Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 program

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22859
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post18 Mar 2019, 01:20

Is an F-15EXclamation a paper airyplane at moment? P'raps ISRAEL will lend some mythical EFT/CFTs to CANADIAN F-35As?
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Online

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5413
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post18 Mar 2019, 01:55

Honestly, if the USAF or RCAF would want the F-15X. Then hold a competition and let the chips fall as they lay.... :wink:
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3281
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post18 Mar 2019, 02:12

marsavian wrote:Eagles with full CFT/EFT are quoted at 1000nm combat radius which current F-35 specification can't match. Eagle has a bigger AESA than F-35 and if your prime reason for being is intercepting Blackjacks, Backfires, Bears and any missiles they are carrying why exactly do you need stealth ? Surely a fast rangy interceptor with big radar and missile capacity might be better suited. F-35 is not the answer to every fighter requirement.

Of that, range is the only valid argument, and that is marginal at best. As far as the radar goes, processing power probably matters more than the small difference in size, and stealth provides a huge advantage in interception, from decreasing the ability of the target to evade intercept to decreasing his ability to evade missiles.
Einstein got it backward: one cannot prevent a war without preparing for it.

Uncertainty: Learn it, love it, live it.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3205
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post18 Mar 2019, 13:00

Canada doesn't need stealth, given its primarily defensive posture. If called to fulfill their NATO commitments, they'll just do what a lot of other countries do - let "someone else" (cough, America) fight first. They'll go in second, which once the US takes out the IADS, they'll be just fine zipping around in Eagles.

They'll love the fact it has 2 engines, has good range and carries a lot of well, everything.

Yes, expense will be a factor. Capability will be a factor. And poltics as always, will be a factor. But does anyone here really believe the Canadian evaluation is going to be logical, after witnessing how Canada runs its acquisition programs so far?
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22859
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post18 Mar 2019, 13:11

So Canadian Government rejects BOING! Super Hornets YET will suffer the BOING! F-15fedEX? Come On. Politics JUNIOR!
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

hb_pencil

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 866
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2011, 21:50

Unread post18 Mar 2019, 14:39

mixelflick wrote:Canada doesn't need stealth, given its primarily defensive posture. If called to fulfill their NATO commitments, they'll just do what a lot of other countries do - let "someone else" (cough, America) fight first. They'll go in second, which once the US takes out the IADS, they'll be just fine zipping around in Eagles.


Except thats absolutely not true whatsoever?

November1941 Deployment to Hong Kong
Dieppe Raid, Italian, Normandy and Scheldt Campaigns.
Korean War
Cold War Brigade and Squadron at Lahr and Baden Baden Germany
UNSOM II in Somalia
UN Operations in the Former Yugoslavia


Just in the last the last 10 years:

12 years of operations in Afghanistan, from the start through some of the worst of the fighting.
Air ops during the Libyan conflict
Air ops for Syrian Conflict
Enhanced foreign Presence in the Baltic
Baltic air policing mission
Romanian air policing mission

Please tell me where we take a "defensive posture" and come in a secondary role behind other countries? I'll tell you the only time it happened, the Gulf War. Say what you will about our procurement system, but Canada's actual defence posture has always been on to put our troops on the front lines alongside allies.

Please if you're going to talk about Canadian Defence, have the decency to learn a bit about it?
Last edited by hb_pencil on 18 Mar 2019, 18:05, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5891
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post18 Mar 2019, 16:08

marsavian wrote: Does Canada really need stealth in their generally defensive posture ?


You might want to check where CF-18s have been operating the last 35 years...

(this is probably the worse stereotype of the RCAF BTW, Marsavian.)

Canada has never fired a shot in anger over the great white north, but Korea, Europe the Middle east and Africa are very different stories...
Last edited by XanderCrews on 18 Mar 2019, 16:13, edited 1 time in total.
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5891
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post18 Mar 2019, 16:11

mixelflick wrote:
Yes, expense will be a factor. Capability will be a factor. And poltics as always, will be a factor. But does anyone here really believe the Canadian evaluation is going to be logical, after witnessing how Canada runs its acquisition programs so far?



The money would wave them off it. Its really that simple. Its not only the cash up front, F-15s cost more to operate, and if its a twin seater (which seems to be the case with these late model F-15s) it brings in personnel and further cost issues. (the guy in the backseat doesn't work for "free rides")
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

archeman

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 708
  • Joined: 28 Dec 2011, 05:37
  • Location: CA

Unread post18 Mar 2019, 21:17

Corsair1963 wrote:Honestly, if the USAF or RCAF would want the F-15X. Then hold a competition and let the chips fall as they lay.... :wink:


NOTE --- I am not defending the F-15X descision --

But I don't think that it is a question of which aircraft is better (F-18 vs F-35 vs F-15X). At least that is what the Air Force has been saying. The Air Force is explaining itself in terms of it's F-15 unit needs. The F-15Cs are going to die bit by bit before they have a replacement at the Unit level. So you can't send a worn out F-15C to the boneyard and replace it with an F-35A one for one because F-35s don't fit in an F-15C unit. Even if the F-35A is better at many or maybe even most of the F-15C missions.

The F-35 has always been sold as a replacement for F-16/FA-8/A-10. Which is a pretty big drawer of shoes to fill.
Daddy why do we have to hide? Because we use VI son, and they use windows.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1988
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post18 Mar 2019, 22:03

archeman wrote:So you can't send a worn out F-15C to the boneyard and replace it with an F-35A one for one because F-35s don't fit in an F-15C unit. Even if the F-35A is better at many or maybe even most of the F-15C missions.


Why?? :?

According to your logic squadrons like for example the 27th Fighter Squadron would never been able to convert to the F-22 (like it did in 2005) because both aircraft (F-15C and F-22) are very different aircraft.

If that F-15X or whatever F-15 variant ever goes ahead then this will only be done for one and following reason:
- To keep Boeing manufacturing fighter aircraft for the USAF, period!

archeman wrote:The F-35 has always been sold as a replacement for F-16/FA-8/A-10. Which is a pretty big drawer of shoes to fill.


And last time I checked the RCAF operated the F/A-18 (which is called CF-18 in Canada).

I hope that no other reader gets offended here with what I'm going to say but saying that the F-15X (or whatever F-15 variant) has any chance to win a contract in Canada to replace the F/A-18 is simple preposterous!

Canada buying the F-15 for the RCAF makes exactly the same sense as buying B-52's for example for the RCAF as well. :roll:

The future Canadian fighter aircraft will be the F-35, period. And the only reason why the F-35 purchase was delayed - and the objective of this "competition" is indeed only to delay the inevitable which is the F-35 purchase - is well known and was already "debated to death" in this same threat (politics of Justin Trudeau).
What Justin Trudeau said about not buying the F-35 was only regarding not buying it in this first term of his, which is ending up riddled with several scandals, Canadian people are also getting tired of him (of his "personality") and by judging by the latest polls - even the ones considered more "pro-Liberal" - it's very likely that this Justin Trudeau's first term will also be his last.

Moreover, the Canadian government already invested more than $500 million and as a result the Canadian industry already received more than $1 Billion - There's no other fighter program that can give the same level of returns as the F-35, period! (and I'm not even talking about capabilities here)
A 4th/4.5th gen fighter aircraft stands about as much chance against a F-35 as a guns-only Sabre has against a Viper.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5891
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post18 Mar 2019, 22:47

archeman wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:Honestly, if the USAF or RCAF would want the F-15X. Then hold a competition and let the chips fall as they lay.... :wink:


NOTE --- I am not defending the F-15X descision --

But I don't think that it is a question of which aircraft is better (F-18 vs F-35 vs F-15X). At least that is what the Air Force has been saying. The Air Force is explaining itself in terms of it's F-15 unit needs. The F-15Cs are going to die bit by bit before they have a replacement at the Unit level. So you can't send a worn out F-15C to the boneyard and replace it with an F-35A one for one because F-35s don't fit in an F-15C unit. Even if the F-35A is better at many or maybe even most of the F-15C missions.

The F-35 has always been sold as a replacement for F-16/FA-8/A-10. Which is a pretty big drawer of shoes to fill.


It's not the air force requesting the F-15X, it's not even SecAF. There was nothing in the budget proposal for F-15X it was added later by the SECDEF
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

lamoey

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1061
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2004, 17:44
  • Location: 77550

Unread post18 Mar 2019, 22:53

XanderCrews wrote:It's not the air force requesting the F-15X, it's not even SecAF. There was nothing in the budget proposal for F-15X it was added later by the SECDEF


Now, why would the acting SecDef, a former Boeing executive, want to acquire an aircraft from Boeing, that the USAF is not asking for?
Former Flight Control Technican - We keep'em flying
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22859
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post18 Mar 2019, 23:06

lamoey wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:It's not the air force requesting the F-15X, it's not even SecAF. There was nothing in the budget proposal for F-15X it was added later by the SECDEF


Now, why would the acting SecDef, a former Boeing executive, want to acquire an aircraft from Boeing, that the USAF is not asking for?

Because until recently resigned ACTUAL US SecDef wanted it? Therefore Acting SecDef just following the lead? Dunno.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Online

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5413
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 01:30

lamoey wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:It's not the air force requesting the F-15X, it's not even SecAF. There was nothing in the budget proposal for F-15X it was added later by the SECDEF


Now, why would the acting SecDef, a former Boeing executive, want to acquire an aircraft from Boeing, that the USAF is not asking for?



He is an Acting Secretary of Defense and will need a job soon......... :wink:
Online

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5413
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 02:22

mixelflick wrote:Canada doesn't need stealth, given its primarily defensive posture. If called to fulfill their NATO commitments, they'll just do what a lot of other countries do - let "someone else" (cough, America) fight first. They'll go in second, which once the US takes out the IADS, they'll be just fine zipping around in Eagles.

They'll love the fact it has 2 engines, has good range and carries a lot of well, everything.

Yes, expense will be a factor. Capability will be a factor. And poltics as always, will be a factor. But does anyone here really believe the Canadian evaluation is going to be logical, after witnessing how Canada runs its acquisition programs so far?


Canada doesn't need stealth.......... :doh:
PreviousNext

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Corsair1963 and 18 guests