Iggy : I will cancel the F=35

[DogOnPorch]

As mentioned in another thread, Canada could use a good prop-driven (or turbo prop) ground attack machine. The Bombardier Sturmovik, let's say.

[bush_cheney2004]

I'd love to own one in a Travolta-like way.

I just checked...it will fit in my garage!

[bush_cheney2004]

As mentioned in another thread, Canada could use a good prop-driven (or turbo prop) ground attack machine. The Bombardier Sturmovik, let's say.

Hell yea! Canada could have the best 3rd world fighter and strike aircraft in the world.

[DogOnPorch]

I just checked...it will fit in my garage!

John had a full terminal gate installed @ his house...think big.

BC-2004: How much for the B-52D?

[DogOnPorch]

Hell yea! Canada could have the best 3rd world fighter and strike aircraft in the world.

Indeed. But a few SPADs (or their modern ilk) would make yer average Taliban soil his undies.

[DogOnPorch]

For those unsure...this be a "SPAD"

[wyly]

Sorry, buddy, you apparently have no idea about the aerospace industry if you refer to the Jane's as a source of reliable information. Do not trust them, trust me (it's a joke).

I do not want to open a technical discussion in a political forum. If you want to have your brain washed - read Jane's. If you want facts - go to professional forums. This is just a friendly advice.

I've been to some of those forums and they're just as undecided and know no more than anyone else, a lot of jet jockeys or wannabes who climb onto what ever team bandwagon they have biases for...you claim to know everything but I know you've never flown an F35 or a F22 or a Typhoon so what's your knowledge really worth? the only pilot who has flow both a Typhoon and a F22 the head of the US Airforce says they are both top planes but comparing the two would be like comparing NASCAR with Formula 1, he couldn't say which was better they were both exceptional...since the Typhoon is a 100 million cheaper than the F22 it's obviously the better deal...the US DND expects the F35 to cost between 115-133 mill, about the same as the Typhoon, so the Typhoon being the better plane why aren't we buying the Typhoon?...

and using more of your logic if it's to believed, the Russians are 20 years or maybe never able to build anything near the ability of a F35 then the only thing we really need is a Super Hornet equal if not better by your wisdom than anything the Russian or Chinese could ever build...

[Wilber]

and using more of your logic if it's to believed, the Russians are 20 years or maybe never able to build anything near the ability of a F35 then the only thing we really need is a Super Hornet equal if not better by your wisdom than anything the Russian or Chinese could ever build...

How reassuring for the guys who will have to fly it. Don't worry guys, we'll make sure you never have equipment better than your opposition.

[Bonam]

I find it funny how some of you guys think we can just get 1000 of a cheaper plane and call it good. Whether they are flying an F-35 or an F-5, the pilot himself (or herself) is very expensive. Millions of dollars of time and training go into every single fighter pilot.

I know two F-16 pilots and the amount of training these guys have gone through, both in super expensive state of the art simulator facilities and on the aircraft themselves, is huge.

Oh, and we'd have to hugely expand the number of people in the airforce and vastly expand airforce facilities to accommodate 1000 fighter aircraft, even if they are old fighters. The amount of support personnel and facilities for every fighter out there is enormous.

Using 65 new fighters is much more cost effective than hundreds of older aircraft, and, they can perform a wider range of roles and duties, and, we can down-select the pilots for them more so we have only the highest caliber people flying them.

Edited October 28, 2010 by Bonam

[DogOnPorch]

Pilot quality is indeed a very important factor in air-to-air combat and a good pilot can make a mediocre aircraft a killer...up to a point. Captain Lanoe Hawker being the classic example...good but not good enough.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanoe_Hawker

But, with all things being more or less equal, the better pilot will win...Israel being the best modern example of this where they shot down 80+ Syrian MiGs without loss in 1982.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/82iaf.html

[Bonam]

But, with all things being more or less equal, the better pilot will win...Israel being the best modern example of this where they shot down 80+ Syrian MiGs without loss in 1982.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/82iaf.html

To be fair, Israel also had significant advantages in organization and C&C, not just pilot quality.

[DogOnPorch]

To be fair, Israel also had significant advantages in organization and C&C, not just pilot quality.

Command control is the be all of battle...as the Arabs have found out numerous times since 1948.

[Rue]

Got no love for the F-5E....errrr....MiG-28? It protects Switzerland! I think Canada just needs more bad ass music in the promotion videos.

Correct me if I am wrong but was not one MIG in the series called a Fagot?

I kid no one.

Not that there is anything wrong with calling a MIG that but I don't k now about MIG's. The few pilots

I know from Israel said they were inferior pieces of manure.

The Israeli pilots and American Pilots I spoke with all agreed on the F-14 as their favourite and praise for the Phantom. F-16's and 18's you don't hear Pilots fawning over.

I haven't heard anyone singing the praises of any Russian aircraft like the Foxbat or whatever its called these days Mig 28's is it..the next generation, etc.

We need a get that can do long range yes but to say we could use F-5's is stretching it a bit. Why not bring back the Voodoo fighters then. Come on.

What we do need and I am surprised no one has mentioned it, are a lot more submarines and surveillance aircraft to look for illegal fishing or illegal entry onto our waterways from drug smugglers, people smugglers or even friendly nations seeking to establish regular use of our North to push access claims to the resources. We also need search and rescue helicopters, more naval ships, long range cargo transportation aircraft, on and on it goes.

We have the second largest gepgraphic zone in the world. No you don't enforce your sovereignty with F-5's or with due respect because I respect them, our Rangers who go out in canoes or whatever it is they are forced to do now.

Edited October 28, 2010 by Rue

[Army Guy]

I've been to some of those forums and they're just as undecided and know no more than anyone else, a lot of jet jockeys or wannabes who climb onto what ever team bandwagon they have biases for...you claim to know everything but I know you've never flown an F35 or a F22 or a Typhoon so what's your knowledge really worth? the only pilot who has flow both a Typhoon and a F22 the head of the US Airforce says they are both top planes but comparing the two would be like comparing NASCAR with Formula 1,

Thats a fair question , have you've every flown a fighter, are you a pilot, every had your life depend on a fighter, so what is your knowledge based on....I eman from reading your posts on the topic, you must have some inside info, more than DND has access to....

I think your Airforce General has already passed judgement of sorts , you can't compare both have been designed and purchased for different reasons.....you can't compare a gen 4 aircraft again'st a gen 5...

he couldn't say which was better they were both exceptional...since the Typhoon is a 100 million cheaper than the F22 it's obviously the better deal...the US DND expects the F35 to cost between 115-133 mill, about the same as the Typhoon, so the Typhoon being the better plane why aren't we buying the Typhoon?...

Who has said the Typhoon is a better plane....

and using more of your logic if it's to believed, the Russians are 20 years or maybe never able to build anything near the ability of a F35 then the only thing we really need is a Super Hornet equal if not better by your wisdom than anything the Russian or Chinese could ever build...

The experts in the matter of fighter jets , in this case the Canadian airforce have studied the problem, for more than 10 years now, they've looked at gen 4 aircraft, UCAV, gen 5 aircraft and they have come up with the best aircraft for there needs is the F-35 right now.....why is that so hard to fathom or accept....because it does not fit in with your vision....do you even wear a uniform, no....But your screaming it's my tax money....well here is a news flash every member of DND pays taxes as well, and yet they don't have a say in what i can watch on CBC, how our health care looks like or the long waiting periods, in fact those decisions like it or not we have very little say in.....Thats life....

This is not about money....it's about politics....and playing with lifes....use to be at one time lifes meant more, now it's all about show me the money......what ever it is we buy, i hope one day you, or your son is laying next to me in some foreign land waiting for an air strike to come in....and 50 sopwith camels come over the ridge, i can turn and smile at you...see your tax dollars at work boy...great ain'nt it...don't worry they won't all fall out of the sky, some are going to crash on the target....

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Thats a fair question , have you've every flown a fighter, are you a pilot, every had your life depend on a fighter, so what is your knowledge based on....I eman from reading your posts on the topic, you must have some inside info, more than DND has access to....

I think your Airforce General has already passed judgement of sorts , you can't compare both have been designed and purchased for different reasons.....you can't compare a gen 4 aircraft again'st a gen 5...

Who has said the Typhoon is a better plane....

and using more of your logic if it's to believed, the Russians are 20 years or maybe never able to build anything near the ability of a F35 then the only thing we really need is a Super Hornet equal if not better by your wisdom than anything the Russian or Chinese could ever build...

The experts in the matter of fighter jets , in this case the Canadian airforce have studied the problem, for more than 10 years now, they've looked at gen 4 aircraft, UCAV, gen 5 aircraft and they have come up with the best aircraft for there needs is the F-35 right now.....why is that so hard to fathom or accept....because it does not fit in with your vision....do you even wear a uniform, no....But your screaming it's my tax money....well here is a news flash every member of DND pays taxes as well, and yet they don't have a say in what i can watch on CBC, how our health care looks like or the long waiting periods, in fact those decisions like it or not we have very little say in.....Thats life....

This is not about money....it's about politics....and playing with lifes....use to be at one time lifes meant more, now it's all about show me the money......what ever it is we buy, i hope one day you, or your son is laying next to me in some foreign land waiting for an air strike to come in....and 50 sopwith camels come over the ridge, i can turn and smile at you...see your tax dollars at work boy...great ain'nt it...don't worry they won't all fall out of the sky, some are going to crash on the target....

Dude, no disrespect but why must you and your brothers and sisters at arms, have to go to foreign lands and enter into armed conflicts in the first place. This is Canada, not the USA, our interests are internal not external. We are under no known national security threat and could seriously use the money going toward our forces to be spent in our own nation. Thats what many folks think, and there is power in their ideas.

In my mind expenditures on armed forces is not merely justified but desirable under the proper conditions. Exporting dollars that we borrowed at interest to purchase arms from external sources represents a seriously detrimental impact to our economy and it has and will continue to cost us far more than is really required to defend the nation. The defense of the nation is the true goal here. The security of citizens must be enacted within the home nation first in terms of governmental priorities. That is just simple common sense. Designing any form of external defense while ignoring the realities of border security is sheer folly. This kind of thing is purely political and it costs the tax paying citizen dearly.

I can only dream of the day when some visionary leader decides to preach the benefits of policies designed around "Home Defense". A program of Canadian defensive infrastructure designed to provide jobs and security while reducing expenses. Yes I am talking about a Canadian version of the military industrial complex. The creation of such a system may well be the only real viable alternative we have to properly deal with this issue.

[bush_cheney2004]

Correct me if I am wrong but was not one MIG in the series called a Fagot?

MiG-15 has the NATO designation of "Fagot".

I haven't heard anyone singing the praises of any Russian aircraft like the Foxbat or whatever its called these days Mig 28's is it..the next generation, etc.

We kid you...MiG 28's don't exist, except in Hollywood movies like Top Gun.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

MiG-15 has the NATO designation of "Fagot".

We kid you...MiG 28's don't exist, except in Hollywood movies like Top Gun.

Yet the MIG 35 does exist, nice bird.

MIG 35

[William Ashley]

Uhhh, you guys do realize that the F-35 contract has yet to be signed and therefore there can be no penalties associated with the cancellation of the contract?

Not the case.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Canada-Investing-in-F-35-Related-RD-05056/

BTW this article is just the tip of ramifications. This is partly why i support the program, just think that the procurement should be earlier and more phased spread out over the project life. So that pilots can train in groups leading up to 2020.When a full component can be trained and ready for the 80 or so aircraft.

The units will not cost less and there is no alternative for Canada within the JSF program.

But no I think the orders should be spread out over a larger time frame but still locked in. This means no new procurement program will pop up - and loose the service contract. If they break send them back and ask for a refund for making crappy 250 million dollar planes or rather 80 million dollar planes. You shouldn't need to order spare parts on 80 million dollar aircraft. You would need to have 75% of the fleet fall out of the sky to make up that cost over a 20 year period.. and this is a 80 million dollar aircraft. Run more of them buy less parts.. part em if you need em.

At 75% of the unit price this seems madness to buy parts instead of whole extra planes. If these things are that brittle the plane ain't that good. At 8000 flight hours .... when are they suppose to start breaking?

Also how spread this program is .. has me wonder on the ability to actually supply in event of a global conflict of proportional size once again limiting the role to kitty picking undeveloped countries.

If canada were to buy an extra 40 and put aside 2 billion for parts on a procurement basis - I think it would be in a much better position. on a basis of 10 per year. The phased procurement would also delay fleet replacement over the same purchase period.

Edited October 28, 2010 by William Ashley

[Argus]

Nope. I don't. Thanks for asking....

Then maybe you should rethink your position.

[bush_cheney2004]

....At 75% of the unit price this seems madness to buy parts instead of whole extra planes. If these things are that brittle the plane ain't that good. At 8000 flight hours .... when are they suppose to start breaking?

Sorry, that's not how field or depot level support works...except maybe in Canada, where crews are forced to cannibalize parts just to keep one platform deployable. During the Kosovo campaign, Canada was shuffling and juggling FLIR pods just to be mission ready.

Edited October 28, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[Argus]

Dude, no disrespect but why must you and your brothers and sisters at arms, have to go to foreign lands and enter into armed conflicts in the first place.

Because democratically elected governments decide it is in Canada's interests to do so.

This is Canada, not the USA, our interests are internal not external. We are under no known national security threat and could seriously use the money going toward our forces to be spent in our own nation.

Under no current threat. If you can assure us that your looking glass is perfect and has shown you that there will be no threat over the next 30 odd years which requires fighter aircraft then that'd be a great money saving. Unfortunately, given the lead time to equip with this particular item, by the time you realize there's a threat it's kind of late to put out bids on a fighter plane and try and find people to train you in their use.

[Topaz]

On CBC yesterday, Simon asked Clements why do we NEED these jets. He said that we need them for our missions, and Canada's security and then he said for other overseas missions. Today, Cannon is going to announcement steps against N. Korea apparently. (hope I got this right) I`ve also have seen articles that said the US in the near future will put N. Korea along with Iran as possible problems that need correction. I don`t think any thing will happen under Obama but when the Republicans take back the WH, and if Canada has these F-35`s, we will be back into another war and all the expenses that goes with it.

[Army Guy]

But no I think the orders should be spread out over a larger time frame but still locked in. This means no new procurement program will pop up - and loose the service contract. If they break send them back and ask for a refund for making crappy 250 million dollar planes or rather 80 million dollar planes. You shouldn't need to order spare parts on 80 million dollar aircraft. You would need to have 75% of the fleet fall out of the sky to make up that cost over a 20 year period.. and this is a 80 million dollar aircraft. Run more of them buy less parts.. part em if you need em.

At 75% of the unit price this seems madness to buy parts instead of whole extra planes. If these things are that brittle the plane ain't that good. At 8000 flight hours .... when are they suppose to start breaking?

WOW...this is not a ford pick-up it is a an aircraft...each part on each aircraft is catolouged and detailed records kept, on how many hours of useage each part has..., alot of those parts have a life span, depending an a long list of things, but in the end it has a life span attched to it, these parts are replaced on or slightly before that life span is reached...broken or not they are replaced , to be rebuilt, or trashed.... this goes on not just in military aircraft but every aircraft.....for obvious reasons...So we will be replacing parts on day one, until the day we retuire them....

The 8000 flight hours is assigned to the airframe only, which can be extended with an upgrade such as the one our F-18's have gone through....replacing parts on a regular scedule is what makes them so safe....the clock starts once the engine is fired up for the first time....during the manufacture process...

[Army Guy]

On CBC yesterday, Simon asked Clements why do we NEED these jets. He said that we need them for our missions, and Canada's security and then he said for other overseas missions. Today, Cannon is going to announcement steps against N. Korea apparently. (hope I got this right) I`ve also have seen articles that said the US in the near future will put N. Korea along with Iran as possible problems that need correction. I don`t think any thing will happen under Obama but when the Republicans take back the WH, and if Canada has these F-35`s, we will be back into another war and all the expenses that goes with it.

OK now your reaching, if your thinking we got these brand new toys lets go and try them out that is just crazy........that has not stopped our country before sending in troops with improper kit....why would that change because we have the kit.....

[Army Guy]

Dude, no disrespect but why must you and your brothers and sisters at arms, have to go to foreign lands and enter into armed conflicts in the first place. This is Canada, not the USA, our interests are internal not external. We are under no known national security threat and could seriously use the money going toward our forces to be spent in our own nation. Thats what many folks think, and there is power in their ideas.

Jerry, believe it or not but Canada does have a foreign policy, and it does extend well past our borders. even the swiss have a foreign policy....and it does require something or someone to defend it. As for no national security threat, that is not what DND, CSIS, RCMP are saying the list of threats is numerous. on top of all that we have signed on to mulitple defense agreements which are 2 way, and require our nation to have a military that does have a multi mission capability...

In my mind expenditures on armed forces is not merely justified but desirable under the proper conditions. Exporting dollars that we borrowed at interest to purchase arms from external sources represents a seriously detrimental impact to our economy and it has and will continue to cost us far more than is really required to defend the nation. The defense of the nation is the true goal here. The security of citizens must be enacted within the home nation first in terms of governmental priorities. That is just simple common sense. Designing any form of external defense while ignoring the realities of border security is sheer folly. This kind of thing is purely political and it costs the tax paying citizen dearly.

Home defense is our first priority, and within our current budget thats hard to do. considering the many things that impact on that such as our nations size, etc etc....however we did sign onto defence agreements and they must be covered as well.

I can only dream of the day when some visionary leader decides to preach the benefits of policies designed around "Home Defense". A program of Canadian defensive infrastructure designed to provide jobs and security while reducing expenses. Yes I am talking about a Canadian version of the military industrial complex. The creation of such a system may well be the only real viable alternative we have to properly deal with this issue.

i think the answer is , lets ask lockheed and the US government how much it cost them to develope the F-35, and then ask our selfs can we afford to do that across the board with every piece of equipment we need....and would all that be cost effective spending all that money when we are only going to build 65 copies.....i think we've already been down that road with the Avro...