Topaz Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Doesn't all this depend on why Canada should build up its military? Is to go to war everytime a country like the US invades one and wants others nations to do the same? We need to have a military strong enough to stop any invasion from any country including the US BUT I feel IF the US wanted to invade Canada, they would do it through economics means and just take over. You can have the best in the world of war toys, but if there isn't any personnel to use them what good is it to have the war toys??? When NEED a better foreign polices and the BEST of the people who can talk peace and avoid war then we may not have to spend so much money on the military. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dizzy Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Personally I don't see the benefit of large lift aircraft other than foreign invasion. The C-17s have been very active in the Haiti response. In fact, our C-17 primary mission was to support Jamaican aid efforts after hurricane dean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 And we don't have any of those things. Our subs (the ones that have finished refit) are among the most capable non nuclear subs in the world, our tanks are barely used and are now undergoing refit, and our fighters are in them middle of a multi billion dollar upgrade program. Victoria class subs, CF-18s and Leopard 1 tanks are all very old. Back to the Pacific. In response to the P-39 Airacobra's horrible performance vs Japanese fighters, it also underwent 'upgrades' giving the Army Air Corp the P-400 Airacobra. Looked like a P-39 minus the heavy 37mm cannon the engineers figured was keeping it from matching the Japanese. The pilots refered to it as a P-40 with a Zero on its tail. Death trap...most ended up getting exported to Russia. Those that weren't shot down in flames, that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dizzy Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Doesn't all this depend on why Canada should build up its military? Is to go to war everytime a country like the US invades one and wants others nations to do the same? We need to have a military strong enough to stop any invasion from any country including the US BUT I feel IF the US wanted to invade Canada, they would do it through economics means and just take over. You can have the best in the world of war toys, but if there isn't any personnel to use them what good is it to have the war toys??? When NEED a better foreign polices and the BEST of the people who can talk peace and avoid war then we may not have to spend so much money on the military. Are you realy talking about preparing for an american invasion? Not going to happen. Our military is no longer about WWII-type conflicts. We are talking asymmetric warfare here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Victoria class subs, CF-18s and Leopard 1 tanks are all very old. The Victoria class is a very good sub, and really isn't that old. The CF-18s are getting old, and that's why they're getting massive upgrades. The Leopard 1 C2 is being replaced as we speak by the Leopard 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 (edited) Victoria subs: To me...the late 1970s is old. Edited February 23, 2010 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 (edited) Victoria subs: To me...the late 1970s is old. The first was built for 1990. They're being rebuilt in 2007 - 2012, so they're won't be a shred of the 90s left in them. Edited February 23, 2010 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 (edited) The C-17s have been very active in the Haiti response. In fact, our C-17 primary mission was to support Jamaican aid efforts after hurricane dean. I don't support the Haiti response, I find it is a waste of tax payer dollars and an overburden to the CF. The Caribbean is not Canada, Canada's military has no purpose there. If you want relief send private relief organizations. I fully support private charity helping overseas foreigners in need, I just don't support the use of our military in performing releif missions when Canadians have a half a trillion dollar debt. Edited February 23, 2010 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 They were built in 1990. The design is from the 1970s and the ones we have were laid-down in the 1980s. Now that might seem a short time ago...to us old guys...lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 The design is from the 1970s and the ones we have were laid-down in the 1980s. Now that might seem a short time ago...to us old guys...lol. But they didn't finish construction until 1990, and they are undergoing complete overhaul now. I mean, my goodness, Brazil bought in 2000 an aircraft carrier built in 1957. 1990 isn't very old. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dizzy Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 I don't support the Haiti response, I find it is a waste of tax payer dollars and an overburden to the CF. The Caribbean is not Canada, Canada's military has no purpose there. If you want relief send private relief organizations. I fully support private charity helping overseas foreigners in need, I just don't support the use of our military in performing releif missions when Canadians have a half a trillion dollar debt. Just saying that they are useful in contexts other than invasion. If you have a problem with the CF's expeditionary duties, then you have a bigger issue than just funding levels. You want to change Canada's place in the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 But they didn't finish construction until 1990, and they are undergoing complete overhaul now. I mean, my goodness, Brazil bought in 2000 an aircraft carrier built in 1957. 1990 isn't very old. Which is why the UK decommisioned them...they served a grand total of three years before being ditched. Good enough for the colonies, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted February 23, 2010 Author Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 And we don't have any of those things. Our subs (the ones that have finished refit) are among the most capable non nuclear subs in the world, our tanks are barely used and are now undergoing refit, and our fighters are in them middle of a multi billion dollar upgrade program. Those subs you talk about have 115 operational days since 2000, for every day spent at sea they've spent 14 days in dry dock under going repair...i think it's time we call a dog a dog...this one is barking has been barking ever since we picked the first one up...in all it was the wrong purchase at the wrong time... And yes they are capable, as long as you don't submerge them or they can fight from the docks... Our Tanks, those barly used tanks , the majority of them sat in a warehouse before we purchased them, and the majority of them are still sitting in a warehouse, for what nearly 2 years now...on top of all that they are Leo IIA4 models....while most of the other german leo users are operating New leo IIA6 or better...such as we are in Afghan, only because we borrowed them for that purpose....they are now worn out or suffering from battle damage.... Our CF 18's are a and b models....the latest version is the F model on avgerage there is 4 to 5 years between models you do the math ....one of the main reasons we are upgrading is becasue we did not have the ability to drop smart wpns, or the comms equipment needed to talk to other NATO countries...there is a list of whys and it's as long as my arm...these upgrades are not going to make this aircraft comparable to new modern fighters , but rather bring it up to the minimum standard required just to operate in todays battle space... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Brazil bought in 2000 an aircraft carrier built in 1957. Many tin-pot countries wanting to be the USA have bought these old ships. One of the best examples of where this gets you is the sad tale of the ANA General Belgrano...ex CL-46 USS Phoenix. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_General_Belgrano Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Those subs you talk about have 115 operational days since 2000, for every day spent at sea they've spent 14 days in dry dock under going repair That's because only one has been launched. By summer, when the second sub is launched, the numbers will look very different, and they will look even more different in 2011 when the third is launched. They were far worse than we were led to believe. The good news is, that means they'll be more new than old when things are done. and the majority of them are still sitting in a warehouse, for what nearly 2 years now The refit has started within the last couple of month according to what I've read on the Canadian army forum. ...on top of all that they are Leo IIA4 models... The combat modes are A6 an will be A6M when the refit is done. The training models (combat capable) will be A4+ containing A6 combat systems. Our CF 18's are a and b models....the latest version is the F model on avgerage there is 4 to 5 years between models you do the math ....one of the main reasons we are upgrading is becasue we did not have the ability to drop smart wpns, or the comms equipment needed to talk to other NATO countries...there is a list of whys and it's as long as my arm...these upgrades are not going to make this aircraft comparable to new modern fighters , but rather bring it up to the minimum standard required just to operate in todays battle space... Yes, and by bringing it up to modern battle standards it will still be better than what the majority of the worlds countries use. According to DND insiders, the purchase of the F-35 is already costed an an announcement is coming down the road a bit. The upgrade is simply an interim measure that leaves us with more than adequate fighter capability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Those subs you talk about have 115 operational days since 2000, for every day spent at sea they've spent 14 days in dry dock under going repair...i think it's time we call a dog a dog...this one is barking has been barking ever since we picked the first one up...in all it was the wrong purchase at the wrong time... And yes they are capable, as long as you don't submerge them or they can fight from the docks... Yes....lots of problems here, starting with what is the mission? Are Victoria class capabilities matched to that mission? Refits and overhauls are two very different things, and the more these boats sit idle, the worse it gets. Play them or trade them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Which is why the UK decommisioned them...they served a grand total of three years before being ditched. Good enough for the colonies, though. The decommissioned them because the cold war was over. It's the same reason we stood so much down. They were having some difficulty with them though...that shouldn't be a problem when we're done with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Yes....lots of problems here, starting with what is the mission? Are Victoria class capabilities matched to that mission? Refits and overhauls are two very different things, and the more these boats sit idle, the worse it gets. Play them or trade them. Sinking the Russians...no wait...the Portuguese. OK...shovelling snow in the nation's capital. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 (edited) Yes....lots of problems here, starting with what is the mission? Are Victoria class capabilities matched to that mission? Refits and overhauls are two very different things, and the more these boats sit idle, the worse it gets. They aren't sitting. 1 is in the middle of refit, and the other is in the middle of overhaul. They will be done in summer 2010 and 2011. The Chicoutimi will be done sometime between 2012 and 2015. The mission is fisheries patrol and sovereignty patrol. It's also overseas deployment. They're very capable of all of those things. Edited February 23, 2010 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 The decommissioned them because the cold war was over. It's the same reason we stood so much down. They were having some difficulty with them though...that shouldn't be a problem when we're done with them. We'll have to agree to disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 We'll have to agree to disagree. Well, not really. The sub we have working has already been deployed overseas and seen service in the arctic and off of the east coast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Well, not really. The sub we have working has already been deployed overseas and seen service in the arctic and off of the east coast. It's a dog. Woof. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 They aren't sitting. 1 is in the middle of refit, and the other is in the middle of overhaul. They will be done in summer 2010 and 2011. The Chicoutimi will be done sometime between 2012 and 2015. The mission is fisheries patrol and sovereignty patrol. It's also overseas deployment. They're very capable of all of those things. Not until they demonstrate such capabilities. The hulls are still aging and have an expiration date. They are not designed for under ice operations. Supply chains for spares and maintenance are still being cobbled together. Does Canada has a sub tender to deploy overseas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Not until they demonstrate such capabilities. The hulls are still aging and have an expiration date. Actually, there are ways to make a ship work indefinitely. The Corner Brook has already proven the capability of these subs in the arctic, off the coast, and overseas. They are not designed for under ice operations. Nope, and they won't be used in such a manner. Supply chains for spares and maintenance are still being cobbled together. Does Canada has a sub tender to deploy overseas? The subs aren't designed to work on their own. They, like almost every deployment, designed to operate in coordination with other navies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Not until they demonstrate such capabilities. The hulls are still aging and have an expiration date. They are not designed for under ice operations. Supply chains for spares and maintenance are still being cobbled together. Does Canada has a sub tender to deploy overseas? Sub tender? Is that optional on your hoagie? I hear the Germans have a bofo design that has been proven to have sunk hundreds of thousands of tons of shipping. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Type_IX_submarine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.