Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) News and Discussions

[Todjaeger]

This is personal opinion @John Fedup, but I doubt if Canada chose not to go for F35 they would loose participation. Canada and the US are attached at the Preverbal hip both geographically and industrially. Canada without an order has spent over 540 million dollars on F35 without buying any to this point with Lockheed Martin promising a return over the life Of the program in the Billions.

https://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/canada/documents/PwC_Economic_Impact_Study_of_Canada.pdf

Canada invests another US$70M in F-35 development despite no commitment to buy

The federal government has made another multimillion-dollar investment into the development of the F-35 stealth fighter jet, even as it weighs a new extension to the $19-billion competition to replace Canada's aging CF-18s.

www.ctvnews.ca

Turkey was of course forced out due to a number of issues that needless to say seem impossible to happen between the US and Canada.
As a matter of opinion I think F35 is the best bet, however I am not Canadian. Each of these Jets has great selling points for my neighbors to the North.
F35 gives state of the art in all aspects,
F/A18 Block 3 Rinos are durable no slouch machines. That bring multirole to new levels. It can even tanker siblings.
JAS 35 along with its great tech brings it’s unique ability to operate in the worst of cold weather from short strips.

I can see this cutting a few ways. If Canada does opt to go with a fighter other than the F-35, the F-35 programme could decide to "refund" the $540 mil. has contributed and the farm out the component workshare which had originally been intended for Canada. I see this as being a real possibility if one of the claimed factors behind not choosing the F-35 is workshare and/or offsets, since the F-35 programme has already set what those can be, and there is no room to change that if Canada were to set different requirements as part of their replacement fighter programme.

Another potential issue, if Canada was mad enough to think that a domestic Gripen build was a good idea, was that either Canada would need to pull aerospace component workers from F-35 component work to make components for domestically built Gripens, or setup entire new facilities and a workforce for Gripen while keeping existing workers producing F-35 components.

 

[Pusser01]

Just a couple of quick questions for the Canadian contingent, how often do the four Forward Operating Locations (FOLs) Inuvik, Yellowknife, Iqaluit and Rankin Inlet get used by the RCAF? Also, should the proposed FOL at Kuujjuaq been built at the sametime? Cheers

 

[Todjaeger]

Just saying. Canada isn't going to fight China and Russia in the event of war between them and America beyond possibly lip service. Canadians are peaceful and not will engage in foreign wars. This is the reason Gripen is sufficient for Canadian air force and the most likely plane Canadian air force will buy to replace the aging CF-18 frames. As for counter terror operations in the future, even if Canada rejoins the war on terror even though such a chance is extremely small, armed drones are far more suited to that type of mission than manned combat jets. The sortie costs are far lower for armed drones than they are for manned combat jets. Case in point. Syria and Libya where armed drones, not manned combat jets, rule supreme.

This article explains my point very well.

No, Canada Doesn’t Need to Spend $19 Billion on Jet Fighters | The Tyee

The Trudeau government is sticking with a plan to buy pricey, carbon-intensive aircraft based on wrongheaded foreign policies.

thetyee.ca

Having bothered to read through the link, I can see why Preceptor had issues with the piece when he had requested proof to support assertions that Canada would not fight China or Russia. Aside from a pricing inaccuracy which leapt out at me and also immediately indicated the political opinion writer did not know their arse from their elbow in terms of military procurement programmes, there was nothing which supported the assertions made. Rather, the writer was arguing that Canada should redirect at least some of the defence budget towards eco/green spending, and also reexamine Canada's membership in NATO and presumably NORAD as well, with the author apparently having a preference for Canada becoming a Non-aligned nation. My take on this is that the author is either ignoring or perhaps ignorant of both past security issues involving Canada, and the increasing instability and competition for resources occurring currently, as well as likely changes to international trade routes and areas of accessible natural resources if climate change continues.

Again, for the general forum membership, citing an article where someone outlines their opinions on what they want or think should happen, is nowhere near proof that the actual outcome or impact will even remotely resemble what was mentioned in the opinion piece. This is something important for posters to remember, if or when they make an assertion about what will happen.

 

[ngatimozart]

Having bothered to read through the link, I can see why Preceptor had issues with the piece when he had requested proof to support assertions that Canada would not fight China or Russia. Aside from a pricing inaccuracy which leapt out at me and also immediately indicated the political opinion writer did not know their arse from their elbow in terms of military procurement programmes, there was nothing which supported the assertions made. Rather, the writer was arguing that Canada should redirect at least some of the defence budget towards eco/green spending, and also reexamine Canada's membership in NATO and presumably NORAD as well, with the author apparently having a preference for Canada becoming a Non-aligned nation. My take on this is that the author is either ignoring or perhaps ignorant of both past security issues involving Canada, and the increasing instability and competition for resources occurring currently, as well as likely changes to international trade routes and areas of accessible natural resources if climate change continues.

Again, for the general forum membership, citing an article where someone outlines their opinions on what they want or think should happen, is nowhere near proof that the actual outcome or impact will even remotely resemble what was mentioned in the opinion piece. This is something important for posters to remember, if or when they make an assertion about what will happen.

That is one of the reasons why that particular poster's time on here was somewhat short. Preceptor swung the ban hammer on that one after the Moderators had their discussion and made their decision about said poster's future on here. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink. In this case the poster in question was given guidance by members, DEFPROs, and a couple of the Moderators. However such guidance was brushed aside and the poster continued on their path of ignorance and ultimate introduction to the ban hammer. The Moderators would like to thank to the forum members and DEFPROs who took the time to offer guidance to HeimDefan.

 

[John Fedup]

Just a couple of quick questions for the Canadian contingent, how often do the four Forward Operating Locations (FOLs) Inuvik, Yellowknife, Iqaluit and Rankin Inlet get used by the RCAF? Also, should the proposed FOL at Kuujjuaq been built at the sametime? Cheers

All of them are available to support NORAD operations and have runways that allow CF-18 use. Yellowknife has a transport role also. Actual use, other than planned exercises, probably minimal but don’t really know. When CF-18 interception occurs, the press announcements usually mention CF-18s operating out of Cold Lake, AB. No idea about Kuujjuaq but the location doesn’t seem to offer any advantage.

 

[Pusser01]

All of them are available to support NORAD operations and have runways that allow CF-18 use. Yellowknife has a transport role also. Actual use, other than planned exercises, probably minimal but don’t really know. When CF-18 interception occurs, the press announcements usually mention CF-18s operating out of Cold Lake, AB. No idea about Kuujjuaq but the location doesn’t seem to offer any advantage.

Thanks for the info John, apparently Kuujjuaq was to become a FOL aswell but was cancelled due to budgetary concerns. Cheers Hearings on National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1993--H.R. 5006 and Oversight of Previously Authorized Programs Before the Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, One Hundred Second Congress, Second Session

 

[John Fedup]

The RCAF is now receiving C-295s, 16 were ordered and delivery is to be completed in 2022. A very long completion to the FWSAR program, as per Canadian military procurement.

RCAF's first C-295 search and rescue aircraft arrives in Canada

The first of the new fixed wing search and rescue aircraft that will be used by the RCAF for operations has arrived in Canada. The aircraft landed in Newfoundland a…

ottawacitizen.com

 

[t68]

The RCAF is now receiving C-295s, 16 were ordered and delivery is to be completed in 2022. A very long completion to the FWSAR program, as per Canadian military procurement.

RCAF's first C-295 search and rescue aircraft arrives in Canada

The first of the new fixed wing search and rescue aircraft that will be used by the RCAF for operations has arrived in Canada. The aircraft landed in Newfoundland a…

ottawacitizen.com

Very bright yellow, even had to put my sunglasses on looking at the picture

 

[Calculus]

Very good video tour and description of capabilities for the C-295:

 

[John Fedup]

The US has offered SHs to Switzerland at almost $1 billion above the voter approved budget so Giovanni over at Defense-Aerospace thinks the US wants to see a F-35 order instead.
Pricing is for 40 jets so Canada’s 88 jet order would mean over 2 billion more for SHs compared to F-35s assuming similar configurations. There are undoubtedly different conditions and perhaps Canada operates under different FMS rules than Switzerland.

 

[Todjaeger]

The US has offered SHs to Switzerland at almost $1 billion above the voter approved budget so Giovanni over at Defense-Aerospace thinks the US wants to see a F-35 order instead.
Pricing is for 40 jets so Canada’s 88 jet order would mean over 2 billion more for SHs compared to F-35s assuming similar configurations. There are undoubtedly different conditions and perhaps Canada operates under different FMS rules than Switzerland.

Canada absolutely has different FMS and ITARS rules than Switzerland. In fact, Canada has different (and less) rules regarding purchasing US military kit than any other nation AFAIK. I would need to go through and check again as it has been some time since I reviewed the various US laws covering FMS and ITARS, but IIRC in many cases Congressional approval is no longer required for a sale to Canada. In fact, State Dept. approval might also no longer be required for many items. I suspect this is due at least in part to the degree to integration between US and Canadian defence/defence-related industries.

 

[pkcasimir]

Canada absolutely has different FMS and ITARS rules than Switzerland. In fact, Canada has different (and less) rules regarding purchasing US military kit than any other nation AFAIK. I would need to go through and check again as it has been some time since I reviewed the various US laws covering FMS and ITARS, but IIRC in many cases Congressional approval is no longer required for a sale to Canada. In fact, State Dept. approval might also no longer be required for many items. I suspect this is due at least in part to the degree to integration between US and Canadian defence/defence-related industries.

The US's Arms Control Export Act controls all US military sales to foreign nations. The act characterizes Canada as a NATO ally and sales to NATO allies are treated differently than sales to non-NATO allies. (Some non-NATO countries, (e.g. Israel, Australia) are designated as non-NATO major allies) Canada, and all NATO allies, still must go through the Foreign Military Sales process. Canada is not treated separately under this act. Any arms sale to Canada, above a certain dollar limit, must be authorized by the President (acting though the State Department) and is subject to Congressional approval.

 

[John Fedup]

If one of the aircrew left food in the helicopter, he or she will be getting an earful.

Canadian CH-149 Cormorant Helicopter Damaged By A Curious Polar Bear

The episode happened after the crew had to divert because of adverse weather and the helicopter was parked at a remote airfield. An unusual incident

theaviationist.com

 

[John Fedup]

Boeing is claiming Canada’s aerospace industry will receive $61 billion over the next 40 years with a SH purchase. Other than CAE, the companies mentioned are all wholly US subsidiaries so the actual economic benefits are questionable. Far more important is how viable will SHs be from 2050 to 2060? By the time an order comes out it will be close to 2030 before all 88 jets would delivered.

Boeing, Partners Commit to Boost Canadian Economy by $61 Billion

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

An understandable decision of Boeing, but this will of course give the Saab JAS 39E and LM F-35 better chances... After all you can spend that $14 billion only once.

Boeing would perform Canadian Super Hornet final assembly in US

Boeing would perform final assembly of its F/A-18 Block III Super Hornets in the United States rather than Canada if it wins Canada’s Future Fighter Capability Project...

www.janes.com

 

[fozraro]

There is no way Canada is buying any new jet fighters any time soon. The economy is in shamble because pandemic and huge amounts of funds are being diverted by the liberal government to social programs and social assistance especially the education sector which has been hit hard by school closing. Not to mention Canada is focusing on drones rather than manned jets which are expensive and few in number.

 

[John Fedup]

The economy is a disaster but drones are not being considered as a replacement for manned fighters. The likely outcomes for a fighter replacement are a reduced buy from the planned 88 jets or another delay. Politically, a reduced buy might be a safer decision for junior rather than yet another delay. If an election happens in the next 3-6 months and he gains a majority then delay becomes more likely or a small purchase of an unsuitable fighter.

 

[fozraro]

The economy is a disaster but drones are not being considered as a replacement for manned fighters. The likely outcomes for a fighter replacement are a reduced buy from the planned 88 jets or another delay. Politically, a reduced buy might be a safer decision for junior rather than yet another delay. If an election happens in the next 3-6 months and he gains a majority then delay becomes more likely or a small purchase of an unsuitable fighter.

All future wars are drone wars. There aren't going to be anymore WW1s and WW2s involving millions of men and tanks. Manned jets are inferior to drones. It's too expensive to train too few pilots. Drones can be built in the hundreds and pilots trained in the thousands. Anyone can be a drone pilot. You don't need to be physically fit.

 

[Terran]

Sorry but Drones have huge sets of limitations on them in the near and foreseeable future that make them inferior. Most drones are sub sonic, have issues due to the satellite connection that requires almost constantly to be operating for many to be piloted this restriction means that if the drone looses connection it becomes like a puppet with the strings cut. As such it has to fly straight and more or less level. No acrobatics.
Those that don’t depend on being preprogrammed for the mission making them less flexible.
Drones have a place and concepts are being worked to make them better yet you are still going to have manned and a need for manned it’s simply a question of how many are human filled and how many are not.

 

[fozraro]

Sorry but Drones have huge sets of limitations on them in the near and foreseeable future that make them inferior. Most drones are sub sonic, have issues due to the satellite connection that requires almost constantly to be operating for many to be piloted this restriction means that if the drone looses connection it becomes like a puppet with the strings cut. As such it has to fly straight and more or less level. No acrobatics.
Those that don’t depend on being preprogrammed for the mission making them less flexible.
Drones have a place and concepts are being worked to make them better yet you are still going to have manned and a need for manned it’s simply a question of how many are human filled and how many are not.

It's not like Canada will fight a major war. Drones will be sufficient for counter terror operations. The costs justify the means.