Let's talk with Noah (Special Mega Edition) (11/16/25): Lot's on CDC, Asterix, F-35 numbers, Victoria-class update.

Happy… Sunday?

Thats right, we're doing this a day early AGAIN! I felt kinda bad that I didnt give you guys a proper opinion piece this week. I know you all said it was fine, expecially with the podcast, but I still feel a bit bad.

So, not only do we have Let's Talk a day early BUT I'm taking the time to make this the largest yet! Twenty-Five questions! Thats insane lol. I love how engaged you guy's are this week.

As always you can ask your questions, and vote on others, over on our Slido page. It will be up until Monday! A lot of you sent stuff in DMs also but I prefer the stuff there as it can be voted on and also kept open to everyone. If you enjoy my content also consider supporting TNSR over on our Kofi!

---

Q1. It would be terribly romantic, but do you Canada could at all consider a small, combat-oriented helicopter carrier class? Perhaps an improved San Giorgio class

San Giorgio itself? A cute concept. Howeever with any sort of Amphibious Assault Ship, no matter that be a Helicopter Carrier, Landing Platform Dock, or whatever you want you need to ask what you want to do with it.

Could Canada consider a ship like this? Absolutely. We had the Vice-Admiral mentioning GLAAM yesterday! Granted a lot of that is less the navies own desires and more getting ahead on government desire for the navy to have heavy Icebreakers.

GLAAM fits well because of all the different capabilities it tries to pack into it's hull, and the desire for some sort of supplement to the lack of permanent infrastructure in the Arctic. We do have Nuuk, which is a great example of the benefit of alloed infrastructure but it's still not ours.

GLAAM is not a true, flattop Helicopter Carrier. I don't think we will ever see that. However it falls into a very similar category. That I think is entirely possible, and you can read all about it in my Let's Talk about GLAAM.

Q2. What is to become of MV Asterix? Will we keep her? It seems shortsighted to me to let her go with only 2 Protecteurs.

Once her contract is done that's it. She will no longer be contracted to us, and Federal Fleet will be free to shop her around to others. The demand is there. I know other countries have exressed interest in leasing her. She is gonna make Inocea a shitton of money.

We still have the option to buy her but we won't. The cost isnt worth her and truthfully? We don't need her once Protecteur and Preserver are in service. She is very expensive to lease. She isn't cheap, and with nearly a a decade before the first River-class and potentially Corvettes are in service? The need isnt there.

Now, the navy has discussed more JSS. The truth is that we have always needed four. That's always been the requirement. However any such chooce on that will come down the line. We also have GLAAM is discussion, which adds to this dynamic as I can't see both it and two more JSS.

Q3. Is replacing the TAPV being discussed?

Its future is being discussed, but there's no replacement in the works if thats what you're asking. That mught come, but I have not heard it.

Q4. Has there been any thought about restoring a reg duty army base in BC (unlikely imo) since the closure of CFB Chilliwack (a mistake to me) there are none

Not that I have heard, sorry. Many know I am one of those who rails against the closing of a lot of thr urban bases in the 90s, so I'm always open to such ideas. However I have not heard it disvussed myself in the realm of Army Restructuring.

Q5. If you had a blank slate and a reasonably large budget to rebuild the navy, what types and/or class's would you choose to make the most effective navy for us?

Do exactly as done now lol. Okay, I would shoft some things, but the current plans are about as reasonably high-end as we can get. 15 Rivers, 12 Submarines, 8 or so Corvettes, AOPS… Thats a lot right there, add on the potential for a school of Inshore Patrol Boats scattered around the Great Lakes, coasts and St. Lawrence? Thats a lot of capability right there.

LUSV are in the plans, XLUUV. I don't think theres much that isn't in the books, which itself is quite a testament and amazing in itself. Honestly add on two JSS/GLAAM, I wouldn't complain about either, and two or three vessels dedicated to submarine support/rescue? And I can't think of much else that would be needed.

A lot is also added by the CCG, which is often forgotten in these conversations.

Q6. Does a sustained 3.5% GDP CAF just looks like a bigger version of itself or does it look quite different with new capabilities. e.g new bases, marines, bombers?

It looks very different, just not always in the ways you think. A 3.5% CAF means athat a lot of projects that might have been doomed by lack of fujds now have a chance. Stuff like Underwater Environmental Awareness? That becomes a lot more likely. LUSV? Corvettes? Those also become realistic with a 3.5% CAF.

A 3.5% CAF means initiatives like NTACS can explore more niche capabilities. It means that we can look at a full order on projects like IFM. It means we can start looking more at Integrated Air and Missile Defence. It means a lot.

It means replacing a lot of thr infrastructure that we have been unable to fund. That means more than a lot of the post-war, fifties-era Infrastructure being replaced, which has been a constant chase to do. We can start talking more about expansion of infrastructure than replacement. It means we can start talking about larger housing projects.

It means things like Domestic-Launch. It means that Space-based Infrastructure like Surveillance of Space, Ground-Based Optical Capability, even offensive capabilities in space can now be explored. It means just about anything.

We have around a hundred different projects on the books. We have tens of billions of infrastructure to replace. We have a training ceiling that will take billions to expand the capacity we need. 3.5% means that a lot of these go from infeasable, from to expensive to at least possible.

Thats the big thing. It isnt what it will do, its the opportunities and the relief it provides. Theres over a billion dollars in maintinence backlog on the Halifax alone. Stretch that out across a CAF that has been starving, that doesnt have the stockpiles it needs.

Dont look at it as a new suit, look at it like a shot from the defibrillator. It is the future lifeline that will keep all of this sustainable. That CAF looks different from anything we've ever had. There is no historical comparison, not World War II, not the late fifties. It is it's own beast.

Q7. Any discussion of WWII style sub pens to protect CPSP against drones or other similar threats?

Not that I have heard. Stuff like that is likely to be discussed later down the road when we start to dive deeper into infrastructure.

Q8. Any rumors about buying the new cv90 tank variant? (And other cv90 mods?)

There are no plans for a Tank replacement anytime soon, so no. The next project for something like that is MEDCAV.

Q09. Stick with the 16 F35, acquire Gripen as required. Would that mix meet Canada’s NATO and NORAD requirements?

No, because 16 F-35 isnt even enough for one squadron. You could get away with 32 for a single squadron but it'll be tight. You have to consider stuff like training, attrition, inventory, etc when discussing this stuff. You can't just look at the ‘base’ combat-coded fighter that make up a squadron.

So for example, if a typical squadron in X Air Force has 18 combat-coded fighters in its fleet, you don't need just 18. You need to consider all of the above factors. For the U.S. Air Force you're looking at I believe ~50% increase on the total numbers because of those factors.

So the actual number is closer to 27-28, although different people will have different calculations. You can also afford to cut some of these numbers, obviously, so it gets a bit tricky. The principle remains the same though. 32 is the minimum viable for a single squadron of F-35.

Q10. Do think Canada could be pulled into a major conflict soon? Seeing as how American warships are stationed near Venezuela and tensions seem to be escalating.

Yes. Its not some open secret that we're planning for such a scenario. We know there are numerous flashpoints across the Indo-Pacific, Europe, Middle East and now our own backyard that can quickly escalate.

Thats why we have people like CDS Carignan stressing the five-year timeline for needed to be prepared. Thats why we talk about needing to start being ready for 2030. It isnt a secret, its a ticking clock hanging above our heads.

The chance we get dragged into things is high, no matter how much some people would like to believe we are safe and secure here.

Q11. I’m not in the military unless service in the 60’s militia counts so I could really use an info sheet for the various acronyms used. Really enjoy your writing.

Thank you! I plan to put together a list for people eventually, at least of my most used terms lol

Q12. Could a variant of the European Patrol Corvette program be a good fit for CDC?

Unlikely. We have some pretty specific demands, especially with the need for some sort of Ice-capability. The Navy also wants to be supportive of local designers. Its a capability and a group we want to keep, so they need work to do.

So its unlikely we will take much of a look at it.

Q13. Who is going to have capacity to even build anything like CDC in Canada before 2035? Heard of anyone doing a broad industry capacity study of the NSS yards(3)?

There is constant communication and review of the various shipyards across Canada, even beyond the big three. We have a fairly good idea of what each yard is capable of, and what yards have the ability to do more. Whether they are given those chances? That's up to government. However there is a system in place to understand capacity and be in communication with yards across Canada.

As for capacity? Irving is out but Davies has it. They have the TC Ferries and Program Icebreakers on the docket but there still capacity to do CDC. Seaspan also apparently could make capacity, although I should follow up with them about how thats looking with the MPI.

Smaller yards like Ontario, depending on the size and svale of the platform, also have the capacity to build Corvettes. Groupe Ocean likely could. Chantier COULD with the right investments be able to do it. The medium-sized yards could tackle a Corvette, though there is risk.

So its entirely possible to do it. We just need the initative and the mandate to get it done.

Q14. Is one of the options of the fighter review a full order of F-35 plus Gripens?

Not that I have seen. I doubt it is.

Q15. With Sweden attempting to increase ties to Canada are CV-90s a potential option for MEDCAV or does General Dynamics have the inside track for MEDCAV?

If GDLS-C is involved than assume they are likely to get it. They're THE company here, and hold that institutional power that comes with that. Everyone else is fighting an unhill battle against them. That doesnt mean they will always win, but it means everyone else has to work harder to get it.

GDLS-C can dangle a lot of jobs and a lot of investment.

Q16. Do you think cms 330 has export potential to other European navies after Germany's adoption?

Assuming it fully goes through? Than yeah, I think the potential is there. In my books its the best CMS not named AEGIS on planet Earth. It just needs those buys of confidence.

Q17. I've heard rumours of Canadian SF along with American and British Sf operating in Ukraine, what's your thoughts, mainly support or actual combat roles?

Support, Training, and protection of diplomatic facilities. All of which I support. The more we can give to Ukraine the better in my books. I'm more aggressive than most there though.

Q18. Much talk about CDC requirements and the upkeep savings by retiring Vic Class early -why is no one talking about massive savings of early Halifax retirement?

Because it is not planned. We won't be getting the River or CDC into service until ~2035. We quite literally need to keep the Halifax going just to avoid critical gaps because new platforms aint coming online fast enough.

Q19. Where are we parking all this new navy fleet when it arrives, and who is going to crew them? Musk's Optimus robots???

I actually recommend my podcast with Vice-Admiral Topshee because he does go into a lot of this stuff.

Q20. Any rumors going around regarding shipbuilding trade recruitment education programs to attract graduates or even a US SAWS like program for Canada?

I actually spoke to the Vice-Admiral about this yesterday! See above! The Navy is exploring a lot of different ways to modernize recruitment and training. Programs like this are certainly part of the conversation. Will they become a thing? Maybe. That is up in the air for what comes of the ongoing work.

Q21. We dont have capacity to build CDC in Canada. Considering every second that passes is lost purchasing power, why wouldnt we build CDC in Europe & sustain here?

See above. We could do it if we wanted, in the timelines we want. There is capacity around. It might just take more investment and accepting some risk, whoch for the Navy is worth it to have thay capscity domestically. Thats why we have NSS, even if I have my own criticisms.

Q22. Great talk with VA Topshee, he mentioned critical need for training vessels. Recent news has CG retiring Hero Class. Could these vessels be repurposed for RCN?

The Hero-class is done. There is no future for them. However the Stan Patrol family remains a possibility, so long as we don't fuck it up this time. The Sentinel-class that the USCG uses, themselves Stan Patrol 4708s, presents a possible option. Personally I see this as an opportunity to tie together both thr Orca and Hero-class projects together.

That comes though when we understand plans, requirements, etc. Until we know what everyone wants we can inly speculate. Other companies like Vard also offer potential solutions in the 7 045 and 7 055 models. We just have to wait and see how close requirements align and what exactly is wanted.

Q23. Based on Topshee saying the CDC may not need an embarked helo, has he mentioned whether a flight deck would still be required?

There will still be a deck capable of supporting UAS, at the least. It just might not be large enough to support a Cyclone. UAS will play a very important role in the future, and CDC is being planned from the start as being Autonomous-ready in support of various Autonomous systems Above, on, and below the water.

Q24. Weren't two Victoria's just sailing? What happened to them? I haven't heard anything. Is there some secret going on?

No conspiracy. Windsor and Corner Brook are who you're thinking of. Windsor and Victoria are both in extended refit (technically Victoria has a while) and Corner Brook is getting a battery change right about now, at least very soon? Thats a few months she'll be out. So everyone is out for dreaded maintinence.

Chicoutimi is done.

Q25. If you interview Topshee again, what would you do?

It would be almost entirely historical. I REALLY wanted to ask more historical stuf My only concern is if everyone would like that if I start going in on like naming conventions and such.

One cool thing would be to tie each project to its historical links. I kinda did that with CASSEV and trying to highlight the River-St. Laurent similarities, but going through the history and then looking at the modern examples feels fun, like the mythical twelve number for Submarines. The Brock report mentioned twelve, CASAP looked at up to twelve. Its interesting to bring up that historical number and dive deep into it.

---

Remember that you can ask your questions for next week by following this link. Dont be afraid to ask multiple questions if you like!

---

Let's Talk is proudly supported by

dominion-dynamics.com

Dominion Dynamics is developing Canada's next-generation Arctic command layer, unifying sensors, autonomous systems, and operators across all domains into a single real-time operating picture. Their energy- efficient, low-latency C2 architecture is purpose-built for extreme northern conditions and fully interoperable with both legacy and future systems, strengthening sovereign capabilities, improving joint decision-making, and enabling adaptable, integrated defence and security operations across Canada's Arctic.