[Xort]

Jonny_C Jonny_C:

Because of our geography and our geographical position, it really doesn't make sense for a maritime nation such as ours, with thousands of kilometers of coastline, to skimp on the navy.

We have need of an army least of all.

Most of our coast isn't a viable route of passage. People are not sneaking drugs, terrorist, or asylum seekers into Canada from under the Arctic ice.

The part of our coast that we need active ships to patrol is much smaller than the geographic summery of Canada would lead you to beleive.

For international ops, we have no long range hitting power from even a helicopter carrier, none of our ships are floating SAM platforms, the navy doesn't have any guided missile ships able to project fire power over long distances.

No one in the world seems intrested in building a super destroyer anymore.

For the army being needed least of all, I think you should read the histroy of Canada's military activities from WWII forward. I couldn't say for sure but the Air Force might get more jobs, but that is likely mostly beacuse they have an ease of mobility and ease of political use.

[saturn_656]

$1:

For international ops, we have no long range hitting power from even a helicopter carrier, none of our ships are floating SAM platforms, the navy doesn't have any guided missile ships able to project fire power over long distances.

Yeah, some time ago we decided the Navy didn't need surface combatants with hitting power.

Or working submarines.

[Xort]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

Yeah, some time ago we decided the Navy didn't need surface combatants with hitting power.
Or working submarines.

When was the last our navy would have been able to take part in a combat roll? The first gulf war?

And before then?

[saturn_656]

Xort Xort:

saturn_656 saturn_656:

Yeah, some time ago we decided the Navy didn't need surface combatants with hitting power.
Or working submarines.

When was the last our navy would have been able to take part in a combat roll? The first gulf war?

And before then?

Someone with prior naval service may give me a verbal smackdown for this, but our naval forces were so geared towards hunting Soviet subs (ASW) that they weren't appropriate for other roles. The ships sent to the Gulf were given rushed weapons refits (Harpoons and Phalanx, among other things) so they'd have half a chance against the threats present in the area.

Up until the Halifax class SAM's were rare on Navy ships and Surface to Surface missiles were totally absent.

[Gunnair]

Xort Xort:

Jonny_C Jonny_C:

Because of our geography and our geographical position, it really doesn't make sense for a maritime nation such as ours, with thousands of kilometers of coastline, to skimp on the navy.

We have need of an army least of all.

Most of our coast isn't a viable route of passage. People are not sneaking drugs, terrorist, or asylum seekers into Canada from under the Arctic ice.

The part of our coast that we need active ships to patrol is much smaller than the geographic summery of Canada would lead you to beleive.

For international ops, we have no long range hitting power from even a helicopter carrier, none of our ships are floating SAM platforms, the navy doesn't have any guided missile ships able to project fire power over long distances.

No one in the world seems intrested in building a super destroyer anymore.

For the army being needed least of all, I think you should read the histroy of Canada's military activities from WWII forward. I couldn't say for sure but the Air Force might get more jobs, but that is likely mostly beacuse they have an ease of mobility and ease of political use.

Curious what you've determined as long range hitting power or what you have determined a DDG as.

[Gunnair]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

Xort Xort:

saturn_656 saturn_656:

Yeah, some time ago we decided the Navy didn't need surface combatants with hitting power.
Or working submarines.

When was the last our navy would have been able to take part in a combat roll? The first gulf war?

And before then?

Someone with prior naval service may give me a verbal smackdown for this, but our naval forces were so geared towards hunting Soviet subs (ASW) that they weren't appropriate for other roles. The ships sent to the Gulf were given rushed weapons refits (Harpoons and Phalanx, among other things) so they'd have half a chance against the threats present in the area.

Up until the Halifax class SAM's were rare on Navy ships and Surface to Surface missiles were totally absent.

Nope, you are correct. We opted to specialize in ASW and our shipbuilding programs from the 50s - 70s reflected this with the St Laurents, Restigouche, Mckenzie, Annapolis DDEs and DDHs. The CPFs were multi purpose frigates designed for more general application. The Tribals have been rebuilt into Command and Control and air defence platforms which is why their replacement will be critical in the next couple of years.

Prior to the CPFs the Tribals had Sea Sparrows and were comparatively armed to their USN counterparts like the Spruence class DDG.

You are correct about the SSMs.

[Gunnair]

Xort Xort:

saturn_656 saturn_656:

Yeah, some time ago we decided the Navy didn't need surface combatants with hitting power.
Or working submarines.

When was the last our navy would have been able to take part in a combat roll? The first gulf war?

And before then?

Same time as the army.

Korea.

[saturn_656]

Gunnair Gunnair:

The Tribals have been rebuilt into Command and Control and air defence platforms which is why their replacement will be critical in the next couple of years.

Prior to the CPFs the Tribals had Sea Sparrows and were comparatively armed to their USN counterparts like the Spruence class DDG.

Given the outcome of the JSS debacle, I don't have much hope for the DDG replacements. The Tribals, as I understand it, were top of the line ASW destroyers when built. Problem is we only bought four.

Not much we get these days seems to be top shelf.

I'm sure they'll be a day late and a dollar short.

[Jonny_C]

Xort Xort:

Jonny_C Jonny_C:

Because of our geography and our geographical position, it really doesn't make sense for a maritime nation such as ours, with thousands of kilometers of coastline, to skimp on the navy.

We have need of an army least of all.

Most of our coast isn't a viable route of passage. People are not sneaking drugs, terrorist, or asylum seekers into Canada from under the Arctic ice.

We don't have land incursions requiring the use of the army either, so I don't think you have much of a point here.

$1:

The part of our coast that we need active ships to patrol is much smaller than the geographic summery of Canada would lead you to beleive.

Yet we still have a very long coastline, even if you discount Arctic coastlines. Our navy only appears adequate if there's nothing going on.

$1:

For international ops, we have no long range hitting power from even a helicopter carrier, none of our ships are floating SAM platforms, the navy doesn't have any guided missile ships able to project fire power over long distances.

Making my argument for me? But I was thinking mainly about adequately patrolling our own coastlines, territorial waters. And for international operations we need ships and aircraft more than boots on the ground, which we are very reluctant to deploy anyway.

I don't say the army isn't important; I say that in a military hierarchy the air force and the navy should take precedence if we want to penny-pinch (which we shouldn't do with the military as much as we do).

$1:

For the army being needed least of all, I think you should read the histroy of Canada's military activities from WWII forward.

I know the military history of this nation quite well. Afghanistan was the only significant deployment of combat troops since WWII and Korea.

[Gunnair]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

Gunnair Gunnair:

The Tribals have been rebuilt into Command and Control and air defence platforms which is why their replacement will be critical in the next couple of years.

Prior to the CPFs the Tribals had Sea Sparrows and were comparatively armed to their USN counterparts like the Spruence class DDG.

Given the outcome of the JSS debacle, I don't have much hope for the DDG replacements. The Tribals, as I understand it, were top of the line ASW destroyers when built. Problem is we only bought four.

Not much we get these days seems to be top shelf.

I'm sure they'll be a day late and a dollar short.

They're about a decade late now. They were built in the army 70s.

[commanderkai]

It could be worse, I guess. We could have bought them used, or something, and have them explode in our face. *Stares at our submarine fleet*

[saturn_656]

commanderkai commanderkai:

have them explode in our face.

Who's to say they won't?

[commanderkai]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

commanderkai commanderkai:

have them explode in our face.

Who's to say they won't?

Well, they'll be fresh out of the shipyards, and hopefully they'll be under warranty? Yeah, I'm being optimistic.

[bootlegga]

QBall QBall:

I say take what you can get. It sucks but the Navy always plays third fiddle in the pecking order of the CF, so either bite the bullet or be prepared to start pulling miracles out of your ass to keep what you've got seaworthy.

Sadly, a big reason the navy plays third fiddle is because ships cost a fortune and take forever to build, so it's hard for most governments to get credit for building them. At least with planes and tanks, you can get a photo op a year or two after you order them.

[bootlegga]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

Gunnair Gunnair:

The Tribals have been rebuilt into Command and Control and air defence platforms which is why their replacement will be critical in the next couple of years.

Prior to the CPFs the Tribals had Sea Sparrows and were comparatively armed to their USN counterparts like the Spruence class DDG.

Given the outcome of the JSS debacle, I don't have much hope for the DDG replacements. The Tribals, as I understand it, were top of the line ASW destroyers when built. Problem is we only bought four.

Not much we get these days seems to be top shelf.

I'm sure they'll be a day late and a dollar short.

Well, this is what DND is hoping for;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Cla ... nt_Project

If we actually get it, it may work out pretty well. Hopefully the Navy will have a bit more influence than the bean counters in that decision, but I'm not holding my breath.