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

CMMA - replacing the CP140 Aurora

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,107
Points
1,160
Figure it’s worth starting a separate thread.

 

GK .Dundas

Sr. Member
Reaction score
599
Points
760
Oh goodie, another thirty year procurement programme for an aircraft that may only have a five to ten year lifespan. Buckle up kids, it's about to get interesting... again.
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
6,593
Points
1,260
Oh goodie, another thirty year procurement programme for an aircraft that may only have a five to ten year lifespan. Buckle up kids, it's about to get interesting... again.
Or we can go full RAF and get rid of the capability.

Ask them how well that turned out.
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Legend
Donor
Reaction score
6,998
Points
1,010
Or we can go full RAF and get rid of the capability.

Ask them how well that turned out.
So well that they are scrambling to buy P-8s and relearn ASW.

Of course, we would probably just learn to do without…
 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
6,593
Points
1,260
I think that Uncle Sam’s strong arm (sharp tongue) will result in us joining Team Poseidon like the other four of the FVEYs.
I think that the fact that there is no other proven flying airframe would push us that way.

Yes, the P-1 exists. Is Japan allowed to sell it?

Edit: Proven, flying airframe that meets our range/endurance requirements. C-295 ASW won't cut it.
 

SeaKingTacco

Army.ca Legend
Donor
Reaction score
6,998
Points
1,010
I think that the fact that there is no other proven flying airframe would push us that way.

Yes, the P-1 exists. Is Japan allowed to sell it?

Edit: Proven, flying airframe that meets our range/endurance requirements. C-295 ASW won't cut it.
Nor will the Q-400…
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
11,995
Points
1,360
That would be another ‘decent’ platform, but hard to argue the “Do what the other four of the FVEYs are doing” logic.
 

FJAG

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
6,841
Points
1,040
I'm just an Army guy but with 150 of these already in service, many with our key allies, and on a 737 airframe that bloody WestJet could maintain for us in a pinch - really - what's there to think about?

:unsure:
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,107
Points
1,160
Oh goodie, another thirty year procurement programme for an aircraft that may only have a five to ten year lifespan. Buckle up kids, it's about to get interesting... again.

So. The US, Kiwis, Aussies, Brits and Norwegians are all “getting it wrong”? And India? Germany?

Where are you getting 30 year procurement and 5-10 lifespan from?
 
Last edited:

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,107
Points
1,160
Or we can go full RAF and get rid of the capability.

Ask them how well that turned out.

I seem to remember getting some free trips to Scotland to play in their AO after they let their fleet go…

😃
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,107
Points
1,160
My first question to DH and Bombardier would be "so, how do you plan on carrying torpedoes?"

There was a discussion about that… in the 140
Thread a month or so ago IIRC?

*edit not the 140 thread…


The Q400 might the only runner on the prop side. As much as I always say we should look at the Sea Herc…
 

Edward Campbell

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
2,621
Points
1,160
I think that Uncle Sam’s strong arm (sharp tongue) will result in us joining Team Poseidon like the other four of the FVEYs.
Agreed! I suspect this meeting was a bit one-sided. It wasn't just the GOB* who was/is frustrated with Canada's constant freeloading and, especially, with Prime Minister Trudeau's hypocrisy.
---
*GOB: Great Orange Buffoondonald-trump-shouting-cartoon-american-flag-vector-27071852.png
 
Top