waldo Posted January 28, 2014 Report Posted January 28, 2014 F-35A of the 422nd TES arrives at Hill AFB in Utah. your point? A video of a 6th month old flight of one of the earliest LRIP planes... flying to Utah to undergo retrofits (the first of 'many') to bring it "current". Of course, he 'A' variant is even farther back/off from any semblance of "operational service" than the aforementioned delays for the 'B' variant that member 'Derek L' originally postured about. Care to describe just what capabilities that plane had within that flight... and after it's (presumed completed now) initial retrofit... particularly as compared to oft hyped "target completion" capability? Quote
DogOnPorch Posted January 28, 2014 Report Posted January 28, 2014 It was just released today. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
waldo Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 oh noooos! Going off script... U.S. General Michael Hostage, head of air combat command in the U.S: "F-35 ‘irrelevant’ without accompanying F-22 jet as support" But in an interview with the Air Force Times, published in February, Hostage pointed out the F-35 needs to work hand-in-hand with the F-22. “The F-35 is not built as an air superiority platform,” Hostage said. “It needs the F-22.” uhhhh... just what kind of a platform is the Canadian military/Harper Conservatives looking for? Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 F-35A of the 422nd TES arrives at Hill AFB in Utah. Well it makes a bit of noise and goes fairly fast. Luckily all one of it's engines kept burning and turning. Of course it's warm in Utah so it can operate there. Cute, but what did you say was the price tag? Quote
DogOnPorch Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 (edited) Well it makes a bit of noise and goes fairly fast. Luckily all one of it's engines kept burning and turning. Of course it's warm in Utah so it can operate there. Cute, but what did you say was the price tag? We've had the F-35 debate over and over already. What aircraft would you suggest for the replacement for the F-18 if any? Edited March 7, 2014 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
DogOnPorch Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 oh noooos! Going off script... U.S. General Michael Hostage, head of air combat command in the U.S: "F-35 ‘irrelevant’ without accompanying F-22 jet as support" uhhhh... just what kind of a platform is the Canadian military/Harper Conservatives looking for? Are we looking for an air superiority fighter? I thought things such as Tu-95s didn't worry you. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 oh noooos! Going off script... U.S. General Michael Hostage, head of air combat command in the U.S:uhhhh... just what kind of a platform is the Canadian military/Harper Conservatives looking for? Frankly, it doesn't matter for Canada, which needs lots of allied (U.S.) and other support to execute forward deployed missions with tactical aircraft anyway. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
waldo Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 Are we looking for an air superiority fighter? I asked the question... you tell me. As you're a staunch proponent of the F-35, you've read the multiple MLW thread critiques of the F-35 presented. We've had a few critical gems slipped out along the way from other active U.S. military leaders... when you read another one of the U.S. military top-dogs going off script like this, one particularly phrased in the context of air superiority, just what do you anticipate/expect to realize should Harper Conservatives/DND continue/complete the F-35 pursuit? Just what kind of a plane capability are you expecting... for Canada, for all other JSF partner nations, without the suggested F-22 support? Quote
DogOnPorch Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 (edited) Frankly, it doesn't matter for Canada, which needs lots of allied (U.S.) and other support to execute forward deployed missions with tactical aircraft anyway. Including those single engined F-16s. Edited March 7, 2014 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
DogOnPorch Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 I asked the question... you tell me. As you're a staunch proponent of the F-35, you've read the multiple MLW thread critiques of the F-35 presented. We've had a few critical gems slipped out along the way from other active U.S. military leaders... when you read another one of the U.S. military top-dogs going off script like this, one particularly phrased in the context of air superiority, just what do you anticipate/expect to realize should Harper Conservatives/DND continue/complete the F-35 pursuit? Just what kind of a plane capability are you expecting... for Canada, for all other JSF partner nations, without the suggested F-22 support? I already know your position of "no aircraft is a good aircraft". As for being a 'staunch supporter'...only in your brain. I ask you and others what aircraft they'd like to see and it always comes up naught. Making my old joke about a proven design seem that much more likely... It has shot down a LOT of enemy aircraft...and it's cheap! Plus we could do a whole 100 years of the Camel at airshows for the crowds. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
waldo Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 I already know your position of "no aircraft is a good aircraft". As for being a 'staunch supporter'...only in your brain. I ask you and others what aircraft they'd like to see and it always comes up naught. no - I've made statements towards other preferred targeting of procurement monies, particularly domestic focused like prioritizing investments in the Coast Guard, in search & rescue, etc.. Only in the context of an eventuality of expending funds on existing Hornet replacement, I've made statements toward a Super-Hornet progression, which affords a timely update. We've well documented and followed the path Australia has been taking, including it's so-called "interim measures" in the face of ongoing F-35 delays/problems... Australia's recent/ongoing purchase of Super Hornet/Growler aircraft was officially tagged as a gap measure. Looks like that stated gap just got a lot longer as Australia has just committed significant funding to upgrade its current Hornet's to keep them flying until 2022. Which, of course, aligns with Canada's earlier "interim $2 Billion" investment in like upgrading that was intended to keep the CF-18s flying until between 2017-2020 (individual aircraft dependent). Quote
DogOnPorch Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 You can fly those airframes until 2022. Be sure your ejection seat is functional. So your choice for Canada's future is the Super Hornet? OK...noted. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
waldo Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 So your choice for Canada's future is the Super Hornet? OK...noted. no - again, if the eventuality of spending the procurement monies exists, I've suggested the Super Hornet alternative (actually, the 'advanced' Super Hornet)... you know, like the 'unofficial' position of the USN. This is nothing new; you must have missed/forgotten my past posts in this regard. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 Last gasp Super Hornet production at 2 per month only gets Boeing to 2017. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
DogOnPorch Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 no - again, if the eventuality of spending the procurement monies exists, I've suggested the Super Hornet alternative (actually, the 'advanced' Super Hornet)... you know, like the 'unofficial' position of the USN. This is nothing new; you must have missed/forgotten my past posts in this regard. So who really knows what you want? Not you. You feel it is safe to operate those old CF-18 airframes until 2022? I don't. The US would have LONG since sent our aircraft to the chopper. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
DogOnPorch Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 Last gasp Super Hornet production at 2 per month only gets Boeing to 2017. For some reason we're counting on it...or some of us are. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
waldo Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 in reality world, per the 2015 budget, USN cuts its F-35C procurement in half! Continues testing of Advanced Super Hornet..... Quote
DogOnPorch Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 in reality world, per the 2015 budget, USN cuts its F-35C procurement in half! Continues testing of Advanced Super Hornet..... They're technically broke...it's not as if a replacement isn't needed. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
waldo Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 (edited) So who really knows what you want? Not you. You feel it is safe to operate those old CF-18 airframes until 2022? I don't. The US would have LONG since sent our aircraft to the chopper. comprehension difficulty? The only 2022 reference made was to the Australian upgrades... Canadian upgrades (the $2 Billion spent because of F-35 delays) were intended to keep the CF-18 flying until between 2017-2020 (again, depending on the individual plane). Edited March 7, 2014 by waldo Quote
DogOnPorch Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 We got them in the 1980s. These machines have WELL over 10,000 hours on them...2020...2022...no difference. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
waldo Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 We got them in the 1980s. These machines have WELL over 10,000 hours on them...2020...2022...no difference. there's no "difference" being discussed or offered. The point for either country, Canada/Australia, is the significant upgrade expenditure was caused by the decade+ (and continuing) delays/problems with the F-35. Australia just announced its need and will spend to keep its Hornets in the air until 2022. Conjecture suggests this will also impact on Australia's overall F-35 purchase commitment... suggesting additional alternate procurements of the Super Hornet/Growler, or potentially the 'Advanced Super Hornet'. F-35 snoozes... it looses! Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 7, 2014 Report Posted March 7, 2014 The F-35 doesn't lose....it just gets pushed out to the right (schedule). They will likely outlive most of the older members here. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted March 8, 2014 Report Posted March 8, 2014 We've had the F-35 debate over and over already. What aircraft would you suggest for the replacement for the F-18 if any? The Superhornet. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 8, 2014 Report Posted March 8, 2014 The Superhornet. Too late....Australia planned ahead...Canada did not, choosing instead to upgrade and extend grandpa's CF-188s. The Americans have no money in the budget for more Super Hornet production beyond 2016, and Brazil has chosen the Grippen instead. It was a good run..... Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted March 8, 2014 Report Posted March 8, 2014 Too late....Australia planned ahead...Canada did not, choosing instead to upgrade and extend grandpa's CF-188s. The Americans have no money in the budget for more Super Hornet production beyond 2016, and Brazil has chosen the Grippen instead. It was a good run..... Happilly the Harper government came to it's senses on this issue. Now we have a number of others to work on. 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.