How to get Phantom II into RCAF service instead of CF-101, 104 and 116? (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Admiral Beez

Captain
8,544
9,619
Oct 21, 2019
Toronto, Canada
I've often thought that the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II would have done well in Canadian service in place of the CF-101 Voodoo, CF-104 Starfighter and CF-116 Freedom Fighter. There are some challenges, unit cost being top of mind of course, especially as many of the Voodoos were bought second hand on the cheap. Also, the Starfighters and Freedom Fighters were assembled in Canada, creating jobs and financial offsets. There's also the matter that only the NORAD-focused Voodoo needed two aircrew, meaning that the ETO-focused squadrons would need double the aircrew. The biggest matter is timing, as without a replacement the RCAF will be flying the increasingly obsolete CF-100 Canuck and CL-13 Sabre into the 1960s.

So, given the above, how do we get the Phantom into RCAF service instead of the Voodoo, Starfighter and Freedom Fighter?

0c8ab7c6601ede10899ce6d1c754711-cf-110e_72_loading.jpg


Maybe start by kiboshing the pricey Avro CF-105 Arrow project by the Canadian subsidiary of the UK's Hawker-Siddeley Group before it got started? That program alone cost CAD $400 million, or $3.7 billion today (in the 1960s a F-4E cost about CAD $2.5 million). To keep some aerospace jobs in Canada the Phantom could be assembled in Canada, like in the UK and Japan - though the top Canadian engineers will still likely leave for NASA, etc. as they did when the Arrow program was canceled.

Had Canada got the Phantom do we think they'd still get the CF-18 Hornet in the 1980s? Other NATO and Allied players kept their Phantoms well into the 1990s, including Greece, Germany, Japan and Britain.
 
Last edited:
In hindsight? Start here...

View attachment 664918
A troublesome PM who tore apart the CAF, but to be fair PET wasn't PM until 1968, likely a few years (but worrisomely close) after the necessary introduction of whatever replaces the CL-15 and CF-100. Germany and others did receive their Phantoms around 1968-70, but hopefully Canada's commitment to Phantoms would be firm with initial aircraft delivered before PET becomes PM in 1968.

And more fairness; Trudeau's government (1968-79, 80-84) did oversee some significant procurement for the Canadian Forces, including the CF-18 Hornet, CC-130 Hercules, CP-140 Aurora, CH-47 Chinook, the Iroquois class guided missile destroyers, the Protecteur class AORs, Leopard I MBT, M109 howitzer (begun under Pearson), M113 APC, and the Colt Canada C7 rifle. Yes, PET deserves to be derisively remembered for scrapping the newly refitted HMCS Bonaventure, buying the cheapo CF-116, playing uniform tailor and amalgamating the services, but he wasn't the worst PM the forces has had. That honour arguably goes to his son and his dithering on the F-35, CSC, etc. Mind you, Chrétien and Harper didn't do much better.
 
Last edited:
I think the US would have been ok seeing Canada as an F-4 operator but Trudeau's anti NATO rhetoric in the late 60s and early 70s as well as his relationship with Nixon squashed any hope of that happening.

The key was having the airframe of a portion of it built in Canada, something that Lockheed and Northrop offered. This is an interesting article from 2013:

Moving into the mid-1960s, the RCAF was under fiscal restraint and was not able to acquire all the Voodoos and Starfighters required to replace the phased-out Canucks and Sabres. In 1965 a competition was announced for a lightweight fighter. The aircraft that the RCAF preferred, the F-4 Phantom, was far from a lightweight and the government chose the Northrop F-5 Freedom Fighter, to be designated as the CF-116. Again the government insisted on a license agreement and most of the 115 CF-116s were built by Canadair.


In this article, it mentions that the RCAF wanted to F-105 for it's NATO mission in Europe, interesting!
 
Following the cancellation of the TSR-2 and the F-111K, there was an urgent need to not only acquire a more modern fighter for the RAF but also to maximize the British content. For the they F-4K used Spey turbofan engines rather than J-79's and British avionics. There were explanations of how much better the Spey would be than the J-79 and how it might be adopted in the later American F-4's, but in reality it was a major mistake. In the words of Bill Gunston, the RAF ended up with the slowest, shortest ranged, and most expensive F-4's in the world. When they need to some more to defend the Falklands after evicting the Argentines in the mid-80's, they gave no thought to building more of those monstrosities and bought surplus USN F-4J's instead. RAF pilots had to be warned that the J-79 equipped Phantom II was a whole 'nuther animal and if they tried to fly them like a K they risked going into orbit.

Read an interesting piece about the CF-5 (note, the C stood for the Canadian dollar which was what it was all about). A former RCAF pilot who flew them said that it had no manuever flaps and no radar, which made them little more than toys, and dangerous toys at that.
 
Read an interesting piece about the CF-5 (note, the C stood for the Canadian dollar which was what it was all about). A former RCAF pilot who flew them said that it had no manuever flaps and no radar, which made them little more than toys, and dangerous toys at that.
In the 1980s I spent 5 years working with the CAF and worked with several pilot who flew CF-5s and was told quite the opposite. Sure, they wanted something more advanced but it was decided that what ever aircraft the CAF chose at the time, Canada wanted their own production line and they got that from Northrop.

The pilots I've worked with who flew the CF-5 loved it for it's simplicity and it's handling, and I heard the same thing from American pilots as well. I briefly worked on F-5s in Botswana and it was a great little aircraft if someone wanted a "low budget" fighter/ fighter bomber.
 
Hey Snautzer01, you have a picture of an F-5 around? T-38s are fine. In Canadian livery, of course!
 
Here is one view of the CF-5.



And an explanation of how it got that way:

 
Maybe someone should post a picture of you with a dot on your forehead.
If they did I want it painted red and blood oozing out of it!!!

It was obviously a joke - I'm sorry you're butt-hurt!

Please govern yourself accordingly - cyberspace is very lonely this time of year!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back