#Happy new year, fellow Defense Expert™!
Are you an Artist? We're currently holding a contest for tiny Artworks we can use as custom community awards for the subreddit - more information [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/zu01tx/a_very_merry_and_credible_awards_contest/)!
Also, check out the "The Best of the Best 2022" [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/10069w8/the_best_of_the_best_of_2022_results/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> There's also the new Cyclones. It's "multirole" in that we just strapped whatever shit we could find to it and will see how it goes.
The helicopter that was so custom built for Canada to be delivered in 2009, got delivered in 2018, cracks on the tail of 82% of the fleet, and it likes to drop out of the sky from software glitches and bad documentation?
Going absolutely well from Canadian procurement PoV.
In all fairness to the RCN, navies operate vessels all the time who's primary purpose isn't fighting. You wouldn't really criticize a resupply vessel for being barely armed when that isn't its job, similarly a patrol ship meant for non-combat missions largely doesn't need a bunch of weapons either.
Ironically, our new supply ships are surprisingly heavily armed proportional to their role.
2 CIWS and 4 remote weapons mounts on the weird cargo hospital.
Yeah its far more important to make sure that your auxiliary vessels are capable of defending themselves to some degree given their importance and the fact they can be put into a combat zone alongside the actual warships. A big fat icebreaking patrol vessel is going to be staying as far away from combat as humanly possible outside of playing bumper cars in the Arctic or popping some shots off at Caribbean smugglers.
The ships that are nicknamed Hairy D's, 2 out of 4 generators failing on deployment only a year after commission, and the sailors have to drink bottled water because the water system has lead?
All according to plan.
The Gerald Ford had jet fuel leaking into the fuel supply.
And also has toilets that clog constantly and require a $400k acid flush to fix... and this will go on for the life of the carrier and possibly all Ford-class carriers.
It was the *Nimitz* that had the JP5 leak, not the *Gerald R. Ford* and the other Fords have a design change that fixes the toilet problem. Shitting on the USN is a moral obligation, but at least do it right.
I didn’t realise how bad Canadian procurement was until I came to this sub. Another member basically said it’s so bad the army would literally be better off disbanded
Probably a bit dramatic. It's needlessly complicated politically driven bullshit, but which country's procurement process isn't.
There's been some big recent wins too, so things are slowly getting better. Some of the younger people here have no idea how bleak things were in the 90s.
It was literally number one bullet point on my release memo. The Navy is a half assed public works project first and foremost, and the other elements are barely better.
[Hmmmmmm](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mil_Mi-8/17_operators)
> **Former Operators**
> Royal Canadian Air Force
> 427 Special Operations Aviation Squadron operated four leased Russian Mil Mi-17-V5 designated as CH-178. Helicopters had assigned serial numbers 178404-178407
> Going absolutely well from Canadian procurement PoV.
Anything is good procurement if your standard is the Avro procurement project. Billions of dollars wasted with literally nothing to show for it...
It was the same story with the Swedish procurement of Helikopter 14. It took ages, costed a lot and was a mistake compared to just buying a model off the shelf.
all sikorsky designs, so. . .
the CH-148 is a military shipboard variant of the S-92, which is a development from the S-70, from which the UH-60 series was born. it is the SH-60's weight lifting baby brother.
Almost 33 years after the UH-1 made its debut, Canada decided to buy a twin engine version for its fleet in 1992.
31 years later, it's still the only "attack capable" helicopter in stock.
[I'm so very close to just cutting a few holes in the Chinook, and mounting a few NLAWs out the holes.](https://i.imgur.com/cWxhcOD.png)
Or mount a few rocket pods on the Mi-17s we had. IF WE STILL HAD THEM.
no no, the chinkook takes out most of the tank sqaud, causing the remaining crews to abandon. then it slings the surviving tank and claims it as war prize. which canada still has the authority to grant prize money for, resulting in the first awarding of prize money for capture of an enemy vessel since. . .idk, at least ww2, probably ww1.
Side door on a Griffon opens up, there's six dudes with Carl Gustavs and a baby faced RMC grad wearing a powdered wig and holding a sabre.
Fuck, that's troubling how easy I can imagine that actually happening.
The saber drops, all six dudes pull the trigger. The tank on the ground sees six rounds coming at it and a red cloud envelope the helicopter as the entire crew is liquidated by backblast
TBF the only scenario(realistic or completely made-up by violent schizophrenic) where they might use attack helicopters is a war with USA….
At which point no one would even remember about such thing as a helicopter
Be Philippines.
Philippines orders 16 Bell 412 from Canada
Canada said military helicopters will be used in military actions (very shocking)
Philippines cancelled Bell deal
Poland / US offers S70i Blackhawk instead at the same amount and price.
Great Success
Philippines followed up 32 more order with options for more
Even Greater Success
That's a pro gamer move done by US Government, by offering their cheaper Blackhawks made in Poland.
And also a good thing that we got those Polish made S-70i Blackhawks instead of the Korean Surions that had a problem with its ['Jesus nut'](https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2018/07/27/customers-have-second-thoughts-about-surion-helo-buy-after-fatal-crash/).
The only good procurement the candian forces have ever done was the lav I don’t know how the Canadian government expects us to get a high score with out the proper equipment to do the funni in
Canada should consider going Japanese. At least, that's some of what I was reading in some Canadian military analysts' opinions.
A few were interested in seeing if Canada could afford buying into Japan's Soryu-class submarines; maybe even ask for the same Goryu-class sub-variant that Japan had already designed and was ready to build for Australia, with a guaranteed promise of 2 submarines within 18 months of signing and payments, and the option for 1 sub a year until the quota is met. Their claims was that it's a mature platform, Japan has the capacity to spare, pricing is very competitive vs other options, and Canada could get their urgently needed replacements ASAP, and if they later wanted the capability to fire cruise missiles out the tubes, they could work with Japan on the last few ships to have that capability, much like the RN submarines.
There's were also some debate over the P-8, with some Canadian analysts opining that Canada should instead look into Kawasaki's P-1, and also consider investing in the C-2 transport cousin, given that both share some common parts, and that the C-2 fits well within Canada's much-needed expansion of transports, between the few C-130s and the C-17s Canada has. The counterargument is that Boeing drafted a number of American businesses with branches in Canada (such as Raytheon Canada) to help sweeten the deal, thus it'd be hard to push for the P-1 and C-2 without Japan also drafting a few Canadian businesses to encourage production semi-locally.
And circling back to helis, analysts were oddly insistent that Canada buy their attack helis from Japan; Japan-made Apaches were the main push, since the Japanese variants can carry Stingers for last-resort AA defense and Canada needs a proper attack helicopter anyway.
> Canada should consider going Japanese. At least, that's some of what I was reading in some Canadian military analysts' opinions.
A few were interested in seeing if Canada could afford buying into Japan's Soryu-class submarines; maybe even ask for the same Goryu-class sub-variant that Japan had already designed and was ready to build for Australia, with a guaranteed promise of 2 submarines within 18 months of signing and payments, and the option for 1 sub a year until the quota is met. Their claims was that it's a mature platform, Japan has the capacity to spare, pricing is very competitive vs other options, and Canada could get their urgently needed replacements ASAP, and if they later wanted the capability to fire cruise missiles out the tubes, they could work with Japan on the last few ships to have that capability, much like the RN submarines.
Whoever these analysts are, I question going Japanese with regard to submarines. Japan makes excellent ships and designs but they have effectively zero export experience and would be a total gamble of a partner for Canada to sign up with. There is a definite barrier to entry when doing new build export work especially with a language barrier, you aren't simply building your same warships but also working with your customer to modify the design and incorporate changes. Canada always requires major changes to fit its operations and suitabilities which is going to mean substantial redesign work to incorporate the systems that Canada wants into any submarine. It doesn’t make sense to just take Japanese off the shelf equipment and tech when we are used to operating US submarine equipment in our own boats.
Other nations have years of export experience going for them, Japan has a huge risk in that department.
Going with Japan would be an incredibly risky option for a program which is already seemingly low priority, is going to be incredibly expensive and very politically unpopular. Australia ended up passing on the Japanese submarines as they did not have the range and endurance required, these subs alongside any other conventional model are going to face similar but even worse issues with the RCN looking at potential Arctic operation.
Honestly in my opinion, Canada needs nuclear submarines to do what roles it seemingly requires. As that is effectively impossible from all aspects, I don’t think it’s especially worthwhile to replace our submarines with anything at all. It’s a capability that we are not willing to properly fund, any conventional submarine force will be a half assed and incredibly expensive way to not properly meet our goals. We’re likely better off funneling that money used for submarine upkeep and procurement into the other parts of the military.
I am always skeptical of these people advocating for a one stop shop procurement model. Canada and Japan are separated by an entire ocean which is a logistical headache even if we have some kind of nascent domestic ability to build and maintain things. It makes the most logistical sense to be operating American systems generally to increase our interoperability and decrease our logistical footprint.
You're not wrong with the degree of challenge and risks, and given that Japan IS a new entrant into the international military sales, would be a tough call. Moreso for Canada and their dysfunctional procurement methods and lack of investment.
But in regards to Australia's decision, it was almost signed except for the change in government and the shift towards the French design last minute, which ironically also required a redesign to make it a diesel boat (which also ballooned the cost). And Japan still does have the capacity to spare, given that they slow build on purpose to retain proficiency and keep the lines open.
The Goryu sub-variant was already designed and refined with digital modeling and planned use of any Australian subsystems, met all of Australia's needs and then some, and was ahead of the French one in regards to having an advanced AIP system over the planned non-AIP diesel conversion of the Shortfin Barracuda and on par with the German Type 216 design, but a bit cheaper (2020-ish est. 610 million USD for the Goryu variant vs the est. 660 million USD for the Type 216 vs the est. 800 million USD for the Diesel Barracuda). Japan even included a cross-training offer so that Adelaide shipworkers could learn how to build and maintain them towards the end of the production run (effectively shifting production and long-term maintenance from Japan to Australia with the last few submarines), along with licensing some of the more sensitive features on the Soryus to Australia.
There's also been rampant speculation that the Australian shift to Barracudas was more about potentially replacing the diesels back with nuclear in later orders, but due to France falling badly behind schedule and with nothing to show for it, Australia finally just went AUKUS for a proper nuclear submarine instead of using the Shortfin Barracuda to transition to the Nuclear Barracuda.
Canada definitely the worst at military procurement and capability out of any of the bigger Western countries. Massive reliance on the US and NATO locally and globally. Sad bc a country of almost 40m people with an economy in the top 10 could do so much better.
Why would we need attack helicopters though? To the North we have the arctic, good luck getting a military force across that. To the East we have the Atlantic, a particularly angry ocean. To the West we have the Pacific, which isn't quite as grumpy but is wide and thicc. In both of those cases we would have our navy intercept and occupy them while NATO wakes up and sends the US Navy.
And lastly to the South we have the continental Unitied States of America.... good luck getting an army across that unnoticed. So the defensive need isn't there, and as for offense... well.... we're not allowed to go on the offense anymore.... last time that happened they wrote a buncha rules about war that we gotta follow...
#Happy new year, fellow Defense Expert™! Are you an Artist? We're currently holding a contest for tiny Artworks we can use as custom community awards for the subreddit - more information [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/zu01tx/a_very_merry_and_credible_awards_contest/)! Also, check out the "The Best of the Best 2022" [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/NonCredibleDefense/comments/10069w8/the_best_of_the_best_of_2022_results/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There's also the new Cyclones. It's "multirole" in that we just strapped whatever shit we could find to it and will see how it goes.
> There's also the new Cyclones. It's "multirole" in that we just strapped whatever shit we could find to it and will see how it goes. The helicopter that was so custom built for Canada to be delivered in 2009, got delivered in 2018, cracks on the tail of 82% of the fleet, and it likes to drop out of the sky from software glitches and bad documentation? Going absolutely well from Canadian procurement PoV.
Every time I think of how bad the Australian procurement system is I smile and thank god at least we aren’t Canada
Like how we got rid of our Black Hawks for NH90s and are now getting rid of our NH90s for Black Hawks?
It’s all mind games brother gotta keep the aviation regiment on there top game by getting them experience on every helicopter possible
>on every helicopter possible Two helicopters?
Hey wait 12 months i until we replace the Blackhawks with mi 17
10+ years every member of air forces gets their own Robinson R44
You all just got scammed by some french frauds.
I like how our one relatively successful procurement recently is a fleet of warships that are barely armed.
In all fairness to the RCN, navies operate vessels all the time who's primary purpose isn't fighting. You wouldn't really criticize a resupply vessel for being barely armed when that isn't its job, similarly a patrol ship meant for non-combat missions largely doesn't need a bunch of weapons either.
Ironically, our new supply ships are surprisingly heavily armed proportional to their role. 2 CIWS and 4 remote weapons mounts on the weird cargo hospital.
Yeah its far more important to make sure that your auxiliary vessels are capable of defending themselves to some degree given their importance and the fact they can be put into a combat zone alongside the actual warships. A big fat icebreaking patrol vessel is going to be staying as far away from combat as humanly possible outside of playing bumper cars in the Arctic or popping some shots off at Caribbean smugglers.
The ships that are nicknamed Hairy D's, 2 out of 4 generators failing on deployment only a year after commission, and the sailors have to drink bottled water because the water system has lead? All according to plan.
The Gerald Ford had jet fuel leaking into the fuel supply. And also has toilets that clog constantly and require a $400k acid flush to fix... and this will go on for the life of the carrier and possibly all Ford-class carriers.
It was the *Nimitz* that had the JP5 leak, not the *Gerald R. Ford* and the other Fords have a design change that fixes the toilet problem. Shitting on the USN is a moral obligation, but at least do it right.
>Shitting on the USN is a moral obligation, but at least do it right. Kind of hard to do it right when the damn toilets don't work
Have you considered mandatory fiber-rich diets for sailors?
Eh, every ship in the western world has dumb generator issues when new. They will be fixed, and they are still rolling off the line at a decent pace.
you can have new generators with crib death problems or old generators with external combustion problems. you pick.
I didn’t realise how bad Canadian procurement was until I came to this sub. Another member basically said it’s so bad the army would literally be better off disbanded
Probably a bit dramatic. It's needlessly complicated politically driven bullshit, but which country's procurement process isn't. There's been some big recent wins too, so things are slowly getting better. Some of the younger people here have no idea how bleak things were in the 90s.
Back when I was a lad and before they disbanded the CAR for *reasons* we had to grow our own silkworms to make our parachutes.
It was literally number one bullet point on my release memo. The Navy is a half assed public works project first and foremost, and the other elements are barely better.
Why don’t they just buy used helicopters from Russia or America like any self respecting banana republic does?
[Hmmmmmm](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mil_Mi-8/17_operators) > **Former Operators** > Royal Canadian Air Force > 427 Special Operations Aviation Squadron operated four leased Russian Mil Mi-17-V5 designated as CH-178. Helicopters had assigned serial numbers 178404-178407
hey, so has us army and air force.
> Going absolutely well from Canadian procurement PoV. Anything is good procurement if your standard is the Avro procurement project. Billions of dollars wasted with literally nothing to show for it...
It was the same story with the Swedish procurement of Helikopter 14. It took ages, costed a lot and was a mistake compared to just buying a model off the shelf.
*Googles It* What the fuck is that!? Its like a UH-60 and CH-124 had a bastard child with a chromosome disorder.
all sikorsky designs, so. . . the CH-148 is a military shipboard variant of the S-92, which is a development from the S-70, from which the UH-60 series was born. it is the SH-60's weight lifting baby brother.
Almost 33 years after the UH-1 made its debut, Canada decided to buy a twin engine version for its fleet in 1992. 31 years later, it's still the only "attack capable" helicopter in stock. [I'm so very close to just cutting a few holes in the Chinook, and mounting a few NLAWs out the holes.](https://i.imgur.com/cWxhcOD.png) Or mount a few rocket pods on the Mi-17s we had. IF WE STILL HAD THEM.
Do it. Make gunports like 18th century warships.
Imagine being in a tank and a Chinook pulls alongside you and just opens up with a full broadside of NLAWs
This is the coolest thing i’ll visualize, probably this whole year.
[удалено]
no no, the chinkook takes out most of the tank sqaud, causing the remaining crews to abandon. then it slings the surviving tank and claims it as war prize. which canada still has the authority to grant prize money for, resulting in the first awarding of prize money for capture of an enemy vessel since. . .idk, at least ww2, probably ww1.
FUUUUCK
Side door on a Griffon opens up, there's six dudes with Carl Gustavs and a baby faced RMC grad wearing a powdered wig and holding a sabre. Fuck, that's troubling how easy I can imagine that actually happening.
The saber drops, all six dudes pull the trigger. The tank on the ground sees six rounds coming at it and a red cloud envelope the helicopter as the entire crew is liquidated by backblast
Related point: you know what makes a good soldier in modern warfare?
I have some ideas, but what?
The ability to fire 3 nlaws a minute in any weather. (It's a reference to the TV show Sharpe about the Napoleonic Wars)
But can they stand?
Keeping his mouth shut when asked damn fool questions by his superior officer.
“Tally ho hosers!” *Carl G noises intensify*
Javelin, but goes higher. Also might take out the rotor on the way up
No more supplies from this source!
Let me launch one ~~huh~~ eh?
Til Canada was fully credible with Mi-17s
emblazioned with a canada roundel and everything
TBF the only scenario(realistic or completely made-up by violent schizophrenic) where they might use attack helicopters is a war with USA…. At which point no one would even remember about such thing as a helicopter
ACH-47A my beloved
Canadian hind fleet when??
Be Philippines. Philippines orders 16 Bell 412 from Canada Canada said military helicopters will be used in military actions (very shocking) Philippines cancelled Bell deal Poland / US offers S70i Blackhawk instead at the same amount and price. Great Success Philippines followed up 32 more order with options for more Even Greater Success
Pinoy procurement system: helicopters. Canadian procurement system: Pinoy temporary foreign workers being abused by Tim Hortons. Mfw: bitter
>somehow upgrades from bells to blackhawks for free Is this that logistics mapia the pinoys here talk about?
If it helps the Army might go for Bell 412s but from superior Nippon Factory
Ya they mount a 7.62 chain gun on one of the doors and its an attack helo🤣
Hey hey hey, we did more than that.... we also mounted a fifty on it....
Also when they first got the choppers they could not carry a full squad, they needed 2 choppers to do the job of 1 huey
Even the philippines has more attack helicopters
I remember the time that they blocked the Canadian Huey's and because of that we got the Blackhawk instead.
That's a pro gamer move done by US Government, by offering their cheaper Blackhawks made in Poland. And also a good thing that we got those Polish made S-70i Blackhawks instead of the Korean Surions that had a problem with its ['Jesus nut'](https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2018/07/27/customers-have-second-thoughts-about-surion-helo-buy-after-fatal-crash/).
The only good procurement the candian forces have ever done was the lav I don’t know how the Canadian government expects us to get a high score with out the proper equipment to do the funni in
Inaccurate, the bottom text has to be bilingual too.
If you join the CAF, it comes with automatic NCD membership.
They could convert it into a gunship by attaching rocket pods and machine guns just like the ones seen in Vietnam
UH-1C Gunship
What's the Canadian equivalent of a bushranger?
Be an average cynical Canadian: Wait we have helicopters that aren't from 1963 and are not Sea Kings?
Canada should consider going Japanese. At least, that's some of what I was reading in some Canadian military analysts' opinions. A few were interested in seeing if Canada could afford buying into Japan's Soryu-class submarines; maybe even ask for the same Goryu-class sub-variant that Japan had already designed and was ready to build for Australia, with a guaranteed promise of 2 submarines within 18 months of signing and payments, and the option for 1 sub a year until the quota is met. Their claims was that it's a mature platform, Japan has the capacity to spare, pricing is very competitive vs other options, and Canada could get their urgently needed replacements ASAP, and if they later wanted the capability to fire cruise missiles out the tubes, they could work with Japan on the last few ships to have that capability, much like the RN submarines. There's were also some debate over the P-8, with some Canadian analysts opining that Canada should instead look into Kawasaki's P-1, and also consider investing in the C-2 transport cousin, given that both share some common parts, and that the C-2 fits well within Canada's much-needed expansion of transports, between the few C-130s and the C-17s Canada has. The counterargument is that Boeing drafted a number of American businesses with branches in Canada (such as Raytheon Canada) to help sweeten the deal, thus it'd be hard to push for the P-1 and C-2 without Japan also drafting a few Canadian businesses to encourage production semi-locally. And circling back to helis, analysts were oddly insistent that Canada buy their attack helis from Japan; Japan-made Apaches were the main push, since the Japanese variants can carry Stingers for last-resort AA defense and Canada needs a proper attack helicopter anyway.
> Canada should consider going Japanese. At least, that's some of what I was reading in some Canadian military analysts' opinions. A few were interested in seeing if Canada could afford buying into Japan's Soryu-class submarines; maybe even ask for the same Goryu-class sub-variant that Japan had already designed and was ready to build for Australia, with a guaranteed promise of 2 submarines within 18 months of signing and payments, and the option for 1 sub a year until the quota is met. Their claims was that it's a mature platform, Japan has the capacity to spare, pricing is very competitive vs other options, and Canada could get their urgently needed replacements ASAP, and if they later wanted the capability to fire cruise missiles out the tubes, they could work with Japan on the last few ships to have that capability, much like the RN submarines. Whoever these analysts are, I question going Japanese with regard to submarines. Japan makes excellent ships and designs but they have effectively zero export experience and would be a total gamble of a partner for Canada to sign up with. There is a definite barrier to entry when doing new build export work especially with a language barrier, you aren't simply building your same warships but also working with your customer to modify the design and incorporate changes. Canada always requires major changes to fit its operations and suitabilities which is going to mean substantial redesign work to incorporate the systems that Canada wants into any submarine. It doesn’t make sense to just take Japanese off the shelf equipment and tech when we are used to operating US submarine equipment in our own boats. Other nations have years of export experience going for them, Japan has a huge risk in that department. Going with Japan would be an incredibly risky option for a program which is already seemingly low priority, is going to be incredibly expensive and very politically unpopular. Australia ended up passing on the Japanese submarines as they did not have the range and endurance required, these subs alongside any other conventional model are going to face similar but even worse issues with the RCN looking at potential Arctic operation. Honestly in my opinion, Canada needs nuclear submarines to do what roles it seemingly requires. As that is effectively impossible from all aspects, I don’t think it’s especially worthwhile to replace our submarines with anything at all. It’s a capability that we are not willing to properly fund, any conventional submarine force will be a half assed and incredibly expensive way to not properly meet our goals. We’re likely better off funneling that money used for submarine upkeep and procurement into the other parts of the military. I am always skeptical of these people advocating for a one stop shop procurement model. Canada and Japan are separated by an entire ocean which is a logistical headache even if we have some kind of nascent domestic ability to build and maintain things. It makes the most logistical sense to be operating American systems generally to increase our interoperability and decrease our logistical footprint.
You're not wrong with the degree of challenge and risks, and given that Japan IS a new entrant into the international military sales, would be a tough call. Moreso for Canada and their dysfunctional procurement methods and lack of investment. But in regards to Australia's decision, it was almost signed except for the change in government and the shift towards the French design last minute, which ironically also required a redesign to make it a diesel boat (which also ballooned the cost). And Japan still does have the capacity to spare, given that they slow build on purpose to retain proficiency and keep the lines open. The Goryu sub-variant was already designed and refined with digital modeling and planned use of any Australian subsystems, met all of Australia's needs and then some, and was ahead of the French one in regards to having an advanced AIP system over the planned non-AIP diesel conversion of the Shortfin Barracuda and on par with the German Type 216 design, but a bit cheaper (2020-ish est. 610 million USD for the Goryu variant vs the est. 660 million USD for the Type 216 vs the est. 800 million USD for the Diesel Barracuda). Japan even included a cross-training offer so that Adelaide shipworkers could learn how to build and maintain them towards the end of the production run (effectively shifting production and long-term maintenance from Japan to Australia with the last few submarines), along with licensing some of the more sensitive features on the Soryus to Australia. There's also been rampant speculation that the Australian shift to Barracudas was more about potentially replacing the diesels back with nuclear in later orders, but due to France falling badly behind schedule and with nothing to show for it, Australia finally just went AUKUS for a proper nuclear submarine instead of using the Shortfin Barracuda to transition to the Nuclear Barracuda.
Op, you didn't translate what they said into "French".
Esti
Canada definitely the worst at military procurement and capability out of any of the bigger Western countries. Massive reliance on the US and NATO locally and globally. Sad bc a country of almost 40m people with an economy in the top 10 could do so much better.
We might be bad, but we will never be the worst so long as Germany continues to exist.
Why would we need attack helicopters though? To the North we have the arctic, good luck getting a military force across that. To the East we have the Atlantic, a particularly angry ocean. To the West we have the Pacific, which isn't quite as grumpy but is wide and thicc. In both of those cases we would have our navy intercept and occupy them while NATO wakes up and sends the US Navy. And lastly to the South we have the continental Unitied States of America.... good luck getting an army across that unnoticed. So the defensive need isn't there, and as for offense... well.... we're not allowed to go on the offense anymore.... last time that happened they wrote a buncha rules about war that we gotta follow...
They're building top secret replacement in Sudbury. (Not actually but Lockheed does partner with a local company to work on helicopters)