Canada seeking to replace CF-18 fighter fleet

[Zulu29]

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/03...s-pilots-warn/

More problems with the F-35. The more I hear about this thing the more convinced I am that it's a pos and we should buy something else.

[pylon]

I say they use a mix.

Order a bunch of new Super Hornets like AUS did as a stop gap, and to transition our existing pilots to as seamlessly as possible. I believe I heard they could have planes ready for delivery in 12 months, at half the cost.

Then go with the Dassault Rafale as our next-gen fighter, just because it looks rad.

[Zulu29]

Yep agree with you, the Rafale is a good plane but apparently a lot of our ordinance we have stockpiled wont work with it. I'd prefer the Eurofighter.

[dammage79]

Wow lockheed completely bungled the design. Such a surprise. IMO stay away from super hornets. Try Eurofighter or the Gripen.

I find it weird that France would make a fighter jet that cannot carry UN ordinance.

[CaptainCrunch]

Lockheed Martin is going to have some serious survivability problems if they can't get this plane figured out. To me based on design capability its the answer to a country like Canada that has a small airforce and needs planes to last 20 years in operation. But until they get the plane straightend out it can't be considered.

but I'm not a fan of the Super Hornet, it makes no sense as its already on an obsolete track and would be transitional at best.

The Gripen is an underwhelming fighter plane with a below average sensor suite and its not a great performer.

The Eurofighter doesn't use Nato Ordinance so its out.

We're in a quandry, what's available now isn't worth buying if we want a 20 year window and to be able to have a smaller airforce then we had under the CF-18.

The option is almost to wait and see what happens with the F-35 or decide to buy a 10 year fighter that's already obsolete.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Wow lockheed completely bungled the design. Such a surprise. IMO stay away from super hornets. Try Eurofighter or the Gripen.

I find it weird that France would make a fighter jet that cannot carry UN ordinance.

Have you seen the french aerospace and arms industries.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by pylon

I say they use a mix.

Order a bunch of new Super Hornets like AUS did as a stop gap, and to transition our existing pilots to as seamlessly as possible. I believe I heard they could have planes ready for delivery in 12 months, at half the cost.

Then go with the Dassault Rafale as our next-gen fighter, just because it looks rad.

there's not a true transition from the Hornet to the Superhornet in terms of pilot training and maintenance training, its a completely different plane with different avionices and flight characteristics and air frame.

So it would be no different then what pilots and maintenance crews have to go through in transitioning from the Cf-18 to the Cf-35A

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Wow lockheed completely bungled the design. Such a surprise. IMO stay away from super hornets. Try Eurofighter or the Gripen.

I find it weird that France would make a fighter jet that cannot carry UN ordinance.

Youve obviously never owned any thing made by Peuguet, Citreon or Renault

[pylon]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

there's not a true transition from the Hornet to the Superhornet in terms of pilot training and maintenance training, its a completely different plane with different avionices and flight characteristics and air frame.

So it would be no different then what pilots and maintenance crews have to go through in transitioning from the Cf-18 to the Cf-35A

This was an interesting article I read on it, and apparently the Super Hornet is a lot more capable than it is given credit for. And from what I understand, it's raw performance is actually superior to the F35. What it lacks in stealth, can partially be made up for with sheer speed. Great video attached to the article. It does seem like somewhat of a sales pitch, but it is food for thought.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stor...-milewski.html

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Lockheed Martin is going to have some serious survivability problems if they can't get this plane figured out. To me based on design capability its the answer to a country like Canada that has a small airforce and needs planes to last 20 years in operation. But until they get the plane straightend out it can't be considered.

but I'm not a fan of the Super Hornet, it makes no sense as its already on an obsolete track and would be transitional at best.

The Gripen is an underwhelming fighter plane with a below average sensor suite and its not a great performer.

The Eurofighter doesn't use Nato Ordinance so its out.

We're in a quandry, what's available now isn't worth buying if we want a 20 year window and to be able to have a smaller airforce then we had under the CF-18.

The option is almost to wait and see what happens with the F-35 or decide to buy a 10 year fighter that's already obsolete.

The Eurofighter uses NATO ordinance, the Rafale doesn't.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by pylon

This was an interesting article I read on it, and apparently the Super Hornet is a lot more capable than it is given credit for. And from what I understand, it's raw performance is actually superior to the F35. What it lacks in stealth, can partially be made up for with sheer speed. Great video attached to the article. It does seem like somewhat of a sales pitch, but it is food for thought.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stor...-milewski.html

Interesting that the chief test pilots for both the F18 and F35 are Canadian.

[RW99]

Super Hornet gets my vote, it looks like it would be the best choice for re-enacting scenes from Top Gun.

[dammage79]

The Plight of the F-35 made Daily Planet today. Not looking good at all. The dude they spoke to even said it would be a terrible mistake for Canada or any other northern country to even look at that plane. It can't even be left outside if the temperature dips below +25C.

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by dammage79

The Plight of the F-35 made Daily Planet today. Not looking good at all. The dude they spoke to even said it would be a terrible mistake for Canada or any other northern country to even look at that plane. It can't even be left outside if the temperature dips below +25C.

Yeah apparently they have to be kept in hangars to avoid exposure to mild cold. Also the test pilots hate the blindspot at their 6. I hope our current CF-18s can fly past 2020 because I have a feeling this procurement is gonna take a long long time.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

Yeah apparently they have to be kept in hangars to avoid exposure to mild cold. Also the test pilots hate the blindspot at their 6. I hope our current CF-18s can fly past 2020 because I have a feeling this procurement is gonna take a long long time.

Why the hell would we sign up for a jet that can't be parked outside?

What's next, they need block heaters too?

Sometimes I wonder if you picked randoms off the street to replace our politicians, if they couldn't do a better job with zero experience.

[dammage79]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

Yeah apparently they have to be kept in hangars to avoid exposure to mild cold. Also the test pilots hate the blindspot at their 6. I hope our current CF-18s can fly past 2020 because I have a feeling this procurement is gonna take a long long time.

How do you correct that blind spot? not like they can fully re-design it and have a full bubble cockpit. The jump jet flap is there.

[FurnaceFace]

Originally Posted by pylon

Sometimes I wonder if you picked randoms off the street to replace our politicians, if they couldn't do a better job with zero experience.

Isn't that pretty much the definition of most politicians?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

The Eurofighter uses NATO ordinance, the Rafale doesn't.

Hey I'm an army guy, to me a plane is a plane

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by dammage79

How do you correct that blind spot? not like they can fully re-design it and have a full bubble cockpit. The jump jet flap is there.

IIRC the model the government is looking to purchase is the "a" version. There is no hover capability with that so it shouldn't have a jump jet flap. The problem is with the headrest apparently. And I don't know how you get around that problem, you can't just shrink the headrest or the pilot has no neck support. Sounds like the designers figured a pilot wouldn't need to see behind them because they would be invisible due to stealth. However as we are learning, the plane isn't as stealthy as advertised and pilots feel the ability to dog fight is still very important so they need good visibility.

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by pylon

Why the hell would we sign up for a jet that can't be parked outside?

What's next, they need block heaters too?

Sometimes I wonder if you picked randoms off the street to replace our politicians, if they couldn't do a better job with zero experience.

That's a great question but Im assuming this was a problem that wasn't foreseen by designers. So not only do the planes need to be stored indoors when it's below 15 *C, they take up a spot in a hangar for a plane that needs repairs so now estimates are longer for aircraft repairs. The engine was supposed to be replaced with a new one in 2 hours, that is now closer to 20. The cherry on top is it can't fly through clouds!