waldo Posted June 11, 2014 Report Posted June 11, 2014 I’m glad you brought up Australia, which is now planning to transition out of it’s (recently purchased) Super Hornets earlier in favour of a follow on purchase of F-35Bs, which will reconstitute the RAN’s FAA….. was that the 'off-the-cuff' comment from the Australian PM Abbott about considering "other variants"... you know, in that same mix of comments that currently has him under intense scrutiny because he said his government has already "set aside" monies for the recent purchase announcement... as in this was a complete fabrication. In any case, your "now planning to transition" words suggest a certainty - cite, please! I certainly don't read anything definitive... anything more than the musings of Abbott and a Senator aligned with the F-35. All I read is a lot of technical scrutiny about the problems in trying to use the F-35B on their existing flat tops... that if there is any real suggestion this is being entertained/pursued, it would mean Australia would be back in the carrier game... with all the costs associated in building a new carrier and supporting infrastructure/requirements. Is that what your forthcoming cite will speak to - yes? . Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted June 11, 2014 Report Posted June 11, 2014 (edited) was that the 'off-the-cuff' comment from the Australian PM Abbott about considering "other variants"... you know, in that same mix of comments that currently has him under intense scrutiny because he said his government has already "set aside" monies for the recent purchase announcement... as in this was a complete fabrication. In any case, your "now planning to transition" words suggest a certainty - cite, please! I certainly don't read anything definitive... anything more than the musings of Abbott and a Senator aligned with the F-35. All I read is a lot of technical scrutiny about the problems in trying to use the F-35B on their existing flat tops... that if there is any real suggestion this is being entertained/pursued, it would mean Australia would be back in the carrier game... with all the costs associated in building a new carrier and supporting infrastructure/requirements. Is that what your forthcoming cite will speak to - yes? . Off the cuff? The Canberra class, based on the Spanish Juan Carlos LHD, were designed from the start with STOVL operations in mind……..As built (well building) the Canberra’s will be able to operate the F-35B in austere conditions (not sustained operations like a conventional carrier, currently lacking dedicated maintenance and weapons magazine facilities), but due to it’s inherent size and modular build, alterations to include these lacking areas wouldn’t be extensive, nor expensive with a F-35B. Note the ski jump on HMAS Canberra's bows: Edited June 11, 2014 by Derek 2.0 Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 11, 2014 Report Posted June 11, 2014 I’m glad you brought up Australia, which is now planning to transition out of it’s (recently purchased) Super Hornets earlier in favour of a follow on purchase of F-35Bs, which will reconstitute the RAN’s FAA….. The Aussies are growing in confidence for the F-35 as testing and flight hours accrue. Canada does not have their perspective, having never flown the Super Bug in an operational squadron. Which begs the question, how much seat time do Canadian pilots have in the F-18 E/F/G ? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Derek 2.0 Posted June 11, 2014 Report Posted June 11, 2014 The Aussies are growing in confidence for the F-35 as testing and flight hours accrue. Canada does not have their perspective, having never flown the Super Bug in an operational squadron. Which begs the question, how much seat time do Canadian pilots have in the F-18 E/F/G ? Minimal if at all……the RCAF does have an exchange program, but I couldn’t give you an exact answer. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 11, 2014 Report Posted June 11, 2014 Minimal if at all……the RCAF does have an exchange program, but I couldn’t give you an exact answer. Yes, I was thinking some Super Bug time as part of an exchange program, but still damn few hours. The point being how come some here are so hot and bothered for an aircraft that has so few Canadian hours ? It is not just a bigger CF-18. The Aussies are really keen on this fighter stuff because of their neighbourhood. They seem...ummmm.....more engaged ! http://www.ausairpower.net/jsf.html Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Derek 2.0 Posted June 11, 2014 Report Posted June 11, 2014 Yes, I was thinking some Super Bug time as part of an exchange program, but still damn few hours. The point being how come some here are so hot and bothered for an aircraft that has so few Canadian hours ? It is not just a bigger CF-18. The Aussies are really keen on this fighter stuff because of their neighbourhood. They seem...ummmm.....more engaged ! http://www.ausairpower.net/jsf.html Yes indeed, and of course, the RAAF purchase of the Super Hornet was a replacement for the ageing F-111 fleet, which after retired by the USAF, became a "pig" (pun intended) to maintain.......lessons others should heed if they subscribe to purchasing a bastard fleet. Quote
waldo Posted June 11, 2014 Report Posted June 11, 2014 does this new 2.0 version truly also avoid cite requests... just like the ole 1.0 version? Just what is different between versions... anyway? Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted June 11, 2014 Report Posted June 11, 2014 does this new 2.0 version truly also avoid cite requests... just like the ole 1.0 version? Just what is different between versions... anyway? What cite are you looking for? Quote
waldo Posted June 11, 2014 Report Posted June 11, 2014 What cite are you looking for? yup - same old Derek. I quit playing your BS game during your 1.0 phase. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted June 11, 2014 Report Posted June 11, 2014 yup - same old Derek. I quit playing your BS game during your 1.0 phase. No game, just a question......Are you looking for what the RAAF/RAN would require to operate F-35Bs off of the Canberra class? Or that the Australians are even looking? Quote
waldo Posted June 11, 2014 Report Posted June 11, 2014 No game, just a question......Are you looking for what the RAAF/RAN would require to operate F-35Bs off of the Canberra class? Or that the Australians are even looking? ya ya, I noticed your "couch word... sustainable" in how you minimized the issues of using the F-35s on Australia's LHDs... I note you didn't say anything about the deck heat resistance... in any case, you made a somewhat certainty claim, one you also tied to the Super Hornet. Your initial cite request avoidance was telling enough... Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted June 11, 2014 Report Posted June 11, 2014 (edited) ya ya, I noticed your "couch word... sustainable" in how you minimized the issues of using the F-35s on Australia's LHDs... I note you didn't say anything about the deck heat resistance... in any case, you made a somewhat certainty claim, one you also tied to the Super Hornet. Your initial cite request avoidance was telling enough... That’s the least of the RAN’s concerns…..as demonstrated by current testing aboard American LHDs…….What would have to be determined first is how many aircraft and in what fashion the RAN intended to operate. If they intended to operate a small number of aircraft (~4-6) and as how the USMC operates it Harriers (and soon to be F-35Bs) aboard USN LHDs then required alterations would be minimal. Now if they intended to operate 12+ plus aircraft, in a sustained fashion like a American/French/British/Italian carrier the ships as current would need a whole host of alterations: Upgrades to their air traffic control radars, possibly the main 3D search radar, additions to the ships flight control operations center, additions to maintenance and weapons storage and ultimately a handful of AEW/AWACS helicopters and an additional 1 or 2 combined stores replenishment ships. Based on precedence (HMAS Melbourne) the Australians would mimic the United States Marines and operate a smaller number of F-35Bs in combination with the already planned rotary wing assets…..my opinion of course. Edited June 11, 2014 by Derek 2.0 Quote
waldo Posted June 11, 2014 Report Posted June 11, 2014 I have no interest in your personal musings... I do have an interest in you supporting your initial claim, the one I asked you to cite... the one you refuse to do so. In any case, no worries, I won't ask again. I'm content enough to have yet another of your unsubstantiated claims shown for what they are. Don't bother responding, I certainly won't. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted June 11, 2014 Report Posted June 11, 2014 I have no interest in your personal musings... I do have an interest in you supporting your initial claim, the one I asked you to cite... the one you refuse to do so. In any case, no worries, I won't ask again. I'm content enough to have yet another of your unsubstantiated claims shown for what they are. Don't bother responding, I certainly won't. Which one? Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 Is Harper really going to try and hide under the bed with this file until after the election? Quote
waldo Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 Is Harper really going to try and hide under the bed with this file until after the election? in spite of that initial Reuter's leak (which was probably purposeful to "test the public reception waters"), it's really quite something to read all the speculation as to what's really coming down... and when. It truly runs the gamut! some of that speculation center's on no announcement coming forward until the new "defence white paper" is complete... that it can't be seen to be in conflict/contradiction with the F-35. There's also the suggestion that Harper will release the report the day before summer dissolution and it will, as expected, reaffirm the initial F-35 direction... that they'll rely on the summer to wash away the/any significant resistance/raised concern. But then... there's actually a couple of "expert analysts" stating they actually expect a real competition will be announced... cause, err... it's not like there's any hurry! Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 some of that speculation center's on no announcement coming forward until the new "defence white paper" is complete... that it can't be seen to be in conflict/contradiction with the F-35. There's also the suggestion that Harper will release the report the day before summer dissolution and it will, as expected, reaffirm the initial F-35 direction... that they'll rely on the summer to wash away the/any significant resistance/raised concern. But then... there's actually a couple of "expert analysts" stating they actually expect a real competition will be announced... cause, err... it's not like there's any hurry! I’ll stick with my prior Friday afternoon prediction from months ago…perhaps not tomorrow, but soon. Simply put, as I said months ago, the invoice for our next level of partnership dues is in the mail. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 in spite of that initial Reuter's leak (which was probably purposeful to "test the public reception waters"), it's really quite something to read all the speculation as to what's really coming down... and when. It truly runs the gamut! some of that speculation center's on no announcement coming forward until the new "defence white paper" is complete... that it can't be seen to be in conflict/contradiction with the F-35. There's also the suggestion that Harper will release the report the day before summer dissolution and it will, as expected, reaffirm the initial F-35 direction... that they'll rely on the summer to wash away the/any significant resistance/raised concern. But then... there's actually a couple of "expert analysts" stating they actually expect a real competition will be announced... cause, err... it's not like there's any hurry! Well if one would be waiting for the F 35 to clear all it's hurdles, one wouldn't want to be in any hurry. I want to see thei "7 point plan" outcome, and I won't be taking my eye off the ball just because it's summer. I pay tax all year round. Plus I expect there are still a bunch of chickens still coming home to roost with this turkey. Pardon the mixed metaphors. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 It's a done deal.....Canada will procure the F-35A in several tranches. I love a story with a happy ending. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
waldo Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 and who was it that said What other nationals think about this is completely irrelevant. ? Quote
WestCoastRunner Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 and who was it that said ? Quote I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a bitch. You've got to go out and kick ass. - Maya Angelou
On Guard for Thee Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 It's a done deal.....Canada will procure the F-35A in several tranches. I love a story with a happy ending. what's that? If we buy F 35's several will end up in trenches! That's not a happy story if you happen to be a pilot who has to climb aboard one of these things that can't see where it's going with an engine that causes grounding with alarming regularity and blows up now and then. I certainly hope it's a "done" deal. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 what's that? If we buy F 35's several will end up in trenches! That's not a happy story if you happen to be a pilot who has to climb aboard one of these things that can't see where it's going with an engine that causes grounding with alarming regularity and blows up now and then. I certainly hope it's a "done" deal. tranche = portion.......in context, we would purchase our 65 aircraft in several batches or tranche.....ie 15 aircraft buy + 30 aircraft buy + 20 aircraft buy +10-15 aircraft option.... Quote
waldo Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 tranche = portion.......in context, we would purchase our 65 aircraft in several batches or tranche.....ie 15 aircraft buy + 30 aircraft buy + 20 aircraft buy +10-15 aircraft option.... what about that onesy, twosesy buy several partners went to? Uhhh... trust... but verify! . Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 13, 2014 Report Posted June 13, 2014 tranche = portion.......in context, we would purchase our 65 aircraft in several batches or tranche.....ie 15 aircraft buy + 30 aircraft buy + 20 aircraft buy +10-15 aircraft option.... Apparently my post went well over your head. 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.