When is enough, enough on F35's?

[Topaz]

Latest report on the lemon of a plane is that Canadian pilots won't be able to COMMUNICATE with each in the Arctic! So many many things are wrong with this plane and yet the Harper gang still wants to buy it, why? So they can blame the Libs when we do really find out its a lemon? No, this is going to be the Tories lemon to suck on. How are the pilots going to talk to each other...through cells phones, maybe free cell for a year!!! It time for an open and honest tender for this replacement. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/canadas-first-f-35s-wont-built-ability-communicate-184717722.html

[Moonbox]

The problem is that the planes, as of now, will not have built-in satellite communication abilities. This is problematic for Canadian pilots because there aren't a lot of communication relay towers in the Arctic circle (next to none). It's a pretty big problem for us and if it can't be fixed then the planes are more or less useless for us.

That said, it's likely one of the easier problems to fix. It doesn't make the plane a lemon at all.

Edited October 24, 2011 by Moonbox

[Tilter]

Latest report on the lemon of a plane is that Canadian pilots won't be able to COMMUNICATE with each in the Arctic! So many many things are wrong with this plane and yet the Harper gang still wants to buy it, why? So they can blame the Libs when we do really find out its a lemon? No, this is going to be the Tories lemon to suck on. How are the pilots going to talk to each other...through cells phones, maybe free cell for a year!!! It time for an open and honest tender for this replacement. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/canadas-first-f-35s-wont-built-ability-communicate-184717722.html

Harper has given in and to satisfy taxpayers like you has ordered 50 new birds with less tech & more usability --- the F1 Tiger moth. He has ordered the larger bomb capacity models, with a configuration that will allow the aircraft to carry 20 hand grenades in the armament basket (rather than 10) and will be equipped with 2 - 9 mm automatics mounted at midwing rather than the model with .22 Cal guns. This makes them harder for the pilot to reload but it is felt that reloading ability would be a redundancy considering the short life expectancy of the plane in a fight with anything more modern than a Sopwith Camel.

Communication will be improved with a longer flagpole to better handle inter plane communications.

The RCAF has also announced a new pilot recruiting program and I have word from the Officer Commanding the RCAF that you, because of your knowledge of Canadian Fighter Plane necessities, are invited to join.

[bush_cheney2004]

What's the big deal...CF-188's were notorious for having outdated Comms and IFF suites. Just give your F-35 pilots some 6 cell Maglites so they can flash Morse Code to each other in flight. Very secure too!

[Moonbox]

This makes them harder for the pilot to reload but it is felt that reloading ability would be a redundancy considering the short life expectancy of the plane in a fight with anything more modern than a Sopwith Camel.

Okay whatever your angle is, that's just funny.

[Wild Bill]

What's the big deal...CF-188's were notorious for having outdated Comms and IFF suites. Just give your F-35 pilots some 6 cell Maglites so they can flash Morse Code to each other in flight. Very secure too!

Do they still teach them Morse code?

-. --- - .-.. .. -.- . .-.. -.--

[Guest Derek L]

The storey is just sensationalism……….The F-35, like the B-2 and F-22, are stealth aircraft, they can’t use one of the various Data Links that’s used on 4th generation, non-stealth aircraft……for obvious reasons, their stealth……..What will be used, is the Multifunction Advanced Data Link, which will be more secure, more resistant to jamming and give the aircraft the ability to remain stealth, well communicating with other stealth aircraft and UAVs………Kind of important for a stealth aircraft…….As for it not being on the first production aircraft, well everyone who’s followed the entire program knew this and it will likely borrow from the F-22 for the first production aircraft……..In reality, it’s a software upgrade.

The article also mentions the “in-flight refuelling issues”………..these are not the fault of the design……it’s been a known quality for over a decade………..we’ll simply have three (well four) options……..buy the “c” version that will be equipped with “probe & drogue”, use the “A” version as planned and replace our current tankers (that will be in their third decade of service) or opt to have Lockheed put a probe on the our A versions, which well doable will cost a bit more to develop….

As for “lemon status” of the F-35, well the one version ,B, that was at one point falling behind in development, and was threatened with cancellation, just achieved it’s first major milestone a few weeks ago:

Edited October 24, 2011 by Derek L

[bush_cheney2004]

Do they still teach them Morse code?

-. --- - .-.. .. -.- . .-.. -.--

--. --- --- -.. --.- ..- . ... - .. --- -. .-.-.- -.-. .- -. .- -.. .- ... - .. .-.. .-.. .-. . --.- ..- .. .-. . ... ---.. .-- .--. -- .-. . -.-. . .--. - .. --- -. ..-. --- .-. -.-. --- -- -- . .-. -.-. .. .- .-.. .--. .. .-.. --- - .----. ... .-.. .. -.-. . -. ... . .-.-.- -. --- .-- - .... . -.-- .--- ..- ... - - . -..- - . .- -.-. .... --- - .... . .-.

[Wild Bill]

Please excuse this brief personal msg in the thread, folks! Apparently, BC can't use the PM system! I tried and it told me "No can do!"

--. --- --- -.. --.- ..- . ... - .. --- -. .-.-.- -.-. .- -. .- -.. .- ... - .. .-.. .-.. .-. . --.- ..- .. .-. . ... ---.. .-- .--. -- .-. . -.-. . .--. - .. --- -. ..-. --- .-. -.-. --- -- -- . .-. -.-. .. .- .-.. .--. .. .-.. --- - .----. ... .-.. .. -.-. . -. ... . .-.-.- -. --- .-- - .... . -.-- .--- ..- ... - - . -..- - . .- -.-. .... --- - .... . .-.

Good question? That's as far as I got. It's not my ears, it's my eyes, BC! Used to hearing morse, not peering at dots on a screen!

I learned about 35 years ago, when I got my Canadian advanced ham radio ticket. That meant 15 wpm with no errors. I got up to about 20 wpm or so before dating girls ate up my hobby time! Then I got married and my key went silent for about 20 years! The wife was a master at discouraging anything SHE didn't like!

Now I'm freshly separated and one of the first things I did was drag out my old gear, throw a wire up in a tree and see how much I remembered! It's like typing, or bike riding. I can still copy over 15 wpm and with only a few contacts seemed to be getting better than I was before!

My original instructor back when I was a young teen was ex-Cdn Navy. I don't know how fast he was - 70wpm? 80? I once saw him in a tent full of ham radio operators on a Field Day weekend operating two different transceivers at once, while saying to a ham on the other side of the tent "Aren't you going to answer that Georgia station that's calling you?"

To him it was just like sitting in a living room with a couple of conversations going on at the same time. He was impressive!

My dad started out in Navy Signals but he kept falling asleep at his typewriter with his headphones over his ears, from late nights courting my mother! He got transferred to the quarter master corps.

The Canadian Navy used to be excellent at teaching Morse, as long as the sailor stayed awake!

[bush_cheney2004]

...The Canadian Navy used to be excellent at teaching Morse, as long as the sailor stayed awake!

Heh heh...that was fun. The Navy was the last to go I think, they were hard core for Morse Code. I learned for flashing light signaling at sea. The radiomen had to be much better at hearing it because continuous wave (CW) was the last method of communications after the big one hit. We had code books and ciphers all set up just for CW.

Canada still requires a practical aural exam with an 8 wpm minimum if Google is right, and man that is a low minimum! It's a lost art/skill...now machines do it for us.

[olp1fan]

Latest report on the lemon of a plane is that Canadian pilots won't be able to COMMUNICATE with each in the Arctic! So many many things are wrong with this plane and yet the Harper gang still wants to buy it, why? So they can blame the Libs when we do really find out its a lemon? No, this is going to be the Tories lemon to suck on. How are the pilots going to talk to each other...through cells phones, maybe free cell for a year!!! It time for an open and honest tender for this replacement. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/canadas-first-f-35s-wont-built-ability-communicate-184717722.html

These planes were never for the arctic... they are for missions like Libya

Harper has no interest in defending the artic, hes probably already sold some of it to america to protect it

[Boges]

These planes were never for the arctic... they are for missions like Libya

Harper has no interest in defending the artic, hes probably already sold some of it to america to protect it

More unsubstantiated claims by olph1fan.

[olp1fan]

More unsubstantiated claims by olph1fan.

even a retard like me can see these are not meant for the arctic

[Guest Derek L]

even a retard like me can see these are not meant for the arctic

Actually, a minimum of 1/3rd of our fighters will be required to maintain our current NORAD commitments…………..which, yes, include the Arctic.

[Guest Derek L]

Thought I’d add, with Video, the non-issue that the Liberals and NDP have brought up about the JSF and inflight refuelling:

How our Current Hornets refuel (Hose & Drogue):

How the proposed F-35A (What we're buying) does it (Boom & Receptacle)

[Guest Derek L]

How our new CC-17s refuel:

And to come full circle, how the F-35B & F-35C do it:

Clearly the technology is already there to adapt our versions of the F-35A to the current hose & drogue method used by our Hornets today and what will be used by the Naval and Marine versions……..Or, replace our current aging tankers with ones using the Boom method, purchase the planned version of the JSF and has an added bonus, we could refuel our current CC-17s……….Amongst various other options, with the point being………the Opposition doesn’t have a point.

[punked]

How our new CC-17s refuel:

And to come full circle, how the F-35B & F-35C do it:

Clearly the technology is already there to adapt our versions of the F-35A to the current hose & drogue method used by our Hornets today and what will be used by the Naval and Marine versions……..Or, replace our current aging tankers with ones using the Boom method, purchase the planned version of the JSF and has an added bonus, we could refuel our current CC-17s……….Amongst various other options, with the point being………the Opposition doesn’t have a point.

Pretty sure mid-air refueling has been the biggest problem with the F-35 from the very start when it was competing as the X-35 against Boeings plane which had even bigger problems with refuling. It has always been a design flaw that had to be lived with and the hope has always been that it could be fixed.

Edited October 24, 2011 by punked

[Guest Derek L]

Pretty sure mid-air refueling has been the biggest problem with the F-35 from the very start when it was competing as the X-35 against Boeings plane which had even bigger problems with refuling. It has always been a design flaw that had to be lived with and the hope has always been that it could be fixed.

I don’t really see your point though……..Both the X-35 & X32 had “problems” in their early development (One of the big factors for the X-32 was their STOVL version) as do many other aircraft…….kind of the point in the evaluation process…………Again, we’re not buying the X-35.……….The A/B/C are all meeting their major milestones today, and as I pointed out earlier, the once troubled STOVL B version is now back on track.

[Smallc]

Or, replace our current aging tankers

Because of only moderate use, the CC-150 isn't expected to need replacement until about 2025.

Edited October 25, 2011 by Smallc

[punked]

I don’t really see your point though……..Both the X-35 & X32 had “problems” in their early development (One of the big factors for the X-32 was their STOVL version) as do many other aircraft…….kind of the point in the evaluation process…………Again, we’re not buying the X-35.……….The A/B/C are all meeting their major milestones today, and as I pointed out earlier, the once troubled STOVL B version is now back on track.

I am saying the fueling has been a very real design flaw from the get go. I understand this flaw was due to the fact that criteria was both the Air force and Navy wanted to buy the plane and they both have different ways of refueling one is boom method and the other is house one. What I have never been clear on was this still perused and it can refuel both ways or has been decide there is only way to refuel this thing.

I think we can agree the Canada media has done a terrible job of reporting on this plane and I am unclear on a lot of facts because of this. Can not get someone who knows something about jets to report on this stuff?

[Guest Derek L]

Because of only moderate use, the CT-150 isn't expected to need replacement until about 2025.

So? The CF-35 likely won’t be fully in squadron service until 2019-20.………..Keep them…..sell them…retire them early…….The JSF will be in service till close to the 2050s……..unless we rebuild the CC-150s in a program akin to the KC-135 they won’t.

As I’ve said in prior threads, I think there will be a market for the A with a drogue and we’ll likely get just that.

[Guest Derek L]

I am saying the fueling has been a very real design flaw from the get go. I understand this flaw was due to the fact that criteria was both the Air force and Navy wanted to buy the plane and they both have different ways of refueling one is boom method and the other is house one. What I have never been clear on was this still perused and it can refuel both ways or has been decide there is only way to refuel this thing.

I think we can agree the Canada media has done a terrible job of reporting on this plane and I am unclear on a lot of facts because of this. Can not get someone who knows something about jets to report on this stuff?

Well any past issues with in-flight refuelling for the F-35 have been dealt with………Our issues are with the tankers (Etc)

And both methods will be used between the various versions……..A boom/receptacle is near impossible on the B versions, since that’s where the lift fan is located…….and the Navy version doesn’t really have a use for the boom method, (They refuel the majority of their aircraft with drogue method) so again drogue it will be………….The fuselage architecture on the on the A & C versions is very similar (The big difference is the wing/landing gear) so adding a drogue shouldn’t be too hard………Worse case, we purchase the C version

[Smallc]

So? The CF-35 likely won’t be fully in squadron service until 2019-20.

And that will have no bearing on the CC-150. It will be retired in the mid to late 2020s, most likely. We'll probably get F-35As with the setup that you're talking about.

[Guest Derek L]

And that will have no bearing on the CC-150. It will be retired in the mid to late 2020s, most likely. We'll probably get F-35As with the setup that you're talking about.

Exactly, the fear mongering of the aircraft in unfounded…………For those old enough, you could nearly swap out JSF for Hornet and relive CBC’s coverage of the Hornet purchase 30+ years ago

[Smallc]

What do you think about the fact that it seems we'll be farming all pilot training out to the US? Do you think that will mean having two, 30 aircraft squadrons, instead of two, 24 aircraft combat squadrons?