Derek 2.0

That's one way to polish a turd......as noted in your link: Whats more, once Canada left Germany, and Norway would no longer need reinforcement (and the fighter force was reduced by over 1/3rd) , our NATO commitments were solely the defense of North America through NORAD...........if this has now changed, what now is our NATO commitment? Has it been determined that North America is under increased threat, as such, we need to increase our NORAD commitment? Will the Liberals be increasing the defense budget? Why has such a drastic change in policy taken place prior to the Liberals defense review? And why are the Trudeau Liberals ordering lifetime gag orders? If this is a new policy by the Liberals, creating a "fighter gap" with a stroke of a pen, why is the replacement competition going to take five years?????? I smell a rat.......clearly the proposed Super Hornet buy was a solution looking for a problem.......since there were no problems to be found, the Liberals simply created one. As Alan Williams said, he doubts their intent to sole source a Super Hornet buy is even legal...............This is Trudeau's open and transparent process.

They would do they same as what they did with Iraq......aerial refueling and quite support from the Sunni neighbors........or nukes....

I agree 100%......forgot all the years of previous dithering, the Danes were able to manage in one year.

And the thing about most first world governments, if Bibi lost the next election, the new guy wouldn't go in a different direction for political reasons.

As I said they would...... As I said numerous times, it would have made sense going this route in the late 90s as opposed to upgrading the (entire) legacy fleet. It will do fine until USAF NORAD ops revolve around the F-35 and F-22, then it will be at a significant disadvantage. "An hour course"? The USN requires pilots who've been on non-flying postings for over 6 months, to take a two week refresher course, just to be recertified.......the RAAF's initial (instructor) conversion training to Super Hornets, for both technicians and aircrew took 18 months with the USN......back in Australia, conversion training for technicians, depending on trade, was two to three months, and aircrew (pilots and air combat officers) from F-111s took ~50 hours and legacy Hornet pilots ~1/3rd that.......a little more than an hour course. And two training streams for technicians, from radar & avionics to engines.....

They don't, the F-35s use a different version than the F-22 and Super Hornet........regardless Trudeau isn't sole sourcing these other aircraft. Bullshit......... if there was a fleet wide systematic problem, it would have been grist for the anti-F-35 mill and reported everywhere, by everyone..........regardless Trudeau isn't sole sourcing the F-35B No, it died for very valid reasons. Again, I think it has little to do with money with this government....

I've heard Boeing offered to put (as part of their sale of Super Hornets) the soon to be surplus Kuwaiti C/D Hornets through the center barrel program and zero hour them, and offer them up as attrition replacements to the USN, USMC and Canada......be a hell of a lot cheaper then buying interim Super Hornets......I'm surprised Trudeau didn't bring that up as an option, instead putting the staff under gag order........Of course it would be embarrassing if such information was leaked formally, with a paper trail, by DoD, USN, USMC and Boeing staff not bound by the Trudeau gag

No, that was resolved several months ago........regardless, Trudeau proposes to sole source Super Hornets.......Super Hornets with a bunk oxygen system that Boeing can't figure out......I would hope Trudeau wouldn't put the lives of RCAF members at risk by buying the lethal lemon Super Hornet. Oh my mistake, I misread your name, OGFT was an insightful member of this community, when he wasn't gracing us with his knowledge and whimsy, was fighting pirates, disarming WMDs for the UN, a solider of fortune, being a shrimp boat captain, a ninja and the spokesman for Dos Equis beer...... Men truly wanted to be him, and the women wanted to be with him. Mea Culpa

Right you are OGFT.....I wonder if Trudeau has been assured by Boeing that the oxygen system in the Super Hornets he wants won't have possible lethal outcomes for pilots.

How about just the States that Clinton squeaked by in.....

Perhaps you'd better reread his quote, as he was clearly referring to the (then) upcoming RIMPAC........not the future of the ships, nor Australian "deep strike".......as you were saying about "making stuff up".......

Two corrections.......nobody but the Americans were buying Phantoms when we selected the Voodoo.......And the Phantom wasn't yet linked into SAGE-NORAD........but by the time the Trudeau government traded in our Voodoos for hand-me-down Air National Guard Voodoos in the early 70s, I fully agree, we should have been trading them in for early mark Phantoms, or better yet, new F-4Es.......

Excellent.....the same article Waldo cited.....over a year and a half ago, a story of a story, never confirmed or acknowledged by the Government edit to avoid confusing Wilber: You repeated a rumor, that was never acknowledged by government, a ~year before the release of the white paper.....a white paper that clearly states no choice will be made until the 2020s.

Oh there is no logic here......just a political promise that backed a feckless leader into a corner.

Source? Chapter & verse please and thank you.

True, likewise the Slam Eagle .......and it stands to reason, if an actual competition were held (as promised by Trudeau) to address this so called "capability gap" (found by the Liberal government), both would be worthy of examining.......

No.......it hasn't.....go read that link I gave you again.

Yes, among several other options......as discussed earlier.

Close....but not really.........it was actually the Tories that put this into the incompetent hands of civil servants at Public Works and Government Services Canada.....like all procurement, by all governments, since the Liberals created the initial department (then called the Department of Munitions and Supply) back in the early 1940s......but nice baseless rant though.........The military (or any other department) has very little say on procurement for itself.......

Uh......did it not state clearly that the Australians won't be choosing an option for deep strike until the early 2020s? I'll quote it again if you like? The Danes and Norwegians think more so......and notice, when asked, Minister Foote wouldn't release a rough cost estimate of their proposed Super Hornet purchase......

I never said it did........as I said several times now, the White Paper proved your news paper article wrong, and that no such choice has yet been made.

And said news release was discussed, and brought up (by Waldo?) over a year and a half ago in another thread discussing this very subject, detailing the list of options the Australians will look at to meet their requirement for future long range strike.......and said news release was debunked this year with the release of the White Paper (Which I cited chapter and verse for you), which clearly states no decision will be taken until the 2020s........hence your point that it won't happen is unfounded. Yes, debunking your baseless claim. I linked to the paper, provided the chapter and quoted it for you.......if you need more than that you're on your own. I'm not being the slightest bit obtuse, quite the opposite.......but I'll agree that you were confused. ------------------------------------------ I really don't think cost is an issue with this government....budgets balance themselves remember........but more so a modern neo-liberal world view rooted in Fabian Socialism.

It has everything to do with it........our Prime Minister is a naif and just proved it to the incoming Trump administration.......as Kevin O'Leary recently commented, Trudeau versus Trump will be like Bambi versus Godzilla....

No, I didn't.....and you brought it up when you stated the Australians wouldn't purchase the F-35B Again, you're wrong, as I already said, starting with the A-4C, produced in the early 1960s, they did have a radar, making them an all weather attack aircraft and adding nearly a half foot to the overall length of the aircraft........later versions had (then) modern avionics installed, in several versions, the avionics suite of the F-16. And Top Gun, ahh, is a school aimed at improved tactics for the USN's......interceptor fleet......really, they made a corny movie about it. You understand they can be based on other ships......even land bases? We'd require two+ if we wanted to guarantee 100% mission readiness....that would be dependent upon our requirements......and I never said different.....as to basing, that too would be dependent upon requirements. You broached the subject of the superior assets of our Allies, affording us the ability to stay home. The F-35A requires a large tarmac covered target to operate.........the F-35B not so much, an important distinction if we found ourselves in a conflict overseas with a near peer...as I said, a split buy (2:1 A-B) between the two would make the most sense, with the majority of the F-35As intended for NORAD and the F-35Bs for operations overseas in support of NATO and other Allies etc......T The "B" offers flexibility not matched by the "A", the next time we have to bomb a third World despot we might not have basing rights next door, instead being reliant upon naval aviation, in such a scenario that could be our own vessel or one of our Allies. Likewise, if the balloon went up with Russia or China, their very first targets would be fixed airbases, bases that have been bracketed for generations...... I think its pretty clear they have no intention of holding a "fair and open competition".............The Gripen would be a great choice if Canada was half the size of British Columbia and our biggest threat was several Soviet tank armies crossing our border.

Says the guy trying to change the channel and disrupt the topic