Derek 2.0

I asked this of you before: What is too much power for a single engine? And how many failures has the F-35 fleet had due to it's engine?

I don’t think said horse is dead, just suffering mild brain damage………So why was the twin engine Super Hornet fleet grounded twice in the 1990s?

USAF single engine safety record as of March 31 2014: http://www.afsec.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-140520-049.pdf The recent F-35 engine failure is the first Class A engine related mishap since the P&W-229 started entering service in the F-16 fleet in 1989.......Not a bad 25 year record......

Why was the twin-engine Super Hornet fleet grounded twice?

So you're suggesting the Super Hornet fleet is ok now? You consider Boeing "smart"? Well how come their Super Hornet fleet was grounded twice, despite having two engines?

But how could that be? The Super Hornet fleet was ground twice for engine issues.........

How can that be? I mean, the fleet was grounded twice for engine problems.....Is it possible that professional engineers were able to create a solution to said problem?

Is the Super Hornet fleet still troubled after being grounded for engine issues?

Experts like who? Frankly, said "experts" are not purvey to the actual performance data attached to the F-35, fore if they were and divulged such information publicly, they’d be residing within Leavenworth. You stated the F-22 production was halted because of no perceived threats, thusly allowing the F-35 to continue sans further F-22s…..Of course couldn’t it be said that the USAF and Lockheed, the builders of both, realize there are no near-term threats to the F-35, including the developments out of Russia and China, the same aircraft that are often touted of being able to handle the F-35 with ease? Ahhh…..not quite, don’t rely on crib notes…..The Serbs positioned a large portion of their search radars along the air corridor, as I mentioned, that the Americans and NATO used repeatedly. To avoid being waxed by American and NATO Wild Weasels, much like the NVA two decades earlier, they would strobe their radars on and off…….They have claimed to have detected the F-117 with said radars, but of course, when using older Soviet SAMS (SA-2 and SA-3), said SAMS require continuous telemetry data from the fire control radar…if you strobe the radar on and off, as made evident during Vietnam, said missile becomes a firework…….Unless of course the missile also makes use of infrared homing, as was the case with upgraded SA-3s. Do you have a source……of course, if this is in relation to sequestration reductions, that of course is not the fault of Lockheed. Winslow Wheeler? I notice he didn't break down said figures......and added the costs of the continual upgrades.......Of course, the biggest and often most quoted critic of the F-35 has no direct aviation experience, was fired/forced to resign from Government, just after the X-35 won, and hasn’t had any direct experience with the program……and of course, works for a peacenik think tank that is critical of every defence program. Of course, because there is no threat in the near term that the F-35 and diminished F-22 fleet won't be able to cope with. I never said there weren't........They outnumbered NATO in terms of aircraft, much like your concern of Russia repeating this past trend........I've no doubt in my mind that Western aircraft like the F-35, will contend well against future Russian aircraft. I have since it beat the X-32

They already did: Outside the sales optics, the transoceanic flight will be another milestone, coupled with flying in weather in Scotland.

Do you believe, outside Pentagon or Lockheed “cheerleaders” (and armed forces of the partners), anyone actual knows the performance of the F-35? That’s a contradiction though…….perceived threats that couldn’t be handled by the F-35, in concert with the F-22 force. The Serbs were able to shoot down an F-117 for two reasons…….First and foremost, the USAF operationally grew complacent using only a handful of transit corridors for their outbound and return F-117 strike packages…….Second, the Serbs shot down the F-117 with a Soviet designed SAM with a IR seeker head, not a radar guided one……IR reduction techniques have been improved since the 1970s. It’s not adjusted for the several years out when the F-35 enters full rate production……… What was the unit price for LRIP block 8 aircraft........We'll be able to compare once LRIP 9 is signed in the weeks ahead. The F-22 tooling has been retained by Lockheed and the USAF………If Romney had of won in 2012, continued production of the F-22, under the guise of FB-22 (likely replacement/complement to the Strike Eagles) would likely have come to fruition. That’s because the Cold War ended before full production ramped up……The Soviet and Warsaw pact forces did outnumber NATO substantially in Europe, and remember, though the bulk of their forces were made up of Mig-21/23s/25s/27s and Su-7s/17s/24s, until the mid 80s, the bulk of the NATO forces were made up of first generation F-16s(no medium range missile), Phantoms and Mirages……

Right: http://ca.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idCAKBN0FD00H20140708

My wife grew-up in a rural area of South Africa……..guns were far more then a hobby.....but now of course, we do live in Canada, so no, we do not own firearms for protection (I‘ve never felt unsafe in Canada), but as a hobby and sport. With that said, to bring this back to the topic of American law and order, what of women in the States that own firearms for protection? Do you feel women in America shouldn’t have this right? And what if said women in the States do own firearms for sports or as a hobby, why in your mind do these women have a problem?

How have said women forgotten to be women? As to said women being fit to take home to meet mom.....well, I've been married to one for nearly 25 years and have a daughter that would also fit that description. Americans have had the right to self defense with a firearm since the creation of their country....this is very unlikely to change.

What of American women gun owners that own a firearm for self defense? Penis envy perhaps?

Would you care to highlight, in another thread perhaps, the Harper Government’s program of turning Canada into the 51st State? As I said, in another thread to allow this topic to remain on task. If you’re incapable, I’m more than willing to start the thread if there is interest.

And as we talked about earlier, I would expect that rate to actually be higher…..somewhere in 6th or 7th spot.

I'm not saying that it will be 1993 over again, but that it could be 1993 over again.......It’s all dependant on what changes to Bill C-68 are tabled both in the Fall and promised for after the next election. This, in all honesty, is the only concern that has shaken my confidence in the Government returning to Majority status next year.

What is worrying the Harper Conservatives, especially in “safe” Tory ridings is a sharp reduction in internal support amongst what is thought to be core supporters…….This has lead to not only a decline in votes, but also donations of both time and money….. Now said disenfranchised Tories will not vote for another mainstream political party, they will stay home or vote Libertarian, so in effect, they are not really in play for the other parties, but their diminished support will effect the Tories in tighter, namely rural ridings........The very same thing that is happening now, which can still be reversed, happened to the PC party under Kim Campbell in namely Western Canada and helped lead to the rise of Reform......and of course said issue became a major plank for the party for the next two decades.

Defiantly cool……I’m also a fan of the older programs, that likely would garner little interest but only to a small few number……. I’ve really enjoyed (several times) the upload of the BBC reality mini-series Sailor: Brief synopsis: Life aboard the Royal Navy’s last real aircraft carrier, the HMS Ark Royal. The series follows the Ark and her crew on one of her last voyages, so does have a sort of ominous feel to the whole thing. In a typical example of actual reality TV, the series touches upon everything, warts and all , of the daily lives of the ships complement. Everything from binge drinking, morality, infidelity, disobedience and serious illness and injury, to more positive things like personal accomplishment, teamwork, Esprit de corps and perhaps the most important of all, personal relationships between the crew and their family……. I’d highly recommend watching the entire lot for any of those that have ever been in the military, or are interested in see what the “life” is actually about. Overall, though “dated”, still top notch programming from the BBC.

Thank you sir.

In my view, that’s more attributed to the weakness found integral to the Obama administration.

What private property? What right do individuals have to airspace within Canada, when Canadians don‘t have rights to property enshrined in the Charter…… Safety would be the key in any legislated effort, for instance, in the United States, the FAA requires in urban areas a 1000 ft, and rural 500 ft, minimum attitude (The limits in Canada are similar) as a safety factor…….for privacy advocates, that is likely the only avenue of approach. And for the tin-hatters in the United States: http://curezone.com/upload/Members/trapper/2013/555436_344605698989601_1767139210_n.jpg

Again, the laundry list of failings being regurgitated is a media report from 2013, which relays GAO findings from the Summer of 2011.………for instance, the claim today that the F-35 is unable to fly at night is absurd, when clearly that has not been the case since 2012.……. The Growler (or Super Hornet itself) was not intended to be replaced (at this time) by the F-35C in USN service.......as to the EW capabilities, it is the USMC that will not replace it's current Prowlers with a dedicated type (Growler) and is choosing to retain a all F-35B/C fleet. The use of the Hornets, like the eventual use of the F-35s, will be a political question. As historic, the Progressive Conservatives, Liberals and Conservatives have all saw fit to leverage this form of diplomacy……I fail to see that changing going forward with a Conservative or eventual Liberal government in Ottawa. Huh? I’ll repeat my question, have their been calls for Canada to replace one current capability with another? I appreciate this is a point that you’ve opined on your own, but it has no ground in actual reality under the current framework of both NATO or NORAD. I’m not a prophet, I’d never imagined Canada fighting in Libya or redeploying fighters to Europe five years ago, but I acknowledge the prospects of a physical invasion to be slim, but Russian encroachment does occur. As to our direct sovereignty, a fighter force is a perquisite for NORAD……without one, the Americans will defend their sovereignty and approaches to, devoid of Canadian participation, the best ways they see fit……One needs only look at a Map. I have in numerous related threads…….Simply put, the greatest cost faced by DND is not the sustainment and purchase of equipment, but personal. By natural deduction, of the three elements (Army, Navy and Air Force), the army is the most reliant on “manpower” and when contrasted with the requirements of the Navy and Air Force, the technical requirements placed upon the members of the army can be maintained (and regenerated if required in time of national crisis) with reduced levels, or certain aspects by a properly funded militia/reserve force. Also, as I’ve stated before, from a political focal point, foreign deployments of the navy and air force often go unnoticed, where as the army’s decade plus in Afghanistan become quite contentious to say the least…..Simply put, I doubt for generations to come, any future Canadian Government will introduce another deployment of the same nature as Afghanistan……relying more so on the diplomatic effect of naval and air deployments. As such, I feel the priorities of the Canadian Forces, within the current funding envelope, should focus on both the navy and air forces inherent abilities as both an expeditionary and domestic force, followed by a reduced regular army, compensated for by investment into the reserve land force.

Identified problems that have since been resolved is of course a different mater. And the relevance? The United States Navy has also secured funding for additional Virginia class attack submarines, as such, does that make the F-35C a poor submarine? Yes, you did mention NORAD did you not? IOW what we’ve used our Hornets for operationally since they’ve entered service…….going forward the F-35 will enable Canada to continue with these sorts of contributions. Has their been calls for Canada to forgo a fighter contribution? And the Mexicans ability to police their sovereignty…….surely you jest It depends on said priorities……..As to funding, if we wish to maintain both our current funding envelope and piss poor procurement system, then I fail to see how priorities won’t come into play a t some point.