• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

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

Assuming the manufacturers are interested in investing the time, money and aggravation necessary to submit a bid for 60 to 80 aircraft to a country that has a track record of tearing up contracts.
 
Chris Pook said:
Assuming the manufacturers are interested in investing the time, money and aggravation necessary to submit a bid for 60 to 80 aircraft to a country that has a track record of tearing up contracts.

Since we've contracted our AOR requirements previously to both Spain and Chile, why don't we just do the same with our NORAD and NATO obligations and pay the USAF to take over these responsibilities.  If it makes anyone happy, we can put our roundel on the planes.....

Yes, I'm being sarcastic.
 
Chris Pook said:
Assuming the manufacturers are interested in investing the time, money and aggravation necessary to submit a bid for 60 to 80 aircraft to a country that has a track record of tearing up contracts.

Time will tell but im willing to bet the RFP will be written in a way to not include the F35 or make some other craft seem the favourite
 
At the rate decision making is happening it may be more beneficial to go into the USAF's "6th Generation" fighter program. At least this way we will be getting fresh, new airframes...
 
PuckChaser said:
Found a pretty in depth Reddit post breaking down the specs of each aircraft in the CAF's fighter replacement program. Keep in mind the Rafale has been pulled by Dassault, so those numbers are useless for the discussion:

https://www.reddit.com/r/F35Lightning/comments/5fv9he/combat_radius_of_western_multirole_fighters/
And from a brief review of this data set it is pretty apparent that the SAAB machine is essentially useless for our purposes.
Which leads me to believe that it will probably be chosen...the recent CBC article seems to think it's the way to go.
But hey? Bombardier can build it in Cartierville. Don't let the door hit you on your arse on the way out Justin!
Woe Canada!
 
Everything you might want to know about earlier generation Gripens (from a biased source):

Flying & Fighting in the Gripen: Interview with a Swedish Air Force pilot

iynym1oz-2.jpg

Lieutenant Mikael Grev flew the Saab JAS-39 Gripen fighter in the Swedish air force, including wartime missions over Libya. Here he describes flying and fighting in this potent bantam weight machine, training against the F-16 and F/A-18, and how it would have handled Russia’s infamous Su-27 ‘Flanker’...
https://hushkit.net/2019/04/15/flying-fighting-in-the-gripen-interview-with-a-swedish-air-force-pilot/

Mark
Ottawa
 
https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/country-size-comparison/canada/sweden

Canada is about 22 times bigger than Sweden.  It would run from the 49th to 60 and fit between Calgary and Medicine Hat.  About two or three times the size of Cold Lake. 

With the Russians coming from east of Medicine Hat.
 
SupersonicMax said:
Fuel was incompatible at a NATO base?  Sounds like a major deficiency for the Grippen...

I haven't read the article but I believe they were used to running JP1 and JP5 was available for the Libya campaign. Not sure what the difference is and how easy it is to switch. Strange though because is the Gripen not running the same engine as the Hornets?
 
Both JP8 and JP5 was available during OUP.  Sig, being a Navy base, probably stocks JP5. You can use different types of fuel but it is generally limited in how long you can use different fuel unless you change the fuel control unit to a different type of fuel (the 404s have that option).
 
SupersonicMax said:
Both JP8 and JP5 was available during OUP.  Sig, being a Navy base, probably stocks JP5. You can use different types of fuel but it is generally limited in how long you can use different fuel unless you change the fuel control unit to a different type of fuel (the 404s have that option).

If I remember correctly, there are no MFC adjustments required for JP8 to JP5 anymore. There are generally more issues changing MFC settings than just leaving it alone.
 
JP8 or JP8+100?  I thought all aircraft using JP8 were using +100 these days, leaving straight JP8 to vehicles only?
 
"...
Finn says officials won't have a real handle on when the first new fighters can be delivered until the winning company is picked and the two sides can hammer out the details..."

Translation: until the industrial benefits, whatever they are, are sorted out. F-35 problem: no such benefits permitted for program members, of which we are one.  FMS route and Canadian companies then lose any future contracts for a couple of thousand planes? What's a poor, dilatory, PM (who cares zip about defence) to do? And after the October election, whoever wins?

FUBAR:

Feds facing short runway on fighter jets amid new questions about schedule
https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/feds-facing-short-runway-on-fighter-jets-amid-new-questions-about-schedule-1.4396916

Finns and Swiss will have Hornet replacements in service long before RCAF:
https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2019/02/01/industry-bids-are-in-for-finlands-13-billion-fighter-race/

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2019-04-13/switzerland-starts-new-round-fighter-trials

Mark
Ottawa

 
This Canadian Press story suggests that the plan for an open competition may violate the terms of our participation in the F35 program. Hopefully someone more knowledgeable this this superannuated soldier will comment on this.

OTTAWA — U.S. officials have warned the Trudeau government that its plan to hold an open competition to replace its aging CF-18s is incompatible with Canada's obligations as a member of the F-35 stealth-fighter program.

The warnings are in two letters sent to the government last year that were obtained by defence analyst Richard Shimooka and released in a report published by the Macdonald-Laurier Institute think-tank.

The letters specifically take issue with the government's plan to have each fighter-jet maker commit to re-investing in Canada if its aircraft wins the upcoming competition aimed at buying 88 new planes for $19 billion.

While that is standard for most Canadian military procurements, the U.S. officials note that Canada agreed not to apply such a requirement when it signed on as one of nine F-35 partner countries in 2006.

Companies in those countries are instead allowed to compete for work associated with the plane, and the U.S. officials say imposing requirements as a condition to bid will mean the F-35 won't be entered in the race.

Canada has contributed roughly $500 million over the past 20 years toward developing the F-35, which now is expected to compete against three other aircraft to replace the CF-18s.
 
the U.S. officials say imposing requirements as a condition to bid will mean the F-35 won’t be entered in the race.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-ottawas-planned-competition-to-replace-aging-fighter-jets-is/

Trudeau probably wants it to play out like this.
 
Back
Top