Canada Future fighter capability project (ex-Next Generation Fighter Capability)

helmutkohl said:
^ I suspect that Carney might be waiting for the outcome of the US mid-terms in a few months at the earliest, or the outcome of the next US election before making a decision, in hopes that there's enough resistance within the US to halt or even reverse US policies towards Canada under this administration.
Click to expand...
Canada have Huge US Factory like Dodge or Ford and others, they must be realy thinking at what they do....
 
red admiral said:
I don't understand why this thread continues to be spammed with Saab marketing nonsense
Click to expand...
This thread has seen an absolutely ludicrous series of replies. You guys can't see the sheer irony of trying to honor U.S. interests (NATO, NORAD) while simultaneously trying to counter U.S. interests? Kindergartners have more political acumen than the lot of you.

You are just arguing over which flavor of political capture looks more fashionable.
 
Archibald said:
Rafale with METEOR. That's the Arrow with Sparrow II, returning from the graveyard lol.
Click to expand...
Except Sparrow II only had about the same range as Sidewinder...

Honestly, something like F-35A with AIM-424s or AIM-260s would likely be the right fit for the Arctic Air Patrol mission. (I'm assuming that the software is the same between the different versions, so once USN gets the Malice cleared on -Cs the Canadian -As can carry it.)
 
MigLui said:
We are committed to about 30 F-35s, which should be enough for NORAD purposes. And there are plenty of Typhoon Tranche 1 available for lease, NATO obligations and overseas deployments; 40-50 would be adequate.
This incurs the costs of a dual fleet for about a decade, but at least both will use AMRAAM, not Meteor.

By about 2036 ( if all goes according to plan ) we can start looking at GCAP replacing the leased Typhoons, and possibly selling the F-35s to Germany, which seems to be stuck going nowhere with their future procurement planning.
Click to expand...

It also buys time which is crucial. And time means credible options in the fighter market at present.... GCAP might not work out (I don't think that is actually likely, but there is always a risk). T1's would bridge the gap at a comparatively low cost until that programme had developed further and risks had dropped away, or if it fails Canada would have other options. FA/XX may be around, KF-21 would have developed further.....the world of unmanned systems will have developed further.....you never know but F-35 Block IV work might have got moving by then....and if things have really gone south but the US has returned to sanity F-47 might be a necessary high end complement to F-35.

The 30 F-35 would give Canada a credible deployable force for some time, pretty certain the T1's would cope with anything that could actually reach Canada in the near to mid term.
 
bennyp said:
This thread has seen an absolutely ludicrous series of replies. You guys can't see the sheer irony of trying to honor U.S. interests (NATO, NORAD) while simultaneously trying to counter U.S. interests? Kindergartners have more political acumen than the lot of you.

You are just arguing over which flavor of political capture looks more fashionable.
Click to expand...
Sir, please, some of us are serious here. At least some try.
The mods even test these planes before buying them.
 
Last edited:
Ainen said:
Why you have to take it so personally? It's an American aircraft.
Click to expand...
I haven't take it personally.
Ainen said:
it's convenient to dump everything on Trump, but there's reason gripen is still there in this room, when rafale and typhoon aren't.
Part is Saab being clingy, but Dassault can be just as persistent when they see a chance.
And frankly speaking, Trump didn't make F-35 worse as a proposal. Trump, for the first time in decades, forced nations to buy aircraft on merits, rather than just paying US to do everything for them.

Then again, Gripen E was back then a "worse risky aircraft, later". Now it turns out they'll deliver FOC together with F-35, and it's very difficult to perceive Gripen as riskier any longer, short of Sweden being nuked.

It's talked about for 1.5 decades. CAF wants their barely affordable toy, though what they want doesn't add up another glorious achievement - F-16G in discussion (can F-35 replace any non-MC aircraft?)
Gripen offers same relative advantages over F-35 which F-16G will.
Click to expand...
You are inventing a narrative that has no basis in fact. I've previously given you the evidence why this position is untrue. That you chose to pursue it isn't for the purpose of truth or fact, it is just being contrarian. If you want to talk wild crazy speculation, then it belongs in Discussion and Speculation, not here.

galgot said:
Well that is a response as classy as the current US admin...
Click to expand...
At some point the behaviour needs to be called out. Other than perhaps a couple of the Saab evagelists there is no one else on this board who would consider what was proposed a valid or potential reason. There is no factual basis for it.
galgot said:
As for what Canada should get, en bon français, I'm with @Archibald for Rafales + Meteors, or even Typhoons + Meteors as second choice cause it's fully European too.
Click to expand...
I agree with your suggestions on alternatives and has been my position all along. If a second fighter is really needed and the reason is no reliance on the US then Gripen is not it. Eurofighter and Rafale make far more sense but at the very least run a competition and make non US content a weighted factor.

Wotan said:
Canada can send the already bought F-35 for deployment overseas in NATO operations and use the Gripen for air policing the Arctic.
Click to expand...
To do so requires the RCAF to approve the Gripen for NORAD which also would likely needs US agreement. Even then you put an aircraft with less range and reduced sensor coverage into a region that requires more of both.
 
I fail to see the justification for the length of this discussion. Canada will receive F-35s, that's the end of it. It's to be seen if they genuinely pony up the cash to acquire an inadequate aircraft on top of that rather than just buying more of the jet they already ordered even if it might displease people that have little grasp on their geopolitical situation.
 
Ozair said:
To do so requires the RCAF to approve the Gripen for NORAD which also would likely needs US agreement. Even then you put an aircraft with less range and reduced sensor coverage into a region that requires more of both.
Click to expand...
The actual canadian CF-18 operating in NORAD defense use standard Link 16 NATO data link, nothing special. There is nothing "NORAD special" regarding the communications between aircrafts and with the ground stations.
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.co...lly-get-link-16-while-h92s-get-link-11-01720/

And any of the more modern aircrafts carying AESA radars and IRST systesm are more capable from the point of view of sensors functionality.
 
Ozair said:
To do so requires the RCAF to approve the Gripen for NORAD which also would likely needs US agreement. Even then you put an aircraft with less range and reduced sensor coverage into a region that requires more of both.
Click to expand...

Realistically if Canada purchased Gripen, low hour Typhoon T1's secondhand, GCAP in years to come...any other option etc etc.....is the US really, seriously, going to deny 'agreement' for a fleet of interceptors that help cover its own northern approaches, that are superior to CF-18 with greater availability? What then?

All of them are 'NORAD' compliant, they've got Link 16, have VHF to communicate with civilian aircraft etc etc...

What is the US going to do? Stop accepting data from the Canadian sited radar stations? Move loads of its own fighters around the country in preparation to intercept at the International Border?
 
EmoBirb said:
I fail to see the justification for the length of this discussion.
Click to expand...
Interest and fun, long discussions can occur when people find the subject interesting and fun to debate. Nothing wrong about that.
EmoBirb said:
Canada will receive F-35s, that's the end of it. It's to be seen if they genuinely pony up the cash to acquire an inadequate aircraft on top of that rather than just buying more of the jet they already ordered even if it might displease people that have little grasp on their geopolitical situation.
Click to expand...
Brrrr... that's a bit... finale, Miss.
Note, I believe too they will get some F-35s, as they are apparently stuck to get some. But I believe too that acquiring some Gripens can be beneficial as a start to get a bit more strategic independence from the US in defence and build cooperations with other actors than the US.

Also it's not like RCAF didn't had several types together in service already, I think they operated CF-101s, CF-104s and CF-5s at the same time in the past. True that was another era, but it shows it can be done.
In peace time I could see the Gripen filling the role of the CF-5 for example, even tho with much more capabilities. Like having a something cheaper to operate for mundane missions like air policing for example, certainly less expensive than sending a stealth jet to escort an airliner in difficulty. Or just maintaining fast jet proficiency for a bigger pool of pilots.
All this while having that cheaper jet with still quite some punch if needed to supplement their F-35s in case of real troubles.
 
Last edited:
galgot said:
But I believe too that acquiring some Gripens can be beneficial as a start to get a bit more strategic independence from the US in defence and build cooperations with other actors than the US.
Click to expand...
It won't. What it can do is produce several hundred high level aircraft specialists in a time where theyatter a lot(drones), and in general save money(maybe for munitions even, god forbid) and available sorties.
 
Ainen said:
It won't. What it can do is produce several hundred high level aircraft specialists in a time where theyatter a lot(drones), and in general save money(maybe for munitions even, god forbid) and available sorties.
Click to expand...
One does not preclude the other. Your theory is not at odds with mine.
Sorry, "theyatter" ?
 
Wotan said:
The actual canadian CF-18 operating in NORAD defense use standard Link 16 NATO data link, nothing special. There is nothing "NORAD special" regarding the communications between aircrafts and with the ground stations.
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.co...lly-get-link-16-while-h92s-get-link-11-01720/
Click to expand...

timmymagic said:
Realistically if Canada purchased Gripen, low hour Typhoon T1's secondhand, GCAP in years to come...any other option etc etc.....is the US really, seriously, going to deny 'agreement' for a fleet of interceptors that help cover its own northern approaches, that are superior to CF-18 with greater availability? What then?

All of them are 'NORAD' compliant, they've got Link 16, have VHF to communicate with civilian aircraft etc etc...

What is the US going to do? Stop accepting data from the Canadian sited radar stations? Move loads of its own fighters around the country in preparation to intercept at the International Border?
Click to expand...
There is more to NORAD systems than just a data-link. The other side of it is Saab will have to open their systems completely for US security review and approval.

EDIT: The other thing I was going to add is I expect relations will improve significantly no matter which party wins the next Presidential election and a Canadian Gripen won't be a thing until 2031 at the earliest anyway. That would make approvals potentially smoother as long as Saab opens the closet to inspection (and that goes for Globaleye and Gripen).

Wotan said:
And any of the more modern aircrafts carying AESA radars and IRST systesm are more capable from the point of view of sensors functionality.
Click to expand...
No there is a clear difference. For starters the F-35s radar and other systems are more capable but the F-35s MADL is also significantly more capable and also LPI, unlike Link 16 & CDL39 combination on the Gripen. The capability of both radar and data-link allow an F-35 flight to spread out further while still sharing data in a way that an adversary will not detect. It translates to more airspace being covered for the same amount of jets and an adversary not being aware they are being tracked or targeted.
 
Last edited:
galgot said:
One does not preclude the other. Your theory is not at odds with mine.
Sorry, "theyatter" ?
Click to expand...
*They matter*. Rushed typing, sorry. As @Apophenia raises it - same specialists that assemble aircraft are applicable to simple COTS drone making, even when you don't have the rest of a full military aircraft supply chain (example - Antonov).
 
dark sidius said:
Canada have Huge US Factory like Dodge or Ford and others, they must be realy thinking at what they do....
Click to expand...
Those factories will run anyway in serious trouble soon...
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-canadian-automotive-steel-tariffs/

""Canada has been ripping off the United States of America for years," Mr. Trump wrote on Truth Social.
"On Jan. 1, 2027, Tariffs on all Cars, Trucks, both large and small, Automotive Parts, and Steel, will be increased to 50%," he said, noting that vehicles that are built in the U.S. are not subject to tariffs.
"Canada will be treated like a State no longer!" he added.
Non-U.S. automobiles and parts are currently subject to a 25% tariff. Imported Canadian steel already faces a 50% levy. "

The american car manufacturers will run into financial difficulties and will have to sell those factories to european firms. Probably the canadians will have soon both Gripen and Volkswagen factories, like the brazilians. Problem solved.
 
Wotan said:
On Jan. 1, 2027, Tariffs on all Cars, Trucks, both large and small, Automotive Parts, and Steel, will be increased to 50%," he said,
Click to expand...
We'll see what Congress has to say about that after Nov 2
 
As @Ainen suggested, any Canadian engineers, technicians, or other skilled trades involved in GCAP (or some other future fighter for the RCAF) are, by definition, unavailable for drone development and production under DDIM.

Wotan said:
Those factories will run anyway in serious trouble soon...
Click to expand...

That is already being sorted. By way of example, GM just poured CAN 1B into Canadian operations. This was not just a reaction, it was a belated survival plan. And much of it involves GM reversing its earlier decisions (Oshawa layoffs, CAMI Ingersoll EV halts, etc.).

Like the rest of 'Detroit', GM had cut Canadian jobs and production quotas to reduce the 'hit' of US tariffs. Then, GM raised prices and adjustments 40% on US-built vehicle intended for sale in Canada. Predictably, the end result was US-made vehicle sales in Canada fell off a cliff.

However, none of this really affects Canadian involvement in aerospace projects. Even with the full assembly of GCAP in Canada (however unlikely), no-one will be planning to nail 'em together in a 73 years old auto plant in Oshawa. And Ukraine - our DDIM model for all things UAS - has demonstrated that most drones can be produced in the smallest and simplest of shops.

What this translates into is now redundant auto parts makers in Ontario repurposing their shops to supply other industries - including making widgets for aerospace and, now, DDIM. We really don't need erratic industrial partners like 'Detroit' anymore.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The minimal number necessary for localised production and an interesting proposal for the engine.

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2026/09...ide-sweden-on-the-f-35-its-ceo-says-its-both/

" Saab says an order for roughly 40 Gripen E fighters would be large enough to support full aircraft production in Canada – not merely the manufacture of components, but assembly of complete jets. It would be the first such Gripen production operation outside Sweden.
That does not mean Saab is asking Ottawa to throw out the F-35.
“We’re not trying to replace F-35 … it’s both,” Saab CEO Micael Johansson told The Globe.""

"The Gripen E utilizes the American-made F414-GE-39E engine.
However, GE and Canada’s Magellan Aerospace said that, if a Gripen is eventually greenlit, they would set up Canada-based repair and overhaul facilities for the complex engine."


https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/ge-magellan-f414-mro/

"Citing industry and government sources, CBC News reported that discussions are ongoing regarding the potential acquisition of a larger, mixed fleet incorporating both Lockheed Martin F-35s and Canadian-built Saab Gripen E fighters.

If the acquisition proceeds, GE Aerospace would provide technical training and formally license Magellan as a Canadian centre of excellence for F414 engine sustainment.

Under the terms set out in the MoU, maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) work for the F414 engines would be based at Magellan’s facility in Mississauga, Ontario."
 
Wotan said:
https://www.19fortyfive.com/2026/09...-in-2028-saabs-jas-39-gripen-could-join-them/

"Former submarine officer Hush Kit has argued that: “The Gripen vs F‑35 debate isn’t about hardware or software. It’s about whether Canada has the self-respect to say, “We call the shots.”
And if Ottawa wants to be taken seriously — not as a junior partner but as a sovereign state — it should choose accordingly.”"

View attachment 824363
Click to expand...
That attrociously fat woman buys over 68% of all of Canada's exports. All of Europe purchases about 15%. That is with a free trade pact (CETA) in force between Canada and Europe since 2016. Europe - no matter how blonde and busty - will never replace the USA as a reliable trade partner.
Carney is being just as idiotic in his behavior as Trump. By the time a new American administration comes along, he will have ruined the trade regime no matter who arrives in the oval office. I am a Democrat and can't wait for Trump's retirement but his rebuilding of our borders and his efforts to bring our factories back home...those are popular with a large majority of American voters (75% of voters support his border policies per a Harvard poll recently and a recent Cato Institute survey shows that 82% of voters support government initiatives that return American industry back to the US.)
This idiocy of claiming that everything wrong between the US and Canada is Trump's fault is not helping our cross-border relations.
One last bit of rant. Canada originally d3cided that the F-35 was its choice to replace the CF18 in 1997, before backing out. Then they "finalized an agreement " for 88 of the jets in 2023. Now they are "reviewing" the deal again and commiting, at the moment, to a ludicrous buy of 16 freaking jets. If Carney can't get himself to commit to a reasonable fleet (88 is minimal for such a large country) he should find the balls to cancel the contract and order 100 or so Rafales or Typhoons. The Saab entry is nothing more than an updated F-20 and Canada is NOT a light fighter nation.

And BTW, stupid memes like this have no place in an intelligent discussion. Ai meme photos are just so damned juvenile.
 
Wotan said:
"The Gripen E utilizes the American-made F414-GE-39E engine.
However, GE and Canada’s Magellan Aerospace said that, if a Gripen is eventually greenlit, they would set up Canada-based repair and overhaul facilities for the complex engine."


https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/ge-magellan-f414-mro/

"Citing industry and government sources, CBC News reported that discussions are ongoing regarding the potential acquisition of a larger, mixed fleet incorporating both Lockheed Martin F-35s and Canadian-built Saab Gripen E fighters.

If the acquisition proceeds, GE Aerospace would provide technical training and formally license Magellan as a Canadian centre of excellence for F414 engine sustainment.

Under the terms set out in the MoU, maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) work for the F414 engines would be based at Magellan’s facility in Mississauga, Ontario."
Click to expand...
Makes sense, IIRC Magellan is currently one of the MRO providers for F404s.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom