Wes - this is the most balanced, non- emotional piece on what we should be doing and why. I don’t think we were ever going to cancel the paid for F-35s. The current story making the rounds is an almost balanced fleet of Gripens and F-35s. Used as you suggest will give us real options and reduce our dependency for decades to come. Thanks for a thoughtful and candid essay.
Excellent analysis from a more credible source than just the well-read chubby gray-haired lady. Pay attention Canada - keep the options-box open. A few notes about the Gripen: the greatest advantage to Canada is the partnership with Saab to build and maintain these things in-country. To 'own' the entire production/ supply chain. If some future US govt. or their proxy, Lockheed Martin, loses interest in the F-35 or wants to leverage Canada into an upgrade platform in, say, 10 years, all they have to do is stop maintaining the F-35 platform. Like Microsoft does "sorry, support for this version will end in October, 2035. Consider upgrading to <ver. X> now."
The high-low teaming is exactly the advantage I see in the mixed fleet, though I was thinking of it in terms of submarines. You have boomers for the long-range stealth stuff and attack boats to do the fast, aggressive stuff. The F-35 is the boomer, the Gripen is the fast attack element, with Globaleye on overwatch it shouldn't be too big a problem to coordinate the communications and data sharing. Canada has the talent and skill to solve those problems and we're reconstituting the Telsat constellation to broaden the umbrella and secure the channels.
I agree with much of your analysis and think that Canada should also consider choosing both the German and Korean subs as we have 3 very different coasts that require different equipment.
What is really needed is a very reliable communication system that is attached to the person not the piece of equipment. It would appear that Europe and Canada will be having a wide selection of equipment so having an excellent universal communication network might solve some of the problems.
Every business owner or CEO knows that it is not smart to rely on a single supplier for your business. It is obvious a mixed fleet is the best of both worlds. Especially one that will reduce overall costs and increase manufacturing jobs in Canada. It's a no brainer
Thanks Wes, this is a great distillation, I find it hard to fairly summarize strengths and weaknesses of the F-35, mostly because the PR overstates the strengths (ownership, not just the airframe) and the full-court press from the US administration makes one tend to overstate the weaknesses in response.
Now the rumour is a full 88 F-35 plus 70 Gripen - sounds like a solution, if one believes the Cdn government will actually take on that expense, capital and operating...and produce/maintain the pilots. Colour me dubious.
Wes - this is the most balanced, non- emotional piece on what we should be doing and why. I don’t think we were ever going to cancel the paid for F-35s. The current story making the rounds is an almost balanced fleet of Gripens and F-35s. Used as you suggest will give us real options and reduce our dependency for decades to come. Thanks for a thoughtful and candid essay.
Excellent analysis from a more credible source than just the well-read chubby gray-haired lady. Pay attention Canada - keep the options-box open. A few notes about the Gripen: the greatest advantage to Canada is the partnership with Saab to build and maintain these things in-country. To 'own' the entire production/ supply chain. If some future US govt. or their proxy, Lockheed Martin, loses interest in the F-35 or wants to leverage Canada into an upgrade platform in, say, 10 years, all they have to do is stop maintaining the F-35 platform. Like Microsoft does "sorry, support for this version will end in October, 2035. Consider upgrading to <ver. X> now."
The high-low teaming is exactly the advantage I see in the mixed fleet, though I was thinking of it in terms of submarines. You have boomers for the long-range stealth stuff and attack boats to do the fast, aggressive stuff. The F-35 is the boomer, the Gripen is the fast attack element, with Globaleye on overwatch it shouldn't be too big a problem to coordinate the communications and data sharing. Canada has the talent and skill to solve those problems and we're reconstituting the Telsat constellation to broaden the umbrella and secure the channels.
Thanks, this was really interesting.
I agree with much of your analysis and think that Canada should also consider choosing both the German and Korean subs as we have 3 very different coasts that require different equipment.
What is really needed is a very reliable communication system that is attached to the person not the piece of equipment. It would appear that Europe and Canada will be having a wide selection of equipment so having an excellent universal communication network might solve some of the problems.
Every business owner or CEO knows that it is not smart to rely on a single supplier for your business. It is obvious a mixed fleet is the best of both worlds. Especially one that will reduce overall costs and increase manufacturing jobs in Canada. It's a no brainer
Terrific analysis. Thanks Wes
Thanks Wes, this is a great distillation, I find it hard to fairly summarize strengths and weaknesses of the F-35, mostly because the PR overstates the strengths (ownership, not just the airframe) and the full-court press from the US administration makes one tend to overstate the weaknesses in response.
Now the rumour is a full 88 F-35 plus 70 Gripen - sounds like a solution, if one believes the Cdn government will actually take on that expense, capital and operating...and produce/maintain the pilots. Colour me dubious.
Biblically accurate Boscali air force combo( drom nuclear option)