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

[GoinAllTheWay]

I don't disagree. The could easily do that. I just think it's silly to make an absolute statement like that. To me it would have made more sense to just simply say we need to re-evaluate all options instead of just flat out saying we aren't going to buy them.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

I don't disagree. The could easily do that. I just think it's silly to make an absolute statement like that. To me it would have made more sense to just simply say we need to re-evaluate all options instead of just flat out saying we aren't going to buy them.

That's on the public and the media though. The public is too stupid to care about nuance so would say the liberals are being wushu washy. This is an example of good governance and should be celebrated. The liberals are willing to take a credibity hit on breaking promises in order to make the best choice given the available facts today.

we want our governments to make promises based on what they believe makes sense
Get into government and evaluate if given all the new data their promises still make sense
Make a decision that best fufills the promise made in the election given the realities of the current data.

In this case the intention of the promise is to get the best fighter jet for Canada for its future military roles.

[Locke]

Sorry to intrude on the discussion but I'd like to ask specifically because I think I'm missing something:

Why are these fighters so controversial? What would make the Liberals adamant not to buy them? Am I correct in assuming that the previous Federal Government was going to buy them?

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Locke

Sorry to intrude on the discussion but I'd like to ask specifically because I think I'm missing something:

Why are these fighters so controversial? What would make the Liberals adamant not to buy them? Am I correct in assuming that the previous Federal Government was going to buy them?

Cost, appealing to idiot voters, and yes.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by SebC

Cost, appealing to idiot voters, and yes.

So they're expensive? Relative to other options?

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Locke

So they're expensive? Relative to other options?

Yes. But no other option has stealth.

[GoinAllTheWay]

Were we looking at the stealth option? I thought we were kicking the tires on the version that didn't?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by SebC

Yes. But no other option has stealth.

Um. Okay. Is stealth important as far as the Canadian Government is concerned?

Generally when we're involved in one conflict or another we're the ones wearing brightly coloured hats and such.

Peace-Keeping? Being very visible?

Who does Canada need to bomb/attack without them knowing?

[GoinAllTheWay]

Originally Posted by Locke

Who does Canada need to bomb/attack without them knowing?

I think it's more for pilot survival? If they don't know you're coming, they can't shoot you down and pilot has a much greater chance of returning unscathed?

CC would have better info on this than I would.

[Baron von Kriterium]

The stealth aspect of the F35 gets the publicity because it's "sexy" to the public; it is apparent and identifiable to the public. The reality, though, is the F35's advantage is its C4ISR ( Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance).

Network integration is such an integral part of US operations and it's light years ahead of anything else. Imagine, if you will, our planes sit at the end of a spoke, where the hub is the US C4ISR element.

The F35 will, in a way, make each aircraft a mini-hub in a distributed system - gathering information and distributing it to other fighters in its network. This will have the biggest change on the fighter's concept of operations, not its stealth ability.

But here's the rub, unless we have the F35, we can't integrate into that network. Whether that is critical or not is not known. Why? Because our government hasn't defined a mission/role for the Armed Forces in general and the F35 in particular.

[GoinAllTheWay]

So basically the F35's will all become mini AWACS?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Locke

Sorry to intrude on the discussion but I'd like to ask specifically because I think I'm missing something:

Why are these fighters so controversial? What would make the Liberals adamant not to buy them? Am I correct in assuming that the previous Federal Government was going to buy them?

The previous government was on the track to purchase them, it was part of their next generation airforce plans, which was also put in place to stop the rust out of the airforce which was rapidly approaching. I'll go more into it later but the strategy was to get leading edge aircraft and reduce the overall size of the airforce. They picked the F-35 for mainly technical reasons.

But before we start, I want to travel back a bit

Background

In 1977 the Government decided to replace the entire airforce. At the time it was made up of a collection of CF-104 Starfighters (Nuclear capable), the CF-101 Voodoo and the CF-116 Freedom fighter. They decided that the prudent strategy was to go with one multi-role fighter that could act as an interceptor, a dog fighter and a bomber. Because of this they decided on the best plane on the planet to fill all three roles and decided on the CF-18 hornet (electric bug). At the time the F-18 was considered to be the best up and coming plane in the world. The Canadian government purchased 138 of the Planes or about 10 operational squadrons at a cost of $35 million dollars a copy, which adjusted to todays dollars would work out to about $145 million dollars today using the CPI Inflation claculation.

The original delivery of 80 was broken into 62 single seat versions and 18 duel seat instructors. Canada also requested some design modifications including a night identification system and a custom paintjob including a simulated cockpit on the bottom.

So we move to today.

The CF-18 which is not about 40 years old has hit the end of life. Both in turns of the structure of the plane and in terms of its upgradability, its also woefully behind the next generation of fighters that are coming onto the market.

Today

In order for Canada to procure a new airforce at a reasonable price it was decided that the airforce should be smaller, they would purchase 60 aircraft which would reduce what is supposed to be an active air force of 80+ planes.

In order to do this they decided that these should be the next generation or Gen 5 aircraft, which would give the pilots maximum survivability in the modern battlefield.

The F-35 came to the fore front first of all because of its stealth aspect. The day and age of the eyeball to eyeball dog fight is ending. Planes are now designed to either shoot over the horizon, but also be able to sneak up on the enemy and punch it in the ass. On top of that because of the Canadian requirement for a modern fighter bomber the f-35 would give it a better chance to get into a bombing area and escape alive. There's also been a change of philosophy whereas planes like the CF-18 were bomb trucks that carried heavy ordinance, the modern fighter bomber is designed to carry less ordinance but that ordinance is either high precision, or high area ordinance.

The biggest advantage for Canada in terms of the F-35 is its advanced electronics suite and inter-operability with other F-35's and military assets such as ships or tanks or soldiers in the field.

In other words a F-35 in Calgary could see everything that an F-35 in the arctic could see, or ship in the pacific, or tank on the ground in Suffield. In the old days this was accomplished through air and ground controllers and radio. While this still happens, it allows for better co-operation between units, and its something that the F-35 does better then any other plane available with the exception of planes like the Raptor, and the next gen Chinese and Russian planes, but only because we don't know what their capabilities are.

The other big thing with the F-35 besides its stealth capability is the situational awareness of the pilots own space, in otherwords its almost like flying in Wonder woman's invisible jet, you can literally see through the plane with the advanced helmet which allows for near 360 degree awareness and lockon, and idea stolen from the Russians Fulcrum helmet.

In terms of the Planes cost, its estimated that they would cost $148 million including operating costs.

If we look at the other planes that are in the bidding

the French Rafale - A decent plane but more made as a straight fighter but with some bomber capability. While its a good plane, its not really stealthy besides some work on reducing its infrared signature. When Canada looked at it prior to the F-35 commitment, they noted that it wouldn't interoperate with Norad that well and it had engine cold weather start up issues. On top of that it costs $101 million per plane not including the operational costs attached to the F-35.

The Euro-fighter typhoon is a excellent fighter bomber, While its not stealth it has radar reduction. It also has an excellent radar suite and is designed to carry the next generation anti-air and air to ground systems. Its a very maneuverable aircraft, probably more so then the F-35 but less so then the new SU-30. Again there are concerns about its interoperability. The plane has a price tag of about 90 million per copy in euros which in Canadian dollars would be about 100 million per copy not including operational costs.

The Saab J-39 Gripen E - A brilliant fighter plane, its considered a smart fighter in that its easy to fly. In terms of weapons carrying capability, its a light weight, with a max take off weight of about 31,000 pounds compared to the F-35's 70,000 lbs. It also won't interoperate with US assets without some major modifications, again its low observable but not stealth. Its more designed to be a fighter then a fighter bomber, though it can do both. Its the cheapest of the bunch at about $75 million but falls the furthest away from the Canadian Air Force next generation requirements.

Anyways just my 2 cents.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Baron von Kriterium

The stealth aspect of the F35 gets the publicity because it's "sexy" to the public; it is apparent and identifiable to the public. The reality, though, is the F35's advantage is its C4ISR ( Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance).

Network integration is such an integral part of US operations and it's light years ahead of anything else. Imagine, if you will, our planes sit at the end of a spoke, where the hub is the US C4ISR element.

The F35 will, in a way, make each aircraft a mini-hub in a distributed system - gathering information and distributing it to other fighters in its network. This will have the biggest change on the fighter's concept of operations, not its stealth ability.

But here's the rub, unless we have the F35, we can't integrate into that network. Whether that is critical or not is not known. Why? Because our government hasn't defined a mission/role for the Armed Forces in general and the F35 in particular.

You said it better then me, I should just erase my post.

don't forget that network can also include tanks, ships, subs and infantry.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

So basically the F35's will all become mini AWACS?

Call it awareness, a Awacs is usually a command element. It directs planes.

With the interoperability of the F-35 the pilot is aware of everything beyond the horizon.

You would still need a command element, but if its done right it doesn't need to be done via a vulnerable AWACS which if knocked out takes aware the operational picture and command for today's aircraft. You could literally put the strike commander in a hardened bunker at the bottom of the ocean and he would see everything that all the planes would see.

[Baron von Kriterium]

Originally Posted by GoinAllTheWay

So basically the F35's will all become mini AWACS?

You can look at it that way, I suppose. The F35 pilot can share information, at the speed of light, with other planes and even other platforms, including, ships, submarines and satellites.

How the F35 is utilized will depend on the mission; it could be the hub or it could be at the end of the spoke.

[CaptainCrunch]

http://www.sldinfo.com/the-f-35-and-...ron-at-a-time/

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by GGG

That's on the public and the media though. The public is too stupid to care about nuance so would say the liberals are being wushu washy. This is an example of good governance and should be celebrated. The liberals are willing to take a credibity hit on breaking promises in order to make the best choice given the available facts today.

we want our governments to make promises based on what they believe makes sense
Get into government and evaluate if given all the new data their promises still make sense
Make a decision that best fufills the promise made in the election given the realities of the current data.

In this case the intention of the promise is to get the best fighter jet for Canada for its future military roles.

I disagree. I think there's a limit. Otherwise I could just promise to lower taxes to 0%, raise everyone's income, pay our teachers a gazillion dollars and everything. Then get into office and be like "oops, guess it wasn't possible."

But yiu are right. It's the voter's fault for being duped rather than the politicians themselves.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Regorium

I disagree. I think there's a limit. Otherwise I could just promise to lower taxes to 0%, raise everyone's income, pay our teachers a gazillion dollars and everything. Then get into office and be like "oops, guess it wasn't possible."

But yiu are right. It's the voter's fault for being duped rather than the politicians themselves.

But that is the public and media's job during the campaign to evaluate the promise and decide it is reasonable based on the amount of data they have. If a government campaigned on the above they hopefully would get attacked for he plan not being feasible.

I'd also evaluate whether or not the intent was met. In this case the intent is get the best value for Canadians which is still being met. Or on his 3 times larger deficit he promised deficit spending to improve infrastructure. Whether you do less and have a smaller debt or the same amount with larger debt both fit into the spirit of the campaign promise.

Wouldn't it have been great if Harper after reviewing data on the effectiveness of tough on crime legislation changed is mind.

[Stealth22]

Originally Posted by Locke

Um. Okay. Is stealth important as far as the Canadian Government is concerned?

Yes. Yes, I am.

[Fuzz]

A total of 46 F-35 stealth fighters are currently without functioning engines due to an ongoing problem with the heat-protective coating on their turbine rotor blades becoming worn out faster than was expected. With the engine maintenance center now facing a backlog on repair work, frontline F-35 fleets have been hit, with the U.S. Air Force’s fleet facing the most significant availability shortfall.

With regards to the Air Force specifically, as of May 8 this year, the service had received 283 F-35As, which means that around a little under 15 percent of the service’s Joint Strike Fighters can’t be flown due to this engine shortage.
"They had a rush on the depot due to unexpected Calcium-Magnesium-Alumino-Silicate (CMAS) degradation on deployed F-35As," Steve Trimble, Aviation Week’s Defense Editor and a friend of The War Zone, wrote on Twitter. "And the depot itself has been a bottleneck, with turn times at two-times planned rates earlier this year.”

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...orking-engines


If we go ahead with these I sure hope they come with a good warranty. Seems to have never ending problems.