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

[GR66]

It appears that not all is rainbows and unicorns with the European 6th Generation Fighter programs:

Italy says Britain is not sharing technology on fighter project​

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/italy-says-britain-is-not-sharing-technology-fighter-project-2025-04-15/

and

Dassault CEO strikes dark tone on Europe’s sixth-gen fighter progress

Trappier's view contrasts with that of Airbus, which cited "strong progress" in a statement.

www.defensenews.com

Here's my personal opinion on the whole F-35 question. You probably don't need the F-35 for the NORAD mission. You're primarily dealing with long-range bombers that are going to try and launch from as far out as possible. A bomb truck with great range and a large payload is what you'd be looking for. For that I'd say the F-15EX would be the best choice. Totally interoperable with our NORAD partner who also uses them in the NORAD mission and has the bonus of a rear seat for future control of UCAVs. For the NATO/Expeditionary mission I don't think there is any real alternative to the F-35. The stealth and sensor fusion will be a must in contested airspace.

So while on the surface a mixed F-35/other fleet might make sense, but when you dig deeper I think it looks a little different and here's why:

• Having a mixed fleet adds an additional logistics and maintenance burden to an already stressed support system.
• While the F-35 is capable of both the NORAD and NATO/Expeditionary roles, the alternate option will only be capable of the NORAD role which limits our expeditionary capability.
• Getting an alternative to the F-35 isn't going to save you any money. (comparative prices per ChatGPT):
  • F-35A - $82.5 million
  • Dassault Rafale - $100 million
  • Eurofighter Typhoon - $130 million
  • F-15EX - $93.95 million
  • Saab Grippen E/F - $85 million
  • GCAP/FCAS - both still vapourware and certainly will be significantly more expensive than the Rafale/Typhoon
• Since Canada's NORAD mission is vital to the defence of the American homeland, Canada's F-35 fleet is probably the least likely of any foreign F-35 fleet to be intentionally reduced in capability
• While I definitely support diversifying both our military and our economy in general from dependence on the US, I think that intentionally taking an action which in the view of the US might be seen as further abrogating our responsibility for the joint defence of North America will only worsen the political situation rather than working to resolve it.

All that to say that I think we should stick with the F-35 as our sole fighter and purchase the whole 88 fighters...or even better, up it to 138 to replace our CF-18's one-for-one.

 

[Underway]

88-100 minimum.

Based on what? Where do you get 100?

 

[KevinB]

Based on what? Where do you get 100?

For the Snowbirds clearly

Having extra is a nice to have luxury, that I don’t think the CAF can afford. I’d put anything above 88 in the nice to have category, but there a lot of other pressing missing items that also need to be filled.

 

[calculus]

Even more reason to stick with the full order of F35s - Lockheed has a raft of NGAD developed tech they are proposing to incorporate into the plane, bringing it to Gen 5+ standard. Lots of life in this program.

Lockheed wants to turn F-35 into a ‘Ferrari’ with sixth-gen tech

Better passive infrared, stealth and longer-range weapons are among the sixth-generation technologies Lockheed might incorporate into the F-35.

www.defensenews.com