Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) News and Discussions

QuietSpike

New Member
The F-35B is the Harrier replacement VSTOL variant not a 2 Seat OCU Variant of the F-35A, there is no 2 seat F-35, Trg will be done in Simulators then straight into the Single Seat Aircraft. Canada’s original requirement was for a all F-35A fleet.
Yea, sorry. My mistake. It's a habit I have. I am aware of the difference.
 

QuietSpike

New Member
US approves Canadian Hornet upgrade
The US State Department has approved an upgrade for Canada’s fleet of Boeing F/A-18A (CF-18A/CF-188A in national service) Hornet combat aircraft, the US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) announced on 16 June.



 

QuietSpike

New Member
What squadron will fly the RCAFs new King Air BE350 ISR+ aircraft?
8 Wing has them listed as an operational aircraft, but no squadron has claimed them.

I'm going to assume 427 Squadron?
If so, that's interesting that are now flying helo's and planes.
 

oldsig127

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
US approves Canadian Hornet upgrade
You might like to go back and add a few lines of commentary to this post or you'll draw the attention of the mods. Sharing content from other sites without adding context opens this site up to copyright claims and other threats.

oldsig
 

QuietSpike

New Member
You might like to go back and add a few lines of commentary to this post or you'll draw the attention of the mods. Sharing content from other sites without adding context opens this site up to copyright claims and other threats.

oldsig
I don't know, dude. It's 2020 and that comes from a Defense Media source that encourages you to share the link via 400 platforms...
 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
I don't know, dude. It's 2020 and that comes from a Defense Media source that encourages you to share the link via 400 platforms...

OldSig was pointing out that on this forum, you're expected to bring some commentary to links and articles posted- not simply repost without comment.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
The recent USAF order for F-15EXs at 88 million each makes me wonder if Boeing should offer this as an alternative to the F-18. From a NORAD perspective, its range and kinematic performance along with its large weapons load make it a superior choice for interception compared to the SH and the price difference is reasonable. I still believe the F-35 overall is a better choice but next best may be Boeing’s new F-15EX.

Edit: one point I forgot is delivery and given the USAF needs, Canada would likely be in for a long wait on the F-15EX.
 
Last edited:

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Couldn’t figure out how to remove the grid box in post #1408 apart from just posting.:eek:
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The recent USAF order for F-15EXs at 88 million each makes me wonder if Boeing should offer this as an alternative to the F-18. From a NORAD perspective, its range and kinematic performance along with its large weapons load make it a superior choice for interception compared to the SH and the price difference is reasonable. I still believe the F-35 overall is a better choice but next best may be Boeing’s new F-15EX.

Edit: one point I forgot is delivery and given the USAF needs, Canada would likely be in for a long wait on the F-15EX.
In one way a Canadian F-15EX acquisition would be beneficial Canada, the US and NATO because it could be the weapons truck behind the F-35s after the F-35s have sanitised the target area. Something to think about.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
In one way a Canadian F-15EX acquisition would be beneficial Canada, the US and NATO because it could be the weapons truck behind the F-35s after the F-35s have sanitised the target area. Something to think about.
Agree and that is partly the reason why for the USAF decision to buy the F-15EX. The other consideration is the preservation of America’s fighter jet manufacturing base. For Canada, the delivery issue might a show stopper though.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
The tender for fighters is closing today. As the article points out, the effect of COVID on vendor pricing and the Canadian government’s fiscal situation will almost certainly mean fewer than 88 jets. Given the expected 300 billion pus deficit it is possible junior may delay the purchase. Hard to judge the political consequences of that given the likely massive whining of leftists demanding more dollars for social programs instead of defence (all junior voters for the most part).https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-fighter-jets-f35-boeing-saab-lockheed-martin-1.56694961596197118929.png
 

old faithful

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
John, did you read the comments in the link?
Seems that the Canadians are just as ignorant about the F35 as us Aussies!
Amazing that the only fighter that the RCAF want is the F35.....wonder why?
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
John, did you read the comments in the link?
Seems that the Canadians are just as ignorant about the F35 as us Aussies!
Amazing that the only fighter that the RCAF want is the F35.....wonder why?
Unfortunately it isn’t only F-35s that Canadians are ignorant about, pretty much everything defence related.:mad: As for the RCAF, they talk to other airforces so it is no wonder they want F-35s! I am reasonably optimistic LM will win but I think many will be disappointed in the numbers. I can already visualize junior defending a 30-40 jet purchase with an insincere promise to buy more when the fiscal situation improves (that is at least a generation away IMHO for Canada, maybe longer with another Liberal government). The Conservatives wanted 65 and junior raised the number to 88 (regrets that I bet). I would imagine vendors have adjustments in their proposals should Canada deviate from the 88 number.
 
Last edited:

Terran

Member
It’s official Boeing is offering Rhino block III
Conformal fuel tanks, podded IRST and as many missiles as Boeing thinks they can add well still being able to fly.
so in summery LM with F35 pitch, Saab with Grippen E and Boeing with F/A18E block III.
that’s three systems which have their own unique selling points. Panther has VLO internal weapons carry and passive coms. Cutting edge everything. US compatible and partially Canadian made.
Saab has proven single engine multi role and excellent rough field.
Boeing is bringing good all around, compatible with the US and able to do just about everything save For being a transport (I hear Paratroopers Don’t like being strapped on the missile rails and being dropped like bombs.) Loaded with as many Aim 120 as the armory’s can spare.
 

Toptob

Active Member
John, did you read the comments in the link?
Seems that the Canadians are just as ignorant about the F35 as us Aussies!
Amazing that the only fighter that the RCAF want is the F35.....wonder why?
The Dutch air force is the same. They had decided they wanted the F-35 long before any politician had thought about it. As far as I know they where pretty single minded on that track since before 2000. But that's not so strange because they all train in the US and the air force is very much used to working along the same lines as the US.

We can all think what we want about the F-35, and there's much to complain about the program. But there are some nice advantages to joining the program as well. As I said, we train with and operate alongside the US a lot. And for Canada, as much as the Netherlands, there's a good chance that any conflict we're likely to be engaged in will also involve the US and see us operating alongside them. And our other partners will likely operate in ways that are similar to the US and therefor similar to ours.

Another big plus for buying American is that you can tag along on their development of their own forces. Of coarse I'm talking about things like sustainment and upgrade programs. But maybe just as interesting is the development of doctrine, tactics and other operational practices for any particular aircraft. I don't know the ins and outs of how the RCAF trains their pilots, they don't seem to operate a fighter training squadron in the US. But I presume they do work together with others that operate the F-18, that being the US Navy and Marine Corps.

Would they do F-35 training (at least in part) in the US? Or would they do everything at Moose Jaw because a lot of training will be done on simulators? But theoretically it does make an interesting difference between the Boeing and LM bids because their prime users are different. I assume that a choice for the F-35 would mean adopting tactics and practices developed by the US Air force while the Super Hornet would mean adopting closer relation with US Navy practices.
 

HeimDefan

New Member
I was at a bookstore in Waterloo a couple of weeks ago and they suggest it is most likely Canada will go for Gripen. For a number of reasons:

1. The liberal government has continued to slash defense budget and barred the Canadian air force from participating in foreign wars. This leaves F-35 and Super Hornet too expensive for Canada to acquire and / or service, and makes such large aircraft redundant. Gripen fully satisfies Canada's requirement in light of the liberal party's policy.

2. Gripen offers Canada full assembly in the country. With the background of COVID, Trump ordered 3M to cease production for Canada and directed all production to the US instead, leaving Canada vulnerable. Canada has learned its lesson. Never depend on the US. F-35 and Super Hornet do not provide Canada full production chain the way Gripen does. That's why Canada is diversifying away from the US. It first became evident when Canada selected Leopard 2 from Germany instead of M1A2 from the US.

3. The US has angered Canada by imposing tariffs on Bombardier in order to intervene in the free market in favor of Boeing. For this reason, as payback, Super Hornet is out of the question.
 
Last edited:

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
The US, if they wished to, could restrict export of the GE engine technology used in the Gripen. Assembly of Gripens in Canada would be more expensive than just buying them from Sweden and component manufacturing wouldn’t be anywhere near what we are doing in the JSF program. A Gripen decision would lengthen the que of RCAF pilots wishing to join the two Commonwealth members committed to the F-35. I agree, Boeing screwed their chances big time and have given junior an excuse to reverse his no F-35 decision.
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
I was at a bookstore in Waterloo a couple of weeks ago and they suggest it is most likely Canada will go for Gripen. For a number of reasons:

1. The liberal government has continued to slash defense budget and barred the Canadian air force from participating in foreign wars. This leaves F-35 and Super Hornet too expensive for Canada to acquire and / or service, and makes such large aircraft redundant. Gripen fully satisfies Canada's requirement in light of the liberal party's policy.

2. Gripen offers Canada full assembly in the country. With the background of COVID, Trump ordered 3M to cease production for Canada and directed all production to the US instead, leaving Canada vulnerable. Canada has learned its lesson. Never depend on the US. F-35 and Super Hornet do not provide Canada full production chain the way Gripen does. That's why Canada is diversifying away from the US. It first became evident when Canada selected Leopard 2 from Germany instead of M1A2 from the US.

3. The US has angered Canada by imposing tariffs on Bombardier in order to intervene in the free market in favor of Boeing. For this reason, as payback, Super Hornet is out of the question.
Points 1 and 2 are diametrically opposed to each other. Based off the costs for domestic production of the Gripen in Brazil, which is ~USD$120 mil. per aircraft, as I had already mentioned previously in this thread, the costs for a domestic Canadian-built Gripen would be as high or higher. The only way that Gripen would be the "low cost" option is if Canada were to purchase them from a line that is already actively producing the aircraft efficiently. This essentially means importing them from Sweden, where the per aircraft flyaway costs might get down to ~USD$69 mil though I have seen some sources which say Gripen's flyaway cost is USD$85 mil.

For a point of comparison, the F-35A cost from LRIP Lot 14 was USD$77.9 mil. data for this can be found here.

The basic gist of that is the assertions that importing the Gripen is the 'low cost' option to acquire new fighters may no longer be accurate, and even if is still true, the cost difference is perhaps 10% less, while the F-35 is at the end of the low rate initial production cycles. While I expect the operating costs for Gripen to continue to be lower, the range of capabilities that a Gripen can offer both now and into the future will also be less. Especially if a conflict were to break out between a peer or near-peer competitor. The other thing to consider is not just the costs to acquire and operate a fighter, but also it's service life. In this regard, the F-35 is likely to have a longer service life while remaining an effective and relevant asset than if any new 4th or 4.5 gen fighters were to be purchased by the RCAF. Where things could really start to fall down is the future options and costs to fit newly developed kit to 4th and 4.5 gen fighters. The fewer user-nations for a fighter, the less urgency there would be to develop and integrate new weapon capabilities on the part of manufacturers, as it would be dependent on what the user-nations wanted and were willing to pay for. Being part of a wide user base however is likely to increase what gets developed and integrated, as well as reducing the costs different users pay because it can be spread around more.

With all the above in mind, there are a number of options available to the RCAF. I know what I prefer as well as why I prefer it, but absent further information or guidance from the CANGov, we cannot state with anything like certainty what will end up being selected, or why.
 

HeimDefan

New Member
The US, if they wished to, could restrict export of the GE engine technology used in the Gripen. Assembly of Gripens in Canada would be more expensive than just buying them from Sweden and component manufacturing wouldn’t be anywhere near what we are doing in the JSF program. A Gripen decision would lengthen the que of RCAF pilots wishing to join the two Commonwealth members committed to the F-35. I agree, Boeing screwed their chances big time and have given junior an excuse to reverse his no F-35 decision.
The liberal government is keen on creating new manufacturing jobs in Canada. Especially now with COVID causing record high unemployment. To this end, Gripen is the best choice because it offers full assembly in Canada. Canada used to have world class aviation industry in the 1950s so it's not a difficult to rebuild Canada's aviation industry.

Sweden being a neutral country has the option to co develop engine with China and Russia. JF-17 Block 3 is powered by RD-93MA which is a further development of RD-33MK and it is a fantastic little engine. Gripen in the future if US threatens sanctions can be powered by new generation of Swedish engines.
 
Top