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

[Altair]

as for helping out PMMC, (if we are allowed to call him Uncle, god help PP for what I will call him), he's fine.

Canadians Favour Gripen over F-35

[Ottawa – December 17, 2025] As the debate over Canada’s next-generation fighter jet continues, Canadians are leaning decisively away from an all-F-35 future.

www.ekospolitics.com

43+29, carry the one....72 percent of canadians would support the Gripen in some capacity. The Gripen would win a supermajority in an election and we don't even know what their tax policy is.

 

[ArmyRick]

as for helping out PMMC, (if we are allowed to call him Uncle, god help PP for what I will call him), he's fine.

Canadians Favour Gripen over F-35

[Ottawa – December 17, 2025] As the debate over Canada’s next-generation fighter jet continues, Canadians are leaning decisively away from an all-F-35 future.

www.ekospolitics.com

View attachment 100920

43+29, carry the one....72 percent of canadians would support the Gripen in some capacity. The Gripen would win a supermajority in an election and we don't even know what their tax policy is.

When PM MC steers in the direction I agree with or he does something I approve, he gets "Uncle Mark"

I am very happy with the direction defence is heading under Uncle Mark. The F35 is a dicey issue, I will admit. But Globaleye is a win. We never had an AWACS plane. Same with HIMARS. Waiting to see which sub he picks, either way its better than no subs (which is what trudeau would have gone with)

 

[Altair]

When PM MC steers in the direction I agree with or he does something I approve, he gets "Uncle Mark"

I guess PP is safe from any moniker from me then.

I am very happy with the direction defence is heading under Uncle Mark. The F35 is a dicey issue, I will admit. But Globaleye is a win. We never had an AWACS plane. Same with HIMARS. Waiting to see which sub he picks, either way its better than no subs (which is what trudeau would have gone with)

So the question is, do you like the process we are going through to buy the subs? Build autos here, we buy subs work for you?

 

[ArmyRick]

So the question is, do you like the process

Process. Depends. On the F35 vs Gripen, in my mind that was settled twice, under the Harper and then Trudeau Government.

I realize we have to balance most effective choice vs the best interest for our economy, sometimes both can meet together (like the LAV6 is an excellent wheeled AFV)

I never want a choice made just to flip off our American friends.

That being said, there have been many decisions made I do agree with. Take Globaleye, I assume it was the ideal solution beyond wanting to make friends with Saab. We already use products from Saab like the Carl G.

You have probably heard by now, I am a big fan of South Korea's kit. They make good stuff. So do many Europeans. Especially the Swedes. For many years they stood on their own and faced down the Soviet Bear, solo. Norway (Kongsberg), Sweden (Saab) and Finland (Patria) have three defence companies that make excellent kit.

On defence, process has been compromised many times in the last several decades (both Liberal and conservatives have been very guilty of it), using defence procurement as a political football.

 

[Altair]

Process. Depends. On the F35 vs Gripen, in my mind that was settled twice, under the Harper and then Trudeau Government.

I realize we have to balance most effective choice vs the best interest for our economy, sometimes both can meet together (like the LAV6 is an excellent wheeled AFV)

I hope the RCAF comes around to that realization but i doubt it.

I never want a choice made just to flip off our American friends.

Which is fair.

That being said, there have been many decisions made I do agree with. Take Globaleye, I assume it was the ideal solution beyond wanting to make friends with Saab. We already use products from Saab like the Carl G.

You have probably heard by now, I am a big fan of South Korea's kit. They make good stuff. So do many Europeans. Especially the Swedes. For many years they stood on their own and faced down the Soviet Bear, solo. Norway (Kongsberg), Sweden (Saab) and Finland (Patria) have three defence companies that make excellent kit.

You know what, i wasnt aware finland made the patria. Screw it, they should buy the lav6 then. Fair is fair.

On defence, process has been compromised many times in the last several decades (both Liberal and conservatives have been very guilty of it), using defence procurement as a political football.

Youre right, but if we can get substantial benefits out of it I believe its worth it.

Jury is out on that though.

 

[YZT580]

I wonder: with all the wizardry associated with the F35 and with the capabilities of the simulators will the flight crews actually get to fly them much or will the spend most of their time in the sim? Same question regarding the Gripen. If they get significantly more time they probably won't complain as much as you think

 

[Czech_pivo]

New week, new direction coming from the US.

"........ the U.S. could work well with Canada on the sixth-generation fighters. You may get an invitation to join the U.S. as part of a consortium to do the sixth gen on fighter planes,” he said. Your choice. You wanna partner with the U.S. or not? Not our decision.”

https://nationalpost.com/news/trump-administration-growing-impatient-with-canadas-delayed-f-35-choice

Trump administration growing impatient with Canada’s delayed F-35 choice​

The debate over the F-35 is not just about air combat; Canada is also deciding whether it wants a role in what comes next

Carney’s team is reportedly mulling whether to seek observer status in the UK-Japan-Italy Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP), a sixth-gen fighter program plagued by money and timing issues that some fear could affect Japan’s commitment. British Defence Secretary John Healey recently resigned over a lack of British defence spending he feared threatened GCAP.
Hoekstra poked holes in the notion of a European partnership for Canada.
“Europe was working on sixth gen, and they’ve been working on it for more than five, maybe 10 years. The partnership between Spain, Germany, and France, poof, gone. F6 is gone. Gen 6 is gone in Europe,” he said.
“I know you’ve been looking at doing business in Europe on defence. You’re not gonna be doing it on Gen 6.”ontent
So should Canada be looking to join a sixth-gen program and, if so, does it matter whether it opts for the GCAP or an American-led system?

 

[KevinB]

The original intent (prior to 47 taking over) was that the NGAS (now F-47) was to be available to at least the 5Eye folks. We have obviously jumped the shark between that intent and now - but interesting to see that option may be opening again -- it is quite frankly the only way to afford enough F-47 is to make it available to other allies.

 

[Czech_pivo]

The original intent (prior to 47 taking over) was that the NGAS (now F-47) was to be available to at least the 5Eye folks. We have obviously jumped the shark between that intent and now - but interesting to see that option may be opening again -- it is quite frankly the only way to afford enough F-47 is to make it available to other allies.

Its impossible to know what is 'real' and what is not right now coming out from this administration. Best to discount all that is said and wait until a new one comes into power. Don't shut any door completely, just wait to see what occurs Jan of 2029.

 

[Good2Golf]

Its impossible to know what is 'real' and what is not right now coming out from this administration. Best to discount all that is said and wait until a new one comes into power. Don't shut any door completely, just wait to see what occurs Jan of 2029.

Join GCAP as a Tier 3 partner, as we did for JSF.

Contractually, the F35 can can be kicked well down the road.

Hoegstra seems to have forgotten about GCaP when he said Euro Gen 6 is dead.

 

[KevinB]

Join GCAP as a Tier 3 partner, as we did for JSF.

At least tier 3, preferably tier 2 (albeit not sure what Canada has to offer in that regard).

Contractually, the F35 can can be kicked well down the road.

You need at least 66 to replace the Hornets for NORAD, that can is getting pretty see through based on the times it has been kicked down the road.

Hoegstra seems to have forgotten about GCaP when he said Euro Gen 6 is dead.

Well technically GCAP is Global just not Europe

 

[Good2Golf]

At least tier 3, preferably tier 2 (albeit not sure what Canada has to offer in that regard).

The GCAP Tier that Canada joins with, will be solid I&W for whether *any type of NGAD/F-47 collaboration happens. Tier 2, Canada’s going Global…Tier 3, it’s keeping its options open to see if the U.S. recovers from its hegemonic degradation and can be a bit more productive than vindictive when it comes to playing nice with others with *whom it wants to spread programmatic (development, procurement and in-service support) costs.

You need at least 66 to replace the Hornets for NORAD, that can is getting pretty see through based on the times it has been kicked down the road.

At least two more purchase option cycles for that, so three years+ of political manoeuver space.

Well technically GCAP is Global just not Europe

Hoegstra being mindful and nuanced as he often is.

 

[childs56]

At least tier 3, preferably tier 2 (albeit not sure what Canada has to offer in that regard).

Canada provides a niche market of sensor fusion and electronic systems. It is not talked about much, but it is a valuable aspect of tech that is required for the systems to all work together. This little box to talk to that little box that makes the woo-way thing spin.
Some of the issues with the F35 and its implementation/ integration of the latest radars and senser systems may be linked to the US trying to limit what allies can have and not have access to on their F35 Platforms. Causing not only a sensor fusion issue but operability of the platform.
The sensor fusion of the systems on the F35 relied on Canadian Tech. They were part of the initial program for such.
Time will tell how things may go on.

I wonder with the 6th gen program, which Canada was very interested in but the US initially beat around the bush with us with our participation. Again they "need" us as part of the program (really they tell everyone they can do it alone). Now we might be seeing a change in heart of how the US does defense R&D/ partnership with Canada now that we have other partners that are very interested in our skills, resources and tech.

I don't think Canada is wrong to partner with Saab for the Gripen along with the GlobalEye as they will work together nicely. (it is a bit expensive per jet) The Gripen may not be the actual platform we are after, it might very well be the future cooperation we will have and the current sensor fusion/integration of the overall system they have .
I say order the full 88 F35s, order 60 Gripens for ferry flights and bulk of patrols. Get the assembly of the aircraft here, Hopefully SAAB will open up shop her in more R&D in Defense research.

You need at least 66 to replace the Hornets for NORAD, that can is getting pretty see through based on the times it has been kicked down the road.

Well technically GCAP is Global just not Europe

 

[Seyek]

New week, new direction coming from the US.

"........ the U.S. could work well with Canada on the sixth-generation fighters. You may get an invitation to join the U.S. as part of a consortium to do the sixth gen on fighter planes,” he said. Your choice. You wanna partner with the U.S. or not? Not our decision.”

https://nationalpost.com/news/trump-administration-growing-impatient-with-canadas-delayed-f-35-choice

Trump administration growing impatient with Canada’s delayed F-35 choice​

The debate over the F-35 is not just about air combat; Canada is also deciding whether it wants a role in what comes next

Carney’s team is reportedly mulling whether to seek observer status in the UK-Japan-Italy Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP), a sixth-gen fighter program plagued by money and timing issues that some fear could affect Japan’s commitment. British Defence Secretary John Healey recently resigned over a lack of British defence spending he feared threatened GCAP.
Hoekstra poked holes in the notion of a European partnership for Canada.
“Europe was working on sixth gen, and they’ve been working on it for more than five, maybe 10 years. The partnership between Spain, Germany, and France, poof, gone. F6 is gone. Gen 6 is gone in Europe,” he said.
“I know you’ve been looking at doing business in Europe on defence. You’re not gonna be doing it on Gen 6.”ontent
So should Canada be looking to join a sixth-gen program and, if so, does it matter whether it opts for the GCAP or an American-led system?

The current administration has demonstrated that any agreement with it cannot be trusted. While I have hopes that future administrations (Democrat or Republican) would be willing to work with us and include us in something like their 6th gen program, I don't trust that at all and a firm commitment solely to the US I don't believe leaves us in a good position. It only takes the next Trump to call us bad hombres and cut us out on a whim at any point.

That said - I'd like to see a minimum of the 88 F-35s, and I'd be supportive of investing into the US next gen efforts. Provided we also invest into GCAP or another 6th gen program, so we leave ourselves with options open. Yes - it may cost us some extra money, but we can make a final decision down the road based on what things look like at that time. I'd even be up for being an observer or joining whatever replaces FCAS. It'll cost us money, but can potentially lead to benefits for Canadian industry and gives us flexibility for the future.

In the interim - we should be looking into building up a domestic UCAV capability to go along with the F-35s, not getting Gripen (note: I am a Gripen fanboy, I love that plane, one of if not my favourite). If we do get it - it should be to have a large fleet and use the Gripen as a cheaper alternative to the F-35 for lower threat missions, and get enough industrial and economic benefits to help offset the costs of it.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

When PM MC steers in the direction I agree with or he does something I approve, he gets "Uncle Mark"

I am very happy with the direction defence is heading under Uncle Mark. The F35 is a dicey issue, I will admit. But Globaleye is a win. We never had an AWACS plane. Same with HIMARS. Waiting to see which sub he picks, either way its better than no subs (which is what trudeau would have gone with)

I think the only true independent Liberal defense purchase was the nine CC-330 Husky's. This was done really before the Trump push and looming threat and I give them 100% credit for a wise purchase. I suspect that the current spending spree would happen regardless of whether the Libs or CPC are in power, it's more of a response to outside forces and events. Carney to his credit is more pragmatic than JT ever was and is on the scale of world leaders average competent level. He just looks really good thanks to the previous bozo. I never forget that the Liberal only dumped JT, when it started to hurt the party, they didn't give a hoot about what he did to the country.

 

[dapaterson]

I think the only true independent Liberal defense purchase was the nine CC-330 Husky's. This was done really before the Trump push and looming threat and I give them 100% credit for a wise purchase. I suspect that the current spending spree would happen regardless of whether the Libs or CPC are in power, it's more of a response to outside forces and events. Carney to his credit is more pragmatic than JT ever was and is on the scale of world leaders average competent level. He just looks really good thanks to the previous bozo. I never forget that the Liberal only dumped JT, when it started to hurt the party, they didn't give a hoot about what he did to the country.

Original scope for CC150 replacement I believe was 1:1 (although even that represents, in raw volumes, a capability increase).

Expanding the purchase to nine a/c occurred as part of a generational plan to reach 2%. That generational plan was accelerated. So even that capacity growth was driven by external pressure (and, I suspect, messaging that as a multi role transport they could support emergency response outside war fighting...)

 

[KevinB]

Canada provides a niche market of sensor fusion and electronic systems. It is not talked about much, but it is a valuable aspect of tech that is required for the systems to all work together. This little box to talk to that little box that makes the woo-way thing spin.
Some of the issues with the F35 and its implementation/ integration of the latest radars and senser systems may be linked to the US trying to limit what allies can have and not have access to on their F35 Platforms. Causing not only a sensor fusion issue but operability of the platform.
The sensor fusion of the systems on the F35 relied on Canadian Tech. They were part of the initial program for such.
Time will tell how things may go on.

I’d be careful on how you work “Canadian Tech” - if you mean subcontract work by a subsidiary of a large US Defense company, I would be much more accepting.

The unfortunately reality is due to GoC miser activities, most Defense entities in Canada are either subsidiaries of a larger US firm (or UK or EU firm), or partially owned or heavily influenced by a US DoD Giant.

I wonder with the 6th gen program, which Canada was very interested in but the US initially beat around the bush with us with our participation. Again they "need" us as part of the program (really they tell everyone they can do it alone). Now we might be seeing a change in heart of how the US does defense R&D/ partnership with Canada now that we have other partners that are very interested in our skills, resources and tech.

Originally everyone says back and watched for NGAS, part of that was the USAF didn’t want any other fingers into the choice - just wanting airframe orders later.
Furthermore given Canada’s utterly embarrassing activity over F-35, PRIOR to President Trump coming to office, you can sort of see why courting you isn’t a high priority.
Even 88 Airframes IF you go through with it, are very late off the mark, aren’t even as much as some smaller countries.
Canada has been about as unstable and unserious on the F-35 from the get go -- while our current clown may be to blame for a portion of that, the 20 years prior doesn’t really get the same mulligan.

I don't think Canada is wrong to partner with Saab for the Gripen along with the GlobalEye as they will work together nicely. (it is a bit expensive per jet).

My concern on Global Eye is not Saab’s part specifically -- the size of the jet is what is concerning to me, as size can matter in terms of EW, as the power draw from large AESA radars and the required cooling - as well as the other resulting requirements, not to mention the lack of spare crews etc, is why I like the E-7 for the role.

The Gripen may not be the actual platform we are after, it might very well be the future cooperation we will have and the current sensor fusion/integration of the overall system they have .
I say order the full 88 F35s, order 60 Gripens for ferry flights and bulk of patrols. Get the assembly of the aircraft here, Hopefully SAAB will open up shop her in more R&D in Defense research.

What makes you think the USG would allow you to get the Gripen?
It took is ITAR controlled - and even if the USG allowed the Gripen, it may not allow you to put some of the stuff you want into it (that parent company, or silent owner issue...)

 

[childs56]

I’d be careful on how you work “Canadian Tech” - if you mean subcontract work by a subsidiary of a large US Defense company, I would be much more accepting.

The unfortunately reality is due to GoC miser activities, most Defense entities in Canada are either subsidiaries of a larger US firm (or UK or EU firm), or partially owned or heavily influenced by a US DoD Giant.

That is why some Canadian Tech Companies have remained as a contractor and not a subsidiary of the US giant machine (even though their main business is the US). In reality the US is a large part of Defense around the world. Buying into or up most of all the minors and majors. They often cant build half the stuff themselves so they buy the ones who can.

Originally everyone says back and watched for NGAS, part of that was the USAF didn’t want any other fingers into the choice - just wanting airframe orders later.
Furthermore given Canada’s utterly embarrassing activity over F-35, PRIOR to President Trump coming to office, you can sort of see why courting you isn’t a high priority.

The threats from the US on defenses and such says otherwise.

Even 88 Airframes IF you go through with it, are very late off the mark, aren’t even as much as some smaller countries.

That's fair. Again Canada was looking at 6th gen as the future. Not a Gen 5 Aircraft.

Canada has been about as unstable and unserious on the F-35 from the get go -- while our current clown may be to blame for a portion of that, the 20 years prior doesn’t really get the same mulligan.

Honestly the US has only been serious about selling a airframe not a full platform. It is evident with the level of support being offered it may not have been a bad idea to hold off. The Block of Aircraft Canada wanted is still not fully operational, dispite reassurance 10-15 years ago it would be.

My concern on Global Eye is not Saab’s part specifically -- the size of the jet is what is concerning to me, as size can matter in terms of EW, as the power draw from large AESA radars and the required cooling - as well as the other resulting requirements, not to mention the lack of spare crews etc, is why I like the E-7 for the role.

I am sure the experts have figured out the power requirements for their operations.
As for crewing, time will tell. I doubt it will have that much effect on the operation as it will be part of a larger overall sensor node, From the looks of it they have a room for the crew to rest and possibly bring extra if required.

What makes you think the USG would allow you to get the Gripen?
It took is ITAR controlled - and even if the USG allowed the Gripen, it may not allow you to put some of the stuff you want into it (that parent company, or silent owner issue...)

Ahh we can find parts to fit from other resources.
Makes things even more so that we may want to steer away from US suppliers. They may end up on the receiving end of those foreign suppliers not allowing the US access to their parts and supplies going forward
Also rings to point why would the US block sales of their equipment to a friendly country? It would only serve to fracture international defense cooperation more with their other allies.