Smallc Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 Doesn't work that way, and is why land based air forces don't use buddy-stores Explain. Quote
ReeferMadness Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 No - the airforce is set on getting the F-35, which has no such capability. In fact, though it has a massive range on internal fuel, the F-35 can currently carry nothing for external fuel. According to my link, the F-35 has 1,100 km range - hardly "massive" in Canada. Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
Smallc Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 The Government of Canada will represent Quebec at the WTO......Dassault is partly owned by Airbus, and both the American and French Governments, as said, have much more to loose in regional airline sales then a small fighter order to Canada. I think you're really reaching here. Quote
Smallc Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 According to my link, the F-35 has 1,100 km range - hardly "massive" in Canada. To put that in perspective though, that's nearly double what the CF-18 can currently do on internal fuel. Also, if the F-35 is making only a 1 way trip (there's fuel somewhere at the other end) you can double that. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 Can anybody point to the actual "requirements" for a replacement Canadian "jet" ? Or is that a big secret that can morph depending on the politics of the ruling government ? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Derek 2.0 Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 Explain. Fuel is heavy, and external tanks induce drag......hence your Super Hornet/Rafale with buddy stores will take off, refuel other aircraft, then land and refuel......... Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 According to my link, the F-35 has 1,100 km range - hardly "massive" in Canada. Nearly 1/3 rd more range on internal fuel than the Gripen NG with drop tanks. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 Can anybody point to the actual "requirements" for a replacement Canadian "jet" ? Or is that a big secret that can morph depending on the politics of the ruling government ? The new Government hasn't laid them out yet. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 The new Government hasn't laid them out yet. Huh ? DND requirements change with each government ? THAT explains a lot ! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Derek 2.0 Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 I think you're really reaching here. Not at all, as Embraer has already taken Bombardier/GoC to court, and all three companies (Embraer/Airbus/Boeing) will take Bombardier/Quebec/Canada to the WTO yet again........Airbus and Boeing have far deeper pockets than Embraer, which its previous battle lasted over 5 years. Do you think Airbus and Boeing will offer attractive off-sets to a Government they are in court with? Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 Huh ? DND requirements change with each government ? THAT explains a lot ! Well they will change with this Government....... Quote
Smallc Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 Fuel is heavy, and external tanks induce drag......hence your Super Hornet/Rafale with buddy stores will take off, refuel other aircraft, then land and refuel......... That would still be useful in many cases. A Super Hornet trio could be deployed to a FOB, where 1 could load with tanks for the duration of a mission. Quote
ReeferMadness Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 Nearly 1/3 rd more range on internal fuel than the Gripen NG with drop tanks. That's different from the chart in the link I provided. It says the Gripen has a 1,300 km range with a 290 gal centreline tank. And a 4,000 km+ ferry range with external tanks. Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
ReeferMadness Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 To put that in perspective though, that's nearly double what the CF-18 can currently do on internal fuel. Also, if the F-35 is making only a 1 way trip (there's fuel somewhere at the other end) you can double that. So, we need a base in the Arctic Ocean? Quote Unlimited economic growth has the marvelous quality of stilling discontent while preserving privilege, a fact that has not gone unnoticed among liberal economists. - Noam Chomsky It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. - Upton Sinclair
Smallc Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 Do you think Airbus and Boeing will offer attractive off-sets to a Government they are in court with? Of course they will. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 That would still be useful in many cases. A Super Hornet trio could be deployed to a FOB, where 1 could load with tanks for the duration of a mission. Is your Super Hornet loaded with buddy tanks fueled by magic? Quote
Wilber Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 Can anybody point to the actual "requirements" for a replacement Canadian "jet" ? Or is that a big secret that can morph depending on the politics of the ruling government ? So far it is, anything but the F-35. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
Smallc Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 Well they will change with this Government....... Well, at least they might follow through. The Conservatives closed the Secretariat altogether. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 Well they will change with this Government....... Right...so why all this kibitzing about which "jet" to buy when nobody can even point to the requirements ? "Bomb truck" is a little vague. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Smallc Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 Is your Super Hornet loaded with buddy tanks fueled by magic? We keep fuel at the FOB. We could keep tanks there as well. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 Of course they will. Not well they are in court. Quote
Smallc Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 So, we need a base in the Arctic Ocean? We have forward operating bases at Inuvik, Iqaluit, and Goose Bay. There may be more that I'm forgetting. Quote
Smallc Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 (edited) Not well they are in court. Of course they will. The two are not mutually exclusive. Companies are involved in lawsuits and complete other transactions at the same time often. Edited November 17, 2015 by Smallc Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 We keep fuel at the FOB. We could keep tanks there as well. So your Hornet with the buddy stores flies to the FOB with magic? Quote
Smallc Posted November 17, 2015 Report Posted November 17, 2015 So far it is, anything but the F-35. We'll have to wait and see what they come up with. It's not unreasonable to discount first strike capable aircraft, as Canada has never done that and never will. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.