It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Canada to operate CF-18s to 2032

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: makemap

Single mission aircraft are on their way out. You won't see any aircraft designed to do one thing anymore, not even the F-22. The F-35 is both ground attack and a fighter, just like the F-18 is. The F-35 is actually better for the area than the F-18 is. With its networking capabilities and being able to link with other F-35s they can cover a huge area with their sensors, as opposed to what any other aircraft can do. A handful of F-35s could cover the entire region, and can tie in with every other NATO ally without having to have a gateway platform.

No matter what they end up going with though, it's not going to be a straight fighter or interceptor. The days of the interceptor are dead, and the days of the single mission fighter are dying. Once the last of them is retired, they'll be dead too.


We train good recon soldiers but they are usually wearing someone else uniform when they are behind enemy lines. Obviously we are not going to provide air support for that.

Libya no fly zone was the only time I really remember Canada acting as an aggressive air force. And in that case, I am pretty sure we were fighting actors and our pilots were in no real danger. Not that our politicians would have known that so they must have had faith in them, maybe misplaced?..

It would have been nice to have the F-35 if something unprecedented ever did occur. But for our role in global affairs currently, the money could be better used elsewhere.

I'm one of the few dozen conservative votes in BC. I would have been hailing the 35 if it made it through, believe me. Though in hindsight, I'm not sure it was really meant for us.

EDT:

Conservatives are going to slay the Liberals with this.


edit on pSun, 28 Jan 2018 20:39:53 -06002018 053Sun, 28 Jan 2018 20:39:53 -0600pmAmerica/ChicagoSunday by MALBOSIA because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:40 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

There are many options other than the F-35, but that is going to be the best value for the money. But the Typhoon, or Gripen would be good deals too.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: MALBOSIA

There are many options other than the F-35, but that is going to be the best value for the money. But the Typhoon, or Gripen would be good deals too.


We didn't have the literal buy-in we had with the F35. I think anything else would have been nonsense.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 08:54 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

No, you'll lose a lot of advantage that you'd have with the F-35, and probably all the secondary contracting work that you have now, since Lockheed has said that only customers would get the work, but there are options.



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 09:51 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Small proxy/spy war doesn't mean Canada doesn't need fighter role jets to defend its land. WW2 was the biggest example. Where troops required air support against Ju junkers from bombing the hell out of them. What Canada doesn't really need is more tanks over fighter jets due to it being mostly forest and cramped city space. They say tanks are for open battlefields which Canada barely have any open fields except farm lands. Even the city landscape is hilly.
edit on 28-1-2018 by makemap because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 28 2018 @ 11:47 PM
link   
Tanks dont work without infantry support.Infantry dont work without air support or Artillery..



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 05:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blackfinger
Tanks dont work without infantry support.Infantry dont work without air support or Artillery..


Infantry don't work without air support since WW1. Just sell the F-22 to Canada and they'll gladly buy it. Talk about being best friends with neighbor in the north. Canada car companies have already merged with Ford. What else does US want from Canada?
edit on 31-1-2018 by makemap because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2018 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: makemap

Sure, they'll buy the F-22. The entire reason we're not reopening the line to build more for us is because they'd be too expensive. Even if Canada added 88 to whatever we bought, they'd still be paying near $400M an airframe.

The F-35 is proving to be almost as good, or better at air to air depending on BVR or WVR.
edit on 1/31/2018 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2018 @ 07:56 PM
link   
And now, they're going to have to upgrade the ejection seats, exterior lighting, and put the aircraft through a SLEP before they can start operating the Australian Hornets after they take delivery of them.

edmontonjournal.com...

And big surprise, the article claims they're buying Super Hornets, when they're getting A/Bs.
edit on 2/4/2018 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 8 2018 @ 04:44 AM
link   
a reply to: makemap

By the time they got it up and running and able to produce a front-line fighter in numbers, we are probably going to be in the midst of the 7th generation whatever-passes-for-a-fighter-these-days...



posted on Jul, 4 2018 @ 04:01 PM
link   
It was just announced that they will add 7 airframes to the purchase from Australia, bringing them up to 25 airframes. They had previously requested 7 non-flying airframes for testing and training. If the sale clears export controls, the first aircraft will be delivered next year.

www.flightglobal.com...



posted on Jul, 4 2018 @ 05:12 PM
link   
I'm not surprised to say the least. The USAF will defend the airspace regardless of Canada's capacity to do so. Its not a political dig but a reality. Even if the countries are at odds, its still needs to be defended.

That plan will ensure they have some creaky F-18 by the end of things. There may be spare parts as the USN loses the legacy Hornets, as the USMC can only absorb / upgrade so much. The Swiss, Kuwait, etc may look to offload aircraft as well.

They really do not have a requirement for force projection or long strike/ deep interdiction since the US has that covered and rather need long range maritime strike, recon, and air superiority so, If Canada is serious it should looks to a combination of F-35's and one of the 4.5 generation aircraft. The B model so that they have interoperability with US Carriers etc. Or a all 4.5 gen force.

I agree that they will not be building their go alone fighter. Its hideously expensive to undertake. For example the Gripen program costed about 13 billion US (and that not counting the E development. Canukistan's defense budget is what 25 Billion US? Your talking about a significant chuck of what they are willing to spend on defense year to year. Could Bombadier do it? Yes for sure but for a ruinous cost. Much better and cheaper to buy off the shelf. Once you gut your industrial base go its difficult to get back




top topics



 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join