Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 16,932
- Points
- 1,260
Bro, we cant even issue you boots.
There is as much hope of us reaching those language levels as there is Carney building a pipeline through BC.
Canada moves to 2% GDP end of FY25/26 - PMMC
- Thread starter Maxman1
- Start date
Bro, we cant even issue you boots.
There is as much hope of us reaching those language levels as there is Carney building a pipeline through BC.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 10,880
- Points
- 1,040
If there is no plan, or the target isn't met, on whom will the sword of consequences fall?
I'd really like to see those who set or support unattainable objectives suffer heavy consequences for a change.
HavokFour
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,970
- Points
- 1,040
I sure hope we don't pass on this opportunity.
www.theglobeandmail.com
Archive
Ukraine willing to share drone and military technology with Canada, envoy says
Defence co-operation could include joint production of technology
www.theglobeandmail.com
Challenger fleet replacement tomorrow:
www.canada.ca
Secretary of State Fuhr and Minister Valdez to announce contract to strengthen Canadian Armed Forces - Canada.ca
The Honourable Stephen Fuhr, Secretary of State (Defence Procurement), and the Honourable Rechie Valdez, Minister of Women and Gender Equality, Secretary of State (Small Business and Tourism), will announce an update on the Airlift Capability Project – Multi-role Flight Service.
- Reaction score
- 37,527
- Points
- 1,210
An announcement in Mississauga? I wonder what platform this could possibly be?Challenger fleet replacement tomorrow:
Secretary of State Fuhr and Minister Valdez to announce contract to strengthen Canadian Armed Forces - Canada.ca
The Honourable Stephen Fuhr, Secretary of State (Defence Procurement), and the Honourable Rechie Valdez, Minister of Women and Gender Equality, Secretary of State (Small Business and Tourism), will announce an update on the Airlift Capability Project – Multi-role Flight Service.
For two or all four?Challenger fleet replacement tomorrow:
Secretary of State Fuhr and Minister Valdez to announce contract to strengthen Canadian Armed Forces - Canada.ca
The Honourable Stephen Fuhr, Secretary of State (Defence Procurement), and the Honourable Rechie Valdez, Minister of Women and Gender Equality, Secretary of State (Small Business and Tourism), will announce an update on the Airlift Capability Project – Multi-role Flight Service.
Oh wait its Friday tomorrow and Parliament just broke for Christmas. Probably 6.
- Reaction score
- 5,840
- Points
- 1,260
Global 8000’s for the Challenger replacement?
I'd say 6. The current fleet of 4 is too small to provide a consistent level of service. And upgrading to Globals is particularly nice. A Global 6500 is double the size of a Challenger with 50% more range. Should enable a lot more executive travel. Will add too that the Global 6500 is becoming a popular platform for ISR missions too.
Here's what 6000nm from YOW looks like:
- Reaction score
- 1,461
- Points
- 1,160
Last edited:
- Reaction score
- 22,180
- Points
- 1,010
Shoulda taped the Board to the top of the Jet. Let his former nibs practice to the coast.
The news release is out. Six new Global 6500s, with the first to be delivered in 2027.
Government of Canada announces contract to deliver new multi-role aircraft for Royal Canadian Air Force - Canada.ca
The Government of Canada is committed to rebuilding, rearming and reinvesting in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). Today, the Honourable Stephen Fuhr, Secretary of State (Defence Procurement), the Honourable Rechie Valdez, Minister of Women and Gender Equality and Secretary of State (Small...
- Reaction score
- 5,840
- Points
- 1,260
Fabius
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,804
- Points
- 1,010
I found the interview article here with CCA interesting. There is nothing new in the interview but what I find interesting is how the CCA framed and answered the questions.
There manner in which the questions were provided is potentially illuminating more so than the actual answers and words.
Asked about high value warfighting roles, the answers are all based on the CA shopping list of specific weapons. Potentially indicative of a lack of integrated understanding as an institution on how the CA plans to fight as an army with all its components.
Asked about the new structure, the Divisions are defined first by either Res or Reg not by task, purpose etc. That is second. It potentially speaks to the CA not really considering itself as a single entity but still 2 separate entities.
There is mention of not being in the Contribution Warfare realm anymore yet no discussion of what that really means and when questioned about the three priority theatres the answer includes a large component of it will depend on what the coalition will need from Canada in terms of land power. That’s framed as us supporting the coalition not being supported in a coalition, that strikes me as still being focused perhaps inadvertently on contribution warfare.
publications.canadianarmytoday.com
There manner in which the questions were provided is potentially illuminating more so than the actual answers and words.
Asked about high value warfighting roles, the answers are all based on the CA shopping list of specific weapons. Potentially indicative of a lack of integrated understanding as an institution on how the CA plans to fight as an army with all its components.
Asked about the new structure, the Divisions are defined first by either Res or Reg not by task, purpose etc. That is second. It potentially speaks to the CA not really considering itself as a single entity but still 2 separate entities.
There is mention of not being in the Contribution Warfare realm anymore yet no discussion of what that really means and when questioned about the three priority theatres the answer includes a large component of it will depend on what the coalition will need from Canada in terms of land power. That’s framed as us supporting the coalition not being supported in a coalition, that strikes me as still being focused perhaps inadvertently on contribution warfare.
Canadian Army Today - Fall 2025 - Volume 9, Issue 2
publications.canadianarmytoday.com
- Reaction score
- 11,871
- Points
- 1,160
I found the interview article here with CCA interesting. There is nothing new in the interview but what I find interesting is how the CCA framed and answered the questions.
There manner in which the questions were provided is potentially illuminating more so than the actual answers and words.
Asked about high value warfighting roles, the answers are all based on the CA shopping list of specific weapons. Potentially indicative of a lack of integrated understanding as an institution on how the CA plans to fight as an army with all its components.
Asked about the new structure, the Divisions are defined first by either Res or Reg not by task, purpose etc. That is second. It potentially speaks to the CA not really considering itself as a single entity but still 2 separate entities.
There is mention of not being in the Contribution Warfare realm anymore yet no discussion of what that really means and when questioned about the three priority theatres the answer includes a large component of it will depend on what the coalition will need from Canada in terms of land power. That’s framed as us supporting the coalition not being supported in a coalition, that strikes me as still being focused perhaps inadvertently on contribution warfare.
Canadian Army Today - Fall 2025 - Volume 9, Issue 2
If he completes his term as a Quartermaster filling bins and an Adjutant organizing a supply of people he will have done well.
At least then we will have some of the necessaries with which to fight. Right now we don't know who we are going to fight, where we are going to fight them or how we are going to fight. And we have little to nothing with which to fight.
