Jump to content

Canada in last stage of negotiations to purchase 88 F-35 fighters


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, chrish said:

Even two engines ain’t enough when you go air to air demolition derby with Canada geese….just ask captain Sully

Canada has air superiority all summer with the geese.

and those nasty buggers don’t take crap from anybody

OMG that made me laugh. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JeepsGunsTanks said:

I remember back in the day, the media was all over how terrible the M1 Abrams was...   

And the M2 Brad, and the F-16, and the F-15 and the list goes on and on. Hell, I still remember an article from the early 80’s that stated the US military only needed upgraded M60 tanks, more M113 tracks and re-engined F-4’s.  
 

Need to face it, many people are terrified of radical change. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, James Rademaker said:

The F-35 reminds me of the early 60’s when US defense secretary of defense Robert Mc Mara ( I know I spelled his name incorrectly) wanted to have commonality in US aircraft.  Remember the F-111 for the Navy? All the extra changes for the F-4 for the USAF. From all the reports I have seen about the F-35’’s ACM data, when it when up against US F-16’s it LOST! Then , you add all of the extra costs for a USAF, US Navy and USMC VTOL platform in my opinion is a huge dog and drain on the taxpayer. Just my opinion.

Jim

And yet all those uneducated pilots seem to love their new ride.   And all those ignorant Air Force procurement depts seem to keep awarding contracts to LM.    Crazy….  They need to listen to the real experts.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my pilots perspective and talking to both F-35 & F-18E/F test pilots - both are good, capable platforms for the intent of each design. My choice, is the F-35. I've heard and seen what the Saab can (and can't) do - I want us to have the F-35. Nothing else fits the bill when it comes to our defence needs (sorry - insiders knowledge here). Our defence needs have changed from 10 and even 5 years ago and also how we would integrate with other nations in a conflict. This has to be taken into consideration and not looked at from a past perspective, if that's what one's doing. Without knowledge of current tactics and systems it's not easy to know what those needs are (if at all). Yes, we Canadians love our CF-18 - almost to a fault. That can't be used to put blinders on for the current needs of the Nation and our requirements. 

 

Single engine discussion - a goose could take out a CF-18 (there - said it, yea a perfect placed bird strike, a one in a million chance but is possible). Yes redundancy is nice if it fits the bill. Two reasons the F-18 beat out the F-16 in evaluations - the F100 engine and intake was a hoover vacuum and the system itself wasn't as proven in cold climates like Canada's north. Some countries had large growing pains in colder climates early on with the F-16. The F-35 & F135 engine (and possible upgrade) are proven by the Netherlands and Norway in cold climates already and with Finland shortly. Sure, there will be failures unfortunately, but there were with the CF-18 too (single engine issue on show demo in Lethbridge in 2016 led to a crash as one eg) but lessons from everyone will be implemented. The one benefit we have is lessons from several countries flying the F-35 currently when we learned concurrently with the CF-18.  

 

just my 2c (I'll get off my soap box now)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've increasingly been getting the impression that sensor fusion and the capacity to be a C2 centre for wingman drones, or even other elements makes the f35 the go to platform.

I often listen to the Fighter Pilots Podcast...the F35.

In another episode on the plane it was discussed by one of the test pilots in that podcast as well. Jello who interviews him is an ex-Navy Topgun F18 and F16 pilot.

Whats up with the F35

 

HTH Matty

NB: our RAAF has a mix of F18's and F35's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a big fan of the F-35 mostly because of the dishonest (in my opinion) way Lockheed sold it to DOD, but fighter pilots like bright pointy things so it was a done deal long before the airplane ever saw daylight.  It was never, ever to my knowledge intended to be a mini F-22 like most people think but more of a hive-mind fighter that can control large segments of the battle space because it can talk to and use everything else in the air with it.  It’s more science fiction than furball.  I don’t like cars that drive themselves, cell phones with more features than I can use, subcutaneous micro chips or talking to mechanical things to make them do what I want but this is where we are.  Old farts like me, and most of you for that matter, don’t have to like it because we’ll never have to try to fight with it, but the kids who were born with surgically attached iPhones seem to love the thing and they are who will use it to its max potential no matter whose colors it wears.  Canada could do a lot worse, I think - they could go shopping for Arrows and end up with F-5s.  Again.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, LSP_Ron said:

Big mistake if you ask me,  the F-35 is not the right plane for us.

Single engine anything is not the right plane for us.

True. However the people in power managed to kick the can down the road long enough.

Same with Germany.

You cannot fight Corporations easily. 
Nobody cares if pilots should rely on one or two engines.

Money is all that matter. I just read that 33 F-22 will be sent to AZ Boneyard in fiscal 2023. To 'use the money to improve the rest of the F-22 and F-35 and for new advanced research"

Are you kidding me?

Of course twin jet. Anytime a TWIN. ANY time. F35C... C as in crap.

 

What comes next? Single-Engine Atlantic Crossing maybe.
I long for the times of the Tri-jets, the Tomcats and others...

 

 

  

3 hours ago, Martinnfb said:

This whole F-35 marketing story strongly resonates with the F-104 saga, sell it to everyone, for everything.

 

AMEN!

Edited by Eagle Driver
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jeroen_R90S said:

Despite the enormous costs I'm happy we were in early on the F-35s.

 

Is there a sudden interest in Rafales, Gripens, Typhoons and F-15EX-es as well, by the way?

Haven't heard a lot about these other contenders.

Curious,

 

Jeroen

Rafale is selling quite well last 2-3 years actually. Again, for political reasons there are many bumps along the way for the French.

Typhoon is a great jet, however more high-altitude oriented. 

F-15EX is expensive and old design,

Gripen is rather a poor man's coat. Single engine as well.

 

For me, Canada was either for Super Hornet or for Rafale. I would bet on the Rafale. Beautiful jet with even better capabilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...