WI Canada retains CV capability?
- Thread starter RogueBeaver
- Start date
- Status
Canadian Power: The Canadian Forces as a Major Power
Part 3
1985 - 1985 begins for the Canadian Forces with its carrier at sea. HMCS Eagle, having spent its entire commissioned career in the Atlantic, moves to the Pacific, but its size requires it to sail the long way around Cape Horn. The carrier and her group take 46 days to sail from Halifax, Nova Scotia, to Esquimault, British Columbia, arriving on February 8, 1985. The "Canada Squadron", as it is now affectionately known as, makes port stops at Norfolk, Miami, Santo Domingo, Rio de Janiero, Buenos Aires, Stanley, Valapariso, Lima, Acapulco, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Seattle along the way. The numerous stops are more for PR and show-the-flag purposes than anything else, but its a successful tour. The highlight of it is at San Francisco, when Eagle's crew is part of the commissioning ceremony for American Battleship USS Iowa, which is recommissioned in San Francisco on January 30, 1985.
At Halifax, the flag duties are assumed by destroyer HMCS Quebec, along with a small but well-trained surface fleet. They spend 1985 mostly exercising with the American, French and British naval forces. The exercises, however, show that Canada's forces, well trained as they are, are lacking in equipment. But all of the allies realize that the solution to that problem is underway.
On the Pacific, Eagle puts on yet more mileage, departing Esquimault for east Asia on June 17. After making a stop at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii, Eagle and her group arrive in Sydney, Australia, on July 7. After exercises, the group sails to Singapore, Hong Kong and Subic Bay before making Tokyo on July 24. Six days later, the big carrier heads for home, arriving in British Columbia on August 15.
The tour is by all accounts a major success, though it causes a bit of a row in Australia, with some asking why Australia didn't replace its carrier after seeing the usefulness in Cyrpus and the Falklands of such vessels. HMAS Melbourne had left Australia in April and was being scrapped, so that option was out. PM Bob Hawke was ripped mightily by most of the opposition after he announced that there would still be no replacement for Melbourne, to the point that several members of his own cabinet went against this. In September, a Canadian Forces ex-member wrote in to the Sydney Morning Herald that one option could be buying rebuilding an Essex-class carrier from the US. This struck a nerve, to the point that in November, Australia made a request to the United States what it would cost to purchase one. To Australia's surprise, the United States pointed out that it had offered an Essex class to Australia for free if it Australia paid its operation and refit costs, and that the deal was still on the table.
On January 24, 1986, the United States announced that the ex-USS Oriskany was to be given to Australia. Oriskany left Bremerton, Washington, under town on February 20, 1986, arriving in Melbourne, Australia, on May 10. Like the Canadian carrier, a plan to rebuild it was drawn up. The carrier was dry-docked at Williamstown, Victoria, on June 18, 1986, for rebuild.
Back in Canada, Eagle and her escorts were proud units, but the rest of the Navy was, in the worlds of Conservative MP Donald Ravis, "Well-trained but underarmed and underequipped." The Patrol Frigate project was well underway, but it was also clear that the submarines and destroyers neede replacing, too. Realizing that the cost of doing it all at once was too high, Canada on September 23, 1985, put out requests for a new destroyer for the Canadian Forces, specifiying a design that used as many off the shelf components as possible to reduce time taken to build and the cost.
By the beginning of 1986, the British had offered the Type 42 and the United States had the Spruance class. Privately, the Americans also said they would be willing to sell the Ticonderoga class, but the price of the Ticos was considered to be too high for the Forces.
1986 - The first big news of 1986 for the Canadian Forces the Patrol Frigate Project. A design was shown off by the forces, a 5,000-ton frigate which had quite a loadout. The original design had been finished in early 1985, but the Forces had spent most of the previous year fine-tuning it. The Commons, which was a big supporter of its being built to a Canadian design and using many Canadian components, approved the first four units on July 10, 1986, with all three parties in Parliament supporting the idea on various grounds.
That year, the government also asked for tenders on new submarines, and stated that it would consider both nuclear and conventional designs, but would prefer nuclear subs. Prime Minister Mulroney, under fire from some corners for the country's big spending, justified it by pointing out that Canada had a huge land mass, a long coastline and many responsibilities under NATO, and that if the country was to be both safe and able to fulfill its duties and goals in the world, it had to have the tools to do so, and right now it didn't have them.
By late 1986, it was clear that the Forces were gonna have lot of commissioning cermonies not that many years into the future. Debate was now raging on just how to proceed with the destroyer and submarine projects, as well as other gear for the future. NATO's Common Frigate project was starting to show promise, but many differences remained on that one. Germany offered to bring Canada into its project to replace the Hamburg class destroyers, but it was looking increasingly like the destroyer competition would be between the British and Americans.
1987 - The Destroyer competition got a left turn when Argentina offered to sell its two Type 42 destroyers, which they for all the obvious reasons could not get parts for, for just $75 million, a 70% discount on their price new. It was far too good a deal to pass up, and Canada bought them. Both Canadian crews collected the vessels on September 10, 1987, and sailed home to Canada with them. With that Canada put the plan on hold, but said that it wasn't cancelled. That was fine with the US and UK, the UK especially. The two Type 42 destroyers were renamed HMCS Newfoundland and HMCS Manitoba, and while they proved to be decent, they were not the caliber of the Kidd class vessels already in service with MARCOM.
HMCS Halifax, the first of the Patrol Frigate project, was laid down at MIL Davie shipyard in Lauzon, Quebec, with no small amount of fanfare. It was hoped that the new frigates would allow the retirement of Canada's 1950s era frigates which they had in significant numbers. The Patrol frigate design was itself plenty impressive, though two important design changes happened fairly early on - four 8-cell SAM systems were installed instead of just two, and the original 57mm gun was found to be inadequate for attacking many of its intended targets. The original upgrade plan was for the OTO Melara 76mm unit, but as the frigate was being built his was changed again, this time to the 5" gun used by the Ontario-class destroyers.
HMCS Eagle went into dry-dock once again, this time to be fitted with new electronic systems and decoys, being fitted with the American AN/SLQ-32 electronic warfare system, and the addition of anechoic tiles and a synethetic hull coating, designed to reduce noise and eliminate corrosion.
On the submarine front, the first offers began rolling in. The Germans offered the Type 209/1500, the French offered the Rubis class, the United States offered the Sturgeon and Los Angeles classes, the British offered the Trafalgar and Upholder classes and Sweden offered the Vastergotland class, and all of them had their own backers and supporters. The backers of the Type 209 and Vastergotland class pointed out that the SSK design was much cleaper than a nuclear vessel to buy and maintain, while the nuclear sub backers pointed out the SSKs had no way of having the capabilities of a nuclear vessel. The Americans jumped on the British, claiming that the British couldn't sell the Trafalgar class due to non-proliferation concerns, but when this broke in the media on November 1987, the government demanded an explanation. The Americans quickly backtracked, calling it an "unfortunate mistake".
A Canadian consortium, Canada Submarine Solutions was also in the news with the sub program, and on November 18, 1987, said that Canada could buy the Trafalgar class hull and systems and develop their own reactor for it. This grew to be the choice of the NDP, which always advocated Made-in-Canada solutions to the defense problems. This group began to be taken more seriously as the debate went on.
Part 3
1985 - 1985 begins for the Canadian Forces with its carrier at sea. HMCS Eagle, having spent its entire commissioned career in the Atlantic, moves to the Pacific, but its size requires it to sail the long way around Cape Horn. The carrier and her group take 46 days to sail from Halifax, Nova Scotia, to Esquimault, British Columbia, arriving on February 8, 1985. The "Canada Squadron", as it is now affectionately known as, makes port stops at Norfolk, Miami, Santo Domingo, Rio de Janiero, Buenos Aires, Stanley, Valapariso, Lima, Acapulco, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Seattle along the way. The numerous stops are more for PR and show-the-flag purposes than anything else, but its a successful tour. The highlight of it is at San Francisco, when Eagle's crew is part of the commissioning ceremony for American Battleship USS Iowa, which is recommissioned in San Francisco on January 30, 1985.
At Halifax, the flag duties are assumed by destroyer HMCS Quebec, along with a small but well-trained surface fleet. They spend 1985 mostly exercising with the American, French and British naval forces. The exercises, however, show that Canada's forces, well trained as they are, are lacking in equipment. But all of the allies realize that the solution to that problem is underway.
On the Pacific, Eagle puts on yet more mileage, departing Esquimault for east Asia on June 17. After making a stop at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii, Eagle and her group arrive in Sydney, Australia, on July 7. After exercises, the group sails to Singapore, Hong Kong and Subic Bay before making Tokyo on July 24. Six days later, the big carrier heads for home, arriving in British Columbia on August 15.
The tour is by all accounts a major success, though it causes a bit of a row in Australia, with some asking why Australia didn't replace its carrier after seeing the usefulness in Cyrpus and the Falklands of such vessels. HMAS Melbourne had left Australia in April and was being scrapped, so that option was out. PM Bob Hawke was ripped mightily by most of the opposition after he announced that there would still be no replacement for Melbourne, to the point that several members of his own cabinet went against this. In September, a Canadian Forces ex-member wrote in to the Sydney Morning Herald that one option could be buying rebuilding an Essex-class carrier from the US. This struck a nerve, to the point that in November, Australia made a request to the United States what it would cost to purchase one. To Australia's surprise, the United States pointed out that it had offered an Essex class to Australia for free if it Australia paid its operation and refit costs, and that the deal was still on the table.
On January 24, 1986, the United States announced that the ex-USS Oriskany was to be given to Australia. Oriskany left Bremerton, Washington, under town on February 20, 1986, arriving in Melbourne, Australia, on May 10. Like the Canadian carrier, a plan to rebuild it was drawn up. The carrier was dry-docked at Williamstown, Victoria, on June 18, 1986, for rebuild.
Back in Canada, Eagle and her escorts were proud units, but the rest of the Navy was, in the worlds of Conservative MP Donald Ravis, "Well-trained but underarmed and underequipped." The Patrol Frigate project was well underway, but it was also clear that the submarines and destroyers neede replacing, too. Realizing that the cost of doing it all at once was too high, Canada on September 23, 1985, put out requests for a new destroyer for the Canadian Forces, specifiying a design that used as many off the shelf components as possible to reduce time taken to build and the cost.
By the beginning of 1986, the British had offered the Type 42 and the United States had the Spruance class. Privately, the Americans also said they would be willing to sell the Ticonderoga class, but the price of the Ticos was considered to be too high for the Forces.
1986 - The first big news of 1986 for the Canadian Forces the Patrol Frigate Project. A design was shown off by the forces, a 5,000-ton frigate which had quite a loadout. The original design had been finished in early 1985, but the Forces had spent most of the previous year fine-tuning it. The Commons, which was a big supporter of its being built to a Canadian design and using many Canadian components, approved the first four units on July 10, 1986, with all three parties in Parliament supporting the idea on various grounds.
That year, the government also asked for tenders on new submarines, and stated that it would consider both nuclear and conventional designs, but would prefer nuclear subs. Prime Minister Mulroney, under fire from some corners for the country's big spending, justified it by pointing out that Canada had a huge land mass, a long coastline and many responsibilities under NATO, and that if the country was to be both safe and able to fulfill its duties and goals in the world, it had to have the tools to do so, and right now it didn't have them.
By late 1986, it was clear that the Forces were gonna have lot of commissioning cermonies not that many years into the future. Debate was now raging on just how to proceed with the destroyer and submarine projects, as well as other gear for the future. NATO's Common Frigate project was starting to show promise, but many differences remained on that one. Germany offered to bring Canada into its project to replace the Hamburg class destroyers, but it was looking increasingly like the destroyer competition would be between the British and Americans.
1987 - The Destroyer competition got a left turn when Argentina offered to sell its two Type 42 destroyers, which they for all the obvious reasons could not get parts for, for just $75 million, a 70% discount on their price new. It was far too good a deal to pass up, and Canada bought them. Both Canadian crews collected the vessels on September 10, 1987, and sailed home to Canada with them. With that Canada put the plan on hold, but said that it wasn't cancelled. That was fine with the US and UK, the UK especially. The two Type 42 destroyers were renamed HMCS Newfoundland and HMCS Manitoba, and while they proved to be decent, they were not the caliber of the Kidd class vessels already in service with MARCOM.
HMCS Halifax, the first of the Patrol Frigate project, was laid down at MIL Davie shipyard in Lauzon, Quebec, with no small amount of fanfare. It was hoped that the new frigates would allow the retirement of Canada's 1950s era frigates which they had in significant numbers. The Patrol frigate design was itself plenty impressive, though two important design changes happened fairly early on - four 8-cell SAM systems were installed instead of just two, and the original 57mm gun was found to be inadequate for attacking many of its intended targets. The original upgrade plan was for the OTO Melara 76mm unit, but as the frigate was being built his was changed again, this time to the 5" gun used by the Ontario-class destroyers.
HMCS Eagle went into dry-dock once again, this time to be fitted with new electronic systems and decoys, being fitted with the American AN/SLQ-32 electronic warfare system, and the addition of anechoic tiles and a synethetic hull coating, designed to reduce noise and eliminate corrosion.
On the submarine front, the first offers began rolling in. The Germans offered the Type 209/1500, the French offered the Rubis class, the United States offered the Sturgeon and Los Angeles classes, the British offered the Trafalgar and Upholder classes and Sweden offered the Vastergotland class, and all of them had their own backers and supporters. The backers of the Type 209 and Vastergotland class pointed out that the SSK design was much cleaper than a nuclear vessel to buy and maintain, while the nuclear sub backers pointed out the SSKs had no way of having the capabilities of a nuclear vessel. The Americans jumped on the British, claiming that the British couldn't sell the Trafalgar class due to non-proliferation concerns, but when this broke in the media on November 1987, the government demanded an explanation. The Americans quickly backtracked, calling it an "unfortunate mistake".
A Canadian consortium, Canada Submarine Solutions was also in the news with the sub program, and on November 18, 1987, said that Canada could buy the Trafalgar class hull and systems and develop their own reactor for it. This grew to be the choice of the NDP, which always advocated Made-in-Canada solutions to the defense problems. This group began to be taken more seriously as the debate went on.
The 1988 Canadian Forces
Maritime Command
Commissioned Vessels
Eagle-class Aircraft Carrier (1)
HMCS Eagle (CV 23)
Ontario-class (Kidd class) Missile Destroyer (4)
HMCS Ontario (DDG 284)
HMCS Quebec (DDG 285)
HMCS British Columbia (DDG 286)
HMCS Alberta (DDG 287)
Manitoba-class (Type 42) Missile Destroyer (2)
HMCS Manitoba (DDG 288)
HMCS Newfoundland (DDG 289)
Iroquois-class Helicopter Destroyer (4)
HMCS Iroquois (DDH 280)
HMCS Huron (DDH 281)
HMCS Athabaskan (DDH 282)
HMCS Algonquin (DDH 283)
Annapolis-class destroyer escort (2)
HMCS Annapolis (DDH 265)
HMCS Nipigon (DDH 266)
Mackenzie-class destroyer escort (4)
HMCS Mackenzie (DDH 261)
HMCS Saskatchewan (DDH 262)
HMCS Yukon (DDH 263)
HMCS Terry Fox (DDH 264)
Restigouche-class destroyer escort (2)
HMCS Gatineau (DDE 236)
HMCS Terra Nova (DDE 259)
Oberon-class diesel-electric submarines (3)
HMCS Ojibwa (S71)
HMCS Okanagan (S72)
HMCS Onondaga (S73)
Protecteur-class auxillary vessel (2)
HMCS Protecteur (AOR 509)
HMCS Preserver (AOR 510)
Provider-class auxillar vessel (1)
HMCS Provider (AOR 508)
Maritime Command Fleet Air Wing
34 CF-188 Hornet (multi-role fighter)
54 CF-187 Corsair II (attack aircraft)
80 CP-121 Tracker (carrier-borne ASW aircraft)
6 CE-2C Hawkeye (carrier-borne AEW aircraft)
25 CP-140 Aurora (maritime patrol aircraft)
36 CH-124 Sea King (ASW/utility helicopter)
27 CF-174 Phantom II (reserve fighters)
Canadian Forces Air Command
Active Aircraft
78 CF-184 Tomcat (air defense aircraft)
98 CF-188 Hornet (multi-role fighter)
70 CF-116 Freedom Fighter (light fighter)
3 EF-101B Electric Voodoo (electronic jamming aircraft)
12 CC-137C Husky (transport/airborne tanker)
32 CC-130 Hercules (transport/airborne tanker)
5 CC-144 Challenger 600 (transport/VIP aircraft)
6 CC-138 Twin Otter (transport aircraft)
2 CC-132 Dash-7 (STOL transport aircraft)
10 CC-109 Cosmopolitan (transport aircraft)
18 CC-129 Dakota (transport aircraft)
6 CC-115 Buffalo (search and rescue)
9 CH-147C Chinook (heavy lift/transport helicopter)
18 CH-113 Sea Knight (Transport helicopter, 6 converted to SAR helicopters)
65 CH-136 Kiowa (light attack/observation helicopter)
44 CH-135 Twin Huey (transport helicopter)
Land Command
75 Leopard C1 (main battle tank)
275 Grizzly AVGP (armored vehicle)
944 M113 (armored personnel carrier)
170 M113 Lynx (command and control vehicle)
76 M109A4+ (self-propelled artillery)
1,210 Volkswagen Iltis (utility transport)
2,740 MLVW (M35) transport trucks)
78 Bv206 (tracked utility vehicles)
27 Husky AVGP (armored recovery vehicle)
9 AVLB Beaver (bridge-laying vehicle)
16 ARV Taurus (armored recovery vehicle)
Maritime Command
Commissioned Vessels
Eagle-class Aircraft Carrier (1)
HMCS Eagle (CV 23)
Ontario-class (Kidd class) Missile Destroyer (4)
HMCS Ontario (DDG 284)
HMCS Quebec (DDG 285)
HMCS British Columbia (DDG 286)
HMCS Alberta (DDG 287)
Manitoba-class (Type 42) Missile Destroyer (2)
HMCS Manitoba (DDG 288)
HMCS Newfoundland (DDG 289)
Iroquois-class Helicopter Destroyer (4)
HMCS Iroquois (DDH 280)
HMCS Huron (DDH 281)
HMCS Athabaskan (DDH 282)
HMCS Algonquin (DDH 283)
Annapolis-class destroyer escort (2)
HMCS Annapolis (DDH 265)
HMCS Nipigon (DDH 266)
Mackenzie-class destroyer escort (4)
HMCS Mackenzie (DDH 261)
HMCS Saskatchewan (DDH 262)
HMCS Yukon (DDH 263)
HMCS Terry Fox (DDH 264)
Restigouche-class destroyer escort (2)
HMCS Gatineau (DDE 236)
HMCS Terra Nova (DDE 259)
Oberon-class diesel-electric submarines (3)
HMCS Ojibwa (S71)
HMCS Okanagan (S72)
HMCS Onondaga (S73)
Protecteur-class auxillary vessel (2)
HMCS Protecteur (AOR 509)
HMCS Preserver (AOR 510)
Provider-class auxillar vessel (1)
HMCS Provider (AOR 508)
Maritime Command Fleet Air Wing
34 CF-188 Hornet (multi-role fighter)
54 CF-187 Corsair II (attack aircraft)
80 CP-121 Tracker (carrier-borne ASW aircraft)
6 CE-2C Hawkeye (carrier-borne AEW aircraft)
25 CP-140 Aurora (maritime patrol aircraft)
36 CH-124 Sea King (ASW/utility helicopter)
27 CF-174 Phantom II (reserve fighters)
Canadian Forces Air Command
Active Aircraft
78 CF-184 Tomcat (air defense aircraft)
98 CF-188 Hornet (multi-role fighter)
70 CF-116 Freedom Fighter (light fighter)
3 EF-101B Electric Voodoo (electronic jamming aircraft)
12 CC-137C Husky (transport/airborne tanker)
32 CC-130 Hercules (transport/airborne tanker)
5 CC-144 Challenger 600 (transport/VIP aircraft)
6 CC-138 Twin Otter (transport aircraft)
2 CC-132 Dash-7 (STOL transport aircraft)
10 CC-109 Cosmopolitan (transport aircraft)
18 CC-129 Dakota (transport aircraft)
6 CC-115 Buffalo (search and rescue)
9 CH-147C Chinook (heavy lift/transport helicopter)
18 CH-113 Sea Knight (Transport helicopter, 6 converted to SAR helicopters)
65 CH-136 Kiowa (light attack/observation helicopter)
44 CH-135 Twin Huey (transport helicopter)
Land Command
75 Leopard C1 (main battle tank)
275 Grizzly AVGP (armored vehicle)
944 M113 (armored personnel carrier)
170 M113 Lynx (command and control vehicle)
76 M109A4+ (self-propelled artillery)
1,210 Volkswagen Iltis (utility transport)
2,740 MLVW (M35) transport trucks)
78 Bv206 (tracked utility vehicles)
27 Husky AVGP (armored recovery vehicle)
9 AVLB Beaver (bridge-laying vehicle)
16 ARV Taurus (armored recovery vehicle)
Interesting take on it all....
Couple of thoughts...a few high profile drug busts and/or human smugglers captures during the early 80's might help maintain enforcement profiles. That or a pirate interception in SE Asia during the round the world tour.
What is the size of the Army? Does Canada still maintain it's highlander battalions?
Air transport? More chinooks and C-130's for SARTEC and mobile response of forces?
Supply ships (Provider, Protector and Preserver) will most likely not be enough. Need likely double this plus replacements for the originals.
Attack helicopters? Do we go into Cobra's as helicopter gunships for the transport helicopters?
Re-positioning of the reserves and Armed Forces. Current reserve units are based often in the WW1 population centers and lack sufficent presence in newer and/or larger centers. Engineers in Prince George, Navy in Prince Rupert and Iqualiat, Army in Grande Prairie, Fort McMurry, Red Deer, Whistler. New regiments based upon changing demographics...Sikh, Chinese, and Native focused recruiting into new battalions? A change in focus where the Engineering units are expanded and a number are on federal duty working on National scope infrastructure projects similar to the US Army Engineers and Levy work for example...
An expanded force (2-3 companies rotated through the reserve units) for http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/past/unefii.htm giving an army specific profile and airforce practice at long distance re-supply?
Taking the Turks and Cacois Islands up on their merger offer into Canada as part future naval base and part expansion of Canada? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turks_and_Caicos_Islands This may lead into a higher role in Caribean nation Aid and peacekeeping instead of Africa.
Couple of thoughts...a few high profile drug busts and/or human smugglers captures during the early 80's might help maintain enforcement profiles. That or a pirate interception in SE Asia during the round the world tour.
What is the size of the Army? Does Canada still maintain it's highlander battalions?
Air transport? More chinooks and C-130's for SARTEC and mobile response of forces?
Supply ships (Provider, Protector and Preserver) will most likely not be enough. Need likely double this plus replacements for the originals.
Attack helicopters? Do we go into Cobra's as helicopter gunships for the transport helicopters?
Re-positioning of the reserves and Armed Forces. Current reserve units are based often in the WW1 population centers and lack sufficent presence in newer and/or larger centers. Engineers in Prince George, Navy in Prince Rupert and Iqualiat, Army in Grande Prairie, Fort McMurry, Red Deer, Whistler. New regiments based upon changing demographics...Sikh, Chinese, and Native focused recruiting into new battalions? A change in focus where the Engineering units are expanded and a number are on federal duty working on National scope infrastructure projects similar to the US Army Engineers and Levy work for example...
An expanded force (2-3 companies rotated through the reserve units) for http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/past/unefii.htm giving an army specific profile and airforce practice at long distance re-supply?
Taking the Turks and Cacois Islands up on their merger offer into Canada as part future naval base and part expansion of Canada? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turks_and_Caicos_Islands This may lead into a higher role in Caribean nation Aid and peacekeeping instead of Africa.
MacCaulay
Banned
I like this a lot. Very interesting stuff. I'm not quite sure why they'd have those Phantom IIs as that would be another system to run that's different from the Hornets or Corsairs, but I'm willing to trust you. It seems like a footnote.
And the introduction of Kidd's is very interesting. If I was writing something like this and having the Canadians buy American, they sure wouldn't be buying something that good.
Good stuff all around. I'm keeping my eye on this!
And the introduction of Kidd's is very interesting. If I was writing something like this and having the Canadians buy American, they sure wouldn't be buying something that good.
Good stuff all around. I'm keeping my eye on this!
Those Kidds had been ordered by the Shah of Iran before he got the boot. Canada got them dirt-cheap.
Yep, same as the Type 42s. I imagine that if they were buying, they'd want to buy something they made - but four top-quality brand-new air defense destroyers for 70% off list price is hard to pass up. The Navy here overall is a slightly small manpower than in OTL, even with the carrier - the St. Laurent class of destroyers, which in OTL lasted into the 1990s, here is decommissioned in 1981-82, the Kidd class taking their jobs. the remaining destroyer escorts will be decommissioned as the Halifax-class comes into being. The next gen of supply vessels will have more members, yes, that would be needed, even though Eagle can resupply the steam-powered vessels herself. Eagle here has a regular loadout of 18 Hornets, 20 Corsairs, 2 Hawkeyes, 4 Trackers and 2 Sea Kings.
The Phantoms are reserve units, kept in case they are needed. I was thinking of having them be converted into EW and Wild Weasel platforms, still debating that. The Army is about the same size as OTL, but that's gonna change. The government hasn't got a blank check and the subs, frigates and upcoming projects in the Air Force (AWACS aircraft, EW, attack helicopters, airlifters) have mostly consumed the procurement budgets for now. But as these projects get finished in the 1990s, the attention will turn to the Army. Keep in mind that the Canadian Army's primary focus in the late 80s was its divisions in Europe, after all what threat have we got on our borders? MARCOM, by contrast, has to secure the sea-lanes between Europe and North America in the event of a NATO-Warsaw Pact conflict.
I'll give you guys one clue about future updates - Royal Canadian Marine Corps.
That's coming. Remember that Canada didn't pay much attention to drug smuggling until the Mounties busted up a big ring after being tipped off in 1990 by a pilot for the drug runners, and in the process picking up Pablo Escobar's girlfriend. I'm thinking that the fleet goes out for NATO exercises, and gets a surprise on the way home.
About the same size as OTL, and Yes, the Highlanders still exist. Right now, they are at nil strength (mandated that way in 1970), but that changes not too far in the future.
That's gonna be in the future. Like I said, the Navy and Air Force projects are at the front of the line, they are needed more right now.
My plan of attack on that one is to build 6-8 ships for this role, but also vessels which are themselves units that serve for peacekeepers. Think a supertanker-sized vessel with large bunkers for marine diesel and avgas, but which also have 3-4 helicopter pads, a fully-equipped hospital, SAR choppers and facilities for Marines and other combat personnel.
I'm not sure what way to go on that one. Yes, we'll be getting attack choppers, I'm just not sure whether it'll be Cobras, Apaches, Mangustas or something else. That's a ways into the future yet, though.
Those changes are coming at the end of the Cold War.
That can't happen yet simply because we don't have the aircraft yet, but peacekeeping is one of the Primary goals of the Canadian Forces. The international involvement of the Canadian Forces ITTL is primarily to be a peacekeeper, a resolver on conflicts rather than a participant. Canadian troops are gonna be doing a fair bit of duty in Africa in the 1990s.
I'm a Canuck and proud of it. You better believe I'm looking at how to feasibly do that.
Yep, same as the Type 42s. I imagine that if they were buying, they'd want to buy something they made - but four top-quality brand-new air defense destroyers for 70% off list price is hard to pass up. The Navy here overall is a slightly small manpower than in OTL, even with the carrier - the St. Laurent class of destroyers, which in OTL lasted into the 1990s, here is decommissioned in 1981-82, the Kidd class taking their jobs. the remaining destroyer escorts will be decommissioned as the Halifax-class comes into being. The next gen of supply vessels will have more members, yes, that would be needed, even though Eagle can resupply the steam-powered vessels herself. Eagle here has a regular loadout of 18 Hornets, 20 Corsairs, 2 Hawkeyes, 4 Trackers and 2 Sea Kings.
The Phantoms are reserve units, kept in case they are needed. I was thinking of having them be converted into EW and Wild Weasel platforms, still debating that. The Army is about the same size as OTL, but that's gonna change. The government hasn't got a blank check and the subs, frigates and upcoming projects in the Air Force (AWACS aircraft, EW, attack helicopters, airlifters) have mostly consumed the procurement budgets for now. But as these projects get finished in the 1990s, the attention will turn to the Army. Keep in mind that the Canadian Army's primary focus in the late 80s was its divisions in Europe, after all what threat have we got on our borders? MARCOM, by contrast, has to secure the sea-lanes between Europe and North America in the event of a NATO-Warsaw Pact conflict.
I'll give you guys one clue about future updates - Royal Canadian Marine Corps.
A Marine Corps, now I am interested. I'm working on a TL where the concervatives come to power in 1945, albeit by a pinch. This leads to closer commonwealth co-operation in which Britain retains the Commando's 40 to 44 while commandos 45 and 46 are "transferred" (in structure, not really in terms of the men involved) to Canada while Australia recieves 47 and 48 Commandos.
Keep going - this is really good!
Never heard that before but I didn't really pay attention to drugs until the mid 1990's when I was a teenager. Figured there might have been more attention after the Miami cartel stories etc...but learn something new everyday.
Excellent...more regiments would have a large impact on the 1990's. Checking for the list of UN missions and the world appears to crap out following the fall of the USSR and deployments skyrocket...
DART with security support? Expo 86 eat your heart out...
I'm assuming this with be somewhat similar to the US Marine Corp Carriers..
Again excellent news...living in the north most of my life there was no local reserve units (unless Edmonton at 450 km is close) which means that most families link to the forces is through their grandparents. Adding in more units/companies under a re-org could do wonders for disaster relief and public visability.
I know the need for assistance there...but why do I cringe everytime I hear Canadians going in as peace keepers in Africa?
I'm a Canuck and proud of it. You better believe I'm looking at how to feasibly do that.
You better...it's -35C outside this morning and I have to shovel snow. I want a hot province to move to.
Despite our reputation of legendary tempetes de neiges, there's hardly been any snow here. Of course, we do have the most beautiful Canuckian women...
This is more related to general recruitment...but currently to serve you must be a Canadian citizen expect for rare exceptions. If Canada retains the organic structure of 45 and 46 Commando could there be a change where greater troop transfer options exist?
i.e. British soldier at end of his term in the British Army in good standing wishes to transfer to the Canadian Army. Cross transfer in allowed with a requirement for 4? 10? years honorable service upon which the soldier must declare a nationality...Canadian or British. Could also be a transfer from say Commando 40 to Commando 45 (null strength) which is then transfered to say 2 PPCLI (in honor of MacCauley).
This could also be expanded upon for the rest of NATO as a means of helping offset the changes in Canadian demographics.
Re Bracken '45: everyone thought the CCF would form a minority govt, as the basically useless Gallup polls of the period showed. Then Mackenzie Karl swiped their platform, threw in Newfoundland and a middle class tax cut, and claimed it as his own. It was still a massacre, a loss of 56 MPs from '40 and a majority of four.
Despite our reputation of legendary tempetes de neiges, there's hardly been any snow here. Of course, we do have the most beautiful Canuckian women...
Ah montreal....Vegas a la francais. Thankfully (for my wallet if nothing else) you're 4000km away. But la belle femmes....I'm jelous
That's why we should have Commonwealth meetups here. Certain people who've never been in a relationship will be exposed to Mlle. Rue Crescent. You'll never be the same again.
*Disclaimer: May result in excessive drinking or sensual pleasures.
*Disclaimer: May result in excessive drinking or sensual pleasures.
- Status