• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

British Military Current Events

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,530
Points
1,060
Something about trying to take a large piece of open ground, surrounded by infrastructure, and probably reinforced to the teeth due to it's importance to AD and Air Superiority; that would make not make it a target of opportunity for an airborne or air assault attack. Not unless you are willing to throw wave upon wave of pers and equipment at the problem.

Makes more sense to me to disable it with munitions and pick up the pieces as part of the rest of the offensive.

That suggests to me the notion of a frontal assault against the Rock of Gibraltar, or Severodonetsk. Why would you do it?

The world is full of commercial runways. Not all of them hard nodes. Why wouldn't you go where the enemy isn't?
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,365
Points
1,160
That suggests to me the notion of a frontal assault against the Rock of Gibraltar, or Severodonetsk. Why would you do it?

The world is full of commercial runways. Not all of them hard nodes. Why wouldn't you go where the enemy isn't?

Because he still has air superiority, if the airfields are not taken out, and he can strafe you to pieces no matter where you try to hide.

Airfield security is the reason why the British invented the RAF Regiment, whose main role is defending airfields, after the massive screw ups in Crete 1941 where friendly forces gave up Maleme to the Germans, resulting in the loss of the Island despite massive German casualties.

RAF Regiment​


In 1941 during the Second World War German airborne forces invaded Crete, then held by Greek, British and Commonwealth forces. The German invasion succeeded in major part because of the failure of the Allied land forces to recognise the strategic importance of the airfields, and hence to defend them adequately. In consequence the RAF base at Maleme was taken largely intact by German paratroop and glider forces, albeit with heavy casualties. The Germans were then reinforced by air behind allied lines. This led eventually to the loss of the whole island and substantial Allied losses in what became known as the Battle of Crete.[9]

 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,530
Points
1,060
1659538342235.png

I just found a job for the Militia - defending over 500 airfields capable of receiving C17s and C130s. 500 RAF Regiment Squadrons should just about do the job.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,530
Points
1,060
Here's a European equivalent - the difference is, of course, almost all of those have major population centres close by that could supply a body of defenders - as at Hostomel.

1659538605277.png
 

rmc_wannabe

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,903
Points
1,310
Because he still has air superiority, if the airfields are not taken out, and he can strafe you to pieces no matter where you try to hide.

Airfield security is the reason why the British invented the RAF Regiment, whose main role is defending airfields, after the massive screw ups in Crete 1941 where friendly forces gave up Maleme to the Germans, resulting in the loss of the Island despite massive German casualties.
@Kirkhill D&B explained it far better than I did. Unless you have air superiority, its a risky endeavour.

Additionally, often at times you have no idea what's on that airfield until you're there. Commercial runways aren't always single use (except in the Canadian context).

I remember landing in Larnaca and seeing a lovely International Airport that would put Calgary to shame.... with AD batteries and a fair few fighter aircraft tucked away on the back end of the Airfield. I would hate to assume that the soft civilian airfield was a viable target, then have reality come and fuck my day up.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,365
Points
1,160
@Kirkhill D&B explained it far better than I did. Unless you have air superiority, its a risky endeavour.

Additionally, often at times you have no idea what's on that airfield until you're there. Commercial runways aren't always single use (except in the Canadian context).

I remember landing in Larnaca and seeing a lovely International Airport that would put Calgary to shame.... with AD batteries and a fair few fighter aircraft tucked away on the back end of the Airfield. I would hate to assume that the soft civilian airfield was a viable target, then have reality come and fuck my day up.

The (much maligned) RAF Regt had Scimitar, amongst other toys.

Trying to take out an airfield defended with those, with 'meat bombs' like us, might just result in some lethal track rash ;)
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,530
Points
1,060
On 19 October 200 Rangers from the 3rd Ranger Battalion (75th Ranger Regiment) departed from four Lockheed MC-130 aircraft towards a desert landing strip south of the city, codenamed "Objective Rhino", supported by 750 U.S. soldiers from the United States Army's 101st Airborne Division to create a forward base at Camp Rhino, 100 miles south of Kandahar.[citation needed]


You can't be everywhere.

And I agree you need clear skies - locally, for a while.

As to using meat bombs - There is a reason David Stirling switched the Special Air Service to Jeeps for raiding airfields in North Africa. An exchange that is echoed by the Light Cavalry perhaps?
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,530
Points
1,060
The (much maligned) RAF Regt had Scimitar, amongst other toys.

Trying to take out an airfield defended with those, with 'meat bombs' like us, might just result in some lethal track rash ;)


Scimitars - 30mm Rardens and 7.62mm Coax on tracks used for airfield defence

TAPV - originally designed for airfield defense as the V100 with the turret used on the AVGP Grizzly (12.7/7.62mm)

LAV - 25 mm Bushmaster and 7.72mm Coax on wheels evolved from the AVGP Grizzly



A sound basis for a Canadian militia structure - A RAF Regiment Squadron - 171 troops complete with 81mm mortars, ATGMs, SAMs and a LAV/TAPV group of 4 to 6 vehicles.
 

Blackadder1916

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,166
Points
1,160
I remember landing in Larnaca and seeing a lovely International Airport that would put Calgary to shame....

And Larnaca International Airport was only developed because the main airport on the island, Nicosia International Airport, was one of the contested targets during the 1974 invasion by Turkey.

This is what the contest looked like.

Nicosia airport 2.jpg


Nicosia airport 1.jpg
 

rmc_wannabe

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,903
Points
1,310
And Larnaca International Airport was only developed because the main airport on the island, Nicosia International Airport was one of the contested targets during the 1974 invasion by Turkey.
Necessity is the mother of all invention after all. I'll stop derailing the thread :)
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,365
Points
1,160
Scimitars - 30mm Rardens and 7.62mm Coax on tracks used for airfield defence

TAPV - originally designed for airfield defense as the V100 with the turret used on the AVGP Grizzly (12.7/7.62mm)

LAV - 25 mm Bushmaster and 7.72mm Coax on wheels evolved from the AVGP Grizzly



A sound basis for a Canadian militia structure - A RAF Regiment Squadron - 171 troops complete with 81mm mortars, ATGMs, SAMs and a LAV/TAPV group of 4 to 6 vehicles.

The British have an 'expeditionary' air force, which justifies the need for a committed airfield defence capability in some pretty dodgy parts of the world. The USAF is in a similar boat (plane?).

We don't.

So the need for a special airfield defence force is probably not there for Canada, IMHO.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,530
Points
1,060
What do the different symbols signify? C130/C17 dots and C5 airplane circles?

Not sure. I took the map from this site.


Here is an alternate presentation from CAPA

1659546189126.png

The British have an 'expeditionary' air force, which justifies the need for a committed airfield defence capability in some pretty dodgy parts of the world. The USAF is in a similar boat (plane?).

We don't.

So the need for a special airfield defence force is probably not there for Canada, IMHO.

With or without the need for an expeditionary force I suggest that the Airfield/Port defence role would provide a much needed training and organizational focus for the Canadian Militia - something that can be used to teach basic skills and provide a learning platform for the organization. Something that could make the incorporation of formed reserve subunits into the full time force easier.

And learning how to defend Calgary or Nanaimo Airport, then transposing those skills to Churchill and Alert would make it easy to provide forces for the defence of Thule, Kirkenes or Lviv airports - freeing up allied troops and our own regulars.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,365
Points
1,160
Not sure. I took the map from this site.


Here is an alternate presentation from CAPA

View attachment 72335



With or without the need for an expeditionary force I suggest that the Airfield/Port defence role would provide a much needed training and organizational focus for the Canadian Militia - something that can be used to teach basic skills and provide a learning platform for the organization. Something that could make the incorporation of formed reserve subunits into the full time force easier.

And learning how to defend Calgary or Nanaimo Airport, then transposing those skills to Churchill and Alert would make it easy to provide forces for the defence of Thule, Kirkenes or Lviv airports - freeing up allied troops and our own regulars.

In empathy with my 'Brylcreemed' colleagues may I just say that the last thing you need is reservists running around on an active airfield.

Believe me.

It was bad enough with regular force 'elite' troops ;)
 

TacticalTea

Sr. Member
Reaction score
859
Points
910
Not sure. I took the map from this site.


Here is an alternate presentation from CAPA

View attachment 72335



With or without the need for an expeditionary force I suggest that the Airfield/Port defence role would provide a much needed training and organizational focus for the Canadian Militia - something that can be used to teach basic skills and provide a learning platform for the organization. Something that could make the incorporation of formed reserve subunits into the full time force easier.

And learning how to defend Calgary or Nanaimo Airport, then transposing those skills to Churchill and Alert would make it easy to provide forces for the defence of Thule, Kirkenes or Lviv airports - freeing up allied troops and our own regulars.
Airfield defence is something the reserve brigades already exercise for, to a degree.

I'm not sure we need to do any more, as opposed to acquire what we need for that task. That is, AMD capabilities.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,530
Points
1,060
In empathy with my 'Brylcreemed' colleagues may I just say that the last thing you need is reservists running around on an active airfield.

Believe me.

It was bad enough with regular force 'elite' troops ;)

's funny that. Because that is exactly what I saw running around Swedish and Danish airfields (mixed civ/mil use) as well as ports and harbours when I used to muck around Scandinavia.

But I guess we're different like that.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,530
Points
1,060
Airfield defence is something the reserve brigades already exercise for, to a degree.

I'm not sure we need to do any more, as opposed to acquire what we need for that task. That is, AMD capabilities.

I'm glad to hear that - but it is that "to a degree" qualifier coupled with the "fitted for not with" mentality that defines the entirety of the CAF that bothers me.

Why not make it the focus of the effort? With that focus you might even find it easier to justify the purchase of appropriate kit to perform the task.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,530
Points
1,060
UK buying 513 of the new model Light Weight Command Launch Units for the Javelins -

300,000,000 USD

Also included are Javelin LWCLU Basic Skills Trainers (BSTs); Javelin Outdoor Trainers (JOTs); Javelin Vehicle Launcher Electronics (JVL-Es); Javelin LWCLU Train the Trainer Package; Lifecycle Support; System Integration and Check out (SICO); Javelin Operator Manual; Technical Assistance (TAGM); and other related elements of logistical and program support.



the Javelin “can be deployed from multiple platforms and used during the day, at night and in any kind of weather. The program has also demonstrated that Javelin can be fired from a remote launcher mounted on an unmanned ground vehicle,”
 
Top