The coming $26 billion windfall for the Canadian Armed Forces. What to buy? (2 Viewers)

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

If we want twin engines and an aircraft from outside of the US, we have only the Eurofighter and Rafale. But is that false reassurance anyway? IIRC, today's jet engined are very reliable, and if a failure damages critical systems (hydraulics, fuel lines, avionics), both engines might be intact, but the aircraft is still doomed.

SAAB will need to update its website. They were smart to leave it up.

I tend to agree. Also, looking at loss rates would be useful: how do, say, the F-16 and F-18 compare? Neglecting a couple of early F-18s where one engine performed partial self-disassembly and fodded the other, there have been several F-18s operating from land lost after a single engine failure. I don't know whether the loss was due to some sort of cascading failure, operating at too great a weight or flaws in training, but it does little good for the argument in favor of twin engine safety.

As a somewhat irrelevant aside, when I was active in the helicopter industry, twin-turbine helicopters' loss rate was driven by a common failure mode: the transmission. Twin helicopters had a significantly higher rate of transmission failure than did singles.
 
Last edited:
The 2->5% bump is quite huge, and I would expect that NATO members would try to weasel all kinds of expenses into the target, in order to make it easier to achieve.

Not sure what the criterias are for what can be counted as defense related spending and what cannot, but it would make sense to have some common standards for this, to avoid needless strife due to some members counting expense X and others not.
One of the problems groups like SIPRI have comparing defense budgets is what different countries throw into the mix. In the US, defense costs include chunks of the Dept of Energy budget, arguably the entire VA budget, and chunks of the budget for the NRO, Coast Guard, and NSA. How does one count the French Gendarmes and Italian Carabinieri, which are largely police forces but are under the defense budgets of those countries?
 
South Korea seems to be on a roll recently, they've got a lot of export wins for their heavy vehicles. And for ships, they're the second largest produces of merchant ships in the world, after China, so they sure know how to churn out hulls economically (now whether that translates into competent warships is another matter).
Looks like Canada is trying to link defence spending with civilian industrial investment.

Paywall free: https://archive.is/7TI6B

The Korean offering, the KSS-III (check out their new Canadian targeted website) is built jointly by Hanwha Ocean and HD Hyundai Heavy Industries (HHI), though I believe HHI is a minor player. It is Hyundai Motors that would invest in a car plant in Canada, but though they share a name, they firm are not connected. So, it would take some heavy involvement from the Korean government to get all these firms working together.

On a related matter, I would like Canada to adopt the EU standard for vehicles so that we can buy the smaller cars seen there. Compared to our southern neighbour, we buy fewer large SUVs and pick-up trucks, and prefer smaller SUVs and regular sedans.

 
They are marketing the hell out of these with public advertisements on TV. As if I had a say in it.
Agreed. They're even advertising in the local newspaper here. The real influencers will be what the officers and sailors from Maritime Forces Pacific (MARPAC), including those from its sole active submarine, HMCS Corner Brook think once they tour the Korean sub. Hopefully we can get some photos of the two boats together.

Imagine if after the 14,000 Km run to Esquimalt, the Koreans sail a further 10,000 Km northeast, including under the remaining ice, to Halifax, before sailing a further 20,000 km around Africa and home for a circumnavigation.
 
Last edited:
What benefit does the Germany offering have over the Korean sub? The second half of this vid speaks of the German subs.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoXkfXO0hqU

I hope one of the Victoria class submarines become a museum, ideally on the Pacific coast. Interestingly, a full two thirds of Canada's fleet of three Oberon-class subs were made into museums, both on the Atlantic or St. Lawrence.

 
Last edited:
What benefit does the Germany offering have over the Korean sub? The second half of this vid speaks of the German subs.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoXkfXO0hqU

I hope one of the Victoria class submarines become a museum, ideally on the Pacific coast. Interestingly, a full two thirds of Canada's fleet of three Oberon-class subs were made into museums, both on the Atlantic or St. Lawrence.


"Spped"?
 
Korea's sub has arrived in Guam. I wonder if this is the first time this century that a SSK has ported here. I suppose a Japanese or Australian sub might have stopped by.


Once the South Koreans begin producing nuclear powered subs the market for US, British and French SSNs will be at risk.

Germany doesn't seem to recognize that their export market for submarines is at great risk. Since 2000 Germany has sold forty-five submarines to ten countries: Greece (Type 214, 4), Portugal (Type 209PN/214 variant, 2), Italy (Type 212A, 4), Norway (Type 212CD, 4 on order), Israel (Dolphin/Dolphin II, 6 since 2000 deliveries), Turkey (Type 214, 6 building), South Korea (Type 214, 9), Singapore (Type 218SG, 4), South Africa (Type 209/1400, 3), Brazil (Type 209/1400, 1 delivered post-2000), and Egypt (Type 209/1400mod, 4). If Canada takes the Korean sub this whole SSK market may shift away from Germany.
 
Last edited:
Looks like some big moves coming up, including the reintroduction of self propelled artillery.

Paywall free: https://archive.is/AX3b5

Maybe we can get some K2 Black Panther MBTs from Korea or new Leopards from Germany as a package with the submarines. I hope we can avoid buying American kit. The Europeans make very good rocket artillery and air defence systems, and of course drones.
 
Last edited:
Snowbirds are done for 2027 and into the 2030s. Jet trainers are being replaced by some Swiss prop bird. A real step backwards for a team that once (under a different name) flew the Canadair Sabre.
That "some Swiss prop bird" is the PC-21:

Royal_Australian_Air_Force_(A54-032)_Pilatus_PC-21_taking_off_for_the_RAAF_Roulettes_display_a...jpg

It is still capable of 685 km/h (426 mph) at sea level and +8/-4g (the g limits are actually higher than the old CT-114s) and still gives the airshow crowd a good time...at a far more cost effective solution than an expensive combat jet.

As for bemoaning it...the RAAF Roulettes changed from jets (MB326) to props (PC-9s and now PC-21s) back in 1989 and one hasn't seen any drop off in people enjoying their performances.
 
Snowbirds are done for 2027 and into the 2030s. Jet trainers are being replaced by some Swiss prop bird. A real step backwards for a team that once (under a different name) flew the Canadair Sabre.
It is so nice to use Canadian made aircraft for your aerobatics team (if you are Canadian).
 
I hope that Canada learns lessons of the current war and conflicts. Drone and anti-drone warfare in all domains, anti-missile (less expensive), new infantry tactics and medevac, cyber and cognitive warfare. Economically viable solutions. Systems that can be scaled up quickly.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back