I also have a personal interest in this, in that I have a 15-year-old son who wants to fly fighter jets.
Certainly, the Canadian Arctic is extraordinarily large. It's 40% of the second-largest country on earth. We have very extensive maritime zones. We have, at the moment, twin-engine fighter jets that we chose because of the safety provided by a second engine, just like the U.S. Navy chose the F-18, and has bought a lot of replacement Super Hornets, again for the second engine, because of the safety over hostile ocean—or Arctic, in our case.
If we were to choose a single-engine jet for the Arctic, we would have to substantially improve our Arctic search and rescue, so that we could get to pilots quickly if they had to parachute to safety.
Again, you might not hear this from the air force; it's a harsh reality. They're not looking at the fighter jet for Arctic security; they're looking at the replacement fighter jet for operations overseas. That's why they want particular planes.
We have a fleet of F-18s. The logical thing, from my perspective, is to do a fleet extension of Super Hornets, which could fulfill the exact same mission, require relatively little new training for mechanics and pilots. And, of course, we know that we can afford the Super Hornet. We don't know if we can afford—