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

[Cloud Cover]

Why is it not okay for Trudeau to make a linkage between defence procurement and the subsidy issue, when the UK (which buys a hell of a lot more kit from Boeing than Canada ever will) does exactly the same thing on this very issue: "This is not the behaviour we expect from Boeing and it could indeed jeopardise our future relationship with them," British Defence Secretary Michael Fallon told reporters in Belfast. "Boeing has significant defence contracts with us and still expects to win further contracts. Boeing wants and we want a long-term partnership but that has to be two-way."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/boeing-bombardier-1.4309000

 

[AlexanderM]

Why is it not okay for Trudeau to make a linkage between defence procurement and the subsidy issue, when the UK (which buys a hell of a lot more kit from Boeing than Canada ever will) does exactly the same thing on this very issue: "This is not the behaviour we expect from Boeing and it could indeed jeopardise our future relationship with them," British Defence Secretary Michael Fallon told reporters in Belfast. "Boeing has significant defence contracts with us and still expects to win further contracts. Boeing wants and we want a long-term partnership but that has to be two-way."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/boeing-bombardier-1.4309000

It is ok for him to do so as there is a larger trade issue here. I think it's great that this involves the UK, who make part of the C Series, as they can throw their weight into the dispute.

They may not know it but here is the US end game.

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/business/trade-softwood-dairy-japan-europe-china-mexico-1.4085031

 

[HB_Pencil]

Why is it not okay for Trudeau to make a linkage between defence procurement and the subsidy issue, when the UK (which buys a hell of a lot more kit from Boeing than Canada ever will) does exactly the same thing on this very issue: "This is not the behaviour we expect from Boeing and it could indeed jeopardise our future relationship with them," British Defence Secretary Michael Fallon told reporters in Belfast. "Boeing has significant defence contracts with us and still expects to win further contracts. Boeing wants and we want a long-term partnership but that has to be two-way."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/boeing-bombardier-1.4309000

That's incorrect. Our aerospace/defence industry is far more exposed to Boeing than the UK, who is highly integrated into Airbus. This isn't just about the Former Shorts facilities in Belfast for the Tories/DUP coalition... its also about supporting Airbus who have been penalized by the same system, and attacking Boeing.  For Canada, 60% of our industry is tier two and below producer.... and a majority of that eventually integrates into a Boeing product. So spiting Boeing has serious consequences for the rump of our aviation industry... which may also harm them too. In that regard this is really dangerous stuff for all parties involved.

Defence procurement itself shouldn't be hostage for this. The justification for the interim buy is there is an urgent requirement that means the usual defence procurement process cannot deliver it. In terms of process, this allowed them to pursue the acquisition without a competition or an ACAN (which LM would likely challenge, and win). That we would now cancel a purchase due to unrelated industrial concerns completely undermines that justification. In a way its a tactical victory for the RCAF which did not want this purchase at all, but at the same time its because of a massively flawed strategic process: Procurements are being run on short term political calculations, which is directly corroding the capacity of the Canadian Armed Forces. Just because the Brits are intimating they are doing the same thing doesn't make it better... because they've got the very same problems we do and its an embarrassment for their government.

 

[AlexanderM]

They had on the news tonight that since 2000 Boeing has received $70B in US gov't subsidies, by far the most of any aircraft manufacturer.

 

[a_majoor]

There is also a possible engine upgrade which I would like to see, giving it the same power as the Typhoon. Here is the F3R upgrade information.

http://www.sps-aviation.com/story/?id=1366

Engine upgrade.

http://www.defenseworld.net/news/15614/Safran_Plans_Engine_Upgrade_For_Dassault_Rafale_Fighter_Jet#.WcvPzNOPLcc

The USAF is working on Adaptive Cycle Engines for the F-35 and projected 6th Generation fighters, so it isn't just a one way street:
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/08/improved-jet-engines-are-key-to-longer-range-sixth-gen-fighter-and-improved-f35.html

 

[AlexanderM]

The USAF is working on Adaptive Cycle Engines for the F-35 and projected 6th Generation fighters, so it isn't just a one way street:
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/08/improved-jet-engines-are-key-to-longer-range-sixth-gen-fighter-and-improved-f35.html

When they come out with those 6th generation fighters they will be bloody expensive and will they even be available, thinking of the F-22, which has never been available for sale outside the US. Having a new engine for the F-35 is great to extend range somewhat but the aircraft isn't designed for supercruise so it doesn't help with that. I'm still all for buying the F-35 but when we see the actual quote for the purchase if it looks at all like the Super Hornet quote we just saw then we may have no choice but to look at other options. I have big concerns regarding the Trump agenda.

 

[nic32]

Do our pilots sometimes fly other country jets? For example, CF-18 pilots that go on training in the USA and for some reason (like one of our plane is broken) they fly a USA F18?

If that is the case and we end up with the Rafale, we lost this kind possibility except for the few countries that have it like France?!

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Do our pilots sometimes fly other country jets? For example, CF-18 pilots that go on training in the USA and for some reason (like one of our plane is broken) they fly a USA F18?

Yes. 

 

[Loachman]

Other than on a formal exchange or something similar?

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Other than on a formal exchange or something similar?

Well, not just "for an exercise".  They'd have to do a OTU, etc, would be my  :2c:, same as when exchange folks come to our neck of the woods.  We have USN P-3 Pilots on Sqn, they still go thru MOAT.

 

[SupersonicMax]

Do our pilots sometimes fly other country jets? For example, CF-18 pilots that go on training in the USA and for some reason (like one of our plane is broken) they fly a USA F18?

If that is the case and we end up with the Rafale, we lost this kind possibility except for the few countries that have it like France?!

Nope, can't do that just because our jet is broken.  There are a host of issues (differences in Type/Model/Series, security, training, etc) that cannot be overcome just because our jets are broken.

Having said that, we do get to fly in their aircraft for familiarization.  I have flown in the Mirage 2000D/N, F-16D, F-15E, T-38C, T-6B, F/A-18F, all front seat.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Nope, can't do that just because our jet is broken.  There are a host of issues (differences in Type/Model/Series, security, training, etc) that cannot be overcome just because our jets are broken.

Having said that, we do get to fly in their aircraft for familiarization.  I have flown in the Mirage 2000D/N, F-16D, F-15E, T-38C, T-6B, F/A-18F, all front seat.

Assuming if there was an exchange posting, though, wouldn't fighter drivers do the OTU at the HN and then be good to go?  I've had skippers from the RAAF, USN, etc who do our MOAT and then go on Sqn as ACs and LRPCCs.

 

[MarkOttawa]

If France offers Bombardier-build Rafale--from a friend:

Memo to Dassault: Paint the ****er white and write "Arrow II" on the nose

Mark
Ottawa

 

[McG]

The MND indicates that we may still buy super hornets from Boeing despite the tough talk and recent 220% tariffs.  And we have also looked at the potential for used Kuwaiti hornets. 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/boeing-super-hornets-pentagon-1.4311860

 

[MilEME09]

If France offers Bombardier-build Rafale--from a friend:

Mark
Ottawa

I would be okay with this, or even bring back any of the old names, Canuck II would be a nice fit if this became the first fighter jet built in Canada in a long time.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

This idea is so stupid on every level (fiscally, militarily) that, naturally, it will be the one chosen by this government.

 

[MilEME09]

This idea is so stupid on every level (fiscally, militarily) that, naturally, it will be the one chosen by this government.

Are you talking our currently Hypothetical Rafale deal or the entire super hornet/ capability gap fiasco?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

The whole thing is a fiasco, but the Rafale angle is the stupidest.

On top of it all, it would take us out of the F35 consortium. How do you suppose all those aerospace subcontractors in Canada who are not Bombardier and who currently get F35 business would enjoy watching Bombardier get propped up again?

I am sure that would be awesome for national unity...

 

[Good2Golf]

On top of it all, it would take us out of the F35 consortium. How do you suppose all those aerospace subcontractors in Canada who are not Bombardier and who currently get F35 business would enjoy watching Bombardier get propped up again?

Come on, SKT, it's only what? $670M of contracts to date, with future billions on the hook?

On verra!

Regards
G2G

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Personally, the "parts" work is where I think Canada and Bombardier can really get back at Boeing.

50% of the C-Series are made by US parts companies or at Bombardier plants for their executive jets production. The labour laws for compensation of laid off employees in the US are a lot weaker than in Canada.

So all that Bombardier has to do is say "Right, you want to put 220% tariff on my airplanes, I am closing my parts work in the US, laying g off everybody, and repatriating them to Canadian aeronautical firms in Canada. Similarly, I am moving the whole of my business jets work to Ontario".

When the various US states (and it's not Washington state) start to lose all these great jobs, they'll put pressure on the US government.