BEST FIGHTER FOR CANADA

We've done it before... One way or another, Canada will soon have a mixed fighter fleet. The RCAF will be fielding at least two, possibly three different fighter designs.  The CF-18, its replacement, and whatever is chosen to be Canada's "interim fighter" (which may end up being one of the former).  One way or another, a mixed fleet will be unavailable as Canada takes delivery of newer fighters while still flying old ones. Needless to say, the usage of multiple fighter types will put additional strain on the RCAF as it is forced to juggle with different training requirements, basing requirements, and logistic concerns.  Simply put, multiple fighter types means more cost. It is for this reason that Canada retired its fleet of CF-116 (CF-5) Freedom Fighters.  Despite being much cheaper to operate than its CF-18 stablemate, this was not enough to justify the extra hassle of maintaining a less capable fighter.  It was deemed wiser to phase out the CF-116 a...

More than this... Sixty-five fighters. That is the minimum amount the RCAF has stated it needs to fulfill its duties.  This is a sharp decline in the current 77 CF-18s Canada currently operates.  Sixty-five fighters would also be less than half of the total 138 CF-18s procured by the RCAF over the years.  It should be noted that the RCAF also operated the CF-116 (CF-5) Freedom Fighter at the time as well.   Why so few? For one, the end of the Cold War has supposedly brought on a "peace dividend" in which military spending can be cut as the world becomes a safer place .   There is also the argument that a modern, advanced fighter like the F-65 offers so much capability, performance, and reliability that less are needed. Initially, RCAF brass requested 78 F-35s to replace the CF-18s on a 1:1 basis.  This was reduced to 65, likely to get the purchase price under a $9 billion limit. While one cannot expect the RCAF to match the USAF...

Changing of the guard? Let me make one thing abundantly clear:  I do not consider the Super Hornet to be the "Best Fighter for Canada"™. The Eurofighter Typhoon offers better performance.  As does the Rafale.  The Saab Gripen E/F offers the best bang-for-the buck.  The F-35 is undoubtedly the future.  So why am I so ecstatic about reports that the Super Hornet is on track to become Canada's "interim" fighter? Put simply, the Super Hornet offers a substantial capability upgrade to our aging CF-18 fleet.  While it does not fly faster, nor is it more agile than the current CF-18, it does benefit from a much improved range, payload, and avionic suite.  Best of all, the Super Hornet represents the safest choice.  It is a tried-and-true platform that offers an easy transition. News of an "interim" Super Hornet acquisition is certainly better than no news at all. Some are calling foul, however.  The Liberals did promise to hold a "fair a...

The USN's and Australia's future fighters. If Canada were to go it alone in building its next fighter, we should challenge the JSF marketing machine head-on.  That is what 46% of you believe, anyway.  While the medium-sized multirole fighter won out, it did not get a clear majority.  19% of you think we would be better off developing a smaller, cheaper aircraft, while  34% of you think that Canada should go big or go home. This goes to show, you cannot please everybody. Or can you? Instead of taking a "one size fits all" mentality, Canada could hedge its bets by operating a mixed fleet of fighters.  I have advocated for this before , and I still believe it allows the most flexibility.  I am not alone in my belief here, as most of the world's major air forces operate at least two front-line fighters. In 20 years, some of the largest fighter fleets around the world will look like this: USAF:  F-22, F-35A, F-15E USN:  F/A-18E/F, EA-1...