F-35 Purchase Cancelled; CF-18 replacement process begins

[Derek 2.0]

Apparently we will have added costs of feeding our pilots more and keeping them fattened up if they are to be safe flying the F35.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/breaking-news/2015/10/14/f-35s-heavier-helmet-complicates-ejection-risks/73922710/

That is no different than previous modifications to the current ACES II seat used in all USAF aircraft. At the time, the previous weight requirements precluded ~2% of males and ~18% of females in American service, and a greater number of Asian operators. None the less its a moot point for Canada, as our current seats limits already have a bottom limit of ~140 lbs/64 Kgs and I wouldn't expect that to change.

Edited October 28, 2015 by Derek 2.0

[On Guard for Thee]

That is no different than previous modifications to the current ACES II seat used in all USAF aircraft. At the time, the previous weight requirements precluded ~2% of males and ~18% of females in American service, and a greater number of Asian operators. None the less its a moot point for Canada, as our current seats limits already have a bottom limit of ~140 lbs/64 Kgs and I wouldn't expect that to change.

Well the article indicates an increased level of risk to pilots under 165 lbs. Plus they are not sure whether the problem is with the seat, the bulky helmet which is required to be able to "see" out of the a/c, or a combination of both. With the history of problems with that single super hot engine, a proper ejection system will come in handy.

[Derek 2.0]

Well the article indicates an increased level of risk to pilots under 165 lbs. Plus they are not sure whether the problem is with the seat, the bulky helmet which is required to be able to "see" out of the a/c, or a combination of both. With the history of problems with that single super hot engine, a proper ejection system will come in handy.

The helmet would be addressed by neck support within the seat, much like ACES II, which also had to address visibility for smaller pilots. The "bulky helmet" is a new reality found within all modern fighters, including our current Hornet fleet which now includes the "bulky" JHMCS.

[Smallc]

They're just kicking the can down the field....an easy election promise for them.....makes it look like they are "saving" money when in fact, the F35 will likely be the chosen craft 6 or 7 years down the road.....after we've spent billions pro-longing the life of our CF-18s.....and we'll have lost our spot in line to become a major player in the F35 Global supply chain. Another Sea King helicopter debacle in the making.

If they keep their promise, they'll start an immediate competition.

[Smallc]

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/government-sets-up-new-office-to-buy-replacement-aircraft-for-cf-18s

This is very quick work by the new government, as promised. I'm impressed with their unwavering intention to keep their word on promises, even the ones I don't agree with.

[Derek 2.0]

The Trudeau Government should place the horse before the cart:

working with the Minister of Public Services and Procurement to launch an open and transparent competition to replace the CF-18 fighter aircraft, focusing on options that match Canada’s defence need

Such needs, as determined by the RCAF nearly 20 years ago, in the decades ahead can only be met by the F-35. Altering said determination is purely a political exercise...........No Cadillac 'elicopters fighter aircraft.

[Smallc]

Such needs, as determined by the RCAF nearly 20 years ago, in the decades ahead can only be met by the F-35.

As opposed to say, France, or Germany who have much less robust needs than us.

[Derek 2.0]

As opposed to say, France, or Germany who have much less robust needs than us.

France and Germany won't be operating the Rafale and Eurofighter until the 2050-60s.......the French have already retired ~10 of their oldest Rafales and the British will begin retiring their tranche I Typhoons in 2018.

[Smallc]

the French have

...not yet received their entire order. The US Navy is also ordering more Super Hornets. They'll be around until about 2040. No matter what we pick will be just fine for the next 30 years.

[Derek 2.0]

...not yet received their entire order. The US Navy is also ordering more Super Hornets. They'll be around until about 2040. No matter what we pick will be just fine for the next 30 years.

Doesn't change the fact that the French have already started retiring the type. With the USN, the later 2030 timeline is with the Growler force and the remaining Super Hornets that will be/are used for support roles like aerial refueling.

Your statement that we will be "just fine" is baseless and runs counter to the determination put forth by the RCAF in the later 90s-to present day.

[Smallc]

The reality is, reviews have found, that for our needs, pretty much anything will be fine. I would give, with current circumstances, either the Rafale of Super Hornet the edge in what will be procured. The Liberals have been clear on what they won't buy. Lets move on from there.

The reality is also that you are very much twisting what's actually going on in the USN and the French Airforce. The Rafale is going to be around for a very long time, and the SuPer Hornet probably even longer than projected. The F-35, after all, was never designed as its replacement.

Edited November 15, 2015 by Smallc

[Smallc]

The Navy had been planning for the Super Hornets to serve well into the 2030s, but now service leaders say that timeline will need to extend into the 2040s.

Read more: http://defensetech.org/2015/04/22/navy-leans-toward-building-more-super-hornets-after-f-35c-delays/#ixzz3rb9I8Ixr

Defense.org

[Derek 2.0]

The reality is, reviews have found, that for our needs, pretty much anything will be fine. I would give, with current circumstances, either the Rafale of Super Hornet the edge in what will be procured. The Liberals have been clear on what they won't buy. Lets move on from there.

What reviews? The RCAF has been quite clear in what they need out to (or past) the middle of this century. You are making up baseless claims.

The reality is also that you are very much twisting what's actually going on in the USN and the French Airforce. The Rafale is going to be around for a very long time, and the SuPer Hornet probably even longer than projected. The F-35, after all, was never designed as its replacement.

I'm not twisting anything. The French have retired, already, a portion their Rafale fleet. The British will retire in 2018 a large portion of their Typhoon fleet. The Super Hornet and Growler retirement for the USN will be determined by several factors, namely the progress of the 6th generation program currently underway, the real word results of the

F-35B in replacing the USMC's EA-6 Prowlers and in the utility role, the integration of the V-22 aboard the carriers in the COD role and the USMC's ability to integrate the refueling variant of the V-22 into operational deployments....factors all that will determine the back end of the Super Hornet service life.

Of course, this doesn't change the fact that the USN, RAAF, RAF and French air force/ navy won't be operating the Super Hornet/Eurofighter/Rafale out past the middle of this century, as the RCAF is expected to do with its Hornet replacement.

[Smallc]

Of course, this doesn't change the fact that the USN, RAAF, RAF and French air force/ navy won't be operating the Super Hornet/Eurofighter/Rafale out past the middle of this century, as the RCAF is expected to do with its Hornet replacement.

The only one saying that about the Rafale and Typhoon is you. The USN themselves are talking about operating the F/A-18E/F to the middle of the century. If we have the latest upgrades at that time, it gives us a few more years, getting us past that point. The F-35 for Canada is dead. Now we have to decide which one of the 4 (and two likely) options will replace it.

[Derek 2.0]

The only one saying that about the Rafale and Typhoon is you.

And the French Government that retired the F1 versions and the MoD that will retire the tranche 1 Typhoons in 2018........

The USN themselves are talking about operating the F/A-18E/F to the middle of the century.

No, they are not.

If we have the latest upgrades at that time, it gives us a few more years, getting us past that point.

Who's funding them? The DoD isn't, nor will Boeing for us.

The F-35 for Canada is dead. Now we have to decide which one of the 4 (and two likely) options will replace it.

No, we, nor the RCAF will decide that, that will be the purview of the Trudeau cabinet, the lobbyists and the lawyers.

[Smallc]

And the French Government that retired the F1 versions and the MoD that will retire the tranche 1 Typhoons in 2018........

And they'll be replaced by - wait for it - new Typhoons and Rafales.

No, they are not.

I posted the article earlier. They're openly talking about the 2030s and quietly talking about the 2040s. That's pretty close to the middle of the century.

Who's funding them? The DoD isn't, nor will Boeing for us.

Ahhh, so it's your position then that the US DOD will operate obsolete aircraft into the 2040s (at which point the remnants of the Super Hornet fleet will be used like today's hornet fleet).

No, we, nor the RCAF will decide that, that will be the purview of the Trudeau cabinet, the lobbyists and the lawyers.

It's already been put in the hands of Public Service and Procurement, your partisan swing notwithstanding.

[bush_cheney2004]

....Ahhh, so it's your position then that the US DOD will operate obsolete aircraft into the 2040s (at which point the remnants of the Super Hornet fleet will be used like today's hornet fleet).

Wait a minute...you stated that the United States does not determine Canadian decisions. So what does it matter what the United States "operates" now or into the 2040s?

Comparisons of USN/USAF procurements and life cycles for aircraft types to constipated Canadian DND decisions are meaningless.

[Smallc]

Wait a minute...you stated that the United States does not determine Canadian decisions. So what does it matter what the United States "operates" now or into the 2040s?

It doesn't influence it. It simply makes upgrades less costly. The French are not going to let the Rafale wither. The Same goes for the USN and the Super Hornet.

[bush_cheney2004]

It doesn't influence it. It simply makes upgrades less costly. The French are not going to let the Rafale wither. The Same goes for the USN and the Super Hornet.

The USN operates many types and variants within types (as stated above) with overlapping life cycles...does Canada do the same ? Does Canada have replacement platforms in production and future platforms in development ? How many training and reserve squadrons does Canada operate with requisite aircraft types ?

[Derek 2.0]

And they'll be replaced by - wait for it - new Typhoons and Rafales.

Well no, not really, the French opted to keep their Super Etendards in service over the F1 Rafales and the British are now going to keep the 70s vintage Tornado in service longer.

I posted the article earlier. They're openly talking about the 2030s and quietly talking about the 2040s. That's pretty close to the middle of the century.

That of course is dependent on a whole host of factors, none the less, as the RAAF and USN is retiring their Super Hornets, Canada will be looking towards a mid-life extension.

Ahhh, so it's your position then that the US DOD will operate obsolete aircraft into the 2040s (at which point the remnants of the Super Hornet fleet will be used like today's hornet fleet).

So its now into the the 2040s......wow, you're making up stuff now.......regardless, the Super Hornet will not be the frontline, or second line fighter of the USN or RAAF into the 2040s, let alone into the 2050s or 2060s..

It's already been put in the hands of Public Service and Procurement, your partisan swing notwithstanding.

Yeah, all three members of its staff, waiting for direction from cabinet

[Derek 2.0]

The USN operates many types and variants within types (as stated above) with overlapping life cycles...does Canada do the same ? Does Canada have replacement platforms in production and future platforms in development ? How many training and reserve squadrons does Canada operate with requisite aircraft types ?

Exactly, the Super Hornet, circa 2030s in USN service will be akin to Prowlers and KA-6s through the 90s........oddly enough, nobody sought the A-6E in the 90s

[Smallc]

So its now into the the 2040s......wow, you're making up stuff now

Again, the article is posted above.

Yeah, all three members of its staff, waiting for direction from cabinet

The minister has already received her mandate letter. She has full authority, working with the MND, Innovation, and Finance, to procure an aircraft.

Edited November 15, 2015 by Smallc

[Smallc]

Well no, not really

So they aren't currently receiving more of them? You'll have to tell them that.

[Big Guy]

So we waste more money on airplanes which will be paid for by Canadians, flown by Canadians maybe even serviced by Canadians and then employ them in conflicts as told to do and directed by the Americans.

Get a few helicopters.

[Derek 2.0]

Again, the article is posted above.

And doesn't indicate the USN will operate the Super Hornet until the middle of the century, nor that it will be in frontline service as its finally retired.

The minister has already received her mandate letter. She has full authority, working with the MND, Innovation, and Finance, to procure an aircraft.

Does the three person staff include the minister?