Thursday, June 12, 2014

NFPS report: We waited 18 months for this?



Canada's National Fighter Procurement Secretariat (NFPS) released its long anticipated report today outlining there research into the four (formerly five) fighters studied to replace the CF-18 Hornet.

The "public" report is not for public release yet.  The NFPS did make a statement, however.  You can read the statement here:  http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/stamgp-lamsmp/dpei-sirp-eng.html

The report makes no recommendations.  No decisions.  Nothing set in stone.  Instead it merely outlines the costs and capabilities of each aircraft being considered.

The actual decision is now in the hands of the Federal government.  By most accounts, it looks like the F-35 is still the front-runner.  There was talk of a mixed fleet of fighters, possibly leading to a similar decision as that made by South Korea recently.

The "Reset" may finally be coming to an end soon.  Then again, things may soon get even more complicated.  Stay tuned...

14 comments:

  1. I guess my question is, what is the rush? Why not take the Australian approach. The F-35 will not even be operation with the USAF until 2016(they hope) and the US Navy in 2019(they hope).
    The other aircraft the Canada is looking at are all towards there final production runs pending foreign sales, there home country orders have been complete. So, why not pick-up a F-18, Rafale, F-15, Eurofighter, or a Gripen at the top of its game and let the other country evaluate the pros and cons of the F-35. If the F-35 really becomes the great fighter it is being sold as, then pick up a squadron of well tested batch II or III aircraft in 2025. Or again, it has not been mentioned very much, but the US Navy is in development of the Boeing FA-XX aircraft. In addition, the other manufactures will also be looking at future concepts. Canada does not have to be at the front of the pack. You never pick up the first year a car manufactures new concept, unless you are rich. What and be patient.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The main problem is the concept that we must have the same fighter to do every mission from A-Z. Think about how ridiculous that really is. We all know that aircraft needs for interception, CAS, SEAD, CAP, bombing are different. This multi-role is marketing speak. There is a reason why there are "different" aircraft" in most air forces around the world. It all comes back to what is the Strategic and Tactical vision of the RCAF?
    The practical reality is for the RCAF to have at least two different aircraft at this point as measures and countermeasures are changing very quickly. We will see a point very soon where electronic attack/jamming may supersede stealth as a prefered means of attack. While the complexity of operating two different aircraft may go up, it also reduces many risks that are currently on the table, including the most important one, which is a viable modern enough aircraft that can go to war on Day 1.

    Sadly this political-bureaucracy wheel will keep spinning.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Helpful chart:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_MRCA_competition

    ReplyDelete
  4. Even if there is not much information in this statement, it's worth noting that they evaluated aircrafts from four companies: Boeing, Dassault, Eurofighter and Lockheed-Martin.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I would be fine with. F-15SE, ASH CF-18, Eurofighter Typhoon, Or Rafale. Personally I don't like the Gripen its impressive especially for its size however that limits payload. I personally don't like that I am too used to it as an American. Its something that has always been in our fighters. I still think Canada should pick ASH CF-18. The only disadvantage for the F/A-18 is it can only handle 7.5 Gs. Shockingly though it is still very maneuverable. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pz2Cl3TnRyM As shown in that link... It can also evolve very easily that's something to be noted

    ReplyDelete
  6. As my comments about the commission implied (I am after all
    a Quebecer and hence an expert in corruption and brown envelops), what they (the
    military and our elected leaders) want, need, and the needs of the nation (you
    and me), do not seem to correlate!

    Can someone tell me when was the last dogfight involving
    Canadian fighters?

    If two stealth fighters pass each other over the forest and
    no one is there to see it, does …

    What about making fighters here, even the Rafale, 2.5 for
    the price of one. Saabs NG, 3 for the price of one mixed with a few Growlers ...
    When is the last time we entered a foreign superpowers airspace outside a UN mandated conflict? Are the F-35s for our new black ops department?

    I am an amateur but if it looks like shit, smells like shit,
    and feels like shit …

    ReplyDelete
  7. Well, I've done my bit. I've voiced my opinion through my local MP protesting the F-35 as being the wrong fighter for Canada. But I don't think it's going to change anything. I have no doubt that the announcement during the summer recess will be to stick with LM. I'm coming to the conclusion that we are being funnelled into no other choice. The U.S. is still going ahead with the purchase and since Canada is so intertwined economically and militarily (NORAD) it's probably in our best interest in the long run to be a part of the system and hopefully the thing will have the bugs worked out at time of delivery. Hope I'm wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  8. You are correct. Typically only country like the US , Russia, China, England , France, Israel, and maybe India would do a first strike. Canada needs to defend itself and carry out strike missions after it has all begun. So yes why a stealth aircraft with no weapons?

    ReplyDelete
  9. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gX_vZB-2nE
    The SU is smooth and the F-18 is trying.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Another reason for the ASH F-18 to get those EPE engines. The increased thrust along with reduced drag using CWP will make the F-18's flight performance envelope very interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Ha! funny! The sukoi fell down a couple of times. Oh and by the way the F/A-18 is more stable while it cannot perform the cobra it can do everything else the Suhkoi does. Especially if you gave it thrust vectoring then you could say good bye to sukois. Oh and by the way the F/A-18 doesn't fall down when doing maneuvers. Please actually watch the video, I am not sure if you are trolling. In the whole video the F/A-18 outperforms the SU-30...

    ReplyDelete
  12. The F-18 is the only western fighter that can do the cobra. There are advantages and dis advantages to every fighter. The pilots no that they don't have the high end power and manoeuvrabllility of the SU , the have better slow end manoeuvrability. The F18 is a fine craft, specially the advanced model.
    I like the Rafale, but the F-18 is the craft that I think will be bought and I have no issue with that.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Uh... F-14 can do the cobra
    F-22 Raptor can do the cobra
    F-16 Can do the cobra (with a little help from TVC)
    JAS 35 Gripen can do the Cobra

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.