Build our own, superior aircraft for cheaper.

Why are we even considering the F-35 anymore?

:rofl:

We should start up the Arvo Arrow program again! :derp:

Err, did you mean to post in the http://www.revscene.net/forums/56514...thread-27.html thread? :p

I like that the top competition listed by the Liberals and NDP are the Super Hornet and the Typhoon. The F-18E/F will be done production in 5-6 years when the US Navy goes on the F35, so how are we supposed to get continued support for the next 30 years from Boeing for an aircraft they no longer build? The Typhoon has a cost per aircraft of more than double the F35. Hell at almost 200mil per plane it's more expensive than the F22, with no North American parts or tech support, or operational compatibility (at this point) with our closest allies.

As Belka said it's purely political bullshittery by people who don't have a clue what's best for the RCAF.

i think the real issue is the lying about the costs and the cons not even giving competitors a shot or discussing it not on the feasibility of competitors

Not sure how you can lie about the costs since they haven't changed. It was always going to be around $1B/year for a fleet F35s. The DND/RCAF did an internal study where all the fighters were compared and that recommendation was given to the government, who approved it. (the F35) The public doesn't need to know all the details, they just have to approve the operating funds for the next fleet. The $1B/year is well within the DND long-term budget.

Just for shits and giggles how about someone do a cost-comparison for the 40 year cycle of the CBC.

national news/tv/radio agencies are far more valuable than military equipment though and they play a greater role for the military as well

Not government funded ones. Canada will do without CBC just fine.

Feds told truth on F-35: Opposition really about clipping air force wings | Columnists | Opinion | Winnipeg Sun

No, I didnt, and I think that the lack of confidence in Canadian enginuity and/or support is apalling.

There is no denying that the F-35 is expensive, and the costs aren't even final at the packaged price of $45 Billion so far during the life of the fleet. It's a complicated aircraft that has been riddled with issues for years.

There is a highly political aspect to deciding what we need for an updated fleet of aircraft, do we want to primarily attack or defend? Personally I would like to see a fleet that is centered on the defence of this nation, I don't think that we should be meddling in affairs overseas that would require a plane that is not within our national interests at home.

I'm not going to go into the technical aspects of the Arrow, what I'm more interested in was the display of genius by the Canadian engineers that created it. It was 50 years ahead of it's time, designed and built so well that the first flight was practically flawless. Requiring little to no improvement, it was superior to anything the Americans had built, and it didn't even have the updated engines installed that were in the works, which would have made it even more spectacular. Those same engineers and designers were later hired into NASA, and helped make the Apollo program possible.

I believe that Canadians should build an aircraft for Canada, it's been proven that we can build a superior aircraft, regardless of the difference in technology between now and then. We have the resources, man power, and intelligence to do so. What most people are forgetting, is that if the plane is built in Canada, most of the money will have been spent in Canada. Buying the F-35 will ensure that $45 billion Canadian dollars are given directly to the Americans.

What some of us lack is the confidence to complete such a venture.

You must be a used car salesman.

Buy Chinese and Russian planes then, i'm sure our neighbors who essentially are our protectors will love that

BBC greatest example; imho CBC is far more valuable to the country than jets or any firearm/bomb/vehicle (pen stronger than the sword deal)

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/...-new-here2.jpg
(and my mom works for CBC)

I was JUST about to post this same article. It has been run by the Toronto Sun as well. Points that stand out to me:

Lexington Institute

Wasn't it the Liberal Government who got Canada into the F-35 program in the first place?

NVM - read above. Its a subject where blame or phrase is hard to place here. Both Liberals and Conservatives earned some here.

Yes, but they are now backing out and saying they invested in the "technology", not the jet itself. Fucking non sense bullshit lefty garbage.

Anywho....

When compared to the alternatives, the F-35 is still the best option


The critics will soon be silenced completely with their bullshit arguments and non sense.

yes, but at that time, nobody knew, that the bird would end up costing as much due to costs overruns. and as other countries drop out of the project price per piece is going up.

regardless, they should have had a transparent bidding process.
given f-35 is good and all, but its an overkill for Canadian forces (my opinion),,

U.S. F-16s tasked to destroy enemy radars, missile batteries to get the same
radar-absorbing paint job of the F-35

Posted by David Cenciotti
The Aviationist

August 30, 2012

All the U.S. "Wild Weasel" F-16s are being given a new paint job similar to
the one of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

It is called "Have Glass 5th generation" as it represents the evolution of
the standard Have Glass program that saw all the F-16s receiving a two-tone
grey color scheme made with a special radar-absorbing paint capable to
reduce the aircraft Radar Cross Section; in fact, "Vipers" are covered with
RAM (Radar Absorbent Material) made of microscopic metal grains that can
degrade the radar signature of the aircraft.

For the moment, the JSF-like paint job will be applied to the F-16CM
(formerly CJ) Block 50 Fighting Falcon aircraft that can carry a variety of
air-to-air and air-to-surface ordnance, including HARM (High-speed
Anti-Radiation Missiles) and precision-guided munitions.

Their role is to enter the enemy territory ahead of the strike package to
take care of the enemy air defenses: radars and fixed and mobile SAM
(Surface-to-Air Missiles) batteries.

Therefore, the units that will fly with the F-16CMs in the new color scheme
will be those tasked with SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses) missions:
the 52nd Fighter Wing at Spangdahlem (Germany), the 35th FW at Misawa
(Japan), the 20th FW at Shaw Air Force Base, the 169th FW at McEntire Joint
National Guard Base (SC), and 148th FW at Duluth International Airport,
(MN).

Whilst two aircraft in the U.S. flew the Have Glass 4 paint job for test
purposes (98-0004 and 98-0005 flying with the 85th Test and Evaluation
Squadron from Eglin AFB) the first aircraft spotted in the new livery is a
Minnesota ANG F-16CM, 91-0391, that is currently deployed at Kandahar,
Afghanistan.

The F-35 will replace the F-16CM in the SEAD role in the future.

===================================

New F-16 software platform to be tested by 40th, 85th

by Samuel King, Jr.
96th Test Wing Public Affairs

12/18/2012

EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, Fla. -- For the first time ever, developmental testing
for an F-16 operational flight program will occur at the 40th Flight Test
Squadron here.

The testing for Block 40 and 50 model F-16s is scheduled to begin in 2014
and will also be the first time developmental testing and operational
testing of the OFP will be conducted at the same base.

"This not only gives DT and OT pilots the unique opportunity for daily
face-to-face contact to discuss potential test issues, but also allows OT
pilots to participate in DT missions alongside their counterparts," said
Beau Booth, the F-16 M7 OFP project specialist for the 40th Flight Test
Squadron.

An OFP is the software in the F-16 that controls the avionics and allows the
jet to interface with external weapons. It is currently in the
design-try-out phase here. This phase is primarily to help the software
developers.

"In the DTO phase, a few early versions of the software, with limited
subsets of the planned new capabilities, are flight-tested to ensure basic
functionality so the software engineers can easily make any fundamental
changes before they get too far into the coding," said Booth.

This takes on a greater importance with this new OFP because it's the first
time an Air Force unit has developed the software. Previous F-16 OFP updates
were created by Lockheed Martin, but the 309th Software Maintenance Group
from Hill Air Force Base, Utah, is the developer for this iteration.

Previous DTO phases had a limited number of sorties due to resources and
test objectives.

"While this approach is adequate, it results in a relatively small number of
opportunities to find potential errors," said Booth. "Since there are
multiple ways to execute most tasks in the F-16, there are a lot of
potential combinations of pilot actions. DT does not have the resources to
test."

This was not the case with this DTO phase, however, since both OT and DT
pilots were available to participate. To date, the combined test team has
flown 41 test sorties. The previous F-16 OFP DTO included only 13 test
sorties.

"The ability to conduct a fully-integrated DT/OT test program allows us to
test new OFPs more thoroughly and field them faster and cheaper than ever
before," said Booth.

Historically, even though an OFP passes DT, OT pilots would find new
software errors due to the amount of flight time and pilot availability. The
added use of OT resources increases the potential of finding anomalies in
the software. It also gives OT pilots, who are ultimately responsible for
the final fielding recommendation, a chance to evaluate the software
development early. OT's upfront involvement cuts down on any late software
changes. It also avoids the associated extra test requirements, increased
costs, and fielding delays that could happen.

Although this F-16 OFP partnership is a new endeavor for the squadrons, the
40th and 85th are frequent collaborators in developmental and operational
testing. They are even headquartered in the same building for additional
functionality.

"In these fiscally-constrained times, the 40th and 85th are setting the
benchmark on how to perform integrated test," said Lt. Col. Thomas Seymour,
the 85th TES commander. "Being collocated is the key. This allows us to
share aircraft, infrastructure, aircrew, and ideas, which results in more
effective and efficient test and a better end product for the warfighter."

This new software package will be incorporated in all active-duty F-16s and
many Reserve aircraft.

http://www.afmc.af.mil/shared/media/...-zz999-533.jpg
http://www.afmc.af.mil/shared/media/...-zz999-534.jpg

Oh christ, wait for the first numpty in the media to suggest we just paint our current hornets to get the same 'stealth'. "It's all in the paint, has nothing to do with shaping."

:facepalm:

Haha, on that note:

7 Secret Ways America's Stealth Armada Stays off the Radar

It's no secret how America's stealth warplanes primarily evade enemy radars. Their airframes are specifically sculpted to scatter radar waves rather than bouncing them back to the enemy. Somewhat less important is the application, to select areas, of Radar Absorbing Material (RAM) meant to trap sensor energy not scattered by the plane's special shape.

In short, the four most important aspects of stealth are "shape, shape, shape, and materials", to quote Lockheed Martin analyst Denys Overholser, whose pioneering work resulted in the F-117 Nighthawk, the world's first operational stealth warplane.

But in addition to shaping and RAM, the Pentagon's current stealth planes -- the B-2 Spirit bomber, the F-22 Raptor fighter, the RQ-170 Sentinel drone, and the in-development F-35 Joint Strike Fighter -- boast other, lesser-known qualities that help them avoid detection. (We left the Army's stealth helicopter out of the discussion owing to a lack of information.)

These other stealth enhancements include: chemicals to eliminate telltale contrails; sophisticated, untraceable sensors and radios; specially-designed, hard-to-detect engine inlets; radar-canceling paint; and cooling systems for reducing a plane's heat signature. All of these evasion methods have been disclosed by the Air Force, although sometimes in scant detail.

With China and Russia both demonstrating a rapidly improving grasp of stealth shaping -- and materials to a lesser extent -- these other, possibly harder-to-master aspects of radar-evasion are arguably becoming more important to maintaining America's aerial advantage.

1. Smart Sensors

Radar is like long-range eyes in the sky for modern warplanes. Without this sensor, a plane is more or less flying blind. The problem is, radar works by emitting energy -- lots of it. And that can be detected by an enemy's own passive radar receptors in the same way that someone standing in a dark room can track the movements of another person carrying a flashlight.

The F-22, F-35, and B-2 work around this problem by practicing what Aviaton Week stealth guru Bill Sweetman called "emission-control principles". With the Raptor, emissions from the jet's AN/APG-77 radar "are managed in intensity, duration, and space to maintain the pilot's situational awareness while minimizing the chance that its signals will be intercepted." In other words, the plane's software is smart enough to use just enough energy to find and track targets -- and no more. The B-2 and F-35 have electronically-scanned radars that are similar to the Raptor's and probably employ the same tactics.

Plus the Raptor and Joint Strike Fighter both have non-emitting backup sensors that can fill in the gaps in the radar coverage. The F-22's AN/ALR-94 radar-warning receptors are among the most sensitive ever designed and can accurately -- and "silently" -- detect most radar-using targets at long range. The F-35 boasts a powerful set of cameras that achieve the same effect.

2. Radio Silence

A stealth plane's communications could also betray its location. In the case of the RQ-170, the dish for the drone's satellite radio hardware itself is a possible giveaway, as its antenna is potentially highly "reflective", or non-stealthy. It could be that's why Lockheed Martin designed the Sentinel spy drone with two distinctive humps on its back, each apparently containing a separate satellite dish. "If your UAV is being illuminated by radar, you turn to place that radar on one side of the aircraft and use the antenna on the opposite, 'shadow' side of the aircraft to communicate," Sweetman explained.

In the case of the B-2, F-22, and F-35, the bigger problem is how to communicate with other planes without sending out some obvious signal that can be tracked back to the source. Voice radio is out of the question. "As soon as I talk, I give myself away," said Mike Therrien, an Air Force comms expert. Likewise, non-voice radio datalinks used by older jets are too easy to detect. Lockheed Martin installed on the 187 Raptors a short-range, low-power datalink that is minimally detectable and the Joint Strike Fighter is getting a new, purpose-made, stealthy datalink that's also being added to the B-2.

But both of these links have problems interfacing with older comms networks, sometimes requiring stealth warplanes to be accompanied by special EQ-4 drones or E-11 manned planes with radio translation systems installed (http://tinyurl.com/9kje8qp).

3. Stealth with an "S"

One of the biggest radar giveaways is inside an aircraft. In most planes, the engine turbines are visible through the air inlet -- and they're a huge source of radar reflectivity. To mask the turbines, stealth warplane designers must connect the inlet to the engine indirectly, by snaking the inlet duct inside the fuselage in a rough S-shape.

The S-shaped inlet is a tricky bit of engineering to pull off. Boeing refined its engine-obscuring techniques using a futuristic, one-off test plane called the Bird of Prey (Boeing: Boeing Unveils Bird of Prey Stealth Technology Demonstrator), among whose most important features was a very stealthy inlet. But the Lockheed Martin-built RQ-170 is apparently too short for a curved duct and instead relies on a radar-blocking grill that covers the inlet mouth. Otherwise, the serpentine inlet is practically standard on current U.S. and, apparently, Chinese jets, but surprisingly Russia's T-50 stealth prototype doesn't have them (New Russian Airpower Efforts Show Progress).

4. Chilling Out

Airplanes generate a lot of heat. And even if you completely mask a plane's radar signature, it might still give off telltale infrared emissions, especially around the engine exhaust, but also from electronics, moving parts, and surface area exposed to high wind friction.

The B-2 and F-22's flat engine nozzles spread out the exhaust to avoid infrared hot spots, but to save money, all 2,400 planned U.S. F-35s will have a traditional, rounded nozzle that spews a lot of concentrated heat. The Spirit, Raptor, and Joint Strike Fighter apparently all feature gear for cooling hot leading edges such as the fronts of wings. They also boast systems that sink much of the heat generated by the on-board electronics and actuators into the fuel. The F-35 in particular pushed that concept to the extreme (F-35 partly recovers flight test record in 2010, but fresh obstacles await). "We're out of heat-sink capacity for the F-35," said James Engle, a former Air Force deputy assistant secretary.

Some researchers have considered new fuel types with better thermal properties in order to boost the heat capacity of today's planes. One university study (PDF: http://www.energy.psu.edu/sites/defa...ed_jetfuel.pdf) found that standard JP-8 jet fuel derived from coal instead of petroleum could safely absorb more heat.

5. Skin Deep

For U.S. stealth warplanes, a paint job is about more than good looks. Stealthy Spirits, Raptors, Joint Strike Fighters, and presumably Sentinels are coated in special paints that suppress heat and partially cancel out radar waves. But to work correctly, the paint has to be maintained in immaculate condition. "We are working all day every day," said Staff Sgt. Matthew Duque, an Air Force F-22 paint technician. Increasingly, high-tech robots guided by laser sensors are taking over stealth painting duties.

In any event, the paint on the F-35 is designed to be more robust than that on the Raptor. The Air Force has such high hopes for the new pigment that it is also painting some of its F-16s with the same formula (The Aviationist » U.S. F-16s tasked to destroy enemy radars, missile batteries to get the same radar-absorbing paint job of the F-35), hoping to lend the older jets a degree of stealthiness.

6. Contrail Control

Contrails are formed when jet engines spew sulfur, nitrogen, tiny fragments of metal, and other impurities into the atmosphere, attracting vaporized water that adheres to the pollutants and forms long, linear clouds that are visible for many miles in all directions, sometimes even at night.

That's obviously a problem for infiltrating warplanes trying to remain invisible to enemy defenders. In 1994, the Air Force paid Northrop Grumman $16 million to add a "contrail management system" to the 20-strong fleet of high-flying B-2 stealth bombers. The system somehow chemically prevents water from sticking to the bombers' exhaust, erasing any contrail. "How do those work? Beats the hell out of me," Matt Rasmussen wrote in an article on the phenomenon.

It's unclear if any of America's other stealth warplanes have similar contrail-suppression gear, but it wouldn't be surprising if they did.

7. Stealth Surprise

Perhaps the most remarkable quality of America's stealth warplanes is their continuing ability to escape public notice during years or even decades of development, testing, and initial operations. The F-117 and B-2 were secrets until the Air Force didn't want them to be anymore. The F-22 and F-35 have always been highly-visible programs, although many of the jets' specific capabilities are classified. The RQ-170, by contrast, reportedly flew during the 2003 Iraq war without any outsiders realizing what it was and stayed in the shadows until a lucky photographer finally spotted one of the 20 or so Sentinels in Afghanistan in 2007 (Return of The 'Beast of Kandahar' Stealth Drone | Danger Room | Wired.com).

Today the Air Force is apparently designing or testing at least two new radar-evading drones (Air Force May Be Developing Stealth Drones in Secret | Danger Room | Wired.com) plus the new Long-Range Strike Bomber, an even stealthier successor to the now-25-year-old Spirit. But the only evidence of these classified programs is oblique references in financial documents, vague comments by industry officials, and the occasional revealing commercial satellite photograph. Who knows what new qualities the next generation of stealth planes might possess in addition to those of the current armada.