No more MBT’s for Canada
 

Well, it looks like our friends to the north are going to eliminate their heavy armored units. And then spend some of their petro bucks in the US for a few Strykers.

Is this the beginning of the end for the MBT?

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">

Re: No more MBT’s for Canada
 

maybe the government can replace the sea king helicopter's while there at it. i understand there kinda old. some new warships and transport's would be nice, so we can actually have a navy.

Re: No more MBT’s for Canada
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The Sea King helicopters do need replacing for sure, and we could use some new transport planes and a few new fighters. But you'll be suprised to know that most of Canada's warships are less than 10-15 years old and are state of the art frigates. Our submarines we purchased from the British Navy (aside from that leak, of course) and are quite nice diesel subs.

It's really the land/air forces that are suffering the most, but as I understand more money is heading their way and with some infrastructure changes should help out alot.

Re: No more MBT’s for Canada
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana"></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Nothing is going to happen until after febuary, after PM-soon-to-be Paul Martin looks over it.

Re: No more MBT’s for Canada
 

http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif I really try and not sound like an arrogant american most of the time, but WTH does Canada need Diesel Subs for?

Not for sure why I got a good chuckle over that, but I did. I can see Infintry, some armor, and Air Force with some Navy support ships, but subs? hehe, guess I better stop laughing before I offend my northern brothers.

Re: No more MBT’s for Canada
 

Actually many nations today have Diesel sub fleets. They are more cost effective than nuclear ones can run almost as long underwater using modern snorkel systems and are excellent for close in shore defense. So it has most of the strengths of the Nuke sub but less cost and size. No wonder they are so popular with nations that don't have the deep pockets of the US.

Re: No more MBT’s for Canada
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">ok, so our navy is new. i wasn't to sure what we had, but i was sure it wasn't much. and it isn't. i'm not sure what you'd find on a frigate, but i'm pretty sure we should have a few destroyer's and a cruiser or two to.

Re: No more MBT’s for Canada
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">ok, so our navy is new. i wasn't to sure what we had, but i was sure it wasn't much. and it isn't. i'm not sure what you'd find on a frigate, but i'm pretty sure we should have a few destroyer's and a cruiser or two to. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">We do have destroyers. DND Site

Re: No more MBT’s for Canada
 

For Narrew: Canadian subs are most usually used for patrolling Canadian waters, supporting Canadian surface combattants, and "bLasting" the "heck" out of American ships in War Games http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

Edit: Pressed Quote instead of Edit. =|

[ October 30, 2003, 22:33: Message edited by: TerranC ]

Re: No more MBT’s for Canada
 

Diesel subs are built for costal defense, and tend to be limited on fuel stowage. But they can pack a big punch. They are much quieter then nukes when submerged, but also very slow, high speed drains the batteries too fast. The snorkels are not all that much good, airborne radar can find them in any sea state where they can be deployed. I would think that snorkels would be a good place to deploy stealth technology. The best way to deal with them is air power; active sonar negates the advantage of silent running. And once found, the lack of speed makes them sitting ducks.

The Soviets probably built the most state of the art stink boats, some were even boomers.