Got Chinooks?

bush_cheney2004 · November 2, 2008

As for the deals these were not my choices.

Right.....a common refrain here it seems....always somebody elses fault. About 25 years ago, I used to design and manufacture lightweight torpedoes (Mk 46)....Canada bought 'em just like everyone else without the means (or desire) to build their own. The torpedoes didn't know the difference.

As far as "a lack of talent" I think that is not so much the truth. There are a lot of very skilled Canadians. Canada just isn't intelligent in its R&D aquisitions. They normally contract. They don't appear to hire staff for NRC type operations. Canada just isn't targetting, it appears. It is filling very tight nieche needs largely based on emulation of other NATO members operations systems. For me to say I know the right way vs. This is how the world military does it is a hard sell.

OK.....but that's how it works in the real world. A much smaller nation does fine at this (Israel). They are ....ummmm...motivated to do better.

None the less if I can design weapon systems that outpace US military weapon systems, then I'm geussing the truely skilled engineers can do far better than myself. The equipment is sadly underfunctioning for the dollars. I would really argue it is the way the operation is being carried out. None the less I've said it is more like one big training exercise than a war. Very pivotal time right now.

Not following you here....but real world engagements are wonderful proving grounds.

Canada has a lot of very capable engineers, also skills training is a very large posibility to job turnover due to the recession. Also the recession in the US may serve for an oppourtunity to hire. The technology isn't that advanced, that is in service. From what I've seen of it.

See Apollo Moon Program....and Canadian contributions thereto.

Edited November 2, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

bush_cheney2004 · November 2, 2008

...speaking of which maybe Canada can ask the US if it can use all the stuff it is leaving in Iraq for itself? Drive it up to afghanistan and leave it in Turkey or something for the next US war.

Fir that matter, Canada could also find far more than six "free" Chinooks at the bottom of the Pacific ocean. These would be the older variants, but were perfectly good when pushed overboard to make room for incoming flights from a "falling" Saigon. The NVA actually captured about 450 Hueys and 30 Chinooks....no charge! :lol:

Wild Bill · November 2, 2008

I take your word on your reference to recorded history. But keep in mind that history is very subjective and easily manipulated. Not that what you're talking about now isn't realistic... just making a point.
Competitions are better than war. Sure. But when one competitor is so much more powerful than others, that leads to unprovoked war... not necessarily, but, history has shown!

And it's not really fair to always refer to Hitler as the justification for perpetual preparation for war. (I'm not saying that YOU do that... maybe you do... but it seems like a common argument). You can't convict somebody of a crime before they commit it and you can't attack a country before they attack you or somebody else.

You're confusing me in trying to understand how your arguments could work in the real world. First off, Hitler DID attack countries before they attacked his! Second, he succeeded so well because those countries WERE woefully unprepared for war!

Now today the situation is even more extreme. Any large scale war would be over in weeks and months, if not even days! There would be no time for Canada to draft and train troops. No time to take a year setting up a British Commonwealth Air Training Program. Wars today are "come as you are" affairs and if you're not prepared, then that's just too bad!

Canada is poorly prepared. That's a fact. We've relied on Uncle Sam to protect us for free and then got crabby if we lost some respect on the world stage for being military freeloaders.. I smile every time someone brings up the example of Jean Chretien keeping our F-18's out of the direct combat of the first Iraqi war, as if he did it out of some moral sense. In actual fact, our planes were so obsolete with their electronics, particularly "Friend or Foe" automatic radar identification and scrambled communications that the other countries refused to ALLOW Canada to fly into combat as it would only confuse things and add to the risk of accidents!

Perhaps I missed something and you could elucidate.

William Ashley · November 2, 2008

Right.....a common refrain here it seems....always somebody elses fault. About 25 years ago, I used to design and manufacture lightweight torpedoes (Mk 46)....Canada bought 'em just like everyone else without the means (or desire) to build their own. The torpedoes didn't know the difference.
OK.....but that's how it works in the real world. A much smaller nation does fine at this (Israel). They are ....ummmm...motivated to do better.

Not following you here....but real world engagements are wonderful proving grounds.

See Apollo Moon Program....and Canadian contributions thereto.

The delay is insignifigant except for those Canadian Soilders who died as a result of not having airlift capacity. There are a lot of Helicopters out there, that is if every major country has a heavy airlift capacity except Canada. I tend to see 'Stan as an American war. So I find it sort of sad Canada needs to buy 6 helicopters from the 1980's based on a design from the Vietnam war, to help the US win their war in putting a less anti western government into power and insure civil war and instability in the region for the next century or so. I wouldn't say "fault" I tend to think the war is just not being run to have any real effect, and I wouldn't place "fault" so much as I would say "misguidance" and ineffectiveness in acheiving results. However I havn't been there, I havn't spoken to the people, but democracy by force of arms is just that regardless of who the one with the guns is. Canada and the US in part lack democratic represenation, imo, as such I think that the idea of foreign intervention is very issued, when systems of democracy and a working society havn't even been acheived within their own borders.

As for the Torpedos etc.. I am someone who totally feels it does not take a super power to run its own military program. Canada's military appears very largely engrained in NATO, NORAD and other defensive agreements, and usually in a Junior role. So the Canadian program being Canadian as a satalite state seems less so important. Sure Canadians are being employed through the US programs, even though only a small fraction of the return actually goes to Canada. I just think it would be better managed in Canada than in the US because the US is a international arms dealer, and Canada is just another client state. For Canada, it is about more than the money and delivery time, it is about the soilders lives, the operational capacity, the identity, and the support for the war at home. A poorly managed, and misguided war will only serve as a means for popular disatisfaction. Albeit the war has gone on for so long, it doesn't even register as such for most people. It is just the odd report of a death count, because the occupation is in full swing, and the war itself is a distant reminder, when it was fresh.

I'm not anti american, I need to make that clear. I also need to make it clear, I'm not a Canadian Pro ultranationalist. I'm a realist, who is advocating for Canadian interests. I fully beleive that the Canadian military should train its soilders to be more than soilders. In the new era of war, it is a technology laden environment, and as such it ain't just about the basics of warmaking, supply, logistics, bombing, line of sight, and geurilla tactics, etc.. there is more too it. There is also more to maintaining a war economy. This has likely hit the US in the face with its own fist. A war economy is NOT the same as a peacetime economy. Sad fact is the recession will only get worse the more war drain there is. The only benefit from this is new technology, however, it isn't being commercially adapted, because government is failing to be visionary in helping adapt old systems to new techonlogy, and not just military, but also industrial.

Sad fact is, they don't need the best - all they need is to plug the hole. There will always be the hole, unless you build a new bucket or invent plumbing.

(Israel). They are ....ummmm...motivated to do better.

Canada is in a far worse situation than Israel. Located between three world Superpowers. Its capacities to mount a whole defence are unproportional to its tapped resources. Canada needs to employ a drasticly advanced policy to adequettely monitor and defend its territories. Canada honestly doesn't need to be a satalite, but it is dominated by US / western influences, because that is who it is. However it is not what is best for Canada. Don't be confused by that in me saying Canada should go Shanghai 5 block. What I mean is that Canada would be better positioned as a neutral power to act as a middle man between the four world powers surounding it (EU, China, US and Russia)

Canada however is deadlocked into defence agreements with the US, which will never see Canada fully capable of independently exercising its souvreignty, it is locked into match of point of noreturn that seems laden by WTO business interests. US and Canada are a lot like cousins, while US and mexcio are a lot like uncle and nephew (the US being the nephew). And canada only remotely related to mexcio through their cousin - or would that be second counsin. Anyway point being Canada doesn't need to buy half the crap it does, and being half way around the world when the US could just pull 3000 troops from their big surge or South Korea or Japan to replace the Canadians in their war, would likely save a lot of headaches in Canada. The US doesn't need Canada in the war, they make money from Canada being in the war, in large part Canada is paying off some of the US war debt and doing little else, except having permanent disabilities and the odd dead soilder pop up on the rolls. Canada has no strategic benifit from being in Afghanastan, if this is not true, I'd like to hear how Canada benefitis from having 3000 troops rotate half way around the world, when the US could run their own war, with less headaches. And Canada has far more talent than Israel. Also Israel buys a lot of US equipment cause the US pays them to. Why doesn't the US pay Canada to fight in Afghanistan for them? The Saudis paid the US to attack Iraq.

As for the moon program ect.... the moon program was such a waste of money, we will see Europe and China follow the footsteps of America within the next decade or two.

The space program is almost as money down the drain as the mars program. People are keeping progressive. The programs have a lot of technological fallout, however, was there really a need to launch a man to the moon? What did it acomplish?

Edited November 2, 2008 by William Ashley

William Ashley · November 2, 2008

The delay is insignifigant except for those Canadian Soilders who died as a result of not having airlift capacity. There are a lot of Helicopters out there, that is if every major ocuntry has a heavy airlift capacity except Canada. I tend to see 'Stan as an American war. So I find it sort of sad Canada needs to buy 6 helicopters from the 1980's based on a design from the Vietnam war, to help the US win their war in putting a less anti western government into power and insure civil war and instability in the region for the next century or so. I woulnd't say "fault" I tend to think the war is just not being run to have any real effect, and I wouldn't place "fault" so much as I would say "misguidance" and ineffectiveness in acheiving results. However I havn't been there, I havn't spoken to the people, but democracy by force of arms is just that regardless of who the one with the guns is. Canada and the US in part lack democratic represenation, imo, as such I think that the idea of foreign intervention is very issued, when systems of democracy and a working society havn't even been acheived within their own borders.
As for the Torpedos etc.. I am someone who totally feels it does not take a super power to run its own military program. Canadas military appears very largely engrained in NATO, NORAD and other defensive agreements, and usually in a Junior role. So the Canadian program being Canadian as a satalite state seems less so important. Sure Canadians are being employed through the US programs, even though only a small fraction of the return actually goes to Canada. I just think it would be better managed in Canada than in the US because the US is a international arms dealer, and Canada is just another client state. For Canada, it is about more than the money and delivery time, it is about the soilders lives, the operational capacity, the identity, and the support for the war at home. A poorly managed, and misguided war will only serve as a menas for popular disaffection. Albeit the war has gone on for so long, it doesn't even register as such for most people. It is just the odd report of a death count, because the occupation is in full swing, and the war itself is a distant reminder, when it was fresh.

I'm not anti american, I need to make that clear. I also need to make it clear, I'm not a Canadian Pro ultranationalist. I'm a realist, who is advocating for Canadian interests. I fully beleive that the Canadian military should train its soilders to be more than soilders. In the new era of war, it is a technology laden environment, and as such it ain't just about the basics of warmaking, supply, logists, bombing, line of sight, and geurilla tactics, etc.. there is more too it. There is also more to maintaining a war economy. This has likely hit the US in the face with its own fist. A war economy is NOT the same as a peacetime economy. Sad fact is the recession will only get worse the more war drain there is. The only benefit from this is new technology, however, it isn't being commercially adapted, because government is failing to be visionary in helping adapt old systems to new techonlogy, and not just military, but also industrial.

Sad fact is, they don't need the best - all they need is to plug the hole. There will always be the hole, unless you build a new bucket or invent plumbing.

Canada is in a far worse situation than Israel. Located between three world Superpowers. Its capacities to mount a whole defence are unproportional to its tapped resources. Canada needs to employ a drasticly advanced policy to adequettely monitor and defend its territories. Canada honestly doesn't need to be a satalite, but it is dominated by US / western influences, because that is who it is. However it is not what is best for Canada. Don't be confused by that in me saying Canada should go Shanghai 5 block. What I mean is that Canada would be better positioned as a neutral power to act as a middle man between the four world powers surounding it (EU, China, US and Russia)

Canada however is deadlocked into defence agreements with the US, which will never see Canada fully capable of independently exercising its souvreignty, it is locked into match of point of noreturn that seems laden by WTO business interests. US and Canada are a lot like cousins, while US and mexcio are a lot like uncle and nephew (the US being the nephew). And canada only remotely related to mexcio though their cousin - or would that be second counsin. Anyway point being Canada doesn't need to buy half the crap it does, and being half way around the world when the US could just pull 3000 troops from their big surge or South Korea or Japan to replace the Canadians in their war, would likely save a lot of headaches in Canada. The US doesn't need Canada in the war, they make money from Canada being in the war, in large part Canada is paying off some of the US war debt and doing little else, except having permanent disabilities and the odd dead soilder pop up on the rolls. Canada has no strategic benifit from being in Afghanastan, if this is not true, I'd like to hear how Canada benefitis from having 3000 troops rotate half way around the world, when the US could run their own war, with less headaches. And Canada has far more talent then Israel. Also Israel buys a lot of US equipment cause the US pays them to. Why doesn't the US pay Canada to fight in Afghanistan for them? The Saudis paid the US to attack Iraq.

As for the moon program ect.... the moon program was such a waste of money, we will see Europe and China follow the footsteps of America within the next decade or two.

The space program is almost as money down the drain as the mars program. People are keeping progressive. The programs have a lot of technological fallout, however, was there really a need to launch a man to the moon? What did it acomplish?

PS my grandfather who sadly is once again ill with Cancer in his other lung, worked on the Avro project. Just a colloquial point.

Smallc · November 2, 2008

No they didn't...much farting around for one-off design changes as reported by Army Guy.

The helicopters have to meet our needs, so I would imagine changes have to be made. It is still a long wait and it is not only because of Canada, but because of the long waiting list.

bush_cheney2004 · November 2, 2008

.....So I find it sort of sad Canada needs to buy 6 helicopters from the 1980's based on a design from the Vietnam war, to help the US win their war in putting a less anti western government into power and insure civil war and instability in the region for the next century or so. I wouldn't say "fault" I tend to think the war is just not being run to have any real effect, and I wouldn't place "fault" so much as I would say "misguidance" and ineffectiveness in acheiving results.

It's not just "this" war....Canada can't decide what it wants to be, even as the much vaunted "middle power" that has been a laughable notion. PM Harper wishes to change that. There is nothing wrong with the CH-47's design variants or block upgrade approach...maybe it is just Canada.

As for the Torpedos etc.. I am someone who totally feels it does not take a super power to run its own military program. Canada's military appears very largely engrained in NATO, NORAD and other defensive agreements, and usually in a Junior role. So the Canadian program being Canadian as a satalite state seems less so important.

FYI.....we test the torpedoes in Canada at Nanoose.

Sure Canadians are being employed through the US programs, even though only a small fraction of the return actually goes to Canada. I just think it would be better managed in Canada than in the US because the US is a international arms dealer, and Canada is just another client state.

Actually, Canada is a major arms manufacturer and exporter as well, but the contracts are mostly US bound and kept off the PR radar. I think the Ploughshares folks would detail this very well

For Canada, it is about more than the money and delivery time, it is about the soilders lives, the operational capacity, the identity, and the support for the war at home. A poorly managed, and misguided war will only serve as a means for popular disatisfaction. Albeit the war has gone on for so long, it doesn't even register as such for most people. It is just the odd report of a death count, because the occupation is in full swing, and the war itself is a distant reminder, when it was fresh.

Canada was in Cyprus for 25 years.

I'm not anti american, I need to make that clear. I also need to make it clear, I'm not a Canadian Pro ultranationalist. I'm a realist, who is advocating for Canadian interests. I fully beleive that the Canadian military should train its soilders to be more than soilders. In the new era of war, it is a technology laden environment, and as such it ain't just about the basics of warmaking, supply, logistics, bombing, line of sight, and geurilla tactics, etc.. there is more too it. There is also more to maintaining a war economy. This has likely hit the US in the face with its own fist. A war economy is NOT the same as a peacetime economy.

The American's don't matter if you really believe this. Decide and own your actions with consequences. If that includes alliances with another nation, then that is part of the deal.

Sad fact is the recession will only get worse the more war drain there is. The only benefit from this is new technology, however, it isn't being commercially adapted, because government is failing to be visionary in helping adapt old systems to new techonlogy, and not just military, but also industrial.

On average, wars are very good for the US economy. A really big one brought the nation out of a depression, not just recession.

Canada is in a far worse situation than Israel. Located between three world Superpowers. Its capacities to mount a whole defence are unproportional to its tapped resources. Canada needs to employ a drasticly advanced policy to adequettely monitor and defend its territories. Canada honestly doesn't need to be a satalite, but it is dominated by US / western influences, because that is who it is. However it is not what is best for Canada. Don't be confused by that in me saying Canada should go Shanghai 5 block. What I mean is that Canada would be better positioned as a neutral power to act as a middle man between the four world powers surounding it (EU, China, US and Russia)

Won't happen as long as 80% of exports and 30% of capital is associated with the US of A.

Canada has no strategic benifit from being in Afghanastan, if this is not true, I'd like to hear how Canada benefitis from having 3000 troops rotate half way around the world, when the US could run their own war, with less headaches. And Canada has far more talent than Israel.

Canada honoured its commitment to NATO and supported UN sanctioned actions as a matter of policy. Hell, why did Canada bomb Serbia when the UN didn't even approve of NATO's operation?

Also Israel buys a lot of US equipment cause the US pays them to. Why doesn't the US pay Canada to fight in Afghanistan for them? The Saudis paid the US to attack Iraq.

Because Canada can afford to pay their own way, and prefers to do so.

As for the moon program ect.... the moon program was such a waste of money, we will see Europe and China follow the footsteps of America within the next decade or two.

Then they were are all fools. Methinks you don't understand the true nature of the "Moon program" wrt defense, intelligence gathering, and "full spectrum dominance".

The space program is almost as money down the drain as the mars program. People are keeping progressive. The programs have a lot of technological fallout, however, was there really a need to launch a man to the moon? What did it acomplish?

It accomplished thousands of things...."we do these things..not because they are easy..."

bush_cheney2004 · November 2, 2008

The helicopters have to meet our needs, so I would imagine changes have to be made. It is still a long wait and it is not only because of Canada, but because of the long waiting list.

The Americans offered to immediately lease six CH-47D's to Canada back in 2007. The reasons for delay (choppers in theatre) are Canada's alone as detailed in the Manley Report:

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Lets-S...-Mission-04861/

Edited November 2, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

Smallc · November 2, 2008

The Americans offered to immediately lease six CH-47D's to Canada back in 2007. The reasons for delay (choppers in theatre) are Canada's alone.

While that delay may have been Canada's fault, but the delay in delivery of the new ones is not.

bush_cheney2004 · November 2, 2008

While that delay may have been Canada's fault, but the delay in delivery of the new ones is not.

This is exactly what I am speaking of.....medium and heavy airlift for Canadian Forces is the responsibility of Canada, and Canada alone. Stop making excuses.

Edited November 2, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

Smallc · November 2, 2008

This is exactly what I am speaking of.....medium and heavy airlift for Canadian Forces is the responsibility of Canada, and Canada alone. Stop making excuses.

And now we have the capability. You seem to be the one who's stuck on a now solved issue.

bush_cheney2004 · November 2, 2008

And now we have the capability. You seem to be the one who's stuck on a now solved issue.

No you don't.....in theatre support and training have yet to be completed. These aren't rental cars.

What I am hung up on is the fact that we are discussing six....1, 2, 3, 4, 5,...6 measely helicopters. Jesus Christ.....SIX HELICOPTERS.

Going home from work on Friday I saw an unusual thing in traffic....a guy was towing a used Bell 212 helicopter with a Ford pickup truck. Just an average guy buying a used chopper.

How hard can it be???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Edited November 2, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

Smallc · November 2, 2008

No you don't.....in theatre support and training have yet to be completed. These aren't rental cars.
What I am hung up on is the fact that we are discussing six....1, 2, 3, 4, 5,...6 measely helicopters. Jesus Christ.....SIX HELICOPTERS.

Going home from work on Friday I saw an unusual thing in traffic....a guy was towing a used Bell 212 helicopter with a Ford pickup truck. Just an average guy buying a used chopper.

How hard can it be???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Actually, there are supposed to be helicopters rented and in theater right now that are not Chinooks. And if you really think that just any helicopter will do...you don't know all that much about war.

Smallc · November 2, 2008

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...0730?hub=Canada

bush_cheney2004 · November 2, 2008

Actually, there are supposed to be helicopters rented and in theater right now that are not Chinooks. And if you really think that just any helicopter will do...you don't know all that much about war.

Oh please...it's not about "war"...how dramatic. Procurements follow planning...from beans to bullets...it's not rocket science. How come other nations have figured out military transport helicopters.... but not Canada?

What is it about rotary winged aircraft that vexes Canada so?

bush_cheney2004 · November 2, 2008

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...0730?hub=Canada

Oh great...playing second fiddle to Poland? Yikes!

Smallc · November 2, 2008

What this all boils down to is that you have a problem with anything that Canada does, because it doesn't meet your expectations.

Canada is doing the best it can in Afghanistan with what it has. We are updating equipment and attempting to expand our forces, but there are other priorities besides war. There are budgetary considerations to take into account.

Edited November 2, 2008 by Smallc

William Ashley · November 2, 2008

Oh great...playing second fiddle to Poland? Yikes!

Hey it'd lower engagment needs if the poles went first all the time, canadians would get in there if needed.

bush_cheney2004 · November 2, 2008

What this all boils down to is that you have a problem with anything that Canada does, because it doesn't meet your expectations.

Turnabout is fair play, eh? Based on many posts, it appears that America isn't meeting some Candian expectations as well.

Canada is doing the best it can in Afghanistan with what it has. We are updating equipment and attempting to expand our forces, but there are other priorities besides war. There are budgetary considerations to take into account.

Nope....your own commission reported otherwise (Manley Report).

Smallc · November 2, 2008

Nope....your own commission reported otherwise (Manley Report).

And the concerns in that report have been or are being addressed. Again, you are just looking for problems with this for some reason. Perhaps you would be happier if Canada simply pulled out now?

Edited November 2, 2008 by Smallc

bush_cheney2004 · November 2, 2008

And the concerns in that report have been or are being addressed. Again, you are just looking for problems with this for some reason. Perhaps you would be happier if Canada simply pulled out now?

OK..can you do it without American airlift?