• 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

What an odd way of saying $250 million and $400 million.
When it comes to major equipment we need to start thinking in billions. :giggle:

The army needs a lot of gear. It won't be had for fractions of billions. That's just perpetuating the "one set of equipment for the deployed force; another for the folks at home" way of thinking. We need to define our force structure and then equip it.

🍻
 
A ordinary hanger will provide protection against a homemade/civilian based drone attack if the bay door is closed. It does mean that you need a protection team in place when bay doors are open and aircraft are being moved. Protecting the fighters will be easier than the larger aircraft. You may have to build "net tents" that the aircraft can fit under. Likely incorporated in with protective berms. Permanent jammers in place that can be switched on and off as needed and optical trackers. Which will no doubt cue onto every fricking bird that goes by. Hopefully energy weapons will become reliable enough to be used near urban areas to avoid falling shrapnel. A couple of dudes with shotguns on duty with a truck mounted optical tracker is also required to escort aircraft as they move or hangers/nets are open.

For airfields not in urban areas, but near non-military structures (ruralish) I have to think that 20mm gives you some reach, but with a smaller safety zone for falling shells/debris, for airfields closers to other structures, a smaller caliber. The internet gives me a danger zone of a 20mm at roughly 6.5km. So for Comox, you would have to stick to 5.56 or 7.62 and you need gunners well trained to avoid shooting your own buildings, antennas, etc.
 
Remote weapon stations have fire inhibit zones programmed in to prevent you from shooting yourself and your antenna mounts. I imagine the same can be done with CUAS guns.
 
Back
Top