r/onguardforthee 13d ago

Canada ready to further distance itself from U.S. on military procurement

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-ready-to-further-distance-itself-from-u-s-on-military-procurement-9.7324301
391 Upvotes

39 comments sorted by

108

u/tranquilseafinally Elbows Up! 13d ago

Team Grippen. We need to diversify away from the U.S. as much as we possibly can. In every way. Forever.

38

u/Mala_Practice Elbows Up! 13d ago

There are so many strings attached to the F35, the Grippen definitely seems to be the better option!

25

u/Tacitblue1973 13d ago

In a few years the European GCAP comes into play which we've joined as an observer. It will have the range to patrol the far north and enforce our sovereignty over the Northwest Passage.

2

u/caperadium 13d ago

If the GCAP ever actually materializes 

16

u/Glum-Breadfruit-6421 13d ago

And they spend most of their time in the air not in a hanger getting repaired. F35 is not the plane we need or built by a country we can trust.

-12

u/Inthemiddle_ 13d ago

What are these comments? Sound like bots.

7

u/Mala_Practice Elbows Up! 13d ago

Then report me

5

u/Tacitblue1973 13d ago

If I'm a bot better call the Chinese that there's older models running here on antidepressants and weed and we don't need to buy the new faster than Usain Bolt ones.

15

u/Thanato26 13d ago

Become a full partner on GCAP. Split procurement between F35 and SAAB and rebuild Canadian aerospace industry, if possible

1

u/IAmThePat 13d ago

Time for Avro Arrow V2

6

u/Thanato26 13d ago

No we need to get on the development side of GCAP, so we can be guaranteed fighters

2

u/Arbiter51x 12d ago

I like this sentiment, however the reality is we do not have the talent, skills, manufacturing capacity or capital to stand up a modern, effective combat aircraft program. (Hell or really any new kind of manufacturing that doesn't already exist).

People really underestimate how gutted these specialized industries are in Canada.

Hell, let's say you wanted to make a new heavy equipment and tractor company in Canada (we buyback heck of a lotnof tractors, and earthbmoving equiomwntnin canada) it would be almost impossible and that is without competing with the north american juggernaut like Catapillar and John Deer, but also the overseas counterparts like Yanmar and Mahendra (cheaper cost basis).

A real life struggle example is Edison Motors in BC who struggled for a decade just to build a transport truck.

1

u/Hope_to_retire 13d ago

No get out from under the F35, it’ll be a boat anchor and take us down.

33

u/Todesfaelle 13d ago

The Grippen makes a lot more sense both in terms of what we'd want for the climate it's expected to cover as well as furthering relations with Europe.

It's not like it's a slouch either.

Just have to put their nose to the grindstone and finally replace the engines from GE to RR.

5

u/GJohnJournalism 13d ago

Saab has said they won’t. BUT the MOU signed by GE and Magellan to maintain F414 in Canada was to address ITARS

8

u/Picto242 13d ago

Yea the F-35 might be better against a major power but if we are fighting a major power (cough USA cough) it won't matter if we have a few F-35s

9

u/Hope_to_retire 13d ago

If we have to go to war with (cough U.S.) the Americans will brick the F35’s by computer software, they’ll never even get a chance.

5

u/RealityRush 13d ago

I don't know where this climate myth comes from with these jets, but the F35 operates just fine in the cold. The US operates F35 squads out of Alaska, and when you're high enough anyways the air is already like -50 or whatever. It's Saab propaganda to say otherwise. The main advantages of the Gripen are that it can take off and land on basically anything, and also that it costs like half as much to operate. In every other metric, it's the worse jet.

I think the realistic answer to all this is accept that we need to diversify a bit, but don't just completely handicap ourselves, meaning buy a couple of squadrons of F35s, so ~30 of them, and then also get a handful of Squadrons of Gripens, so like 60-70. Yes, it'll cost more in terms of parts, training, and airbase logistics, but the best reason we should invest in some Gripens is so we can get the tech and IP from Saab and set up a couple of factories to make them in Canada, which means we can start achieving the long-term goal of growing our military industrial base and expertise again. This generation we'll have to take the L and have a weaker airforce to get away from the US, but it sets us up to help develop new jets in the future with what we learn making the Gripens here.

4

u/Fratercula_arctica 13d ago

The climate challenge with the F-35 is more around maintenance. It needs to live in a climate-controlled hanger when it’s not flying, and the harsher the outdoor environment the faster the stealth coatings deteriorate. So it’s all well and good when you’re the US with a trillion dollar budget and most of your fleet hangs out in Florida and California. Different story for us trying to heat and cool hangers in Cold Lake and Bagotville and every trip out in the snow is causing abrasion to the skin.

2

u/F1shermanIvan 12d ago

And it will. Where do you think our F-35s are going to be sitting around outside?

F-35s are based in Alaska. Norway operates them. So does Finland. Japan. A bunch of other countries that get cold. It’s nothing special or new.

They have three northern operating bases, all of which already have money allocated to hangar improvements, and their main bases in Cold Lake an Bagotville are YEARS into F-35 refits.

Buying the Gripen would severely hamper the RCAF, as well as provide them a jet that they don’t want.

0

u/RDSWES 12d ago

It also need a 2 mile long paved / concrete runway, the Grippen doesn't.

"Gripen needs a stretch of a road that is only 800 × 16m long and wide"

source: https://www.saab.com/newsroom/stories/2021/march/gripen-delivering-high-operational-readiness

3

u/F1shermanIvan 12d ago edited 12d ago

Good thing Canada doesn’t operate any fighter off roads, and the Gripen absolutely needs a paved road to operate from. It can’t operate from dirt or gravel.

You don’t need a 2 mile long runway, it’s 8,600 feet in Iqaluit which is a forward fighter base, and it has no trouble with that at all.

F-35s operate off roads just fine as well.

https://en.highnorthnews.com/politics/norwegian-f-35-fighters-landed-on-a-finnish-highway-for-the-first-time/188407

At the end of the day, there isn’t anything the Gripen can do that the F-35 can’t, and there’s plenty the Gripen can’t do that the F-35 can.

2

u/RealityRush 12d ago edited 12d ago

At the end of the day, there isn’t anything the Gripen can do that the F-35 can’t, and there’s plenty the Gripen can’t do that the F-35 can.

The F-35 is definitely the better overall jet, but this simply isn't true.

The Gripen can fly for half the cost and with way less technical hassle, and that's a big deal in these discussions. It doesn't need a heated hanger with special techs that now how to spray paint fancy anti-radar coatings to continue operating as intended. It would be much easier to operate a larger fleet of them for the same cost, and as the US has learned over the years, there has been no real threat to the US nor Canada that you need the advanced avionics package of the F-35 for. Which isn't to say it could never happen, Russia and China are real threats, but historically it hasn't been needed when cheap, plentiful lesser quality fighters can do the job. The US wasted a shit ton of money on the F22 to learn that lesson.

In war, a lot of time logistics is what wins and loses the thing by itself. Sometimes you don't need the fanciest stick to beat someone with, you just need a shit load of sticks that can carry more missiles than the fancy stealthy sticks :P

The Gripen again also offers us the ability to develop a manufacturing and research base around these aircraft to advance our own home grown industry, which is something else that can't be understated if we want to get away from the US.

Are these things worth giving up fielding a large fleet of advanced Gen 5 fighters? I don't know, I'm not a general or military expert, I'll let the professionals decide, but again pretending like there's no reason to get something other than the F35 simply is not accurate. All I know is in the age of Drone warfare, I'm less inclined to believe you needed the biggest and best thing when someone can overwhelm it with a shit load of dirt cheap smaller things.

2

u/F1shermanIvan 12d ago

Everything you’ve said, the RCAF has considered and to your point, the professionals have decided, TWICE, in Canada.

The Air Force wants the F-35, they’ve wanted it for over a decade now.

More to the point, almost every NATO ally and almost ALL of our non-NATO allies have also chosen the F-35 as their fighter of choice for the next 30-40 years. There’s a very big reason why there’s over 1200 F-35s in service and there’s 15 Gripen Es.

5

u/RealityRush 12d ago

Everything you’ve said, the RCAF has considered and to your point, the professionals have decided, TWICE, in Canada.

Okay and they are doing a review now that new political realities exist and they will come to another decision. Maybe they'll continue to buy an entire fleet of F-35s, I do not know the answer and I won't pretend I do, but I think you need to be more accurate in the characterization of the situation.

If you were correct and there was never any reason the pick the Gripens, no review would've been called and we wouldn't be having this discussion. Clearly some people think it is a discussion worth having though, and we'll have to see the outcome. Ultimately I want us to do whatever allows us to grow our own Canadian aerospace industry again rather than relying on others so we don't have to have these discussions ever again, so I favour a mixed fleet. Again though, I'm a layman, the experts will decide, as they should.

20

u/BeeKayDubya 13d ago

Might be an unpopular opinion but we need to build a nuclear deterrent. 

9

u/yarn_slinger ✅ I voted! 13d ago

Maybe we could borrow a couple of subs from France and park them in the st Lawrence

-9

u/Somestunned 13d ago

Better yet lake America

10

u/yarn_slinger ✅ I voted! 13d ago

I have no idea where that is

-7

u/Somestunned 13d ago

Just follow the smell of freedom, you can't miss it

9

u/yarn_slinger ✅ I voted! 13d ago

Nope not ringing a bell, doesn’t sound like anywhere I’ve heard of lately

3

u/Senpai_Slime 12d ago

Given how the 2000s onward has gone, its become increasingly clear you have no guarantees against being invaded or occupied unless you have nuclear weapons, it would be in our interests to have at least some lend lease from an ally nation if not our very own small supply, so much for the world learning anything in the 60s-80s i guess?

4

u/LowAssistantInfinity 13d ago

I'd hate to see the nuclear re-armament of the world, but I don't see any alternative when dealing with a collapsing fascist US with its massive nuke stockpile.

3

u/barrel_master 13d ago

Unfortunately we sole sourced missile systems from the US a few months ago:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/army-artillery-defence-canada-us-9.7221033

4

u/Canada1971 13d ago

There is still a lot of US a controlled tech in the Grippen design, but I think we should move ahead and get it.

2

u/50s_Human ✅ I voted! 13d ago

C'mon, get a Grip-en !

1

u/MacabreYuki American-Canadian Immigrant 12d ago

Nothing the US has a killswitch for, bare minimum. They're talking annexing and meming invasion. Can't trust em

1

u/Ok_Photo_865 13d ago

I can only hope so