Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Canada To Buy Up To 16 x P-8A

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Canada To Buy Up To 16 x P-8A

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 27th Mar 2023, 23:05
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Nevada, USA
Posts: 1,603
Received 40 Likes on 27 Posts
Canada To Buy Up To 16 x P-8A

Boeing announcement

News Releases (mediaroom.com)

RAFEngO74to09 is offline  
Old 27th Mar 2023, 23:47
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Manchester MAN
Posts: 6,643
Received 74 Likes on 46 Posts
... we are committed to delivering 100% Industrial and Technical Benefits that will significantly grow Canada’s aerospace and defense industry.”
What does that mean? Are they going to build them in Canada?

PS We have a "defence" industry in Canada, eh?
India Four Two is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2023, 07:48
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The back of beyond
Posts: 2,131
Received 173 Likes on 89 Posts
Originally Posted by India Four Two
What does that mean? Are they going to build them in Canada?

PS We have a "defence" industry in Canada, eh?
No, they're not going to establish a new production line in Canada for 16 jets.
melmothtw is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2023, 08:30
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Land of Oz
Posts: 564
Received 9 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by melmothtw
No, they're not going to establish a new production line in Canada for 16 jets.
Correct, of course they're not.
What the "Canada’s aerospace and defense industry” refers to is Boeing Canada doing deeper maintenance, perhaps even intermediate line servicing as probably the RCAF no longer have the capability.

Last edited by BBadanov; 28th Mar 2023 at 08:38. Reason: sp
BBadanov is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2023, 08:38
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Land of Oz
Posts: 564
Received 9 Likes on 5 Posts
If Canada were to obtain "up to 16 P-8As" - which I doubt, as they skimp on Defence spending - they would join the other 5-eyes Commonwealth countries: Australia 14 x P-8As, UK 9 x P-8As, and NZ 4 x P-8As. So it does make sense - numbers would be in doubt, probably 10?
BBadanov is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2023, 09:18
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Here
Posts: 1,707
Received 37 Likes on 23 Posts
So Canada and Boeing are friends again? Or needs must, as there is no real alternative to P-8?
Davef68 is offline  
Old 28th Mar 2023, 13:55
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The back of beyond
Posts: 2,131
Received 173 Likes on 89 Posts
Originally Posted by Davef68
So Canada and Boeing are friends again? Or needs must, as there is no real alternative to P-8?
I'm surprised the Kawasaki P-1 isn't getting a look-in in any of these competitions, to be honest, but with every other 5-Eyes ally operating/ordering it, it was perhaps the only logical choice for Canada also.
melmothtw is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 28th Mar 2023, 15:17
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: virginia, USA
Age: 56
Posts: 1,061
Received 15 Likes on 10 Posts
Sounds more like the usual Canadian dithering, putting their toes in the water, sorta-committing....not-committing, see what we can get out of it with big-numbers, then finally decide to get a few....all while their planes fall out of the air.....
sandiego89 is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 28th Mar 2023, 21:30
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 1,329
Received 104 Likes on 51 Posts
Originally Posted by melmothtw
I'm surprised the Kawasaki P-1 isn't getting a look-in in any of these competitions, to be honest, but with every other 5-Eyes ally operating/ordering it, it was perhaps the only logical choice for Canada also.
In Germany the P-1 was briefly in discussion but it seems even the manuals weren't yet available in English and it was considered to high of a risk from an overall Program perspective (set up Maintenance/Training/Support/continued development and everthing around it) while being technically indeed quite interesting.
henra is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 29th Mar 2023, 08:13
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 8,407
Received 361 Likes on 210 Posts
Originally Posted by sandiego89
Sounds more like the usual Canadian dithering, putting their toes in the water, sorta-committing....not-committing, see what we can get out of it with big-numbers, then finally decide to get a few....all while their planes fall out of the air.....

sounds liek the Brits - start with a need, move it to an "aspiration", buy a few, defer or cancel some of those......................
Asturias56 is offline  
The following 2 users liked this post by Asturias56:
Old 30th Jun 2023, 11:40
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 1,275
Received 131 Likes on 85 Posts
The US State Department has now notified Congress of the potential sale. If they buy the full 16 that would be one more that the current CP-140s

WASHINGTON, June 27, 2023 - The State Department has made a determination approving a possible Foreign Military Sale to the Government of Canada of P-8A Aircraft and related equipment for an estimated cost of $5.9 billion. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency delivered the required certification notifying Congress of this possible sale today.

The Government of Canada has requested to buy up to sixteen (16) P-8A Patrol Aircraft (...)
https://www.dsca.mil/press-media/maj...-p-8a-aircraft
SLXOwft is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2023, 11:51
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: aus
Posts: 1,311
Likes: 0
Received 107 Likes on 68 Posts
Originally Posted by henra
In Germany the P-1 was briefly in discussion but it seems even the manuals weren't yet available in English and it was considered to high of a risk from an overall Program perspective (set up Maintenance/Training/Support/continued development and everthing around it) while being technically indeed quite interesting.
I believe that Japanese defence contractors / government dont have any flexibility. It came up with the possible purchase of Soryu class subs by Australia. A few examples I have seen mentioned, Japan wouldn't give details of specification and capabilities until the contract was signed. Japan was unwilling / unable to do anything locally. It even talk a substantial amount of negoiation to get even basic maintainence done in aus. They would change or adapt the subs they were as designed, Australian subs are mixed sex crews, japanes aren't they were unwilling to do any mods to account for mixed sex crews.

That attitude is changing as Japanese defence contractors get more experience, but it seems to be a real thing
rattman is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2023, 11:52
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 7,197
Received 392 Likes on 243 Posts
On the bright side, the NATO interoperability bit is helped by this choice.
Grats to the Canadian forces, let's hope they get the whole.

As to "will the whole lot get picked up?" ...
... I was hoping the USAF would get the whole lot of F-22's but that buy got cut substantially.
I was hoping the USAF would get the original 180 or so C-17's ... but that buy got cut.
The B-2 IIRC was originally going to be substantially more than the 20 ish that got purchased.
The F-15X numbers have shrunk at least once.
And so on ...
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2023, 16:53
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 68
Posts: 4,407
Received 180 Likes on 88 Posts
Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50
On the bright side, the NATO interoperability bit is helped by this choice.
Grats to the Canadian forces, let's hope they get the whole.

As to "will the whole lot get picked up?" ...
I was hoping the USAF would get the original 180 or so C-17's ... but that buy got cut.
Not to nit-pick, but the USAF actually bought more than the original 180 C-17s - over 220 in fact (although IIRC the rate was somewhat slower than originally planned).
tdracer is online now  
The following users liked this post:
Old 30th Jun 2023, 20:09
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Wildest Surrey
Age: 75
Posts: 10,814
Received 95 Likes on 68 Posts
You forget there are dozens of '737s on the Boeing lot just waiting for a buyer.
chevvron is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2023, 20:50
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 766
Received 544 Likes on 196 Posts
Originally Posted by chevvron
You forget there are dozens of '737s on the Boeing lot just waiting for a buyer.
A P-8 is built as a P-8. It is not a modified commercial 737.
Video Mixdown is online now  
Old 30th Jun 2023, 22:24
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 68
Posts: 4,407
Received 180 Likes on 88 Posts
Originally Posted by Video Mixdown
A P-8 is built as a P-8. It is not a modified commercial 737.
Exactly - the P-8s come off a dedicated (ITAR Controlled) final assembly line.
Plus, the P-8 is based on the 737NG, not the MAX.
tdracer is online now  
Old 30th Jun 2023, 23:56
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: yyz
Posts: 100
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
I would have preferred that it went to an rfp tender. could not 24 global 6500 with the swordfish MPA mod not have been built in canada?
rigpiggy is offline  
Old 1st Jul 2023, 00:32
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Canada
Age: 63
Posts: 5,202
Received 133 Likes on 60 Posts
There are many reasons that the Global MPA is unsuited for Canada starting with the requirement to carry external stores. Nevertheless I am sure that is what the RCAF will, eventually, after a painfully drawn out process get. This is going to be just like the Buffalo replacement. Late, dramatically over budget, and not fit for purpose....

Sadly Canada has learned nothing from the disastrous Cyclone helicopter procurement.
Big Pistons Forever is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 1st Jul 2023, 06:31
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Land of Oz
Posts: 564
Received 9 Likes on 5 Posts
The RCAF order for the P-8A is logical and sensible. Poseidon operators include USN, RAAF, RNZAF and RAF - and some NATO allies.
Really - like JSF - the only show in town. The P-1 may be capable, if anyone can decipher the Japanese specs, but how interoperable?
BBadanov is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.