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

Canada moves to 2% GDP end of FY25/26 - PMMC

Waste of money. How realistic is the air and naval threat to Canada from anywhere except the US? And if someone else did come, they'd be at the end of a trans-Atlantic or trans-Pacific lifeline. They come, maybe they land; at that point they're committed and they lose.

I have never understood why anyone took seriously the threat of Japanese invasion of the west coast.
If the Japanese had been smart they would have used a couple of freighters and small task force to hit Prince Rupert or one of the larger Alaskan coastal communities.

Land a few hundred marines near Prince Rupert, attack the town , burn, blow up up some of the infrastructure, raise havoc for a few hours and then depart. The resulting shock would have forced authorities both in Canada and US to spend far more resource than they did in protecting the coasts. The number of fortifications and equipment was only a portion that had been recommended back in 1936. I do give the Canadian authorities some credit for actually being aware of the threat and doing something prior.
 
From my read the Manoeuvre Div (you can use the Cdn spelling if you're so hung up on names) is simply an administrative grouping on paper that is capable of generating a division sized TF.
Which is Canadian for we have no idea what’s going on above a BG deployment?

I don’t care about names I care about effects.
Putting the LIB’s into the Manure Div just acts like the CA is yet again treating the LI like BN’s w/o LAV’s regardless if they are going to be a RHQ


By the way, 1 CAD isn't an admin HQ. They are an operational formation. Literally why the CAOC is in Winnipeg and why the Commander of 1 CAD is double hatted as the Cmdr CANR.
Okay well woukd you accept not a deployable HQ?
Training support. Pilots in the cold have a short life expectancy.
Sounds like SAR, but again I’d say pilots shot down in combat might also want a ride home.
Geographic dispersion. But also, CAF fighter wings are normal sized by most standards. It's American fighter wings that are exceptionally large. Just like division sized army bases are mostly an American thing in NATO.
Honestly I am not familiar with the fighter stuff, and did a few quick searches and got a huge disparity in both Squadron and Wing sizes.

Correct. So whatever it's called on paper is largely irrelevant.
Agreed
They'll generate what they need to deploy to ensure the supported corps/theatre commander has what they need.
Generally deploying a Div means it picks up and moves - which as you noted above is one of the advantages of the American system with Divisions (and more) on single bases - so they can pull pin and be off lock stock and barrel.



Would you be happier if it was just called the Reg F Division? Or the Tier 1 group? Or the place we put our more expensive shit?
I’d be happier if some logical thought went into the process.

If Canada ever gets into a significant conflict you are going to need Reserves badly.

There hasn’t been a deployment since pre Somalia that hasn’t had a fair chunk of Reservists propping the Regs units up.
 
I’d be happier if some logical thought went into the process.

If Canada ever gets into a significant conflict you are going to need Reserves badly.

There hasn’t been a deployment since pre Somalia that hasn’t had a fair chunk of Reservists propping the Regs units up.

You can add all DOMOPS to that list too.

But, I suppose, the Army thinks it's finally been able to separate the wheat from the chaff which should make it easier to get on with things without having to bother about the annoying rent-a-mob getting under foot ;)


Fail Tiere Bis Unters Dach GIF by SWR Kindernetz
 
If we’re talking about threats to our physical sovereignty by an overseas naval power, then it would seem to me that pretty much any such case will start with detecting existence and discerning intentions as far out as possible, and then making a decision to interdict and if necessary strike as early as possible. I don’t know what that looks like with any great certainty, but the ‘find and fix’ sounds like satellites and aircraft, ‘discern intentions’ is probably gonna be Five Eyes SIGINT, and ‘strike’ will depend on how far out the threat is and what it’s physically made up of.

Exactly how it's done in real life today. Something the chatterati here would actually know if they have ever been inside an RJOC. Ships move at 20-30 kts. They aren't aircraft. So stuff starts getting tracked days or even weeks out. And maintaining the maritime picture is a major part of the job. Not just the last kinetic bit where they fire something.

The opinions here are ignorant and childish. These guys would probably end up firing a PrSM against a boat carrying illegal immigrants. When you have a hammer, everything is a nail, I guess.

Before even this, defense procurement and even day to day buying power of DND needs an over hall, how much better off would our procurement be for example if we didn't give back a billion plus a year, or took ten years to buy anything at all? The fact I, and my wifes grandfather are both qualified techs on the same pistol is hilarious and sad all at the same time.

Let's hope the new agency works out. It's moving quick. Decks were being prepared last week on every major project. Fastest I've ever seen something go from public announcement to actual work.

Generally deploying a Div means it picks up and moves - which as you noted above is one of the advantages of the American system with Divisions (and more) on single bases - so they can pull pin and be off lock stock and barrel.

Which is unique to the US and maybe China. Nobody else has a military large enough to treat a division like a standard tactical formation. If the standard tactical unit is a brigade, the Div as the higher formation will have some administrative and support functions that the Americans might do at the Corps or EAC level. If your argument it's that the American way is the only correct answer, I guess most of NATO is going to be wrong. Oh well.

I don’t care about names I care about effects.
Putting the LIB’s into the Manure Div just acts like the CA is yet again treating the LI like BN’s w/o LAV’s regardless if they are going to be a RHQ

Who says the whole division deploys every single time? They literally said in the doc the LIR is a crisis response force.

Let's be honest what is likely to happen here. They'll force generate a Div HQ for say a place like Latvia. It'll have a CMBG and some support elements. The rest of the combat power will come from other allies attachments. That's what this setup is for. It let's them maintain the competency of operating at the Div level. It doesn't mean the CA is going to start shipping whole divisions to Europe.
 
Again. We buy airplanes and ships and satellites to deal with a whole lot of threats and provide a full spectrum of response options. And they can deal with the full spectrum of threats that a HIMARS can deal with (in a coastal battery role). The reverse is not true. How is a coastal battery going to check whether it's a hostile dark target or a ship in distress?
Why do you keep suggesting that the HIMARS would be the only defence on the coasts - all three of them? Is that the only way that your argument makes sense to you? For the fourth time - it's part of an integrated system that relies on all the other sensors including air and space surveillance and the command and control structure for the entire region. It covers a given region leaving the ships free to manoeuvre elsewhere.

Do you think we've got a FOO with binoculars looking out to sea? How do you think HIMARS finds its targets on land? HIMARS is simply a launch system. It delivers a weapon hundreds of kilometres away and the missiles are more and more the exact same anti-ship missiles a ship can deliver but which are far to large for an aircraft to carry.
Do you see the Americans standing down ANG units to deploy HIMARS as coastal batteries everywhere? Why do you think the country with infinitely more resources than us isn't doing that?
The don't have to stand down ARNG units to deploy HIMARS. The ARNG already has quite a number of HIMARS battalions. They can be deployed wherever the US military wants them and they already have trialled flying HIMARS as single launchers to remote areas as required. The Marines have turned the vast bulk of their tube artillery and all of their armour into long range missile batteries with the specific intention of creating A2AD zones in the Pacific and elsewhere. Why do you think the Australians are buying 90 HIMARS launchers?


It's not because they need them for Latvia. And don't tell me they're in a completely different situation. It's because like us they have a long shoreline and need a close in defence so that their air and naval assets are free to manoeuvre elsewhere and under a land-based umbrella.

I presume you'd argue against long-range air defence system of our coastal infrastructure too because ships and jets can provide that too.

You boys aren't going to have any luck trying to convince any GOFO or politician that you know sea and air control better than sailors and aviators. You can keep trying. It just makes y'all look more desperate and ridiculous.
Let me tell you why one can't convince GOFOs of something like this. Because, around the table where decisions are made, folks like you argue to keep your own little share of the pie sacrosanct. You're so desperate to stay relevant that you deny the possibility of someone else being a partner in what you think is your turf that you recklessly ignore and demean any other possible solution. The problem in Canada is that at the table where decisions are made everyone has to fight tooth and nail for capital dollars and would rip the liver out of their aunt Betsy if it got them a few extra million. The desperation appears to me to be on the side of those who deny the value of ground launch A2AD systems in the face of ever more capable and longer ranging weapon systems.

The reality is that for the price of a single F35 I can buy two HIMARS batteries. One HIMARS battery distributed at key points along either the east or west coast provides adequate A2AD coverage at a tiny fraction of the daily operating cost of either an F35 squadron or a ship. Hell, if you make those batteries ARes batteries then during peacetime, until you need them, the training costs are mere rounding errors in the budget. (Let me add that it's the same folks around that table who won't give the better "toys" to the ARes because taking the steps to make the ARes effective in operating equipment which has limited use during peacetime but is critical during wartime would threaten their precious peacetime PYs. Running HIMARS, isn't rocket science ;).)

Canada can't afford not to add ground based coastal A2AD systems - especially ones that are capable of providing a persistent northern presence.

🍻
 
Why do you keep suggesting that the HIMARS would be the only defence on the coasts - all three of them?

For the same reason your lot is hyper focused on the last part of the kill chain while the real life job is everything before pushing a button.
 
Gents, let’s maybe take a five minute breather? Clearly there’s some very solid knowledge in the thread across a range of domains and levels, but the signal to noise is starting to go to shit a bit with the barbs and causticity. Those of us on the dumber end are just trying to enjoy this and learn.
 
For the same reason your lot is hyper focused on the last part of the kill chain while the real life job is everything before pushing a button.
But that's exactly the point of joint systems. You enable all available sensors and then apply an appropriate solution.

Would it make you happier if the ground based A2AD systems were run by the naval or RCAF service? If so - take them - if you can find the crews. I'm not too proud

@brihard This last one got away from me before reading your post. You're right. @ytz and I are now into flogging a dead horse mode. I'm going on radio silence on this one.

🍻
 
The don't have to stand down ARNG units to deploy HIMARS. The ARNG already has quite a number of HIMARS battalions. They can be deployed wherever the US military wants them and they already have trialled flying HIMARS as single launchers to remote areas as required. The Marines have turned the vast bulk of their tube artillery and all of their armour into long range missile batteries with the specific intention of creating A2AD zones in the Pacific and elsewhere. Why do you think the Australians are buying 90 HIMARS launchers?

Pacific being the key word there. They aren't trying to protect California and Maine with HIMARS coastal batteries. Like I said earlier, there's a role for HIMARS in expeditionary ops. Particularly in places where friendly airfields aren't available. This is not the case in North America.

Let me tell you why one can't convince GOFOs of something like this. Because, around the table where decisions are made, folks like you argue to keep your own little share of the pie sacrosanct. You're so desperate to stay relevant that you deny the possibility of someone else being a partner in what you think is your turf that you recklessly ignore and demean any other possible solution. The problem in Canada is that at the table where decisions are made everyone has to fight tooth and nail for capital dollars and would rip the liver out of their aunt Betsy if it got them a few extra million. The desperation appears to me to be on the side of those who deny the value of ground launch A2AD systems in the face of ever more capable and longer ranging weapon systems.

The reality is that for the price of a single F35 I can buy two HIMARS batteries. One HIMARS battery distributed at key points along either the east or west coast provides adequate A2AD coverage at a tiny fraction of the daily operating cost of either an F35 squadron or a ship. Hell, if you make those batteries ARes batteries then during peacetime, until you need them, the training costs are mere rounding errors in the budget.

Canada can't afford not to add ground based coastal A2AD systems - especially ones that are capable of providing a persistent northern presence.

It's a lot of words to say that you don't understand why we have an air force and a navy and how the day to day business of homeland defence from air and sea threats is actually done. This has nothing to do with budgets. If you were arguing that we should cut a dozen F-35s for another battalion of HIMARS for expeditionary ops, I would agree with you. If you're arguing that this is how we keep Vancouver safe, I'm going to call it out for the dumb idea it is.
 
Exactly how it's done in real life today. Something the chatterati here would actually know if they have ever been inside an RJOC. Ships move at 20-30 kts. They aren't aircraft. So stuff starts getting tracked days or even weeks out. And maintaining the maritime picture is a major part of the job. Not just the last kinetic bit where they fire something.
Let’s be honest there are levels before that as well, as most threat targets are known before they take to the air or sea.


The opinions here are ignorant and childish. These guys would probably end up firing a PrSM against a boat carrying illegal immigrants. When you have a hammer, everything is a nail, I guess.
My argument for ages has been that is the CA’s outlook, except they had a pretty crappy hammer, so a lot of screws managed to avoid getting ‘nailed’.

By and large I agree with you that the Coastal Artillery Missile stuff is just noise.


Let's hope the new agency works out. It's moving quick. Decks were being prepared last week on every major project. Fastest I've ever seen something go from public announcement to actual work.
That is most needed, as the CAF is in some serious rust out issues.
Which is unique to the US and maybe China. Nobody else has a military large enough to treat a division like a standard tactical formation.
The Division is a maneuver formation. It doesn’t matter who has it, it is just that many armies haven’t been involved in LSCO’s and got sucked into the GWOT BCT’ism (I’d argue Canada fell into that trap and worse right after WW2.
If the standard tactical unit is a brigade, the Div as the higher formation will have some administrative and support functions that the Americans might do at the Corps or EAC level. If your argument it's that the American way is the only correct answer, I guess most of NATO is going to be wrong. Oh well.
The breakdown doesn’t occur really like that.
A lot of countries opted for the BCT setup for GWOW as it allowed Brigades to be the core of the deployment as the Divisional assets where not needed at the same level.
Most NATO countries are re-organizing toward focus on LSCO, and reverting some things that had been pushed to Bde’s (like guns) into their own own Bde’s at Div.

Canada has been deploying BN based Combat Teams since Korea, the 4CMBG pocket Div was a Cold War aspect to Canada contribution.

When you deploy less than a Div you end up be reliant on other nations for higher support (both CS and CSS), generally a Bde is viewed as the smallest viable separate formation, even though Canada has repeatedly deployed smaller entities.


Who says the whole division deploys every single time? They literally said in the doc the LIR is a crisis response force.
You don’t need to deploy the whole Div, but you have the ability. It is much easier to scale down to an event than scale up.

The LIR will suffer from two masters - CJOC and 3Div (or whatever it is eventually called).
3Div is supposed to be focused Europe, and will have a Bde+/- deployed to Latvia
Let's be honest what is likely to happen here. They'll force generate a Div HQ for say a place like Latvia. It'll have a CMBG and some support elements. The rest of the combat power will come from other allies attachments. That's what this setup is for. It let's them maintain the competency of operating at the Div level. It doesn't mean the CA is going to start shipping whole divisions to Europe.
Agreed. But if 3Div ends up with the HQ in Latvia along with a CMBG, and then the LIR needs to go to Africa, Asia whatever- the reporting chain is a tad FUBAR.

CANSOF is most likely to take over the vacuum and then no one will get the LIR back - it will be the Ranger Reg’t giving support to CSOR and the Hill. Which while good for CANSOF, will totally gut the CA of Light Force proponents.



It isn’t logical to put the LIR into the Man Div.
I also think the DoC Div name is a tad bizarre, other than perhaps making it more politically palatable to get the PRes equipment.
 
The price of peace is eternal vigilance.

IC and LE will inform the threat.
Yeah, I mean defined it for the purpose of this thread and the talk of splattering people and stuff with great abandon and by various means.
 
Land a few hundred marines near Prince Rupert, attack the town , burn, blow up up some of the infrastructure, raise havoc for a few hours and then depart.
Commando raids...
The resulting shock would have forced authorities both in Canada and US to spend far more resource than they did in protecting the coasts
...are only a problem if the authorities are psychologically too weak to do reasoned estimates. That might have been the case then; it shouldn't now. "Forced" is too strong a word.
 
We still haven’t defined the actual threat…
It's irrelevant to them. Because HIMARS solves it all.

Walk into either RJOC and you'll see a multi department team, RCN, CCG, RCMP, CBSA, focused on watching everything approaching our coasts and figuring out their intent. If they need more information, they'll task collection against it from a variety of government assets (not just RCN and RCAF). They'll determine if a vessel needs a closer inspection or even boarding. And if it ever came to the point that they needed something blown up, they can task an RCN asset or call up the CAOC to deliver a GBU or JSOW or Mk 46 Torpedo.

Their goal is simple. Full awareness and control of what is in their AOR. And ensure no hostile intent can materialize.

If you ask any of folks working there about coastal batteries, you'll get laughed out of the room. They want more drones and satellites on any given day. And indeed, current plans are to dramatically scale up those capabilities so that they have what they need.
 
We still haven’t defined the actual threat…
By all that is holy, yes, please start there. I'm confident that whenever anyone does, all his worries about coastal invasions will go into the bin marked "scripts for movies like 1941".

Fundamentally, navies avoid major operations within range of land-based aircraft during wartime unless the air threat is minimal (hint, hint) or they can themselves dominate the airspace. The latter requires either that they have a carrier force (there's only one nation that can sufficiently do that) or that they are in range of their own land-based aircraft.
 
Back
Top