Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
mastermis wrote:Canadian government makes a non-subtle hint that they may cancel purchase of F18's over CSeries spat.
http://www.newson6.com/story/35465845/c ... dier-probe
CX747 wrote:C Series for 20+ years after illegally being propped up.
bikerthai wrote:The way this is going, they might as well forget about the P-8A. Hang on to the P-3 as long as they can and make due with a smaller MMA aircraft. The MSA is based on the Bombardier frame. But it too is a Boeing product . . . Hope there's a window in that corner that they are painting themselves into.
bt
VSMUT wrote:bikerthai wrote:The way this is going, they might as well forget about the P-8A. Hang on to the P-3 as long as they can and make due with a smaller MMA aircraft. The MSA is based on the Bombardier frame. But it too is a Boeing product . . . Hope there's a window in that corner that they are painting themselves into.
bt
Doesn't Airbus do an MPA version of the C-295? Would make awfully good sense considering that Canada will already get a bunch of those.
ThePointblank wrote:Inadequate endurance. The current CP-140's patrol the second largest coastline in the world. And we are doing it with 18 aircraft.
If anything, LM has another option: the SC-130J Sea Hercules. It's a proposed maritime patrol variant of the C-130J, which means full interoperability with the current C-130J fleet.
VSMUT wrote:bikerthai wrote:The way this is going, they might as well forget about the P-8A. Hang on to the P-3 as long as they can and make due with a smaller MMA aircraft. The MSA is based on the Bombardier frame. But it too is a Boeing product . . . Hope there's a window in that corner that they are painting themselves into.
bt
Doesn't Airbus do an MPA version of the C-295? Would make awfully good sense considering that Canada will already get a bunch of those.
VSMUT wrote:ThePointblank wrote:Inadequate endurance. The current CP-140's patrol the second largest coastline in the world. And we are doing it with 18 aircraft.
If anything, LM has another option: the SC-130J Sea Hercules. It's a proposed maritime patrol variant of the C-130J, which means full interoperability with the current C-130J fleet.
The paper plane that is the so-called "Sea Hercules" is also a product from the country of Trump, so hardly a viable alternative if they want a non-American plane.
VSMUT wrote:ThePointblank wrote:Inadequate endurance. The current CP-140's patrol the second largest coastline in the world. And we are doing it with 18 aircraft.
If anything, LM has another option: the SC-130J Sea Hercules. It's a proposed maritime patrol variant of the C-130J, which means full interoperability with the current C-130J fleet.
The paper plane that is the so-called "Sea Hercules" is also a product from the country of Trump, so hardly a viable alternative if they want a non-American plane.
CX747 wrote:Let them walk. Better to lose out on a Hornet deal than fight with the C Series for 20+ years after illegally being propped up.
Ozair wrote:mastermis wrote:Canadian government makes a non-subtle hint that they may cancel purchase of F18's over CSeries spat.
http://www.newson6.com/story/35465845/c ... dier-probe
And so continues the Liberal Government's preference for political games over military capability.
LightningZ71 wrote:Interesting, so this entire charade could just be political cover to get Canada back into the F-35 family while providing the current Canadian government an excuse to go back on their promise of getting Canada out of the F-35 boondoggle....
Nicoeddf wrote:Ozair wrote:mastermis wrote:Canadian government makes a non-subtle hint that they may cancel purchase of F18's over CSeries spat.
http://www.newson6.com/story/35465845/c ... dier-probe
And so continues the Liberal Government's preference for political games over military capability.
Ah yes, it is so unfortunate that the F18 is the only available fighter plane in the world
Ozair wrote:Nicoeddf wrote:Ozair wrote:And so continues the Liberal Government's preference for political games over military capability.
Ah yes, it is so unfortunate that the F18 is the only available fighter plane in the world
Well done taking my comment out of context... Might be worth reading some of the comments on other Canadian fighter replacement threads before you shoot from the hip.
Channex757 wrote:The Canadian Government could always put in a call to Kawasaki....the P-1 is available for export
queb wrote:VSMUT wrote:bikerthai wrote:The way this is going, they might as well forget about the P-8A. Hang on to the P-3 as long as they can and make due with a smaller MMA aircraft. The MSA is based on the Bombardier frame. But it too is a Boeing product . . . Hope there's a window in that corner that they are painting themselves into.
bt
Doesn't Airbus do an MPA version of the C-295? Would make awfully good sense considering that Canada will already get a bunch of those.
Or the Saab Swordfish MPA based on Global 6000.
http://saab.com/air/airborne-solutions/ ... -aircraft/
bmacleod wrote:Trump eager on Canada to increase its defense/NATO spending asks Boeing to back off its Bombardier C-Series criticism to allow the Super Hornet order to go ahead.
Nicoeddf wrote:Ozair wrote:Nicoeddf wrote:
Ah yes, it is so unfortunate that the F18 is the only available fighter plane in the world
Well done taking my comment out of context... Might be worth reading some of the comments on other Canadian fighter replacement threads before you shoot from the hip.
No, sorry, that one is on you. Context is this thread, not any other potential thread you imply must have been read. But you could have linked to that thread with your comments actually creating context.
Ozair wrote:We can see that clearly with the SH and even more so with the F-35, which is approaching cost parity with the SH but with significantly greater capability.
seahawk wrote:why?Nice to see a country taking defence seriously. I hope it will be 88 F-35s and P-8 + KC-46s + C27.
Ozair wrote:Nicoeddf wrote:Ozair wrote:Well done taking my comment out of context... Might be worth reading some of the comments on other Canadian fighter replacement threads before you shoot from the hip.
No, sorry, that one is on you. Context is this thread, not any other potential thread you imply must have been read. But you could have linked to that thread with your comments actually creating context.
Even if we limit the context to this thread it was still a stupid comment by yourself and I stand by what I have stated, the Canadian Liberal Government continues to play politics with the selection of a replacement fighter aircraft. We can see that clearly with the SH and even more so with the F-35, which is approaching cost parity with the SH but with significantly greater capability.
seahawk wrote:Nice to see a country taking defence seriously. I hope it will be 88 F-35s and P-8 + KC-46s + C27.
ThePointblank wrote:Most of those purchases are in the mid-2020's. IOW, Canada will continue doing what they have been, which is making big announcements but not appropriating any funding. That's how they lost their destroyers and replenishment ships...they kept getting older and they kept postponing their replacements.The new Defence Policy has been revealed:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberal ... -1.4149473
http://dgpaapp.forces.gc.ca/en/canada-d ... report.pdf
It's a mix of the some already announced and in progress commitments, and some new ones. Being highlighted is below:
15 new warships
88 new fighter jets
New armed drones
Replacements for the CP-140 Aurora's
Replace the CC-150 Polaris tankers
Replace the Twin Otter fleet
bmacleod wrote:seahawk wrote:Nice to see a country taking defence seriously. I hope it will be 88 F-35s and P-8 + KC-46s + C27.
88 F-35s? Even half of that number - 40 will be a big challenge for Canada's defense budget.
The Super Hornet order is looking more solid now..
A bigger focus on drones is also more likely...
Also do we really need mid-air refueling? Surely an agreement with the US Air Force would be much cheaper....
keesje wrote:
seahawk wrote:Nice to see a country taking defence seriously. I hope it will be 88 F-35s and P-8 + KC-46s + C27.
seahawk wrote:keesje wrote:
Why would Canada look at obsolete 4th gen fighters?
seahawk wrote:keesje wrote:
Why would Canada look at obsolete 4th gen fighters?
ThePointblank wrote:Especially one that has ZERO compatibility with existing weapons and minimal interoperability with US systems.
zeke wrote:ThePointblank wrote:Especially one that has ZERO compatibility with existing weapons and minimal interoperability with US systems.
Gripen E is network centric airframe with NATO interoperability lots of existing US weapons and datalink at a fraction of the cost. The F414G is very similar to F/A-18 power plant.
seahawk wrote:But again why something with a weapons suite not compatible with current stocks, not compatible with their neighbour to the South ...
keesje wrote:seahawk wrote:But again why something with a weapons suite not compatible with current stocks, not compatible with their neighbour to the South ...
That might not be an overriding consideration in this case and some differentiation also has advantages in terms of capabilities, dependency & predictability.
Apart from that, the Rafale has more range than F35, can carry more, has 2 engines safety and e.g. a conformal fuel tanks option Its faster and has a two crew option for longer complex missions. And it's combat proven. I'm no specialist but it doesn't look to bad at first sight compared to last of the line F18s and F35's.
The new POTUS is a nice guy, but the PM of Canada and Pres of France also seem to get along well and have strong domestic support.
http://www.rcinet.ca/en/2017/05/26/trudeau-macron-bromance-offers-new-face-of-franco-canadian-friendship/
ThePointblank wrote:keesje wrote:seahawk wrote:But again why something with a weapons suite not compatible with current stocks, not compatible with their neighbour to the South ...
That might not be an overriding consideration in this case and some differentiation also has advantages in terms of capabilities, dependency & predictability.
WIederling wrote:ThePointblank wrote:keesje wrote:
That might not be an overriding consideration in this case and some differentiation also has advantages in terms of capabilities, dependency & predictability.
You think the cooperation with the US will stay as close as before?
Politically Canada has increasingly less in common with a US that strongly goes for "crowbar unilateralism".
Why should Canada reserve some space on a sinking ship
ThePointblank wrote:keesje wrote:seahawk wrote:But again why something with a weapons suite not compatible with current stocks, not compatible with their neighbour to the South ...
That might not be an overriding consideration in this case and some differentiation also has advantages in terms of capabilities, dependency & predictability.
Apart from that, the Rafale has more range than F35, can carry more, has 2 engines safety and e.g. a conformal fuel tanks option Its faster and has a two crew option for longer complex missions. And it's combat proven. I'm no specialist but it doesn't look to bad at first sight compared to last of the line F18s and F35's.
The new POTUS is a nice guy, but the PM of Canada and Pres of France also seem to get along well and have strong domestic support.
http://www.rcinet.ca/en/2017/05/26/trudeau-macron-bromance-offers-new-face-of-franco-canadian-friendship/
The Rafale is a more expensive aircraft to buy and sustain. Everything from parts, tooling, and weapons. Different supply chain as well that is across the ocean.
If a RCAF F-35 breaks down in Alaska and needs a spare part, we could walk over to the USAF maintenance people and ask them for the spare part, tools and get help replacing the part. We could probably be on our way again the next day.
If a RCAF Rafale breaks down in Alaska, we would have to first source the part if it available in a Canadian warehouse, get it to a RCAF base, and load it, the tools, and the maintenance technicians on a cargo aircraft, and fly out to repair the aircraft. Probably will take a few days, maybe even a week to get that done.
The Rafale is inferior to the F-35 in many respects; the radar is inferior, it lacks sensor fusion capabilities, the Thales Damocles targeting pod is dramatically inferior to the F-35's internal Sniper XR pod, and it won't go as fast when armed.
It also has a very limited weapons fit, and the Rafale can't even take full advantage of some of the weapons planned for it; for one the integration of the Meteor missile on the Rafale is half-baked; the Rafale is communicating with the Meteor missile using the same data link it is using for the MICA missile, which means it is a one-way data link; both the Eurofighter and the Gripen have two way data links with the Meteor missile, and the F-35 will also have the same two-way data link as well.
Did I also mention that the Rafale is much more expensive as well... and the trend for the Rafale is costs are going to continue to go upwards, while the F-35 is going down...
ThePointblank wrote:The Rafale is inferior to the F-35 in many respects; the radar is inferior, it lacks sensor fusion capabilities
the Thales Damocles targeting pod is dramatically inferior to the F-35's internal Sniper XR pod, and it won't go as fast when armed.
It also has a very limited weapons fit
ThePointblank wrote:The F414 is not at all similar to the F404. While it is derived from the F404, they have very little in common.
Especially considering the variant of the F404 being used in Canadian CF-18's ( F404-GE-400), there's very little that is shared between it and the F414. No parts or tools are common between them. The engine core in the F414 is totally redesigned even compared to the later versions of the F404. Different shop requirements as well.