Canada plans to buy NEW Fighter Jets - F-35 reported chosen

[Madman]

Defence Department gets OK to spend $7 billion on 16 F-35 fighter jets.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/defe...rces-1.6202528

[underGRADFlame]

Originally Posted by Madman

Defence Department gets OK to spend $7 billion on 16 F-35 fighter jets.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/defe...rces-1.6202528

I'm surprised, shocked, relieved and dismayed all at the same time.

I can't believe they actually did it... thought I'd never see the day. I still feel that some how they CF/Government will pooch this up some how, by cancelling further orders and we will end up with 16 F-35's, 8 Gripens and 28 80's era F-18 air frames.

[btimbit]

It's so nice and rare that I see CAF news that I don't get mad at

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by underGRADFlame

I'm surprised, shocked, relieved and dismayed all at the same time.

I can't believe they actually did it... thought I'd never see the day. I still feel that some how they CF/Government will pooch this up some how, by cancelling further orders and we will end up with 16 F-35's, 8 Gripens and 28 80's era F-18 air frames.

Um I have a lot of questions.

Are we running a mixed airforce? hat makes no sense based on the ongoing strategy of the RCAF. needing to have multiple stockpiles of parts, needing to have multiple stockpiles of weapons. Having to have multiple training programs.

It makes no sense.

Also the Gripens won't interact properly with the F35's.

And the F-18's are far beyond their end of life in terms of airframes and avionics.

The original purchase price that was agreed to was 9 billion for 88 now its 16 for 7 billion, meanwhile the actual manufacturing price of the F-35's has slipped down to around $100 million per copy or less.

did we just get a F you for delaying so long penalty from MD?

I think we need a strategy statement from our Defense Minister, but this seems like a really underwhelming deal.

My guess is the esteemed Liberals are going to announce that we have an airforce of 16 fighters by 2050, and a mix of cargo planes and maritime patrol craft.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Um I have a lot of questions.

Are we running a mixed airforce? hat makes no sense based on the ongoing strategy of the RCAF. needing to have multiple stockpiles of parts, needing to have multiple stockpiles of weapons. Having to have multiple training programs.

It makes no sense.

Also the Gripens won't interact properly with the F35's.

And the F-18's are far beyond their end of life in terms of airframes and avionics.

The original purchase price that was agreed to was 9 billion for 88 now its 16 for 7 billion, meanwhile the actual manufacturing price of the F-35's has slipped down to around $100 million per copy or less.

did we just get a F you for delaying so long penalty from MD?

I think we need a strategy statement from our Defense Minister, but this seems like a really underwhelming deal.

My guess is the esteemed Liberals are going to announce that we have an airforce of 16 fighters by 2050, and a mix of cargo planes and maritime patrol craft.

The buying of 16 now is to fulfill a contractual obligation to start receiving deliveries in a certain production slot. More to come after that. Or so said an article I read about this earlier.

Edit: From the CTV article Madman linked:

"While the federal government has said it plans to buy 88 new fighter jets to replace its aging CF-18s between 2026 and 2032, the sources said Canada will be purchasing F-35s in blocks over the next few years.

Canada needed to make an initial order by the end of the calendar year to ensure its planned delivery schedule remains on track, they added.

The Treasury Board approval covers an initial set of 16 F-35s, manufactured by Lockheed Martin, as well as spare parts, weapons and various startup costs associated with obtaining new jets, such as building new facilities."

[PsYcNeT]

Can they fly in the rain yet

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Can they fly in the rain yet

Rain or thunderstorms?

(I think you are trying to be cute, but doing a poor job.)

[Bill Bumface]

I didn't fact check it, but I read that a lot of the shared stories about F-35 limitations, problems and cost overruns have been traced back to Russian sources.

Sort of makes sense that a fractured NATO fleet that loses interop capabilities and economies of scale could be beneficial to some nations out there. Widespread adoption of the highly capable F-35 probably writes off air superiority for certain nations for decades. I could see it being plausible someone would try disrupt this outcome.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

I didn't fact check it, but I read that a lot of the shared stories about F-35 limitations, problems and cost overruns have been traced back to Russian sources.

I don't know about that, I think most problems and cost over runs have more come from the fact that this is one of the most sophisticated planes ever made. Most jets go through serious problems even past the go to production. Is it a capable jet. The Israeli air force is using it in combat missions for data gathering and strikes, and they seem to think its very capable. IIRC the American Military has used it in strike missions as well.

I expect that problems will pop up for a while, and fixes will be addressed.

I'm still baffled by the costs of this first series of jets though.

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

Sort of makes sense that a fractured NATO fleet that loses interop capabilities and economies of scale could be beneficial to some nations out there. Widespread adoption of the highly capable F-35 probably writes off air superiority for certain nations for decades. I could see it being plausible someone would try disrupt this outcome.

Yet to be seen, but there is pretty widespread adoption of the 35. And for NATO and Norad the future state is a combination of conventional and cyber based warfare through data links.

I mean I've read where Saab is extremely frustrated because they're not winning a lot of deals for the JAS 39E.

[btimbit]

I'd have to see an actual report before knowing, but I imagine there's a lot of startup cost with this initial order. Spares, weapons, simulators, sendingechanics to Lockheed, etc. If the next batch costs the same I'll be going WTF right alongside you

[Lubicon]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I don't know about that, I think most problems and cost over runs have more come from the fact that this is one of the most sophisticated planes ever made. Most jets go through serious problems even past the go to production. Is it a capable jet. The Israeli air force is using it in combat missions for data gathering and strikes, and they seem to think its very capable. IIRC the American Military has used it in strike missions as well.

I expect that problems will pop up for a while, and fixes will be addressed.

I'm still baffled by the costs of this first series of jets though.

.

Might be some up front costs that are basically fixed regardless of how many aircraft are delivered. Those may not repeat on subsequent orders bringing the average cost down over time?

[photon]

When can I see one at an airshow?

[BloodFetish]

Originally Posted by Lubicon

Might be some up front costs that are basically fixed regardless of how many aircraft are delivered. Those may not repeat on subsequent orders bringing the average cost down over time?

Quote from the CTV News article linked above:

"The Treasury Board approval covers an initial set of 16 F-35s, manufactured by Lockheed Martin, as well as spare parts, weapons and various startup costs associated with obtaining new jets, such as building new facilities."

[speede5]

It's a huge number that I don't understand fully either.

Start up costs may include sparing based on the final delivery number. It's possible some of that budget is life cycle costs as well.

I do know that Cold Lake is getting all new hangars and sim facilities for the new jet, I expect Bagotville would be the same. That easily 1B right there.

[Locke]

Can we use the fighter jets to launch missiles at our national debt?

[The Fisher Account]

16 seems... low?

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by The Fisher Account

16 seems... low?

It's the first order of the planned 88.

[Johnny Makarov]

Did Top Gun not teach us anything? We can still use our 80s fighter jets against 5th gen fighters as long as we have good enough pilots.

Keep our existing fleet and spend $7 billion on drones.

[Leeman4Gilmour]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Did Top Gun not teach us anything? We can still use our 80s fighter jets against 5th gen fighters as long as we have good enough pilots.

Keep our existing fleet and spend $7 billion on drones.

I was wondering the same. I mean this thread was started 12 years ago. Lots has changed. Will drones replace manned jets? And, if so, why move forward with what may be obsolete in short order?

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Leeman4Gilmour

I was wondering the same. I mean this thread was started 12 years ago. Lots has changed. Will drones replace manned jets? And, if so, why move forward with what may be obsolete in short order?

Well after this Russian war it would be kind of foolish to spend alot on tanks and jets.