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

[ricnunes]

I have no respect for Trudeau at all. He used the early troubles with the program and the fact the Conservatives didn't want to hold a Fighter Competition (complete waste of time and resources) as some big conspiracy/corruption. Which, he used as a weapon to attack his political opponents. While, he could careless about the Canadian Warfighter and Taxpayer. (or NATO for that matter)

Absolutely, there's no doubt about that!

But there's also absolutely no doubt that each F-35 aircraft won't cost Canada $138.5 or 215.9 million dollars!
That was my (sole) point of my last post.

[Corsair1963]

I have no respect for Trudeau at all. He used the early troubles with the program and the fact the Conservatives didn't want to hold a Fighter Competition (complete waste of time and resources) as some big conspiracy/corruption. Which, he used as a weapon to attack his political opponents. While, he could careless about the Canadian Warfighter and Taxpayer. (or NATO for that matter)

Absolutely, there's no doubt about that!

But there's also absolutely no doubt that each F-35 aircraft won't cost Canada $138.5 or 215.9 million dollars!
That was my (sole) point of my last post.

Maybe but if more leaders did what Trudeau did todays F-35 would have cost all of us a whole lot more. Hell, the project may have even been canceled....

[ricnunes]

Yes, I fully agree with you above, Corsair1963.

I hope this serves as a lesson for future military procurement programs in Canada and why they shouldn't be politized!
The problem is that military procurement programs have been "traditionally" used as a "political weapon" in Canada - The Maritime Helicopter in the early 1990's was another example.
But due to the extreme high profile and "cluster fu**" and embarrassment that this procurement became to Canada, maybe and again this serves as lesson for future military procurement programs in Canada or maybe not...

[charlielima223]

Yes, I fully agree with you above, Corsair1963.

I hope this serves as a lesson for future military procurement programs in Canada and why they shouldn't be politized!
The problem is that military procurement programs have been "traditionally" used as a "political weapon" in Canada - The Maritime Helicopter in the early 1990's was another example.
But due to the extreme high profile and "cluster fu**" and embarrassment that this procurement became to Canada, maybe and again this serves as lesson for future military procurement programs in Canada or maybe not...

As if that doesn't happen in the US?
Nowadays its almost impossible for a major military program not to be politicized. There are always many lessons to be learned on how programs should be run and procured. F-35, LCS, and Zumwalt being the most notable for anyone who pays attention. Some fair better than others. Some die on the chopping block before their true capacity/capabilities can be realized. Others have too much creeping and changing requirements placed on them which causes more problems or they are simply too ambitious from the start.

[ricnunes]

As if that doesn't happen in the US?
Nowadays its almost impossible for a major military program not to be politicized. There are always many lessons to be learned on how programs should be run and procured. F-35, LCS, and Zumwalt being the most notable for anyone who pays attention. Some fair better than others. Some die on the chopping block before their true capacity/capabilities can be realized. Others have too much creeping and changing requirements placed on them which causes more problems or they are simply too ambitious from the start.

Sure but the US invests massively and develops "insane amounts" of new military programs ever 5 years (or even less) or so and such programs are the most advanced there is in the world. As such due to the huge complexity and with not any less huge budgets required, there's no wonder why some programs may fail short (for example, Zumwalt) or get cancelled (for example, Comanche) or barely come out from the paper (for example, A-12 Avenger II).

But that's not the case with Canada in terms of military projects which with the exception of the Navy/ships it either buys existing equipment abroad (or builds such equipment under licence) or it participates in multinational military projects like for example and namely, the F-35.
In this regard there are countries which do much better than Canada like for example, Norway, Netherlands, Denmark, Finland, etc...

Actually and "speaking" about Canada and participations in multinational military projects, this has been disastrous for Canada! Out of my head I can remember the following Canadian participations in multinational military projects:
- Multi Role Aircraft (MRA) - which later originated in the Panavia Tornado
- EH-101 Merlin Maritime and SAR helicopter
- IRIS-T missile
- TH-495 Infantry Combat Vehicle (ICV)
- F-35
Canada abandoned all the projects above except as we all know the F-35 but we also know how much was the "pain" for Canada to keep in the project an in the end select the F-35!
Of course one can argue that Canada did the best decision by abandoning the Multi Role Aircraft (MRA) project, the decision to abandon the TH-495 ICV may have not been that bad since LAVIII was acquired instead (which for example was later adapted as the Stryker for the US Army), the decision of abandoning the IRIS-T missile was debatable since for one hand Canada doesn't seem to have the need such missile (since it clearly prefers the AIM-9X) but for the other hand it probably kept Canadian companies out of the missile's further development and manufacturing. And then there was the Canadian decision to abandon the EH-101 Merlin Maritime and SAR helicopter which was simply and nothing short of DISASTROUS since it forced the Canadian Navy to keep flying the already old (back then) Sea King helicopters for 20 more years and the impact on the Canadian aerospace industry was also DISASTROUS since Canada would have been one of the manufacturers of this very successful helicopter (together with Britain and Italy).

Anyway and IMO, all of this gives Canada the image of being a very unreliable partner when it comes to multinational military projects.

[boilermaker]

I think Canada should have chosen the F-35C. They were worried about the short range of the air craft and they get the A version, eh?

[optimist]

I think Canada should have chosen the F-35C. They were worried about the short range of the air craft and they get the A version, eh?

In A2G the A is 669nm and the C is 670nm *. So there isn't a lot in it. What is relevant to this topic. Is that one of the test pilots that has flown both. Said in one of the videos here. That the C wing is the wing, that the A should have had. It is then more maneuverable. Obviously the design team didn't want to trade off other features and kept the A wing.

* page 17
https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Docu ... c_2018.pdf

[Corsair1963]

I think Canada should have chosen the F-35C. They were worried about the short range of the air craft and they get the A version, eh?

The performance benefits of the F-35C aren't that great. Plus, the cost of likely considerably higher being both larger and more expensive. Remember the wing is folding making it more complex. Of course they could redesign a similar wing but without the folding mechanism. Yet, that would add cost too!


Just isn't worth the trade offs for most customers.

[charlielima223]

I think Canada should have chosen the F-35C. They were worried about the short range of the air craft and they get the A version, eh?

The performance benefits of the F-35C aren't that great. Plus, the cost of likely considerably higher being both larger and more expensive. Remember the wing is folding making it more complex. Of course they could redesign a similar wing but without the folding mechanism. Yet, that would add cost too!


Just isn't worth the trade offs for most customers.

If they ever develop a proper EFT for the F-35 or whatever the Israeli's are developing for their F-35's to get more range out of it, Im pretty sure the complaint about "insufficient range" would go away... mostly...

[Corsair1963]

I think Canada should have chosen the F-35C. They were worried about the short range of the air craft and they get the A version, eh?

The performance benefits of the F-35C aren't that great. Plus, the cost of likely considerably higher being both larger and more expensive. Remember the wing is folding making it more complex. Of course they could redesign a similar wing but without the folding mechanism. Yet, that would add cost too!


Just isn't worth the trade offs for most customers.

If they ever develop a proper EFT for the F-35 or whatever the Israeli's are developing for their F-35's to get more range out of it, Im pretty sure the complaint about "insufficient range" would go away... mostly...

The F-35 doesn't have "insufficient range" compared to it's contemporaries. Yet, the shift to the Indo Pacific is requiring ranges we haven't seen since WWII.

As for external tanks I would rather see the adoption of the new XA100 and/or XA101. (Adaptive Cycle Engines) Which, would offer even better range. Yet, without the performance and RCS penalties associated with carrying external stores.

[spazsinbad]

AND... there could be a future F-35 with a 'better range engine' along with extra fuel tanks of whatever notation.

[Corsair1963]

AND... there could be a future F-35 with a 'better range engine' along with extra fuel tanks of whatever notation.

Nothing wrong with having both....of course better to use only internal fuel and weapons whenever possible. In order to maintain its advantage in stealth and performance.

[spazsinbad]

So people can then bang on about the 'lack of range' for the F-35? Perhaps the CFTs will be as stealthy as Israel may claim? Claims that a CFT solution for the F-35 will not be stealthy seem odd, while the EFTs will likely be relatively stealthy.

[Corsair1963]

So people can then bang on about the 'lack of range' for the F-35? Perhaps the CFTs will be as stealthy as Israel may claim? Claims that a CFT solution for the F-35 will not be stealthy seem odd, while the EFTs will likely be relatively stealthy.

They have talked about CFTs and External Fuel Tanks for over ten years. Yet, nothing ever seems to come from it....

[spazsinbad]

Hmmm. Not a lot is known about Israeli changes to their F-35i aircraft. We do not know - perhaps one day we will know.