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

[Baz]

I am not talking about getting the F-35 (I understand that they will not consider it) but rather not getting those simili-fighter aircraft (Hawk and Scorpion) that would do us no good. It would not meet the requirement for range, endurance and payload.

Requirements are much more specific that the 5 items you said.

I would volunterr that the requirements are not set yet... although the RCAF will be responsible to recommend the requirements after the policy is provided by the government, it is up to the government to decide that policy and approve the requirements.

I see one big question here, do they want to do expeditionary strike or not:
- if they do, then I think they need to be reminded they can't have there cake and eat it to... the only real option is the F-35
- if they don't, they need to explain what that means; however, requirements like payload change pretty significantly...

My sense is that they want the second; and I'm not sure they're wrong.  I just hope they understand what that means.

 

[Kirkhill]

I would volunterr that the requirements are not set yet... although the RCAF will be responsible to recommend the requirements after the policy is provided by the government, it is up to the government to decide that policy and approve the requirements.

I see one big question here, do they want to do expeditionary strike or not:
- if they do, then I think they need to be reminded they can't have there cake and eat it to... the only real option is the F-35
- if they don't, they need to explain what that means; however, requirements like payload change pretty significantly...

My sense is that they want the second; and I'm not sure they're wrong.  I just hope they understand what that means.

If they want Sense with out Act then why not UAVs equipped with the F-35s EOTS (Avenger) or AESA (Predator), swarm technology (Scan Eagle) and sensor fusion (the hard bit they are still trying to work out with the F-35s?

 

[jmt18325]

I think all the speculation is rather baseless.  The Liberal platform, as clearly as it says no F-35, says that a competition will begin immediately, and used the Super Hornet as an example.  I'm almost positive that it will come down to about 50 Rafales or Super Hornets.  I would say the Typhoon, but if I recall, it's more expensive (although at a reduced rate may be affordable).

 

[Baz]

If they want Sense with out Act then why not UAVs equipped with the F-35s EOTS (Avenger) or AESA (Predator), swarm technology (Scan Eagle) and sensor fusion (the hard bit they are still trying to work out with the F-35s?

Sure...

I'm pretty sure their line of thinking is much simpler than that.

 

[Kirkhill]

Sure...

I'm pretty sure their line of thinking is much simpler than that.

Prolly....

 

[Baz]

I think all the speculation is rather baseless.  The Liberal platform, as clearly as it says no F-35, says that a competition will begin immediately, and used the Super Hornet as an example.  I'm almost positive that it will come down to about 50 Rafales or Super Hornets.  I would say the Typhoon, but if I recall, it's more expensive (although at a reduced rate may be affordable).

I'm not speculating at all.  I am seriously considering calling my MP:
- I want to know what sound defense policy they are making these decisions on
- if they still intend to do expeditionary ops I'm going to point out to them that doing so without the F-35 may be needlessly putting people at risk.

I don't really care about the discussion over jets.  I do care about the discussion over policy.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I'm not speculating at all.  I am seriously considering calling my MP:
- I want to know what sound defense policy they are making these decisions on
- if they still intend to do expeditionary ops I'm going to point out to them that doing so without the F-35 may be needlessly putting people at risk.

I don't really care about the discussion over jets.  I do care about the discussion over policy.

We're talking the Trudeau Liberals here. I don't think we're going to see very many, if any, expeditionary ops ordered by them.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The world may have more of a say about what Canada does than the Liberals realize. I suspect the next 20 years will be quite interesting....

 

[Loachman]

Like it or not, the statement Not buying F-35 was pretty clear.

Some previous Liberal campaign promises have been equally clear.

We still have GST.

We are still in NAFTA.

Sometimes, when in a position to view real facts after having benefitted from saying whatever they feel that they need to say in order to get into a position where they can view real facts, they actually make a decent decision.

But then there's always "no Cadillac helicopters".

So who knows for certain?

There is only one sure thing: The Liberals will either stick to their promises, or they won't.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

There is only one sure thing: The Liberals will either stick to their promises, or they won't.

Tell me something I don't know Captain Obvious!

 

[Baz]

Tell me something I don't know Captain Obvious!

I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night, so I'm qualified to pick the best fighter?

 

[CBH99]

I was gonna say....the way that was worded, you bound to be right no matter what they do!   

 

[Loachman]

That's my point - what they say to get elected is meaningless.

I would not bet any money either way.

 

[Underway]

So there are a number of factors here:

1) Do the liberals really "need" to keep that particular campaign promise?
2) What happens when the aerospace lobbyists get their claws into the new government (mainly based out of Montreal, Winnipeg and Toronto....Liberal seats in the last election)?
3) Does the government want to limit expeditionary capability for future governments, like the conservatives tried to limit taxing and spending by future governments?
4) What happens when the NATO allies get their input in?
5) Does the government need to have a minimum contribution into NORAD, what is it and what are the requirements?
6) What is the required role for the new fighters, just NORAD contribution, expeditionary, other??

That has a huge impact on the type and number of aircraft for the replacement.  I think the RCAF has boxed themselves into a corner.  I wouldn't be surprised if they came out and said we need more aircraft if the F-35 isn't an option.

 

[vonGarvin]

NEWSFLASH:

This is a photo of Justin Trudeau (or any politician from any party, for that matter) illustrating how much they are concerned with what fighter we get:

 

[MilEME09]

So there are a number of factors here:

1) Do the liberals really "need" to keep that particular campaign promise?
2) What happens when the aerospace lobbyists get their claws into the new government (mainly based out of Montreal, Winnipeg and Toronto....Liberal seats in the last election)?
3) Does the government want to limit expeditionary capability for future governments, like the conservatives tried to limit taxing and spending by future governments?
4) What happens when the NATO allies get their input in?
5) Does the government need to have a minimum contribution into NORAD, what is it and what are the requirements?
6) What is the required role for the new fighters, just NORAD contribution, expeditionary, other??

That has a huge impact on the type and number of aircraft for the replacement.  I think the RCAF has boxed themselves into a corner.  I wouldn't be surprised if they came out and said we need more aircraft if the F-35 isn't an option.

This is my two cents, run a competition, hope Dassault wins, yes I know its not the best offer on the table BUT they are offering a full technology transfer. Meaning we could Canadianize it, upgrade it, and do what every we want, including manufacture. Now if we increased the order and said hey unlike the F-35 we aren't building parts or sections but the entire plane. You'd win those seats back, build the first few in france till our production is online, then bang we are pumping out aircraft here, likely at a costly rate, but you just created thousands of jobs and boosted an entire sector.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

The manned-bomber threat disappeared long ago, and indeed, it was that threat, plus the need to allocate air assets to Canada's NATO contingent in Germany that drove the purchase of the CF-18. Similarly, technology has advanced to the point where drones could be used to handle most of the air patrols and surveillance missions in the country's far north with the idea of sending up a fighter jet or two only if the situation really demands it.

:facepalm:  Are you even in the Air Force??  I am sorry, I am so tired of everyone with their "drones can do EVERYTHING!!!" BS.

 

[The Bread Guy]

NEWSFLASH:

This is a photo of Justin Trudeau (or any politician from any party, for that matter) illustrating how much they are concerned with what fighter we get:

Well expressed!

 

[Edward Campbell]

So there are a number of factors here:

1) Do the liberals really "need" to keep that particular campaign promise?
    No party actually "needs" to keep any promises - witness Jean Chrétien in the 1990s: we still have the HST/GST and we're still in NAFTA. But this is a fairly easy promise to keep - witness Prime Minister  Chrétien, again, and the EH-101.

2) What happens when the aerospace lobbyists get their claws into the new government (mainly based out of Montreal, Winnipeg and Toronto....Liberal seats in the last election)?
    There are always ways to buy off special interests

3) Does the government want to limit expeditionary capability for future governments, like the conservatives tried to limit taxing and spending by future governments?
    That is, probably, the farthest thing from the politicians' minds, right now. I expect the PCO national Security Advisor to raise that point, but it will be just one of many
4) What happens when the NATO allies get their input in?
    That can matter: witness Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau's "walk in the garden" with Chancellor Helmut Schmidt which kept us, in a very limited (essentially useless) way in NATO's European Command and got us new, German, tanks

5) Does the government need to have a minimum contribution into NORAD, what is it and what are the requirements?
    I don't think it is detailed down to that level

6) What is the required role for the new fighters, just NORAD contribution, expeditionary, other??
    That's the government's decision

That has a huge impact on the type and number of aircraft for the replacement.  I think the RCAF has boxed themselves into a corner.  I wouldn't be surprised if they came out and said we need more aircraft if the F-35 isn't an option.
This is a golden opportunity for the DM and CDS to craft and present a CF wide vision to a new government, free of the "I'm more special than he is" stovepipes that characterize high level policy making in DND today. What [size=13pt]is the world situation, today? What do we really need? For what roles/missions? How jointly shall we fight and, therefeore, how jointly should we be organized? But, I expect we'll let newly elected politicians have the final only word.[/size]

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

OK. Time perhaps to provide some people with an Arctic perspective, in layman's term and unclassified version (available to any one who researches it even superficially):

Satellite communication in the Arctic, especially the high Arctic is not the same easy-peasy one available in the South (and even in the South we can lose it in bad weather - see Videotron ads against Bell Satellite). It can still be pretty dicy at times. So for RPA's, you may have to rely on something closer. Best bet if UHF, but that means very short distances, and hence tonnes of towers to set up, man and maintain.

Moreover, with the magnetic North Pole smack in the middle of the North-West Passage, other navigation systems become unavailable. Those same magnetic currents that give us wonderful Auroras also play havoc with all sorts of electronics up there.

Finally, RPA's are good at looking down, but not so great at looking all around them at the horizon. Up in the Arctic, you can see the weather change drastically faster than you can say "HollydelabricamollyBatman!", and it is unforgiving even with humans present. Sorry. you just lost an expensive RPA.