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

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

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5392
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 02:27

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


Hell, they can't even come up with a remotely good case for the F-15X either........ :doh:
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1981
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 11:49

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.

.....

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


As others already mentioned, the RCAF fired all its shots in anger after WWII (and even during WWII) abroad as part of an allied coalition and even against a technically well equipped enemies which was the case of Operation Allied Force in 1999. By the way the Canadian participation in Operation Allied Force in 1999 was sanctioned by a Liberal government. BTW, the Canadian participation on the JSF (which as we all know led to the F-35) was also sanctioned by the same Liberal government.
As such it's obvious that Canada needs a future stealth aircraft and IMO I believe that everyone making these decisions knows it.
The "F-35 and Canada doesn't need Stealth" was only a petty political weapon used (by JT&theLiberals) to win the previous elections against the Conservatives which were in the government at the time and like a renown Canadian Singer sings in one of her also renown songs -> "Those days are gone..."


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


- F-86 Sabre (known as CL-13 in Canada)
- F-104 Starfighter (known in Canada as CF-104)

These 2 main and historical post-WWII jet fighter aircraft were "only" single engine.

Moreover Canada's post-WWII main training jet aircraft, the CL-41 Tutor and the BAe Hawk are also single engine.
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

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3189
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 12:29

OK, but the F-86 and Starfighter were a LONG time ago. And how many Starfighters did they lose in accidents, something on the order of 50%?!? Since then, they seem to have changed their thinking considerably.

As far as the liberal gov't sanctioning combat use/investment in the F-35 program. Maybe. But they're also the same liberal gov't that snubbed the F-35. Their past behavior/decision making is no barometer of what they'll do in the future. In fact, Canada's behavior is (at times) absolutely bizarre. Which is why I think the F-15X buy is at least plausible.

People here have outlined very logical reasons why the F-15X wouldn't be the best choice. Problem is, Canada has proven anything but logical. Buying 2nd hand retro 80's Hornets sounds like a punch line, not the best fighter for Canada..
Offline
User avatar

botsing

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 797
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2015, 18:09
  • Location: The Netherlands

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 16:36

mixelflick wrote:Which is why I think the F-15X buy is at least plausible.

Smokin' that stuff again? :roll:
"Those who know don’t talk. Those who talk don’t know"
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5879
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 17:01

mixelflick wrote:OK, but the F-86 and Starfighter were a LONG time ago. And how many Starfighters did they lose in accidents, something on the order of 50%?!? Since then, they seem to have changed their thinking considerably.


F-18 wasn't chosen because it has 2 engines. Thats an "interesting footnote" that has been blown out of all proportion. It was never the primary reason for the F-18 selection, it was an "afterthought" to create a better case for the low IQ types. Mention "safety" and people go into a hypnotic trance.


AND GOOD GOD DID IT WORK


As far as the liberal gov't sanctioning combat use/investment in the F-35 program. Maybe. But they're also the same liberal gov't that snubbed the F-35. Their past behavior/decision making is no barometer of what they'll do in the future. In fact, Canada's behavior is (at times) absolutely bizarre. Which is why I think the F-15X buy is at least plausible.

People here have outlined very logical reasons why the F-15X wouldn't be the best choice. Problem is, Canada has proven anything but logical. Buying 2nd hand retro 80's Hornets sounds like a punch line, not the best fighter for Canada..


Im telling you. The sticker shock makes it a non starter. If they balk at the F-35 price, and even the Super Hornet price, then the F-15 is even less plausible as it costs more money. in every conceivable way. from the start up costs, to the buy, to the CPFH, to the personnel, everything about F-15s costs more which is why things like F-16s and F-18s exist.

My point is, no matter how dumb the liberals are, they are too cheap to do anything that foolish. We saw the interim super hornet bust.
Choose Crews
Offline

hb_pencil

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

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

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 18:08

mixelflick wrote:OK, but the F-86 and Starfighter were a LONG time ago. And how many Starfighters did they lose in accidents, something on the order of 50%?!? Since then, they seem to have changed their thinking considerably.

As far as the liberal gov't sanctioning combat use/investment in the F-35 program. Maybe. But they're also the same liberal gov't that snubbed the F-35. Their past behavior/decision making is no barometer of what they'll do in the future. In fact, Canada's behavior is (at times) absolutely bizarre. Which is why I think the F-15X buy is at least plausible.

People here have outlined very logical reasons why the F-15X wouldn't be the best choice. Problem is, Canada has proven anything but logical. Buying 2nd hand retro 80's Hornets sounds like a punch line, not the best fighter for Canada..


Again procurement =/= military strategy. The same day you say this, the government announces an additional 850 troops will be contributed to Iraq and Ukraine missions.

Procurement has a domestic industrial component that deforms choices and decisions, as well as the requirement to navigate the peculiarities among a less defence literate populace.
Offline
User avatar

archeman

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

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

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 18:31

XanderCrews wrote:
My point is, no matter how dumb the liberals are, they are too cheap to do anything that foolish. We saw the interim super hornet bust.


Well it depends on their REAL goal.
I would bet at this stage that they clearly are not interested in replacing their air defense.
They are more interested in maintaining their political points with their fan base.
F-15X serves that purpose very well. They are not really going to buy those but it does give them the power to kick that non-F35 option(non-option really) around and not actually make any decision at all. They only have to wait out the clock till the October elections and make it look like they are doing something.
Daddy why do we have to hide? Because we use VI son, and they use windows.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3189
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post20 Mar 2019, 12:47

archeman wrote:
XanderCrews wrote:
My point is, no matter how dumb the liberals are, they are too cheap to do anything that foolish. We saw the interim super hornet bust.


Well it depends on their REAL goal.
I would bet at this stage that they clearly are not interested in replacing their air defense.
They are more interested in maintaining their political points with their fan base.
F-15X serves that purpose very well. They are not really going to buy those but it does give them the power to kick that non-F35 option(non-option really) around and not actually make any decision at all. They only have to wait out the clock till the October elections and make it look like they are doing something.


This makes as much sense as anything I've read in this thread. Personally, I'm looking forward to artist conceptions of F-15X's sporting Canadian Maple Leafs. Given all of the other non-starters, throwing F-15X into the mix will just up the entertainment factor. In fact, I'd say Canada's fighter acquisition process is starting to pull away from India as the #1 funniest thing going on in military aviation today.

The only thing missing here is the big top music and the Super Arrow :)
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1981
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post21 Mar 2019, 21:41

mixelflick wrote:OK, but the F-86 and Starfighter were a LONG time ago. And how many Starfighters did they lose in accidents, something on the order of 50%?!? Since then, they seem to have changed their thinking considerably.


The accident rate of the Canadian F-104 fleet was absolutely in no way related to the aircraft having a single engine only.
The reasons for this were basically the following:
1- The aircraft (F-104) which was designed as an high altitude interceptor was used by the Canadian Forces has a low altitude bomber aircraft. Resuming, the Canadians used the F-104 in completely opposite task to which the aircraft was designed for.
2- The fact that it took too long for the Canadians to replace the F-104 (and now, history repeats itself) also didn't help in any way its accident rate. Resuming, old equipment/aircraft are way more prone to crash compared to new aircraft and this is independent of the number of engines that the aircraft may have.


mixelflick wrote:As far as the liberal gov't sanctioning combat use/investment in the F-35 program. Maybe. But they're also the same liberal gov't that snubbed the F-35. Their past behavior/decision making is no barometer of what they'll do in the future. In fact, Canada's behavior is (at times) absolutely bizarre.


Again, this is only history repeating itself (in Canada). Or do you think that the Canadian F/A-18 purchase in the early 1980's went smoothly and without any derails and second doubts at the political level??
If you do then read the following:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Fight ... ft_Project

While the negotiations with McDonnell Douglas were continuing, Air Canada announced it was purchasing the Lockheed L-1011 to add to its wide-body fleet. This greatly angered James Smith McDonnell, the Chief Executive Officer of McDonnell Douglas, who personally threatened to cancel his company's participation in the NFA project.[5] Neither DND and DSS wanted this to happen, and wanted both the F-16 and F/A-18 aircraft to remain in contention for the NFA project. However, these concerns were later muted when a report was leaked that suggested the F/A-18 was favoured to win the NFA project, and it appeared that the DITC's concerns were going to be overridden. As a result, McDonnell Douglas became much less vocal about the Air Canada purchase.[5]

Contract negotiations went on throughout 1978 and 1979, continuing through two federal elections. The proposed contracts were finalized by June, when then new Progressive Conservative Party of Canada formed a minority government. A lengthy review of the contracts followed, and was completed in early December. These were tabled to be signed off on December 14, however, on the 13th the Progressive Conservative government failed a vote of non-confidence and the NFA project was set aside. The Liberal Party of Canada was elected to a majority government in the ensuing elections, and on February 19, 1980 formal negotiations for the NFA project started again.


Sound familiar, eh?

Or watch the following "gem". When watching the following video, I invite you to watch it with your eyes closed or resuming to listen the video's audio only and everytime you hear the words "F/A-18" or "Hornet", replace them in your mind with "F-35":


Again, too familiar, eh?


mixelflick wrote:Which is why I think the F-15X buy is at least plausible.

People here have outlined very logical reasons why the F-15X wouldn't be the best choice. Problem is, Canada has proven anything but logical. Buying 2nd hand retro 80's Hornets sounds like a punch line, not the best fighter for Canada..


The problem is that you're focused on the "mess" that the Canadian military procurement's indeed are (no discussion here) but you fail to acknowledge that most of the times - specially when it comes to fighter aircraft - the end result is that Canada buys what's expected which is the best multi-role aircraft possible for the best/cheaper price/cost possible and for the desired capabilities and there's only one fighter aircraft that can meet such criteria which is again, the F-35! (yeah, the stealth aircraft).
That "Buying 2nd hand retro 80's Hornets" seems to support everything what I've been saying about the subject which is that the clear winner is the F-35. And why?
Because "Buying 2nd hand retro 80's Hornets" is only a "stalling" measure to buy extra time so that the current government doesn't have to buy any new fighter aircraft and that the decision to buy the new fighter aircraft - which is the F-35 - is delayed to the next term or government.
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

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3189
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post22 Mar 2019, 12:48

Perhaps.

You make some good points, but I would say it's anything but certain at this point they buy the F-35. I hope they do. It seems to check all the boxes. But something politically precluded them from pulling the trigger the first time. It just makes me wonder if they won't do it again.

They have a very robust field: Super Hornet, Rafale, Typhoon, F-35, Gripen. One might argue F-15X. I think the sleeper is Rafale. Very capable multi-role, some signature reduction measures, two engines (whether you believe 2 engines is a favored point). Going to be expensive but what of these options isn't?

Egypt,Quatar and India have selected Rafale and in India's case, I believe with local production/tech transfer? If they pitched the same deal to Canada, I wouldn't under-estimate the impact of such..
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2125
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post22 Mar 2019, 14:10

mixelflick wrote:Perhaps.

You make some good points, but I would say it's anything but certain at this point they buy the F-35. I hope they do. It seems to check all the boxes. But something politically precluded them from pulling the trigger the first time. It just makes me wonder if they won't do it again.

They have a very robust field: Super Hornet, Rafale, Typhoon, F-35, Gripen. One might argue F-15X. I think the sleeper is Rafale. Very capable multi-role, some signature reduction measures, two engines (whether you believe 2 engines is a favored point). Going to be expensive but what of these options isn't?


Who is they? Canaduh? The topic of this thread? How can Raffy be a "sleeper" if Dassault dropped out? Or did they announce they're back in? Or am I just confused?
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
Offline

magitsu

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 399
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2015, 22:12

Unread post22 Mar 2019, 19:34

steve2267 wrote:Who is they? Canaduh? The topic of this thread? How can Raffy be a "sleeper" if Dassault dropped out? Or did they announce they're back in? Or am I just confused?

Indeed. Dassault is a small company compared to the others. They're wisely not taking part in Canada and Poland where there's little chance of success. Canadian procurement already failed to complete the acquisition of French radars (which are in high demand by their peers, so the pick wasn't wrong any more than in the case of F-35).
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada ... -1.3145196
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1981
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post22 Mar 2019, 21:29

mixelflick wrote:You make some good points, but I would say it's anything but certain at this point they buy the F-35. I hope they do. It seems to check all the boxes.


Yes, I agree that nothing is "set on stone" yet. However like you acknowledged all the "check boxes" or the vast majority of them are on the F-35 side (and by far).

mixelflick wrote:But something politically precluded them from pulling the trigger the first time. It just makes me wonder if they won't do it again.


Well, like you can read in my previous post it wouldn't be the first time that Canada selected something and then "pull the trigger" from it and then to select it again. Again as you can read in my last post, this happened with the Canadian F/A-18 acquisition in the early 1980's.


mixelflick wrote:They have a very robust field: Super Hornet, Rafale, Typhoon, F-35, Gripen. One might argue F-15X. I think the sleeper is Rafale. Very capable multi-role, some signature reduction measures, two engines (whether you believe 2 engines is a favored point). Going to be expensive but what of these options isn't?

Egypt,Quatar and India have selected Rafale and in India's case, I believe with local production/tech transfer? If they pitched the same deal to Canada, I wouldn't under-estimate the impact of such..


I believe you missed the fact that Dassault removed the Rafale from the Canadian competition.
So, now you have Super Hornet, Typhoon, F-35 and Gripen in the Canadian competition and I honestly expect that Saab will soon follow Dassault and remove the Gripen from this competition as well.

The Rafale would never stand a chance in the Canadian competition because:
1- It's not an American aircraft. The next Canadian fighter aircraft will be American (due to NORAD compatibility and all...).
2- The Rafale is more expensive than the F-35. Even more considering that Canada is a JSF member and as such it as access to purchase the F-35 at a cheaper price, this compared to non-JSF nations such as Japan or Belgium.

So technically the only fighter aircraft that have a chance in the Canadian competition would be either the F-35 or the Super Hornet. The current Canadian government and Boeing relations means that the F-35 is an even stronger contender compared to any other competitor.
In theory the Typhoon could have some (slim) chances since again in theory, at least it should be "compatible" with US equipment and assets but then again the Typhoon is much more expensive than the F-35.
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

icemaverick

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 428
  • Joined: 21 Feb 2012, 23:05
  • Location: New York

Unread post22 Mar 2019, 22:24

Also, the Rafale would require new weapons. The F-35 would at least be compatible with much of what Canada already has in its arsenal.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5879
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post22 Mar 2019, 22:27

mixelflick wrote:Perhaps.

You make some good points, but I would say it's anything but certain at this point they buy the F-35. I hope they do. It seems to check all the boxes. But something politically precluded them from pulling the trigger the first time. It just makes me wonder if they won't do it again.




Its purely politics. The guy who promised to not buy the F-35 won the election. Your trying to apply logic to a foolhardy (And contradictory as he also pledged a "fair and open" Competition) political promise. One that's become so obviously bad they screwed up their "interim emergency" and are now buying used Legacy Hornets. its an utter farce. In the meantime Canada has nothing except for busted aussie jets, a pilot exodus, and the F-35 going into operation with all 3 variants, full rate production this year, and even more sales in the meantime.

Its not some grand conspiracy, or some nuanced decision based on strategic and tactical needs of the RCAF, Its just a retarded leaf at the helm steering the RCAF into an iceberg because he promised Canada he would.

Which is the scary part, because no one her in Theme Park America can figure out if this guy is just incompetent or deliberately sabotaging, because his decisions are so terrible, people believe he must be doing it on purpose.

Image
Choose Crews
PreviousNext

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests