Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 528 posts

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#461

Post by bluegatty »

ifwinterco wrote: post #387
adjejmxbdjdn wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the past countries would buy American equipment even if it wasn’t the best fit because that would make you essentially an American ally. Being part of the U.S. ecosystem was valuable. Unfortunately, over the last 1.5 years, the political value proposition has turned by 180 degrees. - Being a U.S. ally no longer guarantees that you will be protected by the U.S. as Ukraine is seeing. But the U.S. has been tearing ag…

This is 100% true and I agree with all of it, but I would just add that for fighter jets specifically the calculus is a bit different. Unless you want to buy Chinese jets your choices are either F35s or a big step down to 4th generation fighters that are materially worse in terms of capability. Modern 4th gen fighters are still very capable, cheaper, simpler and more reliable, but if you ever do end up facing an adve…

"Unless you want to buy Chinese " ???

Also - the landscape is changing.

Stealth is a standoff mechanism, but weapon systems are starting to change the value of stealth.

There are some who think that stealth mechanisms are being defeated with better sensors.

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#462

Post by benj111 »

funnym0nk3y wrote: post #455
benj111 wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the state of missile tech, is that as relevant anymore? If you strap a missile on to a Cessna that can take down a 5th gen fighter before it knows you're there. Doesn't really matter what fancy doodads the latest and greatest jet has. Further if your 5th gen jets are relying on tech from your adversary....

Yes and no, there is no easy binary answer here. At altitude most AA is radar based, thus a lower RCS will help directly in not being seen. So you can get closer to the enemy you still can see because of the higher RCS. For BVR fights this is essential. Those machines shouldn't be low level though. IR missles don't care about RCS. It is not their natural territory either. Third that Cessna is not hidden either. From…

Well yes, I'm taking an extreme example.

I'm just thinking about something like the meteor missile, if you're up against a 5th gen jet with shorter range missiles, the 5th gen jet doesn't necessarily have the advantage.

Then there's things like drones. A cheap drone with a good missile is arguably the better option than an expensive jet with poor weapons.

Yes, the best option is the good jet with the good missile, but most militaries have limited budgets, so it isn't a question of having all the the things, but one of where that money is best spent. I suppose you could argue that the military knows best, but then the US military insisted on keeping cannon around on jets just in case, so it seems to me, at least plausible that the current view is more about inertia than bang for buck.

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#463

Post by ex1fm3ta »

ThePowerOfFuet wrote: post #394
nl wrote: post #339

The Saab GlobalEye is based on the Bombardier Global 6500 airframe. Bombardier Aviation is a Canadian company. For those who aren't aware, the Boeing E7 is yet-another-delayed-Boeing project. The UK has bought it but it has been continually delayed: https://breakingdefense.com/2026/03/uk-defense-official-boei... Australia flies it (an earlier version) but today announced they are also buying three Bombardier Global 6…

>Bombardier Aviation is a Canadian company. Was. They are now part of Airbus, much like Bombardier Transport is now part of Alstom.

Only C-Series program was sold to Airbus, Bombardier still makes private jet.

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#464

Post by kakacik »

gostsamo wrote: post #342
lysace wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately the EU still hasn't gotten the balls to confiscate that frozen oligarchy money, so no. Just wait, though. Soon you will cry. ;)

confiscating money is much bigger deal than you can imagine. Russia and the EU are not officially at war and just taking money because you can is a serious violation of fundamental rights.

Yeah rules apply only on one side it seems, russia confiscated western planes, factories etc. worth tens of billions. I'd say eye for an eye is the only strategy mafia state like russia understands. That and rule of stronger, bigger dog fucks weaker, as russia tends to frequently do.

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#465

Post by chimprich »

mikestorrent wrote: post #347
marcus_holmes wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do we need to actually go to war with Russia? Yes. That's what everyone signed up to [0] when Ukraine gave up its Soviet-era nukes. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum

Great, more dead boys for nothing. As a Canadian, I think we've sacrificed enough generations for European brother wars. Given retrospect, wouldn't a land deal have been better than half a million dead? Wouldn't walking away from your house, maybe with a reparations package, be better than it being blown up by drones and your family killed? I don't think we need to go to war. We need to find a way to deal with Russia…

> Wouldn't walking away from your house, maybe with a reparations package, be better than it being blown up by drones and your family killed?

Please explain your analogy. Everyone should give up their property whenever they are threatened? For free, or whatever the aggressor chooses to give them?

> I don't think we need to go to war. We need to find a way to deal with Russia with humanity instead of treating them like some boomer-era cold war bogeyman.

What does that mean? How would you deal with them with humanity? Just give up your country when they invade?

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#466

Post by chimprich »

selivanovp wrote: post #381
marcus_holmes wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree completely. But part of that would be getting Russia to stop attempting to become a cold-war boogeyman, and stop behaving like a cold-war boogeyman. Russia also signed that treaty, and is also blatantly breaking it.

[flagged]

> Russia's war against Ukraine has never been about getting more territory,

That's completely counter to everything we know about Putin's mindset, and completely counter to all his actions so far. How would a war for territory look any different to what is occurring now?

> when Ukraine has to be a sovereign and neutral state

That's an oxymoron. Why does a sovereign democratic have to be neutral? A democratic state has the right to pursue whatever alliances it chooses.

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#467

Post by graemep »

znort_ wrote: post #442
graemep wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ukraine was essentially invaded because they became too friendly with NATO (and hence america). Also because it was considering joining the EU. The Russians threatened at least as early as 2008 that they would invade Ukraine if they did either. They actually invaded Ukraine in 2014 and captured a lot of territory. Why did the US and their European allies not plan for the Russians doing what they had threatened to d…

[flagged]

> russian invasion started in february 2022. 2014 was the

https://web.archive.org/web/20140825144115/https://abcnews.g...

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-31796226

> ousting of the legitimate government, secession of crimea and donbas, ukraine declaring donbas secessionist to be terrorists and starting a bombing campaign and the civil w

That is the Russian argument justifying the invasion. its irrelevant to whether an invasion occurred or not

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#468

Post by graemep »

funnym0nk3y wrote: post #456
graemep wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ukraine was essentially invaded because they became too friendly with NATO (and hence america). Also because it was considering joining the EU. The Russians threatened at least as early as 2008 that they would invade Ukraine if they did either. They actually invaded Ukraine in 2014 and captured a lot of territory. Why did the US and their European allies not plan for the Russians doing what they had threatened to d…

Because since then Russia has threatened nuclear war a dozen times. Russias threats are worth almost nothing.

On the other hand Russia has threatened to invade places and has done so. Georgia, Ukraine in 2014, etc.

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#469

Post by ifwinterco »

bluegatty wrote: post #461
ifwinterco wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is 100% true and I agree with all of it, but I would just add that for fighter jets specifically the calculus is a bit different. Unless you want to buy Chinese jets your choices are either F35s or a big step down to 4th generation fighters that are materially worse in terms of capability. Modern 4th gen fighters are still very capable, cheaper, simpler and more reliable, but if you ever do end up facing an adve…

"Unless you want to buy Chinese " ??? Also - the landscape is changing. Stealth is a standoff mechanism, but weapon systems are starting to change the value of stealth. There are some who think that stealth mechanisms are being defeated with better sensors.

China do have a fifth generation fighter, as do Russia in theory, nobody else is close right now.

However if you're Canada there may be one or two issues with building your air force around Russian or Chinese hardware, even if they were available

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#470

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD »

1718627440 wrote: post #417
0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eh, the US was also hated in Europe as Biden was sending lots of money to Ukraine in the wake of Russia's invasion: https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/06/11/views-of-the-u... You can see even with Biden as president, around half of Europe's population regarded the US unfavorably. This was at a time when the US was sending more aid per capita than almost all European countries: https://old.reddit.com/r/europe/com…

The very statistic you presented, shows that the USA was seen as neutral, slightly favorable. The fact that there is now an unprecedented animosity towards the emerging autocracy of the USA, does not mean there were no issues before. They just pale in comparison. You didn't give me enough good grades for my actions, therefore I run amok now, doesn't sound like healthy behaviour.

>shows that the USA was seen as neutral, slightly favorable

Yep, we could've gotten the same level of favorability by doing nothing, just like Switzerland. All of that stuff about the "soft power" we supposedly get from defending Europe is nonsense.

>You didn't give me enough good grades for my actions, therefore I run amok now, doesn't sound like healthy behaviour.

I'm not defending Trump's foreign policy. I'm an isolationist. I'm simply saying there's no reason for the US to try to please European public opinion. You'll never get anywhere.

Europeans just don't like the US. That's been true for as long as I can remember. If they aren't criticizing our foreign policy, they will criticize our domestic policy, as though how we handle our internal affairs was their business. Europeans essentially view the US as a vassal state.

Post reply on HN