F-35 looking more like white elephant

[Big Pistons Forever]

The problem is that everybody in the Canadian Forces can't have Gen 5 kit, the budget simply is not there. Cost overruns in the F 35 program are going to be measured in the Billions. That is billions that will not be available to, for instance, buy safer vehicles for the army so that soldiers are less likely to be killers or injured by IED's. Nobody is saying send out pilots out into danger defenseless. Many are only saying that Gen 4.5 is here now, comes with largely fixed and understood costs and maybe the money that Gen 5 costs could be better spent on other threats to our Military personnel that exist now and are not likely to go away. I find it a stretch that for any conflict that Canada is likely to get involved in, A Gen 4.5 fighter like the Super Hornet isn't going to be good enough.

This is why governments do not buy from opinions garnered from internet forums.

Actually having seen first hand and up close how the Politicians and Government bureaucrats go about buying equipment for todays soldiers,sailors and airmen/airwomen, I would suggest many could learn from what is on this thread. They should be at least able to ignore posts that are plainly ignorant........no names no pack drill as we used to say

[Spokes]

BPF, all good points, and like I said I don't know what would make a good solution. Maybe if the F35 does fall through, which I don't think is impossible, the Typhoon might be a viable choice. I don't know much about it though, so that is pure uninformed speculation. My gut would prefer to by North Americam, for various regions. Time will tell though.

[North Shore]

Maybe if the F35 does fall through, which I don't think is impossible

I think that it is quite possible. Mr. Flaherty is in Victoria today talking with his provincial counterparts about medicare funding post-2016(?) It seems that a cut in funding is coming. The medical system is stressed as it is. The financial troubles of the last few years have/are being exacerbated by debt. I'd wonder if there's the political will power to go to the taxpayers, saying that we need to keep deficit spending, cut back on Medicare, and at the same time write a semi-open ended cheque for new fighters.

[trampbike]

I can't wait to see what the media will do when Japan confirms it will buy many F-35 (and therefore reducing the production costs)

Yes, I'm sure they'll be all over that when they finish paying for the earthquake, the meltdown, and the recovery of their slumped economy. Frosti, do you work for Lockheed, or do you just carry the pom-poms on behalf og the Cndn Military?

This thing is not only a lemon, like many weapons systems before it, it's a trillion $ one. Sign me up. In fact, I'm not sure how we're managing all the current threats without it????????? HURRY!!!!!

Thats is not what I meant...
Every time there's a rumor of countries reducing the amount of F35 they plan to buy, the media jump on it and point out the F35 will therefore cost more. Now that Japan has expressed interrest for a substential number of F35 jets, I was only wondering if the media would point out the fact that this kind of news is good news as far as price goes...

[frosti]

the Typhoon might be a viable choice.

The Typhoons are scheduled to be retired, by the RAF any ways, in 2030. Most other countries will follow suit shortly after.

They should be at least able to ignore posts that are plainly ignorant........

Yes, this entire thread would probably be in the trash bin very quickly. Citizens suggesting military buys, who would otherwise not care if we had a national defense sector in the first place? I'm sure they really give a crap.

[teacher]

According to this article the first Super Hornets are to be retired in 2025 with the fleet being totally stood down in the 2030s. That means when Canada has it's full complement the US will begin scrapping theirs, sounds about right for our Defence Department.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... net%20Life

[Big Pistons Forever]

According to this article the first Super Hornets are to be retired in 2025 with the fleet being totally stood down in the 2030s. That means when Canada has it's full complement the US will begin scrapping theirs, sounds about right for our Defence Department.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/ ... net%20Life

Maybe you should re read the article. The article states that with the current airframe life limits the lead tail number Super Hornet will reach its life limit in 2025 with the rest of the fleet running out of time through the 2030's. This is why as the article says they are allready starting on a life extension program which could increase the airframe hour limit by 50%. There is plenty of open source reporting of the US Navy fleet plan, all of which discusses operating Super Hornets in the 2040 + time frame.

So buying Super Hornets at the next available delivery date would result in a full fleet in the 2015-2017 time frame. Don't forget that there will be a requirement to push the current Hornet fleet up to 3 years past its current planned retirement and that is if there are no further delays to the F35 program. The extra costs of the current Hornet fleet extension should be applied to the F 35 total program costs, but of course nobody wants to do that because it makes the already bad numbers for the Canadian F35 buy look worse.

[frosti]

Japan isn't convinced that the Super Hornet or Typhoon is better...

Lockheed Martin F-35 wins Japan fighter jet deal

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/lockheed- ... 27987.html

Japan has picked Lockheed Martin's F-35 jet as its next mainstay fighter, choosing the radar-evading aircraft over combat-proven but less stealthy rivals, as concern simmers over North Korea and as China introduces its own stealth fighters.

"The market place is signaling to Boeing that its days in the fighter business may be numbered,"

Japan should read more internet forums, there are so many good suggestions for selecting outdated equipment instead.

[North Shore]

Yah, and Japan is so similar to Canada, geographically, militarily, and politically, that the aeroplane they choose *must* be the best choice for us, too

Here's an Australian take:

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-300309-1.html

And, with direct reference to Canada:

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-191010-1.html

[Beefitarian]

That's kind of chilling. Makes me wonder if I should move to Russia while the kids are young enough to become citizens so they can be on the winning side in a couple of decades?

[Big Pistons Forever]

That's kind of chilling. Makes me wonder if I should move to Russia while the kids are young enough to become citizens so they can be on the winning side in a couple of decades?

There is a lot more to tactical air success than boasting about the performance statistics of your fighter. Training, the Logistical and maintenance supply chain and the huge Command and Control capacity in equipment, facilities and personel required to effectively manage the air battlespace are as, if not more, important. Right now that capability has only be demonstrated by the major Western Powers with absolutely no evidence anyone else in the world is even close to having the same capability

Here is a statistic to chew on. The F15 family, the premier Western Multi-role fighter, has been in front line sevice for more almost 30 years and is operated by a host of airforces. It's current air to air record is 115 enemy aircraft kills for zero losses in air combat. So all of a sudden that record of air supremacy is going to be totally up ended by a couple of unproven potential Russian and Chinese designs...... I think not. Even if they were quantitatively better, where is the training system that is going to produce the equivalent quality of Commanders, HQ personnel, Pilots, Maintainers, and support staff; and where is all the infrastructure to support them ?

I find it interesting that nobody has answered a question that I posed earlier. What is a likely scenario that would have Canada participating in an air military operation where a gen 4.5 fighter like the F18E would not be good enough ? Personally I can't think of any scenarios that are even remotely credible.

[Beefitarian]

You know we have the longest coast line in the world right, and who is closest to it?

[Big Pistons Forever]

You know we have the longest coast line in the world right, and who is closest to it?

St Pierre and Miquelon ?

[AuxBatOn]

I find it interesting that nobody has answered a question that I posed earlier. What is a likely scenario that would have Canada participating in an air military operation where a gen 4.5 fighter like the F18E would not be good enough ? Personally I can't think of any scenarios that are even remotely credible.

Stop thinking Air-to-Air weapons and start thinking Surface-to-Air weapons. Mobile Strat SAMs will kick your ass and they are hard to destroy. By decreasing detection ranges, you just decreased the system's prime deterrent: Engagement Range. It enables you to go deeper into enemy territory without having to worry about the telephone pole coming at your from 100 NM away.

Take that from a guy who has been on the receiving end of the telephone pole...

[Rockie]

By decreasing detection ranges, you just decreased the system's prime deterrent: Engagement Range. It enables you to go deeper into enemy territory without having to worry about the telephone pole coming at your from 100 NM away.

Two points:

Detection and engagement range is also decreased by going low and fast. How much training do we do for that these days? Is it also not true that everything we've done since GW 1 is from med/high altitude with laser guided munitions?

The military's primary role is sovereign defence over delving into "enemy" territory. For Canada that mean arctic sovereignty, and indeed with the opening of the Northwest passage and the resources it makes available that is unquestionably this government's priority. How many telephone poles do you expect to be coming your direction up there? Plus how do you feel about that single engine out over the Beaufort given Canada's pathetic SAR capability?

[cdnpilot77]

Plus how do you feel about that single engine out over the Beaufort given Canada's pathetic SAR capability?

Uncalled for Rockie, you are better than that. You expect us to have hercs on standby every 500miles? Look at your globe again, big country lots of area to cover, limited resources and limited basing capabilities. If you change "pathetic" to "limited" I would possibly agree with you.

One thing i will ad about the actual subject is that I do not believe the f18e is the answer either. I think it would be an even deeper kick to the face for the average taxpayer that doesnt know the difference between the A/b/c/d/e/f models and what they understand is the f-18's are being replaced by f-18's at significant cost to them. Perception is reality to the vast majority and there is no way around it. Just take the blinders off, open it to a fair competition and maybe the 35 with out anyways.

[Rockie]

Uncalled for Rockie, you are better than that. You expect us to have hercs on standby every 500miles? Look at your globe again, big country lots of area to cover, limited resources and limited basing capabilities. If you change "pathetic" to "limited" I would possibly agree with you.

No, pathetic covers it quite nicely. I respectfully suggest you take a look at an atlas again and look at the extent of coastline and landmass we have. In that context "limited" is the understatement of the year.

This is not directed at the military who can only do what they can with the equipment and personel made available to them. This is squarely aimed at successive governments that have bled that capability dry over the years.

By the way that lack of capability will become even more acute as we fall all over ourselves developing and transporting resources from the north.

[cdnpilot77]

As I said, perception is reality and that could very easily be perceived that you think the people which put their lives on the line for you are pathetic. You are forgetting again that the government is not an endless resource of money. They have LIMITED capabilities of how much money can be spend in certain areas. Therefore the SAR is limited in its resources as is every other aspect of life in Canada.

[Rockie]

As I said, perception is reality and that could very easily be perceived that you think the people which put their lives on the line for you are pathetic.

Only if that's the meaning you're looking for.

[cdnpilot77]

As I said, perception is reality and that could very easily be perceived that you think the people which put their lives on the line for you are pathetic.

Only if that's the meaning you're looking for.

Since you can't send tone through a computer, it can be taken in any meaning and any context unless you choose more decisive wording. Choosing wording that can give multiple reasoning allows more opportunity to back track I guess.

[Rockie]

Since you can't send tone through a computer, it can be taken in any meaning and any context unless you choose more decisive wording. Choosing wording that can give multiple reasoning allows more opportunity to back track I guess.

For crying out loud, I said "Canada's pathetic SAR capability". How much more clear do you want it? Is it really necessary to also list all the things I don't mean for you to know what I meant?

[Big Pistons Forever]

I find it interesting that nobody has answered a question that I posed earlier. What is a likely scenario that would have Canada participating in an air military operation where a gen 4.5 fighter like the F18E would not be good enough ? Personally I can't think of any scenarios that are even remotely credible.

Stop thinking Air-to-Air weapons and start thinking Surface-to-Air weapons. Mobile Strat SAMs will kick your ass and they are hard to destroy. By decreasing detection ranges, you just decreased the system's prime deterrent: Engagement Range. It enables you to go deeper into enemy territory without having to worry about the telephone pole coming at your from 100 NM away.

Take that from a guy who has been on the receiving end of the telephone pole...

I would suggest your comments actually reinforce my argument. Success at the SEAD mission isn't some guy/gal in a F35, it is as a result of a huge coordinated, integrated joint, C4ISR campaign. Canada will always be at best be a contributing nation to any significant campaign because we will never be able to field all, or even most, of the enablers. We will like now contribute to the extent of our capabilities. I don't see where that contributions automatically has to be the F 35. Even in the unlikely event that a war starts at a threat level that legitimately requires a gen 5 fighter bomber it won't stay that way and there will still be plenty of work for a gen 4.5 work horse flown by really good pilots.

[cdnpilot77]

Since you can't send tone through a computer, it can be taken in any meaning and any context unless you choose more decisive wording. Choosing wording that can give multiple reasoning allows more opportunity to back track I guess.

For crying out loud, I said "Canada's pathetic SAR capability". How much more clear do you want it? Is it really necessary to also list all the things I don't mean for you to know what I meant?

Nope, just be more clear in the direction of your posts
Merry Christmas Rockie...

[Rockie]

I find a great tool to determine the tone of writing is to read in context with the rest of what's written. Try that with my original post leaving out any preconceived ideas and see what you come up with.

Merry Christmas to you and yours as well

[Old Dog Flying]

From our house to yours, we wish everyone a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Barney