Vanguard Magazine

16 APRIL/MAY 2018 www.vanguardcanada.com pilot. The F-35 has the best second pilot in the world in the form of its many ad- vanced systems, and the Rafale provides a somewhat diminished but similar capabil- ity. The same can be said for the Typhoon. The Super Hornet faces similar issues to the Gripen E. The only aircraft designed to be a true all-in-one solution is the F-35. By 2025, the Rafale will likely be better equipped to match the F-35 of the current year, but by that point, the F-35 will be even more potent as the airframe is designed to be re- ceptive of upgrades. As algorithms become more advanced and systems are able to han- dle them, the F-35's performance envelope will only increase. Spread out over 2,000+ airframes, the upgrades to the F-35 will also be significantly less impactful. Upgrade Costs As far as the cost of upgrades, the Gripen E is pretty much designed to be moderately scalable like the Typhoon and Super Hor- net, but it's still a budget fighter at heart. Whereas the F-35 often takes flack for hav- ing too much attention paid to every de- tail, the Gripen E's lack of success in com- petitions would seem to speak to too little focus on areas outside of cost reduction. The Typhoon was focused on being the best fighter at the time, and the Rafale was the only other aircraft that was designed with scalability in mind – to a degree – while also being more focused on threats at the time of its development. The Su- per Hornet is much the same. The F-35, however, was designed from the outset to be scalable to a massive degree, which is why so many of the aircraft's systems are dependent on advanced electronic systems for large scale automation. As algorithms become more sophisticated and comput- ers more adept at handling them, the pos- sibilities are nearly infinite. Capabilities When it comes to required capabilities, the needs haven't changed much from the original process that determined the F-35 was the best fit for Canada's needs. Pure and simple, we neighbor a military juggernaut and have ties to another across the Atlantic. We also have obligations to NORAD and NATO, all of which dictate a capability to run on the frontlines of any operation or counter-operation that may arise. To fulfill that obligation, Canada would need an aircraft capable of launch- ing attacks in denied-access environments and supporting efforts to establish domi- nance and control in the event of a large- scale conflict involving NORAD and/or NATO. As the ice recedes in the Arctic and more and more resources are revealed, the ten- sions have begun to rise between Russia, Canada and the United States over who those resources belong to. Russia has been working on reopening Soviet-era air force bases in the Arctic since the early 2010's in a bid to better respond to perceived threats CoVer from the US and Canada as well as the Nor- dic countries. This also means that in the event of a conflict Russia would be able to respond to and carry out attacks far quicker, and with more sophisticated anti-aircraft technology being rolled out, the threat is rather severe. The long-range plans involve having fleets of SU-57 fighters and PAK- DA bombers conducting daily patrols of the Arctic which will dictate similar efforts from the United States and Canada. In addition to the next-generation stealth fighters that Russia has already started fielding, the S-400 SAM systems and Verba MANPADS pose massive threats to any 4th generation fighter – most notably the Super Hornet, Gripen E and Typhoon, as they lack the more sophisticated EW of the Rafale and F-35. I know some will be thinking about the Growler variant of the Super Hornet and the F variant of the Gripen, but a single aircraft capable of han- dling all tasks is what is needed. The S-400 can pick up on the F-35 but getting a reliable lock at long range is highly unlikely, especially when jamming is used to enhance an already low-signature aircraft. The other 4th generation aicraft will be able to be picked up at much longer ranges and locked up much sooner just by the nature of their less stealthy designs; this makes initial response a very risky propo- sition and puts the responsibility on our American and Nordic counterparts in the event of a conflict. That's simply not ac- ceptable for a nation in Canada's position. In Europe, you will see Sweden trailing Norway, Denmark, Italy and the UK into battle in secondary roles as they lack the capability to match up head on with the threat Russia poses. The same can be said for Switzerland as they also lack a 5th gen- eration fighter force. Another often over- looked aspect is the force multiplication that the F-35 provides (Figures 3). A rising area of concern when operating in a denied-access environment is the threat that modern MANPADS (Man-Portable Air-Defense System) pose. The Russian Verba is probably the greatest example as it can lock onto targets at 17,000 feet and below and doesn't require an engine heat signature to acquire a lock. All it needs is the heat generated by friction on the nose and/ or wings to establish a reliable lock, and its tri-seeker design is highly resistant to coun- termeasures. It can also be connected to a larger radar network and allow operators to use reliable tracking data to aid in striking unsuspecting aircraft, as the lack of radar Figure 2: F/A-18F Cost Comparison Image: Brett Odom, Fightersweep.com

• Cover