F-35 JSF. Canada's new jet?

[#juan]

I can't see what's wrong with CF-18s. If they are maintained, they are useful. Hell's bells, the US was still using P-38 Lightenings in the Viet Nam war. They are still using F-15s and F-16s and Warthogs, let alone F-18s.

Gilbert
It's not what we need or what we have. The whole idea is keeping the money flowing into the military-industrial complex. They are using F-15s ans F-16s because there is nothing better and I think there will be Warthogs around until 2060 at least....again there is nothing better.

 

[Lineman]

Everything wears out eventually, At a certain point the cost and effort to keep a family vehicle becomes too much so we ship it off to the shredder and buy another. (The CF188 isn't there yet but it is getting close). Some of us can only afford used cars or new compacts, others jump into the mid size SUV and then there's those people who are always driving $50,000 trucks. It may be a stretch but using this analogy Canada would likely be the SUV buyer but with a need for a few big trucks to drive around our when our weather demands it. Why not get about 30 F22's (if the US will sell them to us, we are defending their northern front aren't we?) and then maybe something like 40 of the Swedish Grippen, made for the north by a northern country.

Any fighter retired out of the US inventory should stay there, If they're having trouble maintaining them and choose to replace them how the heck are we supposed to? By the way you can see most of the F14's on Google earth parked in an Arizona Graveyard along with thousands of other obsolete equipment. Lat 32° 9'28.89"N Long 110°49'54.83"W

 

[Starscream]

The CF-18 will have to be replaced at some point (2020 the latest by the feds). The feds have anylised the most likely options: Replace the CF-18 with another combat aircraft, invest in UCAVs (Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle), or leave Canadian air defence to the U.S.

I say the feds should replace the CF-18 with another combat aircraft, but which one?

 

[Canaduh]

Why not get about 30 F22's (if the US will sell them to us, we are defending their northern front aren't we?)

That ^, i believe America offered to sell Australia fa 22 raptors, basically a watered down version of the American f 22. The f 35 is already out maneuvered and out gunned by alot of other fighter jets in the air, by 2020 its foreseeable that even 3rd world countries could have access to advanced migs and European jets. Quite simply the f 35 is a piece of crap.

 

[dj03]

or leave Canadian air defence to the U.S.

Whatever we go with, this would be a really bad idea.

 

[Lineman]

Sensfan
First of all my sympathies on the tough end to the season.

What's your view on the Gripen? I've read it's capable but not too much out there on how it compares to other fighters. Any CAF in the crowd who could enlighten us?

 

[Starscream]

At 76$ million dollars a pop, I doubt the feds would pay that much for the SAAB Gripen. The feds would want something cheaper probably.

 

[Canaduh]

Sensfan
First of all my sympathies on the tough end to the season.

Aye

What's your view on the Gripen? I've read it's capable but not too much out there on how it compares to other fighters. Any CAF in the crowd who could enlighten us?

The problem is that all gen 4.5 fighters are close to or at the point where its costing more to maintain them than it would be to replace ( I highly doubt the Canadian government would pay 43 million USD per jet, to get something that is already out of date.) The F 22 raptor is the best jet on the horizon, Canada could get get a watered down version quite easily (if Australia can Canada could).

 

[Starscream]

sensfan

Whats the point in buying the F22 if we get the "dumb down" version?

 

[Canaduh]

sensfan

Whats the point in buying the F22 if we get the "dumb down" version?

Because the dumb version of the F 22 is still vastly better than the F 35 (on information so far released). Its not technically a dumb version, I believe it was the more secretive technology that the Americans where unhappy exporting. I read some where that the US would sell Australia full version F 22's, but the US wouldn't release the security codes and that Australia wouldn't be able to do repairs/upgrades on the technology.

Take a look @ the specs of the F 35 run way version and the F 22.

 

[Lineman]

Rafale C (EUR 51.8) $ 62.1
Rafale M (EUR 56.6) $ 67.9
JAS-39C Gripen (Poland bid) $ 68.9
F-18E Super Hornet $ 78.4
Eurofighter (Germany) (EUR 85.7) $ 102.8
F-15E Strike Eagle $ 108.2
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter $ 115.0
Eurofighter Typhoon (UK) (GBP 64.8) $ 118.6
F-22A Raptor $ 177.


Taken from defence-aerospace.com 2006

 

[lone wolf]

Have a MSR for that new Russian jet? This is Canada. We need something that you can park outside overnight without having to plug it in, then launch from an improvised strip. High tech doesn't seem to consider that the airport just might be one of the first things smashed to smithereens.

 

[Lineman]

Forgot to add the link
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/dae/articles/communiques/FighterCostFinalJuly06.pdf

 

[unclepercy]

I don't mean to be sarcastic, but why can't Canada build it's own aircraft? If you dislike what the US has to offer, that seems to be the sensible next step. :-?

Softpedaling the sarcasm again, realistically what is Canada defending? I'm serious. What
resource, structure, etc. is Canada protecting? I don't understand why Canada would be a
threat to anyone, or why Canada would want people of the world to believe it was a big-bad monster with huge numbers of armed aircraft.

It sounds like you are discussing killing a fly with a hydrogen bomb. Please explain.:?:

Uncle

 

[lone wolf]

I don't mean to be sarcastic, but why can't Canada build it's own aircraft? If you dislike what the US has to offer, that seems to be the sensible next step. :-?

Softpedaling the sarcasm again, realistically what is Canada defending? I'm serious. What
resource, structure, etc. is Canada protecting? I don't understand why Canada would be a
threat to anyone, or why Canada would want people of the world to believe it was a big-bad monster with huge numbers of armed aircraft.

It sounds like you are discussing killing a fly with a hydrogen bomb. Please explain.:?:

Uncle

Ewww, Unc.... Did someone urinate in your corn flakes? Where do you see anything dissing Uncle Sam?

Sidenote: Canada did build one - years ahead of anything anyone had - and a US butt-kissing Conservative government killed it for Made-in-the-USA Bomarcs.

 

[#juan]

We paid about thirty million dollars apiece for 138 CF-18s. These new aircraft are not three times as good, or three times as fast.(In fact they are hardly an improvement at all) They don't carry three times as big a payload. Sounds like a scam to me. A hundred and twenty million each? Or a hundred and sixty million each?

 

[dj03]

I don't mean to be sarcastic, but why can't Canada build it's own aircraft? If you dislike what the US has to offer, that seems to be the sensible next step.

I'm not sure that we have the infrastructure or expertise to design and build a modern fighter. We did back in the sixties but since the PC's killed the Arrow program we lost our edge in aviation and I suspect most of our talent in this area these days ends up in the US.

We could certainly restart this but the cost and time would be much larger than our investment in the JSF. While the PC's killed the Arrow, this whole project would be mothballed by the Liberals the next time they formed a government.

Softpedaling the sarcasm again, realistically what is Canada defending? I'm serious. What
resource, structure, etc. is Canada protecting? I don't understand why Canada would be a
threat to anyone, or why Canada would want people of the world to believe it was a big-bad monster with huge numbers of armed aircraft.

It sounds like you are discussing killing a fly with a hydrogen bomb. Please explain.

This is exactly what I was wondering earlier in the thread, what are our CF-18 doing these days that couldn't be handled by a UAV?

I thought about it for a bit and realized that we have this vast amount of territory to defend and most of it is sparsely populated. We need a way to get military power to any part of the country very quickly and the only way to do that is with fighter aircraft.

Obviously, we don't plan to shoot down Russian and American aircraft, but when it comes to sovereignty issues being able to put heavily armed military personnel into a region seems to say "this is ours" better than saying so at the UN, even if no aggression is intended.

We also have alliances that we belong to and our partners expect us to contribute and not freeload. Canadian CF-18's participated in Operation Noble Eagle after 9/11 and helped intercept suspect aircraft approaching both Canada and the US many times.

While the USAF is more than capable of looking after air defence throughout North America, as a Canadian, I want my government controlling Canadian airspace and the US has said many times they want us doing that so they can focus on the US and their domestic and foreign policy goals.

How many Americans want to see their tax dollars and service people defend a country that won't take care of itself? Especially a modern first world country like Canada.

Another reason relates to what happened with our sub fleet. We planned to retire the Oberon subs and not replace them, NATO said if we didn't maintain a sub fleet they wouldn't share sub intelligence with us or notify us of sub activity.

If we are going to belong to NORAD and NATO we need to do more than just be freeloaders.

If the Sea King situation has taught us anything, we need to plan well in advance to replace equipment before it starts falling out of the sky. The IMP should keep the CF-18 in effective condition but moving to the F-35 in the next 10 - 12 years will probably keep our air defence capacity in top shape until 2050.

 

[unclepercy]

Ewww, Unc.... Did someone urinate in your corn flakes? Where do you see anything dissing Uncle Sam?

Sidenote: Canada did build one - years ahead of anything anyone had - and a US butt-kissing Conservative government killed it for Made-in-the-USA Bomarcs.

OMG. You are actually asking me where anyone dissed Uncle Sam on this BB?
I've been here three years, and it comes up in almost every thread. "US butt-kissing
Conservative government?"

What is the reason that Canada doesn't make its own aircraft? I don't understand.

Uncle

 

[lone wolf]

OMG. You are actually asking me where anyone dissed Uncle Sam on this BB?
I've been here three years, and it comes up in almost every thread. "US butt-kissing
Conservative government?"

What is the reason that Canada doesn't make its own aircraft? I don't understand.

Uncle

Mostly because the majority of AVRO's best and brightest took jobs with grandfathers of McDonnel Douglas and Lockheed when Diefenbaker killed the Arrow in favour of Bomarks. The day of the manned interceptor was over....

Canada is still in the aerospace racket. Canadarm, the Mars weather station and the CL 415 water bomber come to mind, but as an innovator, the industry died with the Arrow.

US butt-kissing Conservative government is a diss to you? Are you a Conservative? That's a diss to Canadian butt-kissing governments.

 

[Lineman]

Bombardier builds a range of passenger aircraft but nothing over 90 passengers. That whats left of our aircraft industry. To build a modern jet fighter would be possible, throw enough money at anything and it'll get done (see SAAB Gripen), but it would take years to build up the industry and assemble the engineering team before it could happen. With the trend to pilotless aircraft it might be something to consider though very unlikely.