164 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

Unless the Russians come a knockin'...
http://m.theglobeand...?service=mobile

[AllseeingEye]

Unless the Russians come a knockin'...
http://m.theglobeand...?service=mobile

Meh, typical fun and games stuff. The Soviet/Russians have been doing this for decades nothing new here. Even the aging F-18's are more than a match for those poor old Bear Bombers. The RCAF isn't huge but the skill of our pilots for the roles they play takes a backseat to no other air force.

[spanky123]

Meh, typical fun and games stuff. The Soviet/Russians have been doing this for decades nothing new here. Even the aging F-18's are more than a match for those poor old Bear Bombers. The RCAF isn't huge but the skill of our pilots for the roles they play takes a backseat to no other air force.

 

And of course Canada sent two F-18's to Romania earlier this year to send a message to Russia over Ukraine

[AllseeingEye]

And of course Canada sent two F-18's to Romania earlier this year to send a message to Russia over Ukraine

Yep as a member and signatory to NATO we are expected and required by treaty to contribute to provide military assets as required by the alliance, when requested. This is in large part why the Liberals under Trudeau, at a time when they were spending virtually nothing on defence, focused what funds they did have on the navy since destroyers were and are far more 'visible' demonstrations of our commitment - such as it was - than were tanks or soldiers for example; which is why we got the shiny new ships we did in the early 70's. Ironically the very ones we are in process of retiring.

[LJ]

Meh, typical fun and games stuff. The Soviet/Russians have been doing this for decades nothing new here. Even the aging F-18's are more than a match for those poor old Bear Bombers. The RCAF isn't huge but the skill of our pilots for the roles they play takes a backseat to no other air force.

The Russians are smart enough to know we have limited capability that is why they sent the Bear's against us. Now off Alaska where they sent the Mig31's would have been a different storey for our F18's, they would have been shot out of the sky before they ever got a lock on.

[AllseeingEye]

The Russians are smart enough to know we have limited capability that is why they sent the Bear's against us. Now off Alaska where they sent the Mig31's would have been a different storey for our F18's, they would have been shot out of the sky before they ever got a lock on.

You do realize the MIG and the Russian bombers have completely different missions, yes?

 

So this is really a moot point since the CF-18 would never normally face a MIG 31, which is an all weather superiority fighter designed to counter the US bomber threat. MIG 31's (or any MIG variants) would not be deployed in numbers (or likely at all) over the pole so the point is not particularly relevant. The MIG 31 is tasked specifically to intercept and neutralize the US B1 and B52 squadrons. The F-18 is perfectly suited to take on any current Russian bomber. As for the MIG 31's buzzing Alaska, while the plane posted several impressive performance statistics back in the day the fact is the last MIG 31 rolled off a production line 20 years ago and the basic design dates from the late 70's. Today, off Alaska, versus an F-22 which it would encounter, I strongly suspect it would experience an exciting but very short day in the event of a shooting war.

[jonny]

For those reasons, again purely IMO, we should focus on a fleet of destroyer-escort type ships like the current Halifax-class. Back them up with a first-class, modern and armed coast guard capable of supporting the navy if required, providing coastal security and able to operate in the Arctic (icebreaker anyone??) as needed - I wonder how many Canadians even realize our Coast Guard ships are unarmed? - and that in my opinion would give us the naval presence that would satisfy both our treaty obligations and provide the level of security-surveillance a nation bordering on 3 oceans needs and deserves.

 

^ Thumbs up to this.

 

The Halifax Class frigates seem pretty much ideal for the types of overseas missions Canada participates in and for intercepting problematic ships along the Canadian coast.

 

Regarding jets (in particular the F-35) it seems strange to me that given the vastness of Canada we would go from 120+ F-18s to 60ish F-35s. That's a massive drop in numbers. Given the types of deployments and responsibilities, I'm not convinced we need a few Lamborghini's (F-35) and wonder if we would be better served by a higher number of Porsche's (F-18 Super Hornets).

[LJ]

You do realize the MIG and the Russian bombers have completely different missions, yes?

 

So this is really a moot point since the CF-18 would never normally face a MIG 31, which is an all weather superiority fighter designed to counter the US bomber threat. MIG 31's (or any MIG variants) would not be deployed in numbers (or likely at all) over the pole so the point is not particularly relevant. The MIG 31 is tasked specifically to intercept and neutralize the US B1 and B52 squadrons. The F-18 is perfectly suited to take on any current Russian bomber. As for the MIG 31's buzzing Alaska, while the plane posted several impressive performance statistics back in the day the fact is the last MIG 31 rolled off a production line 20 years ago and the basic design dates from the late 70's. Today, off Alaska, versus an F-22 which it would encounter, I strongly suspect it would experience an exciting but very short day in the event of a shooting war.

Well the F22 has stealth going for it but caught at the wrong angle the long range missiles and FLIR that the Mig has would give it the advantage. By the way did anyone else see the F16 fly low over the area heading northwest today.

Edited by LJ, 22 September 2014 - 07:45 PM.

[Bingo]

 

 Canadian sailors will no longer be able to drink aboard ships, unless the vessel is tied up

or an exception has been made for a special occasion such as Christmas or a barbecue.

The order was made today by navy commander Vice-Admiral Mark Norman, and it follows an order in July

for HMCS Whitehorse to abandon an exercise in San Diego and return to port in Canada following three allegations of drunken misconduct.

http://www.cbc.ca/ne...2871521?cmp=rss

 

 

I wonder if the navy will be conducting a lot more "barbeque" exercises from here on?    

[dasmo]

The drug dealers are HAPPY!!!

[concorde]

1) there shouldn't be any drinking on navy ships period

2) if they are allowed, they should be paying full price just like other person in Canada.  Someone told me not that long ago that cigarettes were $1 a pack and beer was 50 cents a pint (no idea what it is in 2014 please feel free to correct me).  I don't think CRA would like my company buying a Ferrari and turning around and selling it back to me a minute later for $30k.

[spanky123]

1) there shouldn't be any drinking on navy ships period

2) if they are allowed, they should be paying full price just like other person in Canada.  Someone told me not that long ago that cigarettes were $1 a pack and beer was 50 cents a pint (no idea what it is in 2014 please feel free to correct me).  I don't think CRA would like my company buying a Ferrari and turning around and selling it back to me a minute later for $30k.

 

There are no duties or taxes charged so that is why the booze and cigs are so cheap. You or I could pay the same price if it wasn't for the Government's share!

[concorde]

Great, so my company will be doing the same thing, buying items at full value and then selling them to me personally with no tax.  CRA won't mind will they, after all they have set a massive prescendent.

 

I'll start off by loading up at the liquor store.  Next I need to find out all the hidden taxes, levies, etc on a new car.

[spanky123]

Great, so my company will be doing the same thing, buying items at full value and then selling them to me personally with no tax.  CRA won't mind will they, after all they have set a massive prescendent.

 

I'll start off by loading up at the liquor store.  Next I need to find out all the hidden taxes, levies, etc on a new car.

 

Remember the Navy is part of the Federal Government so nobody is buying anything at full value and then selling it at a discount.

[Bingo]

Remember the Navy is part of the Federal Government so nobody is buying anything at full value and then selling it at a discount.

 

They probably bought it all at the naval base San Diego.

[concorde]

Remember the Navy is part of the Federal Government so nobody is buying anything at full value and then selling it at a discount.

I get your point.  Mine is that CRA would be all over me if I did something like that.  As it stands my accountant is constantly making sure that taxable benefits are recorded properly such as when employees take company vehicles home

 

Why are certain people above the law, yet government bodies can ignore it.

 

On top of that if a sailor gets pissed at the ship, drives somewhere immediately after, the Navy is responsible according to prescendent law

[lanforod]

Technically, it should be considered a taxable benefit for those sailors...

[Mike K.]

The navy base will conduct another test of its newly installed "Mass Notification System" tomorrow, March 4th. Testing will take place at any time between 8AM and 4PM. Then every following first Wednesday of every month the system will be re-tested.

The system is intended to serve as a means of conveying information to personnel throughout the base during an emergency.

[VicHockeyFan]

Cyclone helicopter noise concerns residents near Victoria airport 

 

The new Cyclone military helicopters to be based at Victoria International Airport should go to CFB Shearwater in Nova Scotia instead — at least until an independent evaluation on noise levels is complete, says a local resident.

 

An environmental assessment on noise should have been completed, but was never done, said retired provincial judge Ben Casson, who lives on Curteis Point in North Saanich near the airport.

 

Such an assessment would determine if nine Sikorsky CH-148 Cyclones should be delivered to the west coast, Casson said. Cyclones are to be housed in the new $155-million hangar and base for 443 Maritime Helicopter Squadron on Victoria Airport Authority land. They were ordered by the federal government to replace six aging Sea King helicopters. The first Cyclones are expected to arrive this month, but no delivery dates have been formally announced.

 

The Cyclones will be used for surveillance, search and rescue and supplying tactical transport for national and international security efforts.

 

Casson is meeting with lawyers to petition the commissioner of the environment and sustainable development in the hope it will trigger an assessment. The commissioner’s job includes determining if federal departments meet sustainable development goals and to oversee the environmental petitions process.

 

A proper assessment requires public meetings — something that has not happened — and a broader consultation, Casson said.

 

 

This guy lives on Curteis Point and is concerned with noise?  That's a fair bit away from the 443 base. 

 

- See more at: http://www.timescolo...h.orDpgb8W.dpuf

[Bingo]

 

 

This guy lives on Curteis Point and is concerned with noise?  That's a fair bit away from the 443 base. 

 

- See more at: http://www.timescolo...h.orDpgb8W.dpuf

 

 

Curteis Point is about 4 km away, but it is lined up with a flight path for one of the runways.