Search results

Smaller target profile… Oh and few running vehicles.

The 3/4 of Century of Darkness.

OMFG that almost sounds like a plan.

My concern is with ~5k LAV, ~500 CFV’s who crew these? Especially if there are more Tracked IFV/APC in the matrix. Don’t get me wrong I think more equipment is fantastic. But if a BN has ~100 vehicles that is a lot of vehicles, even if you have a 100% War Stock.

I thought they died along time ago with the Buffalo?

Tell me you have had no business dealings with the Turks without telling me…

Ideally three, potentially 4. Rotary Aviation (Hook, Griffon, Cormorant, Cyclone MH-60 ;) ) Fixed Wing Fast Jet (F-35, F-18) Fixed Wing Turbo Prop (Herc, Kingfisher - anything else? ) Fixed Wing Jet (C-17, MRTT, P-8 and AEWCC)

So the Armoured School isn’t… Canada (well the CA) wants to have 2 RegF Armoured Reg’ts. Now that is ~90 MBT’s, simply for operational units. One would need at least a Squadron + for training at the Armoured School. Plus ones for the RCEME folks to use for training on maintenance...

CABC in Edmonton used to house the Mountain clique. Mumble mumble something about it being a task for Airborne - eye roll emoji isn’t loading for me. Where quite frankly any Army serious about Mountain work generally puts the school well actually in the mountains or as close to as possible.

My big concern about that is while down here there is the 19K (M1 Crewman), 19D CavScout MOS, and 11C (Mortarmen), 19C (Bradley Crew) and 11B's in those units. -- in Canada, the Infantry and Armoured line serials don't split like that. With "unification" of the 11B Infantryman of the 11M and 11H...

I’d suggest some of their intentions for the PRes seem lofty - and Gun Batteries are a better use of PRes Gunners. I’d say the RCAC is currently stuck in Vehicle Limbo. It needs more tanks for its RegF tank regiments. The “Medium’ Cavalry Vehicle is coming, apparently, but that doesn’t...

There already was tandem warhead HEAT for Carl G’s. From Saab too. Flashy new packaging?

Only Iraq x2, which Canada declined to send Conventional Forces to.

Well given it’s the RCN, a resounding no ;)

ah yes the Suez, it was going so well too wasn’t it? Given France was accorded a seat at the table and a slice of Berlin really went to CdG’s head. Given America had troops in Greece and elsewhere in Europe actively fighting communists, and heavily involved in Africa and the Middle East...

One slight correction, Canada did have SOF in Iraq, though often not publicly admitted, and PM Harper at the time of one public admission after a rescue mission, cleverly announced that all JTF-2 personnel had left Baghdad, leaving it to the belief that meant out of Iraq.

Which is why I would suggest a non US Coalition. A viable third party, that could force/enforce a solution. If you can’t work with him, work around him, or force him to accept a joint goal. There will be another refugee crisis if things continue as they are. Trump got Militarily involved...

Maybe everyone else? Want a voice, pull up to the table with something other than convening. I get that many don’t like POTUS, but some here seem to be eager for him to fail (and seem to miss the second and third order affects of that). Sitting on the sidelines tossing poo doesn’t do...

Can you wait 20 years?

Thanks Mike, it was in my preferences. I had a ‘ah ha’ moment when you posted The above. Somehow that got switched to Navy.ca. Now back to Green as it should be ;)