Still Going to Buy the F-35, Really?

[bush_cheney2004]

I wouldn't agree with that per say. Canadians don't really care all that much about defence though - you're right about that.

So it is just a political game and can kicked down the road by each ruling government. That's how Canada ended up with a U.S. Navy carrier based strike fighter to begin with....hemmed and hawed until the decision was made by time and money.

[bush_cheney2004]

When did I say we should buy the F-22? Your logic should better follow the discussion.

Canada couldn't buy the F-22 even if it wanted to...illegal to export.

[Derek 2.0]

Really?

Yes, how you might define national survival will differ with how I define it, or the nations used as examples define it.

[Smallc]

So it is just a political game and can kicked down the road by each ruling government.

Until absolutely necessary. It's the Canadian way.

[Smallc]

Canada couldn't buy the F-22 even if it wanted to...illegal to export.

You seem to be trying to divert this in some kind of direction that no one was taking thing .

[Derek 2.0]

To be operated along side older aircraft, for decades to come.

Says who? Even if that were the case, its not justification for an effective defensive strategy...........throughout the Cold War, the Soviets maintained vast reserves of equipment left over from the second world war in reserve......yet no Western NATO power suggested fielding WW II surplus to defend against dated Soviet equipment.

[Smallc]

Yes, how you might define national survival will differ with how I define it

Or anyone else on the planet for that matter.

[Derek 2.0]

Which will happen. After all, how many aircraft projects of late (or ever) have happened on time and on budget?

It doesn't mater........

None of those. They all were and are behind schedule, many of them by 5 years to a decade. The Super Hornet will see 2040 and beyond.

.......because carrier aircraft only have a finite number of hours in which the structural airworthiness of the aircraft will allow it to operate........The USN isn't going to replace their Super Hornet fleet with Super Hornets, hence your suggestion that they will operate decade longer than planned is laughable and not grounded in reality.

[Derek 2.0]

Or anyone else on the planet for that matter.

Do you have anything of worth to offer? Do you not think the spread of Communism was seen as a grave national threat to the Americans during the cold war? Was the British reaction to the Falklands any different then other nations that have seen their own territory invaded? Was the threat to the global economy not real when Saddam was weeks away from controlling the majority of the World's known oil reserves?

[Derek 2.0]

It does bring several things forward though; specifically in the areas of radar cross section mitigation and and situational awareness. Still, another aircraft will serve our needs just as well. If it can do it for less, great.

You have yet to demonstrate how that unfounded claim is valid............would the F-86 meet our requirements today?

[Derek 2.0]

The Liberals have already made some very important moves to fix up the procurement mess left by the Conservatives in shipbuilding.

What moves?

Hire a retired British admiral, to play expert, that was involved in three British programs that spiraled out of fiscal control and delivered far less ships than required......and said programs weren't sorted until a change of Government and said admiral "retired"..........brilliant plan.

[Smallc]

It doesn't mater........

Right - this time will be different. ha

.......because carrier aircraft only have a finite number of hours in which the structural airworthiness of the aircraft will allow it to operate

Without modification - as you've already admitted. Look, the USN is the one talking about the 2040 timeline. I didn't make it up.

[Smallc]

Do you have anything of worth to offer?

If you can't understand the difference between a priority and a life and death situation, I doubt it.

[Smallc]

You have yet to demonstrate how that unfounded claim is valid

We'll have to wait for the new statement of requirements. The last one was written to favour the F-35.

[Derek 2.0]

Right - this time will be different. ha

Without modification - as you've already admitted. Look, the USN is the one talking about the 2040 timeline. I didn't make it up.

As cited numerous times, the Super-Duper Hornet isn't being funded........so yes, you are making things up when you suggest that to be the case.

[Derek 2.0]

If you can't understand the difference between a priority and a life and death situation, I doubt it.

By all means, explain the difference, as to why the spread of communism was different than the spread of Nazism, or why the invasion of ones own sovereign territory in the 1980s differs from the same action in the 1940s, or the Japanese control of natural resources in the 1940s was of more importance then Saddam's control of the majority of the World's oil reserves in the 1990s.......

[Smallc]

As cited numerous times, the Super-Duper Hornet isn't being funded........so yes, you are making things up when you suggest that to be the case.

When the centre barrel replacement becomes necessary (instead of the proposals that no one but you brings up - and then you proceed to argue against...yourself?), it will be done. Structural integrity can be reinforced. When the replacement arrives behind schedule, as does every new aircraft, it will become necessary.

Again, the USN is talking about operating the Super Hornet until at least 2040. You're making things up.

[Derek 2.0]

We'll have to wait for the new statement of requirements. The last one was written to favour the F-35.

You mean to say the RCAF require a modern fighter to operate through the middle of this century? I'm shocked I tells you

[Smallc]

By all means, explain the difference, as to why the spread of communism was different than the spread of Nazism,

I don't think the communists invaded Western Europe or bombed London. If you don't understand the difference between the threat of war, and actual war and occupation, I can't help you.

[Smallc]

You mean to say the RCAF require a modern fighter to operate through the middle of this century?

There are several modern fighters that will operate until then. The F-35 happens to be newest and currently the most problem plagued of those choices.

[Derek 2.0]

When the centre barrel replacement becomes necessary (instead of the proposals that no one but you brings up - and then you proceed to argue against...yourself?), it will be done. Structural integrity can be reinforced. When the replacement arrives behind schedule, as does every new aircraft, it will become necessary.

The Super Hornet is going through the CBR now........so it can continue to operate into the 2030s.......

Again, the USN is talking about operating the Super Hornet until at least 2040. You're making things up.

Not the current aircraft in service, nor do they have any intention to replace the current fleet with new (advanced) Super Hornets......so yes you are making things up, and poorly..........and are clearly unable to understand that aircraft fatigue and carrier operations make your suggestion fantasy.

[Smallc]

The Super Hornet is going through the CBR now........so it can continue to operate into the 2030s

And apparently, out to 2040 - at least.

The U.S. Navy, meanwhile, expects to fly the F/A-18E/F “until 2040, and maybe even beyond 2040,” Rear Adm. Mike Manazir, director of air warfare, told the conference.

Edited February 27, 2016 by Smallc

[Derek 2.0]

I don't think the communists invaded Western Europe or bombed London. If you don't understand the difference between the threat of war, and actual war and occupation, I can't help you.

They sure as shit invaded Eastern Europe..........and Vietnam, the Falklands and the First Gulf Wars were actual wars

[Derek 2.0]

And apparently, out to 2040 - at least.

The U.S. Navy, meanwhile, expects to fly the F/A-18E/F “until 2040, and maybe even beyond 2040,” Rear Adm. Mike Manazir, director of air warfare, told the conference.

Not their current fleet of aircraft they won't.

[Smallc]

They sure as shit invaded Eastern Europe

You're arguing with yourself again.

..........and Vietnam, the Falklands and the First Gulf Wars were actual wars

And never actually went to war with the same powers that the Nazis did.