The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)

[Czech_pivo]

a few non American purchases to send a message are in order. Ones that arent counter productive. Cutting the F35 would not be one of them IMO

we could lease some K2's and get an assembly/production plant in Canada while donating our Leo2's to Ukraine
go ahead with the Globaleye 6500 for AEW
are PULS/Lynx and K239 really inferior to HIMARS?

What about bringing the F35 down in numbers and adding 3 full squadrons, plus trainers/replacements in something else?
Having overall numbers north of 110 airframes.

 

[PuckChaser]

We can't afford to light money on fire. Cutting the order is a stupid COA and will result in a Lockmart lawsuit that we'll lose. If we want more aircraft, buy a 2nd order from some other country and actually increase our capability instead of cheaping out.

 

[Good2Golf]

We can't afford to light money on fire. Cutting the order is a stupid COA and will result in a Lockmart lawsuit that we'll lose. If we want more aircraft, buy a 2nd order from some other country and actually increase our capability instead of cheaping out.

I could go with that. F-35 (65) for NORAD and some NATO, Rafale for expeditionary and working elsewhere NATO doesn’t care but Canada should.

 

[Quirky]

We can't afford to light money on fire. Cutting the order is a stupid COA and will result in a Lockmart lawsuit that we'll lose. If we want more aircraft, buy a 2nd order from some other country and actually increase our capability instead of cheaping out.

Canada runs on feelings, not common sense and rationality.

 

[GR66]

The Blair comment was that we were going to examine if we will acquire ALL 88 planned F-35's. That's how many we currently have PLANNED. We have only ORDERED 16 to my knowledge and the original number PLANNED was 65.

IF we were to get the full 88 fighters we wouldn't expect final delivery until 2032 and FOC in the 2032-2034 timeframe. That of course assumes everything stays on schedule. Despite being the best fighter currently available, there are issues with the F-35. Serviceability remains a stubborn issue and if Elon Musk remains influential in the White House we could potentially see reduced production or even earlier than planned cancellation of the F-35 as Musk is a strong proponent of uncrewed systems over crewed aircraft. This could potentially delay Canada's acquisition or make the spare parts situation worse if the production line closes in favour of UCAVS.

I'd suggest that a viable option could be to continue our purchases up to the originally planned fleet of 65 aircraft. At the same time we see what Canadian industry can offer to the next generation designs that are currently underway...UK/Italy/Japan's GCAP which has an aggressive timeline of production aircraft coming off the line in 2034 or France/Germany/Spain's FCAS program targeted to be in service in 2040.

We continue our F-35 purchases up to the originally planned 65 aircraft and wait and see how GCAP/FCAS are proceeding (or any long shots like Sweden's Flygsystem 2020 or Korea's KF-21 evolution). If any of these are looking like a better option for Canada in the early 2030's we pull the trigger on an initial order of 23 aircraft to bring our total fleet up to the fully planned 88 aircraft along with ongoing future tranches to eventually replace our F-35's as they reach EOL.

If none of the alternate platforms are looking viable and the F-35 remains the best option at that time then we simply order the remaining 23 F-35's to complete our fleet.

No need for big "cancellation" announcements or penalties for breaking contracts...simply adjust our future purchases based on what's the right aircraft for the RCAF at the time. And who knows, maybe by the early 2030's UCAVs will be a better option for completing our fleet and we will be fine with 65 x F-35's and 120 x UCAVs.

 

[MilEME09]

Canada runs on feelings, not common sense and rationality.

So does the white house, but at the extreme end, what good is the F35 if the Americans can reduce it to a paper weight on us?

 

[RangerRay]

My view is to keep the original 65 order and reevaluate after that. Replacing the fighters has already been delayed too long. I don’t see the point in delaying any further.

 

[Good2Golf]

My view is to keep the original 65 order and reevaluate after that. Replacing the fighters has already been delayed too long. I don’t see the point in delaying any further.

I’ll go out in a limb and predict how this will go down aerospace-wise:

1. Canada reviews the F-35 procurement and decides only 65 aircraft are required.
2. France pitches a package of Rafales for Canada and includes an aerospace share effort between France and Canada.
3. Canada establishes a 6-gen ‘way ahead’ sub-activity within FFCP Office, and puts GCAP and FCAS on the list…but for now, not NGAD.

 

[Underway]

We can't afford to light money on fire. Cutting the order is a stupid COA and will result in a Lockmart lawsuit that we'll lose. If we want more aircraft, buy a 2nd order from some other country and actually increase our capability instead of cheaping out.

That new Tempest looks interesting. Air superiority fighter as well. It would pair well with a F-35 which could then focus on strike more readily.

 

[Underway]

So does the white house, but at the extreme end, what good is the F35 if the Americans can reduce it to a paper weight on us?

I think people are overstating this particular situation a bit, more clicks and such. I thought the same with the Aegis system, then some more research and we're not as beholden to the US as originally thought. There is also the option to negotiate a Canadian owned and held package that obsolves us of this particular restriction. Then contract goes ahead as per normal. Besides, by the time the aircraft is IOC in Canada, we'll well be on our way into the next US election cycle which may completely flip the script in a new way again.


I do like the Tempest though that UK/Japan/Italian air superiority fighter they are working on. Mixed fleet might work if we are increasing expendatures.

 

[Good2Golf]

That new Tempest looks interesting. Air superiority fighter as well. It would pair well with a F-35 which could then focus on strike more readily.

Rafale M is the only non-US fighter jet that has integrated and operated from American nuclear aircraft carriers, so people can’t use the ‘it doesn’t integrate with the US’ argument.

Nuclear-capable non-US strike aircraft operating from a US nuclear strike carrier group…how much more integrated could you get??? Seriously!

 

[GR66]

I think people are overstating this particular situation a bit, more clicks and such. I thought the same with the Aegis system, then some more research and we're not as beholden to the US as originally thought. There is also the option to negotiate a Canadian owned and held package that obsolves us of this particular restriction. Then contract goes ahead as per normal. Besides, by the time the aircraft is IOC in Canada, we'll well be on our way into the next US election cycle which may completely flip the script in a new way again.

Re: the highlighted part. Lots of people are counting on the next election to flip the switch back to "normal" relations with the US. The problem is that we have no control over that switch being flipped back again or not. Again, I'm not in the "Anything but American" crowd because frankly the French or the South Koreans, etc. could withhold parts/upgrades/etc. in exactly the same way that the Americans could if they have a falling out with us.

Regardless of where the US heads after the next election we should always have an eye to domestic production and unrestricted use of the IP where it makes sense.

 

[MilEME09]

Re: the highlighted part. Lots of people are counting on the next election to flip the switch back to "normal" relations with the US. The problem is that we have no control over that switch being flipped back again or not. Again, I'm not in the "Anything but American" crowd because frankly the French or the South Koreans, etc. could withhold parts/upgrades/etc. in exactly the same way that the Americans could if they have a falling out with us.

Regardless of where the US heads after the next election we should always have an eye to domestic production and unrestricted use of the IP where it makes sense.

DeHaviland does have it's new manufacturing facility about to break ground. Would be an opportunity to build a world class facility to build for us, give economic benefit to AB. Would be a win win

 

[Underway]

Re: the highlighted part. Lots of people are counting on the next election to flip the switch back to "normal" relations with the US. The problem is that we have no control over that switch being flipped back again or not. Again, I'm not in the "Anything but American" crowd because frankly the French or the South Koreans, etc. could withhold parts/upgrades/etc. in exactly the same way that the Americans could if they have a falling out with us.

Regardless of where the US heads after the next election we should always have an eye to domestic production and unrestricted use of the IP where it makes sense.

All I'm saying is that given the current temperature the fever will come down. A lot of this is personality driven. I don't think the switch will be flipped but a dial will be turned and things will be different.

That being said who's to say the French are any better, or the Swedes, or the UK/Japanese/Italians? Actually the French are known for being worse than the US on a lot of this IP stuff (particularly as they stole a lot of it themselves, the original China).

There is also an alternative to fighters. Using GBAD and creating a soviet style air defence network. Canada could do that as a hedge and that's also much easier to domestically produce.

 

[Quirky]

So does the white house, but at the extreme end, what good is the F35 if the Americans can reduce it to a paper weight on us?

I’m more concerned with lack of crews for the 88 we’re buying. They’ll be paperweights in the hangars through self-incompetence rather than someone at the pentagon punching in the valet mode for the Canadian fleet.

 

[Good2Golf]

All I'm saying is that given the current temperature the fever will come down. A lot of this is personality driven. I don't think the switch will be flipped but a dial will be turned and things will be different.

That being said who's to say the French are any better, or the Swedes, or the UK/Japanese/Italians? Actually the French are known for being worse than the US on a lot of this IP stuff (particularly as they stole a lot of it themselves, the original China).

There is also an alternative to fighters. Using GBAD and creating a soviet style air defence network. Canada could do that as a hedge and that's also much easier to domestically produce.

Diversifying is valid, as it spreads partner reliability risk.

Korean tanks and subs. French fighter aircraft (and potential linkages to non-US beholden nuclear forces), US capabilities that Canada deems are worth retaining in light of US unreliability, etc. much better than have 100% US-supplied capability.

 

[Underway]

Korean tanks

These usually have M1 Abrams transmissions. But I'm pretty sure that's not ITAR so... we're good.

 

[brihard]

All I'm saying is that given the current temperature the fever will come down. A lot of this is personality driven. I don't think the switch will be flipped but a dial will be turned and things will be different.

That being said who's to say the French are any better, or the Swedes, or the UK/Japanese/Italians? Actually the French are known for being worse than the US on a lot of this IP stuff (particularly as they stole a lot of it themselves, the original China).

There is also an alternative to fighters. Using GBAD and creating a soviet style air defence network. Canada could do that as a hedge and that's also much easier to domestically produce.

Trump amplifies the risk to Canada presented by MAGA politics, but he could stroke out and die tomorrow and it wouldn’t go away. The genie is out of the bottle, probably for a generation. A lot of Americans have been hoodwinked into economic isolationism, but it’s not a super hard sell in some circles to argue that American manifest destiny should extend to economic and military dominion over whatever parts of the continent interest them. We should absolutely working to diversify economically and militarily. We will remain economically reliant on the Americans to a significant extent, but we still want to try to get less reliant than we are.

I don’t think we should be walking away from our existing F-35 commitments- it’s still a tangible thing happening right now that we need for the Canadian Forces. It’s a necessary capability from a credibility perspective. But maybe we do look at that additional fleet of something else, earlier and overlapping. Is it ideally efficient? No. But strategic diversification can necessitate some inefficiency as a hedge.

 

[Humphrey Bogart]

We can't afford to light money on fire. Cutting the order is a stupid COA and will result in a Lockmart lawsuit that we'll lose. If we want more aircraft, buy a 2nd order from some other country and actually increase our capability instead of cheaping out.

This is a perfect scapegoat for a Government not serious about Defence to not spend $$$ on Defence.

 

[MilEME09]

I’m more concerned with lack of crews for the 88 we’re buying. They’ll be paperweights in the hangars through self-incompetence rather than someone at the pentagon punching in the valet mode for the Canadian fleet.

Takes less time to solve that problem then to build a fighter. By the time we transition fully i doubt it will be an issue