There's a lot of threats to defend against. Protecting military assets are one among many concerns. All kinds of critical infrastructure and personnel have to be protected. Not just the aircraft on the ramp. I notice how none of you guys are talking about say the water supply, POL or power to the bases. Or protecting personnel and their families. We could spend entire budgets just on force protection. Doesn't deliver extra capability. Investment on force protection has to be reasonably balanced.
Dispersion is certainly one force protection technique.
For the record, I am not advocating that every single fighter in Canada have a HAS. I did not think that all the QRAs being HAS was too high a bar, however.
I am also all for hardening fuel, ammo storage, water treatment and having electrical power redundancy…
There's a lot of threats to defend against. Protecting military assets are one among many concerns. All kinds of critical infrastructure and personnel have to be protected. Not just the aircraft on the ramp. I notice how none of you guys are talking about say the water supply, POL or power to the bases. Or protecting personnel and their families. We could spend entire budgets just on force protection. Doesn't deliver extra capability. Investment on force protection has to be reasonably balanced.
National Defence is a capability.
Force Protection is also a capability.
Offensive capabilities are something else.
Most Canadian taxpayers might be forgiven for believing that they were paying the Department of National Defence for National Defence.
Not sure what your point is. I don't think the average person would expect us to spending $10B on HAS and buy half the number of jets just because. Balancing priorities, like force generation and force protection, is also part of sound management of National Defence.
Prepare tinfoil hat…maybe it wouldn’t be the first time?
Site: PIN-3 | The DEWLine
lswilson.dewlineadventures.com
He wants the CAF to primarily guard infrastructure in Canada in case the first strike of Russia or China is destroying the Kelowna international air port.Not sure what your point is. I don't think the average person would expect us to spending $10B on HAS and buy half the number of jets just because. Balancing priorities, like force generation and force protection, is also part of sound management of National Defence.
That’s a pretty nonsensical ‘strawperson’ argument for build HAS at least at the FOB QRA hangars.I don't think the average person would expect us to spending $10B on HAS and buy half the number of jets just because.
And hardened hangers would protect against this unlikely arson how?
Nellis has its own Force Protection, as well as NTR’s and the other side of the mountain have vastly different FP postures and capabilities. While it’s relatively “open” it really isn’t.Yep. CL and Bag are also more remote than most American fighter bases. Notice how nobody here is talking about Nellis here, like a 20 min Uber from the strip. I was here a few years ago. I don't remember HAS on the Weapons School flight lines.
Those ANG Wings and Squadrons do have folks near them who have a lot more guns than the RCAF has.And think of the types and numbers of aircraft that base sees. Also, no talk of all the ANG bases that are basically hangars at some regional airport.
Well I’d say that it’s 6 of 1, Half Dozen of another for F-22 to C-17, neither is replaceable at this point.Also, interesting to me how people only think of protecting fighters and now say a C-17 that costs more and is impossible to replace.
That’s a pretty nonsensical ‘strawperson’ argument for build HAS at least at the FOB QRA hangars.
As noted above to ytz, at least RUSOF would need heavier armt than an FPV drone with a 3kg warhead if they infiltrated an F-35 FOB like Rankin Inlet.
View attachment 87340
He wants the CAF to primarily guard infrastructure in Canada in case the first strike of Russia or China is destroying the Kelowna international air port.
RUSOF would obviously wait until the hangar doors were opened to launch a CF-35 to intercept a Tu-95 or Tu-160 deliberately bouncing the CADIZ, and launch maybe a 5kg UCAV at them from their manned UUV, like a follow on to their 2000 ‘not an attack.’
RUSOF would obviously wait until the hangar doors were opened to launch a CF-35 to intercept a Tu-95 or Tu-160 deliberately bouncing the CADIZ, and launch maybe a 5kg UCAV at them from their manned UUV, like a follow on to their 2000 ‘not an attack.’
Your suggesting that will be their declaration of war ? Luring out an F35 to hit it with an FPV? Or do you think that we would adjust our force protection measures in a large scale conflict ?
@Kirkhill I will not engage with you, you know why.
Small arms wont stop 2,000 lb penetrators bombs, which is what a HAS is really meant to protect against. I’m a lot more concerned about cyber attacks to the F-35’s IM infrastructure than a physical attack against our future F-35s.Nellis has its own Force Protection, as well as NTR’s and the other side of the mountain have vastly different FP postures and capabilities. While it’s relatively “open” it really isn’t.
Those ANG Wings and Squadrons do have folks near them who have a lot more guns than the RCAF has.
Well I’d say that it’s 6 of 1, Half Dozen of another for F-22 to C-17, neither is replaceable at this point.
But it would be nice if they are all had hardened storage and maintenance.
I mean Hurricanes and Tornadoes have taken a bigger bite out of aviation assets down here in the past three decades than enemy action.
Small arms wont stop 2,000 lb penetrators bombs, which is what a HAS is really meant to protect against. I’m a lot more concerned about cyber attacks to the F-35’s IM infrastructure than a physical attack against our future F-35s.
Revitalizing boom systems from back in the day (especially the bits that take time, like detailed planning and engineering studies, and the bits that are seasonal and tidal, like fitting attachment points) might be worth looking at.Frankly I don’t see a massive concern with a direct attack on Canada, and if we follow that line of reasoning we should probably encase Halifax harbour in concrete to protect our ships.