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

[ytz]

Well you better tell the PAO's to update what they pump out. I grew up with pairs of fighters being shown "Patrolling Canada's North and coasts" Plus it's not clear who is doing what when you go online and if you use AI, it clearly believes that is the case. Causal observers will conclude that is very much what we use fighters for domestically.
Canadian sovereignty operations - Canada.ca

I struggle to see how this gives the impression that we're just flying CAPs all the time and they are all fighters:

Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF)​

The RCAF conducts air patrols to keep watch and defend Canadian and United States airspace. This includes the North. The RCAF also supports SAR and other operations in the North.

440 (Transport) Squadron is the only RCAF flying unit based in the North. It is based in Yellowknife and reports to 8 Wing Trenton in Ontario. The squadron operates four CC-138 Twin Otter aircraft. They fly people and equipment throughout the North. The aircraft perform “off-airport” operations on skis in the winter and on tundra tires in the summer. The RCAF also sends CP-140 Aurora long-range patrol aircraft on regular air patrols to monitor activity in the North.

CFS Alert also reports to the RCAF through 8 Wing in Trenton, Ontario. CFS Alert has a geolocation tool that allows it to find where a person or object is located on the globe. This is used as a tool to support SAR operations. It also supports Environment Canada, Arctic researchers and other operations.

The RCAF maintains Forward Operating Locations (FOLs) for fighter aircraft, in conjunction with NORAD. The FOLs are in place to send NORAD aircraft to remote locations across the Arctic. They have airstrips and buildings for maintenance and storing supplies.

People who live on the coast are well aware of Auroras and Sea Kings/Cyclones regularly doing Fish Pats and SAR. Sovpats are not always fighters. Heck, I am not even sure the majority of sovpats are fighters.

 

[ytz]

And therein lies the disconnect. If someone as prolific on these threads as @czech pick isn’t fully aware of how the RCAF conducts its business, you can bet your boots the average Canadian knows far less. For myself, I had no idea there weren’t even semi routine patrols operating in Canadian airspace. I think then, if you want the public to get on side, the biggest hurdle is communication. The CAF has got to find a better way to get the word out about what and how they do what they do (obviously observing opsec). How can anyone expect Mindy in Gimli to know why we should buy this or that when we don’t actually tell her what we want/need to do and why which tool is the right one for the job? You want better understanding for the CAF, you need a way to make the people footing the bill understand.

How much of this is people thinking air force = equal fighters, army = tanks, navy = large fighting boats? And how much of the Canadian public perception of what the military does is based on American cultural and media influences?

Expecting the CAF to educate past that with granularity is really a lot.....

 

[QV]

And therein lies the disconnect. If someone as prolific on these threads as @czech pick isn’t fully aware of how the RCAF conducts its business, you can bet your boots the average Canadian knows far less. For myself, I had no idea there weren’t even semi routine patrols operating in Canadian airspace. I think then, if you want the public to get on side, the biggest hurdle is communication. The CAF has got to find a better way to get the word out about what and how they do what they do (obviously observing opsec). How can anyone expect Mindy in Gimli to know why we should buy this or that when we don’t actually tell her what we want/need to do and why which tool is the right one for the job? You want better understanding for the CAF, you need a way to make the people footing the bill understand.

Or... Canadian Government stops exploiting CAF spending for political purposes. Grow up, legislate defence funding, and take it off the political debate plate entirely.

 

[ytz]

How can anyone expect Mindy in Gimli to know why we should buy this or that when we don’t actually tell her what we want/need to do and why which tool is the right one for the job?

We don't. But somehow, defence seems to be a unique space where everybody thinks their opinion should carry the same weight. That and high speed rail recently, I guess. And not even all defence. Just fighters. We have space projects that will spend double digit billions. You will not see Wikipedia experts pop up on which satellite bus is better.....

 

[Swampbuggy]

How much of this is people thinking air force = equal fighters, army = tanks, navy = large fighting boats? And how much of the Canadian public perception of what the military does is based on American cultural and media influences?

Expecting the CAF to educate past that with granularity is really a lot.....

I’m certain a huge amount of it is media based. Top Gun, Iron Eagle…all of those types. Yep. I don’t think it would be easy and I don’t imagine you could make certain people care no matter what you did, but usually people are more amenable with a reasonable explanation. And, yes, it really should be coming from the Government rather than the CAF, however, at the end of the day it’s the forces that have to make do with what’s been provided. I think I’d do what I could to press my case.

 

[OldSolduer]

Hey troops we’re peacekeepers aren’t we?

What do we need fighters tanks and warships for?

Oh what about our day care and free dental plans?

 

[Swampbuggy]

Or... Canadian Government stops exploiting CAF spending for political purposes. Grow up, legislate defence funding, and take it off the political debate plate entirely.

Agreed. Wholeheartedly. I do think there’s room for the explanation of why and what for, though. Hopefully, through both, it eventually just becomes part of doing business the right way.

 

[PrairieFella]

And therein lies the disconnect. If someone as prolific on these threads as @czech pick isn’t fully aware of how the RCAF conducts its business, you can bet your boots the average Canadian knows far less. For myself, I had no idea there weren’t even semi routine patrols operating in Canadian airspace. I think then, if you want the public to get on side, the biggest hurdle is communication. The CAF has got to find a better way to get the word out about what and how they do what they do (obviously observing opsec). How can anyone expect Mindy in Gimli to know why we should buy this or that when we don’t actually tell her what we want/need to do and why which tool is the right one for the job? You want better understanding for the CAF, you need a way to make the people footing the bill understand.

The reserve units and stone frigates are absolutely crucial in this going forward. They need to be far more visible and involved in communities to show the flag where the Regs usually cant as they were banished to the periphery decades ago. Not much COMREL going on in Cold Lake, Goose Bay, Shilo or Petawawa.

 

[MacNav63]

And therein lies the disconnect. If someone as prolific on these threads as @czech pick isn’t fully aware of how the RCAF conducts its business, you can bet your boots the average Canadian knows far less. For myself, I had no idea there weren’t even semi routine patrols operating in Canadian airspace. I think then, if you want the public to get on side, the biggest hurdle is communication. The CAF has got to find a better way to get the word out about what and how they do what they do (obviously observing opsec). How can anyone expect Mindy in Gimli to know why we should buy this or that when we don’t actually tell her what we want/need to do and why which tool is the right one for the job? You want better understanding for the CAF, you need a way to make the people footing the bill understand.

This. As someone who spent a career in communications, including in government, I've long bemoaned the state of comms coming out of the CAF/DND. It wasn't always so. Even in the bad old days of the 70s and 80s I remember pouring over every issue of Sentinel and the annual defence reviews (admittedly, as a brat I had better access then most but the were also available in libraries).

But the CAF/DND comms team don't exist in isolation. They can only communicate what the government wants and allows them to. And since I worked in government comms in the 90s that has become more and more restrictive.

It's too bad though because a big part of getting people behind something is to build up their knowledge of an issue so that they can see why something needs to happen. That's not unique to defence. I've said much the same thing on the HSR thread.

On this topic the lack of knowledge out there is stunning. There are some of us on this forum like me despite being civilians are relatively well informed on defence issues. But we are far and away in a minority and even then, we can't begin to match the expert knowledge of many of you.

The government (regardless of party) needed to have done a much better job 15-20 years ago on helping Canadians understand the importance of needing to replace the CF-18s and what we needed the replacement to do and why the F-35 was the right, indeed the only choice.

Now we're dealing with a very ill-informed populace who only really know that it's American, it's had what we here know are normal teething problems (I remember when the F-18 was going to be a lemon), and is much more expensive in their minds than the perceived alternatives.

Instead they see SAAB offering something that also goes fast and can be "built" in Canada and go let's do it. I'm sure the comms team at the CAF/DND could do a much better job of explaining why that's all smoke and mirrors but does the government really want them to while the trade war bubbles along?

 

[YZT580]

I struggle to see how this gives the impression that we're just flying CAPs all the time and they are all fighters:



People who live on the coast are well aware of Auroras and Sea Kings/Cyclones regularly doing Fish Pats and SAR. Sovpats are not always fighters. Heck, I am not even sure the majority of sovpats are fighters.

Boy, are you dumb. It is simple. Fighters patrol watching for enemy fighters trying to penetrate our borders. Books and movies say so.

 

[Swampbuggy]

We don't. But somehow, defence seems to be a unique space where everybody thinks their opinion should carry the same weight. That and high speed rail recently, I guess. And not even all defence. Just fighters. We have space projects that will spend double digit billions. You will not see Wikipedia experts pop up on which satellite bus is better.....

Of course. All a fighter does is fly over there, chase a guy around in another plane and either shoots it down or gets shot down. Same thing with tanks. People are gonna roll with the most obvious interpretation, especially backed up with “experience” that had a kick ass soundtrack. Until someone who knows says to Craig in Tillsonburg that we don’t buy these things to dogfight, we use sensors and standoff weaponry to hit someone before they know you’re there, he’s always gonna think there’s zero difference between two fighters except for speed and where it comes from. Pizza is pizza, until you know better.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Apparently people think our 3 Wg and 4 Wg are simply burning YFR flying CAP in the middle of the country.....

Well does get pretty boring I image in Cold Lake and Bagottville.

 

[ytz]

Well does get pretty boring I image in Cold Lake and Bagottville.

You think places where they have ranges that let them manoeuvre aggressively, train with ordinance and don't have to worry about traffic gets boring enough they would rather fly straight and level for hours over the Prairies?

 

[Furniture]

Instead they see SAAB offering something that also goes fast and can be "built" in Canada and go let's do it. I'm sure the comms team at the CAF/DND could do a much better job of explaining why that's all smoke and mirrors but does the government really want them to while the trade war bubbles along?

The GoC is being careful, because unlike posters on this site they have to be careful about what they say.

The Gripen passed the mandatory requirements, but was beat by the F-35. People on here can bash it, and make ridiculous statements to support their argument, but if the GoC/CAF do, they will likely face legal action by SAAB, and political backlash from Sweden.

Otherwise I agree completely with what you're saying. The CAF os terrible at communicating with the oublic in more than slogans... We need a lot more intwrviews and "day in the life" stuff being pushed by the CAF and amplified by the GoC.

We don't. But somehow, defence seems to be a unique space where everybody thinks their opinion should carry the same weight. That and high speed rail recently, I guess. And not even all defence. Just fighters. We have space projects that will spend double digit billions. You will not see Wikipedia experts pop up on which satellite bus is better.....

Defense isn't unique, its expensive and high profile. Just like health care, immigration, HSR, etc... You just happen to be in defense, so realize how off base people can be.

People who live on the coast are well aware of Auroras and Sea Kings/Cyclones regularly doing Fish Pats and SAR. Sovpats are not always fighters. Heck, I am not even sure the majority of sovpats are fighters.

You really overestimate the knowledge the average person on the coasts has regarding the CAF and what is going on...

I grew-up in a fishing community that regularly had Auroras flying around, and basically nobody knew what the planes were, or what they were doing.

Even when the CAF is in plain sight, the average Canadian doesn't register who they are or what they are doing.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Apparently people think our 3 Wg and 4 Wg are simply burning YFR flying CAP in the middle of the country.....

Let me ask this question - when compared to the USAF, say those F22's and F35's based in Alaska, how often are they flying sovereignty flights over Alaska? How often are they probing the Russian's airspace? Are we not doing something similar because of:

1) Age/availability of our remaining CF-188's
2) Lack of funding, lack of spare parts, to do so
3) Lack of adequate pilots/aircrews to do so
4) Lack of a 'reason to do so'

IF our existing fighters were younger and had higher availability ratio's, would we be doing these sort of things?
IF our funding in terms of fuel/maintenance/resourcing/spare parts allowed for more of this, would we be doing these sort of things?
IF we didn't have a lack of trained pilots/aircrews, would we be doing these sort of things?
IF there was a greater emphasis to 'show the flag', the 'RCAF' flag in the North, would we be doing these sort of things?

If your answer is 'No' to those 4 points, then how can the general public ever understand the need for a F35 vs a Gripen or a Eurofighter?

A number of years ago news broke out that the head of the RCN said that the majority of the RCN vessel's were all tied up because of a lack of funds. Once that got out to the general public I believe that money was found and the ships left their berths.

 

[Czech_pivo]

You think places where they have ranges that let them manoeuvre aggressively, train with ordinance and don't have to worry about traffic gets boring enough they would rather fly straight and level for hours over the Prairies?

No, I'm sure that a pilot would love to be in the air up there as much as possible. That would not be the boring part. It would be the being on the ground up there.