• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Search results

  1. C

    CH-148 Cyclone Progress

    I certainly can appreciate there would be the cost of the terminals plus some integration work. Maybe some airframe certification for any mods such as antennas. But I still can't see this being a $300Million program. To be honest, I'm shocked these were delivered without Link 16 (or 22) as part...
  2. C

    CH-148 Cyclone Progress

    Something doesn't add up. I've seen the Link 16 terminal - it's the size of a shoe box. Why would this cost $300million?
  3. C

    Replacing the Subs

    It's interesting the comment about having the choice to integrate systems other than the Korean systems. That has been a concern I've seen expressed by pundits, specifically around training, and interoperability with NATO partners. If there is a clear path to developing a version of this sub...
  4. C

    Replacing the Subs

    Thanks @Underway. The maintainer geek in me is satisfied. :)
  5. C

    Replacing the Subs

    I'm curious. How does the RCN classify availability. For example, in my line of business, we have three tiers: 1) Available (Operational, all functionality working as expected), 2) Operational with Deficiencies (Available, some functions degraded or not working), and 3) Out of Service. Does...
  6. C

    Replacing the Subs

    More news from Korea: https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/navy-news/2025/breaking-news-south-korea-challenges-u-s-defense-grip-with-bold-submarine-offer-to-canada https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/south-korea-canada-submarines-artillery-defence-1.7523180
  7. C

    Canada's tanks

    Some information on possible future K3: https://armyrecognition.com/news/army-news/2025/hyundai-rotem-officially-registers-the-design-of-south-koreas-future-k3-stealth-tank
  8. C

    The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)

    This is looking like a good fit for Canada's North. Might be worth getting involved as a partner nation. Note that I would still advocate the full purchase of 88 F35s. By the time this FCAS is realistically operational it will be 2040ish, so we can't wait until then to replace the CF-18s...
  9. C

    The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)

    More on this: https://www.twz.com/air/f-35-chassis-can-deliver-80-of-6th-gen-capability-at-half-the-cost-lockheed-declares
  10. C

    Maritime Coastal Defence Vessels (MCDVs)

    Team Vigilance has entered a partnership with Algoma for steel. https://canadiandefencereview.com/team-vigilance-welcomes-algoma-steel-into-the-preferred-supplier-program-as-the-primary-steel-provider/ For a program that as far as I know is unfunded, these guys are certainly acting as if a...
  11. C

    The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)

    Good analysis in support of sticking with F35: https://canadiandefencereview.com/should-canada-consider-a-mixed-fighter-fleet/
  12. C

    Replacing the Subs

    Bit more on the Hyunmoo 3x: https://missilethreat.csis.org/missile/hyunmoo-3-abc/
  13. C

    Replacing the Subs

    Bit more on Korean SLCMs (article is 2 years old). Looks like the Hynmoo 3 sub launched version is called C-Star-111, and may (as of the date of the article) only be torpedo-tube launched. https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2023/07/south-korea-completes-hyunmoo-v-ballistic-missile-development/
  14. C

    Replacing the Subs

    Found this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyunmoo-3 Seems to be a real thing, and the 3C version has a 1500Km range, which is quite respectable.
  15. C

    Replacing the Subs

    Not sure if it's been tested, but the graphic in the link below clearly shows a cruise missile (Hyunmoo 3C). Question is if these cells can accommodate sub-launched Tomahawk. https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/04/south-korea-conducts-second-slbm-test-from-kss-iii-submarine/
  16. C

    Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

    I think it's a done deal: Global Eye (or some other Global 6000/6500 based platform). This following article on the Liberal spending platform specifically references a “Canadian-made airborne early warning and control aircraft”...
  17. C

    Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

    Your comment re. reflexive anti-Americanism is bang on. Here's a really good write up, by Richard Shimooka, about why pivoting to European defence contractors might not be a great idea, given our close relationship to the US...
  18. C

    Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

    But maybe not needed? My understanding is the funding for these comes from the Defence of the Arctic component of the budget, and would not be considered expeditionary assets, but limited to patrolling in the North. The GlobalEye reputedly has an endurance of 11 hours, so AAR may not be strictly...
  19. C

    Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship AOPS

    US Coast Guard is looking to foreign yards to build arctic patrol ships. Is it just me, or does their requirement ("the icebreaker needs to make a path through three feet of ice, have a range of 6,500 nautical miles at 12 knots and operate for more than 60 days. It also would have a flight deck...
  20. C

    Government hints at boosting Canada’s military spending

    Haven't heard much lately on the rumoured AEW purchase, but this is interesting, and bodes well for the GlobalEye program...
Back
Top