Shrug not my F-35. The pilot was probably insufferable anyway.
CAF Security Forces [Split from RCN Anti Drone Weapon]
- Thread starter Underway
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 20,011
- Points
- 1,280
Far, far louder.I didn't know that.
How does it compare to say passenger jets at say Edmonton or Saskatoon or Quebec?
When I was deployed in KAF (the world’s best airshow, btw) one could almost pick out the aircraft taking off based on sound alone.
Fighters, especially turbojets, are ear-splittingly loud.
Especially those two French Air Force bastards who had a patrol starting every goddamned morning at 5 am.
- Reaction score
- 20,011
- Points
- 1,280
Our tent lines were between New Canada House and the Role 3, pretty close to the east end of the airstrip. If they were awake, we were awake…
- Reaction score
- 6,972
- Points
- 1,140
Well, being Canada, about a week after the war starts...
I'm not suggesting having a capable and well trained AD capability in the Reg and Res world is a bad idea. I'm just saying they are a separate problem from the security forces we need in a couple of years for our air bases and dockyards.
I'm guessing it will be assessed, and deemed an unlikely threat without solid Int to highlight a specific threat at a specific time. In which case, bringing in the AD folks is likely smarter/more effective than training security guards to be AD pers as well.Hordes of missiles coming across the North Pole may not be high on the list, but a herd of UAVs - both recce and weaponized - launched from inside the country by domestic terrorists and saboteurs would probably be high on any threat assessment. Which branch/service operates C-UAS may be debateable but I would think it would be part of any security force.
If you want them to do all things at once, you'll need a huge number of pers to keep things running 24/7.
- Reaction score
- 8,491
- Points
- 1,160
Which leads me back to an earlier thought.
Air Defence seems to comprise three components: Control, Sensors and Effectors.
Civilian air space is managed by: Control and Sensors.
In peace time the air space is managed controllers watching sensors and issuing commands to flying objects that follow orders.
The issue is what happens when the flying object doesn't follow orders and becomes a nuisance? How quickly can an effector be brought on line? Who mans it, maintains it and fires it?
And I am sure there are all sorts of laws to be written and debated to permit an airfield to be equipped on a permanent basis with kinetic effectors. But putting that aside how many uniformed personnel would have to be added to the current permanent Air Traffic Control staff? And how about the "half-measures" effectors like lasers and EW systems?
Rheinmetall
Rheinmetall's drone defence toolbox helps to protect civilian and military infrastructure, and is applicable for various threat environments.
www.rheinmetall.com
One option is to equip airports with "military capable" air space control system into which the military can plug lethal effectors if the threat level is deemed high enough.
At least 5 bases had nuclear weapons storage at the peak of the program — the Voodoo squadrons in Comox, Chatham and Bagotville and the Bomarc missile sites in North Bay and Mont Tremblant. Plus the sites in Germany, and possibly even more that I’ve missed. I own Sean Maloney’s book on the subject, but I don’t have it readily at hand.
These weapons were all secured by military police, who currently seem collectively uninterested in the task.
- Reaction score
- 17,834
- Points
- 1,010
Not precisely.
The weapons were US property and secured by USAF personnel.
The outer perimeter was Canadian MPs.
Agreed. We might simply be splitting hairs on the definition of security. The official role of the USAF 425th Munitions Maintenance Squadron dets in Canada was “Custodial and Maintenance functions for US material in Canada” and to my mind custody doesn’t include security. There were no USAF Security Police Squadrons in Canada; this was the role fulfilled by RCAF/CF MP’s and the role that we now need to revitalize.
Last edited:
- Reaction score
- 22,383
- Points
- 1,260
Civilian Air Traffic Control Radars are not Military Air Defense Radars.
In the NCR here (as opposed to your NCR) the Air Zone is monitored by 7 three letter agencies, the Secret Service, the FAA, and DoD/USAF.
It is located at Dulles, but not in the control towers - and issues get flagged and dealt with as required.
There are NASAM, Stingers, Avengers for Ground Based AD, as well as USAF Aircraft that can be scrambled to deal with more direct threats.
I do not believe the other regions have the same readily available assets for response - but that is way out of my prevue.
The issue is what threat are you trying to neutralize?And I am sure there are all sorts of laws to be written and debated to permit an airfield to be equipped on a permanent basis with kinetic effectors. But putting that aside how many uniformed personnel would have to be added to the current permanent Air Traffic Control staff? And how about the "half-measures" effectors like lasers and EW systems?
Rheinmetall
Rheinmetall's drone defence toolbox helps to protect civilian and military infrastructure, and is applicable for various threat environments.
One option is to equip airports with "military capable" air space control system into which the military can plug lethal effectors if the threat level is deemed high enough.
Enemy AC, a Hijacked Airliner(s) like 9/11, or UAS systems?
Should the threat increase to a level that it is deemed acceptable, then EW and DE systems would probably be the best option to protect commercial airports.
- Reaction score
- 6,972
- Points
- 1,140
My uncle was an MP that worked in Chatham, the Canadian MPs were definitely the public facing security forces there. If Americans were also doing security it was behind the initial screen of armed Canadians.
