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: 23083
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post18 Apr 2019, 07:40

Correct. Apologies the original PDF file size was misquoted by me - it is 15+Mb. Do you see the faint lines around the graphics in my 'reprinted (PRN) PDF'? One can enhance fine lines when viewing a PDF with Acrobat (or Reader I guess).

I did resave the original and only a small 0.2 reduction in file size so it was well made etc. The PDF was originally made with InDesign 2017 with a MacIntosh. I have found InDesign will make LARGE PDFs so I make only text (no grfx) with it.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2049
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post18 Apr 2019, 20:02

spazsinbad wrote:Do you see the faint lines around the graphics in my 'reprinted (PRN) PDF'? One can enhance fine lines when viewing a PDF with Acrobat (or Reader I guess).


Yes, I see faint and white lines around of what I gather are images. For example I see such lines around the map and around each aircraft image.
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

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23083
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post18 Apr 2019, 20:16

ricnunes wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:Do you see the faint lines around the graphics in my 'reprinted (PRN) PDF'? One can enhance fine lines when viewing a PDF with Acrobat (or Reader I guess).
Yes, I see faint and white lines around of what I gather are images. For example I see such lines around the map and around each aircraft image.

Yep that can be a 'problem' when reprinting as described using Acrobat. I'll keep that utility used in mind for future use.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2049
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post19 Apr 2019, 16:54

spazsinbad wrote:I'll keep that utility used in mind for future use.


Yes, that smallpdf utility is very interesting indeed. Besides compacting pdf files it also allows conversion of pdf's to Word, PowerPoint, etc... formats and vice-versa and this among other features.
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

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 23083
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post19 Apr 2019, 20:35

ricnunes wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:I'll keep that utility used in mind for future use.

Yes, that smallpdf utility is very interesting indeed. Besides compacting pdf files it also allows conversion of pdf's to Word, PowerPoint, etc... formats and vice-versa and this among other features.

Utility says this which may help me fine tune whatever: "Perfect quality Reduce your scanned PDF files to 144dpi [twice screen resolution] which is perfect for uploading files to the web and through email."
Tried the Acrobat Embedded Utility (Reduce File Size) retaining the most current PDF version (requires Adobe Reader DC) which claims it will have the best result. It looks good but larger PDF file size attached below (ORIGINAL then REDUCED).

A different internal utility is the OPTIMISER where one may fiddle to one's heart content. See GIF for default settings which when used did not decrease the 'REDUCED' file size whilst generating a message that "image masks not reduced". I'll stop there because the 'ricnunes' utility @ smallpdf.com seems to be a simple hassle free way to quickly reduce file size.
Attachments
rcaf-map REDUCED.pdf
(4.68 MiB) Downloaded 143 times
AcrobatPDFoptimiser.gif
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

luke_sandoz

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 498
  • Joined: 08 Feb 2011, 20:25

Unread post06 May 2019, 23:44

Ouch!

Here we go again. The difference thus time seems to be that the USA has reached its frustration breaking point over the Canadian Government’s Group Fuster Cluck of a procurement.

http://macdonaldlaurier.ca/files/pdf/20 ... a_FWeb.pdf


In-depth. Detailed. Rips many new *****.



....
Attachments
8BE0E494-3929-474F-8464-BCD02EC9F37D.png
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8380
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post06 May 2019, 23:52

Ottawa's planned fighter competition incompatible with F-35 obligations: U.S.
https://www.citynews1130.com/2019/05/06 ... tions-u-s/

Basically, Canada is requiring guaranteed offsets despite signing agreements that stated otherwise.
The letters specifically take issue with the government’s plan to have each fighter-jet maker commit to re-investing in Canada if its aircraft wins the upcoming competition aimed at buying 88 new planes for $19 billion.

While that is standard for most Canadian military procurements, the U.S. officials note that Canada agreed not to apply such a requirement when it signed on as one of nine F-35 partner countries in 2006.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8380
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post07 May 2019, 00:08

Nice conformation of the A2A Combat radius

The F-35 and the Eurofighter have both demonstrated that they can make this 1,451 nautical miles trip, which includes a significant altitude change, while carrying four missiles.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5570
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post07 May 2019, 00:37

SpudmanWP wrote:Ottawa's planned fighter competition incompatible with F-35 obligations: U.S.
https://www.citynews1130.com/2019/05/06 ... tions-u-s/

Basically, Canada is requiring guaranteed offsets despite signing agreements that stated otherwise.
The letters specifically take issue with the government’s plan to have each fighter-jet maker commit to re-investing in Canada if its aircraft wins the upcoming competition aimed at buying 88 new planes for $19 billion.

While that is standard for most Canadian military procurements, the U.S. officials note that Canada agreed not to apply such a requirement when it signed on as one of nine F-35 partner countries in 2006.



Canada will wake up when we pull the F-35 Contracts. Which, would last for decades and be worth Billions....
Offline

luke_sandoz

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 498
  • Joined: 08 Feb 2011, 20:25

Unread post07 May 2019, 00:52

SpudmanWP wrote:Nice conformation of the A2A Combat radius

The F-35 and the Eurofighter have both demonstrated that they can make this 1,451 nautical miles trip, which includes a significant altitude change, while carrying four missiles.



I would think that be on internal fuel for the JSF but with gasbags for the Eurofighter.

The F-35 will soon be able to do that mission with 6 internal carriage missiles✅
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2243
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post07 May 2019, 01:03

I'm surprised nobody linked Canada's subversive tact with Chinese influence in the public realm. Luckily their version of the DOJ hasn't been transformed by Trudeau (yet) and we had cooperation on the Huawei scandal. Boeing is tainted by Chinese influence in their civilian programs which haven't exactly been fruitful for them economically. When you add up 2+2 you get why Canada is so hellbent on Boeing. Just wait, as China has already cheated with fishing in Canadian waters Trudeau will brush it all under the rug for his socialist buddies. Canada is already showing ineptitude with challenging Chinese researchers activity in the arctic.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3315
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 3

Unread post07 May 2019, 14:19

OK, so if the F-35 is out - what's next?

We all know who the usual suspects are. Personally, I think they're going to opt for Rafale. Two engines, some LO tech built in (enough for the PR value), decent range, fantastic E/W suite and... expensive. This will necessitate a reduced buy, but Canada's entire air force seems predicated on that "requirement".

It'll be marginally more capable than the SH, which wont' win solely on the bad blood between Boeing/Ottowa. Gripen too small, carries too little and no legs. Single engine along would kill it. EF Typhoon is a possibility, but the Rafale will rightly be judged more "multi-role" and allow for both the Canadian homeland defense mission as well as better meeting her NATO obligations.

New build F-16's are possible too, but I never saw it in Canadian colors. If not Rafale, then I can't imagine where they're going next. The boneyard, maybe?

There have to be Hornets galore there. No reason why they can't fly that airframe out to the year 2100 timeframe :mrgreen:
Offline

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1178
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post07 May 2019, 14:21

OK, so if the F-35 is out - what's next?


The next government will have the last word on this aircraft competition and its parameters.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2049
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post07 May 2019, 15:32

mixelflick wrote:OK, so if the F-35 is out - what's next?

We all know who the usual suspects are. Personally, I think they're going to opt for Rafale.


Don't get me wrong but I think that you forgot what was told you in page 346 of this same thread:
- That the Rafale is out from the Canadian competition (Dassault pulled out from it)

Also and as a reply to what was told you before in page 346, you replied the following in page 347:
mixelflick wrote:Did not know Rafale was out, thanks for letting me know.


:wink:

So you cannot count with the Rafale as a candidate in the Canadian competition!

Anyway, I hope that with all this, that the F-35 isn't out! The fact that this leaked letter was actually sent during the later part of last year (if I'm not mistaken) and it is only known now and again due to a leak, seems to indicate that the Liberals tried their "best" to hide this issue so that the F-35 continues on the competition and that any amend to the competition could be done "secretly" in order to overcome this situation.

However I agree that this looks worse for the F-35 and the Canadian competition right now - or more precisely the forecast for the RCAF operating the only viable choice (the F-35) looks grim - mostly IMO and curiously, due to this leak.

But here I have to agree with marsavian, the last word will come from the next government, whoever it might be.

Finally in the case the F-35 is out from the Canadian competition (I hope not!) I would again say that the winner would be the Super Hornet because:
1- It's the cheapest of all remaining options (if/with the F-35A being out, that is)
2- It's the most interoperable with US aircraft and equipment of all remaining options (if/with the F-35A being out, that is)
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

luke_sandoz

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 498
  • Joined: 08 Feb 2011, 20:25

Unread post07 May 2019, 16:48

A quick perusal of Canadian Media and it appears that Canadian voters have tired of their celebrity crush on Trudeau.

Seems he has stepped in too many poo-piles and lots of it has stuck.

Anyone up to speed on the CPC policy wrt a new plane?
Attachments
CB38E3A7-0561-4A40-86A3-4E6188651C29.png
PreviousNext

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests