I said when this came out that we should complete the 16 aircraft first order and tell them that we are reviewing the rest. This gives us lots of time to "review" as it will take time to get the jets, train pilots and create the infrastructure up here to house, not to mention the security requirements that goes with it.
That will likley take us to the mid-terms and we see if the US gets a congress that will clamp down on Trumps erratic behaviour, if that happens we can discuss the buy of up to 40 of them. But also look at non-ITAR options that are out there.
For the SPY-7 radar on the RCD, that ship has (proverbially) sailed.
However for things like subs, SPG, MBT and IFV, moving away from anything with ITAR in it will be a good thing and also why I am a fan of strong ties with South Korea. It moves us a bit farther from the US sphere and removes more constraints on us and sends the message that these things has consequences.
Nothing will happen will stick with our 88 order and if anything maybe increase. I like the idea of a proposal that ties in a fighter trainer and would make the most sense (and is probably already discussed. But still keeps the conversation grounded with mentions of future airframes in which no 4th gen can beat out Lightning on in terms of support.
We need a new fighter fleet now not in 6 years if we were to even go dual fleet and that’s not accounting for any delays for setting up such an industry.
Noah thanks again for a pretty in depth conversation that remains well grounded unlike certain Twitter / X users who are absolute simps for certain companies.
I could act like a real dick but I’ve choose the civil path with a bit of a trolling zest cuz god knows how many times we have to be reminded by X company from a certain country thats glorified like a Warhammer 40K faction.
I personally maintain that I think an option to slim our F35 order down to around 40 planes (one Sqn + trainers and spares), and then fill the rest with the Saab Gripen-E is the right way to go.
From experience in the military, we’re like a drug addict for US equipment, or like a child who is fearful of letting go of their favourite toy. It might be the best thing in the world to go with another piece of kit, but the military will say it’s IMPERATIVE that we go with the US kit, even when it’s not the case.
The GripenE is a great capability offset from the F35, it does all the things well that the F35 doesn’t. It’s faster, it’s cheap to fly, it can on rough surfaces, and more. It’s great for a lot of missions that you just don’t want to be wasting an F35 on. You don’t need a Ferrari to drive for groceries. You don’t want an F35 flying a CAP, or intercepting drone/missiles in flight; you want that F35 flying into enemy airspace to conduct SEAD missions. The Ukrainians have put their F16s to good use, and they’re not stealth fighters, very much not obsolete; just fulfill a different role.
Plus, it’s not clear that the 88 F35s are enough to meet all our commitments as is, and if the war in Ukraine has taught us anything; having fewer of a more expensive piece of kit isn’t always an advantage.
On the economic front I think the Gripen offer is a no brainer. Whichever company builds it would now have the capability and experience to build Unmanned Wingman Fighter craft. It would also be huge political boost with the Europeans when we desperately need friends.
In summary, the CAF is an addict for US equipment and scared of trying something new. The Gripen is a great aircraft that compliments the F35 well, and is far from obsolete. The Gripen also provides great economic benefits exactly when we need it. We’ve run dual fleets in the past, we can do it again. if we’re looking for things to spend money on, I think we could do worse than a duel Fighter Fleet.
Thanks Noah for a well balanced perspective! I agree with almost all of it! I also liked a few of the readers comments!
The F-35 decision has to be also considered against the past 70+ years of history, where U.S. policy and politics has dictated that they will not ever buy any major Canadian military platform (except one time under an exception, the US Army did order LAV’s back in 1982).
No doubt, the upcoming decisions by the Carney Gov at this time are incredibly complex and also important for the future of Canada as a preposterous, secure and sovereign nation.
Canada at this moment has a golden opportunity to set a new independent course for Canada and our industrial defense industries. I believe there is a growing demand in the global market for ITAR free products.
I'll comment on the F-35 expected to still be flying in the 2080s. I believe it is totally unrealistic to believe that a human flown platform, designed in 1995 and first produced in 2015 would still be effective into the 2080s. There are two main attributes that make this platform a current marvel 1) it is hard to target the F-35 in 2025. However, it is not impossible to target remotely. Over the coming years it will become more and easier to target and shoot down. There are many new ground-based and satellite-based tech developments that will accomplish this. 2) It is an excellent flying data fusion and information processing centre. This represents a unique combination today, however its computer hardware and software has a dated architecture and is already experiencing diminishing returns with each new revision I.e. "Technical Debt".
The broader economic consideration is insulating ourselves from arbitrary US actions like tariffs. I think this can take two flavours: One is to buy equipment from non-US sources, the other is to explicitly buy from as many US sources as possible. In America all politics is local, and the US defence industry is a master at influencing state and local politicians. The more US jobs that depend on Canadian spending, the better protected we are - and pitting defence majors against each other can only help us. From a strategic-economic perspective, buying both F35’s and F15EX’s integrates us into the most effective lobbying and influence infrastructure that exists in our most important economic partner. Does it make sense for any other reason? No, not really.
I said when this came out that we should complete the 16 aircraft first order and tell them that we are reviewing the rest. This gives us lots of time to "review" as it will take time to get the jets, train pilots and create the infrastructure up here to house, not to mention the security requirements that goes with it.
That will likley take us to the mid-terms and we see if the US gets a congress that will clamp down on Trumps erratic behaviour, if that happens we can discuss the buy of up to 40 of them. But also look at non-ITAR options that are out there.
For the SPY-7 radar on the RCD, that ship has (proverbially) sailed.
However for things like subs, SPG, MBT and IFV, moving away from anything with ITAR in it will be a good thing and also why I am a fan of strong ties with South Korea. It moves us a bit farther from the US sphere and removes more constraints on us and sends the message that these things has consequences.
What comes after thunder????
Lightning ⚡️
Nothing will happen will stick with our 88 order and if anything maybe increase. I like the idea of a proposal that ties in a fighter trainer and would make the most sense (and is probably already discussed. But still keeps the conversation grounded with mentions of future airframes in which no 4th gen can beat out Lightning on in terms of support.
We need a new fighter fleet now not in 6 years if we were to even go dual fleet and that’s not accounting for any delays for setting up such an industry.
Noah thanks again for a pretty in depth conversation that remains well grounded unlike certain Twitter / X users who are absolute simps for certain companies.
Honestly im just proud you're being this civil about it lololol
I could act like a real dick but I’ve choose the civil path with a bit of a trolling zest cuz god knows how many times we have to be reminded by X company from a certain country thats glorified like a Warhammer 40K faction.
I personally maintain that I think an option to slim our F35 order down to around 40 planes (one Sqn + trainers and spares), and then fill the rest with the Saab Gripen-E is the right way to go.
From experience in the military, we’re like a drug addict for US equipment, or like a child who is fearful of letting go of their favourite toy. It might be the best thing in the world to go with another piece of kit, but the military will say it’s IMPERATIVE that we go with the US kit, even when it’s not the case.
The GripenE is a great capability offset from the F35, it does all the things well that the F35 doesn’t. It’s faster, it’s cheap to fly, it can on rough surfaces, and more. It’s great for a lot of missions that you just don’t want to be wasting an F35 on. You don’t need a Ferrari to drive for groceries. You don’t want an F35 flying a CAP, or intercepting drone/missiles in flight; you want that F35 flying into enemy airspace to conduct SEAD missions. The Ukrainians have put their F16s to good use, and they’re not stealth fighters, very much not obsolete; just fulfill a different role.
Plus, it’s not clear that the 88 F35s are enough to meet all our commitments as is, and if the war in Ukraine has taught us anything; having fewer of a more expensive piece of kit isn’t always an advantage.
On the economic front I think the Gripen offer is a no brainer. Whichever company builds it would now have the capability and experience to build Unmanned Wingman Fighter craft. It would also be huge political boost with the Europeans when we desperately need friends.
In summary, the CAF is an addict for US equipment and scared of trying something new. The Gripen is a great aircraft that compliments the F35 well, and is far from obsolete. The Gripen also provides great economic benefits exactly when we need it. We’ve run dual fleets in the past, we can do it again. if we’re looking for things to spend money on, I think we could do worse than a duel Fighter Fleet.
Thanks Noah for a well balanced perspective! I agree with almost all of it! I also liked a few of the readers comments!
The F-35 decision has to be also considered against the past 70+ years of history, where U.S. policy and politics has dictated that they will not ever buy any major Canadian military platform (except one time under an exception, the US Army did order LAV’s back in 1982).
No doubt, the upcoming decisions by the Carney Gov at this time are incredibly complex and also important for the future of Canada as a preposterous, secure and sovereign nation.
Canada at this moment has a golden opportunity to set a new independent course for Canada and our industrial defense industries. I believe there is a growing demand in the global market for ITAR free products.
I'll comment on the F-35 expected to still be flying in the 2080s. I believe it is totally unrealistic to believe that a human flown platform, designed in 1995 and first produced in 2015 would still be effective into the 2080s. There are two main attributes that make this platform a current marvel 1) it is hard to target the F-35 in 2025. However, it is not impossible to target remotely. Over the coming years it will become more and easier to target and shoot down. There are many new ground-based and satellite-based tech developments that will accomplish this. 2) It is an excellent flying data fusion and information processing centre. This represents a unique combination today, however its computer hardware and software has a dated architecture and is already experiencing diminishing returns with each new revision I.e. "Technical Debt".
The broader economic consideration is insulating ourselves from arbitrary US actions like tariffs. I think this can take two flavours: One is to buy equipment from non-US sources, the other is to explicitly buy from as many US sources as possible. In America all politics is local, and the US defence industry is a master at influencing state and local politicians. The more US jobs that depend on Canadian spending, the better protected we are - and pitting defence majors against each other can only help us. From a strategic-economic perspective, buying both F35’s and F15EX’s integrates us into the most effective lobbying and influence infrastructure that exists in our most important economic partner. Does it make sense for any other reason? No, not really.