Another F-18 Down

[StaxBundlez]

[SkunkWorks]

Originally Posted by tofu1413

... imagine this plane in Canadian skies... but one could only dream.

... About a Russian airstrike? Fuck that.

[tofu1413]

patrolling canadian skies.

[CorneringArtist]

Yes, a Veritech is based off an F-14 already, but while on the subject of ridiculous sky patrollers...

[tofu1413]

Originally Posted by CorneringArtist

Yes, a Veritech is based off an F-14 already, but while on the subject of ridiculous sky patrollers...

VF 25G Messiah. (sniper variant)

[darkfroggy]

Oh yes, let's use Russian planes to defend the North against Russians.



As cool as the Sukhoi looks, it's pretty obvious no Western country would use it.

[StylinRed]

Originally Posted by belka

That first statement is complete bullshit - give your head a shake. We don't just stop caring about maintenance because we may or may not buy new aircraft. I'm sure the pilots would feel perfectly safe flying "why bother fixing these" aircraft.

Second, it will cost A LOT more in the long run to keep these 30 year old fighters flying. This isn't an airliner that just cruises at 40,000ft, its a fighter jet that pulls constant G's that puts immense stress on all the components.


LOL @ suggestion that Russian fighters are better.

Originally Posted by too_slow

Were you serious,or are you just trolling? :rolleyes

you're telling me you don't think maintenance slows/drops when something is about to be replaced?

that's fine, i can see why that could be true but can you see where maintenance could be cut or why it would be? (i can)

I'm not saying that's the case but to say it isn't without a doubt?


as for the Russian fighters being better remark (@belka) i'm astonished that you're more intelligent than the entire RAND corporation (who if you knew anything about you wouldn't dare say such a thing) and the expert government military analysts in charge of National Security issues (Wheeler)

However in the RAND war games analysis they didn't say the SU-35s were superior fighters per se they simply said the SU-35s would beat the F-35; the SU-35s would beat the F35s not by engaging them but rather by taking out the refueling jets which the SU-35s would be capable in doing without engaging (the F35s)

they later backtracked from their analysis due to pressure from the govt


keep forgetting RS is full of teenage, bus riding experts that don't need to pay heed to real analysts

[Levitron]

Ahhh....what the hell....since we're at it:

[belka]

Originally Posted by StylinRed

you're telling me you don't think maintenance slows/drops when something is about to be replaced?

that's fine, i can see why that could be true but can you see where maintenance could be cut or why it would be? (i can)

I'm not saying that's the case but to say it isn't without a doubt?

Yes, I can say 100% without a doubt because I maintain them. We don't have situations where parts are not replaced because "we have new fighters on "order" (no official contract has been signed by the way) so we just leave components in the jet", even though it can cause issues. This practice is highly illegal and not only puts the pilots life at risk but also the civilian population. Even suggesting such a retarded practice shows just now little, if at all, you know about this topic.

i'm astonished that you're more intelligent than the entire RAND corporation (who if you knew anything about you wouldn't dare say such a thing) and the expert government military analysts in charge of National Security issues (Wheeler)

I don't know more than the RAND corporation and I don't care what they say, nor does any sane military in the world. The DND has an office in Ottawa that is dedicated to the CF-18 replacement program. It was their job for the last 10 years or so, to find a suitable CF18 replacement for our military. The F-35 was the only modern, 5th-gen fighter that met all our criteria.

However in the RAND war games analysis they didn't say the SU-35s were superior fighters per se they simply said the SU-35s would beat the F-35; the SU-35s would beat the F35s not by engaging them but rather by taking out the refueling jets which the SU-35s would be capable in doing without engaging (the F35s)

You are really gonna base your argument on video simulations? Go play Ace Combat.

keep forgetting RS is full of teenage, bus riding experts that don't need to pay heed to real analysts

You keep believing and listening to idiot "think tanks" and the media that feeds you absolute drivel. Clearly you know nothing about this topic and don't have a clue because you base your posts on crap you read on the internet. First hand experience - you have none.

[tofu1413]

Originally Posted by Levitron

Ahhh....what the hell....since we're at it:

there was a conspiracy that the americans were behind the cancellation of this plane...

the plane made an excellent interceptor though.

[StylinRed]

its only a conspiracy because our govt wont admit to it but we alll know it was those bloody americans -_-

[orange7]

we need this to defend against any zerg invasion in the Artic.

[gars]

one of the important factors with the F35 as well - is that if we contributed to the design, and also bought the fighters, it allows more Canadian Companies to help produce the parts for the plane - which is very important for our small aerospace industry. This will allow a lot more skill to develop north of the border, rather than allowing all the good engineers and workers to go south for work.

[GabAlmighty]

Hopefully I get to fly the F-35...

[91LS-VTak]

The Canadian government already pumped a bunch of money into the F-35 program...they're not going to back out now and throw that money down the drain. To anyone that says "cancel the F-35 contract" i say "lets not have another SeaKing disaster again" (where the Liberals came to power and the first thing they did was cancel the contract to replace the Seaking helicopters).

[gars]

the worst part about the Sea King replacements were that they still had to pay out the contract, but we still didn't get replacements!

[Bouncing Bettys]

At times I do wonder where our military and aerospace industry would be now if the Avro Arrow had not been cancelled and NASA and other agencies hadn't scooped up the talented minds behind it.

[seakrait]

well, the aussie gov't recently their F/A-18E/F Super Hornets as an interim fighter replacements for their F-111s. then again, they only bought 24.

i'm not particularly crazy about the f-35 and its performance or our need for 'stealth' technology nor the procurement process that the government went through. they should still have had a proper competition...

i suppose the stealth technology the f-35 brings would be a safety factor for our pilots in the defense of our country...

[StylinRed]

Originally Posted by belka

Yes, I can say 100% without a doubt because I maintain them. We don't have situations where parts are not replaced because "we have new fighters on "order" (no official contract has been signed by the way) so we just leave components in the jet", even though it can cause issues. This practice is highly illegal and not only puts the pilots life at risk but also the civilian population. Even suggesting such a retarded practice shows just now little, if at all, you know about this topic.

on a much smaller scale i suppose (but affecting far more people) the Pitt River Bridge was decaying a year prior to construction beginning for the new bridge, pot holes/ barriers were either not repaired or fitted with temporary solutions (when that accident occured where a guys car drove off into the river the fence just had a temporary sheet of metal thrown up instead of being fully repaired)

not it may not be on the same scale as a fighter jet but it affects more ppl daily

however i'll take your word about maintenance over my musings based on other govt projects.

I don't know more than the RAND corporation and I don't care what they say, nor does any sane military in the world. The DND has an office in Ottawa that is dedicated to the CF-18 replacement program. It was their job for the last 10 years or so, to find a suitable CF18 replacement for our military. The F-35 was the only modern, 5th-gen fighter that met all our criteria.

Actually the world listens to the RAND corporation... governments, the military, dictatorships, the united nations... you name it... (so like i said if you knew anything about them....) being in the occupation that it sounds like you're in its unbelievable that you don't know who they are...

You are really gonna base your argument on video simulations? Go play Ace Combat.

You keep believing and listening to idiot "think tanks" and the media that feeds you absolute drivel. Clearly you know nothing about this topic and don't have a clue because you base your posts on crap you read on the internet. First hand experience - you have none.

that was just ridiculous

[Noir]

People keep talking about, in defense of country, no need for stealth, blah blah blah, but are people forgetting the Canada is part of NATO. It potentially means that if the situation calls for it, Canada has to be part of the aggressors to a country with a conflict not entirely related to Canada itself.

Sure.... let's send our 3rd gen planes in a conflict where our allies are using 5th gen machinations. That should do wonders to Canada's cred on the international stage. I mean, does anyone remember Harper condeming China's human rights treatment. Anyways, like they gave a fuck what Harper thinks.

[JD¹³]

Originally Posted by seakrait

well, the aussie gov't recently their F/A-18E/F Super Hornets as an interim fighter replacements for their F-111s. then again, they only bought 24.

i'm not particularly crazy about the f-35 and its performance or our need for 'stealth' technology nor the procurement process that the government went through. they should still have had a proper competition...

i suppose the stealth technology the f-35 brings would be a safety factor for our pilots in the defense of our country...

The Australians got the Super Hornet's as their F111's were well beyond their expiry date, and they only got a few as they will be some of the first to obtain the F35. They, like Canada, saw the Super Hornet as a GREAT aircraft yet still like putting a bandaid on a broken leg in terms of service longevity. Not worth a major investment.

Canada itself may not need the Stealth technology but as has been mentioned it's NATO or UN affiliation may put our pilots into harms way elsewhere. The Balkans comes to mind where luckily we didn't lose any aircraft but the Americans did. One very adept SAM operator managed to shoot down a Stealth Fighter and an F16 was also lost behind enemy lines (basis for the movie of the same title). As technology both in the air and on the ground advances we need to keep up.

If we're not on the same level (or even close) than our Air Force becomes obsolete and practically useless. Saying we don't need a new generation of fighter aircraft is like saying those from the Vietnam and Korean War era would still be effective today. Aircraft age aside, the design and capability of jets like the F4 Phantom, F86 Sabre, MIG21, etc............ those fighters today would be shot down before they even knew they were being engaged. The F22 for example, before being put on active duty, did an air-to-air sim with FIFTEEN F15's in Virginia. The single F22 shot down every F15 without any of them ever getting a clean lock or shot at it. Considering the F15 is still the US's most abundant air-to-air fighter that is a massive leap in technology and capability.

EDIT - And FFS there WAS a proper procurement process. It just took place behind the scenes over a long period of time, out of the public eye. Just because the government announces something that you've never heard of before doesn't mean they just made a black and white decision on a whim. The F35 vs FA-18E/F vs Eurofighter vs...... has been going on much longer than the news agencies or NDP "we need more social programs instead of planes" wannabe's would have you believe.

[Jackwimmer]

rofl if u guys think this is old, imagine the Iranians!
guys are still rocking the f14's from the times of the shah LOL

[adambomb]

^^

Why are you unthankable?


:IDL

[Jackwimmer]

good question!

[tofu1413]

Originally Posted by Jackwimmer

rofl if u guys think this is old, imagine the Iranians!
guys are still rocking the f14's from the times of the shah LOL

they just wont let them go..

i bet they were so sold since they watched top gun.