- Reaction score
- 11,612
- Points
- 1,160
Just accept that screwing is inherent to the human condition. Sometimes it is pleasant and sometimes it isn't. Co-operation generally makes it less unpleasant.
The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
- Thread starter WingsofFury
- Start date
Just accept that screwing is inherent to the human condition. Sometimes it is pleasant and sometimes it isn't. Co-operation generally makes it less unpleasant.
- Reaction score
- 1,193
- Points
- 1,010
It’s also linked to the USAF taking the lesson learned from the first Persian Gulf war that Air Power, applied against a center of gravity, can solve all military problems.
Even though, in that war, we had to use ground power in order to meet our aims (to wit, expel Saddam Hussein from Kuwait).
The Canadian Air Force, as an organization, has wholly bought into the USAF way of thinking, even though it is as much used in US inter service budget wars as anything else. Right down to all air assets should be owned by an Air Component Commander (which, in my opinion, makes no sense for organic air). This includes a robust contingent that get all of their operational planning and strategic thinking skills at Maxwell AFB, which is probably not a center of joint and combined excellence.
- Reaction score
- 11,057
- Points
- 1,160
- Reaction score
- 5,407
- Points
- 1,260
Do you think that Sweden or UAE or Indonesia or South Korea are wringing their hands saying to themselves, "I wonder how those Canadians are planning on screwing us. All they want is access to our market of XX million people, they want out products and our resources and they want our research money."
Sometimes I think Canadians are the most neurotic people on this plant.
I thought we were buying the Aussie Arctic Over-the-Horizon Radar system. This should in itself calm the US and their NORAD complaints. Couple that with the Remaining DEW site radars up north and add a few (lots of these) Interceptor missiles and we have a winner.
They buy natural resources, some refined some not. We buy the unrefined stuff back as finished products. We buy more dollar value from them then they do us.
The question one needs to ask is what is a long term aspect of a expanded trade deal with a country who has made some top notch pieces of equipment. How can we use this to build our industries stronger. Sweden is only a country of 10,600,000 people. That is not a big market for us in trade aspect. But in the tech side and what they have access to directly through aerospace, defense, manufacturing markets I would think it is a partnership we should be looking at for a long term prospects.
Who really knows, the US is the largest trading partner of many nations, we have to either find other ways to sustain markets or we need to bow down to them entirely.
I think once further deals are made outside of the Traditional US/ Canada trade in tech. The US will warm back up to us if were not providing or putting as much effort into things such as the little black box that allows all the other bigger black boxes to work together.
(I think part of the F35 issues with the newest upgrades is the US defense trying to do it alone without external assistance). Canadian Tech has always been a leading aspect of making things work outside of what was expected. Allowing function and operation of equipment in a way no one expected.
Sell us short on what do provide and what we can provide and we will keep down the same path. Allow us to expand and see the growth.
Quirky
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,536
- Points
- 1,260
Has anyone asked the RCAF if operating the Gripen alongside the F-35 is even possible given the personnel and logistics requirements/shortfalls? Hangar construction has been started on the basis of 88 F-35s. Just where the hell does the LPC think we will put the Gripens? This crap just doesn't happen overnight with our own self-inflicted regulatory policies.
- Reaction score
- 5,407
- Points
- 1,260
Pick your combination of required inputs in order to have any semblance of providing an answer.
Timelines:
1) Short - 5-7yrs
2) Medium - 7-10yrs
3) Longer - 11+yrs
Recruitment:
1) Flat - no change
2) Up 5-7% per annum
3) Up 8-12% per annum
4) Up 12+% per annum
5) Down 2-5% per annum
Retention:
1) Flat - no change
2) Up 5-7% per annum
3) Up 8-12% per annum
4) Up 12+% per annum
5) Down 2-5%
Training Pilots:
1) Flat - no change from the approx. 15-18/yr
2) Up 10% per annum
3) Up 15-20% per annum
4) Up over 20% per annum
5) Down 5+% per annum
Budget based on NATO reqt of 3.5% - 5%
1) Spending at 2.5% GDP
2) Spending at 2.5-2.75% GDP
3) Spending at 2.75-3% GDP
4) Spending at 3+% GDP
5) Spending below 2.5% GDP
Pardon the sarcasm but doesn't Borden still have hangars? Seriously though, you build them. We used to have lots more than just 188 and we had places to put them too. What is involved is breaking the do more with less standard and plan and work for more with more to work with. Does that make sense?
- Reaction score
- 11,057
- Points
- 1,160
In sprung shelters all along the trans Canada highway, collocated with Military Police who can block traffic while they take off and land.
- Reaction score
- 5,867
- Points
- 1,160
I'm 100% in the keep the F-35 camp (hopefully 88 but at least 65) but I'm not willing to ignore the possibilities presented by a potential Saab collaboration.
With or without a Gripen purchase for the RCAF the domestic production and especially R&D partnership would potentially give us a head start in domestic CCV/UCAV production which is where I really see the future of air combat going. Saab is leaning heavily into those areas (with the possibility of a Next Gen manned fighter a possibility as well) as noted in this article.
With or without a Gripen purchase for the RCAF the domestic production and especially R&D partnership would potentially give us a head start in domestic CCV/UCAV production which is where I really see the future of air combat going. Saab is leaning heavily into those areas (with the possibility of a Next Gen manned fighter a possibility as well) as noted in this article.
Quirky
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,536
- Points
- 1,260
You mean those ones from the WWII era? Putting new fighters in 80 year old hangars would be a Canadian thing to do.
The provinces will love fighters taking off and landing on their highways. I'm sure they'll rush right over to repair the asphalt.
- Reaction score
- 5,407
- Points
- 1,260
Don't say it too loudly on here, some seem less inclined to explore any other options in conjunction with the F35. An awful lot of first girlfriends turned into life long marriages.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 20,468
- Points
- 1,260
I am in that camp too. We - Canada - are at a crossroads and need to choose the direction we go carefully
To be fair, we can repurpose some of that infrastructure for other aircraft if needed. There might be some separation requirements. But not impossible. No different than when Americans send F-35s to allied bases. Also, if they are buying more total aircraft, there will have to be more infrastructure funding.
But yes. Dual fleet absolutely sucked. And the RCAF has recommended against it every single time it's been asked.
- Reaction score
- 8,760
- Points
- 1,140
That's kinda the point I was getting at.
Everybody is looking to gain from a deal, and unless it's a deal between genuine friends, most are looking to come out with a better deal than they are offering.
The people implying Sweden wants something nefarious are being as irrational as the "screw Trump at all costs" types.
Way to latch onto one sentence and ignore the point. See my above reply regarding the "screwing".
The bolded part is exactly what everybody wants from us, and we want similar things from them. Canada makes deals with countries like China for access to their market of a billion people, and for access to their goods. We make deals with America to sell our good, and have preferential access to their market.
Sometimes I think people respond to posts before even making the slightest attempt to figure out what was said.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 20,468
- Points
- 1,260
Quirky
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 4,536
- Points
- 1,260
Trump may very well be dead before any hypothetical Gripen is fully operational in the RCAF.
Canada turns isolationist into Switzerland. At that point get 200 Gripens to tool around the country.
- Reaction score
- 7,032
- Points
- 1,190
Seems like actual pilots and RCAF officers support F35 enough to sign a letter to decision makers to get them to stop this Gripen madness.
www.flightglobal.com
Former Canadian military officers urge Ottawa to ignore Gripens and proceed with F-35 buy
Twelve retired senior Royal Canadian Air Force officers have written to Prime Minister Mark Carney warning against reducing Canada's planned 88-aircraft F-35A purchase in favour of Swedish Saab Gripen fighters, as political tensions with the USA prompt Ottawa to reconsider its fighter...
www.flightglobal.com
