I'll believe it when I see it.
Neither the Russians nor the Ukrainians have had much success in building and sustaining bridges across the Severo-Donetsk for long. And now the Ukrainians have to get across the Dnipro in Kherson. Of course they are operating in waters more suitable to launches than either amphibious buggies and rubber dinghies or frigates and submarines. Yet another race-course demanding yet another horse.
Here is a article on the 23 aircraft DHC-515 orders that DeHavilland has received.
If you want to do this sort of stuff more often, give the Naval Reserve in Victoria two CB 90 assault boats, they can double as patrol boats and landing craft.
Ghosts of WWII HMC Corvette crews enter the chatMight want to generate an enclosed cabin version for Canada's waters, but still....
no weapons on the Great Lakes but doesn't mean you can't install the mounting hardware. Regardless of jurisdiction having a reserve unit with boats in places like Saskatoon, Lake Winnipeg and North Bay may be a good way to recruit and train up reservists. Maintain their current jobs, train for navy and kept current all without going away for 3 months until called up (would it work?)I used to call it coincidence.... now I am not so sure
No sooner noted than another horse presents itself. Thanks to don3wing...
No. Not his useful link to the DHC-515 article but the follow on article.
Coming to Canada: The Whiskey Multi Mission Reconnaissance Craft
Coming to Canada: The Whiskey Multi Mission Reconnaissance Craft – Vanguard
vanguardcanada.com
View attachment 78202
Might want to generate an enclosed cabin version for Canada's waters, but still....
MMRC.... redesignate as MMRRC (Multi Mission Reconnaissance and Rescue Craft) and paint some orange.
View attachment 78203
If you want to build a presence and small boat skills then operate launches on those waters. Equip them with an RWS like the TAPVs but keep the guns in a gun-locker.
Wouldn’t that be 120mm from the Leo2For Afghanistan the request was made early in September 2006. The government approved the deployment of a 15 tank squadron and an armoured engineer troop on the 15th of September. The first tank arrived in theatre on the 3rd of October. The tanks were originally ready to forward deploy in November but the Dutch commander of ISAF RC(S) held that up until Lavoie, coming back from HTLA, convinced him that a 105mm round from a tank was a kinder and gentler way of dealing with strongpoints than a 155mm HE or a 500 lb bomb. With ISAF approval granted, the tanks forward deployed on 2 Dec 2006.
I don’t think the weapons on that would contravene the GL rules.no weapons on the Great Lakes but doesn't mean you can't install the mounting hardware. Regardless of jurisdiction having a reserve unit with boats in places like Saskatoon, Lake Winnipeg and North Bay may be a good way to recruit and train up reservists. Maintain their current jobs, train for navy and kept current all without going away for 3 months until called up (would it work?)
no weapons on the Great Lakes but doesn't mean you can't install the mounting hardware. Regardless of jurisdiction having a reserve unit with boats in places like Saskatoon, Lake Winnipeg and North Bay may be a good way to recruit and train up reservists. Maintain their current jobs, train for navy and kept current all without going away for 3 months until called up (would it work?)
U.S. to put machine guns on Great Lakes cutters
CBC News · Posted: Mar 15, 2006 6:54 AM MST | Last Updated: March 15, 2006
U.S. Coast Guard vessels on the Great Lakes will soon be armed, marking the first time weapons have been authorized on boats patrolling the inland waters bordering Canada and the United States since 1817.
Petty Officer William Colclough said 7.62-mm machine guns will be stored below decks of the coast guard's 11 Great Lakes cutters and will be mounted only when needed.
Warning shots will be fired when vessels refuse to stop, said Colclough, who is based at the U.S. Coast Guard's Great Lakes headquarters in Cleveland.
Colclough said staff have already conducted live-fire drills in American waters off the coast of Sault Ste-Marie, Ont.
Demilitarization dates back to 1817
In the Rush-Bagot treaty of 1817, the two countries agreed to demilitarize Great Lakes waters.
The treaty followed the War of 1812, which saw Canadian and American forces wage violent battles on Lake Erie and Lake Huron.
Its provisions have now been reinterpreted because of U.S. concerns about customs violations, human smuggling and international terrorism.
An official with Foreign Affairs says Canada has agreed to read the treaty in such a way that machine guns of sizes up to .50 caliber will be considered weapons of law enforcement rather than weapons of war.
No. The Leopard C2 was the first tank deployed. They came out of existing Canadian stocks and carried a 105mm. They were replaced by the German/Dutch Leo 2 the year after.Wouldn’t that be 120mm from the Leo2
Roger. I hadn’t realized any of those hadn’t been scrapped already.No. The Leopard C2 was the first tank deployed. They came out of existing Canadian stocks and carried a 105mm. They were replaced by the German/Dutch Leo 2 the year after.
I don't think that they'd scrapped any yet but I think only about half of the 100 and some odd fleet were runners. The LdSH had been using some of them as ersatz MGSs as they had been trialling the Direct Fire Unit concept with the ADATS and TUA the year or two previously.Roger. I hadn’t realized any of those hadn’t been scrapped already.
I was going to post this in the Ukraine war thread as the YouTube video that linked it stated this is what the Ukraine's will be facing when they start their Offensive.
But IMHO, thought the video may be more appropriate here.
Think the CAF could do this? Dream on.
Click to expand...
And you have ALL the assets in the related video, or is it NOTAL Atk helo's, air superiority, mine breaching specialized vehicles, AFV's etc. etc, etc.We literally validate doing this all the time
Well air superiority is a state not an asset, but yes we have CAS on station. We do this live, with explosive breaches, bales into anti tank ditches, plow tanks and engineers clearing lanes, all the damned time. The only thing we do t include is the attack helo but that’s not a critical asset. It’s a nice to have.And you have ALL the assets in the related video, or is it NOTAL Atk helo's, air superiority, mine breaching specialized vehicles, AFV's etc. etc, etc.
My understanding is the TUA turrets are in storage, could probably be useful put on a LAV.I don't think that they'd scrapped any yet but I think only about half of the 100 and some odd fleet were runners. The LdSH had been using some of them as ersatz MGSs as they had been trialling the Direct Fire Unit concept with the ADATS and TUA the year or two previously.
I think that you are right but I'm not sure if that's the way to go.My understanding is the TUA turrets are in storage, could probably be useful put on a LAV.
Mine almost went to the States. That would have made me a prime candidate for Vietnam.If an outsider could see this. We are struggling to project obsolescent capability to an Ally so that our political masters can avoid the requirement, moral and otherwise, to equip its own forces. There are days when I wish my parents had chosen to emigrate to a real country