10 Billion for military equipment

[bush_cheney2004]

I think we should just stick with destroyers and frigates....cruisers at most.

Good idea...you'll need them to help protect the carriers. Add fast attack subs for screening and some big fat oilers too. Before you know it, you will have a real fleet in your bathtub....anchors aweigh!

You'll need more hookers too....

[Remiel]

As much fun as it might to play armchair admiral and amass a decent force of current age weaponry, I almost wonder if it strategically we would be better off to start looking to the possible weaponization of space, and having a navy that could deal with that as mentioned by that one fellow that was quoted. We keep talking about building stuff inhouse, and well, next generation submarines do not design themselves.

Edited July 15, 2009 by Remiel

[Jerry J. Fortin]

I think we should just stick with destroyers and frigates....cruisers at most.

Cheaper by far, and a most likely direction for the government to take. In fact most people would agree with you, but that will not fix the problem. Destroyers and frigates will not project force to any great extent at all, but then again the mission dictates the assets. In our current case the mission defines the deficits of our armed forces. Every time we send troops someplace we find out what we CAN'T do because of a lack of functional assets designed for force projection. What this really boils down to is determining what missions we should even consider accepting. To date we have done a rather poor job of that. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime, ever hear of that one. It applies here. We should not send troops into harms way with targets painted on their backs due to our primitive TOE.

Aside from that, destroyers and frigates don't due to damned well in the arctic. We need a way to defend an incredible amount of area that is frozen over six months a year. That means aircraft at least, and it also means permanent land and sea bases. We have nothing to use to protect the north at the present time. The north is the focus, its a use it or lose it kinda deal dude.

[M.Dancer]

It's a safe bet we won't be having a carrier fleet. No need twinned with no money.

I would say that there may be a slight need for a tawara class...but even then...

[Smallc]

I don't think carriers will add much of anything that Canada needs. We have the ability to do what we need with our navy outside of the arctic. Now we need to get the next two naval projects working that are supposed to have arctic capability. Of note, our frigates do have limited ice capability.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

As much fun as it might to play armchair admiral and amass a decent force of current age weaponry, I almost wonder if it strategically we would be better off to start looking to the possible weaponization of space, and having a navy that could deal with that as mentioned by that one fellow that was quoted. We keep talking about building stuff inhouse, and well, next generation submarines do not design themselves.

Interesting thought, how do you feel about the North Koreans having a space platform?

[Remiel]

Interesting thought, how do you feel about the North Koreans having a space platform?

Err, if it sounded like I was suggesting that we weaponize space, that was not my intention. It was more along the lines of, " Maybe we should be ready in case other idiots do. " North Korea having a space platform? Baaad. Us having ships that won't be helpless against space platforms? Maybe not such a bad idea.

Edited July 15, 2009 by Remiel

[Jerry J. Fortin]

I don't think carriers will add much of anything that Canada needs. We have the ability to do what we need with our navy outside of the arctic. Now we need to get the next two naval projects working that are supposed to have arctic capability. Of note, our frigates do have limited ice capability.

I am preaching to the damned!

Let me put it this way, our armed forces could not defend Alert if the lives of the 70 personal up there depended on it. You can say what you want, but that is a fact. The north is undefended for all intents and purposes.

It is people like you who supported the appeasement policy of England while staring into the eyes of Adolf.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Err, if it sounded like I was suggesting that we weaponize space, that was not my intention. It was more along the lines of, " Maybe we should be ready in case other idiots do. " North Korea having a space platform? Baaad. Us having ships that won't be helpless against space platforms? Maybe not such a bad idea.

Nothing is safe from an attack from space. A ten dollar steel rod launched from near earth orbit can take out an M1 tank.

[Smallc]

A couple of F-18s could defend Alert. It's a long shot from Cold Lake, better if their stationed closer, but they could do it.

[M.Dancer]

Nothing is safe from an attack from space. A ten dollar steel rod launched from near earth orbit can take out an M1 tank.

I think the M1 would be safe. Your $10 steel rod would be vapourized during re-entry

[Jerry J. Fortin]

A couple of F-18s could defend Alert. It's a long shot from Cold Lake, better if their stationed closer, but they could do it.

Combat radius of about 550 kms, 3300 kms ferry range. You could use tanker support to get there and back, we do have two used Wardair Airbus 310's converted for that purpose. Now imagine getting attacked in Alert, do you really think you can load the Airbus and scramble the fighters to make any kind of direct flightline to Alert from both Cold Lake for the fighters and Trenton for the tankers? Having solved one problem, sufficient fuel to just get there, once you are there it would in fact be too late to do anything about it. Sort of like planning to close the gate once the horse has been seen leaving.

[DogOnPorch]

Combat radius of about 550 kms, 3300 kms ferry range. You could use tanker support to get there and back, we do have two used Wardair Airbus 310's converted for that purpose. Now imagine getting attacked in Alert, do you really think you can load the Airbus and scramble the fighters to make any kind of direct flightline to Alert from both Cold Lake for the fighters and Trenton for the tankers? Having solved one problem, sufficient fuel to just get there, once you are there it would in fact be too late to do anything about it. Sort of like planning to close the gate once the horse has been seen leaving.

Which is why we actually need something to replace the ol' Argus...something that can threaten a ship/sub/ground force from about 1500km away and can fly forever on a tank of gas.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

I think the M1 would be safe. Your $10 steel rod would be vapourized during re-entry

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Publ...05/700oklkt.asp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment

Hmmmmmmmmmm.....

[DogOnPorch]

I think the M1 would be safe. Your $10 steel rod would be vapourized during re-entry

Indeed...but a reentry shroud of some sort would do the trick. Once a country has the ability to put a (big) payload into orbit, range no longer matters. All they need then is a nuclear warhead with a retro and some attitude thrusters for plane changes. Voila, Iran drops an egg on Denver.

Edited July 15, 2009 by DogOnPorch

[DogOnPorch]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Publ...05/700oklkt.asp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment

Hmmmmmmmmmm.....

Tungsten has one of if not the highest boiling point of all metals if I recall my chemistry correctly. Expensive, though. It could survive a ride through the atmosphere.

[M.Dancer]

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Publ...05/700oklkt.asp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment

Hmmmmmmmmmm.....

The steel rods just got a lot more expensive....

each up to 20 feet in length and 1 foot in diameter

[DogOnPorch]

Remember this?

http://www.astronautix.com/craft/moose.htm

[DogOnPorch]

The steel rods just got a lot more expensive....

And HEAVY.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Okay I will admit a little poetic license in declaring the product to cost 10 bucks. Yet when you think about it, it isn't all that expensive.

[Remiel]

Nothing is safe from an attack from space. A ten dollar steel rod launched from near earth orbit can take out an M1 tank.

But in an unsafe world, the safest thing would be the vessel that was least easy to detect.

And I am aware that if anyone were to ever build a mass driver in space, it would be bad news.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

But in an unsafe world, the safest thing would be the vessel that was least easy to detect.

And I am aware that if anyone were to ever build a mass driver in space, it would be bad news.

Which is why the weaponization of space is prohibited by international treaty.

[bush_cheney2004]

Which is why the weaponization of space is prohibited by international treaty.

...but nothing prevents visible and IR sensors, radar terrain mapping, weapons systems data links, recon, communications, GPS navigation, and RF jamming. No suh!

[Peter F]

Which is why we actually need something to replace the ol' Argus...something that can threaten a ship/sub/ground force from about 1500km away and can fly forever on a tank of gas.

In its early years, the Argus was reputedly the finest anti-submarine patrol bomber in the world.[3]

{says who? Says Canadiar!}

The Argus flew its last service mission on 24 July 1981, and was replaced by the CP-140 Aurora.

Range: 5,900 mi (9,495 km)

Canadair_CL-28

CP-140 Aurora

The aircraft were acquired in the early 1980s to replace the CP-107 Argus

Range: 9,300 km (5,000 nm, 5,737 mi)

CP-140 Aurora

[Peter F]

I am preaching to the damned!

Let me put it this way, our armed forces could not defend Alert if the lives of the 70 personal up there depended on it. You can say what you want, but that is a fact. The north is undefended for all intents and purposes.

It is people like you who supported the appeasement policy of England while staring into the eyes of Adolf.

Well, first off, there's gotta be somebody to appease in order to appease. As it is nobody is now, nor has ever,c

challenged Canada's claim over the arctic islands ...ceptin Denmark re Hans Island.

Alert, by the way, is of no practical importance to anyone. The Evil [enter favoured nationality here] could sieze Alert and, for that matter, all of Ellesmere Island, and the only actual loss we would suffer is loss of our stinkin pride.

There is no requirement/need to blow billions on Carrier Groups or Naval Bases in the Arctic Archapeligo.