Ok, How many percent of the total a/c inventory went ?
how much time percentage wise of the expected lifetime was used by those that did go ?
All in all <1% i figure, and how many of the engagements were standoff ?
The times where RCAF could save a buck from operating F-35 can be expected to be counted in ppm

As well as what swerve said. We also participated in Bosnia. And while not a frontline operation we have also partaken in air policing duties in Iceland.
Agree that only a small percentage was sent to these areas. But with protecting Canada as well as a large percent in refits (must remember these planes are old) we only have so much to spare.
I think regardless of the type selected, the numbers will probably stay at 65-70 aircraft. I think this is the number the politicians want.

Obviously he is going to be biased considering his employment but nevertheless it is a fair consideration. Like Australia it would allow draw down of the older Hornet and be a good transition platform in itself to the F-35 with its newer avionics and AESA radar. A decision can be made later to retire it in favour of F-35 or operate a mixed force like Australia. By buying Super Hornet first they also get the chance to push any F-35 purchase to the right when hopefully costs will have been driven down further.

That’s all good and all, but….. There would be no transition from super hornet to F-35. What ever one we choose will be the one we have for the next 35-45 years. Will the super still be an effective platform that far out?

The only viable alternative in my opinion, is the SH or the Advanced SH (international)….Although i still think Canada would eventually buy the F35. I would rather they buy a bunch of Advanced Global Hawks, and instead of contributing to north american defense by buying a small number of fighters, they look at other areas, such as missile defense or something like that. Do they really need to be be operating advanced fifth gen fighters?

Yeah we did that in the fifties when we canceled the Avro Arrow and bought the BOMARC missiles. Turned out great for us.

Our air force has participated in operation desert shield, Bosnia and more recently in Libya. We do policing duties in Iceland and protect the north. Our air force is pretty active.

Do we need to be operating advanced fifth gen fighters? Probably not…. But our next purchase will remain in service for quite some time and will need to remain current for any Nato operations we partake in, in the future.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]219218[/ATTACH]

End of thread

Agreed!

What would a pair of Hawks have to operate with?… Excluding the wingtip stations the Hawk has 5 more stations free, 1 centre, 2 per wing. They’ll both need two tanks each for endurance, one will need a single LDP at least, the other a Cannon, that leaves them with just 4 stations between them for weapons. That’s pretty much the same as a single Harrier GR9. It’s not really a practical solution and that’s before we start discussing the enhancements needed for the weapons and pods.
capabilities.

I thought the Hawk 200 had in built cannons?

To be honest every time I think British defence procurement is poor I sit back and reflect about the joke that is Canadian defence procurement.

APARS, Merlin, Cyclone, frigate/destroyer replacement indecision, retiring Leopard 1 without replacement, buying second hand Leopard 2 when they realised the mistake and of course the Victoria Class.

Yup, that sums it up exactly!
I really hate our form of goverment. Most of that was selected when we had a minority gov’t. The opposition stopped everything. Not that our majority has done better.

There were two naval yards awarded with multi billion dollar contracts, and they are still sitting there twittling thier thumbs.

A french FREMM class visited Canada recently, and our defence minister was very pleased with it. But that means nothing….

I third the An-22 vote!

Only if the person analysing the scenario was smoking one of these :highly_amused:

Haha, too funny!