To have an effective air force capability in the near- to mid-term, Canada will have to operate two different fighter aircraft types, and that is not a bad thing. The F-35 is looking to be neither affordable nor efficient as a do-everything fighter, and we must have aerial intercept capabilities for all three coasts, plus some ground attack forces for expeditionary operations.
If the Joint Strike Fighter program does produce a cost-effective first strike combat aircraft sometime in the mid-2020s, then we could procure a couple of squadrons of them to complement the 50 or more modern fighters that will replace most of the CF-18s in the near term.
On the chance that the JSF does not come to fruition, then we will still be involved in technologies that can be applied to future aircraft, such as a workable F-22 Raptor, or a more international Eurofighter-type aircraft.
Japan, Australia, Canada, and South Korea are pretty much in the same boat regarding the need for a modern high-tech fighter that is interoperable with allied nations. The F-35 may not meet the cost, timeline, or capabilities requirements for anyone.
Instead of just buying older Boeing or Lockheed technology, perhaps we should think outside the box. All four nations, very much including Canada, have under-utilized strengths in aerospace technology.
We should put those abilities to use, thereby increasing domestic expertise and allied co-operation. The notion that United States-controlled technology will never be surpassed is utter nonsense.
No one has a crystal ball that can foretell what will be relevant to future military operations, and putting all of our eggs in one technological basket could be suicide when there are no secrets in the cyber age.
Prior to the Vietnam War, the US went down the path of having no guns on fighters because missiles would do it all; history proved them incorrect, with rapid-fire cannon being tacked onto front line fighters, so that they could compete with Soviet designs. Assumptions can be deadly.
Aerial drones will not, in the medium term, replace tactical fighters. They will be capable of long-duration reconnaissance and patrol, as well as the search part of search and rescue.
But remotely-piloted drones require two-way communication connectivity from satellites, aircraft, or ground sources to operate. That connectivity requirement is a weak link, assuring that human-piloted aircraft will be around for quite a while.
In the end, Canada needs up to 100 fighter aircraft to meet our sovereignty requirements and allied obligations. We should stay involved in the JSF program as long as massive further investments are not required. But another fighter, preferably of the air superiority variety, is needed before the F-35 can be fully operational and combat ready.
Why not have the four Pacific Rim nations research a collective approach, in conjunction with European partners, which would take fighters like the Eurofighter Typhoon to a high-level multi-role capability, while retaining its air superiority.
Canada and Australia have many similar requirements for a front-line fighter, but have downgraded significant range and twin-engine reliability thresholds to fit within the American playbook.
Rather than producing components to US military specifications, should we not also be involved in ventures to which we propose and integrate technology that would meet our sovereign needs, while boosting the tech sector?
By modifying a modern and proven allied fighter design that is twin-engine, exceeds Mach 2, has the ability to supercruise, is stealthier than earlier fourth-generation fighters, and has perhaps the best pilot-machine interface, we could only enhance allied forces abilities, and survivability, if times become troubled. We could jointly produce the Pacific Rim Fighter.
Please withhold your disbelief; the Yanks took the British Harrier technology and made it their own.
Mark M. Miller is a Vancouver-based research consultant who writes on international and military affairs. He is also a contributor to Esprit de Corps magazine.
Original Article
Source: embassy mag
Author: Mark M. Miller
No comments:
Post a Comment