[serious] Canadian Airfield Ground Defense

[bc1871]

Though the "meatheads" do a decent job when it comes to base provost duties, and WASF provides a decent force protection element in country, the Canadian Air Force does not have the appropriate or necessary resources in place to protect its air assets in hostile parts of the world. A ground defense unit, similar to the RAF Regiment would be the preferable option for providing ground defense to Canadian air assets.

[bc1871]

Also Asher, don't ruin this thread. I would like to attempt to have a semi-serious discussion on this issue...or at least as serious as discussions in the off-topic forum can get. If you want to have a sci-fi thread, go make your own.

[Lorizael]

Per the thread creator's implied request, this thread is now serious. Keep it relatively on topic, please.

[BeBMan]

Not just the Nazis, all of Germany (which was all Nazi anyway!)

[KrazyHorse]

Canada is at peace and has no plausible conventional ground threat to its forces at home. The idea that places like Canada or the US or UK or similar should have every defense installation hardened against coordinated conventional attack IN PEACETIME is ridiculous, a complete waste of resources.

Agreed.

[Patroklos]

Though the "meatheads" do a decent job when it comes to base provost duties, and WASF provides a decent force protection element in country, the Canadian Air Force does not have the appropriate or necessary resources in place to protect its air assets in hostile parts of the world. A ground defense unit, similar to the RAF Regiment would be the preferable option for providing ground defense to Canadian air assets.

Are you trying to imply that Canadian air assets deployed to hostile territory do not enjoy the protection of attached army defenses?

[BlackCat]

Are you trying to imply that Canadian air assets deployed to hostile territory do not enjoy the protection of attached army defenses?

Dat's true - canuck airplanes are only allowed to park on the civilian car park outside the defense perimeter - if they try to park inside, they will be towed away

[SlowwHand]

Do they have valet parking?

[Japher]

only serious,

trolls ignore the seriously serious threads

[SpencerH]

Canada is at peace and has no plausible conventional ground threat to its forces at home. The idea that places like Canada or the US or UK or similar should have every defense installation hardened against coordinated conventional attack IN PEACETIME is ridiculous, a complete waste of resources.

I had the opportunity to have a friendly look-over of some of the defenses on a US airbase about a year prior to the adventure I mentioned previously and I can say that the defenses were much more 'stout' than those we bypassed.

Perhaps, you're not getting the picture. This was a low tech infiltration of an airbase by small teams armed with nothing more ferocious than submachine guns and explosives. No night vision, no body armour, no stun grenades, ie no snazzy stuff one might see on such a group today. IMO, it could have been done by any group of reasonably well trained men (for very little money). I think we could've stolen a jet if we had had a pilot. Certainly, there was nothing to stop us doing so.

[Patroklos]

I had the opportunity to have a friendly look-over of some of the defenses on a US airbase about a year prior to the adventure I mentioned previously and I can say that the defenses were much more 'stout' than those we bypassed.

I have never been stationed/lived/served on any US base I could not easily gain access to with a set of wire cutters and dark clothing.

Perhaps, you're not getting the picture. This was a low tech infiltration of an airbase by small teams armed with nothing more ferocious than submachine guns and explosives. No night vision, no body armour, no stun grenades, ie no snazzy stuff one might see on such a group today. IMO, it could have been done by any group of reasonably well trained men (for very little money). I think we could've stolen a jet if we had had a pilot. Certainly, there was nothing to stop us doing so.

Yes, I have had the pleasure of participating in these sorts of things and they are almost universally BS. The testers assume everything they set up works perfectly. They forget to simulate things like the sounds of explosions and gunfire going off and warning people, huge plums of smoke, the fact that as testers you have no fear of anything, that in reality you have to noticable destroy security barriers, etc. etc. ets. Sorry, but such "training" has always proved universally useless whenever I have encountered it.

But thats not the point. The point is the resources required to reliably and universally protect such large installations from such small unit clandestine penetration is even more wasteful. So you blow up a few F-16s, what would cost to build triple layerd razor wired electric fenses around a 30 square mile base that is also patroled by dogs and has 20 foot verical steel bars burried below it to prevent tunneling?

[bc1871]

I have found that depending on the air base, the force protection level varies quite extremely. CFB Winnipeg for Example, has a very poor force protection status, while on the other hand places like Cold Lake seem to have a much more elevated security state, while Comox tends to offer an interesting mix, of fp. Personally, I still think that the navy offers the best force protection option, as both Halifax and Esquimalt, have both their own sustained and continually operating force protection units, supported by the MP's for provost. As for US Air bases, having both known airmen who served in the security forces field, and having seen a few US AFB's for myself, I have to admit, depending on which base, and what their tasking is, the security forces can be everything from extremely overworked to extremely bored. I think when it comes to base defense in the CONUS, the security network set up to defend airbases is not as robust as when the AFSF are deployed. The largest problem, is that the CAF does not have one well established force protection organization, and instead is forced to rely on a strange mix of alternatives and units.

[bc1871]

Another interesting option, would be to cross train "meatheads" who join the airforce. After all, the former RCAF Service Police/Air Force Police performed both tasks of security and provost...though unfortunately the trade suffered from high turnover rates. Another option, would be to make any airfield defense trade a remuster trade, which would provide us with airmen who have multiple skills outside of simply being a PPCLI reject. I would also see it as important and necessary to bring in a proper dog section(though the RCAF over the years, had a dog section while in Europe, it was never implemented back home).

[Patroklos]

I think the problem is you play too much metal gear solid. Real military bases are not fortifications.

[Asher]

I've been to CFB Cold Lake and CFB Wainwright and I'm not sure why anyone needs to defend them.