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

[markppcli]

We would be more likely to invest in defence if we have jobs and industrial capacity on the line.

Again, GDLS london.

GDLS makes a product the world's largest defence consumer wants. Saab leases jets to Hungary.

 

[markppcli]

Being blown up on the ground hardly speaks to the air to air capabilities of either airframe.

Well you argued about them not being a peer. Iranian aircraft launched and were destroyed. Thats not arguable. Their prime fleet was target first and the results was good enough fighting made to win.

 

[Altair]

GDLS makes a product the world's largest defence consumer wants. Saab leases jets to Hungary.

And if it makes jets for canada, with canadian jobs and canadian profits the GoC will be a lot more keen on spending defense dollars to upgrade and enhance future capabilities.

We just buy from the yanks and we wait another 40 years before our next jet purchase.

Again, this is why im happy it bot in the RCAF hands. Industrial policy in regards to defense procurement helps both. Industrial policy separate from procurement helps neither.

 

[Altair]

Well you argued about them not being a peer. Iranian aircraft launched and were destroyed. Thats not arguable. Their prime fleet was target first and the results was good enough fighting made to win.

Can you point to any air to air victories by the USAF or the Israeli air force?

I didnt hear of any. Maybe i missed it?

 

[Fabius]

Alternatively, people are trying to have a discussion about the advantages of having domestic capacity to build fighter aircraft, and it gets derailed by "but the F-35 is better".

People here may be but is Canada? Ie the RCAF, CAF, DND, Cabinet?

building Gripens is a way to expand the fighter fleet, but more importantly get into the business of making warplanes again.

That’s fine but building licensed airframes to what end? Where is that conversation?

As many have pointed out repeatedly in this thread; if jobs are directly tied to the production of aircraft for the RCAF, the GoC is more likely to buy them more often.

That is a hope COA not a serious national security project.

Looking at the NSS, there is zero reason we couldn't have an National Aircraft Strategy for the RCAF as well. We choose not to, because we choose to not be serious about defense, or supporting Canadian defense industries.

There maybe reasons why we would not want to, again opportunity costs.
However what should the NAS look like?

Full Indigenous Fighter ( Airframe/ Avionics/ Engine/Weapons)

License Built Indigenous Fighter

Major Partner in Allied Fighter Consortium

What is the desired national end state?

 

[GR66]

Well you argued about them not being a peer. Iranian aircraft launched and were destroyed. Thats not arguable. Their prime fleet was target first and the results was good enough fighting made to win.

Doesn't even have to be a peer aircraft to be a threat...

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/iran-50-year-f4-f5-new-tactics-evade-defences

In late April it was confirmed that an Iranian Air Force F-5E third generation fighter had successfully conducted a bombing run against Camp Buehring in Kuwait, penetrating multi-layered U.S. and U.S.-supplied Kuwaiti air defences, and raising serious questions regarding the limitations of these defences. Subsequently in early May it was confirmed that the F-5’s heavier and longer ranged counterpart in the Iranian Air Force, the similarly obsolete F-4E, had been used to launch a successful penetration strike over Saudi Arabia. This operation became known only because it resulted in an engagement between the F-4 and at least one U.S. Air Force F-16CJ fighter, in which the F-16s failed to shoot down the Iranian aircraft, allowing them to return to Iran. The report raised the possibility that F-4s may have been launching penetration strikes more widely.

 

[markppcli]

Can you point to any air to air victories by the USAF or the Israeli air force?

I didnt hear of any. Maybe i missed it?

Yup F35 shot down a YAK 130

Israeli F-35 notches first kill of a manned fighter in downing of Iranian Yak-130

In another first, the U.K. reported that its Royal Air Force’s F-35B jets had intercepted Iranian drones above Jordan.

www.defensenews.com

Hence why I mentioned the over match its an armed trainer / LCA really.

 

[Altair]

People here may be but is Canada? Ie the RCAF, CAF, DND, Cabinet?


That’s fine but building licensed airframes to what end? Where is that conversation?



That is a hope COA not a serious national security project.



There maybe reasons why we would not want to, again opportunity costs.
However what should the NAS look like?

Full Indigenous Fighter ( Airframe/ Avionics/ Engine/Weapons)

License Built Indigenous Fighter

Major Partner in Allied Fighter Consortium

What is the desired national end state?

Any of those is better than the status quo, tbh.

 

[Altair]

Yup F35 shot down a YAK 130

Israeli F-35 notches first kill of a manned fighter in downing of Iranian Yak-130

In another first, the U.K. reported that its Royal Air Force’s F-35B jets had intercepted Iranian drones above Jordan.

www.defensenews.com

Hence why I mentioned the over match its an armed trainer / LCA really.

So no peer to peer air victories?

 

[markppcli]

Doesn't even have to be a peer aircraft to be a threat...

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/iran-50-year-f4-f5-new-tactics-evade-defences

So failed engagment by an F16 ?

So no peer to peer air victories?

Ehhh Iran is a regional power as an airforce they are certainly Isreal's peer. This is a prime example, however, of what happens when you can shoot before you are seen.

 

[Altair]

So failed engagment by an F16 ?



Ehhh Iran is a regional power as an airforce they are certainly Isreal's peer. This is a prime example, however, of what happens when you can shoot before you are seen.

So its fair fo say, most fighter aircraft we are discussing have a extremely limited resume when it comes to air to air combat.

How does the gripen do in mock battles/exercises might be the better question. I've never heard a bad word, but im obviously biased.

 

[Good2Golf]

However what should the NAS look like?

Full Indigenous Fighter ( Airframe/ Avionics/ Engine/Weapons)

No

License Built Indigenous Fighter

Yes

Major Partner in Allied Fighter Consortium

Yes

What is the desired national end state?

Increased defence & security productivity, particularly in the aerospace sector, contributing to Canada’s GDP and reinforced/expanded collaboration with European industrial base.

 

[Fabius]

Canada allowed a 6 year gap in between the last LAV 3 delivery and the placing of the LAV 6 contract. We seem to have learned with the ACSV etc and are certainly exploring for GDLS a continuous build program based off Cdn orders.

We will see.

 

[Altair]

Canada allowed a 6 year gap in between the last LAV 3 delivery and the placing of the LAV 6 contract. We seem to have learned with the ACSV etc and are certainly exploring for GDLS a continuous build program based off Cdn orders.

We will see.

And for the record,if the Canadian Army threw a fit and said they only wanted the VBCI they would be laughed out of the room.

 

[Fabius]

Increased defence & security productivity, particularly in the aerospace sector, contributing to Canada’s GDP and reinforced/expanded collaboration with European industrial base.

A License built Indigenous Fighter, irrespective of which one will incur a higher overhead cost in terms of modernization and upgrades over the lifetime of the platform. We would not be able to piggyback off the USN F18 upgrade pathway for example.

A major partner in an allied consortium I would tend to think would come with firm expectations of significant purchases of the aircraft. Ie no “yeah but we now want to do a fighter competition”.

I am not opposed to either thing but we need to be upfront about the end state desired, and the costs associated with the commitments to achieve it.

 

[markppcli]

So its fair fo say, most fighter aircraft we are discussing have a extremely limited resume when it comes to air to air combat.

How does the gripen do in mock battles/exercises might be the better question. I've never heard a bad word, but im obviously biased.

I think the reality of "mock battles" is that its far less likely to be free play and far more likely to be scenario driven. Further for the last twenty years how willing were the Swedes or the US to have their full ECM suites playing with countries they aren't fully engaged with?

I dont think this really tells a full story either: Let’s Talk About Those F-35 Kill Ratio Reports From Red Flag

 

[Fabius]

And for the record,if the Canadian Army threw a fit and said they only wanted the VBCI they would be laughed out of the room.

Up until the current US Administration, it could be argued that for the RCAF the F35 saga has played out in the exact opposite fashion.

 

[Altair]

Up until the current US Administration, it could be argued that for the RCAF the F35 saga has played out in the exact opposite fashion.

There are very few things I'm thankful to trump for but this is certainly one, assuming we go with SAAB in some capacity.

 

[Altair]

I think the reality of "mock battles" is that its far less likely to be free play and far more likely to be scenario driven. Further for the last twenty years how willing were the Swedes or the US to have their full ECM suites playing with countries they aren't fully engaged with?

I dont think this really tells a full story either: Let’s Talk About Those F-35 Kill Ratio Reports From Red Flag

I agree, everything needs to be taken with a pinch of salt, but it's the best we have to go off of.

 

[Good2Golf]

A License built Indigenous Fighter, irrespective of which one will incur a higher overhead cost in terms of modernization and upgrades over the lifetime of the platform. We would not be able to piggyback off the USN F18 upgrade pathway for example.

So why could a licensed indigenously built fighter not be able to benefit from the licensor’s baseline in-service support and upgrade program.

A major partner in an allied consortium I would tend to think would come with firm expectations of significant purchases of the aircraft. Ie no “yeah but we now want to do a fighter competition”.

And wasn’t that the case with the F-35 when Canada joins the JSF Program? Why would this be a problem for a non-US program but was okay for a US-program?

I am not opposed to either thing but we need to be upfront about the end state desired, and the costs associated with the commitments to achieve it.

You mean like how the NSS was framed and costed?