Informing the Army’s Future Structure

[MilEME09]

I look forward to seeing it - but not holding breath too hard.

Having seen plan 2040 which will be signed off this fall, if the funding remains steady, we will be back. It will also require significant expansion of bases over the next 8 years.

 

[FJAG]

Having seen plan 2040 which will be signed off this fall, if the funding remains steady, we will be back. It will also require significant expansion of bases over the next 8 years.

Do we have time to 2040?

 

[KevinB]

Do we have time to 2040?

No.
Australia went to 3.5% GDP Defense Budget yesterday. They know they waited too long.

 

[Underway]

Do we have time to 2040?

My take:

For the army? Yes. Ukraine is crippling Russian ability to attack Europeans with a chance of success the short term, and the Europeans will have enough time to rearm to take on Russia by themselves. in a 5 year window they can do it.

For the Airforce? Yes with some gaps. They are quite a long way into their modernization. F-35', P8, MQ9B's are all in the pipeline. They just need to unf*** their training right now. 5 year window they will mostly be ready (helicopter fleets notwithstanding).

For the RCN? No. Naval conflict in Asia is sooner than later. JSS 1&2 will be ready but there won't be a single new combatant ready in the next 5 years barring the subcontractors/LMC/Iriving going to 24hr and three shifts. Navy is going to be on convoy and "plug into allied task group" duty, if not only defense of Canada duty. It will be like WW1.

Industrially? I dunno.

 

[DBNSG]

My take:

For the army? Yes. Ukraine is crippling Russian ability to attack Europeans with a chance of success the short term, and the Europeans will have enough time to rearm to take on Russia by themselves. in a 5 year window they can do it.

For the Airforce? Yes with some gaps. They are quite a long way into their modernization. F-35', P8, MQ9B's are all in the pipeline. They just need to unf*** their training right now. 5 year window they will mostly be ready (helicopter fleets notwithstanding).

For the RCN? No. Naval conflict in Asia is sooner than later. JSS 1&2 will be ready but there won't be a single new combatant ready in the next 5 years barring the subcontractors/LMC/Iriving going to 24hr and three shifts. Navy is going to be on convoy and "plug into allied task group" duty, if not only defense of Canada duty. It will be like WW1.

Industrially? I dunno.

So Canada keeps MV Asterix and the Ramp at Comox has more P-8's than the handful planned for . Canada becomes an AOR and LRMP contributor to any Asian conflict.

 

[Kirkhill]

Do we have time to 2040?

Canada may have time but NORAD doesn't think there is time and NATO certainly doesn't think there is time.

Everybody else is on the ice. Canada isn't even lacing up its skates. It is still shopping for them and wondering if it can make them itself.

Not much of a team player.

 

[Kirkhill]

If I understand the message from gunners correctly the weapon is not the gun it is the thing that is sent through the air: the projectile, the missile.

With ballistic projectiles getting smarter, with smaller calibres being able to change course in flight and self-target, with guns launching rockets and mortars launching prop, jet and rocket powered aircraft, with helicopters being launched from the palm of the same hand that throws a grenade, with aircraft being able to navigate enemy defenses on their own to find an open window after flying thousands of kilometers
...

Where does artillery end and air force begin?

And how closely can you approach the enemy in your vehicle?

 

[Halifax Tar]

So Canada keeps MV Asterix and the Ramp at Comox has more P-8's than the handful planned for . Canada becomes an AOR and LRMP contributor to any Asian conflict.

If that is what Canada sees as it desired contribution, so be it.

 

[Kirkhill]

US Air National Guard.

Down 1x Tactical Air Control Squadron.

Up 2x Cyber Squadrons.

Utah Air Guard base to wind down tactical air control party squadron

Tactical air control party airmen called in airstrikes alongside Army and special ops troops for years, but the Air Force is moving away from that posture.

www.defensenews.com

Everybody's assumptions are changing.

 

[Underway]

If that is what Canada sees as it desired contribution, so be it.

Desired or what we can actually contribute. A fight in the South China Sea really isn't in our geostrategic critical interests categories. Arctic and Europe are. Helping Japan and Korea in the situation where they are pulled into a conflict over Taiwan is in our critical interests I would argue. If they don't go though, someone needs to explain very clearly why Taiwan is a place we should be dying over, because I don't see it.

The other way to help is that we cover off gaps created by the US sending resources. More NORAD, more ship patrols, more aircraft patrols etc... They can go fight their war and we stay here doing more for continental defence.