Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Canada
Reload this Page >

Canadian jet fighter purchase when?

Canada The great white north. A BIG country with few people and LOTS of aviation.

Canadian jet fighter purchase when?

Old 24th Jul 2019, 15:05
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: MTL
Posts: 19
Canadian jet fighter purchase when?

Canada has called for bids to replacement fighter jets. What bothers me is the likelihood it will get bogged in politics and go nowhere. I am sure Australia will sell more of their used F18's if needed.



https://nationalpost.com/news/canada...-favours-f-35s

Chas2019 is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2019, 15:15
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 312
Originally Posted by Chas2019 View Post
Canada has called for bids to replacement fighter jets. What bothers me is the likelihood it will get bogged in politics and go nowhere. I am sure Australia will sell more of their used F18's if needed.



https://nationalpost.com/news/canada...-favours-f-35s
So far the used F18s are in better shape than the used British Subs were / are.
Longtimer is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2019, 17:11
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Itinerant
Posts: 619
Originally Posted by Longtimer View Post
So far the used F18s are in better shape than the used British Subs were / are.
Hahaha! Excellent point, Longtimer.

The Canadian gov't seems to prefer shopping at thrift shops rather than buy anything new (65 year old pipelines, 30 year old submarines and aircraft, etc.). If they do buy something new the purchase invariably involves (coincidentally of course) buying from one of several Quebec based companies that Canadian taxpayers have been keeping afloat for years. Sigh...

grizz
grizzled is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2019, 17:18
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: toronto
Age: 54
Posts: 47
There was this brilliantly handled project too... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadi...ng_replacement
standbykid is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2019, 17:27
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: MTL
Posts: 19
Originally Posted by grizzled View Post
Hahaha! Excellent point, Longtimer.

The Canadian gov't seems to prefer shopping at thrift shops rather than buy anything new (65 year old pipelines, 30 year old submarines and aircraft, etc.). If they do buy something new the purchase invariably involves (coincidentally of course) buying from one of several Quebec based companies that Canadian taxpayers have been keeping afloat for years. Sigh...

grizz
it seems that Quebec industry must be kept afloat for the sake of the country...ships, planes, tanks whatever need a quebec input.
Chas2019 is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2019, 17:50
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2
What direction do you think properly suits Canada's needs? The expensive F-35 fighter bomber from Lockheed? F-18's from Boeing which just torpedoed Bombardier aerospace alongside the US government? Or technologically inferior and less-compatible options like the Gripen or Eurofighter? There simply is no good option on the market right now for Canada. I think the apparent plan to cobble together whatever parts are required through used purchases at least through 2022 is likely prudent. If you think otherwise I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.

PS grizzled: A bombardier equivalent based anywhere else in Canada would also consistently be in the running for large Canadian transportation contracts. There simply is not any equivalent transportation and aerospace company in Canada. I loath this petty and simple minded regionalism where we hope for our countrymen to fail, generally to the benefit of foreign corporations. Plenty of other companies in our country, and around the world receive large subsidies and tax benefits to keep them competitive. There is no reason to slag off Quebec companies just because you don't like the province or you think somehow all the politicians in Canada only work for Quebec votes.
yyzflightpath is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2019, 18:27
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Itinerant
Posts: 619
Hi yyzflightpath, and welcome to PPRuNe.

I'm going to cut you some slack -- as you're new here -- and not jump to conclusions about you or make ad hominem attacks, like you did to me: accusing me of "petty and simple-minded regionalism", which I can only assume means you believe criticism of a federal government decision or action that involves my tax dollars, and happens to also involve Quebec, is based on some kind of innate prejudice rather than a considered position or philosophy relating to use of my tax dollars.

I did NOT say, or even allude to not liking the province, nor did I say anything about politicians working only for Quebec votes. Most importantly I was not slagging off Quebec companies; of course there are many Quebec based companies that neither ask for nor receive federal government funds to bail them out. I simply don't like my tax dollars being used to bail out companies that would otherwise be losing great whacks of money, or even be insolvent. Alberta, Quebec, BC -- Nova Scotia, wherever. For a lot of reasons the majority of such bailouts in Canada have been directed to Quebec based enterprises. If you want to continue this discussion with considered opinions, facts and figures, I'm happy to do so.

grizz
grizzled is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2019, 18:44
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Great White North
Posts: 178
Originally Posted by yyzflightpath View Post
There is no reason to.... think somehow all the politicians in Canada only work for Quebec votes.
No reason?

Adscam.
SNC Lavalin.
Bombardier

Yes, there are reasons. The list could go on for a very long time and include all the policies designed to cripple the economies of other regions in Canada as well as the bailouts and transfer payments, but these are a good primer.
Mostly Harmless is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2019, 19:29
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2
The auto industry (also potentially the green energy industry) in Ontario, and oil and gas development out west have both received massive subsidy supports far beyond the $ value bombardier or likely any Quebec corporation ever received. The simple fact is many industries are given subsidy support and federal government support to keep them competitive. Aerospace in particular is generally a government backed venture, from Boeing to Airbus to Embraer all major manufactures have received large subsidy. The benefits of this kind of industry and related industries are generally seen to be worthy of government backing. It's simple minded to think that bombardier does not serve the national interest and is only supported to win votes in Quebec.

Originally Posted by Mostly Harmless View Post
No reason?

Adscam.
SNC Lavalin.
Bombardier

Yes, there are reasons. The list could go on for a very long time and include all the policies designed to cripple the economies of other regions in Canada as well as the bailouts and transfer payments, but these are a good primer.
Adscam - kickback scheme total fraud ~$3.5 million
SNC lavalin - Received worse punishment than virtually any other corporation caught in similar circumstances. The Euro's and the American's would have come to a deferred prosecution agreement if they even bothered investigating their own firms for foreign contract bribery.
Bombardier - Aerospace/Transportation company receiving subsidies, like virtually every other similar company on the face of the globe.

You guys can go ahead and believe you are being rational and logical, but in reality you're just perpetuating small minded Canadian regionalism to the detriment of this country.
yyzflightpath is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2019, 20:26
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 64
Posts: 29
Great, an argument over Canadian politics.

People who talk about "tax dollars" paying for these things need to bone up on modern monetary theory. That simply isn't how it works anymore, and hasn't been since we went off the gold standard almost half a century ago.

Quebec has a lot of seats in parliament. Any government with political sense will want to keep it sweet -- hence all the federal installations of various kinds there. But subsidies to a specific company? Maybe in a marginal riding ...

Originally Posted by yyzflightpath View Post
The auto industry (also potentially the green energy industry) in Ontario, and oil and gas development out west have both received massive subsidy supports far beyond the $ value bombardier or likely any Quebec corporation ever received. (...)
Right. In my Ontario childhood it was always explained that part of the tax on gasoline went to develop Alberta's oil industry and hence Canadian energy autonomy. And then what did we see during the 1970s energy crisis? Bumper stickers in Alberta saying "Let the eastern bastards freeze in the dark!" Gosh, thanks.
Well it always was a centrifugal country.

Anyway, back to the thread topic. What Canadian government at the moment would go so low as to purchase an American fighter after recent (and not-so-recent) events?

Also (I have to ask this), what purpose do these fighters serve? To strafe Edmonton should Alberta decide to become the 51st state? I'm now citizen of a country where I ask exactly the same question. Some people can get pretty huffy, but nobody has yet produced a convincing answer. And yes, they're F18s, and yes, they're a-gittin' old.
VFR Only Please is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2019, 20:48
  #11 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: MTL
Posts: 19
Originally Posted by VFR Only Please View Post
Great, an argument over Canadian politics.

People who talk about "tax dollars" paying for these things need to bone up on modern monetary theory. That simply isn't how it works anymore, and hasn't been since we went off the gold standard almost half a century ago.

Quebec has a lot of seats in parliament. Any government with political sense will want to keep it sweet -- hence all the federal installations of various kinds there. But subsidies to a specific company? Maybe in a marginal riding ...



Right. In my Ontario childhood it was always explained that part of the tax on gasoline went to develop Alberta's oil industry and hence Canadian energy autonomy. And then what did we see during the 1970s energy crisis? Bumper stickers in Alberta saying "Let the eastern bastards freeze in the dark!" Gosh, thanks.
Well it always was a centrifugal country.

Anyway, back to the thread topic. What Canadian government at the moment would go so low as to purchase an American fighter after recent (and not-so-recent) events?

Also (I have to ask this), what purpose do these fighters serve? To strafe Edmonton should Alberta decide to become the 51st state? I'm now citizen of a country where I ask exactly the same question. Some people can get pretty huffy, but nobody has yet produced a convincing answer. And yes, they're F18s, and yes, they're a-gittin' old.
The Canadian government will only buy american planes as that it the way it has to be because of historic reasons.. The Gripen and Eurofighter are included to make it look like a competition. lol.
Chas2019 is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2019, 21:02
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Itinerant
Posts: 619
Some here seem to be confusing "subsidies" with "fraud, bribery or kickbacks,".

Specifically, yyzflightpath, if you truly believe that a "deferred prosecution agreement" was / is suitable for SNC Lavalin, I suggest you haven't researched (or perhaps don't care) how they do business and why many Canadians (and others around the globe) consider SNC Lavalin to be an embarrassment to Canada.
How about this short list of proven frauds or scandals involving SNC Lavalin:
  • Kerala hydro dam (India)
  • Jacques-Cartier bridge (Montreal)
  • Illegal political donations (Canada)
  • Corruption, fraud, money laundering (Libya)
  • McGill University Health Care (Montreal) – referred to by some as “the biggest fraud in Canadian history”.
  • Padma bridge (Bangladesh)
I have listed six but there are more. How many more? -- Here’s a summary of SNC Lavalin’s activities and reputation on the world stage:
  • SNC Lavalin is in the midst of a 10 year ban on bidding for, or being involved in any way, in any World Bank related contracts. The ban was invoked after the Libya affair caused the World Bank to look deeper into SNC Lavalin’s involvement in contracts.
  • Here are some statistics from the World Bank that make Canada look like a modern day mafia hideout: “Of the more than 250 firms that are banned from bidding on World Bank contracts, 117 are from Canada. Think that's bad (it is)? There’s something even more sinister: SNC and its affiliated companies represent 115 of those 117 companies.
Contemplate all the above -- objectively if you can -- and then tell me again that my opposition to bailouts (and issuing free passes as in Deferred Prosecution Agreements) is because I'm biased against Quebec. I'm biased against giving any of my money to such companies anywhere.

Your serve...
grizzled is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2019, 21:11
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Tana
Posts: 51
In all honesty, does Canada even need an air force? And I'm saying that with all due respect. They have good relationships with everyone. They don't have "archenemies". They have a big strong ally who will defend them if not as a friend then as a buffer zone. Why bother with all this procurement? I'm sure that money can be spent better. Maybe in Quebec.
UltraFan is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2019, 22:20
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Itinerant
Posts: 619
Ultrafan, I think your first question is a very good one. Analysis of what Canada really needs (v/s wants) for military capability doesn't seem to happen in the higher echelons. Spending billions on fighters, as opposed for example, to much better equipped and resourced SAR capability, is something many Canadians would want to hear more open and realistic discussion on.

grizzz
grizzled is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2019, 23:25
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Been around the block
Posts: 470
Anyway, back to the thread topic. What Canadian government at the moment would go so low as to purchase an American fighter after recent (and not-so-recent) events?

interoperability. Your closest neighbor, NATO partner and ally perhaps...
4runner is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2019, 23:27
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Been around the block
Posts: 470
Originally Posted by UltraFan View Post
In all honesty, does Canada even need an air force? And I'm saying that with all due respect. They have good relationships with everyone. They don't have "archenemies". They have a big strong ally who will defend them if not as a friend then as a buffer zone. Why bother with all this procurement? I'm sure that money can be spent better. Maybe in Quebec.
defence/defense commitments. NATO and UN come to mind. National pride as well. You guys would get made fun of by the bigger kids too if you didnít have an Air Force with any fangs. The Kenyans have a squadron of F-5ís and the Dutch have 6.5 million people and have greater offensive capability than you do...
4runner is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2019, 00:55
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Nova Scotia Canada
Age: 73
Posts: 11
Originally Posted by standbykid View Post
There was this brilliantly handled project too... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadi...ng_replacement
Correct, an absolute disaster in procurement. Completely the wrong aircraft and still not in service either. Canada is the only country and will remain the only country to order this helicopter because it is not suitable for its intended use.
Military procurement in Canada is a complete mismanagement of public money and is a disgrace to the taxpayers of Canada.
RobertP is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2019, 02:39
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 213
Canada's position is similar to Australia's and I often wonder what Australia is going to do when the enemy or itís 5th columnists simply attack the handful of runways, the couple of dozen pilots on the ground (or their families) and the incredibly insecure weak and tenuous support infrastructure (water, food, fuel, ammunition & transport).

We too are living in la la land thinking that a couple of handfuls of FA18s or F35s give us any degree of superiority against smarter more dedicated ruthless and numerous adversary.

We will be overcome by a swarm of simple technology.



Last edited by ramble on; 25th Jul 2019 at 07:21.
ramble on is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2019, 04:30
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: back out to Grasse
Posts: 96
......that make Canada look like a Quebec a modern day mafia hideout:
There you go...fixed it for you..

IG
Imagegear is online now  
Old 25th Jul 2019, 15:15
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Potomac Heights
Posts: 456
Originally Posted by 4runner View Post


defence/defense commitments. NATO and UN come to mind. National pride as well. You guys would get made fun of by the bigger kids too if you didn’t have an Air Force with any fangs. The Kenyans have a squadron of F-5’s and the Dutch have 6.5 million people and have greater offensive capability than you do...
Just to keep things factual. The Netherlands has a population of 17 million, not 6.5 million. So it it is about 46% as populous as Canada, not 17.5% as populous. But point taken.
SeenItAll is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.