Canada to buy fewer F-35s than thought!

[F-15 Eagle]

The Canadian government said on Monday it would buy 65 new F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, a figure lower than the 80 planes that had widely circulated in the media.
"One of the reasons there will be fewer of the new fighters is we anticipate the new fighters will have significantly greater capacity than existing fighters," Prime Minister Stephen Harper told a news conference.
He was speaking in Nova Scotia as he unveiled what he called the Canada First Defence Strategy, involving C$30 billion ($30 billion) in projected new military spending for the next 20 years.
The F-35s will replace Canada's CF-18s, which are scheduled to reach the end of their working lives in 2017-20. Canada bought 138 of them in the 1980s and now has 98, 80 of which are being refurbished.
Lockheed Martin Corp will make the F-35s. The Joint Strike Fighter program is being funded by the United States, Canada and seven other countries.

Link: http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssIndustryMaterialsUtilitiesNews/idUSN1231405420080512

 

[stan]

Thats a shame, what are the air defence concerns of Canada?

The UK is supposed to be ordering in the region of 120, most of us woul dbe happy to see us order 100 if we continue with our usual cuts.

 

[ASFC]

To be fair though, it is the right thing to do. Canada's domestic needs are not great (despite being a large country) due to having such a powerful friendly neighbour to the south. And it is not as if they cannot order more later on in the program.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

I think Canada has had enough defense cuts over the past 30 years and they really need to increase the size of their military. The U.S. Military is overstreached as it is and they don't have enough personal to defend everybody.

 

[Grand Danois]

I expect Denmark and Norway to buy 40 odd fighters instead of the publicly stated requirement for 48, regardless of choice. There is simply not enough maintenance crew around for more. This issue doesn't seem to be alleviated medium term either.

 

[ASFC]

I think Canada has had enough defense cuts over the past 30 years and they really need to increase the size of their military. The U.S. Military is overstreached as it is and they don't have enough personal to defend everybody.

Well lets be fair about this, if a country is attacking Canada, then in all likelihood they are going to be having a go at attacking the US as well (unless US-Canadian relations suddenly go down the pan and it is the US attacking Canada). I suspect that other than NORAD commitments, Canadas air combat arm exists purely to support operations abroad, hence the low number as they obvious reckon on working with other countries when deploying abroad. I'm not saying Canada should not have more F-35's, I believe they should, but it is closer to the 100 odd that Australia are after rather than having a huge dream of some large fighter force.

 

[Capt. Picard]

I agree with this. Canada simply does not need to waste billions on aircraft it will likely never need.

 

[tphuang]

I agree with this. Canada simply does not need to waste billions on aircraft it will likely never need.

what canada generally needs is the type of force that can assist USA in NATO operations. And of course, it has to show US that it's willing to spend money on defense and not completely getting free ride.

 

[RubiconNZ]

I agree with this. Canada simply does not need to waste billions on aircraft it will likely never need.

What do you mean never need, in 911 CF-18's were used extensively in the increased air patrols when the US stood down it's F-15's CF-18's, made up for a lot of the gaps, nice attitude its the same reason the RNZAF got rid of its Air Combat force. Not to mention it is a wealthy country and easily afford it.

 

[Falstaff]

I think Canada has had enough defense cuts over the past 30 years and they really need to increase the size of their military.

Well that's what they intend with their $30 billion, 20 year program.

The initiative will include major combat fleet replacements of surface combat ships, maritime patrol craft, fixed-wing search and rescue aircraft, fighter aircraft, and land combat vehicles and systems.

Canada will also increase its troop numbers to 70,000 regular soldiers and 30,000 reservists, for a total increase of 11,000 troops.

source

On the one hand, they will increase defence spending, on the other hand they will buy less F-35's. As I understand it, they are going the way most smaller NATO militaries are going these times and concentrate on NATO peacekeeping, peace enforcing and stabiliziation missions, reducing their "conventional" forces needed for symmetric warfare. Most countries can't afford both, and Canada as a relatively small (population and economy) country sets priorities.

Makes sense to me... Would be interesting how many F-35s will be built after all. There will be a few more cuts in numbers I guess.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

I hope 65 F-35s is enough fighter jets to meet Canada's defense needs so they can support NATO including the U.S.

 

[F-15 Eagle]

I agree with this. Canada simply does not need to waste billions on aircraft it will likely never need.

I would love to see how you come up with that conclusion? Canada does need fighter jets for their national defense and the CF-18s are too old to maintain their air superiority. As [FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica]robsta83[/FONT] has said that kind of attitude is the very reason why the RNZAF got rid of their A-4s and AM-339s(I think thats what there called).

 

[ASFC]

I would love to see how you come up with that conclusion? Canada does need fighter jets for their national defense and the CF-18s are too old to maintain their air superiority. As [FONT=verdana,arial,helvetica]robsta83[/FONT] has said that kind of attitude is the very reason why the RNZAF got rid of their A-4s and AM-339s(I think thats what there called).

Exactly. Canada cannot have a free ride, but at the same time cannot afford to have a huge air combat arm. 80-100 F-35's will suffice. Okay so they have ordered 65. But whats to stop them ordering more later on? Has it been said anywhere that they intend to stop at 65 or is Air Command just being cautious in making a smaller order?

 

[IrishHitman]

what canada generally needs is the type of force that can assist USA in NATO operations. And of course, it has to show US that it's willing to spend money on defense and not completely getting free ride.

Canada isn't the pet dog of the US, it's independent.
How much Canada spends on defence is up to Canada.

 

[RubiconNZ]

Exactly. Canada cannot have a free ride, but at the same time cannot afford to have a huge air combat arm. 80-100 F-35's will suffice. Okay so they have ordered 65. But whats to stop them ordering more later on? Has it been said anywhere that they intend to stop at 65 or is Air Command just being cautious in making a smaller order?

I do wonder if they are allowing room for the possible introduction of UCAV's as the RAAF are, with their Tier purchasing program.

 

[Sea Toby]

Simply put, in the age of escalating petroleum prices, expect more high end defense cuts. The price of energy has to come from some where. Do you expect government to find those funds from health care programs or from education, or from the justice system?

Canada bought as many Hornets to begin with having NATO squadrons based in Europe. They have sold those squadrons, the Cold War is over.

Canada wishes to have more defense assets along its northern coast, along with similar if not lesser assets along its eastern and western coasts. Especially during the current process of global warming.

Canada will modernized its armed forces, but not necessarily replace each asset one per one. With the United States allies next door, Canada need not worry much about defense as the defense of Canada. Canada is a world player and will continue to do so. If the United States have ever had manifest destiny aspirations of Canada, the US would have annexed Canada by now.

 

[battlensign]

Simply put, in the age of escalating petroleum prices, expect more high end defense cuts. The price of energy has to come from some where. Do you expect government to find those funds from health care programs or from education, or from the justice system?

Canada bought as many Hornets to begin with having NATO squadrons based in Europe. They have sold those squadrons, the Cold War is over.

Canada wishes to have more defense assets along its northern coast, along with similar if not lesser assets along its eastern and western coasts. Especially during the current process of global warming.

Canada will modernized its armed forces, but not necessarily replace each asset one per one. With the United States allies next door, Canada need not worry much about defense as the defense of Canada. Canada is a world player and will continue to do so. If the United States have ever had manifest destiny aspirations of Canada, the US would have annexed Canada by now.

1) Canada a world player? For how much longer? (Hard Power through economics and military are comparatively declining and soft power doesn't make you a world power - it only allows for flags on your backpack without getting attacked for it)

2) Why? It looks like it'll be sooo much easier in 20 or so years time!


Brett.

 

[tphuang]

Canada isn't the pet dog of the US, it's independent.
How much Canada spends on defence is up to Canada.

we are independent, but so much of what we do is depending on assisting US in NATO operations.

 

[Sea Toby]

1) Canada a world player? For how much longer? (Hard Power through economics and military are comparatively declining and soft power doesn't make you a world power - it only allows for flags on your backpack without getting attacked for it)

2) Why? It looks like it'll be sooo much easier in 20 or so years time!


Brett.

May I inquire why the British and the French, and the Germans can reduce their aircraft and ship's inventories, but Canada can't?

They had 12 frigates and 4 destroyers before, and will continue to have 12 frigates afterwards. A cut of four destroyers whereas the British have cut what appears to be six destroyers....

While the Canadians have not operated aircraft carriers for a long time now, it appears the French may cut one of their two aircraft carriers. Four destroyers or one aircraft carrier, which is more important?

The Canadians are about to build two or three large JSS ships, adding sea lift capacity they never had before. I don't see this as so much a cut, but as reconfiguring their navy, allowing their navy to be of more use. Destroyers don't necessarily project power, but sea lift ships do, projecting their army forces abroad. How many navies have built 12 frigates in the same class since 1990? Not many.

Australia felt comfortable with their navy before East Timor, but afterwards they feel the need to increase their sea and air lift forces. The Canadians see a need to increase their non existent sea lift capabilities having been found short in the not to distant past.

Most of the world's navies are seeing cuts. Most of the world's air forces are seeing cuts. Not many are building up their fleets of ships or aircraft. Not even the United States of America.....

AS LONG AS ENERGY PRICES ESCALATE FASTER THAN THE INFLATION RATE, I SUSPECT WE'LL SEE MORE DEFENSE CUTS ELSEWHERE AS WELL. As I see it, much of the free world will see a recession in the near future, there isn't enough oil to go around.

 

[jtl310]

I believe part of the problem is 8 years ago, it was initially decided that the F-35 would replace the whole fleet of F-18 hornets. From 100-> 80-> 65 in the past 5-8 years. Yes the current hornets will get modernized, but for how long will they last for? these are not brand new frames, its new avionics, radars.. mainly electronics to keep up with NATO protocol. In the end by 2020 majority of the CF-18 will have to be retired.

So i dont see canada maintaining more than 60-70 Fighter planes past 2020, unless there is a new war/cold war etc... In the end this is peace time and as such defense expenditures will be cut and honestly if they keep their promise of 65 i would be happy! I pray they dont cut anymore!

Because in the end, canada does not need such a large airforce. Just enough to maintain basic air superiority across Canada and a few squadrons that may be active abroad. Canada's main focus will be towards its army, where it can make a more significant impact. Not only with peacekeeping missions but just take a look at the armies role in Afghanistan. As for the navy, its main role will be supporting NAtO naval task groups, and protecting Canada's own waters.

In the end it all boils down to the war in afghanistan. It was a wake up call for the government when they realized just how far the canadian army had fallen. Since the war has started the army has been on a spending spree new tanks, trucks,etc.. But a second lesson was also learned by the government when they realised just how much money was wasted on renting planes for troop and equipment transport. Hence the new globemasters, hercules, and chinooks simply due to the war. As for the Jss same reasoning, to provide the ability to transfer large amounts of personal and equipment to support a combat role, but also for disaster relief and support.

In the end canada has been spending alot more money because IT NEEDS TO! and as such there is greater focus on the army, and strategic lift capabilities. But what is more important is it shows that canada is not going to sit back in the world stage. With strategic lift and a capable army, i do think stephen harper has every intention of placing canada back into the world stage.

In the end 65 new F-35 is not that bad, it could be alot worse! Then again we can always buy more. Or then again what if in the future the F-22 is allowed to be sold to US allies, we could pick up a few lol - yes yes i know its a dream that will never come true .. but still i can dream

Sea toby you have to consider just how large canada is, and by how much water canada is surrounded by. 12 frigates is really nothing, not to mention we bought 4 submarines and only ONE is operable!!! its a shame really!
and also if canada does build 2 JSS we will need appropriate escort for the ship a proper task group! It would be a real shame if we needed Nato allies to escort the JSS.

The french have been operating one carrier since the start of the 21st century, and such i only see them building one carrier.

The British are a different story, they have seen very large cuts across the board. Even though im sure it is a hard pill to swallow, you do have to take a look at the capabilities of the new ships! It is hard not to igrnore. In the end the british are still in a good position to play a role in this world. 2 carriers and 3 amphibious ships is not bad at all!