Canada and the CF-35

[ricnunes]

It has been quite interesting to notice that the Canadian media (or at least an important part of it) seems now to be reporting positive aspects of the F-35, like for example the following and quite interesting video where a Canadian F-35 test pilot (Andrew Soundy) gets interviewed:



Is this an indication that the Canadian government will soon state the obvious and finally say that it will go full ahead with the F-35?

[Corsair1963]

It has been quite interesting to notice that the Canadian media (or at least an important part of it) seems now to be reporting positive aspects of the F-35, like for example the following and quite interesting video where a Canadian F-35 test pilot (Andrew Soundy) gets interviewed.
Is this an indication that the Canadian government will soon state the obvious and finally say that it will go full ahead with the F-35?

This speaks volumes.

[ricnunes]

The Gripen Illusion: Why Canada Shouldn’t Buy Yesterday’s Fighter
Saab has returned to Canada with promises that sound too good to be true—because they are. Amplified by AI-generated social media posts and uncritical mainstream media coverage, their marketing campaign has been remarkably effective. Even more striking is how Russian and Chinese trolling has spread the messaging even broader, with AI-generated posts flooding social media to amplify Saab’s narrative. The Swedes have convinced major players that their narrative is gospel, dismissing expert consensus from around the world. It may be the most influential defense marketing campaign in a generation, but influence doesn’t make it honest. Their logic is vacuous and needs to be called out for what it is.

[...]

Full article: https://billieflynn.com/the-gripen-illu ... s-fighter/

[Corsair1963]

I can't see a scenario where Canada would buy the Gripen for a very long list of reasons.

[ricnunes]

I can't see a scenario where Canada would buy the Gripen for a very long list of reasons.

Yes, absolutely! And the article that I shared in my last post adds more items to that very long list of reasons (why Canada won't or shouldn't buy the Gripen).

[pron]

We will soon know.

According to "The Globe and Mail", Saab and Bombardier began talks about building Gripen this week, and on November 18, King Carl XVI Gustaf, Queen Sivia, the Minister of Industry and the Minister of Defense, as well as Saab and about 30 other Swedish companies, will travel to Canada.

This big visit must center around a big deal, and we know it is not the A26 submarin. What's left then other that Gripen or GlobalEye? But is Canada in the marked for AEW&C?

[ricnunes]

But is Canada in the marked for AEW&C?

Yes, Canada is on the market for AEW&C aircraft. The competitors are said to be the E-7 Wedgetail and the Saab GlobalEye.
Here:
https://apps.forces.gc.ca/en/defence-ca ... sp?id=2401
or here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20240423171 ... w-aircraft

About the Gripen, it must be clear that no Canadian company would ever build Gripens. All that it would do would be to assemble Gripens. Is the Canadian government going to benefit a single company that would just assemble Gripen (and therefore at a higher cost) in lieu of 30 other Canadian companies that actually build parts for the F-35? I doubt it but...

[Corsair1963]

We will soon know.

According to "The Globe and Mail", Saab and Bombardier began talks about building Gripen this week, and on November 18, King Carl XVI Gustaf, Queen Sivia, the Minister of Industry and the Minister of Defense, as well as Saab and about 30 other Swedish companies, will travel to Canada.

This big visit must center around a big deal, and we know it is not the A26 submarin. What's left then other that Gripen or GlobalEye? But is Canada in the marked for AEW&C?

We already know the answer....

[hornetfinn]

But is Canada in the marked for AEW&C?

Yes, Canada is on the market for AEW&C aircraft. The competitors are said to be the E-7 Wedgetail and the Saab GlobalEye.
Here:
https://apps.forces.gc.ca/en/defence-ca ... sp?id=2401
or here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20240423171 ... w-aircraft

About the Gripen, it must be clear that no Canadian company would ever build Gripens. All that it would do would be to assemble Gripens. Is the Canadian government going to benefit a single company that would just assemble Gripen (and therefore at a higher cost) in lieu of 30 other Canadian companies that actually build parts for the F-35? I doubt it but...

Thank you for the links! I have to say that Wedgetail vs Globaleye is actually really interesting competition, far more so than Gripen vs F-35. Both are highly capable and modern systems and both have their own advantages. It's not nearly as clear-cut thing as is the case with fighter aircraft. Wedgetail is definitely more capable system but Globaleye is no slouch either and it actually is noticeably cheaper to buy and operate according to public information. I would go for Wedgetail myself for Canada but I think it will likely be very tough competition.

[ricnunes]

Thank you for the links!

You're welcome, hornetfinn

I have to say that Wedgetail vs Globaleye is actually really interesting competition, far more so than Gripen vs F-35. Both are highly capable and modern systems and both have their own advantages. It's not nearly as clear-cut thing as is the case with fighter aircraft. Wedgetail is definitely more capable system but Globaleye is no slouch either and it actually is noticeably cheaper to buy and operate according to public information. I would go for Wedgetail myself for Canada but I think it will likely be very tough competition.

I fully agree with you!
I also think that Wedgetail is definitely more a capable system in great part due to it's (IMO) more powerful radar which on top of that has a 360 degree radar coverage while the Globaleye does not (it has blind spots right in the front and rear of the aircraft).

However and like you said, the Globaleye is no slouch either and it actually has other advantages besides being likely cheaper to buy and operate and the other main advantages are IMO actually centered around the aircraft itself that carries the radar which is this case and for Canada is a double advantage:
1- The aircraft that carries the Saab GlobalEye radar is the Bombardier Global Express which is actually built in Canada (as opposed to a Gripen solution which would only be assembled in Canada).
2- Like mentioned above, the GlobalEye radar is based on the Bombardier Global Express aircraft, namely the Global Express 6000 or 6500 and these aircraft have considerably more range than the Boeing 737-700ER which is the aircraft that carries the Wedgetail radar. Finding "apples-to-apples" range figures between both systems is not easy but here's what I found (all ranges below are from "Point A to Point B" or more precisely they are not "Combat Radius" but rather "Ferry Range"):
- The Boeing 737-700ER can have a maximum range of 5,510 nautical miles but this is with smaller cargo capacity plus nine auxiliary extra fuel tanks and as such in a "normal" configuration its range would be shorter. The E-7 Wedgetail is said to have a range of 4,000 nautical miles while the P-8A Poseidon which is based on the same aircraft is said to have a range of 5,200 nautical miles.
- The Bombardier Global Express 6000 has like the name implies, a range of 6,000 nautical miles while the Global Express 6500 has a range of 6,600 nautical miles which is considerably longer when compared with a 737-700ER with all possible extra auxiliary extra fuel tanks and smaller cargo capacity and diference between this and the Global Express 6500 is even and quite higher (more than 1,000 nautical miles). There's no range figures for the Saab GlobalEye configured aircraft but and while it should be less than the 6,000 and 6,600 nautical miles for Global Express 6000 and 6500 respectively, it should still be quite higher than the E-7 Wedgetail.
On top of this, I guess or imagine that it should be possible to place the GlobalEye radar and sensor set on a Global Express 8000 which like the name hints, has a range of 8,000 nautical miles which would increase the range diference even further (and much more so).

As such and IMO, I think that for domestic operations the GlobalEye might have an advantage because it should be cheaper to buy and operate and the aircraft (not the radar) has a longer range than the Wedgetail which should be very important to Canada, afterall it's a huge country, the 2nd largest in terms of landmass. On the other hand the Wedgetail brings a bit more commonality with the P-8A Poseidon that Canada already ordered since and afterall both are based on the same airframe (Boeing 737-700ER) but using a Canadian aircraft that should be cheaper to operate probably offsets this.
For expeditionary (such as NATO) roles then I think that the E-7 Wedgetail has the advantage since it should have a better and more powerful radar with a 360 degree coverage which together with other sensors would likely better support friendly forces while at the same time its somehow lower range shouldn't be much of an issue for most expeditionary missions/scenarios.

As such, I fully agree with you that this not nearly as clear-cut thing as is the case with fighter aircraft and the sourer US-Canadian relations may indeed play a significant part in this AEW&C competition.

[hornetfinn]

Totally agree with you ricnunes and thanks a lot for info about Bombardier aircraft. I had no idea about their capabilities but they do seem excellent when it comes to range and endurance.

I checked the info about the radars and they have very similar size as Wedgetail has 10.8 meter long AESA and Globaleye is 10 meters long. Also their published range performance figures are in the same ballpark, so I guess the radar performance is probably not hugely different. Of course Wedgetail being significantly larger aircraft has more room for the operators and computing systems for example but modern systems make this less important than previously. But naturally Wedgetail should have higher capacity for controlling fighters, attack packages anddrones. However I think Globaleye might still be enough and lower price and crew requirements might allow more of them, which would mitigate this. In any case, this will be very interesting competition.

[ricnunes]

Totally agree with you ricnunes and thanks a lot for info about Bombardier aircraft. I had no idea about their capabilities but they do seem excellent when it comes to range and endurance.

Yep, the Bombardier Global Express is indeed a very interesting aircraft and is one of the best of it's class.
After digging a bit more, I found this on Bombardier's website:
https://bombardier.com/en/defense/advan ... -portfolio
https://bombardier.com/en/aircraft/glob ... -section-1

From what I gather, it seems that the Global Express 6000 is now fully replaced when it comes to new built aircraft by the Global Express 6500 as the 6000 is no longer listed in Bombardier's aircraft portfolio.
So, I imagine that any new build Globaleye would be based on the Global Express 6500 rather than the 6000 (unless the customer buys second hand 6000's, I guess) which means an even more expended range (compared to 6000's based Globaleyes).

I checked the info about the radars and they have very similar size as Wedgetail has 10.8 meter long AESA and Globaleye is 10 meters long. Also their published range performance figures are in the same ballpark, so I guess the radar performance is probably not hugely different. Of course Wedgetail being significantly larger aircraft has more room for the operators and computing systems for example but modern systems make this less important than previously. But naturally Wedgetail should have higher capacity for controlling fighters, attack packages anddrones. However I think Globaleye might still be enough and lower price and crew requirements might allow more of them, which would mitigate this. In any case, this will be very interesting competition.

That's interesting!
By the way, do you know what's the diference in terms of length or height between both radars?
It would be interesting to know this as from what I read, one the Wedgetail's main advantage is that it provides a 360 degree coverage while the Globaleye (as well as the Erieye predecessor) seem to have blind spots (albeit relatively narrow) just in front and at the rear of the AEW&C aircraft.

[pron]

Totally agree with you ricnunes and thanks a lot for info about Bombardier aircraft. I had no idea about their capabilities but they do seem excellent when it comes to range and endurance.

I checked the info about the radars and they have very similar size as Wedgetail has 10.8 meter long AESA and Globaleye is 10 meters long. Also their published range performance figures are in the same ballpark, so I guess the radar performance is probably not hugely different. Of course Wedgetail being significantly larger aircraft has more room for the operators and computing systems for example but modern systems make this less important than previously. But naturally Wedgetail should have higher capacity for controlling fighters, attack packages anddrones. However I think Globaleye might still be enough and lower price and crew requirements might allow more of them, which would mitigate this. In any case, this will be very interesting competition.

Even if the length is almost the same, the hight of the MESA array on Wedgetail is much larger.

The 10.8 m long by 3.4 m high antenna assembly incorporates 7.3 m long by 2.7 m high Side-Emitting Electronic Manifold array, with the top hat supporting array providing 120° coverage on port and starboard side, while the top hat array itself provides 60° fore and aft, thus providing a complete 360° coverage.

[hornetfinn]

Yes, that's correct. MESA array on Wedgetail is larger in height and area. Erieye ER radar assembly in Globaleye is about 10 meters long and 1 meter high according to image measurement tool. Of course the actual radar array is quite a bit smaller than that as MESA measurmenets show. Erieye ER has larger width than MESA radar but height is probably only around 80 cm for this array. They also use differernt frequency band as MESA uses longer L-band frequencies and Erieye ER uses S-band.

This has the effect that Wedgetail has significantly larger area of close to 20 square meters whereas Erieye radar is about 8 square meters. Antenna gain is calculated with this equation:

eqd1.gif (1.86 KiB) Viewed 172 times

If we assume each one uses the central frequency of their frequency band (MESA 1.5 GHz and Erieye ER 3 GHz), then we get almost equal antenna gains for these radars. MESA gets more gain from much larger area but that is counterbalanced quite a bit with higher frequency and thus shorter wavelength in Erieye ER.

Radar range is basically a result of antenna gain multiplied with output power and it's pretty much certain that MESA has quite a bit more power if both use equal technology in their radars. Because we have no idea of that, I think we must assume about similar tech level but real world might well be quite different. Usually when radar frequency is halved, then output power of T/R modules is doubled. So MESA likely has about twice the output power of Erieye ER.

Putting all that into radar range equation, we get that MESA radar should have about 70 percent longer range than Erieye ER if we assume equal tech level and signal processing etc. So each Wedgetail should cover about 3 times the area with their radar compared to Globaleye solution. Wedgetail solution has better elevation resolution but quite a bit lower angular resolution. Erieye radar produces very thin beam in azimuth but it's wide in elevation. Both do likely have better resolution than say E-3 in both directions though. Both also likely outrange E-3 especially against small, low flying or slow targets. MESA likely very significantly so.

It's true that Erieye ER has blind spots to the front and rear of the aircraft that are about 30 degrees wide in both cases. MESA radar has apertures pointing to those directions but they are very narrow in elevation, likely producing only 2D data without elevation information. They are also much shorter in width, so the performance is far from the main array performance. Of course it's still much better than nothing at all. Both definitely try to keep their main arrays pointed towards to area of interest as much as they can though.

But it's pretty certain that Wedgetail MESA has higher performance overall and in some ways significantly so. But if Globaleye is half the price, it can compensate with larger numbers. Of course there are a lot of other things to consider than just raw radar performance or number of aircraft.

[ricnunes]

Thanks for the information, hornetfinn! It makes perfect sense

For what's worth, if I could choose Canada's AEW&C aircraft, I would choose the E-7 Wedgetail, for the reasons already mentioned and the range advantages of the Global Express (Saab GlobalEye) could be more than easily offset by operating these aircraft from northernmost airbases such as Yellowknife, NT or even Inuvik, NT or Iqaluit, NU.

Although, I think that in this case and since the diference between the E-7 Wedgetail and the Saab GlobalEye aren't that big (compared with for example between a F-35 and Gripen E), I think the Canadian government may choose the GlobalEye.