Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) News and Discussions

[BigM60]

Short answer on Romeos, no. The RCN wanted a larger marine helicopter which is one of the reasons the E101 was selected back in 1991. That program was cancelled by the incoming Liberal government. In the interim 15 E101s were purchased for SAR in 1997 (CH-149 Cormorants). When the time came to order new RCN helicopters, the size requirement still remained. The obvious choice for the Martin Liberal government was to order more E101s but this would have been a major embarrassment for former PM Chrétien so a paper design H-92 was selected as it met the size requirement (about the only spec met in 2005).

If the Cyclone program were to be cancelled it makes more sense to go with Merlins. Canada has 14 active airframes ( one crashed several years ago). In addtion Canada purchased the nine A101s from the cancelled presidential helicopter program for spares. I am willing to bet LM- Sikorsky would forget penalties if Canada were to order F35s. This might be a way for junior to order the right jet and save face at the same time, not to mention fixing the helicopter program that previous Liberal governments screwed up.

Will there be a Griffon replacement any time soon? It looks like a requirement that doesn't get a lot of discussion but considering they are assets the RCAF deploys overseas, at least a part replacement of the fleet might be a consideration and acceptable to the voters/tax payers?

 

[John Fedup]

Will there be a Griffon replacement any time soon? It looks like a requirement that doesn't get a lot of discussion but considering they are assets the RCAF deploys overseas, at least a part replacement of the fleet might be a consideration and acceptable to the voters/tax payers?

I can't see a replacement occurring anytime soon. Likely the government will piss away millions on next to useless upgrades on a helicopter that really isn't mission suitable. This link shows a replacement proposal. Notice the incredibly long procurement process keeping in mind the units being replaced are already 20 years old and aren't really mission compatible. This yet another example of procurement stupidity by the Canadian government (doesn't matter which party).

Tactical Reconnaissance Utility Helicopter

 

[BigM60]

I can't see a replacement occurring anytime soon. Likely the government will piss away millions on next to useless upgrades on a helicopter that really isn't mission suitable. This link shows a replacement proposal. Notice the incredibly long procurement process keeping in mind the units being replaced are already 20 years old and aren't really mission compatible. This yet another example of procurement stupidity by the Canadian government (doesn't matter which party).

Tactical Reconnaissance Utility Helicopter

20 years old and still working hard. The replacement projects are backing up and there will be a point where government commits more funds to get them done or announces some loss of capability. I will keep my eye out for the Defence Review, it will be interesting reading.

 

[John Fedup]

This link is to an article suggesting a path forward for Canada's aging maritime patrol fleet. Can't say I really agree with the restoration of the 4 Auroras. It makes more sense to start investing in P-8 fleet. As for trying to develop a MPA based on a C-series, that would likely end up costing more and there would be no export market left by the time it becomes flyable. Also, it is politically impossible if Bombardier maintains its current preferred share structure.

Canada needs to boost Aurora fleet now, start purchase of new surveillance aircraft | Ottawa Citizen

 

[gf0012-aust]

This link is to an article suggesting a path forward for Canada's aging maritime patrol fleet. Can't say I really agree with the restoration of the 4 Auroras. It makes more sense to start investing in P-8 fleet. As for trying to develop a MPA based on a C-series, that would likely end up costing more and there would be no export market left by the time it becomes flyable. Also, it is politically impossible if Bombardier maintains its current preferred share structure.

Canada needs to boost Aurora fleet now, start purchase of new surveillance aircraft | Ottawa Citizen

I'm not so sure on the statements around aurora capability - they only used a subset system and were never as capable as the USN P3C's, and the P3C's were mot as capable as the digital upgraded RAAF AP3C's . I'd suggest that the USN supporting comments were about moral rather than factual support

as a submission paper they completely missed the opportunity to argue in defence of sheer numbers - no reference to increased russian activity, no references to the strategic importance of the north westen approaches, no reference to rebuilt russian northern fleet and increased submarine activity, no reference to the concerns of sweden, norway, denmark and finland re the north sea fleet, and no reference to the 400% increase in breaches of sovereign air space since 2012. no reference to alternative solutions such as BAMs to save on manned costs but which would help maintain tempo

if you don't identify the threat and sovereign risk, then govts think you are just wanting the toys.

 

[John Fedup]

if you don't identify the threat and sovereign risk, then govts think you are just wanting the toys.

Very true but it doesn't really matter given our present government. The paper's authors are also likely assuming there is zero chance of any replacement program until 2030 or beyond so restoring the 4 Auroras is the only way so increase capability before then. Like so many other programs, things will be "put off" by junior. It's pretty sad when we have to hope for a major threat to our sovereignty in order to get new kit (by which time it will be probably too late).

 

[hauritz]

Very true but it doesn't really matter given our present government. The paper's authors are also likely assuming there is zero chance of any replacement program until 2030 or beyond so restoring the 4 Auroras is the only way so increase capability before then. Like so many other programs, things will be "put off" by junior. It's pretty sad when we have to hope for a major threat to our sovereignty in order to get new kit (by which time it will be probably too late).

Has anyone ever sat down and worked out the cost of all the programs that are being pushed back until some indeterminate time in the future?

It seems to me that it is incredibly irresponsible and even immoral for a current government to basically dump their problems into the lap of some future administration.

What may well happen is that in 10 or 20 years time the backlog of projects that need to be funded could simply become unaffordable and Canada would be forced to strip those capabilities from their armed forces.

 

[John Fedup]

Exactly right, the backlog on recapitalization of defence assets is becoming so large and when inflation and currency are factored in there is no way Canada can restore defence without a massive cuts to other programs. If interest rates ever get back to historical norms the situation becomes impossible given the debt levels of provinces and the federal government itself. A green water navy and no fast jets could be in the cards the way things are going.

 

[Novascotiaboy]

I agree that we are on the cusp of loosing many capabilities without adequate funding.

A look at the news today shows the soft side of our military capabilities as the army deploys in eastern provinces to help bolster flood defences and aid civil authorities.

Good to see our new TAPV vehicles in use.

The populace needs to realize the military is a nations insurance policy. When all else fails the military is there to protect us.

 

[vonnoobie]

I believe it's time the politicians in Canada make the hard decision. Either increase defence spending now or decrease the size of the armed forces.

Better to have a smaller force that is well funded for it's size allowing to to be properly equipped then a larger force having to duct tape cold war era crap togethor to make work.

Number's are great, As an Aussie I'd love for the ADF to be larger as there are benefit's but if you dont have the funding to support the larger force then it becomes a negative as the amount you can spend on each person training, equipping, supporting etc quickly decreases resulting in under trained, under equipped troops.

 

[John Fedup]

I believe it's time the politicians in Canada make the hard decision. Either increase defence spending now or decrease the size of the armed forces.

Better to have a smaller force that is well funded for it's size allowing to to be properly equipped then a larger force having to duct tape cold war era crap togethor to make work.

How much smaller should our armed forces be assuming the pollies want to keep spending at 1% of GDP? The RCAF has about 14,000 members and the RCN has 13,000 sailors. Both these services require the most capital expenditures. The army has 55,000 members. Cutting army numbers will mean bases being closed so there will be lots of provincial whining. The RCAF has responsibilities for all aviation assets including SAR,maritime patrol, RCN aviation, transport aircraft, and all combat aircraft. Short of elimating capability in these areas, there aren't any reduction possibilities.

The most vulnerable service is the RCN as it recapitalization costs are the going to be the largest. If pollies were to cut the frigate program then the AORs would no longer be required. The resulting savings could be used for a modernized submarine fleet and leftover savings could go towards RCAF recapitalization. Even if the government decided to get out of the fast jet business the resulting savings wouldn't be enough to save the RCN. As always, any decision will be based on electoral blowback (both federal and provincial) as well as pressure from allies.
Would NATO prefer a really good RCAF or RCN or three barely functioning services?

A GDP 2% on defence is only possible with trade threats (CETA and NAFTA) or an actual military threat. With our pollies, even this might lead to nothing.

 

[John Fedup]

Updated information on the FWSAR project and Leonardo's protest.



http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/ne...ore-than-1-billion-but-dnd-didnt-tell-bidders

 

[hauritz]

The same senate committee that recommended that Canada acquires 12 new submarines also recommended that Canada back out of the current plan to buy 18 Superhornets and instead go directly to a competition to select the next fighter.

The F-35 is such an obvious choice that I am not sure why Canada needs to have any competition to select a new fighter other than to allow Trudeau to save some face.

https://www.skiesmag.com/news/senate-report-scrap-super-hornets-start-fighter-competition/ilitary

 

[John Fedup]

The F-35 is such an obvious choice that I am not sure why Canada needs to have any competition to select a new fighter other than to allow Trudeau to save some face

Correct, saving face is the only reason. BTW, saving face for PM Chrétien is the only reason the Liberal party pressured PM Martin to buy Sikorsky Cyclones over EH101s.

 

[John Fedup]

Well guess what, perhaps Bombardier is good for something after all. If the Boeing-Bombardier dispute over subsidies to the C-Series results in the Superhornet interim purchase being cancelled it will be a win for the RCAF.

Ottawa hints Boeing shouldn’t take military contracts for granted in trade spat with Bombardier | Financial Post

 

[oldsig127]

Well guess what, perhaps Bombardier is good for something after all. If the Boeing-Bombardier dispute over subsidies to the C-Series results in the Superhornet interim purchase being cancelled it will be a win for the RCAF.

Ottawa hints Boeing shouldn’t take military contracts for granted in trade spat with Bombardier | Financial Post

Well, they're causing chaos in Brisbane with the non-delivery of railway rolling stock becoming a serious political embarrassment for politicians on both sides of the house, so your irritation with their aviation operations is mirrored elsewhere even if not at Boeing's expense.

oldsig

 

[John Fedup]

fftopicThe city of Toronto has been waiting for street cars for several years and city pollies are absolutely pi$$ed. Unfortunately the frigging witch premier of Ontario won't allow them to cancel the order. The cars are built (sorry, supposed to be built) in Thunder Bay, Ontario, where Bombardier is the only major employer. Worst managed company in Canada and constantly seeking corporate welfare.

 

[ngatimozart]

Well guess what, perhaps Bombardier is good for something after all. If the Boeing-Bombardier dispute over subsidies to the C-Series results in the Superhornet interim purchase being cancelled it will be a win for the RCAF.

Ottawa hints Boeing shouldn’t take military contracts for granted in trade spat with Bombardier | Financial Post

Yep, seems that Ottowa are playing hardball. This is the AP story via Defense News.

Canada warns it may cancel US Super Hornet jet buy over probe

Both are heavily protectionist economies so who blinks first loses.

 

[BigM60]

Yep, seems that Ottowa are playing hardball. This is the AP story via Defense News.

Canada warns it may cancel US Super Hornet jet buy over probe

Both are heavily protectionist economies so who blinks first loses.

The Canadian press is reporting the possible Super Hornet purchase as a 2 billion USD deal. Is that a little lite on for 18 Super Hornets? I am thinking 3 billion plus a little, depending on the extras. 2 or 3 billion is significant but in the total value of the commercial aircraft market, it's a low figure. Boeing's strength is the commercial aircraft market and they will do anything to keep their territory. If Canada doesn't buy the SH's, that line closes a little sooner but the 737 line continues with a stronger order book. Canada has a hand but I wouldn't bluff - Trump could give Boeing a replacement order for 18 SH's just to prove a point.

 

[John Fedup]

Yep, seems that Ottowa are playing hardball. This is the AP story via Defense News.

Canada warns it may cancel US Super Hornet jet buy over probe

Both are heavily protectionist economies so who blinks first loses.

With the recent orders coming in from the ME, I guess Boeing won't be too concerned with losing 18 SHs. Their intimidation of Bombardier really isn't about the C-Series and the 737 as the competition crossover is minimal, it is a warning shot not to go above the 160 seat threshold. I think they also realize that the F-35 progress is advancing to the point where the SH can't win the final fast jet competition later on. Even junior realizes this which is why the interim purchase was conceived as a face-saving measure.