- Reaction score
SeaKingTacco said:I have spoken to actual Hungarian Air Force officers about the Grippen. It certainly is an improvement over their Soviet era MIGs, but they didn't describe it as the best fighter in the world. More like the best that they could afford.
I do not see the continued attraction to building in Canada. What is the point of setting up a production line to build fewer than 100 fighters that will then just shutdown in a few years?
If jobs in Canada are the over riding consideration, then wouldn't being a continued partner in the F35 program be the way to go and get a piece of building 3000 (plus) jets over the next 3 decades?
"Don't let perfect be the enemy of good"
Nobody is saying the F35 is better than the Gripen E. I have no doubt the F35 is a far more capable aircraft; however, the real issue which I think is a valid point presented in the above article is:
"Can Canada afford the F35 without major sacrifices to other programs and overall General Purpose Combat Capability across the Spectrum of Operations?"
What do we need to sacrifice IOT afford the F35? half the expected number of CSCs? The Submarine Program? Griffon Replacements? Future Maritime Patrol Aircraft? Kingston Class Replacements? UAVs that we still don't have? Air Defence? Future Anti-Tank Capability? Artillery? Cyber & Renewed EW Capability? Heavy Engineering & Mobility?
Think of all the tools we already lack or are deficient in:
Replacements for the CP140s
Replacements for Tac Hel
Replacements for Kingston Class
Replacements for Halifax Class
This list is not exhaustive.
The Future Fighter is going to have two primary roles:
1. Defence of North America through NORAD (Gripen E is more than capable of filling this role)
2. Bombing Brigands in North Africa and the Middle East (It is also perfectly capable of filling this role) in fact a Spitfire could probably do a relatively good job in certain instances.
So what exactly do we give up so the Air Force can have their Ferraris?