Sweden can teach Canada how to build a fighter jet for its own air defence needs

By Fareed Khan

The process to replace Canada's aging CF-18 Hornet jet fighters is now well into its second decade.  The aircraft, which first entered into service in 1982, are currently programmed to be phased out by the mid-2020s when the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) is supposed to take delivery of replacement aircraft from one of the aircraft manufacturers currently competing for the lucrative contract with the Canadian government. 

 

CF-18 Hornet

 

CF-105 Avro Arrow

Since it began, the debate surrounding which company should replace Canada’s fighter jet fleet also raised questions about whether this country has the ability to design and manufacture a jet fighter suited to Canadian air defence needs, the way it once did in the 1940s and 50s.  The last Canadian designed and manufactured fighter jet was the ill-fated Avro Arrow which was abruptly cancelled in 1959 by the Conservative government of John Diefenbaker.

In 2012 a Canadian company proposed an updated version of the legendary Arrow as a Canadian-made alternative to the purchase of American or European designed fighter jets.  One of the proponents of that proposal was retired Canadian Armed Forces Maj.Gen. Lewis MacKenzie, who noted that the Arrow’s basic design and platform still exceeded any current fighter jet, and that it was perfect for Canada’s needs.  The proposal was rejected by the Conservative government of Stephen Harper.
 

This proposal was evidence that Canada does have the knowledge and resources to design and build a fighter jet to meet its needs, as well as the entrepreneurial spirit and business acumen required for such a venture.  The only thing that seemed to be lacking was political will.  

If Canadian politicians and those who advocate a Canadian-made solution to this nations air defence needs are looking for a template on how to take on such a venture successfully then it should look no further than Sweden.  This small nation has been able to create a robust domestic military aviation industry based on the needs of the Swedish Air Force (SAF) for a fighter jet.

The Saab conglomerate has been the supplier of front line fighter jets to the SAF since the late 1940s.  Its success is built on a foundation of aviation technology, a commitment to innovative research and development, a political commitment to the company by all political parties that have held government in that country, and a realization that as a small nation with an official policy of neutrality in the great conflicts of the 20th Century, it could not depend on other nations to defend its air space or territory.  As a result Saab has been the main supplier of front line fighter jets for the SAF for decades.

Sweden is a country with a population of more than 10.1 million people (27% of Canada's population), a geography that is 4.5% the size of Canada's, and a GDP that is 32.5% of Canada's (2018 International Monetary Fund figures).  Yet for almost seven decades this small nation has managed to produce jet fighters to equip its own air force that matched or exceeded the performance of other top line fighter jets produced in the West and by the Russians.  These planes were supplied to the SAF in numbers that were and are two or three times greater than the number of front line jets that have equipped the RCAF over the past half century.

The decision by Diefenbaker's Conservative government to cancel the Avro Arrow, which was apparently made on the basis of the program's cost (but some say was a vindictive political move against a Liberal project), was one of the biggest blunders in industrial policy in Canadian history.  That decision resulted in more than 15,000 well-paid and highly educated Canadian workers immediately losing their jobs with another 25,000 jobs lost in the supply chain, in spin-off and support industries, and in businesses that depended on the buying power of those aviation industry workers.  In addition, the cancellation resulted in the loss of tens of thousands of potential future jobs that would have been created through further innovation and evolution of the technology developed by Avro.
    

CF-101 Voodoo

The replacements for the Arrow -- the Bomarc missile, CF-101 Voodoo, and the CF-104 Starfighter -- not only did not meet the performance specifications that the RCAF had for the Arrow, but also ended up costing significantly more in the long run than if Canada had purchased the Arrow for the RCAF.

Squadron of CF-104 Starfighters

One of the reasons often given by critics as to why Canada can't design and build jet fighters for the RCAF today is that Canada does not have the technological capacity or deep enough pockets as a government to finance a fighther aircraft from design to production to operation.  This is despite the fact that Canada's aerospace industry was ranked third in terms of revenue and fifth in terms of civil aircraft production in the world in 2018.  In addition, Canada's largest aerospace company -- Bombardier -- has been on the leading edge of innovative aircraft design when it comes to civil aircraft for years, despite setbacks in recent years resulting from over extending itself financially to design and build the C-Series passenger jet, which was eventually sold to Airbus.  Furthermore, Canada's economy was ranked 9th in the world compared to Sweden which was ranked 22nd.  Given these realities it begs the question, if Sweden is able to design and build their own fighter jets with a much smaller economy, tax base and aerospace sector than Canada, then what is stopping Canada from doing the same?  The simple answer seems to be political vision and will.
     

Bombardier C-Series 100

 

The 138 CF-18 Hornets that Canada purchased in 1982 were intended to defend the second largest geography in the world and meet Canada's NATO commitments.  By comparison, the SAF had over 300 front line jets operational in its arsenal during the same time period to defend a nation with a tiny fraction of Canada's geography.  Either Sweden wasted tax dollar on defence of its air space or Canada didn't spend enough on defence of its territory.

Now Canada is looking at buying even fewer replacement aircraft -- 88 to be precise -- to replace the CF-18s to defend its geography and meet its NATO obligations.  Based on Canada's NORAD and NATO defence requirements, as well as requirements to defend Canada's sovereignty from the air over the vastness of the Arctic, a fleet of only 88 aircraft is totally inadequate, and is a signal that Canadian politicians do not take defence of Canadian sovereignty over its vast territory seriously.  In addition, in a controversial decision, Canada has committed to purchasing 25 used F-18 Hornets from Australia in the interim to meet a "capability gap" resulting from the wear out, crashes and retirements of older CF-18s, which have resulted in a severely depleted RCAF fleet.

Sweden's first jet fighter was the single-engine Saab 29 Tunnan -- a single seat fighter similar in design to the Russian MIG 15 and the American F-86 Sabre.  More than 660 Tunnan's were built (some for export) and they served with the SAF from 1950-76. 

The first supersonic fighter deployed by the SAF was the single-engine, Mach 2 capable, Saab 35 Draken interceptor, which was able to operate from public highways and roads, and could be refueled and rearmed within 10-15 minutes by relatively untrained conscripts.  Canada's Avro Arrow and the French Mirage III were aircraft that were comparable.  The SAF equipped its squadrons with 474 of these jets which served with the SAF well into the 1990s.  The replacement for the Draken was the Saab 37 Viggen -- a single-engine, single seat jet capable of Mach 2.1 designed for air superiority, ground attack and reconnaissance.  This jet saw service in the SAF from 1971-2005 with over 329 being produced.
 

Saab Draken                                                                                                     Saab Viggen

 

The current front line fighter jet serving with the SAF is the Saab JAS 39 Gripen -- a single-engine, multirole jet fighter comparable in performance to the Eurofighter Typhoon, the Dassault Rafale and the MIG 29.  Over 240 Gripens have been built, and it is one of the planes in the running to replace the RCAF's fighter jet fleet.  The Swedish government has also been working aggressively with Saab to market Gripens to other European nations as well as to Brazil, India, Indonesia, Argentina, Mexico and the Philippines.

  

Saab Gripen

 

Given Canada's unique air defence needs and its vast geography, and since Canada already has a robust and competitive aerospace sector that could design and build fighter jets to meet RCAF needs if called upon, one has to question why Canada can't take a page from Sweden and follow their example of creating an industry, the main purpose of which would be to provide for its domestic air defence needs, while creating jobs and contributing to Canada's GDP in a significant manner.

Those who criticize Canadian governments for supporting a domestic aerospace industry demonstrate their lack of confidence and vision in the capability of the Canadian aerospace sector, and an unwillingness to take advantage of the innovation and ingenuity resident in Canada.  Critics also fail to realize or are unwilling to admit that Canada's air defence needs are very different from those of its allies, and therefore requires a tailor made approach.

Since there are vast areas of Canada's geography where sovereignty can only be exercised from the air, there is no excuse for Canada not producing its own fighter aircraft to equip the RCAF to meet its unique air defence needs, particularly when it has the talent, ingenuity and technological capability to do so.  Canada use to do this and the Avro Arrow was the last time that Canada took an independent approach to air defence procurement.  Had the Arrow gone into service it would have been able to exceed the performance of most of the front line jet fighters of its allies and adversaries well into the 1970s.  In addition, advances in design and technology would likely have meant that it could have continued to be a superior jet fighter into the 1980s, 90s, and possibly into the 21st century.  The absolute folly of the Diefenbaker government's decision to cancel the Arrow program is evident by the fact that the government spent far more in the subsequent decades on aircraft and missiles for Canada's air defence than the original Arrow program would have cost.  By doing so Diefenbaker seriously damaged the Canadian economy, Canada’s technological and industrial capacity, and in the process diminished the ability of Canada to defend its sovereignty.  The repercussions of that decision are still being felt more than 60 years later.

The knowledge to design, build and equip RCAF fighter squadrons in numbers that would cover Canada from east to west to north is present today and would only succeed if the federal government, supported by all political parties, and Canada's aerospace sector, came together to make this project a national priority, not only to meet Canadian defence needs, but also to create well paid, value added, high tech manufacturing jobs.

Canada suffered a huge loss in terms of industrial capability, innovation, research and development, and jobs when the Arrow was cancelled in 1959.  The impact of the loss of tens of thousands of jobs, the money that was taken out of the economy, and the talent, knowledge and ingenuity that was lost to the US and the UK aerospace sectors when engineers and designers left Canada, was incalculable.  Who knows where Canadian industry (particularly the aerospace sector) would be today if Canada had proceeded with outfitting the RCAF with the Arrow as planned?

 

The evolution of aerospace technology would have seen the Arrow evolve into something that could have gone toe to toe or even surpassed the stealth jets which are the front line fighters of the US, Russia and China.  Concepts for a 5th generation Arrow have been floated for the past decade in many social media forums, and concept designs like the illustration below could have become reality if there had been political vision to support the ingenuity of Canadian aerospace designers and engineers, and adopt a build and buy Canadian policy for the RCAF.

 

However, an opportunity exists again for Canada to be the master of its own destiny when it comes to air defence.  But only if it follows the example of Sweden, instead of being subservient to the defence priorities of the US government and the American military-industrial complex.  

Committing to designing and building a Canadian-made fighter jet would be a way to exercise sovereignty in defence procurement based on Canadian air defence needs.  It would unleash innovation that would not only benefit the defence sector but would have economic spin offs for the non-defence sector as well.  It would also instill a sense of national pride among Canadians, particularly those who know the story of the Arrow.  Finally, it would create tens of thousands of new jobs both within and outside the aerospace sector that would boost the aviation industry and the high tech sector in ways that hasn’t happened since the days when the Avro Arrow was the height of technological achievement.

Canada shouldn't turn its back on the potential that is possible if this nation does as Sweden did, and charts its own course for Canada's air defence priorities.  It has little to lose and much to gain.

© 2020 The View From Here.  © 2020 Fareed Khan.  All Rights Reserved.