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

[Furniture]

To purchase only 16 IMO would invite nothing but trouble. I am no expert on foreign relations - would the US government ban sale of spare parts to Canada? Would the USAF be told not to train Canadian pilots?
Elbows up does have consequences.

That would kill sales to other countries, as they would start questioning if they were next.

LM will likely try to sweeten the pot, not threaten us, to get us to buy more.

 

[Rainbow1910]

The threats continue...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/norad-canada-us-f35-9.7059800

"Ambassador Hoekstra describes the current defence relationship as "awesome," but says such interventions by the U.S. military over Canada would increase if Canada does not increase its purchase of F-35s beyond the 16 currently on order. "

As much as I loathe Hoekstra generally and his typical inflammatory rhetoric specifically, he is sadly right in this scenario. If the Canadian Govt adopts the Gripen over the F-35, NORAD will be weaker and less advanced as a whole, requiring the US to step in and fill the gap with likely more F-35/next gen platforms. The Gripen is an inferior product versus the F-35, and its adoption would be a sizable integration/interoperability hurdle for NORAD compared to the F-35. Gripen is adequate currently and in the short term for NORAD uses, but it's a waste of resources in the medium and long term, or even if we do expeditionary work in the short term.

 

[Furniture]

As much as I loathe Hoekstra generally and his typical inflammatory rhetoric specifically, he is sadly right in this scenario. If the Canadian Govt adopts the Gripen over the F-35, NORAD will be weaker and less advanced as a whole, requiring the US to step in and fill the gap with likely more F-35/next gen platforms. The Gripen is an inferior product versus the F-35, and its adoption would be a sizable integration/interoperability hurdle for NORAD compared to the F-35. Gripen is adequate currently and in the short term for NORAD uses, but it's a waste of resources in the medium and long term, or even if we do expeditionary work in the short term.

I think his meaning was far less complex that interoperability. If Canada doesn't buy enough fighters, the USAF will conduct more intercepts over Canada, because we won't have enough jets available.

As for interoperability, @Good2Golf already mentioned the Rafale integrated with the USN without issues, so I suspect the "interoperability issues" with the Gripen WRT NORAD is more a marketing thing than a reality.

 

[Rainbow1910]

I think his meaning was far less complex that interoperability. If Canada doesn't buy enough fighters, the USAF will conduct more intercepts over Canada, because we won't have enough jets available.

As for interoperability, @Good2Golf already mentioned the Rafale integrated with the USN without issues, so I suspect the "interoperability issues" with the Gripen WRT NORAD is more a marketing thing than a reality.

Rafale doing cross deck operations off USN Carriers and utilizing NATO datalinks is the bare minimum interoperability for our alliance as a whole, the Gripen can do exactly the same thing with other LINK capable NATO platforms. That isn't what I'm talking about here, and doesn't hold a candle to the F-35 and its low probability of intercept, high bandwidth and proprietary Multifunction Advanced Data Link. This is the sensor fusion "special sauce" that makes the F-35 so potent, outside of its obvious physical stealth features. MADL is such an upgrade over the standard NATO LINK systems that they really aren't even comparable.

Any F-35 can seamlessly and stealthily integrate data with other F-35's, fusing together their combined sensors into a larger overall picture (sensor outputs, EO targeting, radar tracks, etc) which all of the nearby F-35's can utilize. Gripen and other 4th generation western fighters do not have this ridiculous datalink capability, and there is really no replacement. This also can fuse in AEGIS from the upcoming River class destroyers, AWACS platforms and even ground platforms like HIMARS to provide other platforms with targeting data from the F-35.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

To purchase only 16 IMO would invite nothing but trouble. I am no expert on foreign relations - would the US government ban sale of spare parts to Canada? Would the USAF be told not to train Canadian pilots?
Elbows up does have consequences.

A lot of F-35 components are made here, so I would expect those contracts to wind up. However the US may not have that capacity. My friend worked for MTU, when the USAF decided to stop sending their jet engines to MTU in BC to be rebuilt, because a US company said they could do it. That US company turned out, not to have the tooling, specs or trained staff and were trying to buy it at discount from MTU, who said "Nope". MTU then filled the slots used by the USAF with other customers, whereupon the USAF had to come back, begging MTU to slot engine in for rebuilds when they could fit them in. Not sure where that situation is now. Moral of the story is that the US is not always prepared for what their politicians want or claim.

 

[Quirky]

Gripen is adequate currently and in the short term for NORAD uses

It's also adequate enough to keep your base happy who don't want any more US products. Dealing with the gripen mid to long-term is problem for the next prime minister and voter base who are still in diapers. We need to think about now!