Canadian Forces Shying Away From Using the Term Next Generation Fighter?

January 30, 2013. David Pugliese - Defence Watch

There has been some suggestion that the senior leadership of the RCAF isn’t happy with the use of the term “Next Generation Fighter.” The argument against the term is that it denotes a high degree of sophistication, maybe one that Canada won’t be getting after all. If the Super Hornet is selected to replace the CF-18 then could it be termed a “next generation fighter”, argue those in uniform against using such terminology.

There is also the argument that the use of the term could indicate that the RCAF is already determining what it wants, contrary to the Harper government’s claim it is now open to alternatives to the F-35.

Not that Canadians are buying the claim that the government is open to other aircraft. The Hill Times recently had an article by Tim Naumetz that reported on an opinion poll that found nearly half of Canadians said they believe the government will go ahead with the F-35 fleet procurement anyway.

The poll is from Forum Research.

The Forum poll survey of 1,600 voting-age Canadians also found that even though the government argued that an independent review released in December confirmed its own estimates of F-35 costs were accurate, two-thirds of Canadians remain convinced that Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Cabinet misled Canadians with estimates they released prior to the federal election in 2011, Naumetz reported.

Back to the Next Generation Fighter terminology – the Canadian Forces also faces the problem that the term has been used so much that it has become part of Canada’s defence landscape. So whether the RCAF or government can shake Next Generation Fighter label remains to be seen.