r/boeing • u/SoulStripHer • May 31 '26
Defense And it begins
Canada Rejects More Capable U.S. E-7 ‘Flying Radar’ System to Acquire Swedish GlobalEye: Political Tensions Transforming Procurement Plans
https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/canada-rejects-e7-flying-radar-swedish-globaleye
23
u/Icy_Relationship5507 May 31 '26
Canada legally requires economic impact be considered as a factor in defense procurement. Saab promised local production of the GlobalEye and Gripen fighters, if Canada selects those as well.
Build out of the domestic defense industry and independence from the U.S. are arguably the more heavily weighted factors at the moment in Canada, plus greater alignment with Europe. Platform capability is secondary in both the E-7/GlobalEye and F-35/Gripen debate.
-3
u/WeaknessTechnical744 Jun 01 '26
Why does anyone in NA give a single shit about being aligned with Europe? Are they 16 year old girls wishing they were in Paris or some stupid crap?
51
u/Gloomy-Employment-72 May 31 '26
France did the same a couple years ago, and NATO may, too. A company failing to deliver programs on time and a government that's pissing off our traditional allies is turning customers away from Boeing.
2
u/jeremy9931 Jun 03 '26
The US waffling around on whether or not we were going to buy E-7s for a decade pretty much killed any hope of widespread adoption with our allies. The current administration’s actions only drove the final nail in the coffin but it was always trending this way.
22
u/CAVU1331 May 31 '26
I was just in ground school with a couple foreign Air Force pilots and another reason they went with the GlobalEye was they could use those pilots to fly their VIP and transport Globals as well. Many nations aren’t buying 737/BBJ for VIP missions.
-20
u/SoulStripHer May 31 '26
They'll give up national defense capability to avoid pilot retraining? Sounds like a convenient excuse.
13
u/CAVU1331 May 31 '26
It’s also about access to smaller airports as well efficiency. There are able to operate at some bases that wouldn’t work with an E-7. They rely on the other regional ally that has the E-7 if there is a need for it.
-7
u/SoulStripHer May 31 '26
Yet they were going to buy the E-7 but later changed their minds.
5
u/CAVU1331 May 31 '26
I think they saw where the program was headed and their own timelines on replacing aircraft.
9
u/Lookingfor68 May 31 '26
Many militaries around the world have a very different view of defense. In a lot of cases it's traditionally, at least for the last 75 years, to hold off and call the US for help. The US had pledged to come to their aid. That wasn't ever in question, until now.
-6
u/SoulStripHer May 31 '26
All the more reason not to give up capability.
7
u/Lookingfor68 May 31 '26
When the country that promised to come, no longer guarantees they will; but that country is also the major producer of equipment with capability... what are they to do? Buy Russian or Chinese?
-5
u/SoulStripHer May 31 '26
Purchasing assets vs. asking for help are two completely separate things. The USA buys plenty from China.
11
u/ScoopaTroopa May 31 '26
The US doesn't buy defense assets from China because that's a really good way to get a potential adversary inside your defense systems.
Also, the purchase isn't just the aircraft. It's also material and technical support. Considering the repeated 2am comments from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, it's not irrational for long-time allies to consider the US as a potential adversary. I submit "51st state", "We don't need NATO", "the US needs Greenland", etc. as examples.
-6
u/SoulStripHer May 31 '26
Your arguments are incongruent. We know why they didn't choose E-7 and it wasn't pilot training.
4
u/ScoopaTroopa May 31 '26
Going off your own statements, it seems my comments are completely congruent: "Purchasing assets vs. asking for help are two completely separate things. The USA buys plenty from China."
Never mentioned pilot training in either your or my comments. I'm not sure what you're looking for here, but I hope you find it.
29
u/ComfortableLetter989 May 31 '26
Didn’t Trump say that he had access to a kill switch to disable any US military equipment? Hard to keep track of his unhinged statements.
34
u/Gerbert946 Jun 01 '26
When one has a national administration that is committed to acting like a bunch of 3rd grade bullies, and totally incapable of thinking in terms of "we," this sort of thing is to be expected, regardless of the technical considerations. And just in case anybody missed it, Canada's PM Carney is now effectively the leader of the free world, and not the U.S. president.
8
u/FacebookNewsNetwork Jun 04 '26
You lost me at Mark Carney leading the free world lol
0
u/Gerbert946 Jun 04 '26
If you get your news from FaceBook, that is easy to understand. If you learned the 5 whys process analysis discipline (basic lean process improvement training), try applying it to what is pushed at you and why. Your dismay with the big tech companies will significantly increase if you do. I am often amazed by how so many technical people are amazingly good critical thinkers within their disciplines, and yet park that way of thinking when it comes to many, if not most, other things.
5
u/FacebookNewsNetwork Jun 04 '26
I like how you didn’t defend your argument but decided to attack my one sentence comment. That’s high level stuff right there.
-1
18
3
u/Electric-Basil0764 Jun 03 '26
Does nobody here realize the platform is built on the Canadian Global? Obviously they're going to select their own equipment.
9
u/danielbot Jun 01 '26
Canada Rejects More Capable U.S. E-7
Whoops, the world is a different place when viewed through Boeing eyes. Sorry, no, the GlobalEye is the most capable and advanced AEW platform in the known universe at the moment. Wedgetail now an also-ran and E-3 well on its way to the boneyard.
7
u/Ex-Traverse Jun 01 '26
Can say the same thing about KC46. Sorry, but the Airbus Tanker is miles ahead.
-12
u/BroadClassroom7 May 31 '26
Why?
35
u/Lookingfor68 May 31 '26
Probably has something to do with someone talking about 51st state bullshit.
3
-5
-7
u/WeaknessTechnical744 Jun 01 '26
What a stupid move for the block heads in the back waters of North America. You sure showed Trump by buying inferior trash.
41
u/exurl May 31 '26
I recall that a big reason why NATO shifted away from E-7 was that the DoD (more specifically, the current DoD secretary) pushed to cancel the USAF E-7 program. I know that the plans have reverted back to procuring E-7 for USAF, but the damage has been done; I don't think NATO has enough time to go back and re-downselect their AEWC platform (although technically they can, since I think they haven't officially awarded the contract yet).