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

[Quirky]

I've heard rumint we'll be sticking with the F-35, ordering more P-8s and replacing the Cyclone with UH-60R Seahawks, and the government is trying to figure out how to announce it while still saying "elbows up".

Elbows up will believe whatever MSM tells them. If the media frame it as a win for Canada - buying more US equipment - they’ll eat it up as Carney making great decisions.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Elbows up will believe whatever MSM tells them. If the media frame it as a win for Canada - buying more US equipment - they’ll eat it up as Carney making great decisions.

The F35 and P8’s were already announced so nothing new here. The Seahawks are the only net new piece here.

 

[Rainbow1910]

I've heard rumint we'll be sticking with the F-35, ordering more P-8s and replacing the Cyclone with UH-60R Seahawks, and the government is trying to figure out how to announce it while still saying "elbows up".

I dearly hope so, it will be incredibly amusing if this whole marketing push by Saab turns out to be a move by the Govt to push LM into additional concessions lol.

 

[Czech_pivo]

I dearly hope so, it will be incredibly amusing if this whole marketing push by Saab turns out to be a move by the Govt to push LM into additional concessions lol.

It would be incredibly stupid of us to leave the Swedes high and dry with their dicks in their hands - we’ll be seen as untrustworthy and just like the Americans.

 

[Rainbow1910]

It would be incredibly stupid of us to leave the Swedes high and dry with their dicks in their hands - we’ll be seen as untrustworthy and just like the Americans.

We literally don't owe the Swedish anything here, they lost the fighter competition itself and all that is going on is discussions from Government from Carney's review of the contract. Nobody has promised anybody anything, and Saab's proposals are just that, proposals. If they want to call us untrustworthy for considering their proposal and not taking it, they are unreasonable sellers.

 

[Czech_pivo]

We literally don't owe the Swedish anything here, they lost the fighter competition itself and all that is going on is discussions from Government from Carney's review of the contract. Nobody has promised anybody anything, and Saab's proposals are just that, proposals. If they want to call us untrustworthy for considering their proposal and not taking it, they are unreasonable sellers.

You don’t just send a King and Queen off to a country to tour a place like Bombardier without our side clearing it as being appropriate and with merit.
In the world of Ceremony and Protocol this would be seen as a huge fuck up by us for allowing it to happen.

 

[ytz]

There are fantastic Swedish products.

The CV90. The Archer. The Carl G. The AT4. The NLAW. The BvS10.

The T-7 Red Hawk. The Meteor. The GLSDB.

The Giraffe radar family. The ARTHUR counter battery radar.

But from all of that we might get the two things that are unsuitable for Canada.

 

[ytz]

You don’t just send a King and Queen off to a country to tour a place like Bombardier without our side clearing it as being appropriate and with merit.
In the world of Ceremony and Protocol this would be seen as a huge fuck up by us for allowing it to happen.

Not quite. It's part of their lobbying to send the mascot. The Brits do the same. They don't always win.

They won't be bitter if they don't win. Business is business.

They'd be more upset if they actually spent money on a plant and then we nixed a deal or changed our mind.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Not quite. It's part of their lobbying to send the mascot. The Brits do the same. They don't always win.

They won't be bitter if they don't win. Business is business.

They'd be more upset if they actually spent money on a plant and then we nixed a deal or changed our mind.

We’ll see.

 

[ytz]

We’ll see.

We deal with OEMs in my line of work. They lobby hard. That part is not personal. What they take a dim view of, is where they spend money on a futile effort. Like say we rig a bid and they bid anyway. Complex bids can take tens of millions. That kind of thing can attract a lawsuit. On the other hand, they don't hold grudges if the lobbying fails. Especially in a situation where their lobbying expects us to damage a substantial relationship.

 

[Nvlgzr]

I've heard rumint we'll be sticking with the F-35, ordering more P-8s and replacing the Cyclone with UH-60R Seahawks, and the government is trying to figure out how to announce it while still saying "elbows up".

Seahawks? Not Aw101? After all, the helicopter deck, hanger and Mission Bay (2 choppers in tandem) were originally laid out for the Merlin.

 

[Maxman1]

Seahawks? Not Aw101? After all, the helicopter deck, hanger and Mission Bay (2 choppers in tandem) were originally laid out for the Merlin.

I'd prefer AW101s. It's probably because of Chretien that they picked the Seahawk.

 

[Czech_pivo]

We deal with OEMs in my line of work. They lobby hard. That part is not personal. What they take a dim view of, is where they spend money on a futile effort. Like say we rig a bid and they bid anyway. Complex bids can take tens of millions. That kind of thing can attract a lawsuit. On the other hand, they don't hold grudges if the lobbying fails. Especially in a situation where their lobbying expects us to damage a substantial relationship.

From the newest batch of rumint saying we are sticking with 88 F35, the P8 (which there was no chatter of us not getting) and now us getting Seahawks, to the G&M article talking about 32-40 F35’s and the Globaleye - there is a lot of disinformation and counter information being blown about.

 

[ytz]

From the newest batch of rumint saying we are sticking with 88 F35, the P8 (which there was no chatter of us not getting) and now us getting Seahawks, to the G&M article talking about 32-40 F35’s and the Globaleye - there is a lot of disinformation and counter information being blown about.

Says who?

I think there's definitely something cooking here. Joly has been pushing this since the summer. The Swedish royalty would only be visiting to either announce or help close the deal.

All that's left to learn is what the final numbers will be. And whether we're also stuck with the Globaleye.

 

[Furniture]

From the newest batch of rumint saying we are sticking with 88 F35, the P8 (which there was no chatter of us not getting) and now us getting Seahawks, to the G&M article talking about 32-40 F35’s and the Globaleye - there is a lot of disinformation and counter information being blown about.

It`s speculation, not disinformation.

The P-8 is the only available ASW platform available on the market now, so it`s a no-brainer. We are already partners in the F-35 programme, so continuing with some number of F-35s is pretty obvious. What those numbers are, and when is where speculation comes in.

Seahawks seem a bit out of left field, but stranger things have happened.

The E-7 was rejected by NATO, and is being rejected by RoK, who already operates some, which should maybe a be a warning to us that the E-7 maybe isn`t "all that"... AAR is pretty important, but if the aircraft costs so much we can't afford to run them, AAR is a just a cool party trick to be pulled out at RIMPAC and other similar events.

 

[Remius]

McGuinty not ruling out fighter jet purchases from several companies with F-35 decision still pending

Defence Minister David McGuinty says Canada isn’t ruling out diversifying its fighter-jet purchases from more than one company in order to fulfil capability requirements.

www.ctvnews.ca

From the MND.

 

[armrdsoul77]

McGuinty not ruling out fighter jet purchases from several companies with F-35 decision still pending

Defence Minister David McGuinty says Canada isn’t ruling out diversifying its fighter-jet purchases from more than one company in order to fulfil capability requirements.

www.ctvnews.ca

From the MND.

"If anybody walks into Canada tomorrow from a sovereign wealth fund or with a joint venture in mind or is looking to set up a company in Canada to create 10, 20, 30, 40, 50,000 jobs, game on.”

 

[NavyShooter]

OK, so why are we even wasting time with SAAB and Lockheed, when all we have to do is turn around, give the Avro Arrow blueprints to Mikey McBryan at Buffalo Airlines, and they'll resurrect that project for us and we'll have a great home-built option for national air defense in a matter of weeks.

We can also task them to figure out how to integrate a radar system onto one of their old C-47's, or, perhaps get a dispersed light-weight radar that can be installed in the Norseman aircraft, which, wearing floats, can take off and land practically anywhere giving us mobile, rapid deployable air radar systems which will preclude our need for anything so fancy as an E-7?

This will be a key initiative in bringing our defense team further into the North, and provide opportunities for community engagement and both youtube and history channel sound-bites that will give us a boost with the social media world that is unbeatable!

(Edit to add - we can contract them to cover off the SAR tasks up north as well - we can double-hat the SARTECHS as the Radar Operators in the Norsemen airplanes!)

 

[Kirkhill]

We deal with OEMs in my line of work. They lobby hard. That part is not personal. What they take a dim view of, is where they spend money on a futile effort. Like say we rig a bid and they bid anyway. Complex bids can take tens of millions. That kind of thing can attract a lawsuit. On the other hand, they don't hold grudges if the lobbying fails. Especially in a situation where their lobbying expects us to damage a substantial relationship.

As you suggest .... they want a fair shot. Not just a bit of performance art. And on this I speak from experience having been used as the anvil against which the customer could beat the preferred bidder. The anvil takes the beating.

 

[suffolkowner]

Seahawks make sense if we are being cut a deal on dumping the cyclone

The gripen makes sense if its the price of admission for a Sweden German 6th gen project