[CaptainCrunch]

I've never bought the Super Hornet argument based on the oh well it should be an easy transition because its a you know. Hornet.

Its got completely different avionics, a different power plant, its a larger airframe with different flight characteristics.

Its not like you can take a F-18 pilot and throw him in a super hornet and its fine.

Its not like you can take regular f-18 parts and toss it into this new jet.

As well, its at best a transitional fighter, that's fine if your America where you can afford to go through multiple purchases. The Standard for Canada seems to be a 30 year purchasing barrier.

Strategically Canada is actually downsizing their airforce, going from I think 85 fighters down to a airforce with about 60 fighters in it. Because of that you need the maximum effective fighter. Like it or not that's the F-35. while the F-18 is low observable for example the F-35 is stealth and next generation in terms of interoperability.

As well people ask me all the time about the one engine versus two argument and its pretty irrelevant to me, Its getting fairly rare that you see engine failures in flight with advanced single engine fighters. As well the engine replacement on the F-35 is suppossed to be fairly quick.

I like the Super Hornet. But in the case of a very small airforce that's expected to hold on to an airframe for multiple decades and can frankly be upgraded to fight future wars, a plane like the F-35 is probably the best bet. You can't go the budget option in my mind.

Also if you look at the 1977 purchase of the CF-18 at $35,000,000 per copy, in todays dollars that's something like $128 million dollars