Let's talk with Noah (9/22/25): A400, We have to many trucks, CAMM

Good Evening everyone,

I apologize that this is a bit later in the night, and a day late. I have had a very busy few days! I also apologize for this one being a bit short. The weekend and last week was packed, and this week is looking to be even busier.

However this is still a fun week, and im sure this is a fun AMA for all you!

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. Why have we procured so many 8x8 chassis types? Macks, Zetros, and now HX. Why not standardize on one, with axle variants, instead of adding another part chain?

The Zetros was supposed to fix this lol. The idea behind the Zetros was a common chassis to buiod the fleet around. Sadly, that doesnt really work at this time.

The HX comes from the Zetros not being selected in ERC. This isnt to disregard the HX. It is a wonderful platform and the recovery variant is apparently amazing. I see why it was chosen.

However this is what happens when you don't coordinate projects and treat each one independently of each other. You get the case where you are running things like multiple Class 8 trucks, each designed for a specific role that could have been filled by one platform.

Realistically the Navis are past thwir life and we should be looking to acquire more Zetros to replace them. The numbers for LVM were already far to low as is.

SMP are also starting to get a bit older. Realistically, a continuous model of procurement, acquiring a set number of Zetros each year to slowly phase out at least the MILCOTS fleets would be ideal.

Once we get HIMARS we will also have a few FMTV running around! If we do decide to keep the abysmal amount of fleets, I vote for a Hino or Tatra next.

Q2. Is there any discussion about keeping the VLS amidships on the RCD even though CAMM is gone? A tactical length 8 cell Mk 41 for ESSM would fit perfectly there.

I don't know what will be going into that space, however I know it won't be MK.41. There are no plans that I know of, and I believe that there would be some issues trying to put even a Tactical length set there. That I would need to look more into.

But yeah, no plans that I know.

Q3. Were Boeing to restart production on the C17, do you see Canada adding to its fleet. The Current fleet seems to be in heavy demand.?

With the Army moving to a Division structure, the inevitable discussion in or Air and Sealift capabilities will inevitable come up. The CC-177 are well loved. Theyre an amazing asset. I have little doubt the RCAF would love to add to the fleet.

The current fleet is well used, and while still in good shape, they wont last forever, amd are always in demand.

The Huskys will help in some regard there, with their own cargo capabilities, however thats more relief than anything. If production did restart, picking up a few more would be highly beneficial IMO.

Q4. What is a capability that you would like the CAF to add outside of obvious ones like GBAD

I talk about it all the time but Sealift, see above. Its a capability we need, especially when, again, discussing the logistics of moving a Division. With Europe still our primary focus, the ability to move assets across the Atlantic independently (away from allied or private hands) is an imperative.

This doesnt have to be a LPD or LHD. It can easily be something along the lines of thr Point-Class Ro/Ro. It doesnt need to be expensive, nor complex.

There is even more possibilities if we talk about a potential civilian lease role, but thats for another day.

Q5. Similar to the C 17 q, do you think we should acquire something like the A400m to complement the C17s

I like the A400. I know its a popular choice among many. The C130 is great, however admittedly its small size is starting to become a noted discussion topic, especially as vehicles get bigger and bigger.

That isnt to say that its a sure absolute, there is still the question of infrastructure that will need to be upgraded or built to accommodate them, and all the things that come with it.

Also, while the A400 can land at many of the remote airstrip up north, it is still a bit of a sacrifice switching to it from the C130. All things to consider.

Q6. Do you see Canada, 20 or 30 years down the road, becoming more aggressive in the arctic once there is a public diet for that and we have the assets to do it?

Thats hard to predict. Anything beyond a decade is hard to give any concrete on. Look at the world 10 years ago to now lol. I do think it would take some major incidents to see us become more ‘Aggressive’ as you say. Keep in mind, by 2040, we will have a much more expansive fleet North, P8, F35, OTHR… The assets will be there, however I think we will see a lot more of the same.

The big issues in the North aint military related. Thats the facts. Those issues will continue to dominate the foreseeable future.

Q7. Has Roshel explored advanced suspension upgrades, such as Liquid Spring, to boost the Senator’s off-road capability, ride comfort, and performance?

I have no idea, but if I ever hear on it I'll let you know lol

Q8. What new munitions are we planning to get for the F-35s. I know we are, but news on the multitude of relatively small projects on that front seems to be sparse.

New Short, Medium, and Long Range Air-to-Air missiles will be acquired. Those are the big ones. Timelines are a bit in flux for all of them. My understanding is that really only the Long Range Air-to-Air Missile is looking for a new capability, while more AIM-9 and AIM-120 will be procured for the MRAAM and SRAAM.

The working timeline I saw for LRAAM was ~2035ish. Again its in flux as far as I know, so are the requirements. Other than that there isnt much out there publicly, however the acquisition of LRASM for the P-8 will likely also lead to the F-35 eventually getting JASSM at some point to give them a Long-Range strike capability.

Other usual stuff in service, like JDAM will obviously carry over.

Q9. Any update on the LUV project?

Sadly no. Phase I is still planned to drop this year, as I've spoken before, but there isnt much else to say on the project at this time sadly.

Q10. Whats one thing you wish people would stop talking about?

Defence industry people. Please stop calling shit the Arrow. It isnt original. It doesnt fit your product. No product that had used it has even been successful. Why do you keep naming your product after the Arrow when the superior chad that is Canuck exists?

Like, its overused. Its done. Move on. Let. It. Go. All of you. I dont care what it is. Stop it.

Also can we please stop trying to make Churchill a thing? I already did a rant on it a few weeks ago, but let it go. It aint gonna work. It aint even that good an idea.

Build it in Labrador. There. I gave a better idea right there. At least it isnt frozen most of the year, and depending where, is CLOSER than where you need to be than Churchill.

---

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