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

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

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2586
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post07 Apr 2021, 07:12

What's the Canadian AAR requirement? Don't expect Trudeau to spend money on an asset that only the Americans use.
Offline
User avatar

Lieven

F-16.net Webmaster

F-16.net Webmaster

  • Posts: 3677
  • Joined: 23 May 2003, 15:44

Unread post10 Apr 2021, 11:15

Unlocking this topic - just be sure to stay on topic. ;-)
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2910
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post10 Apr 2021, 14:13

Hurrah!

The Best Fighter for Canaduh, the F-35 lives!

just had to sneak this in here...
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

luke_sandoz

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 541
  • Joined: 08 Feb 2011, 20:25

Unread post10 Apr 2021, 18:57

The whole side bar into an RCAF tanker does highlight the consideration of range.

Only the F-35 meets the range requirements on internal fuel

And once you hang gas bags and weapons on a Super Hornet, the USAF would likely not want to fly their stealth F-35s or 22s to do an Arctic intercept along side a giant radar target.

The Gripen . . . Short legs, no good.
Offline

loke

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1186
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post20 Apr 2021, 12:18

"Companies found to have prejudiced Canada's economic interests through trade challenges will have points deducted from their procurement bid score at a level proportional to the severity of the economic impact, to a maximum penalty," the budget says.

"This policy will protect Canada's economic interests and make sure the government does business with trusted partners who value doing business with Canada."

The policy revival comes at an interesting time.

Defence procurement expert Elinor Sloan, a poltical science professor at Carleton University, was just as surprised to see the statement in the budget. She wonders whether the Liberal government is softening the political ground for its impending contract award.

There is a lot of political baggage associated with the fighter jet purchase. During the 2015 federal election, the governing Liberals promised to ditch a Conservative-era plan to buy Lockheed Martin built F-35 stealth fighters and purchase something cheaper, such as the Boeing Super Hornet, and plow the savings back into a revitalized navy.

"My guess is they are having to walk back that clear policy statement," said Sloan, who was also searching for more clarity from the government. "I can only read into this that [F-35 Joint Strike Fighter] will be chosen. They need to find a way, a political way, to justify this about-face."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/fighte ... -1.5994031

That's what I kept saying -- Canada will buy the F-35. Only question is, how many? Will they end up buying more than the UK? It's kind of ironic, if they stick to their current plan they may well end up getting the second largest F-35 fleet in NATO (after the US)... quite a change!
Offline

pushoksti

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 230
  • Joined: 01 Nov 2008, 04:50
  • Location: Canadar

Unread post20 Apr 2021, 15:41

I think 100 is a good number. That will give them the planned 88 plus an extra 12 to thunder into the ground in typical RCAF fashion.
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4506
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post20 Apr 2021, 18:27

pushoksti wrote:I think 100 is a good number. That will give them the planned 88 plus an extra 12 to thunder into the ground in typical RCAF fashion.


God that was harsh, LOL

440 pages, still no decision from Canada. Pure awesomeness... :mrgreen:
Offline

go4long

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 109
  • Joined: 04 Sep 2013, 07:20
  • Location: Calgary

Unread post20 Apr 2021, 20:17

mixelflick wrote:
pushoksti wrote:I think 100 is a good number. That will give them the planned 88 plus an extra 12 to thunder into the ground in typical RCAF fashion.


God that was harsh, LOL

440 pages, still no decision admitted from Canada. Pure awesomeness... :mrgreen:


I fixed that for you.

I think it's hard to even think that they still don't know exactly what it is they're buying. They've awarded contracts on the hangars. Essentially made a decision on the tankers. They've launched studies into extending and adding FOL runways (essentially an anti-gripen admission). They reaffirmed wording on the anti Boeing clause.

It's done. It's all over but the crying, they're just hoping to wait until after the election which is likely coming this spring or fall to admit it.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3371
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post20 Apr 2021, 23:37

go4long wrote:
mixelflick wrote:
pushoksti wrote:I think 100 is a good number. That will give them the planned 88 plus an extra 12 to thunder into the ground in typical RCAF fashion.


God that was harsh, LOL

440 pages, still no decision admitted from Canada. Pure awesomeness... :mrgreen:


I fixed that for you.

I think it's hard to even think that they still don't know exactly what it is they're buying. They've awarded contracts on the hangars. Essentially made a decision on the tankers. They've launched studies into extending and adding FOL runways (essentially an anti-gripen admission). They reaffirmed wording on the anti Boeing clause.

It's done. It's all over but the crying, they're just hoping to wait until after the election which is likely coming this spring or fall to admit it.


Yup, I fully agree with you go4long!
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7689
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post21 Apr 2021, 07:01

Don't get me going about Trudeau................ :-x
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4506
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post21 Apr 2021, 15:22

This spring, or fall?

I say we get to 500 pages before they formally decide. Thinking it will be a big blow to SAAB, but they have to see the writing on the wall too. Does SAAB specialize in denial, or just fiction?
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7274
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post21 Apr 2021, 15:52

go4long wrote:I fixed that for you.

I think it's hard to even think that they still don't know exactly what it is they're buying. They've awarded contracts on the hangars. Essentially made a decision on the tankers. They've launched studies into extending and adding FOL runways (essentially an anti-gripen admission). They reaffirmed wording on the anti Boeing clause.

It's done. It's all over but the crying, they're just hoping to wait until after the election which is likely coming this spring or fall to admit it.


Do we know the details on the hangars? The F-35 uses a specific power type different from legacy airplanes

https://www.aviationpros.com/aircraft/d ... or-the-f35

If the hangars are using that specific power allotment then that is one helluva tell.
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7274
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post21 Apr 2021, 15:56

mixelflick wrote:This spring, or fall?

I say we get to 500 pages before they formally decide. Thinking it will be a big blow to SAAB, but they have to see the writing on the wall too. Does SAAB specialize in denial, or just fiction?



it all depends. The Gripen often drives the most posts on this topic. There will be more gripen news as it FINALLY gets into "Service" this year. and then of course the crying if and when it drops from Canada.

One of the reasons Gripen really drives posts is there isn't really that much more to write about regarding the F-35 and SH. Block III and the CFTs not being possible was very newsworthy. For F-35 its just about money and what it costs or doesn't.

Whereas Saab uses Gripen just constantly tries to make headlines claiming it invented or reinvented the wheel, theyre always "juicing" the media.

but hilariously RoK's New fighter puts Gripen to shame. Saab has been claiming for years stealth is "too expensive" "compromised" or "obsolete." Then boom little south Korea upstages the mighty saab. Europe is revealing a new series of LO future projects. Saab has for years claimed the cost of stealth makes it unobtanium, which is looking more and more like piston engine manufacturer betting against jet engines. "They're so costly! the future is actually Radials!!"
Choose Crews
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7689
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post22 Apr 2021, 00:13

It would be very hard for Canada not to buy "American".
Offline

alloycowboy

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 870
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2010, 08:28
  • Location: Canada

Unread post22 Apr 2021, 06:07

With Super Hornet production ending at the end of 2021 and the Saab Gripen having a to short of a combat radius and being not American, the F-35 is going to win the Canadian fighter contest by default.
PreviousNext

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 guests