Recent content by FJAG

Just watched a video of the film for the 1st Moscow victory parade. Besides seeing Zhukov and three other generals reviewing the parade on horses rather than convertibles, the size of the parade was massive. :oops:

My guess is that you are probably right if for no other reason than the armoured corps will not want to cede any PYs to others to round out "their" regiment. It would probably have been better for me to simply state that whatever vehicle constitutes the MACV will need to come in a variety of...

All I see right now is two regiments of each. I would dearly love a plan for more (based massively on reserves - after all, my plan calls for six mech brigades for Canada - two to deploy, one in reserve.) but not holding breath. From a domestic industry point of view we should aim for more...

I don't think that there is any intent to use a 105mm armed MCAV as a "tank" per se. I see a clear difference in their roles. OTOH, I do wonder if there is a need to field two different direct fire support vehicles - one heavy one medium. In other words is the difference in price tag per...

I'm not so sure this is a government position as much as a CAF one generated by the down-the-road retiring of the 105mm C3 as a gun capable of doing live fire. This reminds me of a sign-off by the deputy commander of the army on a staff paper around 2010 or so that basically retired the 105mm...

There were also a small pile of turretless Ram Kangeroos. The wheeled, medium weight poison runs deep in the Force, young Grasshopper. We have a generation of officers who bought into the "wheels good, tracks bad" cult of the turn of the century - that was fueled, in part, by the disgraceful...

I disagree. The cavalry role is much like the line brigade's. To engage and defeat the enemy but in a sector far forward and far larger than that of the main force. It needs a strong mix of many capabilities including fighting vehicles, infantry, engineers and indirect fire support. For sure...

There was a time when I could maintain my 65 Mustang (not to mention my 1952 3/4 ton truck). I can't do a thing with my 2025 Forester except change the tires and add gas and oil. Perhaps one of the fundamental criteria of army vehicles should be to use 1960 technology with the engine. 🍻

Ever seen the inside of a C 42 radio :giggle: I agree entirely You ought to know my attitude about Class Bs by now. IMHO a full-time job that needs to be done continuously is he job for a RegF person and not a class B. The reserves need a lot more RegF people allocated to those jobs that need...

On the surface he is non-judgemental as between the two subs while subtly saying - "Go Korean." 🍻

In that case do not forget that Borden was the home of both the infantry and armoured schools and they were maintaining everything up to Centurion tanks there and firing them at Meaford which had its own tank hangers back then. That said, the Fort Gerry Horse also had tanks in those days in...

My guess is that if we were to onboard the AUKUS project now, then we could receive nuclear subs when the first of our Korean ones are due for replacement/augmentation instead of a decade after. :unsure:

It's funny isn't it how at one time Militia units could maintain and operate tanks and self propelled guns. :unsure:

Those were the days. My first Southern Ontario summer concentration we had people from the 8th Field in Hamilton, the 50th Field in Peterborough and the 57th Field in Niagara/Welland along side the 7th Toronto from Toronto, the 11th Field from Guelph, and the 56th Field in Brandtford. A few...

Ours now come from Toronto and amble around in TAPVs and G Wagons - so no. 🍻