Derek 2.0

No problem at all........

The F-15 has been, and will continue to be the mainstay of the USAF’s air supremacy fighter fleet, coupled with the F-22, until the latter half of the next decade…………Of course, other F-35 partners operate the F-15 (Israel, Japan and South Korea) and will be looking to replace the aircraft in the same timeframe………… As has been stated numerous times, the F-35 was never intended to replace the F-15 (and F-22) in the air supremacy role………..

That's simple.........they signal the levels of expected production once the F-35 enters FRP......

Exactly, doing so is simply throwing good money after bad.........said funds are better allocated to developing the Super Hornet's replacement.

No.......Boeing has only offered conformal tanks (like what the F-15 has had for decades) to increase the Super Hornet's range, and a flared weapons pod as a retrofit to existing Super Hornets to make them relevant until they retire.........Boeing's proposed new radar, avionics and new engine has not been funded by the US Government, nor Boeing.

Yes, in it's fully proposed developed form.........

Already provided.....

Commitments to purchase the aircraft once it has entered FRP.

Reread the quoted passage........his views seems rather clear.

Has the claimed support translated into funding for a Super-Duper-Hornet? Also, the what exactly is supported? You suggest additional aircraft, or is it actually retrofitting of current aircraft to keep them relevant until they retire in the 2030s?

You disagree with the notion that the services that will operate the aircraft, will also declare when they are considered operational... Who do you feel would make a better assessment of the planes operational abilities?

But not ha-ha funny........more like this milk smells funny Why would anyone want to operate the Super Hornet far past it's best before date?

The F-35 program has spanned both left and right leaning governments of the partner nations since it's inception..........As to your claim of having to be "budied up", the majority of the user of the F-35 will operate it as their sole type in their inventory. So why would you put the men and women of the RCAF into the Super Hornet, and have them operate it long past it's retirement by it's current users...........Why do you refuse to answer this very simple question? Why do you desire the RCAF to operate the Super Hornet, designed in the 1990s, based off a design from the 1970s, out to the 2050s........At that point, the base design of the Hornet will be ~75 years old........that would be akin to operating aircraft today that had their roots in World War two era technology.........Why do you want the RCAF to be at a distinct disadvantage against potential enemies?

So despite these concerns you hold, the JSF partners are sticking with the F-35.............Why do you suppose they don't simply purchase Super Hornets like you suggest? Why do you want Canada to operate Super Hornets out to the 2050s, decades past the retirement of the aircraft by the USN and RAAF? Why don't you value the lives of the men and women of the RCAF?

Why would we/I? The F-35 will be a far better "bomb truck" then our current Hornet fleet, or your Super Hornet, for decades to come......... You appear hesitant on explaining why you feel the Super Hornet would be a suitable "bomb truck" for the RCAF through to the middle of this century, decades past it's retirement by it's current operators...........why is that? Why do you want the RCAF to operate a substandard and obsolete (post ~2030) "bomb truck"? Do you place no value on the lives of the men and women in the RCAF?

For some reason I'm doubting Obama (or Clinton or Bush jr) will get one named after them any time soon From my understanding, the next one will be Enterprise......I'd think recycling Lexington, Saratoga, Yorktown and Hornet would be more fitting going forward.

So it seems....

Exactly........and some can't gain an actual understanding by gleaming knowledge from Wikipedia, the MSM and blogs

The F-22 isn't carrier based, and the F-35C's IOC isn't until ~2018.

............Yet I can't pick lotto numbers. I agree, there is level of whimsy with the Bush being the carrier in the Gulf.

People that actually know, know that it will be no more, or no less a "bomb truck" then the aircraft it will replace....... You would rather throw money after the Super Hornet and operate until the ~2050s, decades past the retirement date set by the USN and RAAF.

The technology isn't there? F-35B IOC with the Marines is next year.......the F-35A the following year....and the F-35C with the Navy several years after that..........You're on the wrong side of reality..........sorry

Super Hornet orders are "expanding"? So that's why Boeing is closing the line...........And nobody called the Super Hornet a bomb truck? You do know which aircraft it replaced in USN and RAAF service right?

Take a look at the actual developments in technology involved in the Super Hornet "vis a vis" the F-35 and ask yourself why the Super Hornet line is closing and the two sole operators will start retiring their fleets at the end of the next decade........and you want the RCAF to operate a "bomb truck" like the Super Hornet into the 2040-50s timeframe? Why is that? Why does no other military share your ignorant view that the Super Hornet "bomb truck" will be viable towards the middle of this century?

Far too ignorant.........Fore this continued failed meme would have seen your Super Hornet abandoned in the 1990s after it's initial engine troubles during development..........