Jump to content


Photo

F-35 Purchase


3900 replies to this topic

#1726 Derek L

Derek L

    F-35 Cheerleader Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,062 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Beautiful British Columbia
  • Interests:Drinking scotch in the backroom of the old boys club.

Posted 26 April 2012 - 06:51 PM

That is the point. We can add all the tanks we want to the Hornet we aren't paying for a stealth fighter with it.


And we can add all the tanks we want to the F-35 for NORPATs and have a much greater range.
The income tax created more criminals than any other single act of government.
-Barry Goldwater-

Some people regard private enterprise as a predatory tiger to be shot. Others look on it as a cow they can milk. Not enough people see it as a healthy horse, pulling a sturdy wagon.
-Winston Churchill-

Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
-Ronald Reagan-

#1727 Smallc

Smallc

    as in just a little

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Waterhen, Manitoba
  • Interests:Politics and Cars

Posted 26 April 2012 - 07:02 PM

And we can add all the tanks we want to the F-35 for NORPATs and have a much greater range.


And if you need to go stealth, then you drop them. If you drop them from a SH...you have a SH. Also, the F-35 has more than some stealth.

#1728 Derek L

Derek L

    F-35 Cheerleader Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,062 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Beautiful British Columbia
  • Interests:Drinking scotch in the backroom of the old boys club.

Posted 26 April 2012 - 07:07 PM

And if you need to go stealth, then you drop them. If you drop them from a SH...you have a SH. Also, the F-35 has more than some stealth.



Exactly.......As for single engine aircraft in the Arctic:


USAF F-16s, some even on the ramp

Norway's largest F-16 base

And a forward base for the Danes F-16s
The income tax created more criminals than any other single act of government.
-Barry Goldwater-

Some people regard private enterprise as a predatory tiger to be shot. Others look on it as a cow they can milk. Not enough people see it as a healthy horse, pulling a sturdy wagon.
-Winston Churchill-

Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
-Ronald Reagan-

#1729 punked

punked

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,987 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 07:14 PM

And we can add all the tanks we want to the F-35 for NORPATs and have a much greater range.

That really isn't the point. The point is once we add the tanks it doesn't have stealth so why pay for stealth at all?

#1730 Smallc

Smallc

    as in just a little

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Waterhen, Manitoba
  • Interests:Politics and Cars

Posted 26 April 2012 - 07:19 PM

That really isn't the point. The point is once we add the tanks it doesn't have stealth so why pay for stealth at all?


Because if the planes are threatened, they can drop the tanks, and they're stealth. The SH, EF, and Raf don't have that ability.

#1731 Derek L

Derek L

    F-35 Cheerleader Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,062 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Beautiful British Columbia
  • Interests:Drinking scotch in the backroom of the old boys club.

Posted 26 April 2012 - 07:19 PM

That really isn't the point. The point is once we add the tanks it doesn't have stealth so why pay for stealth at all?


Because we can choose not to add tanks or choose to drop said tanks, and the aircraft is stealth, the Hornet…..not so much.
The income tax created more criminals than any other single act of government.
-Barry Goldwater-

Some people regard private enterprise as a predatory tiger to be shot. Others look on it as a cow they can milk. Not enough people see it as a healthy horse, pulling a sturdy wagon.
-Winston Churchill-

Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
-Ronald Reagan-

#1732 punked

punked

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,987 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 07:21 PM

Because we can choose not to add tanks or choose to drop said tanks, and the aircraft is stealth, the Hornet…..not so much.

It is stealth it just can't be used. I wonder if all those dropped tanks Harper calculated in the life cycle costs?

#1733 Derek L

Derek L

    F-35 Cheerleader Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,062 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Beautiful British Columbia
  • Interests:Drinking scotch in the backroom of the old boys club.

Posted 26 April 2012 - 07:26 PM

It is stealth it just can't be used. I wonder if all those dropped tanks Harper calculated in the life cycle costs?


Why can’t it be used? As for the cost of drop tanks, like munitions, I don’t see how one could estimate their expenditures. How many wars/conflicts will Canada be involved in between now and the 2050s?
The income tax created more criminals than any other single act of government.
-Barry Goldwater-

Some people regard private enterprise as a predatory tiger to be shot. Others look on it as a cow they can milk. Not enough people see it as a healthy horse, pulling a sturdy wagon.
-Winston Churchill-

Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
-Ronald Reagan-

#1734 punked

punked

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,987 posts

Posted 26 April 2012 - 07:29 PM

Why can’t it be used? As for the cost of drop tanks, like munitions, I don’t see how one could estimate their expenditures. How many wars/conflicts will Canada be involved in between now and the 2050s?

That really isn't my point is it?

#1735 Smallc

Smallc

    as in just a little

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Waterhen, Manitoba
  • Interests:Politics and Cars

Posted 26 April 2012 - 07:34 PM

That really isn't my point is it?


What is your point? I'm not sure you even know.

#1736 Derek L

Derek L

    F-35 Cheerleader Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,062 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Beautiful British Columbia
  • Interests:Drinking scotch in the backroom of the old boys club.

Posted 26 April 2012 - 07:34 PM

That really isn't my point is it?


I fail to see your point, it seems to be ever so changing………The point, as I understand it, from the article you linked to was that the current Hornet (and Super Hornet & Eagle) was a superior platform for Arctic Sovereignty patrols, based on it’s two engines and “greater range than the F-35”, with both “points” being proven false.
The income tax created more criminals than any other single act of government.
-Barry Goldwater-

Some people regard private enterprise as a predatory tiger to be shot. Others look on it as a cow they can milk. Not enough people see it as a healthy horse, pulling a sturdy wagon.
-Winston Churchill-

Government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
-Ronald Reagan-

#1737 DogOnPorch

DogOnPorch

    Klown Without Pity

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,547 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:British Columbia
  • Interests:Propane and propane accessories.

Posted 26 April 2012 - 09:40 PM

Drop tanks tend to get jettisoned before entering the combat zone as they are a liability. This has been the deal since WW2. The idea is to have the longest time possible in the combat zone while under combat power. Since mid-air refueling has become very reliable (and plentiful), drop tanks are now optional rather than mandatory for most missions.

Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
---Cletus


#1738 DogOnPorch

DogOnPorch

    Klown Without Pity

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,547 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:British Columbia
  • Interests:Propane and propane accessories.

Posted 26 April 2012 - 09:51 PM

A notable historical exception to this would be the B-58 Hustler that was designed around its massive droppable pod which carried the fuel for the outward bound leg + yer Hydrogen Bomb. Once the device was lobbed towards the target, the Hustler could then gun-it to its intended Mach 2 speed and head for home base clean. Provided there was a home base.

Jingoistic, chest thumpy video w/ Brig. Gen. Jimmy Stewart USAF


Edited by DogOnPorch, 26 April 2012 - 09:59 PM.

Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
---Cletus


#1739 waldo

waldo

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,998 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 April 2012 - 10:47 PM

No, his opinion is just that and, based on when he retired, his opinion isn’t anymore valid then anyone else’s outside of the program.

the retired CF-18 'fleet manager's' statement suggests the F-35 has less range than the CF-18... and that from a Canadian north patrol/reconnaissance aspect, the F-35 is disadvantaged in relation to the CF-18. This same range reference shows up, many times over across various sites... if the guy has it wrong, if all these other appearances of the same reference are wrong, just what are the range numbers that would correspond to that type of flight mode; i.e., patrol/reconnaissance?

I've also read several references that suggest the F-35 drop tanks only realize a minimal 8% gain over the range associated with the internal tank... drag performance considerations. In any case, MLW member punked hit the other point I was lining up around - stealth. If you're so accepting to dropping stealth for maximizing range... and that, supposedly, that dropping stealth only realizes you an additional (and measly) 8% range gain, isn't "dropping stealth" a non-starter?

but again, what are the range numbers for the flight mode associated with flying patrol/reconnaissance... CF-18 versus F-35?

#1740 Smallc

Smallc

    as in just a little

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Waterhen, Manitoba
  • Interests:Politics and Cars

Posted 27 April 2012 - 07:18 AM

the retired CF-18 'fleet manager's' statement suggests the F-35 has less range than the CF-18


But it doesn't as you can see, and has already been posted. The F-35 can go farther on internal fuel than any other option. The same is true on external fuel.

Edited by Smallc, 27 April 2012 - 07:19 AM.




Reply to this topic