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

[SeaKingTacco]

For what? That number was based on the minimum for NORAD and NATO commitments. If the F-35 number is calculated strictly based on NORAD, the number will be smaller still.



No. It'll end up being 90-100 frames total with some mix of F-35s. I don't think we'll any component of the mix be less than 40%.



Not substantially no. Massive changes are already underway for FFCP. Maybe if Americans get insanely touchy, we build a few hangars to separate the Eurocanard fleet we buy.

Or put all the Panthers at one base and the Eurocanards at another….

 

[ytz]

I believe the RCAF is looking at CCAs, just being low-key about it. It’s probably in pre-OA/ID so won’t show up yet on the CDB.

That's kinda the problem though. It should be much further along to meet any 2035 date. And I've heard way more buzz on say AEW than CCAs.

 

[ytz]

Or put all the Panthers at one base and the Eurocanards at another….

Also an option. Not sure how this impacts training. But overall, I can't imagine infrastructure would be that much of a hurdle. It's not like Rafales and Typhoons and Panthers don't exercise together at American and European bases.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Also an option. Not sure how this impacts training. But overall, I can't imagine infrastructure would be that much of a hurdle. It's not like Rafales and Typhoons and Panthers don't exercise together at American and European bases.

The infrastructure at Bagtown, Cool Pool and all the FOLs needed redoing, anyway, regardless what fighter we got. I can’t imagine there is much difference in hangar requirements for an F35 vice a Eurocanard…

 

[Czech_pivo]

Today's RCAF would have also had trouble supporting 88 F-35s. Any option will have to come with a capability growth plan.

The parallels to 1938/39 and now are evident. I'm not talking necessarily about a war occurring but about the overall makeup/abilities of the CAF in 1938/39 and right now.

Both were/are neglected. Both were/are understrength. Both had/has obsolete equipment. Both were/are realising that 'the times, they are a-changing.'

Change is painful. Change is scary. But change is necessary and its part of our everyday life. Adapt or die. I've been told that the key to survival on the battlefield is 'movement'. If you don't move, you die. Its the same with change, if you're not willing to change, you stagnant, become obsolete and then you die.

Some are saying/thinking that just doing enough to wait out the next 4yrs and we'll be fine. I will say that these people are fools. We cannot think like this. We need to be thinking 8yrs down the road and then another 8-16yrs after that. Alot of people thought, Pamela Harris will win the next election and we'll be fine. We just sprinkle a few new procurements here and there and not address fundamental, structural issues in the CAF and all will be well. Well guess what MF's, it didn't work out did it?

 

[ytz]

The parallels to 1938/39 and now are evident. I'm not talking necessarily about a war occurring but about the overall makeup/abilities of the CAF in 1938/39 and right now.

Both were/are neglected. Both were/are understrength. Both had/has obsolete equipment. Both were/are realising that 'the times, they are a-changing.'

Change is painful. Change is scary. But change is necessary and its part of our everyday life. Adapt or die. I've been told that the key to survival on the battlefield is 'movement'. If you don't move, you die. Its the same with change, if you're not willing to change, you stagnant, become obsolete and then you die.

Some are saying/thinking that just doing enough to wait out the next 4yrs and we'll be fine. I will say that these people are fools. We cannot think like this. We need to be thinking 8yrs down the road and then another 8-16yrs after that. Alot of people thought, Pamela Harris will win the next election and we'll be fine. We just sprinkle a few new procurements here and there and not address fundamental, structural issues in the CAF and all will be well. Well guess what MF's, it didn't work out did it?

I don't understand the point of your post. Nobody has suggested putting off recapitalization. If we're going to talk about the current plan, we're taking 16 F-35s by the end of 2028. So it's not like the current plan is fast anyway.

 

[Czech_pivo]

I don't understand the point of your post. Nobody has suggested putting off recapitalization. If we're going to talk about the current plan, we're taking 16 F-35s by the end of 2028. So it's not like the current plan is fast anyway.

The point is that I'm sure within all 3 major parties there is a cadre (in some parties maybe large, in others, maybe smaller), that hopes/believes that all this military spending will just go away after 4yrs when Trump is gone.

 

[ytz]

The point is that I'm sure within all 3 major parties there is a cadre (in some parties maybe large, in others, maybe smaller), that hopes/believes that all this military spending will just go away after 4yrs when Trump is gone.

There always is.

But I am also seeing signs that they also understand that defence spending is necessary to facilitate geopolitical aims. Carney, I think, understands that this the price of the seat at the table for broader deals with Europe. Poilievre, I think, hopes that this spending can reassure the US.

 

[Czech_pivo]

There always is.

But I am also seeing signs that they also understand that defence spending is necessary to facilitate geopolitical aims. Carney, I think, understands that this the price of the seat at the table for broader deals with Europe. Poilievre, I think, hopes that this spending can reassure the US.

Carney has the benefit - outside of ALL other current CDN politicians - of having had a seat at the Adults table during his time at the Bank of England. He was a Sr Gov't employee for a country that has nuclear weapons and is one of the Big 5 at the UN. That knowledge, experience is something very very very few here in Canada have had since the end of WWII.

 

[OldSolduer]

It’s frustrating seeing all the “elbows up” “cancel the F35” strategic thinkers on other outlets.

 

[T700]

So, retired Lt-Gen Blondin - the former Commander Royal Canadian Air Force that originally recommended the F-35 to PM Harper - has now come out saying it would be "irresponsible" to build Canada's fighter force solely on the F-35 due to the hostility of the US government. He says we're currently in a fight for our survival as a nation and is suggesting the RCAF should go with a mixed fleet of fighters, perhaps something like 36 x F-35's and up to 150 x other, European fighters.

My original thought was that the F-35 review announced by Carney was more of a negotiating tactic than an actual plan, but as more people with credibility (with the media and general public anyway) weigh in supporting the idea I'm beginning to think it's quite possible that we will end up with less than 88 x F-35's.

Blondin also had a CF 18 tail fin installed in the back yard at the official RCAF residence in Winnipeg for $68k including crane and traffic control. Which his replacement had removed and placed at 17 Wing for additional cost. Reno’s of same residence exceeded 1.5 million. While base housing and accommodations were rapidly failing due to floods, mold,and general neglect. Base CE took care of monthly electrical bill, new piano, lawn maintenance, dog sitting, and movement of patio furniture.

 

[GR66]

Blondin also had a CF 18 tail fin installed in the back yard at the official RCAF residence in Winnipeg for $68k including crane and traffic control. Which his replacement had removed and placed at 17 Wing for additional cost. Reno’s of same residence exceeded 1.5 million. While base housing and accommodations were rapidly failing due to floods, mold,and general neglect. Base CE took care of monthly electrical bill, new piano, lawn maintenance, dog sitting, and movement of patio furniture.

Never met the man but from what you say it sounds like he certainly had failings as a leader. However, he was a fighter pilot, Commander RCAF and a former cheerleader for the F-35, so that's why I simply suggested that his publicly stated opinion that we should cut back our F-35 purchase could influence the general public and our political leaders to support such a plan.

My personal bet/preference would be that we stick with at least the originally planned 65 x F-35's but come the mid-2030's seriously assess the current state of the 6th Gen Fighter and/or UCAV programs before finalizing our decision on the final 23 x F-35's.

 

[DBNSG]

Blondin also had a CF 18 tail fin installed in the back yard at the official RCAF residence in Winnipeg for $68k including crane and traffic control. Which his replacement had removed and placed at 17 Wing for additional cost. Reno’s of same residence exceeded 1.5 million. While base housing and accommodations were rapidly failing due to floods, mold,and general neglect. Base CE took care of monthly electrical bill, new piano, lawn maintenance, dog sitting, and movement of patio furniture.

So entitled to his entitlements then.

 

[Genetk44]

RCAF can’t support this with our infrastructure and personnel, but it’s nice to think it’s possible.

The parallels to 1938/39 and now are evident. I'm not talking necessarily about a war occurring but about the overall makeup/abilities of the CAF in 1938/39 and right now.

Both were/are neglected. Both were/are understrength. Both had/has obsolete equipment. Both were/are realising that 'the times, they are a-changing.'…….

Been like this since 1913…..Canadian politicians and citizens never ever seem to learn….

 

[ytz]

Been like this since 1913…..Canadian politicians and citizens never ever seem to learn….

Our military never learns either. You can just look around here for grandiose plans on how many armoured divisions we'll field in Europe.

It's great to dream. But it's impossible to plan if you don't acknowledge reality. And the CAF as an institution is plenty guilty of that on many fronts.

 

[ytz]

My personal bet/preference would be that we stick with at least the originally planned 65 x F-35's but come the mid-2030's seriously assess the current state of the 6th Gen Fighter and/or UCAV programs before finalizing our decision on the final 23 x F-35's.

A mixed fleet will mean a higher number of total frames. I think it's likely that we get to ~100 total with something like a 60/40 split. Which one gets the bigger share is probably going to be determined by politics. I just hope the Eurocanard is the Rafale F5 and not the Gripen.

 

[Czech_pivo]

A mixed fleet will mean a higher number of total frames. I think it's likely that we get to ~100 total with something like a 60/40 split. Which one gets the bigger share is probably going to be determined by politics. I just hope the Eurocanard is the Rafale F5 and not the Gripen.

I think that it we hope (need?) French/British support over the next 4+yrs into the future, we then need to be buying substantial kit from both of them. If we hitch our wagon to their wagon train it behooves them to support us.

Buying 60 odd Gripens won't get us that.

The troika really needs to be a mix of UK/France/SK with a mix of added on Euro's as required - for example Italy for the 127mm naval gun on the River's.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Well, SaaB is going to demo the Gripen Sovereign in Berlin in 2026. Completely ITAR free.

Interesting development.

 

[ytz]

The way the FFCP bid was run with mission scenarios was really clever. They should just run the same competition again and add the "No American dependency rule".

 

[ytz]

I favour the Rafale for the pure independence from the US. But the Typhoon would integrate well with current weapons stocks. The Gripen is so puny......