Canada's tanks

[Kirkhill]

Unfinished Wars don't resolve conflicts, but you can most definitely finish a war with Artillery

There is a need to also break the population from it's original bend that led to the conflict - sometimes a change of leadership (and a lot of casualties can do it), sometimes there just needs to be way more casualties...

And patience..... lots and lots of patience.

 

[KevinB]

And patience..... lots and lots of patience.

No longer a western word, hence the need for more tanks to go faster

 

[suffolkowner]

Is not one of the reasons we have these dispersed forces to avoid the targeting and elimination of large forces? Maybe hard to avoid one if one can not avoid the other?

 

[Brad Sallows]

Move dispersed; fight concentrated has been around for a while.

Someone who can manage tank formations can set the pace against someone who can barely manage tank company groupings, whether due to lack of resources or lack of knowledge. Patton didn't exactly line his right flank with a bastion of concentrated infantry divisions during his sweep leftward after the COBRA breakout.

We ought to be capable of fighting a tank-heavy brigade as part of a division. Otherwise, whatever we procure may just end up being targets. The tank "delta" isn't that much. An armoured division could be one brigade armour, two infantry, all triangular, with two armour and one infantry unit in the armour brigade. Thus, only two armour units are needed in the entire formation, which could be as little as 90 or so MBTs. We aren't that much short. And by historical standards, that can be argued to be a reasonably balanced formation compared to some that were a lot tank-heavier.

 

[KevinB]

IMHO Canada should have a min of 300 tanks.

~100 per Armour Bde (for ~200 operational units using my 2 Armoured Bde force) and ~100 for war stock.

Building 30 or so a year then allows for rotation of older ones, plus potentially allowing PRes units to have armour.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Would you accept a LAV based Infantry entity - or a mixed "CAV" force for that role?

I think that mech infantry can certainly execute a task such as guard or screen between two formations or along the flank of a formation. It just might not be the best use for them. A Recce Sqn as configured pre-doctrine note with all those two-vehicle Patrols was established and trained to conduct such economy of effort tasks (Screen at a minimum) to provide wide coverage with low density. A Light Cavalry Squadron could execute those tasks as well.

Now to the second part of your question, a Battle Group with two Light Cavalry Squadrons, a Tank Squadron and an Mech Infantry Company with some form of integral fire support (mortars?) would be very well suited to guard an area (wider than a normal defensive frontage for a force of similar size) to allow other forces to concentrate elsewhere.

 

[GK .Dundas]

IMHO Canada should have a min of 300 tanks.

~100 per Armour Bde (for ~200 operational units using my 2 Armoured Bde force) and ~100 for war stock.

Building 30 or so a year then allows for rotation of older ones, plus potentially allowing PRes units to have armour.

Actually in to order to do that you might have to something on the order of 450 - 600 tanks. And I suspect that actually a minimum.
Sitting at Cancer Care waiting for my next appointment so I'll do another posting later

 

[KevinB]

Actually in to order to do that you might have to something on the order of 450 - 600 tanks. And I suspect that actually a minimum.
Sitting at Cancer Care waiting for my next appointment so I'll do another posting later

Honestly I am a firm believer that to have one, you need 3-4. But I think 800 tanks is probably well beyond the Canadian range of effort, even with a 2% GDP budget.

I think 300 is a solid enough number to be actually reasonable in a Defence strategy for Canada.

Plus if your building 30 a year, I doubt all 30 you are replacing in 10 years are totally crapped out - so you will eventually built up a decent enough surplus that you may ‘accidentally’ get to 800, it just may take 40 more years.

 

[Brad Sallows]

IMHO Canada should have a min of 300 tanks.

~100 per Armour Bde (for ~200 operational units using my 2 Armoured Bde force) and ~100 for war stock.

Building 30 or so a year then allows for rotation of older ones, plus potentially allowing PRes units to have armour.

I think we could make do with 150. A battalion's worth for a unit in a mixed formation (brigade) spending the year working at level 5 and up; another battalion in a mixed formation working at getting to 5; and a third "battalion" to piecemeal out as a sub-unit for a battle school, a sub-unit for operations, and a sub-unit in long-term refit. Given the numbers of LAVs we have, 150 tanks isn't unreasonable. But the arrangement I imagine, and what it implies in terms of where units are based, is probably politically infeasible.

 

[MacNav63]

300 would seem a reasonable number given I believe it's ball park what we had in the way of Centurions back when the peacetime army was at it's post war peak with 4 brigade groups, each with a tank regiment.

 

[MacNav63]

300 would seem a reasonable number given I believe it's ball park what we had in the way of Centurions back when the peacetime army was at it's post war peak with 4 brigade groups, each with a tank regiment.

At least post war peak in terms of brigade groups with tank regiments. I realize the post WWII peak was 5 brigades groups.

 

[GK .Dundas]

Plus you had 19 or 20 reserve regiments run a squadron's worth of Sherman's.

 

[KevinB]

I think we could make do with 150. A battalion's worth for a unit in a mixed formation (brigade) spending the year working at level 5 and up; another battalion in a mixed formation working at getting to 5; and a third "battalion" to piecemeal out as a sub-unit for a battle school, a sub-unit for operations, and a sub-unit in long-term refit. Given the numbers of LAVs we have, 150 tanks isn't unreasonable. But the arrangement I imagine, and what it implies in terms of where units are based, is probably politically infeasible.

Honestly I don’t think the LAV is a good partner for a tank, and because of that you need more tanks in a Bde to account for the fact your Mech Inf isn’t able to tank with you in a lot of terrain.

The LAV centric nature of the CA is very limiting to the Armoured Corp as far as combined operations.

 

[GR66]

300 would seem a reasonable number given I believe it's ball park what we had in the way of Centurions back when the peacetime army was at it's post war peak with 4 brigade groups, each with a tank regiment.

Comparing Centurions to Leopards/Abrams is apples to watermelons. With all the competing (and very expensive) equipment requirements that the CAF has I don't in my wildest dreams imagine any Canadian government purchasing 300 MBTs.

The best I can imagine is a Regiment's worth pre-positioned in Europe for a mostly fly-over force and a 2nd Regiment's worth in Canada for training and replacements.

 

[KevinB]

Comparing Centurions to Leopards/Abrams is apples to watermelons. With all the competing (and very expensive) equipment requirements that the CAF has I don't in my wildest dreams imagine any Canadian government purchasing 300 MBTs.

The best I can imagine is a Regiment's worth pre-positioned in Europe for a mostly fly-over force and a 2nd Regiment's worth in Canada for training and replacements.

That’s really only about 7b. If spread over a few years it’s not that significant compared to F-35’s or CSC’s.

 

[MacNav63]

Comparing Centurions to Leopards/Abrams is apples to watermelons. With all the competing (and very expensive) equipment requirements that the CAF has I don't in my wildest dreams imagine any Canadian government purchasing 300 MBTs.

The best I can imagine is a Regiment's worth pre-positioned in Europe for a mostly fly-over force and a 2nd Regiment's worth in Canada for training and replacements.

I did say "reasonable," not "likely." I honestly can't see a scenario in which a Canadian government of any political stripe is willing to invest in any new/used tanks. What state were the Centurions in when PET had his come to Jesus moment with Chancellor Schmidt and bought the Leopards? And what had become of those Leopards when we suddenly realized we needed tanks in Afghanistan? Absent an external force of some sort, I'm not optimistic about any scenario. And even then, I fear the most likely external force will the same one that drove Chretien/Martin to get our finances in order in the 90s and that won't bode well for procurement of anything. But I'm having a pessimistic kind of day and hope I'm wrong.

 

[GR66]

That’s really only about 7b. If spread over a few years it’s not that significant realistic compared to considering F-35’s or CSC’s, JSS, NORAD upgrades, P-8's, submarines, Kingston-Class replacements, RPAS, ATGM's, C-UAS, AD, tube and rocket artillery, munitions build-up, infrastructure replacement, digitization, and, and, and....

FTFY

Desirable? Yes. And when looked in isolation should be entirely doable for a G7 nation. But when you look at the deep, deep hole (abyss) the CAF has been dug into - in addition to serious personnel shortages, an apathetic public and a hostile Government it's simply not going to happen.

 

[IKnowNothing]

FTFY

Desirable? Yes. And when looked in isolation should be entirely doable for a G7 nation. But when you look at the deep, deep hole (abyss) the CAF has been dug into - in addition to serious personnel shortages, an apathetic public and a hostile Government it's simply not going to happen.

I think the expectations for a "G7 Nation" are subconsciously distorted by the US skewing the "average."

France is planning 200 tanks to the XLR standard (~ 175% our population, 150% our GDP)
UK ~200 Challengers (similar ratio to France)
Italy is only upgrading 125 Ariete's (150% of our population, comparable GDP)

2 regiments + spares and training (~120-150 combat grade tanks) is a reasonable expectation from both sides of the coin, neither too high nor too low- providing there's roughly equivalent numbers of cavalry fighting vehicle, a tracked heavy IFV, proper amount of SPG's, mortars, ATGM's etc. etc.

 

[GK .Dundas]

Comparing Centurions to Leopards/Abrams is apples to watermelons. With all the competing (and very expensive) equipment requirements that the CAF has I don't in my wildest dreams imagine any Canadian government purchasing 300 MBTs.

The best I can imagine is a Regiment's worth pre-positioned in Europe for a mostly fly-over force and a 2nd Regiment's worth in Canada for training and replacements.

Currently I suspect the best we can hope for are a limited distribution of photocopies of Rheimetall sales brochures. Just to remind people what an actual tank really looks like.

 

[childs56]

Currently I suspect the best we can hope for are a limited distribution of photocopies of Rheimetall sales brochures. Just to remind people what an actual tank really looks like.

Ouch.... but funny