Jay LangleyOk, I don’t doubt you have the best of intentions for what you believe will be the best choice for your country. However, some of metrics you are using to compare the F-35 vis- a -vis other aircraft are just not correct. Technically the F-18C is a 1.8 mach aircraft, it won’t really reach those speeds armed, nor can it reach them for long clean. The F-18C is and always has been a bit short legged. Reaching the theoretical top speed, even clean would mean that it could not stay at that speed for long. The F-35 is technically a mach 1.6 or in a test article, mach 1.67 probably at 30,000 feet (they will test the aircraft in excess of requirements to ensure a margin of safety, ex. 9g limit yet tested to 9.9g) How long the F-35 could maintain top speed is questionable, as few aircraft can maintain speeds above mach 1.2 for very long due to fuel burn. Using the F-16 as a comparison, which has both better acceleration and a higher climb rate than the F-18, the F-35 is about 8 seconds off the F-16’s acceleration from mach .8 to 1.2 at 15,000 feet, that was one of the test f-35’s which are a bit heavier than production aircraft. In reality, compared to what the RCAF is currently flying, the F-35 will have better overall performance.
Without knowing the RCAF operational requirements, it would be hard to rule out or favor any of contenders unless it is based on cost (which would be higher for the F-35), commonality with U.S. ( a strong point), or industrial participation ( which Canada already has in JSF program).
OK, you explained that well….how ever I still see there being issues with it……..
Firstly, perhaps the CF188 may not “supercruise”, yet, in an “intercept ” TYPE mission, the inclusion of two wingtip missiles is going to denegrate performance that substantially?….and not to mention that in all honesty, the CF188’s are meeting Russian Planes unarmed for the most part( they have for decades)…..and the acceleration in question isn;t at 15,000 ft, but at altitude of say 30 – 50,000 ft.
and by your statement, “Few aircraft can maintain speeds above MACH 1.2 “…so again, what effects the F35 will also effect the CF188 and versa visa correct?..as well the F35 also does NOT supercruise..so that levelled, BOTH planes are operating at MACH 1.2, the CF188 STILL outperforms the F35 at operational altitudes in regards to high speed manouverability and climb rate at speed and altitude? Your saying that the F35’s performance is superior, yet I have a hard time seeing that….in fact much has been written about just this in Canadian press and Government releases….”Does the performance outwiegh the MASSIVE costs both in purchase AND to operate?…is the performance really any better? ( if you take away factors Canada doesn;t NEED, like Stealth)…I guess my issue is that Canada doesn’t operate specific “strike” aircraft like the RAF and US do…we have not needed anything “better” than the CF188 to pitch in and do more than our share, why do all of a sudden need this extremely heavily priced, maintenance heavy plane?…we don;t do “first strike”, it;s not in our doctrine, and what we need is more akin to a faster, slightly newer version of what we have ( not nessessarily reffering to the F18 E/F, just simular tasking and type)…not all these bells and whistles that make the F35 good ( I guess) at some tasks and not so good at others ( poor Air Superiority performance by all accounts I have found, to slow, not manouverable enough at top speeds etc.) which is where we need to be…
By the way, the Industrial Participation that Canada got is PATHETIC…so bad in fact that the Company in Ottawa that makes some special valves that THEY designed, that are used in the F35’s is selling them to wind turbine producers as sales are so slow that their production line was in danger of closing for the $5,000 part….and the few other firms making stuff for the F35 are also pathetically few in numbers and required parts….if anything I would estimate that fewer 2,000 Canadian jobs hinge on the F35….
Jay LangleyHow is interception performance lower when an armed F-35 is faster and offers more range?
True the F404-400 equipped F-18 is not the yardstick for modern fighter performance but it is what Canada currently flies and at least the F-35 managed to beat that.Here’s a quote from an article in Combat Aircraft Nov. 2014, from a Dutch F-35 pilot: “The F-35A turns like a heavyweight F-16, but climbs, descends and accelerates like a clean one.” I would read that as mixed signals…
See this is where I get confused….I am SURE that the CF188 Hornet ( Canadian designation)…flies at MACH 1.8 @ 36,100 ft and has a ceiling of 50,000 ft……
By the way the CF18’s under went substantial upgrades including the MIL-STD 1760 interface for the AIM 120 and JDAM family and use integrated Joint Helmet mounted Cueing Systems, the LINK 16 system and use the LM “Sniper XR’s” and the An / ARC Stored management for use with the latest PGM’s….I mean it’s an old airframe for sure…..but it is still in active service and doing the jobs put before it….Ideally the two phase upgrades will have allowed them to keep flying actively until at least 2020 and perhaps slightly beyond.
Now, as I understand it the F35 has a top speed of MACH 1.6 and was tested out to MACH 1.61….well in my math…that is LESS than MACH 1.8, correct?…..
As well, the F35’s performance, manouverability etc. rate of climb etc, DECLINE at high speeds and altitudes correct?……is that a fair assumption?……
so, as old as our 25 year old ‘ish CF188’s are, are they really THAT incapable?….and I would NEVER say that the CF188 is a “yard stick” to measure anything on…but from any info I have and have read….it matches or beats the F35, at altitude and speed, and certainly out manouvers the F35 AT Altitude and high speed, but suffers somewhat from a smaller range, is that a fair assumption to make?……..
so how does that equate to better interception performance by the F35 vs. CF188 Hornet? except for the range issue
Is there an ONLINE link to that article, sounds like an interesting read…
out of curiousity, how long do the Dutch F35’s , I believe F-001 and F-002?….have to remain at Elgin Air Force Base? then they get transfered to Edwards AFB in California “eventually”?…WHY, I’m not sure I understand that theory at all….if the Dutch OWN the planes, and they have instructors being trained IN the USA now, well since 2013….why not take the planes to the Netherlands and train the pilots there?…in THEIR climate, conditions and airbases? seems a strange way of training to me…so EVERY Dutch Pilot for F35 is required to go to the USA for how long?…to be trained? NEVER heard of a system like that before….usually once an injstructor cadre is trained, the rest get trained in the home Nation….why is this different?
First Dutch pilot flies F-35 Lightning II
AIRheads/EH 2013/12/18 Fighters, News Catch
Major Laurens Jan Vijge took F-001 to the air on Wednesday 18 December, becoming to first Dutch pilot to fly the Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II. (Image © Ministerie van Defensie) Major Laurens Jan Vijge took F-001 to the air on Wednesday 18 December, becoming to first Dutch pilot to fly the Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II. (Image © Ministerie van Defensie)
The first Royal Netherlands Air Force pilot flew the F-35 Lightning II on Wednesday 18 December from Eglin Air Force Base in Florida, the Dutch MoD reports. Major Laurens Jan Vijge took off in RNLAF F-35 with serial F-001 and was joined in the air by an American instructor pilot flying another F-35. Only last September, the Dutch government decided on buying 37 F-35A Lightning II fighters after years of hesitation.
Eglin is currently home to a Dutch detachment learning to fly and maintain the new aircraft. Among the Dutch personnel are four pilots. The major’s commentary after landing F-001 back a Eglin after the seventy minute flight: “Fantastic! What a great plane to fly. It’s like driving a new car for the first time and knowing ‘it’s the one’. A milestone!”
The Koninklijke Luchtmacht (KLu) now owns two F-35s: F-001 and F-002. Both were delivered earlier this year at the Lockheed Martin factory at Fort Worth, and were transferred afterwards to Eglin. The aircraft will relocate eventually to Edwards Air Force Base in California.
Laurens Jan Vijge is a happy man. (Image © Ministerie van Defensie) Laurens Jan Vijge is a happy man. (Image © Ministerie van Defensie
Jay LangleyActually there is a choice for the A-model. It can have either or maybe even both (don’t know if that’s still possible) but of course you would have to pay for that. As far as I know, Canada decided to stick with the boom equipped F-35A afterall.
As far as I know, for the air defence role that is not an issue as Canada relies on US tankers when needed. The 2 CC-150 tankers don’t deploy to the north to support the Hornets. But of course, the Tankers not being able to refuel the future fighter is not ideal. 3 options: get a probe-and-drogue equipped fighter, pay for F-35A probe-and-drogue integration, or equip the CC-150 with a flying boom: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/13/A310MRTT.jpg
Interesting,
Last I had heard that the possability of offering it at a substantial extra cost was to become available, same as the Drag Chute…but as far as I knew NO Probe and Drogue had actually been placed on the F35 A at all, and the Drag Chute was still on the drawing boards, not even close to ready for implimentation or testing…I will watch these developments as they come along…..
by the way, for the “Air Defense Role”, Canada does NOT rely on the USA for anything….within Canadian airspace the RCAF manages to provide our own A2A refueling with the CC-150’s ( we have two dedicated to A2A refuelling, and actually accompany the Cf18’s on deployments, refueling in transit, and they certainly DO fly in the north, just not as often as the CC130’s can also handle that with ease, they are Stationed at CFB Trenton Ontario…center of Canada) and the CC130’s and CC-130 J’s. Trying to rely on the USAF wouldn;t work anyway, as they use the boom and the RCAF uses the Navy / Marines style probe and drogue. During overseas Missions, as long as an allied Tanker is kitted in a suitable manner, I guess thats part of being an Ally…same as any other contributing Nation.
Jay LangleyListen, such comments are well beyond the acceptable for those who believe that F-35 is the only valid choice for all non-Chinese/non-Russian federation air forces in need of replacement fighters.
Where Canada is concerned, I do wonder how many fighters (of any type) are needed to provide adequate cover for such a vast area.
Hey Spitfire,
Canada got the CF18’s starting in 1982, with a few years of overlap with the outgoing CF101 VOODOO’s and CF-104 Starfighters…we eventually got a total of 130 some odd examples….at that point it was still questioned IF that provided Canada with enough to provide for Sovergn airspace patrol, overseas NATO commitments of the time ( West Germany, CFB Baden-Soellingen) and other missions, exercises etc. that came up…..after 1987, the RCAF went to a SOLE Fighter airframe, the CF18 A/B…….the RCAF lost 18 in accidents over the years, others damaged and salvaged for parts or just run out of “air time” left….. Right now we have less than 100 total, somewhere around 80 I believe. The RCAF has held it together and has managed to provide for every need, including overseas deployments ( two currently), training and operations….but the stress on the planes and crews and maintenance etc. is relatively high. In a ideal situation, seeing between 100 and 130 new aircraft come in would be welcomed, reality, likely 60 to 70 ish in numbers…will it help …YES and NO…..still to few and the RCAF will continue to operate a rather high intensity program relating to aircraft, However, some of the strain of keeping aging and outdated planes operational will disapate with new and better planes that will make for better abilities. NOTE: Canada currently has THREE Fighter Squadrons: 425 “Alouette” Tactical Fighter Squadron ( @ CFB Baggotville Quebec), the 409 “Nighthawks” Tactical Fighter Squadron and the 410 “Cougar” Tactical Fighter and Operational Training Squadron ( both @ CFB Cold Lake Alberta)
Jay LangleyThanks Obligatory,
I couldn;t agree more….YES the F35 IS going to be the the American replacement for many other types….and that is fine, the USAF, USN and Marines have the infastructure etc. to support that. That was NEVER my contention, will it do as well as predicted…who knows….NO ONE will know until the time comes and it is in the air against a real foe. But I can see that the F35, along with the wealth of having OTHER types to support it, compliment it will likely do the US OK….likewise the RAF/RN…as it will have other types as well…..
and I fully agree with your conclusion and example of Hartmann….I had mentioned exactly this on the Gripen thread and was berated again…In all honesty, the weaponry of the near future will likely level the playing field substantially, allowing for a decent, capable Gen 4.5 aircraft to pose a real threat to even Gen 5 aircraft, especially if the top end speed isn’t there to allow for escape.
It actually makes me feel alright that another person has again agreed that in individual Nation by Nation cases, that the F35 may not be right…that is all I EVER was trying to state. Canada is NOT a War Hungry nor aggressive Nation…we don;t need the bells and whistles to do what is best for Canada, but being able to replace our OLD cf18’s with a BETTER, NEWER and capable plane IS important, and really as long as information and communications can flow back and forth ( as has been shown to be able to happen on numerous types, NOTE: Canadian CF18’s have the LINK 16 system )..( important in “alliance” type missions) then why should be seen as almost an “insult” to some that the F35 wouldn;t fit?..
Again, my intention is not to say that the F35 isn;t any good…..only to say that the F35 isn;t nessessarily the best choice or fit for every Nation. And as I had said previously, LM has shown little to NO interest in the other nations at all….EXAMPLE: Obviously the F35A SHOULD have had a CHOICE between the Boom or drouge style A2A refueling, as every Nation MAY NOT use only the Boom style, should a Nation be forced into buying the more expensive “B” simply because of the refueling issue?…IF the “A” was a better choice EXCEPT for that, should the Nation look at buying a whole new fleet of tankers?….
That is what I meant about shoehorning “square pegs into round holes”, and that is all I was attempting to say, but it seemed like that wasn;t allowed, to question the sanctity of the F35…..
I really do hope it does work out as expected for the USA forces and anyone who buys it…..but I hope that My Nation doesn;t , just because it won;t work for us….and THANK YOU for at least seeing that…
Jay LangleyThere, see? Was that so hard? All you had to do is say from the start that you weren’t here to actually discuss aircraft but were instead essentially projecting a Canadian domestic political debate into the world of aviation.
You could have saved everyone a lot of time trying to straighten you out.
Actually, NO, all your input did was reinforce that the F35 program is supported Blindly by halfwits, more inclined to endlessly argue technical GEEK points that in relative terms do nothing to remidy the fact that the F35 is slow, doesn;t have decent manouverability, stated as from General Hazzard USAF, that the F35 is incapable of operating missions without the F22’s to provide top cover ( Dated info I know, but still relevant as he knows SOOOOO much more than you or anyone else does about the program and plane).
Again, bottom line, the F35 is NOT “the plane” for many Nations in the world, the F35 is NOT capable of successfully operating a “single airframe design” Airforce, it lacks the the ability to serve as an Air Superiority fighter.
Some Nations just simply do not have the resources to operate and maintain the type that offers PARTIAL capability , nor to operate multiple types to make up for the shortcomings of the F35.
Now, as for geographical and operational points that where made……..well those are equally just as pertinant to a decision for or against the F35…….by ANY Nation…..
You argued endlessly that Canada was NOT unique, yet every nation IS unique, point in case Japan is MOST DENATELY NOT the USA, therfore UNIQUE.
Bottom line, LM and the US Government bullied and browbeat numerous Nations around the world into “buying” the F35, as was shown in links by others….essentially to save their sinking ship, without international orders , the F35 program was dead in the water. The US manipulated and achieved a “rescue” of it’s rediculously over budget money sucking program on the backs of other Nations purchases…..
All of these exact same points have been made in other threads by other posters over a wide variety of airframes, yet it is ONLY the F35 threads that get instant arguements and bashing by the “Pro F35” side…
Why is it so hard for any pro F35 person to just revel in their own gleefull happiness with their little pet project…if others see it as flawed, incapable, a money drain , operational incompatable with their Nations doctrines and Air Force or climate/geography, so be it.
As I said before, no matter how much YOU brow beat or “try to straighten me ( or anyone) out”. personal opinion is allowed, my reasons where posted and explained it was simply a few of you refused to take MY opinion and reasons and continued to bash away…it is NOT your right nor job to convert people to the F35 religion.
And in all honesty, if you enjoy sitting on this ( and likely every other F35 forum) happily dissecting Technical facets of various systems and parts endlessly, then by all means do so, BUT do NOT give me grief about posting less than 15 posts with Different views and points about things just as relivant to the F35 being the right aircraft…when the endless bashing and science lessons about CLASSIFIED information that you are all speculating about has gone on for 60 some odd pages of posts.
Laughably, you posted the other day that all members of the Forum that don;t have a love affair with the F35 just eventually go away…..and I am sure they do, and I am likewise sure they do because they are driven away by the likes of the F35 Fanboy club.
Perhaps a few of you would rather start a new thread ” dissection, arguing and insults and pure Speculation over the individual systems of the F35″.
Jay LangleyDear Christ…
No religion allowed, sorry…….If Mohammad, Buddah , Odin or the Gitchie Manitou aren;t welcome than neither should the Nailed god be welcome either……..
Jay LangleyA few bits of data for your consideration. The Gripen went out of production in 2012 and will not return to production.
When you hear people talking about the possibility of Canada buying Gripens what they are generally referring to is the Gripen NG (AKA Gripen E), an as-yet unflown aircraft derived from the original Gripen but with a newer engine and essentially entirely new avionics. The Gripen NG is supposed to become operational sometime in the 2020 timeframe.
Of all of the options out there for Canada the Gripen NG is the least tested.
http://globalaviationreport.com/2014/04/30/gripen-e-production-is-fully-underway/
Don’t forget!
:highly_amused:
who cares what you think or say……..personally I couldn;t care WHAT aircraft Canada buys…as long as it is NOT the POS F35…..that is my opinion, and the opinion of many many hundreds of thousands of people world wide……..I guess thats because some of us refuse to drink USA koolaid and believe the spin dotors at LM…ironically the same ones that Gen Hazzard pointedly dismisses as redundant…and I would likely suggest that his intimate knowledge of the F35 program and the USAF far , far exceed yours or anyone elses…..yet he PUBLICALLY went forward and clearly stated what was obvious to some of us…the F35 is NOT capable to perform past it;s designed role…as a JSF…not an Air Superiority fighter in any way shape or form….old news I know, but still relevant
it;s funny who you turn the same arguement used against THE F35, around to shut down any support or comment regarding a challenger for F35 buisness…….isn;t it…..again, what is good enough for any consideration of the F35, MUST be considered for any others as well….we’ll see…Open Competition for this sale will be widely watched I am sure…….it;ll be awesome to see them all go head to head on a LEVEL field wouldn’t it?……..OH thats right, LM doesn;t like that route…..
Any further word on the severe reductions in the Italian F35 purchase…heard up to HALF the order may be cut….including almost all the B versions, Japan ‘s looking for far fewer as well isn;t that right?…….the orders are shrinking fairly substantially from “other users”…but hey that’s just what I read by goi9ng through the news from each of the Nations….
Jay LangleyYou do understand that in political/economic terms, ‘western’ doesn’t mean west of GMT? Hence neither of the two countries mentioned is ‘western’ in this sense.
Funny you should mention that……seeing as that ARGENTINA enjoys holding a “Major NON NATO Ally Status”, granted by the USofA…certainly including Argentina into the fold of “Western” in terms of political affiliation….this is the SAME status that is enjoyed by Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, Israel, Japan and Egypt…..OH my, that does seem to be almost a complete list of F35 “customers”…so I guess that for all , inclusion into this catagory is good enough ……at least to sell the USA’s “Most advanced weapon” too anyway…….
Brazil maintains and enjoys pretty decent ties with the west and with the USA as part of the G8+5….their political allegiance with BRICs is an obvious issue…but in all cases, it seems Brazil treads a fine line between situations and stances anyway……
I do hope that your incorrect opinion is again of note…..
and just to add, by your equation , the Rafale’s that where involved in an mid air collision WHILE flying in formation has anything to do with targetingor even radar issues?…..they where within visual sight of each other………..WHERE on the other hand, the Typhoon II couldn;t locate, identify and conduct evasive manouvers prior to having a mid air collision with a LEAR Jet?………strange that isn;t it?……..
By the way, is there any write up on this event?…I would certainly like to see some documents that outline the timeline for the repairs to active flight that occured for that Typhoon II………especially as I had understood that the damage done was highly significant….
Jay LangleyThe use of an algorithm to extend range and reduce false detection is plainly mentioned in Air International. So unless you’d like to tell them they’re full of ****, it’s clear that you’re wrong.
But but Gripen, it’s got 6th gen, it’s the 2nd coming.:highly_amused:
It really is truly tragic that nobody in the West is interested in these continental European canards but there’s no need to blame everything on the F-35.
Saddly, although, in your opinion “nobody in the West is interested”….the Gripen has more actual airframes flying Operationally the the F35 has total production at this point… Brazil ( certainly WEST, southern hemisphere, but still west) has just signed a deal with SAAB for the Gripen, Brazil is trying a deal with Argentina, wise, even feasible or a pipe dream, interest is there in Argentina. Canada has NOT ruled out the Gripen and like the others are waiting to find out the result of the delayed decision on the “reboot” and an open competition. Again, that does not sound like “Nobody is interested in these continental European Canards”…especially if further upgrades etc. see performance and options make it an even faster , better handling and capable option.
Jay LangleyI didn’t mention it sarcastically at all, I was merely noting that the Gripen NG was single-engined and the Rafale has a far higher loss rate than Typhoon.
The world is well aware that the Gripen is a single engined airframe as is the Gripen NG…..as previously stated…if the F35 is to be considered, as a single engine airframe, then obviously the single engine is NO LONGER of paramount concern, and should thereby open the competition to other single engined types as well, especially ones that are cheaper, faster, more capable in Air Superiority.
After a little looking….
Your statement regarding the Rafale having a “FAR HIGHER LOSS RATE” is absolutely incorrect….the Rafale has had FOUR accidents:
– 2007 the pilot blacked out caused the crash- pilot error
– 2009 in air collision, – pilot error
– 2010 Fuel Starvation caused crash on takeoff – Pilot Error
– 2012 Crash @ launch from Carrier De Gaule – unknown
The Rafale has also logged mission flight times in Libya, Afgahistan and during the French action in Mali
The EF Typhoon II : has had FOUR accidents
– 2002 Engine flameout caused crash
– 2010 Crashed during takeoff, no cause stated
– 2014 Crashed during Landing, no cause stated
– 2014 Mid Air Collision / managed emergency landing
The Typhoon II has logged NO mission hours during actual combat, the closest it came was post air campaign “patrol” in Libya
Not sure how you came to your statement, the data simply does not support that concept.
Jay LangleyHopsalot,
Firstly everything that you post drips with your nationality…..to people the world over, it would be immediately and obviously clear……secondly YOUR facts…are far from Factual, they are simply YOUR opinion…”debate”, there is no debate not with Americans in general and certainly not with you…
Your points are laughable…..the F-18 IS a fighter, a decent one as well….one that has survived the run and flown the missions…the F35 is a “model”…NONE are operational…it hasn;t done anything except fly around…….well so does a Cessna, and to be honest the F35 has more incommon with a cessna than a Military Aircraft at this point.
Your assertations that a MILITARY decision becomes “political”…..REALLY the USA is so stupid that they let moronic cretins from the Senate or Congress decide WHERE MILITARY assets should be Stationed?…..POLITICAL?…absolutely stupid…never mind the actual Military reasoning behind something…lets let idiots make the decision to either pay back a favour or pull votes….pathetic reasoning…..
And NO, it doesn;t have ANYTHING to do with Skiing, that was just a VERY true little story to show how little the Average American knows about Canada…
And I am sorry, putting an airplane in a freezer and dribbling some water on it to make ice does NOT “test” an aircraft…..when the winds are howling at 30 miles and hour and the sleet and snow is driving near horizontally…yeh, that is testing the aircraft…..
Your reply to Msphere regarding the “latest batch just ordered” is idiotic…..how would YOU have any idea of what was ordered by whom and what their costing will be?……especially when Nations considering PLACING orders don;t know what the costs will be!……Orders are nothing…cancelling at any time is an option……and considering that the BIGGEST Partner in this joke is the UK and they have gotten…how many?…..the USAF has HOW many?… Australia I am sure will like their ONE, at some point once the US and LM decide to give it to them……it;s farsical….costs and orders and such are BS and speculation …Funny…where is the official press releases from those Nations saying YES, we have NOW ordered our F35’s?….there is NONE
You know, the quiet Canadian is slowly going by the wayside…..mostly because if we don;t speak up, then people just try to bulldoze THEIR opinions and points of view down our throats….Not ONCE have you considered anything I have said…you just toss it all aside because it doesn;t fit YOUR theory….and you know what, why should I waste tact and grace on your posts…..you have been the one right from the start that has come out slamming everything…even when it is put in front of you that your wrong…you just keep bulldozing right along…..so perhaps my temporary lack of tact and grace is due to your over bearing and domainering attitude towards this thread and others posts, not even just mine…… tact, politeness and grace are reciprocal, perhaps when YOU start to show even a remote amount of respect for others posts and opinions, even those that disagree with yours, you may experience that being returned….. Being a Canadian does not mean that we are to become a dog to be kicked around…Canadians do have backbones….and have shown them many many times
Perhaps you should watch Monty Python’s “the Meaning of Life”…there is a great scene in that movie…at a diner in a cottage….perhaps you should watch it and learn something…….
you know, I DO feel bad for Myself, for my usually very rational and calm demenor being rattled and upset by the likes of you…..your simply the epitomy of the “Loud American”…..no wonder so many Americans sew Canadian Flags onto their coats and luggage when they travel around the world….too bad it gives Canadian a bad rep. right up until those Americans open the mouths…..
Jay LangleyHopsalot,
I will grant you that as an American you are certainly patriotic and supportive of what has in real life become not such a great deal…..
Firstly, your assertion that “All cold weather testing” is done in Florida ( like it is some major secret )…problem is this…NONE of those popsicle planes are OPERATIONAL…they are stationary, not being run, taxied or any other normal aircraft functions..they are plane popsicles….just put them in deep freeze doesn’t “Test” a plane, it tests IF seperate parts can survive the deep cold…..NOT if the systems can FUNCTION under stress and flight conditions in adverse cold….the ONLY way to do that is to actually operate the aircraft in cold adverse weather…….
and I will argue that a senator or congressman can over write the Strategic and Operational needs of the Pentagon and Chiefs of Staff regarding where things Go……..shear BS……..I may not be American, but as Canadians are far , far more aware of The US that Americans are of Canada, point in case the endless stream of Americans that show up at the Canadian Border in JULY and AUGUST with skis on their roofs looking to come to Canada to go skiing.
Funny that you say the Cf18 is NOT an interceptor…yet strangely, Canada HAS used them as such for decades with no issue…I wonder how?…..and as to my recollection, the F35 has never flown ANY Missions operationally…so again, capabilities are pure speculation…..
If you want to wave the Red White and Blue…by all means do so……but do NOT try to BS the people of the world that are smart enough to see it coming and form opinions contrary to the “‘Merican Way”…..just because Momma June and Honey Boo Boo say so doesn;t make it right nor acurate…
Your inability to grasp even the simplest of EXPLAINED points ( I clearly took the time to carefully explain HOW and WHY population density WAS a factor in providing Emergency Services rapidly , ease in travel to and from “crash sites”, multitudes of options for emergency landing locations, substantially more thorough Ground to Air Radar stations to monitor events, and simply NOT having hundreds of thousands of KM’s of uninhabited land to patrol over…….)….seems pretty clear to me…AGAIN…..
Bottom line, No One will ever be able to talk logically with you…you stand on your box and wave “Ol Glory” sing the Star Spangled banner and parrot the lies and propaganda flowing out of LM…..you seem to NOT be able to understand that not everyone likes or doesn;t want your “American dream machine”…..hopefully Canada as a Nation get it right and end this gob****e before it costs another decade of BS and broken promises, and buy something that WORKS for Canada for a change…much like we did when we turned down your M1 Abrahms MBT’s and got far better deals, upgrades and service from the Dutch and Germans for the Leopard 2A4’s and 2A5’s…works for Canada…..
Jay LangleyUnreal Hopslap,
Your statement is so stupid as to be laughable… “the population Density of ONE STATE, ALASKA, is LESS than the entire Country of Canada”…OBVIOUSLY…try a Province, a Northern Province say Nunavut…Population density…0.015!…for an even BIGGER landmass!….or North West Territories, .04!……and your point was WHAT?
Now Canadian Planning factors in “Greater US resources”…REALLY?…I am sure that effects EVERY allied Nations “plans” equally…..HOW does the F35 “help in Canada’s Overseas commitments”?……Really?……seeing as we are operating in one local ( Baltic) as Air Superiority / Intercept mode…the F35 would benefit Canada in ABSOLUTELY NO WAY….the other local is in a ZERO threat environment bombing ground targets…..and quite frankly conventional or “Dynasty” aircraft such as the CF 18 are doing fine and have no restrictions on weaponry as well as a decent load out and a much reduced operating cost…and seeing how the aircraft the USA is using are also conventional, well…..speculation…..as well, the Allies with THE most advanced planes IN SERVICE right now, France and the UK are using them just fine……where is the F35?….oh yes….sitting in the USA being “tested”…..
Your Document you produce to “Prove” F35 deployment to Alaska is by a US SENATOR?…someone that has NO SAY in Strategic Deployment?….also it was selected as “A PREFERED LOCATION”…yep so they can TEST it in cold and snow!….your talking about something MAYBE happening, MAYBE in two years! and AFTER a period of Environmental Impact ( at least a full year as SEASONAL IMPACTS vary)…so MAYBE F35’s get to Alaska, Operationally in three to four years…. ooopty dooo…..did any figure they wouldn;t get there eventually?……
And as I said…….if the Damn USA would STOP trying to FORCE THEIR Square PEG into every other Nations Round Holes…I guess there would be alot more happy nations…sorry if it offends YOU…but Canada IS SPECIAL…..we are NOT part of the USA…just as Australia IS SPECIAL, the UK is Special and it goes on and on…..the ONLY ones that don;t see that seems to be Pro USA F35 fanatics…
By the way, your “map” of the Alaskan air space is great…BUT try looking at a map that shows the ENTIRE Arctic Circle and how much each nation needs to cover…….
[ATTACH=CONFIG]232716[/ATTACH]
Jay LangleyWho does think the F35 is the right aircraft for Canada then? Really?
The idiots in the Government that sit behind a desk and make the decissions ..unforunately….given the spectrum of choices, criteria and opitons out there…I would assume that most aircrew that actually have to FLY the planes might like to an oportunity to have a say….as in an OPEN level competion…….
The general public in Canada definately are questioning the F35’s, lots of news reports and articles, coverage on TV and live debates….feelings differ, but whatever the differences, most ( and by that I mean overwhelmingly so) seem to be against it. Our current Prime Minister is likely on his way out this coming election, the other candidates have ALL said it will cancell the F35 with no further participation…in Canadian Politics, the Budget is a major issue, and the LIES and hiding of the actual figures of this F35 have been a major topic, for example, the PUBLIC sees $200 MILLION basically handed to Lockhead Martin and absolutely NOTHING in return…now that bites a Public that is heavily taxed as it is….as does the REAL forcast costs of the F35 program for Canada, compared to what was Originally released……, then added to the ( Unrelated, yet somehow simular) Deal Canada has with Sikorsky for the CH148 Cyclones that has just run and run over budget, 13 years without ANY operational helicopters and further costs and delays, and now increased purchase prices…and where Canada has paid for ALL the development of it, Sikorsky will turn around and sell them to any Nation that wants them……
I guess the General mood in Canada has become that as a Nation, we are tired of the overcosts and lies and back door deals ( F35 )….
There is NO question Canada needs NEW Planes….that said we need NEW and MORE…the F35 ‘s were NOT even going to replace plane for plane what we had AFTER decades of wear and tear had reduced our CF18 fleet from 120 to 76, and in NO way do we need a 1st Strike Plane…we need a GOOD Multi Roll Interceptor / Attack Fighter……and the F35 doesn;t fit that criteria
Canadian view in a nut shell…….
Sign In
