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

All Things Air Defence/AA (merged)


New Member
Reaction score
How good is Canada's anti-aircraft abilities, would the equipment we use pose any kind of major defense against lets say America's airforce?  I heard aircraft technology is still years ahead before anyone can make an impact to take away the advantage with anti-aircraft capabilities.

I would think the only future solution would be some kind of laser technology that would make sense to invest heavily in, what are your opinions?
I think the only thing close to anti-aircraft abilities is NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command)
NORAD is not an anti-aircraft ability, it is a military organization.

Canada has a variety of tactical anti-aircraft weapons, do a search in the artillery forum, and you will find enough about them.

explore those links you may learn a thing or two from them
also heres some videos on air defence(as well as other pieces of equipment): http://www.armee.forces.gc.ca/lf/English/3_2.asp#
Being an *educated*(mostly) Army forum, I'm supprised it took so long for someone to volunteer some info. (obviously Infanteer knew). Discovery had a British program that reviewed militaries and their equipment. I saw the episode where they reviewed ADATS. They rated it 3rd in the list compared with American, French (I think), and British AA equipment. They said that even though it was an old system, it was sturdy and reliable.
Thanks for the links, but I have already tried doing a search and looking up information.  I can't find anything about how well our AA defense would do against the top military aircraft of the world, that's why I thought I would pose the question here, where maybe some people have a more realistic idea of how well our equipment would do.

I remember watching a show awhile ago about AA defense and how it trailed behind the capabilities of the best aircraft and their defensive systems.
Cheeky....a little under 3 hours from the time the question was asked till when MARC posted the links is not a long time, unless the time space is different where you are from?
Well, 3 hours is a little slow, compared to the "Combat training in Cadets" topic. This topic is no where near as controversial, so I should have expected it to be slower. The original topic was posted at 4:00, and Marc's explanation at 7:00, so me thinks it a little slow. This forum stretches across 5 time zones, so some posts can seem a little wierd. It would be 10pm here and 1am there.
ALso depends on who is interested in the topic, who is on that might be able to answer and who is on who is willing to do the research.
Also depends on who's willing to offer the answer "do a search, it's been asked a million times" for the millionth time.
"ALso depends on who is interested in the topic, who is on that might be able to answer and who is on who is willing to do the research. "

Should have considered that.
Like I said, I did a search and if the question was asked a million times there would be no problem to post a link or answer the question whether our air defense would be effective against the top aircraft in the world?  To give the specs on the equipment does not answer if it is capable of effectively defending  our skies. 
The problem in answering your question is that Canadian Air Defence capabilities have not been tested in actual operation.  I can tell you that with a 80% hit percentage for first-time firers on the ADATS system is pretty impressive.  Go to the Jane's web site and they can give you a lot of info on our capabilities.  And about that British show about air defense, I saw that too and the British Rapier that they had was the latest version, not the one that the troops use, and all the video clips they used to show hits were from the ADATS informational video made by Orlicon aerospace.
It doesn't look like any gunners have taken a crack at this thread yet... I'll say something on behalf of my AD brethren, but bear in mind that I'm just a mudgunner and haven't had any AD training.

Canada's air defence artillery is pretty good overall. Compared to the field side, which is still using 60's era platforms like the M109 and older guns like the C3, the air defence kit we have is modern (developed in the 80's). The ADATS is an outstanding piece of kit, as it can engage both aerial and armoured ground targets, and has a good radar system.

As well as the ADATS, the AD uses Javelin manportable missiles and 35mm guns linked to Skyguard radars. However, these systems are likely to be dropped soon in favour of a primary focus on ADATS (Javelin may be kept in a residual capacity). ADATS will be re-engineered and placed on a LAV chassis (that's the plan) and the Army wants to mix it with TOW and the MGS to make an anti-tank organization. What effect this may have on air defence training remains to be seen, but that capability will still exist.

Compared to the States... Well, the Javeling is a VERY Short Range system, while ADATS is a Short range system. Canada possesses no long range system like the US Patriot; but, on the other hand, the US doesn't really have a ground-based air defence system to cover the gap between their Stingers and their Patriot. Our ADATS fills that gap rather nicely, as I understand.... It's one of those few things that we have and they don't.

Now, manning is a big problem - like the rest of the army; lack of funds for training (live missiles are VERY expensive) and the uncertainty about the future resulting from the new anti-tank role are making life hard for the air defenders. Also, there aren't a lot of platforms - Canada only bought 36 ADATS systems, and only has one Reg Force regiment (4th Air Defence Regiment) composed of two batteries.

So in short, the equipment's good, but there's not a lot of it and the pressure on the organization is very high right now. 

If there's any birdgunners in the forum who know more than I do, please add your thoughts....
Well you pretty much hit it on the head.  Being a Bird Gunner, our future has always been rather uncertain.  Now with the new ADATS on LAV chasis, the closeing of Javelin units and the mothballing of the 35 mm guns, we are in a constant state of change.  You're right about the only reg force air defence unit in Canada is also the only one with ADATS being the 4 AD REGT and they are an Army, Navy and Air Force asset, they train with everybody! 

But the ADATS is one nice peace of equipment, even without taking into consideration it was developped in the 1980s.  I was on it for 7 years and I enjoyed working with it.  I actually miss it now that I'm gone.
I have always felt nervious around the adats with a signal being beamed outwards for those who hunt such signals (harm?).

Modern systems operate on thermal signatures that don't give off a signal like radar. It's ture that in the 80's this was a good system, but now thermal searching systems have overtaken radar. With soo many systems both ground and air/space based looking in that spectrum, it would seem a risk to light your self up. I may be wrong here, but after reading the capiblities of the electronic warfare units now deployed in operations abroad, I feel the Adats and such systems are not going to last long if the enemy has a good elec/warfare systems in place and knows how to use them.

Am I wrong in this thinking?
Actually all the ADATS in an area dont need to turn on their radars.  They can be slaved to a single ADATS and get the radar picture from that.  The missile is laser guided and tracked by FLIR/TV so no real radar is needed for that either.  Of course if it wants to operate by itself and detect targets beyond visual range then it needs to fire up the radar.  BTW, this info is all avail on Janes.
And depending on that band of the radar it might not be detected at all by opposition counter measures.