|
|
|
- Thread starter BMO
- Start date
kEiThZ
Superstar
I am not exactly sure. But I know it didn't meet CAN/US security requirements and withdrew. I suspect they probably couldn't give enough software access or compartmentalize support systems to ensure full control in Canada. Either way, not an issue for the second fleet.
European fighter-jet manufacturer pulls out of Canadian competition to replace CF-18s
According to three sources, the decision made by French-based Dassault Aviation is related to the difficulties facing the European company in meeting the need to integrate its equipment with the Canadian and American militaries
www.theglobeandmail.com
kEiThZ
Superstar
kEiThZ
Superstar
No idea why people can't use common sense to understand that any kind of "kill switch" could and would be exploited by adversaries.
EBT
Active Member
Foreign operators of the F-35 jet are somewhat dependent on the U.S. for its operation, but not because of a "kill switch" or direct control mechanism. The dependency arises from the jet's reliance on U.S.-managed systems for maintenance, software updates, and spare parts. The F-35 is a highly advanced and complex aircraft, with millions of lines of code and integrated systems like the Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS) and its successor, Operational Data Integrated Network (ODIN).
These systems are essential for the jet's functionality, ensuring that it remains operational and up-to-date. Without access to these updates and logistical support, the aircraft could face challenges in maintaining its full combat capabilities. This has raised concerns among some foreign operators about their strategic autonomy when using the F-35
kEiThZ
Superstar
kEiThZ
Superstar
Some context to keep in mind:
ottawacitizen.com
The only path here is to keep the F-35 order. Cut the numbers. Plan the second fleet.
U.S. could block Canadian attempts to buy new fighter jets to replace F-35s, warn analysts
Defence analysts say the Americans could derail attempts to buy F-35 alternatives, as all of the fighter jets contain U.S.-built equipment.
ottawacitizen.com
The only path here is to keep the F-35 order. Cut the numbers. Plan the second fleet.
lenaitch
Senior Member
I was always under the impression that the Rafale had no components that were subject to US strategic control by that article says 'limited'. Regardless, in terms of NORAD, there would be other layers of security integration they could invoke. Some argue that Saab could switch to a Volva engine but as you know these changes are not simply plug-and-play.Some context to keep in mind:
U.S. could block Canadian attempts to buy new fighter jets to replace F-35s, warn analysts
Defence analysts say the Americans could derail attempts to buy F-35 alternatives, as all of the fighter jets contain U.S.-built equipment.
The only path here is to keep the F-35 order. Cut the numbers. Plan the second fleet.
Besides, with initial deliveries starting next year, it's a little late. I imagine our air and ground personnel are already training in the US.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Some context to keep in mind:
U.S. could block Canadian attempts to buy new fighter jets to replace F-35s, warn analysts
Defence analysts say the Americans could derail attempts to buy F-35 alternatives, as all of the fighter jets contain U.S.-built equipment.
The only path here is to keep the F-35 order. Cut the numbers. Plan the second fleet.
Canada must weigh risk Trump blocks software upgrades for F-35s: former official
A former senior federal procurement official warns that Lockheed Martin’s control of the warplane’s source code makes Ottawa vulnerable to the U.S. President
www.theglobeandmail.com
What I do want to know is the plausibility of replacing the innards - including the software, with non-US replacements. Maybe we need to talk to our partners who are also using F-35 to discuss a joint effort on that front - I am sure they share the same concerns as we do, and they are further down the path.
AoD
lenaitch
Senior Member
Along with stealth design and coating, the software 'innards' is the foundation of the aircraft. It's not like it is noted as a cutting edge, high-performance, airframe. Besides, you can't simply gut an aircraft without the blessing of the manufacturer (and US law). Israel has managed a higher degree of flexibility but nobody has bought the rights to the aircraft.Canada must weigh risk Trump blocks software upgrades for F-35s: former official
A former senior federal procurement official warns that Lockheed Martin’s control of the warplane’s source code makes Ottawa vulnerable to the U.S. President
What I do want to know is the plausibility of replacing the innards - including the software, with non-US replacements. Maybe we need to talk to our partners who are also using F-35 to discuss a joint effort on that front - I am sure they share the same concerns as we do, and they are further down the path.
AoD
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Didn't say it was easy or nice, but discreet reverse engineering might be something to start working on. The experience of late has demonstrated that we cannot rely on goodwill.
AoD
kEiThZ
Superstar
Canada must weigh risk Trump blocks software upgrades for F-35s: former official
A former senior federal procurement official warns that Lockheed Martin’s control of the warplane’s source code makes Ottawa vulnerable to the U.S. President
What I do want to know is the plausibility of replacing the innards - including the software, with non-US replacements. Maybe we need to talk to our partners who are also using F-35 to discuss a joint effort on that front - I am sure they share the same concerns as we do, and they are further down the path.
AoD
It would be very, very difficult. To begin with, they don't share the source code. Not even with the UK. And even on development, there's only a handful of countries included in the lab in the US:
Aslo, article which quotes Alan Williams.....arggh. That f***ing guy....
Admiral Beez
Superstar
I think we should go through with the full F-35 purchase and any other projects underway or contracted. There's less than 211 weeks until Trump's gone, the last of Canada's F-35 probably won't be delivered until afterwards. It's a thirty plus year commitment, POTUS47 through 50 will be long gone.
en.wikipedia.org
But for future projects we should avoid US firms unless we have no better options.
Planned Canadian Forces projects - Wikipedia
But for future projects we should avoid US firms unless we have no better options.
Last edited:
afransen
Senior Member
We can (and perhaps should) go ahead with the full purchase. Nothing stops us from using it as a bargaining chip though. The deals off unless Trump gives us concessions on tariffs. Then he can claim victory on Canada deciding to uncancel the contract we never planned to cancel in the first place.I think we should go through with the full F-35 purchase and any other projects underway or contracted. There's less than 211 weeks until Trump's gone, the last of Canada's F-35 probably won't be delivered until afterwards. It's a thirty plus year commitment, POTUS47 through 50 will be long gone.
Planned Canadian Forces projects - Wikipedia
But for future projects we should avoid US firms unless we have no better options.
EBT
Active Member
Of course, in theory the US could block sales of European fighter jets to Canada but think of the ramifications of the United States telling Europe you cannot do business with Canada a fellow NATO nation because they cancelled an order from us. At that point you are looking at the dissolution of NATO. How can you have a military alliance under such conditions? You can't and it would go beyond just NATO - the G7 would dissolve along with it. The Europeans have been waking up lately to the fact that the United States is not their friend. You don't blow up Europe's only source of affordable energy (Nord Stream) if you are a real ally. That one act - AN ACT OF WAR - decimated Germany's economy.Some context to keep in mind:
U.S. could block Canadian attempts to buy new fighter jets to replace F-35s, warn analysts
Defence analysts say the Americans could derail attempts to buy F-35 alternatives, as all of the fighter jets contain U.S.-built equipment.
The only path here is to keep the F-35 order. Cut the numbers. Plan the second fleet.
If Trump blocked military sales to Canada, he would be in essence declaring Canada an enemy nation. You only block military sales to your enemies. If that ever-happened Canada would have no choice but to buy stealth fighters and other military equipment from Russia and China. What other option would we have?
Turkey - a NATO nation - bought S-400 air defense systems from Russia and Canada could sure use a bunch of those right now! The reality is these countries are building better military equipment than the United States. Russia and China have had unstoppable hypersonic missiles in service for years. The US is yet to be able to successfully test one hypersonic. The Russian S-400/500 air defense systems are legendary and unmatched by any other country. I could go on and on heck even Iran is building impressive missiles and drones.
The United States is no longer the indispensable nation. It hasn't been for a long time. Americans are about to find out.
Last edited: