The future is in drones. If Canada should sink funding into anything, it should be that.

The real concern is not “which aircraft to buy” — its “in 20 years will Canada be able to even arm itself in a world of disrupted supply chains?”

Agreed that drones are tactically important, but tanks and fighters ships are strategically important, and will never go out of style.

Until someone comes up with a very compelling anti-drone countermeasure, drones are basically the ideal weapon for a battlefield. Cheap, mobile, can loiter, good recon, etc.

Drones are the future, fuck building fighters or bombers.

Drones can’t defend the Arctic. In fact they’d be fairly useless to most of Canada that doesn’t sit within the 49th-50th parallel.

You know you can launch satilites that cover the arctic right? Or you making some claim about the cold and the batteries.

At -60C not much works well.

Which is why we really need to build cheap, simple, and purposeful aircraft. We need to move away from “everything AND the kitchen sink” aircraft, as multiple conflicting roles frequently reduce an aircraft’s effectiveness in any one role. Have five completely different fighter aircraft, if necessary, in order to ensure we can continue to maintain them via simplicity and ease of parts manufacturing. And to be able to drop an entire model to focus on the remaining ones, if necessary.

The money is there. The Weston family and other billionaires are all holding it.

I have seen plenty of tanks and ships crippled or destroyed by drones…

Deep pockets and a spine

The cost isn’t actually much higher for the Gripen proposal this is about, although I’m not sure if that leaves things like the actual factories out.

I’ve wondered about just SAMs and MANPADs as an alternative to any new fighter jet. We can’t really trust the F-35 and the alternatives (the Gripen E) might not be survivable, depending on a bunch of data I don’t have.

Sure, they can’t be used offensively, but that’s not the main thing I worry about in the near future.

I mean, -60 is extremely unusual even in the high arctic, but the point stands at “just” -40.

It’s usually more a matter of designers not bothering with severe cold conditions than any fundamental issue. In a pinch, I imagine just getting an FPV drone up to temperature in a tent or sleeping bag would give you a bit of range. For more, you’d need to insulate it and add a little internal heater, but that seems doable.

Most of what happens in the arctic is going to involve long-distance gas (or nuclear) powered equipment anyway. It’s big and sparsely populated.

Sort of? Existing software isn’t smart enough to fight a battle on it’s own, and electronic warfare is a real thing that makes communications hard. In a full-blown war situation there’s appeal in having a human being in a cockpit close to possible targets.

The things we worry about in Canada are more specific, though. For example, we probably don’t need long-range bombers of our own.

No more than what we’re spending on the F35. We could design 10 new aircraft for that price

And time. Don’t forget time.

drones. If Canada should sink funding into anything, it should be that.

ECM says what?

Fibre optic drone says hi.