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: 3
8
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 19 2019 @ 01:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Leonidas

That is better than nothing which Canada doesn't even have. Remember Quantity > Quality. In today's world you can't destroy a large country without a world war or throwing super weapons all over the place. Land is too large to protect. Not enough defenses around the country. And lack air support without relying on so called allies whom could back stab you or friendly fire(just like Iraqi war)
edit on 19-2-2019 by makemap because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 19 2019 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Sorry, but there is will always be two types of aircraft. Bombers and Fighters. Sure Fighters can have small ability to hit targets on ground. But, cannot be both because Fighters cannot carpet bomb.
edit on 19-2-2019 by makemap because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2019 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: makemap

Which is a major over simplification, and not really relevant to my point. Barring a very small number of aircraft purpose built for very specific missions, almost all fighters built since the F-15A are multirole aircraft. The day of the single mission aircraft is dead.



posted on Feb, 20 2019 @ 05:24 AM
link   
a reply to: makemap
Not necessarily so, the line has been blurring steadily for at least 50 years and will become even more blurred with the B-21/PCA (NGAD or whatever they are calling it now). Expect the B-21 to be more than just capable of dropping or launching heavy loads of precision weapons, it will almost certainly have a measure of air defence capability, even if its just self defence. There may even be versions based on the airframe that are more tailored to air to air. Same goes for the PCA role, dont think its just a fighter, it may well turn out to have a capability more inline with a notional FB-22 or "F-58 Hustler" role. Its possible that both roles may be filled from versions of the same basic airframe or architecture.

Zaphs half right, there wont be anymore single use airframes....
Unless the role is completely new and can only currently be performed by a single purpose built airframe rather than as a multi role by existing or immediately planned types. But that's the way its always been anyway.



posted on Apr, 16 2019 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Get your popcorn ready folks. RFP in May, selection after the elections(big surprise).

www.cbc.ca...



posted on Apr, 17 2019 @ 08:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Why do I feel like the fudge this up as well?



posted on Apr, 17 2019 @ 09:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Caughtlurking

Because everything else about this program has been? Why stop now.



posted on May, 7 2019 @ 07:59 PM
link   
a reply to: makemap

Canada would do well with a fleet comprised of the F35 and the Gripen E



posted on May, 7 2019 @ 10:47 PM
link   
a reply to: gasman71

Can't afford a mixed fleet. They have to pick one.



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

Oh Canada...

www.defensenews.com...



posted on May, 8 2019 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Just pull their workshare and give the work to member countries that are actually pushing lot prices down with orders and aren't just playing games. Problem solved. For the F-35. Canada would still have to figure out its plan, but that's not "my problem" .

Between Turkish share and Canadian workshare, it should be pretty easy to reward program participants who wish to place orders and help everyone involved.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 06:52 PM
link   
SAAB is making a pitch for domestic Canadian production of the Gripen. The article doesn't state which model but it would be safe to assume its the E/NG rather than the earlier C/D's. They acknowledge its early days and not really a formal kind of offer, more flagging their willingness to negotiate with a domestic production incentive. Numbers mentioned was 88 airframes.I actually think it could work quite well for Canada.
FG article



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 06:58 PM
link   
a reply to: thebozeian

The Gripen would be a good aircraft for them.



posted on May, 30 2019 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I like the Grippen alot. You equip it with the meteor and you have a reasonable long range interceptor with The Soviets getting all frisky in the arctic



posted on May, 31 2019 @ 01:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: FredT
a reply to: Zaphod58

I like the Grippen alot. You equip it with the meteor and you have a reasonable long range interceptor with The Soviets getting all frisky in the arctic


Sweden has built it to face down the Russians if they come knocking, same reason Canada needs an Airforce, if they aren't looking at expeditionary operations then why not partner with Sweden, probably have some similar winter terrain so it will be equipped with heaters.



posted on May, 31 2019 @ 05:57 AM
link   
The only issue the the Gripen imho is that it is a light fighter and thus somewhat short legged, payload limited compared to other multi-role fighters. Although they've tried to address the range issue with the E version, increasing internal fuel tanks by 40%.



posted on May, 31 2019 @ 11:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: moebius
The only issue the the Gripen imho is that it is a light fighter and thus somewhat short legged, payload limited compared to other multi-role fighters. Although they've tried to address the range issue with the E version, increasing internal fuel tanks by 40%.


I took a look at that actually

So the E model has a combat radius of 560 miles which is more or less what the F-18's they are replacing has. The Typhoon with 3 tanks has a A2A combat radius of 750 miles with a 10 minute loiter time.

But I don't see Canada barring a total shift in leadership procuring the Typhoon or the Rafale which as noted the Grippen can handle the cold AND operate from austere fields

Actually the US should allow Saab to sell it Taiwan too
edit on 5/31/19 by FredT because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2019 @ 05:57 PM
link   
Hmmm Malaysia is getting into the used legacy Hornet action

www.freemalaysiatoday.com...

They are buying the C/D that Kuwait is phasing out. Im betting they are in better shape than the ones the Australians sold Canada



posted on Jun, 1 2019 @ 07:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: FredT
Hmmm Malaysia is getting into the used legacy Hornet action

www.freemalaysiatoday.com...

They are buying the C/D that Kuwait is phasing out. Im betting they are in better shape than the ones the Australians sold Canada


I'd take that action.



posted on Jun, 2 2019 @ 07:14 AM
link   
a reply to: FredT
They should be in better shape given they were purchased post GW1. Australia and Canada were early buyers with first of type both around 84-85 from memory, Kuwait's are probably around 7-9 years younger. I'd also wager they haven't been pushed as hard with combat use either. The RAAF Hornets that have been sold to Canada have as far as I know all been through centre re-barrelling and late model upgrades so are in good condition actually.

Its a bit of a sad indictment that Malaysia cannot afford or is unwilling to spend on anything other than second hand classic Hornets. Even used early SH's would have made more sense. Maybe if they stop stupid forays into operating mixed Russian/Western types without the money or infrastructure a la Finland did, they might actually get somewhere meaningful?




top topics



 
8
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join