| 0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic. |
 Author
|
Topic: Group question regarding Close Support Aircraft? (Read 943 times)
|
Chet Malone
Hero Member
 Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 57
Pro Patria
|
Coming back to the original discussion on aircarft, 80 of our F18's are presently going through refit, they are getting advanced updated avionics packages, updated air to ground capabilities and the engines are being upgraded. This retrofit is supposed to relife them sometime through 2017-20 or so. We already have the air support capability, we just have to use it. Full story and link at bottomof article The CF-18 Incremental Modernization Project, launched in 2001, is an eight-year project, divided into two phases, that will result in a total of 80 CF-18 Hornets (62 single-seat and 18 dual-seat aircraft) being significantly upgraded in their radios, avionics and weapons systems as well as in the structural integrity of their fuselages, wings, and tail sections. The IMP is based on a U.S. Navy Engineering Change Proposal (ECP 583), which defines how the USN/USMC are upgrading and extending the service life of their F/A-18s. Total costs for the Incremental Modernization Project are not yet confirmed, but are estimated to be at least $1.9 billion (Cdn). Including various other CF-18-fleet enhancements that are not officially part of the IMP, total spending on upgrading the lifespan and operational effectiveness of the Hornet fleet will come in at about $2.6 billion. Phase I of the IMP is occurring between 2002 and 2006, and involves the procurement and installation of a new on-board radar system; “Have Quick” jam-resistant radios that are compatible with technology employed by NATO-ally air forces; a combined interrogator/transponder unit to ensure that CF-18s are recognized as “friendlies” when spotted on allied radar scopes during combat operations; a stores management system for weapon-system and associated-equipment control; new mission-designation computers; and embedded Global Positioning System/Inertial Navigation System (GPS/INS) capability. (The first completed “Phase I” CF-18 was delivered back to Air Command in May 2003, and by mid-December 2004 a total of 40 CF-18s had completed the Phase I upgrade.) Separate from the IMP, but being acquired in the same timeframe are a new infrared sensor; a multipurpose instrument-panel display group; a night vision imaging system; advanced air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons; a landing-gear “get well” program to reduce corrosion and improve gear retraction; and an Advanced Distributed Combat Training System. Phase II of the IMP is scheduled to begin in 2006 and conclude in 2009.It involves the installation of a data-link system for information-exchange connectivity with similar systems on other surveillance and air-combat platforms; a helmet-mounted display; a crash-survivable flight recorder; and an upgraded electronic warfare (EW) suite to enhance survivability against future surface-to-air threats. Again, not officially part of the IMP, but related to upgrading the CF-18’s capabilities are these other projects: a fuselage Centre Barrel Replacement Project (for 40 of the upgraded aircraft); an Air Combat Manoeuvring Instrumentation System; an Integrated Electronic Warfare Support Station; and the Electronic Warfare Test Equipment Project. Collectively, the abovementioned initiatives will ensure that Canada has a state-of-the-art CF-18 fighter force that remains effective and operationally credible until the 2017-20 timeframe. http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/equip/cf-18/future_e.asp |
Battle school depot 79/80 Petawawa
1RCR London Dukes coy 1980
3RCR 1980 - 1984 Baden
3RCR 1984 -1986 Winnipeg Kapyong Barracks
Infantry school Tpt Pl Gagetown 1986 - 1988
3RCR 1988 - 1992 Baden Q Coy Bn Tpt.
4RCR London 1992 - 1999 Reg force cadre
31 Bge HQ 1999-2001 Desk jockey.
Medical release in London 2001
|
|
|
Dave Brydon
Veteran 100+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 193
|
Hi Chet; I’m glad the CF 18’s are finally upgrading, it’s been a long time coming. However, in regards to this topic – yes we understand that our fighters play a Close Support Role, but it’s role is in no way similar to that of an Attack Helicopter. In fact, I believe the differences are rather vast.
Essentially, operating Fighter Aircraft from dispersed sites is an immense logistical challenge, and for the close support role, their weapons are best suited against heavily defended targets, where as an Attack Helicopter provides an over-watch for ground units, and immediate and decisive firepower in close support of troops on the ground. Additionally, as Terry stated, time in area and on target is far greater, and turn-around time is more acceptable when rounds are coming in…
The two air packages are decisively different in their close support roles, but each one is certainly appreciated for what they can do, and deliver on target.
Cheers,
Dave
|
"I don't measure a man's success by how high he climbs but how high he bounces when he hits bottom."
-George Patton
Pro Patria
|
|
|
Mike Blais
SSM (NATO Bar), CPSM, UN-Cyp, CD
Ultimate 2000+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3437
A ROYAL CANADIAN "NEVER PASSES A FAULT"
|
First.... we need trucks... and mine clearing vehicles...
Canadians Buying Heavy Trucks for Afghanistan
Posted 14-May-2007 09:24
Despite a major emergency equipment buy launched prior to the latest Canadian deployment in Afghanistan, there's no substitute for the reality of warfare to drive home key equipment gaps. While the need for medium-heavy helicopters remains as acute as ever given Boeing's delivery schedules, land forces are seeing steady improvements and support from the government. Fresh on the heels of announcing its EROC buy of 16 counter-mine vehicles comes this DND release, re: a C$ 87 million (currently about $78.4 million) contract:
"The Canadian Forces' heavy logistics requirement is currently provided by a fleet of more than 1,200 unarmoured Heavy Logistics Vehicle Wheeled (HLVW) trucks that were procured in the late 1980s. In the 1990s, during operations in the Balkans, the threat of small arms fire, grenades and blast mines led the Army to develop an armour protection system (APS) for the HLVW. The APS components are made of steel, ceramic and ballistic glass... extremely heavy and could only be designed to defeat certain threats without seriously degrading the payload capacity and functionality.... The HLVW currently provides the entire heavy logistics capability to Canadian Forces (CF) operations in Afghanistan, and is equipped with the same APS that was procured for the Balkans conflict. The fleet was meant to operate primarily on paved roads, and the aging HLVW fleet is significantly challenged by the harsh conditions and challenging terrain of operations in Afghanistan...."
The Armoured Heavy Support Vehicle System (AHSVS) RFP was issued in 2007, and 3 comprehensive bids were received. DaimlerChrysler AG's Actros truck won, and for every contract dollar awarded, DaimlerChrysler AG will commit a corresponding dollar in economic activity in Canada. Given Chrysler's substantial manufacturing presence in Canada, this will be easy.
The contract calls for 82 trucks:
* 25 cargo with material handling crane variant vehicles, of which 8 will be gun tractors for the M777 ultralight towed howitzer;
* 5 recovery variant vehicles, which can be used on vehicles up to LAV-III/Stryker size;
* 12 heavy tank transporter tractor variant vehicles, to complement the Leopard tanks now in theater;
* 40 palletized loading system (PLS) with container handling unit variant vehicles that include 10 petroleum, oils, and lubricants variants; and 5 water variants.
The contract also includes an option of procuring an additional 26 AHSVS of various variants.
The AHSVS will be replacing the HLVWs that are presently in Afghanistan. The new trucks will will provide high levels of crew protection, incorporating mine blast resistance and protection against both IED land mines and ballistic threats thanks to an armored cab developed by LMT in Pretoria, South Africa. It claims to protect against mines and small arms fire, but only weighs 2000 kg/ 4,400 pounds. Interestingly, LMT has also developed a "protected personnel transporter" for Daimler-Chrysler that is mounted on Actros trucks, and resembles EADS' TransProtec "battlebox" in use by the German and Danish militaries.
Initial delivery of the AHSVS to Afghanistan will commence in the fall of 2007, with final delivery anticipated for March 2008.
The HLVW fleet "will continue to service Canadian troops in areas where there is a lower threat environment."
|
1RCR 1977-79 Depot (Italy PL), B Coy, Mortars, Pioneers, D Coy (CFB London)
3RCR 1979-82 M Coy, Pipes & Drums, Sigs, Mortars. (CFB Baden-Soellingen)
1RCR 1982-88 Mortars. Dukes, Cyprus-Welfare NCO 84-85, Injured, WO&Sgts Mess, (CFB London)
1988-92 Med-remuster to HELL/ 35 DU, CFB Baden
1992 Medical release. God Bless you all!
Pro Patria
|
|
|
Mike Blais
SSM (NATO Bar), CPSM, UN-Cyp, CD
Ultimate 2000+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3437
A ROYAL CANADIAN "NEVER PASSES A FAULT"
|
And some boats.... Be nice if they bought Canadian....
Arctic patrol vessels get cabinet approval
The Ottawa Citizen
Monday, May 14, 2007
A key federal cabinet committee has given the go-ahead for a plan to construct six corvette-sized Arctic patrol vessels, The Canadian Press has learned.
The cabinet priorities and planning committee approved the program to build the 100-metre-long, 6,000-tonne warships within the last 10 days, according to defence and political sources. The patrol vessels, which are almost as large as the navy's frigates, are a step down from the armed Arctic icebreakers that the Conservatives promised in the last election campaign and will likely not be in service before 2015.
Nevertheless, said one political source "it'll be good for the military, good for Canadian industry and the Arctic is critical to our national interest."
Cabinet is said to have authorized a two-year definition phase in which the scope of the shipbuilding project will be laid out. Much of the cost of the new vessels -- about $300 million apiece -- is being put off until later years.
The vessels, which will be capable of smashing through "fresh ice," are expected to be based on the Royal Norwegian Navy's Svalbard class design, said a military source. That particular type vessel is armed with a 57-millimetre deck gun, missile-launching tubes and also has a helicopter pad.
The recommendation has gone forward to Prime Minister Stephen Harper for final approval.
"We are not commenting on cabinet discussions as they are confidential," said Isabelle Bouchard, a spokeswoman for Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor. "No final decision has been made. When we are ready we will make an announcement."
She said the Conservatives are deeply committed to protecting Canada's security and to asserting sovereignty in the North, including the country's internal Arctic waters.
Cabinet is proposing to build the ships in Canada under a competitive process similar to the Defence Department's program to construct joint ships for the navy. Currently two consortiums, which involve foreign and domestic defence contractors, are vying to build three 28,000-tonne replenishment vessels.
The new ships were approved well before the Conservative government has had a chance to consider a key policy paper, the Canada First Defence Strategy.
Rob Huebert, of the Centre for Military and Strategic Studies at the University of Calgary, said the corvettes are a good step, but they cannot be the only solution for the Arctic.
"It makes sense only if the coast guard is getting its icebreaking fleet recapitalized," he said in an interview.
"If this is just a cheap buyout to allow the navy not to get icebreakers, and the coast guard does not get its very old icebreakers replenished, then we're going to be in a lot of hurt."
Last year, Fisheries Minister Loyola Hearn, who is responsible for the coast guard, was warned that the agency's fleet was experiencing severe "rust out" and needed to be replaced. As it stands, coast guard icebreakers are not due to begin being replaced until 2017.
Since the Tories were elected there has been a fierce debate within National Defence over the party's campaign promise to build three armed icebreakers to protect Arctic sovereignty.
Icebreaking has traditionally been a role for the Canadian Coast Guard -- one it has been loathe to give up -- and many have argued that if new ice-cutting ships were to be built they should go to that agency, not the military.
In the end, the prohibitive $1 billion-per-vessel cost of armed icebreakers appears to have torpedoed the election promise. The navy was worried that such an ambitious program would seriously dent its well-laid plans to eventually replace its aging destroyers and frigates with a new single-class surface ship.
With global warming melting the northern icepack, many experts have predicted the Northwest Passage will become a commercial waterway within the next few decades.
The Australian dollar snapped three days of losses as traders raised bets the interest-rate gap with the U.S. will widen after weaker data in the world's largest economy. Australia's dollar is the second-best performer in the Asia- Pacific after New Zealand's in the past year, as the two-year bond yield spread widened. A report yesterday that showed slower U.S. personal spending may force the Federal Reserve to cut interest rates, while Australia's central bank is forecast to keep borrowing costs at a six-year high of 6.25 percent when it announces its policy decision tomorrow.
"Interest-rate spreads are widening as U.S. rates fall, while Australia stays on hold," said George Kapasakis, a senior foreign-exchange trader at Mizuho Corporate Bank Ltd. in Sydney. "That should keep the Australian dollar buoyant."
The Australian dollar was at 82.95 U.S. cents at 3:37 p.m. in Sydney, from 82.80 cents late in Asia yesterday. It may reach 85 cents over the next one to three months, Kapasakis said.
© The Ottawa Citizen 2007
|
1RCR 1977-79 Depot (Italy PL), B Coy, Mortars, Pioneers, D Coy (CFB London)
3RCR 1979-82 M Coy, Pipes & Drums, Sigs, Mortars. (CFB Baden-Soellingen)
1RCR 1982-88 Mortars. Dukes, Cyprus-Welfare NCO 84-85, Injured, WO&Sgts Mess, (CFB London)
1988-92 Med-remuster to HELL/ 35 DU, CFB Baden
1992 Medical release. God Bless you all!
Pro Patria
|
|
|
Dave Brydon
Veteran 100+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 193
|
This is exactly the point - we need equipment, Air, Sea and Land!
This really annoys the heck out of me; we [Canada] go for so long being screwed over based on whose in power…if the Conservatives bought it, then the Liberals want to get rid of it…all at a high cost to the taxpayers of Canada. The bottom line is, we as a nation end up with an inadequately equipped military, and our troops suffer the subsequent consequences.
Our guys (Civilian/Military) in Ottawa, need to get off the dam political wagon, and stop worrying about how to advance their careers, and start focusing on presenting long-term focused solutions to meet the needs of current and future operations, and how to absolutely fulfill our job of protecting Canada, and it’s interests.
I’m tired of knee-jerk and obsolete, and unnecessary purchases. Come-on…we didn’t even have desert uniforms, what a screw-up that was. You would think, after the first Desert war, someone would have clued in, and put it on a to-do list. And buying crap like the Iltis…come-on…lets get a grip!
I’m sure a group of us, could spend a day in a room, with a whiteboard, and produce a very good list for all elements of our forces, and by the week’s end, have whittled it down, and have prioritized it.
Let’s start building a long-term equipment plan; dam-it all, we’re the army, were suppose to be the personification of command and control, and our country depends on our professionalism.
If we have a well thought out equipped force, we should be able to go anywhere in the world, and get the job done. Mission specific needs can be determined before and/or during a mission, but lack off, should not hinder the mission, because of a well equipped force to start with.
And if our planners in Ottawa, can’t see passed their personnel ambitions, then get the heck out of uniform.
|
"I don't measure a man's success by how high he climbs but how high he bounces when he hits bottom."
-George Patton
Pro Patria
|
|
|
Terry Hanna sgt'd ret.d
Guest
|
This is a case of DEJA VU Dave,we lacked equiptment for desert storm iin one hand and on the other hand we had equiptment taken of us,specifically crew served weapons.the powers to be decided that we were not to be combatant's if the fight was brought to us,we were ordered to surrender thus the removal of our weapons would stand us in good stead with the enemy.The then CDS was accompanying the then MND Bill Mcknight on a visit to Al JUBAL. when asked why our equipt was removed and why Canada wasn't better prepared for this war he replied ''WHILE EVERY BODY WAS PREPARING FOR WAR WE WERE PREPARING FOR PEACE'' Quite the statement,as we were right in the middle of it. The point is, the equiptment then and now it appears also is not,meeting the mission specifics.commanders should address the issues with the politicians and only accept nothing less than agreement to the rectifying of the issues.This is a global conflict and not an election the voters demand the best for their troops and there should be no hesitation in giving it
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Blais
SSM (NATO Bar), CPSM, UN-Cyp, CD
Ultimate 2000+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3437
A ROYAL CANADIAN "NEVER PASSES A FAULT"
|
Kneee jerk reactions indeed. What pisses me off is the response when logic demands queries as to just what the hell is going on with some of these purchases and whther they were intiated by officers of her majesty's armed forces or politicians. Tanks or abuse, whats the difference, the response is the same. They just wrap thenselves in red and white shroud and spout bs like a fire hydrant.
Afghanistan in black and white
With Canada's conduct under fire, Stephen Harper is using the Maple Leaf as protective cover. Criticize the mission and you are anti-military -- or worse, pro-Taliban
Mike Blanchfield
The Ottawa Citizen
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Randi Davidson is less than impressed with Canada's conduct in its war in Afghanistan. She made that much clear in an April 30 letter to her member of Parliament.
In an e-mail later excerpted in a Brockville newspaper, the Prescott woman urged MP Gord Brown "to not only have a spine but to use it" by becoming the first member of the Conservatives to call for the resignation of Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor.
Davidson's note was written during the height of the Afghan detainee abuse affair when calls for O'Connor's job were at a fever pitch and the government's conduct of the war was questioned daily. The Conservatives were under fire over whether Canada was living up to international obligations governing the transfer of Afghan detainees -- suspected al-Qaeda or Taliban insurgents in southern Afghanistan captured by Canadian troops.
Two days later, Davidson heard back from her MP. "Every report of abuse, upon investigation, has been found to have originated with the Taliban," the e-mail said. "It may arrive here via different channels, but the originating source is always the same."
As it turned out, Gord Brown did not write the letter to his constituent nor did he support the view that "every report of abuse" out of Afghanistan is a Taliban lie. In truth the letter had been written by the MP's aide. An embarrassed Brown apologized and emphasized that his government takes allegations of torture seriously.
And yet the aide's response was not much different from that of his boss's fellow Conservative MPs and cabinet ministers. As the Afghan detainee imbroglio mushroomed, the Harper government repeatedly played the Taliban card.
Stephen Harper may not have sent Canada to war in Kandahar -- he inherited the violent and controversial mission from the Paul Martin Liberals -- but he is determined to make it his own. The prime minister has wrapped himself in the Maple Leaf, using it as a protective cover to defend his government's conduct of the mission, which critics say has been evasive, vague and contradictory.
The response from Harper and his team: If you criticize the mission, you are anti-military -- or worse, pro-Taliban.
"These are merely allegations being made by the Taliban," Harper said in response to a Liberal MP during April 24 question period. "I don't accept allegations without evidence from the Taliban."
Judging by recent polls, the tactic may be souring voters. The Conservatives fell to a virtual tie with the Liberals as the detainee controversy raged on, putting on hold any hopes for a snap election and a much-coveted majority government.
"Whenever Afghanistan is in the news, the Tory numbers in Quebec drop," explains pollster Nik Nanos, president of SES Research. "Although the mission may be good at consolidating core Tory support, it basically throws a wrench in any efforts for the Tories to build a majority coalition."
No one -- it must be said -- has a shred of evidence to suggest Canadian Forces in Afghanistan have abused detainees. But there are questions about how the government -- both the current Conservative and the former Liberal one -- negotiated a deal to transfer detainees to the Afghanistan government's control.
Canada recently signed a strengthened version of the December 2005 pact that gives them greater access to Afghan prisons to follow up on detainees that they have transferred there. Under the Geneva Conventions, Canada is legally bound not to transfer detainees if it thinks they could face torture or abuse. Numerous credible international rights watchdogs -- not to mention the U.S. State Department and Canada's Foreign Affairs Department -- have documented a general state of abuse in Afghan prisons that includes torture and extrajudicial killings.
Such nuances are lost in Canada's political debate. "The opposition should really stop inventing stories to help the Taliban," Conservative House leader Peter Van Loan said as he fended off another Liberal attack. "If they have any proof, they should put it on the table."
In the blogosphere, widespread comparisons are being drawn between Harper's black-and-white characterizations of the war and U.S. President George W. Bush's post-9/11 declaration that people are either on the side of terrorists or on the side of freedom. "Harper apparently is of the view that political debate on the Afghan mission is unpatriotic. That any issues that arise are to go unaddressed because the military is in Afghanistan," wrote a blogger who calls himself Impolitical. "The attempt to stifle debate by holding up the troops for cover, the same way we've seen this thing played in the U.S., is remarkable."
Former Liberal defence minister Bill Graham -- the minister who presided over Canada's return to Afghanistan two years ago -- has been quiet during much of this debate. But this past week when Harper used a military rally in Petawawa to criticize debate in the Commons, Graham rose to his feet to accuse Harper of trying to "stifle legitimate debate about this mission; impugn the motives of members of this House who are every bit as patriotic as the prime minister."
Graham said partisan attacks undermine informed debate in the House -- "the foundation of democracy" -- principles for which Canadian troops are fighting.
"We don't really talk about what is the essence of it," Graham said later. "All we do is get into shouting matches about who's more or less loyal to our troops, which doesn't take the Canadian public anywhere and it certainly doesn't take us anywhere in terms of a genuine political dialogue."
© The Ottawa Citizen 2007
|
1RCR 1977-79 Depot (Italy PL), B Coy, Mortars, Pioneers, D Coy (CFB London)
3RCR 1979-82 M Coy, Pipes & Drums, Sigs, Mortars. (CFB Baden-Soellingen)
1RCR 1982-88 Mortars. Dukes, Cyprus-Welfare NCO 84-85, Injured, WO&Sgts Mess, (CFB London)
1988-92 Med-remuster to HELL/ 35 DU, CFB Baden
1992 Medical release. God Bless you all!
Pro Patria
|
|
|
Jim Hickson
CWO H.J. Hickson, MMM, CD. (Retd)
Ultimate 2000+ Member
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 5353
Pro Patria
|
Hi Mike
You know that you don't get any TANKS for being in the armored corps today......
Jim
|
1961-Depot San Lenorado
1962-1st Bn RCR Ex Gagetown
1962-JR NCO Course Grad 19 Oct
1962-1965 Germany B-C-D-A Coy (Revecated Nov 64)
1965-1967 Sigs Pl Cyprus Prom CPL 'til xmas and C of Drums
1967-1973 Cpl, MCpl, Sgt, Sigs, D Coy
1973-1977 CFOCS Chilliwack Prom WO
1977-1982 UEO, Sigs, Pl WO RECCE, CSM B&A Coy,
1982-1984 SIT School
1984-1988 Career Manager (Prom CWO 1986)
1988-1990 RSM 1RCR
1991-1995 CWO Adm(Per) - C Of S
1995-1999 Base CWO Wainwright
1999-Retired
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
