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

[ytz]

I think the US right could care less about our capabilities. Right now they want us to rebuild as long as we buy THEIR stuff. So more subs and ships and planes bought from others won’t make a difference even if we spent 10% of GDP.

You're not wrong.

But also, if we're going to do this, then just rip the band aid off. Two fleets is terrible for the RCAF. That too when the F-35 fleet is so small. Rumored as low as 32 frames.

Also, like I get not buying American in this moment. But that didn't mean they have to wholesale make Saab the new defacto RCAF supplier. It's not just the F-35 purchase. The Globaleye could be there. And that plane is very much unsuitable for us.

 

[ytz]

But my understanding is that maintenance of quals for the fighter force is already challenging; would maintaining dual qualifications be a viable CoA?

Sure. If we double manning.

 

[ytz]

Keep the F-35 order. This will satisfy NORAD interoperability requirements and expeditionary capabilities requirements. Buy 30 Grippens. Put 10 in Cold Lake for FLIT, and put 10 in Bagotville and Cold Lake as proficiency platforms/Red Air, to be flown by F-35 pilots who are dual qualified.

See the G&M article.

What's being discussed is the complete opposite of your plan. 30-40 F-35s. 70-80 Gripens. Gripens will be the main fighter for the RCAF.

 

[ytz]

Humbug. Question: Why do pilots smile during thunderstorms? Answer: they think someone is taking their picture? Seriously, pilot are a rare breed. Carl Millard used to charge Air Canada and CPAir pilots for the privilege of flying right seat in his DC3's and getting rated. They were flying for an airline, they had their ratings but the allure of being Dak rated brought out their wallets anyways. Start with the Air Cadets and increase the number of flying scholarships that you hand out. Take the senior cadets out to Morden or Moose Jaw and strap them into the back seat of a modern trainer for an hour or two and you will snare enough to keep those Gripens manned. I don't know how the Americans do it with their National Guard pilots but if it works, try and emulate it with reserve pilots for the Gripens if you have to.

We don't have a problem getting people to walk in through the door dreaming of being pilots. We have a problem with getting enough through training and on to a fleet.

 

[Maxman1]

NATO just dropped their order like it was on fire, while it seems entirely up in the air if the USAF will continue purchases given the ongoing political SNAFU around the E-7. Confidence around US support and interoperability has been entirely eroded around the E-7 and with Carney pledging for a Canadian made AEW&C platform and Bombardier standing there with their hands out in this political environment, E-7 for Canada is entirely dead.

The RAF, RAAF, Turkey and South Korea currently operate the E-7. The US purchase is unclear, but it sounds like it might go through.

Funding for E-7 Wedgetail included in bipartisan deal to end 41-day government shutdown

Despite Pentagon and Air Force protests, Congress continues to support the radar jet program.

www.defenseone.com

 

[Czech_pivo]

The RAF, RAAF, Turkey and South Korea currently operate the E-7. The US purchase is unclear, but it sounds like it might go through.

Funding for E-7 Wedgetail included in bipartisan deal to end 41-day government shutdown

Despite Pentagon and Air Force protests, Congress continues to support the radar jet program.

www.defenseone.com

I thought that the South Koreans were going with the L3 Harris plane (which uses the Bombardier Global 6500)?

 

[Kirkhill]

Off

US Air Force to retire all A-10s, cancel E-7 under 2026 spending plan

The Air Force wants to retire hundreds of older aircraft, including the entire Warthog fleet, to free up money for future planes.

www.defensenews.com

On

Pentagon's Bold Pivot: Keeping the E-7 Alive

The Trump administration and the Pentagon deserve commendation for reviving the E-7 airborne early warning and control program.

www.airandspaceforces.com

Off

NATO allies cancel E-7A Wedgetail order, eye replacement, says Netherlands - Breaking Defense

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte told reporters today at the alliance's AWACS main operating base in Geilenkirchen, Germany, that an E-3A Sentry replacement process is "ongoing."

breakingdefense.com

Plan B

France to Procure 2 Saab GlobalEye AWACS Aircraft

French defense agency signals intent to buy two airborne early warning planes from Saab, with option for two more

defensemirror.com

Plan C

General Atomics brings Saab onboard for MQ-9B AEW mission package - Naval News

GA-ASI has partnered with Saab to develop an AEW mission capability for its MQ-9B family of remotely piloted aircraft.

www.navalnews.com

First Two Canadian MQ-9B SkyGuardian RPAS are in Production

 

[Kirkhill]

Right now we might as well be playing poker dice. The odds are probably equal.

 

[MilEME09]

had Chat GBT do a quick comparison chart, for how the two stack up. Give us a decent side by side to compare the two.

 

[ytz]

The RAF, RAAF, Turkey and South Korea currently operate the E-7. The US purchase is unclear, but it sounds like it might go through.

Funding for E-7 Wedgetail included in bipartisan deal to end 41-day government shutdown

Despite Pentagon and Air Force protests, Congress continues to support the radar jet program.

www.defenseone.com

Yeah. I don't get why people keep thinking that the E-7 is dependent on the US. Literally started without the Americans. It's a great example of a small country innovating (Australia) and then finding a bigger market. The platform is still viable without the US.

NATO pulled out because the Trump Administration withdrew from the NATO project. Probably because they want to try and get the Europeans to spend on the crazy Golden Dome idea. Europeans will end up with buying Globaleyes though if the Americans won't sponsor the E-7.

I thought that the South Koreans were going with the L3 Harris plane (which uses the Bombardier Global 6500)?

The South Koreans currently operate E-7s. They haven't been happy with them. They cancelled a fleet expansion. And ordered the L3/Bombardier Global CAEW.

 

[ytz]

had Chat GBT do a quick comparison chart, for how the two stack up. Give us a decent side by side to compare the two.
View attachment 96756

Some relevant points that discussions never consider:

1) Combat radius when the F-35 only uses internal carriage.

2) Productivity. A handful of F-35s can do what might require a dozen other aircraft. When you have a higher signature, you now need jammers and sweepers out front. And then those aircraft drive up needs for tankers. On and on.

3) Survivability. How are people forgetting this:

"Red Flag confirmed F-35 dominance with a 20:1 kill ratio" U.S. Air Force says

Looks like the F-35 achieved an impressive 20:1 kill ratio at Nellis Air Force Base's Red Flag 17-1 Every aviation enthusiast knows about Red Flag, the

theaviationist.com

 

[Czech_pivo]

I think the US right could care less about our capabilities. Right now they want us to rebuild as long as we buy THEIR stuff. So more subs and ships and planes bought from others won’t make a difference even if we spent 10% of GDP.

So to that point - who gives a crap what they think then. If we buy 65 F35's for NORAD needs and are a partner on Golden Dome and implement the necessary other radar related changes for NORAD that takes the wind out of their sails for complaints about North America.

We've never bought their ships, ever, and that looks to be the case going forward. I'm sure that the first time we 'ping' one of their subs unexpectedly in our Arctic with new future sub, it will ruffle their feathers, again, should we care about it?

If they are stepping away from NATO, and if we continue to actively be involved in European defense/issues, then our equipment needs to be compatible with the Europeans, not necessarily with the US.

 

[Furniture]

The South Koreans currently operate E-7s. They haven't been happy with them. They cancelled a fleet expansion. And ordered the L3/Bombardier Global CAEW.

What makes the Koreans not happy with them?

 

[ytz]

What makes the Koreans not happy with them?

Apparently cost and reliability.

South Korea Has Chosen Its Next Airborne Early Warning Radar Jet

South Korea will add the L3Harris Global 6500-based airborne early warning and control aircraft to its current fleet of four Boeing E-7s. South Korea will add the L3Harris Global 6500-based airborne early warning and control aircraft to its current fleet of four Boeing E-7s.

www.twz.com

 

[ytz]

So to that point - who gives a crap what they think then. If we buy 65 F35's for NORAD needs and are a partner on Golden Dome and implement the necessary other radar related changes for NORAD that takes the wind out of their sails for complaints about North America.

Y'all keep talking about 65 F-35s. It's not at all clear that we're going to get that. The Globe and Mail article said 30-40. That's why we have a problem.

Also, we do care what they think because we share NORAD, Five Eyes and NATO with them. They can easily pull the plug on 2 of 3 of those. Remember this:

White House official pushes to axe Canada from Five Eyes intelligence group

A top White House official has proposed expelling Canada from the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing network to ramp up pressure. Read more

financialpost.com

We've never bought their ships, ever, and that looks to be the case going forward.

Usually because we can't afford them and they are too much capability for us. It's kinda funny that we're calling that our new ships are "destroyers" with only 24 VLS cells. Compare that to what an American Arleigh Burke has. And then look at how much ammo some destroyers expended during engagements with the Houthis.

If they are stepping away from NATO, and if we continue to actively be involved in European defense/issues, then our equipment needs to be compatible with the Europeans, not necessarily with the US.

You know what is really well integrated into NATO? The F-35. A lot more NATO countries fly the F-35 than the Gripen.

 

[Furniture]

Usually because we can't afford them and they are too much capability for us. It's kinda funny that we're calling that our new ships are "destroyers" with only 24 VLS cells. Compare that to what an American Arleigh Burke has. And then look at how much ammo some destroyers expended during engagements with the Houthis.



You know what is really well integrated into NATO? The F-35. A lot more NATO countries fly the F-35 than the Gripen.

Part of Canada's problem is that we are constantly comparing ourselves to the crumbling empire that's bankrupting itself to stay ahead of everybody else.

The Rivers will be some of the most advanced and capable warships on the planet. When we have all 15 we will be operating a fleet of surface combatants larger than most other navies as well...