3900 replies to this topic

[cybercoma]

Colonel Maillet retired in '01....Colonel Maillet.......Now it's doesn't mention the exact date, but the X-35 had only won the JSF Competition that year………So I fail to see how the Colonel would have any “inside information” pertaining to the program………….As for his opinion on the suitability of a “single engine aircraft in the arctic”, well I’d suggest he explains the service of the F-16 (single engine) used by both the Americans and Norwegians for over 30 years up North……The Norwegians themselves, base over 2/3rds their fleet within the Arctic circle……As for “range”, as mentioned by smallc, the F-35 carries more internal then our current Hornet carriers with external drop tanks…………

So your position is that this former fleet manager and aerospace engineer is wrong about the capabilities and suitability of the F-35? Because given his education and experience, it seems like he would know what he's talking about.

[Army Guy]

I dont want to disband the military, or the airforce, but I also dont want to spend borrowed money on global socialism in the form of world policing.

so did yoyu mind when military budgets were slashed to fund other depts and programs, resulting in our current state of affairs.

[Army Guy]

So your position is that this former fleet manager and aerospace engineer is wrong about the capabilities and suitability of the F-35? Because given his education and experience, it seems like he would know what he's talking about.

So your postion is that this guy knows more than the rest of the Airforce chain of command, Not to challage a full Col who's expertise lie in manging the F-18 project, yes he would very knowledgable in the intel he was exposed to...but how much is that? i would not take his word over the subject matter experts with full access to all the details...

[Derek L]

So your position is that this former fleet manager and aerospace engineer is wrong about the capabilities and suitability of the F-35? Because given his education and experience, it seems like he would know what he's talking about.

Yup. When did he retire? There wasn't even an F-35 in 2001, but an X-35 & X-32.....Again, as I’ve said, I question his opinion, since the two major points, the single engine & range, are very much false concerns when contrasted with the F-35........

[Derek L]

So your postion is that this guy knows more than the rest of the Airforce chain of command, Not to challage a full Col who's expertise lie in manging the F-18 project, yes he would very knowledgable in the intel he was exposed to...but how much is that? i would not take his word over the subject matter experts with full access to all the details...

Within the all the Air Forces (And a few Navies), of all the partner nations & Singapore, Israel and Japan……..

[GostHacked]

His views don't make any sense. This aircraft has TWICE the range of the current fleet of CF-18s. Also, the idea that drones are going to quickly supplant human pilots in these type of aircraft is funny.

The military in the USA has been moving towards a UAV fleet since the early 80's when they were thinking about it. The goal was to eliminate the pilot from the aircraft so lives are saved (oh the irony). ... It's not funny, it's a reality.

[DogOnPorch]

The most recent time is Syria, so far. The last one before that was probably Russia / Georgia. Many would present a case for military involvement in both cases.

World War II was, by far, the most serious.

Not really. I expect nation states to act in their own interests, and various different "coalitions" doing various things at various times. If Canada has a direct interest in a certain foreign policy then we should participate. Otherwise we should only participate in extreme cases.

So, we could be 'conditional members' of NATO and NORAD, then? Participate when it is of Canada's interests, only? Let's hope the US doesn't ever develop the same selfish attitude.

Hey... who believes in the good will of humans? Youre the one saying that I should pay taxes that go towards fixing other peoples problems. Id rather pay down my mortgage with that money, unless a direct threat emerges.

Actually, I never said anything remotly like that, liar. But, I take note that you'd be willing to let our armed forces decay unless a 'direct threat emerges'.

Edited by DogOnPorch, 26 April 2012 - 07:37 AM.

[cybercoma]

Yup. When did he retire? There wasn't even an F-35 in 2001, but an X-35 & X-32.....Again, as I’ve said, I question his opinion, since the two major points, the single engine & range, are very much false concerns when contrasted with the F-35........

So you can read the news reports and articles and know everything you need to know about those jets to say he's wrong, but he, an aerospace engineer and former fleet manager, is wrong because he retired? Whatever you say.

[Smallc]

So you can read the news reports and articles and know everything you need to know about those jets to say he's wrong

Yes, you can. His concerns are nonsense.

[Fletch 27]

With the Liberal math, It is much more prudent to achquire used P51 Mustangs from the UK war Museum and maintain them for the next 40 years. It would be WAY cheaper.. But makes no sense... Withthe NDP math, they would just like a Museum..

The F-35 makes sense unless your ok with your pilots getting shot down by China's Next-Gen Chengdu J-20 stealth fighter. Oh, and China is more than happy to supply these to many of our friendly/not-so friendly nations that we are currently "playing in the sandbox" with now..

And regardless of what the Libs and NDP spin; the process was a battle that was narrowed down to 2 suppliers (from 5).. This plane out-performed them all and bring many additions that the runner up could not accommodate at that time, nor can now for that matter (all development halted)..

[waldo]

This aircraft has TWICE the range of the current fleet of CF-18s.

As for “range”, as mentioned by smallc, the F-35 carries more internal then our current Hornet carriers with external drop tanks…………

His concerns are nonsense.

you've hit upon one of his expressed concerns... range. In regards the type of mode/flying for Northern patrols/reconnaissance, care to offer up those respective range numbers for each plane:

CF-18 => ???? km

F-35 => ???? km

[waldo]

And regardless of what the Libs and NDP spin; the process was a battle that was narrowed down to 2 suppliers (from 5).. This plane out-performed them all and bring many additions that the runner up could not accommodate at that time, nor can now for that matter (all development halted)..

narrowed down by who? What 5 planes... leaving which 2? What were the defined requirements particularly as relates to Canada's needs? Out performed... on what... paper?

as for math, it's quite clear you're most accepting of Harper Conservative "under which pea" math... it's quite clear you accept a 'whatever it costs, it costs' summation.

[Smallc]

CF-18 => 537 - 704 km

F-35 => 1080 km

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/pentagon-agrees-to-f-35a-combat-radius-reduction-369287/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_CF-18_Hornet

Now of course, there are other range numbers, but for interception missions, this is the important one.

[dre]

so did yoyu mind when military budgets were slashed to fund other depts and programs, resulting in our current state of affairs.

Both military and social spending were cut to balance the budget as they should have been. But the first places that should get cut are the ones with no return on investment. Like OPERATION: "OOPS Should thought THAT through a little better!" in Afghanistan that were still mired in 10 years later. Thats not "defense" spending, it actually diverts money AWAY from real defense spending.

[GostHacked]

narrowed down by who? What 5 planes... leaving which 2? What were the defined requirements particularly as relates to Canada's needs? Out performed... on what... paper?

as for math, it's quite clear you're most accepting of Harper Conservative "under which pea" math... it's quite clear you accept a 'whatever it costs, it costs' summation.

Canada's best bet was to be at least partially involved in the USA's projects. The only thing that might stand a chance would be Bombardier, but they lack the experience in fighter aircraft. Canada simply does not have the infrastructure to support this type of venture. If Canada had pursued with the Arrow that might have turned into a different story.

But hey, it's only because of agreements that Canada really has no other option but to go with Made in the USA (but parts made here and abroad). I say if we go for the F-35, let's get the good ones. The VTOL would be a complete asset for remote locations where you want to conceal yourself. You can save money just by not needing to build large runways and the needed facilities and equipment to maintain them. You can operate almost anywhere and set up camp.

The Euro Fighter venture kind of paid off, and it's not a bad piece of kit, it can serve most of our needs. Also, the Swedes also have some damn fine aircraft. But the Chinese and the Russians are now bringing their offers to the table. And like said here, they have no problem selling to anyone.