Derek 2.0

Sure, but the USAF isn't replacing their current F-15Cs, procured in the later 70s and early 80s, until the ~2030s, at which point, they would have had a longer service life than our Hornets. Sure. It would seem difficulties faced by the Canadian Forces are mirrored with the US military (granted on a far larger scale), but then your only complaint is that said Canadian difficulties receive less in depth coverage and open source information?

How many F-15s are in service versus the F-22? F-15s of the same vintage of our Hornets. Didn't you bring up the prospect of US Naval aircraft in Canadian service? By subject to the wind, do you mean the same kind of difficulties associated with the replacement of the F-15C by the F-22, which will lead to an aircraft of the same vintage as our Hornets serving far longer?

Sure, I couldn't agree more, but said point doesn't explain our Hornets expected service life, versus for example, the USMC, which still uses the F/A-18A/B Hornets (same vintage as ours) in a maritime environment. The B-52 and modern fighter aircraft are apples to oranges.......The B-52H is only now halfway through its expected structural life, with the "weakest link" being the leading edges of the upper portion of the wing, which "only" have an expected life of ~38-40000 hrs, the B-52H fleet is currently sitting at ~20000 hrs on average........ That doesn't change the fact that USAF still operates the F-15C, which has seen fleet wide groundings associated with fatigue (unlike our Hornet fleet) and is expected to still be in service through the 2030s. No, but then the F-15C is still the mainstay of frontline units in the USAF......and will be far longer than our Hornets are in service.

No as in it wasn't an error? The J79 aside, early Soviet radars were capable of announcing said arrival at a far greater distance, hence the USAF's introduction of the Wild Weasel variant of the F-4, which served into the 90s, including the First Gulf War.........that would suggest, combined with the F-4E being the mainstay of NATO through the 70s and early 80s, that the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom, designed for the USN, proved a level of success for users that operated them from land bases........in actual fact, the Phantom had a far longer service life with land based users, then operating from carriers by the USN, USMC and RN FAA........ The F-15A, procured in the early 70s, was only retired several years ago by the ANG......a near ~40 year service life....the current mainstay of the USAF, the F-15C, was procured in the late 70s through the early 80s (slightly older than our Hornet force) and is expected to serve into the 2030s........wouldn't that equate to a near 50 year service life?

You consider the decades long service of the F-4 Phantom with the USAF an error? Did the engineers at McDonnell Douglas envision the Eagle to operate for 40+ years in USAF service, a similar expected service of our McDonnell Douglas Hornets?

Was that a consideration in the USAF's purchase of the F-4 Phantom, an aircraft designed for the USN? It would seem dozens of nations, including the United States, have, for decades, purchased McDonnell Douglas naval aircraft and adopted them for use from land bases......Are you suggesting this was in error?

Seemed the way forward for the USAF's F-4 Phantom.......and every other user of one of the most prolific fighters ever produced.

Not since, several years ago, the French Government announced a reduction in their planned buy absent outside orders. As cited in the other thread, the Blue Angels are to receive the Super Hornet........additional attrition Growlers, a finite resource in any military, make sense if the funding is there. I have offered comment in several threads, the report is now dated in several aspects, namely in its mention of the Ohio SSBN replacement, which will be ring fenced outside the standard procurement budget, and as mentioned, the probability of the next generation bomber receiving the same treatment.........from the recent budget request above, the DDG purchase has been confirmed and added to. The two previous links which I provided with the breakdown on the additional F-35 purchases.

No, I'm equating Russian aircraft to Western designs. To the SU-35 versus F-15, the limiting factor for the Russian aircraft is still radar/avionics/weapons. Though it might be the F-15's peer in terms of raw performance, the F-15 still will have superior radar/avionics/weapons then the Russian aircraft..........maybe a peer for the earlier F-15A, but doubtful for the more modern types. Not the slightest bit odd, as said Russian types, like the F-15 and F-22 (and Eurofighter), are high performance air superiority types versus a multirole type like the F-35, Rafale, Gripen NG, Super Hornet, Falcon etc.

There was nothing bold about it, the final French aircraft are to be delivered Spring-Summer 2016, absent new orders, the line will/would close.......... You realize next Year's LRIP production of the F-35 is over 60 aircraft, in addition, the DoD has bought 11 additional F-35s, more than expected? (and the flyaway cost of the F-35A is now $98 million per?) I'm not hesitant at all to speak to it..........better than the F-22? In Putin's Russia, propaganda reads you........In the early 80s, many in NATO feared the then vaunted Mig-29 being superior to the then new Hornet and F-16s, in reality, once the Wall came down and the West got their hands on former East German Migs, such fears were quickly dismissed........It should be telling that the unified Germans retired their 1980s era Mig-29s a decade earlier than their 1970s purchased (of a 1960s design) F-4 Phantoms. At the end of the day, Russian aircraft rely on Russian electronics/avionics.........I assume Comrade Waldo doesn't own any Russian household electronic products? As to the Chinese purchase, that should be telling onto their own domestic types, including their 5th generation program's progress..........whats more, the recent Chinese purchases of Russian (1970s era) fighter engines for their own domestic programs is a clear indication that the Chinese are yet unable to build high performance engines, even reverse engineering Russian products........one doesn't need have a background in aviation to understand putting sub-par Mig-29 engines into ones own (far larger) domestic 5th generation fighter isn't boost of confidence........ Where does that leave the T-50? Best case for the Russians is a (near) equal to the F-15/Eurofighter/Rafale and an improvement over multirole types like the Hornets, Falcons, Gripens etc.........and thats if it works as advertised, and assuming the Western aircraft don't have the benefit of numerous "force multipliers"...i.e AWACS, aerial refueling, electronic warfare etc etc.......

How's that? IIRC, I didn't even suggest what aircraft the Indians would procure. Looking at their near term requirements (and current inventory), coupled with their desire for local production/technology transfers (American makers wouldn't agree, nor be allowed, the later to the extent the Indians would want) a Russian or French purchase shouldn't surprise.......and of course, they've done both this year. Maybe, but let's put it into context, 36 aircraft represents ~3-5% of the inventory of the Indian air force.... Again, I'm not sure that it impacts that status, as its a different program.........what would be more telling is if they had of purchased the Rafale for their navy in addition, instead, opting for the latest incarnation of the Mig-29.......with said fleet being roughly 3xs that of their eventual Rafale fleet. That would depend on the terms of the deals and Dassault's rate of production, which has been at its lowest (viable) possible rate, of which (absent new orders) would have met French requirements in the next several years. Again assuming the rate of production isn't increased, the assembly line staying open several more years would be a given.

That's true, but in fairness, there is a multinational cab ranking of aircraft over both Iraq and Syria providing 24/7 coverage to allied forces on the ground..........that of course is no excuse, nor does it offer a reasoning as to why the Trudeau Government wants to pull our Hornets out........we have forces on the ground acting as forward air controllers with the Kurds, CP-140s locating targets over the region and a Polaris refueling strike aircraft.........but we can't maintain our own strike aircraft in the theater because? The Liberals said they'll add to the Forces on the ground (good idea) but we can't do this well still bombing the IS? That makes zero sense, and though I disagree with them, the NDP had a more coherent plan to pull all the Forces out.....

Here:

Again it comes down to the IRBs.........one of the IRBs we received when McDonnell Douglas won our original Hornet contract was McDonnell Douglas financing General Mill's business expansion inside Canada, including bringing Red Lobster North of the border............

One would hope, but then there is already one aircraft using Canadian technology in its multinational development and production program .........In relation to the ALIS, there is already a Vancouver based tech company producing portions of said software......the end user: When the rubber hits the road, a Hornet replacement, like past procurements, will come down to pork........the F-35 program already has Canadian content versus promises made by various companies' marketing departments. If we don't procure the F-35, Canadian aerospace companies will be hurt and Canadians will loose their jobs...........and that is why we are still a F-35 partner.

Of the ALIS network......... Or a reflection of cyber (lack of) security throughout the US Government........

How much money is Canada investing in similar Boeing, Dassault, Saab etc programs? In the spirit of "fairness" shouldn't we spread the pork investments around?

Considering their last two frontline fighters were Dassault products, not too surprised. Not sure on the status of the T-50 program, but then its an unrelated program, as the Rafale will be the replacement for the Indian's older Migs and Jaguars, in the (nuclear) strike role........again, not a surprising move, as the Indians have longstanding ties with both the Russians and French.

I saw it last night, without spoiling it, my wife and I both left feeling let down......it was worth seeing in the theater in 3D, and it wasn't a bad movie (we'll go see the next two), but JJ Abrams left his mark.......borrowed a lot from a New Hope, not a reboot, but maybe a "remix" of the first two....it was non stop action, short on dialogue (unlike the previous ones) which was disappointing and felt like it left a lot of holes (They could fill a movie between this and Return of the Jedi)........and a few parts probably could have been left out or at least explained/drawn out slightly more. Of the new characters: Rey is the new "star" and the actress did a great job......Kylo Ren is like Darth Vader meets Tarantino villain, the new (conflicted) evil.......Finn had a few good lines but (IMO) was almost forgettable in the second half of the movie.......Poe Dameron, we should be so lucky, we will have more of.......The little droid BB-8 will be a favorite with its mannerisms like R2 mixed with an Ewok/Jawa.......I won't speak to the originals for fear of spoiling something, other than to say Chewbacca had a more "vocal" role.........Oh and Daniel Craig was one of the Storm Troopers (see Jedi Mind Tricks) From what I understand, Abrams won't be involved in the next one (or a key cast member ) and thats probably a good thing..........

Why hasn't Canada left the F-35 program and is still investing development dollars in said program?

If he did, C-SPAN's ratings would 'uuuuuge.

The previous race didn't have this number of candidates......From ~late October 2011 through late Dec 2011, Gingrich, Cain and Romney were engaged in a three way race until Cain withdrew after the sexual harassment scandal and endorsed Newt, who lead in most polls for weeks......Santorum just barely beat Romney in Iowa, Romney won in NH, Gingrich in South Carolina (Mitt was "done" at that point), Romney won Florida (and another State, I forget which one), Gingrich's supporters left for Santorum, then Romney sailed the rest of the way......... Anything could happen.........as I said, it will be telling where the first 3-4 States will land, who then retires from the race and where that support (and big money) goes....lots of potential for dramatic swings......in a few polls, Cruz is leading in Iowa and Christie in New Hampshire (which lets independents vote).....

Of the F-35's ALIS network........as it was the subject of the previous cyber-security concerns several years ago, and yet again in relation to the recent security testing

Post#5

Without a doubt..........And Reagan, trailing Bush early, used the race card against Connally in South Carolina for the win......people didn't take Reagan seriously.........interesting times.