Canada Cannot Into Marine Deck

[RoadkillRodger]

The strengthened suspension is important if you don't want your aircraft to collapse on itself the first time it tries a carrier landing, though.
Nevermind, they still retained them along with folding wings.

However, Canadian pilots do not practice carrier takeoff and landings, and there's no way in hell any navy would let such unqualified pilots try to land on their carriers. Even in wartime.

It is probably the single biggest step towards making mixed/norad marines a competitive deck though. Pretend that sometime in the 90s the Canadian government ran a pilot training exchange with American naval units.

[Xeno426]

It is probably the single biggest step towards making mixed/norad marines a competitive deck though. Pretend that sometime in the 90s the Canadian government ran a pilot training exchange with American naval units.

Carrier landing is a perishable skill, so it wouldn't be a simple exchange program because they would have to keep practicing and making their carrier quals.

That's a lot of training time and money (plus pilots not available for other duties) to do something that Canada as a whole completely lacks. Plus everyone else's carriers are rather full with their own carrier aircraft. Where the heck would the Canadians fit in?

[captaincarnage]

Why are we getting hung up on Aircraft having to be carrier capable to appear in the Marine tab? I we pursued this line of logic then half of the air tabs in marine decks would be empty

Adding the Canadian hornets to the marine spec would make NORAD and Commonwealth Marine playable - its ridiculous that you can select that speciality as a coalition and yet you can hardly access any of the bleeding units beyond a few random ones. From an authenticity perspective you can't make the argument Canadian aircraft shouldn't be in the Marine spec because their pilots can't land on carriers without advocating that an awful lot of other aircraft are removed from the same spec, with only nations which could field an actual aircraft carrier being allowed to deploy planes within the marine spec.

[RoadkillRodger]

It is probably the single biggest step towards making mixed/norad marines a competitive deck though. Pretend that sometime in the 90s the Canadian government ran a pilot training exchange with American naval units.

Carrier landing is a perishable skill, so it wouldn't be a simple exchange program because they would have to keep practicing and making their carrier quals.

That's a lot of training time and money (plus pilots not available for other duties) to do something that Canada as a whole completely lacks. Plus everyone else's carriers are rather full with their own carrier aircraft. Where the heck would the Canadians fit in?

I completely agree that under normal conditions Canada has zero need/desire to train their pilots for carrier landings with the CF18, especially given that the skill isn't retained over prolonged periods.

That said, you didn't address the playability concern as far as marine decks are concerned. I personally think that it's 'what-iffy' enough to happen in the alternate universe WG represents. We've already got fulcrums from Poland and EGer in redfor marine decks, nations which never operated them as such (afaik).

[Bullfrog]

Why does it mater if CF-18s are taking off from a carrier or not.

[KattiValk]

Considering Canada itself doesn't even have the Marine spec open to them, and that ANZAC Hornets are already in Marine, this effectively serves as a representation of other countries' Hornets in the Marine tab.

If we're worried about space on carriers then we can rest assured that taxi space for air superiority fighters is decidedly open on US ones.

[BeyondNight]

Why does it mater if CF-18s are taking off from a carrier or not.

it doesn't, im pretty sure some USN aircraft have operated from land bases regularly during conflicts as well.

[Trimen]

US Marine Fighters operate from land as well as carriers.

What is the reason as to why realism must only pertain to things that involve the US? LAV no longer transport cause it could only fit 5- 6 fully equipped soldiers or no MH-6 Delta transports cause they only carried 4 operators, yet there are many clown cars and helos just in the Russian selection alone. If a semblance of realism must be adhered to, then apply that test universally not specifically.

Canadian ASF in NRD/CMW Marine decks is not balance breaking. Nor is adding the Mexas or LAV III. I cannot see the Chimera fitting in. Mexas would be easily deploy-able via LCAC or other landing Craft.

It's sad that the best Air superiority unit in the US/NORAD arsenal is a helicopter