Topaz Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 UBC professor is saying that Canada should cancel the F-35, close down the Victoria class sub-program and buy 40 Super Hornets, which could have a savings of 10 billion over the next 12 years. Last night, he was also saying the military is in a mess and his views could get the military what it needs and create jobs in Canada. Thoughts? http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/buy-super-hornets-abandon-victoria-class-submarines-new-report-recommends Quote
PIK Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 We need the subs. We should be buying new ones. And what will only 40 plane do? Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
On Guard for Thee Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 I agree with the professor. This airplane is nothing but a money pit with what seems to be an endless string of problems. As recently as April the GAO in the US produced a report describing further doubts about the dependability of its engine (of which there is only one). The 400k dollar hud helmet doesnt work in turbulence or during high g maneuvers and tends to make pilots motion sick. And of all things they have recently had to paint the trucks that supply fuel to the thing white, because war fuel can cause engine failures. We know the F18 and we know what they will cost. Lets go with the devil we know. http://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-engine-problems-2015-4 Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 Doesn't matter what Canada wants to do...too little...too late. if the U.S. Navy does not order more F-18 Super Hornets soon, the supply chain for long lead items will dry up and the production line will shut down by 2017. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 And the navy will very likely do that as the problems with the bomb truck continue to pile up. Quote
Argus Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 UBC professor is saying that Canada should cancel the F-35, close down the Victoria class sub-program and buy 40 Super Hornets, which could have a savings of 10 billion over the next 12 years. Last night, he was also saying the military is in a mess and his views could get the military what it needs and create jobs in Canada. Thoughts? http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/buy-super-hornets-abandon-victoria-class-submarines-new-report-recommends A law professor who was an unsuccessful NDP candidate telling us what fighter planes are the optimal for our military? Gee, why do I have doubts about the wisdom of that? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 I agree with the professor. This airplane is nothing but a money pit with what seems to be an endless string of problems. All new aircraft have an endless series of problems. The F18 did too. Now it's at the end of its production run, including the "super' version and while it might be a good aircraft now it won't e in twenty five years. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
On Guard for Thee Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 All new aircraft have an endless series of problems. The F18 did too. Now it's at the end of its production run, including the "super' version and while it might be a good aircraft now it won't e in twenty five years. New aircraft often have some teething problems, but the extent and the costs with this thing are head and shoulders above most. Even beyond the seemingly endless string of major systems problems (engines exploding, the hud cant see etc) the basic one size fits all initial design concept just isn't working. The US navy looks like it will have the production of Supers extended because they are skeptical of the F 35. Quote
Argus Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 New aircraft often have some teething problems, but the extent and the costs with this thing are head and shoulders above most. Even beyond the seemingly endless string of major systems problems (engines exploding, the hud cant see etc) the basic one size fits all initial design concept just isn't working. The US navy looks like it will have the production of Supers extended because they are skeptical of the F 35. You are looking at the two aircraft in 2015. What will the comparison be in 2040? Any fighter we order will still be flying then. The F18 is near the end of its production run. It is old tech. That's why it is stable. But how good will it be in twenty years? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
PIK Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 Did I not read a story about the price is coming down for the F-35? Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
On Guard for Thee Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 You are looking at the two aircraft in 2015. What will the comparison be in 2040? Any fighter we order will still be flying then. The F18 is near the end of its production run. It is old tech. That's why it is stable. But how good will it be in twenty years? The old F 18 is old tech. The block 3 Superhornet not so much. Even if the F 35 could achieve its advertised goals, it is designed for missions we arent likely to do, and furthermore as more problems show up, Lockmart just changes the original parameters to make things appear better. Ad if we decide we need something beyond the Hornet then there are better options from various European suppliers. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 Did I not read a story about the price is coming down for the F-35? You may have heard that from Chris Bogdan, the man in charge of the program at the Pentagon. Do you think that could be a tad biased though as they try to justify the whole mess...as usual you can slice and dice numbers to say whatever you want and even he admits there have been a lot of setbacks with the program and continue to be. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) There are always better options for Canada, because that means never having to make a decision and spend some serious loonies (now worth less than before). Dither away Canada, the rest of the world is moving on. Edited June 30, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Smallc Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 And the navy will very likely do that as the problems with the bomb truck continue to pile up. So they'll order the plane that's even more of a bomb truck (less manoeuvrable)? Just so we're clear. Quote
Smallc Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 New aircraft often have some teething problems, but the extent and the costs with this thing are head and shoulders above most. Because it has the most advanced equipment ever put on an aircraft. That's bound to have problems at the beginning. Quote
dre Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 Because it has the most advanced equipment ever put on an aircraft. That's bound to have problems at the beginning. The problems that have plagued the F22 and F35 are hardly just teething problems. Quote I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger
On Guard for Thee Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 Because it has the most advanced equipment ever put on an aircraft. That's bound to have problems at the beginning. Yeah but we are a long way from the beginning, and the problems cropping up are serious. But aside from various equipment failures, there is the basic design problems. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) F-35s, now numbering over 100 aircraft, routinely put in more flight hours than Canada's dwindling fleet of CF-18s. F-35s are ramping up....CF-18s are ramping...down. Edited June 30, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 So they'll order the plane that's even more of a bomb truck (less manoeuvrable)? Just so we're clear. Dont think anybody called the Super Hornet a bomb truck. The 35 wont out maneuver it in many configurations. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 The F-18 Super Hornet is most certainly a "bomb truck" : Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Canada_First Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 I like the Saab and the Mirage personally. Quote
Smallc Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 Dont think anybody called the Super Hornet a bomb truck. Then they don't know that the F-35 and (E)F/A-18E/F are aircraft with the same role in mind. Quote
Smallc Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 The problems that have plagued the F22 and F35 are hardly just teething problems. That's exactly what they are. The F-22A is past most of its issues. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted June 30, 2015 Report Posted June 30, 2015 That's exactly what they are. The F-22A is past most of its issues. And the F 35 just keeps finding new ones and it has been around long enough now that that shouldn't be happening so much. For one thing they are asking too much out of a single engine. It runs too hot to try and achieve the thrust and thats why it pukes its guts. 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.