Derek 2.0 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 Russia has a hard enough time keeping their carrier at sea. The other countries, again, are those we aren't going to be fighting (not that we're likely to be fighting any of them). Their bomber force works, as do their Foxbats and Sukhois they have based in the Arctic, both armed with missiles that can engage their targets 2-3 the distance our current Hornets can..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 Russia has a hard enough time keeping their carrier at sea. The other countries, again, are those we aren't going to be fighting (not that we're likely to be fighting any of them). Russia does not need carriers to reach Canada....they have in-flight refueling for fighter escorted bombers with cruise missiles....today. China will continue to develop carrier based air power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 How are they going to purchase fighters in 2017 now? They have no money budgeted for any fighters.......and forget the frigates, they don't even have money budgeted for the Queenston class AORs....... How many budgets have they delivered so far? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 You don't pay for fighters upon selection. Dealer financing? Odd that, with the Globemaster, Cyclones, Hercs and Chinooks, cash was exchanged upfront........Cash the Liberals don't have budgeted. If the Conservatives had money budgeted, as you say, for 2019 (since F-35 delays forced them to move back the date) then that is within the mandate of this government. They didn't lay-out a fiscal framework through 2019/2020, hence they had no money budgeted......as such, if they purchased F-35s in 2019, they would have had to come up with money........since they did budget a Hornet life extension through ~2025, that would indicate they had no intention of purchasing F-35s inside this decade. If the Conservatives had the money budgeted for a time that is within the mandate of this government, the same money is there. The Queenstons are 4 ships and about that many years down the line, so it's unlikely that they'll start construction within this mandate. The final contract was to be signed late next year........The Liberals have not indicated in their 4 year fiscal plan any such funds........I suppose we will have to wait until they table their first budget, but as it stands, no money for the Quessnstons........and, since being in Government, AFAIK, no money to Davie for project Resolve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 It is indeed.....as an American, what impact do you feel a neutered Canada would have on your own National Security? Canada has/had capabilities that are assessed for risk and effectiveness...the U.S. would just factor those in and augment force structure as needed to counter present and future threats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 Russia does not need carriers to reach Canada....they have in-flight refueling for fighter escorted bombers with cruise missiles....today. China will continue to develop carrier based air power. Their Foxhounds, in the Arctic, can reach (Northern) Canada with external tanks, well armed with long range air to air missiles, with double the range of the Tomcats old Phoenix AAM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 Canada has/had capabilities that are assessed for risk and effectiveness...the U.S. would just factor those in and augment force structure as needed to counter present and future threats. Exactly, if Canada doesn't purchase a modern Hornet replacement, that equates to several more ANG squadrons with F-35As.......not the end of the World. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 Exactly, if Canada doesn't purchase a modern Hornet replacement, that equates to several more ANG squadrons with F-35As.......not the end of the World. Canada will hopefully buy modern Hornets and save a shitload of money. I know soe of the boys will be upset about their toys, but the grownups will get the job doe without breaking the bank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 Exactly, if Canada doesn't purchase a modern Hornet replacement, that equates to several more ANG squadrons with F-35As The US, as it currently stands, won't be able to afford the number of F-35s they're supposed to get, never mind more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 It's a small number, to be sure. That said, a force that can actually bring enough aircraft with them to Canada to counter what we'd have available each day (say 20 - 24 of those) is...well the only one that could do that is the US. We need to be able to defend our own airspace. We can do that with a relatively small number of aircraft. Personally I'd like to see us have an airforce with about 120 aircraft. We could have 4 forward deployed groups in the north and west at all times ready to respond. We're not getting that so I don't see a point in dreaming. Since the sixties we have gone from a mixed fighter fleet of 266 CF101's and 104's, to 138 CF-18's (79 still operational) and now down to what? I agree with one thing, you can degrade your forces to a point where there really isn't one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 Their bomber force works, as do their Foxbats and Sukhois they have based in the Arctic, both armed with missiles that can engage their targets 2-3 the distance our current Hornets can..... Sure they can. Russia has a lot of theoretical capabilities. Sounds like we're doomed anyway. I'm not sure why we even bother intercepting anything they send over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 The US, as it currently stands, won't be able to afford the number of F-35s they're supposed to get, never mind more. So how are they going to look after us? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 Since the sixties we have gone from a mixed fighter fleet of 266 CF101's and 104's, to 138 CF-18's (79 still operational) and now down to what? I agree with one thing, you can degrade your forces to a point where there really isn't one. We're not the only country doing this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 So how are they going to look after us? That's a good question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 The US, as it currently stands, won't be able to afford the number of F-35s they're supposed to get, never mind more. So what ? The U.S. and partner nations will buy F-35 variants in some numbers, and they don't need Canada's decisions as an excuse not to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 That's a good question. So ask JT and his boys and girls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 The US, as it currently stands, won't be able to afford the number of F-35s they're supposed to get, never mind more. Obama won't be President forever.....none the less, previous Republican and Democratic Presidents (even Carter) haven't shied away from defending the United States with changing security requirements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 Yet another reason to think about scrapping the F 35 ad ordering some more Hornets. http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/f-35-might-not-meet-performance-standards-of-cf-18s-u-s-think-tank-1.2512495 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 Sure they can. Russia has a lot of theoretical capabilities. Sounds like we're doomed anyway. I'm not sure why we even bother intercepting anything they send over. Nothing theoretical about their strategic bomber force, that with a mixture of Blackjacks, Backfires and Bears, attacked Syria yesterday...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 Meanwhile, speculation that the US may operate the Super Hornet out to 2050: “So we’re taking life out of them, if you will, sooner than we wanted to,” Greenert said, even though the Navy needs the Super Hornets to stay in its airwings alongside the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter through 2040. That's not TO 2040, but through. http://news.usni.org/2015/03/12/cno-greenert-warns-congress-of-fighter-shortfall-boeing-super-hornet-line-to-close-in-2017-absent-new-orders Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 Nothing theoretical about their strategic bomber force, that with a mixture of Blackjacks, Backfires and Bears, attacked Syria yesterday...... No, that's actually surprising. Of course, they are in the middle of a depression like deep recession, so we'll see how long they can keep that up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 Meanwhile, speculation that the US may operate the Super Hornet out to 2050: Again...pointing to possibilities in the U.S. to rationalize "Canadian decisions". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 (edited) No, that's actually surprising. Of course, they are in the middle of a depression like deep recession, so we'll see how long they can keep that up. What is surprising? That the Russian bomber force works as advertised? Their countries economy aside, they have demonstrated the ability and willingness to fight, including the use of their very large strategic bomber force. Edited November 19, 2015 by Derek 2.0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 Meanwhile, speculation that the US may operate the Super Hornet out to 2050: “So we’re taking life out of them, if you will, sooner than we wanted to,” Greenert said, even though the Navy needs the Super Hornets to stay in its airwings alongside the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter through 2040. That's not TO 2040, but through. http://news.usni.org/2015/03/12/cno-greenert-warns-congress-of-fighter-shortfall-boeing-super-hornet-line-to-close-in-2017-absent-new-orders Reread your link: The Navy’s “flight plan” to keep the jets modern and relevant through 2040 includes not only software upgrades and increased computing capacity, but also the Infrared Search and Track (IRST) pod that will join the fleet in 2017, the Integrated Defensive Electronic Countermeasures Block 4 with improvements for the electronic warfare self-protection suite that will be installed on Super Hornets beginning this year and legacy Hornets next year, and an enhanced Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar. Meaning the USN intends to keep their current Super Hornet and Growler force relevant until they are retired in 2040......to be replaced by: As the Navy and industry begin work on the F/A-XX future fighter program, meant to replace the Super Hornets beginning in the 2030s, Gillian said Boeing’s work on the Super Hornet upgrades and backfits in the flight plan will be a good starting point. Notice the USN (or RAAF) do not intend to operate their Super Hornet force out to the 2060s, as Canada would be required to do with a purchase of Super Hornets.......a purchase the current Liberal Government doesn't have budgeted through 2019/2020 fiscal year........as such, unless new money is added, we will not purchase new Super Hornets as the line will be closed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 19, 2015 Report Share Posted November 19, 2015 ...as such, unless new money is added, we will not purchase new Super Hornets as the line will be closed. Right back to this reality...Canada cannot buy Super Hornets that are no longer in production, and would not likely buy used ones with airframe hours already used up. Canada does not have the type and variant options of the United States. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.