Canadas Next Fighter

[GGTharos]

Canada's CF-188's are about as far from SH as they can be. I don't think his point is that great. It's there, but it's not that great.

 

If you save any money here at all, it'll just get eaten up trying to keep that SH going past its date IMHO.

 

You can disagree with the author but I think his points have some merit.

[PiedDroit]

It's RCS is optimized everywhere except pretty much rear quarter. You want to see aircraft optimized for frontal stealth'ing'? Look no further than the SuperHornet. I'm not sure how you could reason that the much stealthier F-35 would be more vulnerable to IADS.

Read my post, I meant more vulnerable to IADS than non-IADS. I didn't put any other aircraft into this comparison.

Just saying that whatever how stealthy a plane is, it will have hard times hiding from a truly integrated system.

[Tirak]

You can disagree with the author but I think his points have some merit.

 

VFA-122 is the Fleet Replacement Squadron, you know, where replacement pilots are trained up, or pilots going from non flying assignments back to flying ones get their refresher course and sent to actual squadrons. Citing the success for easy cross integration by using them is laughable at best, and intentionally disingenuous at worst.

 

The "Advanced" Super Hornet also isn't stealthed, not even in the front aspect. Sure, it has RCS reducing qualities, but it's not stealth, not by a long shot.

 

The F-35 brings Stealth, unparalleled situational awareness through the Distributed Aperture System and a powerful integrated electronic warfare package. Capable, survivable, and future proofed. It's a far superior investment than sinking cash into an inferior out of date aircraft you'll have to replace in five years.

[Sweep]

Read my post, I meant more vulnerable to IADS than non-IADS. I didn't put any other aircraft into this comparison.

Just saying that whatever how stealthy a plane is, it will have hard times hiding from a truly integrated system.

 

Hiding (or not being detected.) maybe not on the first hour of a war, but engaged? Forget about it, SDB spam incoming.

 

Hopefully Canada will go for CF-3335555553535535s. :joystick:

Edited December 3, 2015 by Sweep
fixed some grammatical errors/typos

[GGTharos]

Stealth is a problem, and there exist solutions to a problem.

 

IADS isn't new, and guess who has it AND stealth fighters and gets to train to deal with it. :)

 

Read my post, I meant more vulnerable to IADS than non-IADS. I didn't put any other aircraft into this comparison.

Just saying that whatever how stealthy a plane is, it will have hard times hiding from a truly integrated system.

[DataHawk]

My guess…Scaled back F-35 purchase

supplemented by long range drones

And the rest of the money goes to buy ships and helicopters for the Navy

[Gladman]

My guess…Scaled back F-35 purchase

supplemented by long range drones

And the rest of the money goes to buy ships and helicopters for the Navy

 

 

I hope you're wrong but that's a hell of a possibility.

[Flogger23m]

Should be the F-35. My understanding is the F-35 is now cheaper than the Eurofighter/Rafale. This leaves them with the following options:

 

- F/A-18E / Advanced Super Hornet. Australian versions cost roughly the same as the current F-35 price if I am not mistaken, let alone the newest version plus pods and other equipment.

 

- Gripen.

 

 

After new competition costs I do believe Canada will get shafted for what was mainly a political/election policy.

[Hummingbird]

F-35 cheaper than the Eurofighter/Rafale?? I highly doubt that.

 

The F-35 is extraordinarily expensive, not just in terms of purchase but also in terms of maintenance.

[Sweep]

Should be the F-35. My understanding is the F-35 is now cheaper than the Eurofighter/Rafale. This leaves them with the following options:

 

- F/A-18E / Advanced Super Hornet. Australian versions cost roughly the same as the current F-35 price if I am not mistaken, let alone the newest version plus pods and other equipment.

 

- Gripen.

 

 

After new competition costs I do believe Canada will get shafted for what was mainly a political/election policy.

 

The Gripen is a Swedish plane for...you guessed it, a Swedish problem. It doesn't really fit the Canadian requirements (intercept/strike). While the Gripen does both of those, its got the legs of a two year old, AFAIK.

 

I fully agree with that last bit though, its a domestic political game with people/media using Arrows and wing loading as key points!

 

IADS isn't new, and guess who has it AND stealth fighters and gets to train to deal with it.

 

...Russia, right? :megalol:

 

In all seriousness, I hope Canada will see the light and buy the Lightning II, it'll save the RCAF a lot of pilots down the road.

Edited December 3, 2015 by Sweep

[Bullfrog_]

They should go with the -35, though I wouldn't be against the Arrow simply because it adds a bit a diversity, even though it is a pipe dream.

[Ktulu2]

The arrow was great in it's time, but you got to remember that the plane was meant to intercept russian bombers and that's it... The desing goes back to the late 50's. It was ahead of time back than, but with the arrival of fly-by-wire and other big improvements (doppler radar) it would be pretty worthless in nowdays combats (I think it was planned to be used with aim-4...). Sure, you could modernise the avionics, but you'd be left with an outdated airframe in air superiority fights. Also, let's assume that the CF-105 could be an F-15-like BVR skilled plane (LOL), well Canada would never deploy them as they couldn't bomb anything. What's 5-6 A2A planes gonna change in the 200 the US send?

[Fer_Fer]

Personally wait.

the USN is replacing their F18's in 15 years or so with the VFXX programme. If Canada is smart they wait for that, and see what rolls out of it. Since it will be far less of a Schizophrenic aircraft then the F-35, and will be cheaper as well, (most likely)

The USN for that matter, seems to be hedging their bets. They have only 4 F-35's and have scaled back their buy from 280 to 200, with talk of scrapping the buy all together.

[GGTharos]

I don't. Economies of scale plus equipment requirements will drive those costs up. Those two aren't as sweet as some people would like to make them out to be in terms of price.

 

And what's this about maintenance? Are we saying two engines are cheaper to maintain than one? Are we saying that the E/R didn't go through a bathtub maintenance model?

 

F-35 cheaper than the Eurofighter/Rafale?? I highly doubt that.

 

The F-35 is extraordinarily expensive, not just in terms of purchase but also in terms of maintenance.

[GGTharos]

Can't wait, CF-188's are already way past due date and will start falling apart. It will actually cost more to keep them.

 

There's nothing Schizofrenic about the F-35 ... it was designed for one thing: Strike.

 

Personally wait.

the USN is replacing their F18's in 15 years or so with the VFXX programme. If Canada is smart they wait for that, and see what rolls out of it. Since it will be far less of a Schizophrenic aircraft then the F-35, and will be cheaper as well, (most likely)

The USN for that matter, seems to be hedging their bets. They have only 4 F-35's and have scaled back their buy from 280 to 200, with talk of scrapping the buy all together.

[Tirak]

The USN for that matter, seems to be hedging their bets. They have only 4 F-35's and have scaled back their buy from 280 to 200, with talk of scrapping the buy all together.

 

This is a gross misrepresentation of what's actually happening. The Navy is prioritizing the F-35B purchases for the Marine Corps, as their version is already in service, and the USMC needs to replace its legacy Hornets and Harriers. Of the three air fleets, the Navy currently has the youngest and can afford to buy more F-35Bs over Cs for now. When the F-35C completes its certifications, that will no doubt change.

[NineLine]

Can't wait, CF-188's are already way past due date and will start falling apart. It will actually cost more to keep them.

 

There's nothing Schizofrenic about the F-35 ... it was designed for one thing: Strike.

 

I honestly hope its the F-35, just based on wanting to see them here in Abbostsford at the Airshow each year :)

 

I think there is a huge stigma with them now, in some cases unfair, in some maybe fair, but they have a huge uphill battle to get back into contention as Canada's next fighter.

 

If I was a gambling man, I would put my money on a Super Hornet, it will appease some critics and someone else down the road will have to deal with the fact that they will need to be replaced sooner than something newer like the F-35.

[GGTharos]

What will happen is that we won't replace them ... we'll keep them until they're falling apart.

[fltsimbuff]

The Gripen is a Swedish plane for...you guessed it, a Swedish problem. It doesn't really fit the Canadian requirements (intercept/strike). While the Gripen does both of those, its got the legs of a two year old, AFAIK.

 

I fully agree with that last bit though, its a domestic political game with people/media using Arrows and wing loading as key points!

 

 

 

...Russia, right? :megalol:

 

In all seriousness, I hope Canada will see the light and buy the Lightning II, it'll save the RCAF a lot of pilots down the road.

 

Iraq *had* a truly integrated Air Defense network. Mostly Russian built and French-integrated. That was dealt with by cruise missiles and Apaches coming in low, taking out the I part of the equation in the first hours of the war.

 

It may have looked easy, but it was really the epitome of the Soviet IADS strategy that so many countries still rely on today.

[NineLine]

What will happen is that we won't replace them ... we'll keep them until they're falling apart.

 

There is that, or something bad will happen as a result and then a knee jerk move will be made...

[Fer_Fer]

This is a gross misrepresentation of what's actually happening. The Navy is prioritizing the F-35B purchases for the Marine Corps, as their version is already in service, and the USMC needs to replace its legacy Hornets and Harriers. Of the three air fleets, the Navy currently has the youngest and can afford to buy more F-35Bs over Cs for now. When the F-35C completes its certifications, that will no doubt change.

 

The USMC has its own procurement programme, and its own policies. I am talking about the purchase which is done by the USN proper. Which currently only has 4 F-35's. (initially they bought 2 Congress doubled it for some dark reason)

 

And i feel obligated to mention that the USN isn't even planning to use in the Strike role, but as an overly expensive Recon asset, which will detect Targets so the F18 can destroy it.

 

- Naval Future vision, 2014

[Tirak]

The USMC has its own procurement programme, and its own policies. I am talking about the purchase which is done by the USN proper. Which currently only has 4 F-35's. (initially they bought 2 Congress doubled it for some dark reason)

 

And i feel obligated to mention that the USN isn't even planning to use in the Strike role, but as an overly expensive Recon asset, which will detect Targets so the F18 can destroy it.

 

- Naval Future vision, 2014

 

The three services share a procurement schedule which is split among the three variants. The navy reduced its recent allotments, but the Marine Corps increased theirs by a comparable amount, which in effect means, the Navy is purchasing more F-35Bs for the Marines, a short term shift to handle current realities, the Navy isn't jumping out of the program by any stretch of the imagination.

[RAZBAM_ELMO]

It just seems silly to procure a plane that won't meet Canada's defence requirements. Yes DAS and STEALTH are nice features but do we really need to go that far just to say we have the bigger stick? Why not the most reliable and useful stick instead?

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[RAZBAM_ELMO]

And on top of that what if it doesn't perform as required in our conditions? Has the F35 been tested IN Canada? Maybe it will be like iPhones and not boot up if it's too cold outside.

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[Tirak]

And on top of that what if it doesn't perform as required in our conditions? Has the F35 been tested IN Canada? Maybe it will be like iPhones and not boot up if it's too cold outside.

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

 

The amount of ignorance in this statement is painful :doh:

 

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/features/2015/f-35-climatic-testing.html