel Electric plant. But it had serious used car problems. It needs to look at the Air independent technology used by Sweden and Germany for example Who use it in their coastal patrol boats. A made in Canada solution is out of the question, we don't have the infrastructure and spooling up production for 4 to 6 subs makes no sense.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CaptainCrunch For This Useful Post:
