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

[AvroArrow92]

80 to 65 to 88 to ??

I think they meant purely the a possible JAS-39 fleet, my educated guess is 30-48 F-35 and then I personal think a minimum of 72 JAS-39 for one main reason. That is the demanded number from Saab for domestic production, 72 JAS-39 and 6 GlobalEye I remember correctly. Otherwise what is the point of this split fleet really from political and industry perspective?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/saab-canada-gripen-globaleye-f35-9.7043896

I have heard similar rumours as well as the split fleet is a done deal at this point. What I am more curious about is what happens to the planned F-35 infrastructure investments, do they just keep the F-35 at only one MOB probably Cold Lake or still spread them out? Also with 72 new fast jet where do they place all these aircraft? Cold Lake has the space but not Bagotville really maybe enough for two full gun squadrons at most. Goose Bay has space but its Goose Bay, you think retention is an issue now what until you have a gun squadron in Goose. Cold Lake maybe/ most likely but even then Cold Lake could maybe host 2-3 gun squadrons and the OCU after that the space is limited. Comox is an option but that base barely has space as is. What then of the FOL and the security infrastructure requirements for the F35 do we just f- it for everything but Cold Lake? Finally were are we going to find the crew for all this fins? We are already in a massive hole with fast jet pilots, and effectively having three fleets run concurrently will potential truly be a death blow to the RCAF.

I do believe there is path forward were a mixed fleet could work to our benefit and bridge a gap to the sixth gen, but I doubt our political leadership will be able to do honestly. The biggest problem in my mind is how do we datalink feed from the P8 and F35 to GlobalEye and JAS-39 then to the shared NORAD picture? I am sure its possible but its going to be very complex and pricey, with the Americans have absolutely zero interest in helping us with. Finally I really hope the RCAF has a workable plan for a mixed fleet instead of stonewalling the shit out of PMO office for a mixed fleet saying "NO NO NO NO NOT LISTENING NO NO NO", because if they do not that is trouble as well.

 

[Kirkhill]

Or maybe buy from our “friends” that don’t want to screw us. Such as the TA-50. If Lockheed thought it was good enough for USA then it’s good enough for Canada.

Who are our friends?

 

[ytz]

I think they meant purely the a possible JAS-39 fleet, my educated guess is 30-48 F-35 and then I personal think a minimum of 72 JAS-39 for one main reason. That is the demanded number from Saab for domestic production, 72 JAS-39 and 6 GlobalEye I remember correctly. Otherwise what is the point of this split fleet really from political and industry perspective?

The 72 number is BS. It's maximal demand on the part of Saab and was made at the point where we only had 16 Panthers on order. 88 - 16 = 72.

They are not going to pass up a smaller order. They built a FAL in Brazil for a much smaller order.

Finally were are we going to find the crew for all this fins? We are already in a massive hole with fast jet pilots, and effectively having three fleets run concurrently will potential truly be a death blow to the RCAF.

This is why sequencing matters. The only way to free up people to retire the Hornet while ramping up the Gripen. This means buying enough F-35s to retire the Gripen. That's 50-60.

The biggest problem in my mind is how do we datalink feed from the P8 and F35 to GlobalEye and JAS-39 then to the shared NORAD picture?

The GlobalEye isn't getting enough attention. It's has the potential to really mess up the RCAF. No AAR. No 360 coverage. No MADL.

Finally I really hope the RCAF has a workable plan for a mixed fleet instead of stonewalling the shit out of PMO office for a mixed fleet saying "NO NO NO NO NOT LISTENING NO NO NO", because if they do not that is trouble as well.

I've heard that the Air Staff did push back and that Cabinet offered some concessions. Apparently, inducting foreign pilots is one of these. Hopefully, the concessions include sequencing and not buying the Globaleye.

 

[suffolkowner]

I think they meant purely the a possible JAS-39 fleet, my educated guess is 30-48 F-35 and then I personal think a minimum of 72 JAS-39 for one main reason. That is the demanded number from Saab for domestic production, 72 JAS-39 and 6 GlobalEye I remember correctly. Otherwise what is the point of this split fleet really from political and industry perspective?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/saab-canada-gripen-globaleye-f35-9.7043896

I have heard similar rumours as well as the split fleet is a done deal at this point. What I am more curious about is what happens to the planned F-35 infrastructure investments, do they just keep the F-35 at only one MOB probably Cold Lake or still spread them out? Also with 72 new fast jet where do they place all these aircraft? Cold Lake has the space but not Bagotville really maybe enough for two full gun squadrons at most. Goose Bay has space but its Goose Bay, you think retention is an issue now what until you have a gun squadron in Goose. Cold Lake maybe/ most likely but even then Cold Lake could maybe host 2-3 gun squadrons and the OCU after that the space is limited. Comox is an option but that base barely has space as is. What then of the FOL and the security infrastructure requirements for the F35 do we just f- it for everything but Cold Lake? Finally were are we going to find the crew for all this fins? We are already in a massive hole with fast jet pilots, and effectively having three fleets run concurrently will potential truly be a death blow to the RCAF.

I do believe there is path forward were a mixed fleet could work to our benefit and bridge a gap to the sixth gen, but I doubt are political leadership will be able to do honestly. The biggest problem in my mind is how do we datalink feed from the P8 and F35 to GlobalEye and JAS-39 then to the shared NORAD picture? I am sure its possible but its going to be very complex and pricey, with the Americans have absolutely zero interest in helping us with. Finally I really hope the RCAF has a workable plan for a mixed fleet instead of stonewalling the shit out of PMO office for a mixed fleet saying "NO NO NO NO NOT LISTENING NO NO NO", because if they do not that is trouble as well.

No i think it is in part a question on what the F35s final numbers are. More than the Gripen, hell at the rate of Gripen production the F35s will be retired by the time we get our Gripen fleet or hopefully we bypass the Gripen as GR66 suggests

Mirabel and then internal "deployments" to Cold Lake, Bagotville etc..?

Is there a solution to the datalink problem?

 

[Czech_pivo]

I think they meant purely the a possible JAS-39 fleet, my educated guess is 30-48 F-35 and then I personal think a minimum of 72 JAS-39 for one main reason. That is the demanded number from Saab for domestic production, 72 JAS-39 and 6 GlobalEye I remember correctly. Otherwise what is the point of this split fleet really from political and industry perspective?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/saab-canada-gripen-globaleye-f35-9.7043896

I have heard similar rumours as well as the split fleet is a done deal at this point. What I am more curious about is what happens to the planned F-35 infrastructure investments, do they just keep the F-35 at only one MOB probably Cold Lake or still spread them out? Also with 72 new fast jet where do they place all these aircraft? Cold Lake has the space but not Bagotville really maybe enough for two full gun squadrons at most. Goose Bay has space but its Goose Bay, you think retention is an issue now what until you have a gun squadron in Goose. Cold Lake maybe/ most likely but even then Cold Lake could maybe host 2-3 gun squadrons and the OCU after that the space is limited. Comox is an option but that base barely has space as is. What then of the FOL and the security infrastructure requirements for the F35 do we just f- it for everything but Cold Lake? Finally were are we going to find the crew for all this fins? We are already in a massive hole with fast jet pilots, and effectively having three fleets run concurrently will potential truly be a death blow to the RCAF.

I do believe there is path forward were a mixed fleet could work to our benefit and bridge a gap to the sixth gen, but I doubt our political leadership will be able to do honestly. The biggest problem in my mind is how do we datalink feed from the P8 and F35 to GlobalEye and JAS-39 then to the shared NORAD picture? I am sure its possible but its going to be very complex and pricey, with the Americans have absolutely zero interest in helping us with. Finally I really hope the RCAF has a workable plan for a mixed fleet instead of stonewalling the shit out of PMO office for a mixed fleet saying "NO NO NO NO NOT LISTENING NO NO NO", because if they do not that is trouble as well.

Spitballing here - is Yellowknife anymore acceptable than Cold Lake? Could the F35's go to Yellowknife only if we get the smaller number and base them out of only 1 place.

 

[Nvlgzr]

Who are our friends?

Any country that we have civil discourse with and isn’t trying to take us over.

 

[Czech_pivo]

The 72 number is BS. It's maximal demand on the part of Saab and was made at the point where we only had 16 Panthers on order. 88 - 16 = 72.

They are not going to pass up a smaller order. They built a FAL in Brazil for a much smaller order.



This is why sequencing matters. The only way to free up people to retire the Hornet while ramping up the Gripen. This means buying enough F-35s to retire the Gripen. That's 50-60.



The GlobalEye isn't getting enough attention. It's has the potential to really mess up the RCAF. No AAR. No 360 coverage. No MADL.



I've heard that the Air Staff did push back and that Cabinet offered some concessions. Apparently, inducting foreign pilots is one of these. Hopefully, the concessions include sequencing and not buying the Globaleye.

The no AAR should result in a 'full stop'. A bit like how the K9 is the only one that has the proven ability to operate in 1m of snow while the other wheeled competitors do not......

 

[Remius]

Any country that we have civil discourse with and isn’t trying to take us over.

Or make us a vassal.

 

[Kirkhill]

Any country that we have civil discourse with and isn’t trying to take us over.

I was going to ask how many of them have useable kit for sale when the world is full of buyers but I realized that is irrelevant.

The only thing that is relevant is if the government is actually going to convert its promises into things that go bang.

 

[Rainbow1910]

The GlobalEye isn't getting enough attention. It's has the potential to really mess up the RCAF. No AAR. No 360 coverage. No MADL.

They have been talking about adding AAR to the Global platform and I presume that as well, and I've also heard Saab coping that their various radars elsewhere on the aircraft provide 360 degree coverage lol. I'd rather have Phoenix at this point compared to GlobalEye, but it seems increasingly unlikely given how the Govt looks to be entirely folding to domestic production nonsense.

 

[Rainbow1910]

Is there a solution to the datalink problem?

That is something I have a lot of concerns about, because F-35 and E-7 come pre-integrated with MADL out of the box alongside being fully NORAD/Five Eyes compliant, while tossing GlobalEye, Gripen E and F-35 all together looks like a sensor meshing and integration nightmare. I find it unlikely that the US will agree to integrate MADL into a competitor aircraft that is being also operated by a bunch of questionable and leaky as hell South American backwater nations. We'd also have to get Saab to play ball by opening up the source code of their aircraft designs and their systems to get this all done.

We are opening up a frankly worrying amount of potential points of failure in this sort of hypothetical fleet composition, one what has the potential to further drag down and cripple our already fragile fighter fleet.

 

[GR66]

They have been talking about adding AAR to the Global platform and I presume that as well, and I've also heard Saab coping that their various radars elsewhere on the aircraft provide 360 degree coverage lol. I'd rather have Phoenix at this point compared to GlobalEye, but it seems increasingly unlikely given how the Govt looks to be entirely folding to domestic production nonsense.

Here's an article that notes the RCAF's interest (plans?) to work with Bombardier in getting an AAR capability for the Global

RCAF working on Air-to-Air refueling for the Global 6500, MGen Smyth confirms (so let's talk about it)

Skies Magazine is out with a new interview with MGen Jeff Smyth, Chief of Air and Space Force Development, in the aftermath of last week’s Global announcement.

www.truenorthstrategicreview.ca