I'm not sure if the Canadian systems developed have been been deployed but if the Canadian government were to perform due diligence it may have been compared with the Jindalee system ,which has been operating for a few decades now and undergoing constant upgrades ,certainly though Canada may require more than one of these perhaps further north, A Jorn system deployed in the south west could ostensibly detect at long range hypersonic threats to the east coast of Canada and be aligned with Norad?I too would like to see an explanation of why we chose Australian technology over our own home grown solution. I have no issue with Australian Defence Tech, if it's the best solution, but this company seems to offer a similar solution, and has a pedigree of international customers.
Feds partner with Australia on $6-billion Arctic radar project in 'slap in the face' to Canadian company
D-TA Systems says the government should use made-in-Canada equipment for the Arctic radar system, which will detect incoming missiles.ottawacitizen.com
Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) News and Discussions
- Thread starter John Fedup
- Start date
Maybe Canada should put in its own bid to takeover Greenland's sovereignty. Greenland's overwhelmingly Inuit population has a lot more in common with Canada's own Inuit population than it does with any other nation.
I should think companies like this may end up building the physical radar arrays. I understand those are fairly ordinary anyway. It's the software that matters, which has been developed and refined in Australia for at least forty years.I too would like to see an explanation of why we chose Australian technology over our own home grown solution. I have no issue with Australian Defence Tech, if it's the best solution, but this company seems to offer a similar solution, and has a pedigree of international customers.
Feds partner with Australia on $6-billion Arctic radar project in 'slap in the face' to Canadian company
D-TA Systems says the government should use made-in-Canada equipment for the Arctic radar system, which will detect incoming missiles.ottawacitizen.com
I would expect most manufacturing to take place in Canada.
Part of the US concerns is that no one has filled in the void in and seems to think peace is endless.
The US is feeling very vulnerable right now.
Canada is an ideal partner with Denmark to help address those concerns.
These are huge arrays, kilometers long. They are more like civil engineering projects like power lines or roads than a military platform.
Getting OTHR to work is mostly in the processing and software. Australia would love to help share development costs of a platform like this to keep it relevant going forward. This could become a joint project. Canada and Australia are of similar size and have similar space and volume to monitor. It's a very short list of countries that need to monitor over 10 million km2.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Umm... What?! I am in the US, and neither seem to me to be accurate descriptions of US sentiment, or at least among those I come in contact with.
I very much wonder about what actual configuration Canada can get, and what technical challenges will be encountered. In a number of important respects regarding OTHR systems like JORN, Australia is rather unique which is why the systems can be made to work. What I am less certain of is whether Canada has areas like Australia which would be appropriate for receiver array sites and whether or not northern looking OTHR system performance would be impacted by their proximity to high latitudes, which themselves are more effected by interactions between the magnetosphere and solar winds.
downunderblue
Active Member
I think this is a very interesting topic. I know its a RCAF threat but I would tend to agree, somewhat anyway.
US defense strategy argued for a “two-war construct,” namely that United States should have sufficient military capability and capacity to fight and win two simultaneous wars in different theaters against major regional powers.
From a defense planning perspective, I anticipate (esp when listening to the US Senate ASC hearings) that planners have concluded that if war with China is included in one of those simultaneous wars, that there is very little left in the tank to fight the second conflict, moreso if the conflict is coordinated, they likely lose (and are inherently insecure of that risk thus needing more commitment/ contribution from allies- ie the EU can deal with Western Russia).
Think a breakout of conflict on the Korean Peninsula, an incursion against the Baltic states or a regional conflict affecting the MEast. If any of them occurred similatiously with a peer to peer conflict with China then the US would feel very very vulnerable. That being said, on the surface it's 'Make America Great Again' etc, but it's important to differentiate between the bark and the bite etc.
For ref, this thinking is not new ... DoD needs new force construct to fight multiple wars
Again apols to others given its off RCAF topic but I think you made a reasonable assessment (when looking at some circles in the US).
I understood this system was to be installed in the lower south west Ontario ,still a different environment to its present location
It may appear to be an odd statement. From the outside it seems to be a way of making some sense of what the US is doing. Even if it isn't true, it may be a correlation more than a causation. Maybe it is a more palatable suggestion for those on the outside, than the realisation that the US genuinely and permanently hates its allies and intends to genuinely fight and destroy them via military and economic means.
I am operating on the presumption it is feeling (and a feeling doesn't mean fact) that it is (potentially) vulnerable and wants to allies to do more. With this lens, many of the US actions, while imperfectly communicated, fit within a reasoned logical framework. The US has often commented through many presidents that Canada is perhaps not doing enough to monitor and secure its north. Canada acquiring JORN would be a huge step towards addressing that. These types of radars do need optimal sites, and the most optimal sites may be in Canada.
There may well be limitations, as there are on JORN in its current locations. But in terms of OTHR for surveillance purposes over large areas, it is a very real option. but it may well take decades to build and be implemented in a working capacity, with significant development required.
But in doing so it is a clear demonstration that Canada takes it duties seriously, putting billions into a real tangible project. Canada herself didn't seem to show much interest in the project, but the Americans have been over it for decades and were very keen to integrate it into their networks.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
AND
TBH and I am by no means an expert of this, but I do have some awareness of RF propagation including HF bands, am I not certain that there is anywhere in North America that is really suitable for an OTHR array and network like JORN. I am also uncertain whether or not such a system could be implemented to monitor polar regions.
AFAIK Australia currently has JORN configured to monitor approaches to continental Australia from the west, northwest, and north, all directions either being parallel to or towards the equator. Canada OTOH if transmitting north, would be transmitting towards the north poles (true and magnetic) which means how the magnetosphere and ionosphere might cause HF transmissions to behave is likely to be quite different from what happens with JORN.
And Northeast, apparently. Longreach is being, or already has been, extended to 180 coverage over the Coral Sea to the Solomons and further.
Hopefully any atmospheric differences can be adjusted for, in time. These systems seem to have an almost indefinite lifespan.
Jindalee extension will put a constant Australian eye on Melanesia | The Strategist
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Hopefully, but given the potential differences in magnetic conditions and how variable the charged conditions might be in that area of the ionosphere, it might be something which could take decades if it is even possible.
These issues are in addition to any possible problems with finding suitable sites for transmitters and receiver arrays.
This may well be true. The US (and the soviets)experimented with this a lot and (in particular the US) didn't find it particularly useful for solid technical reasons. But the threat back then was Soviets and over the north pole. The Chinese are to the side. Plenty of space on the west coast.
Maybe the Canadians want to monitor their southern neighbor? The sites could be up the very far north and focus on detecting everything east and west and south. Canada has a mostly uninhabited north, being able to detect threats over their own territory and from the side approaches is still useful.
JORNs capabilities are highly speculative and storied. There were rumors of it being able to detect B2's taking/landing off from CONUS. US seemed interested in it being able to monitor missile launches from North Asia for BMD, ot cue other assets.
JORN and the art of missile defence - Australian Defence Magazine
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Agreed, and some who used to post on this board were aware of some of the capabilities.
I am not saying that it would not be worthwhile for Canada to look into OTHR systems which bounce HF signals off the ionosphere for broad area surveillance. What I am saying is there are a number of issues which would need to be overcome in order for Canada to implement such a system and it might take several decades of work before a useful system gets developed. It is also quite possible that such a system cannot be successfully developed.
Looking at JORN, Project Jindalee started back in 1972, getting delivered as JORN in 2003. Now certainly some of the technology developed by/during Project Jindalee could possibly be used to shorten some of the development time for a Canadian OTHR network. However, one also needs to be mindful that by a quirk of location, Australia ended up with a number of advantages (or arguably, did not have a number of disadvantages) which impacted the development.
One example of what I am referring to is the fact that JORN transmitter furthest from the equator is ~28°S, whilst the location in mainland Canada closest to the equator is ~42°N.
Or this simplified explanation of Canadian studies into oth in the polar regions plenty of light reading
This article from last year stating much of the spending going to U.S firms
This article from last year stating much of the spending going to U.S firms
New $6-billion Arctic radar will track incoming missiles, says Canadian military
The $6-billion Canadian system would provide missile tracking and other data to NORAD.
ottawacitizen.com
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #1,976
With Trump’s announcement that a 25% tariff on automobiles will proceed in April, there are increasing calls to cancel further F-35 deliveries (16 ordered and paid for). Gripens, built in Montreal, maybe anywhere else in Canada IMO might be an option. Same applies to other Euro options. Trump, being the dick he is, could restrict GE jet engines for the Gripen. Both the P-8 and future F-35 orders should be be on the cancellation table, might get get corporate people to apply pressure on GOP Trump supporting cowards.
As I have mentioned before, buy another 15-25 F-35s and move on to non-US alternatives. That applies to other military kit as well.
As I have mentioned before, buy another 15-25 F-35s and move on to non-US alternatives. That applies to other military kit as well.
I understand Canadas annoyance with its neighbour but it seems the discontinuation of the f-35 acquisition is wrong no other aircraft comes close to what it can do and is also markedly cheaper,A block four f-35 will enable Canadas defences unlike the others, certainly President Trump will not be around forever , the expression cutting off your nose to spite your face comes to mind ,I believe Canada should be more strategic in its trade dispute in what's reversible
What would be the minimum number of F-35s needed to see Canada through until the next generation of combat aircraft such as GCAP or FCAS become available?
It might be worthwhile for Canada to join one of these programs to ensure early access to these aircraft.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #1,979
Realistically Canada likely only has about 40 active Hornets at present so add 25 more F-35s to the 16 already paid for, the RCAF in 2030-33 will be much more capable than it is at present. The planned F-35 order is 88 jets for NORAD and NATO commitments. Forty jets by early 2030-33 and then wait for GCAP.
SolarisKenzo
Well-Known Member
GCAP will basically be a big bomb truck, it will have to carry the new MBDA TP-15 and from what I got reading government documents... Air superiority will not be a priority.
To be seen as a sort of new F-111.
Maybe FCAS could be more interesting for Canada, it will be smaller and more focused on air to air.
To be honest, and from someone who always supported autonomy from the US, the F-35 is really the best there is out there...
To be seen as a sort of new F-111.
Maybe FCAS could be more interesting for Canada, it will be smaller and more focused on air to air.
To be honest, and from someone who always supported autonomy from the US, the F-35 is really the best there is out there...