 New stealth fighter project highlights Russia, China as future threats With their military having spent the better part of a decade amongst insurgents, improvised explosive devices and suicide bombers, Canadians have arguably become accustomed to the idea that future wars will largely consist of low-intensity counterinsurgenCommentsview comments in forum Page 1 You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
Share
|
Mobile
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
And exactly how are we going to defend it if we can't reach it, it costs too much to patrol the northern wastes effectively, or if that single-engine gives way on the way there?
Well, we do have aerial tanker planes which can stretch the range of the plane to basically whatever the pilot can endure, which is thousands of kilometres more than its current range, but I agree with you that the single engine is a worrisome. Perhaps we should keep a few dozen CF-18s as back-up (kind of like how we did with the CF-5s in the 80s) until we get all the kinks worked out of these new planes.
I'm not 100% sure that the F-35s are the best plane for Canada, but our options are quite limited - either inferior planes (Super Hornet) or less-interoperable and potentially more expensive ones (Typhoons). I'd like to see a squadron or two of Super Hornets purchased as well, seeing as the 65 planes we're buying will only outfit two squadrons (24 planes per) with a few left over as trainers.
And exactly how are we going to defend it if we can't reach it, it costs too much to patrol the northern wastes effectively, or if that single-engine gives way on the way there?
Then I guess you may as well start negotiating to sell your Arctic north before someone else takes it from you. Seriously, if Canada has no intent of protecting her territory then why bother calling it 'Canada'?
And exactly how are we going to defend it if we can't reach it, it costs too much to patrol the northern wastes effectively, or if that single-engine gives way on the way there?
Well, we do have aerial tanker planes which can stretch the range of the plane to basically whatever the pilot can endure, which is thousands of kilometres more than its current range, but I agree with you that the single engine is a worrisome. Perhaps we should keep a few dozen CF-18s as back-up (kind of like how we did with the CF-5s in the 80s) until we get all the kinks worked out of these new planes.
I'm not 100% sure that the F-35s are the best plane for Canada, but our options are quite limited - either inferior planes (Super Hornet) or less-interoperable and potentially more expensive ones (Typhoons). I'd like to see a squadron or two of Super Hornets purchased as well, seeing as the 65 planes we're buying will only outfit two squadrons (24 planes per) with a few left over as trainers.
Dude, we have two tanker planes. Two. That's it. We either need more (read: more money that we don't really have) or we go with something like the F-15 Silent Eagle. That, could be interesting...
And Bart, I am all for protecting Canada's north. Too bad the F-35 is inadequate in that regard and most Canadians in general don't want to put the time and money into the north the way Denmark, Norway and Russia have.
Then I guess you may as well start negotiating to sell your Arctic north before someone else takes it from you. Seriously, if Canada has no intent of protecting her territory then why bother calling it 'Canada'?
Ah yes. The American perception that Canadians are a bunch of ill-equipped wimps. Well now, we ill-equipped wimps burned your White House three times, kicked you guys the hell out of our country in 1812, fought the hardest battles of World War II and won, etc, etc.
If someone wants to try to take OUR arctic, I say let them try.
Let's find out who really wants a piece of us.
-J.
And exactly how are we going to defend it if we can't reach it, it costs too much to patrol the northern wastes effectively, or if that single-engine gives way on the way there?
Well, we do have aerial tanker planes which can stretch the range of the plane to basically whatever the pilot can endure, which is thousands of kilometres more than its current range, but I agree with you that the single engine is a worrisome. Perhaps we should keep a few dozen CF-18s as back-up (kind of like how we did with the CF-5s in the 80s) until we get all the kinks worked out of these new planes.
I'm not 100% sure that the F-35s are the best plane for Canada, but our options are quite limited - either inferior planes (Super Hornet) or less-interoperable and potentially more expensive ones (Typhoons). I'd like to see a squadron or two of Super Hornets purchased as well, seeing as the 65 planes we're buying will only outfit two squadrons (24 planes per) with a few left over as trainers.
Dude, we have two tanker planes. Two. That's it. We either need more (read: more money that we don't really have) or we go with something like the F-15 Silent Eagle. That, could be interesting...
And Bart, I am all for protecting Canada's north. Too bad the F-35 is inadequate in that regard and most Canadians in general don't want to put the time and money into the north the way Denmark, Norway and Russia have.
Wrong dude, we have 7 aerial tanker planes - 2 CC-150T Polaris (Trenton) and 5 CC-130 Hercules (Winnipeg).
Airbus CC-150 Polaris
Second-hand Airbus A310 transports purchased in 1992 for use as a strategic transports and air-to-air tankers to replace the Boeing CC-137. Two have been converted to tankers and are designated the CC-150T. Based at 8 Wing Trenton, ON
Lockheed CC-130 Hercules
Four-engined tactical transport, the Hercules has been used in a number of different variants since 1960. Five are operated as air-to-air tankers. Based with 14 Wing Greenwood, NS, 8 Wing Trenton, ON and 17 Wing, Winnipeg, MB.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_F ... ir_Command
While that likely wouldn't be enough in the event of a major incursion or invasion, neither are the 65 planes we're buying to replace 80 CF-18s. In that event, the US and NATO (assuming it hasn't collapsed or rendered irrelevant) would come to our aid.
And exactly how are we going to defend it if we can't reach it, it costs too much to patrol the northern wastes effectively, or if that single-engine gives way on the way there?
Then I guess you may as well start negotiating to sell your Arctic north before someone else takes it from you. Seriously, if Canada has no intent of protecting her territory then why bother calling it 'Canada'?
Your country has had a bloated, inefficient, massive military and lately it's only major job has been to carry out it's interests in Iraq and Afghanistan and been doing a piss poor job of it for the better part of decade because for that time it's had it's head up its ass. and giving it gifts that keep on going, like Gitmo, Abu Ghraib.
So now we know that simply because one country has the most expensive guns around doesn't translate into much of anything except deeper national debt.
I'm sorry you we're offering some free advice?
Ah yes. The American perception that Canadians are a bunch of ill-equipped wimps. Well now, we ill-equipped wimps burned your White House three times, kicked you guys the hell out of our country in 1812, fought the hardest battles of World War II and won, etc, etc.
Please stop embarrassing self-respecting Canadians with the good ol '1812' references please. At least do it with good historical knowledge.
Then I guess you may as well start negotiating to sell your Arctic north before someone else takes it from you. Seriously, if Canada has no intent of protecting her territory then why bother calling it 'Canada'?
Ah yes. The American perception that Canadians are a bunch of ill-equipped wimps. Well now, we ill-equipped wimps burned your White House three times, kicked you guys the hell out of our country in 1812, fought the hardest battles of World War II and won, etc, etc.
If someone wants to try to take OUR arctic, I say let them try.
Let's find out who really wants a piece of us.
-J.
War of 1812?
Are you serious?