After countless hours in this thread learning and reading about all sorts of very interesting things that I would have never known outside of this thread, I am curious, are there many members on here who are into the Russian fighters?

I have, in the past few years, really taken a liking to there designs and approach to fighters. Planes like the Su-35 just astound me with there capability.......would be cool to see Canada to rock some Russian jets (will never happen I know).

Actually, the Russians were showcasing their sukhoi's to Canada recently :troll:

+1.

Im a pretty big fan of the Russian hardware. They just work. Rugged and very capable machines.

The color schemes they rocked were pretty awesome too (Russian "Test Pilots", the SU35 prototype colors, the SU37 Prototype colors)

http://static.businessinsider.com/im...0015/image.jpg

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft...35/su35_02.jpg

http://www.mars.slupsk.pl/fort/sukho...u[596].jpg


Cold war era stuff from the soviet union were pretty awesome as well.

Mig 19, 21, 23, 25, 29, 31 :fullofwin: and of course.... the TU 95 Bear / TU 160 Blackjacks :megusta:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-lmfEEs-63Y...gic+Bomber.jpg

http://files.air-attack.com/MIL/euro...r_20070822.jpg



good watch on russian hardware. this episode on the MIG 25 programme!

canada has no use for 'super maneuverability' fighters like the su-35. low speed, low altitude air show tricks aren't relevant in modern BVR combat.

They said the same thing in Vietnam and they paid for that.
What do you do when your target comes in to low to be picked up on radar or you flew over a target on the ground and they take off within visual range of you?

F4's over Vietnam discovered quickly that a big fast jet at low altitude designed for BVR is not a good plan.
In theory, BVR is ideal however in the real world it is not always an option. When you are ordered to visually confirm your target the BVR world means nothing and if you have a jet that can not hold its own on a close in fight you may just end up being shot down.

The Su-35, and many other 4th-5th gen fighters have missiles that are more capable than those carried on our jets. Ones like the K-74M2 Archer which can fire over 90degrees off boresight.
If the fight gets in close enough to fire such weapons you will need to be able to do some crazy manoeuvring to defeat these as they have some very advanced systems that are able to defeat the countermeasures used on our planes.

If you truly believe that BVR is the end all then why are all fighters still equipped with cannons?
Ask an old F-4 pilot to explain that one :P

Actually not everyone in Australia is on the same page, like in Canada. This is just one article highlighting that fact:
F-35 Joint Strike Fighter purchase 'a great national scandal' says Coalition MP

If the numbers in that article are true (12.4 billion for 58 aircraft) that's over 213 MILLION DOLLARS PER AIRCRAFT! It doesn't matter if that's in AUD, USD, or CAD - that's a disgusting amount of money. Not to mention the additional 12 BILLION DOLLARS for upgrades and maintenance over a 30 year lifespan, and that's not even for their entire fleet of 72! Additionally, for the (only) two bases the Aussies plan to house the F35's at, their overhauls are going to cost an estimated 1.5 billion dollars. And they're in a much milder and more temperate region than we are.

Australia taking delivery of first F-35, plans to buy 72 - Pacific - Stripes

Numerous independent assessment's of the F35 have slammed it for it's actual capability/cost ratio versus competitors from other nations, most notably those being produced by Russia and China. In this interview with Pierre Spray, an aircraft designer who was involved with the design and production of the F16 and A10, he outlines the F35's major issues:


If an Advanced Super Hornet really does cost 115 million dollars, it's still looking like an almost 2-for-1 bargain compared to the F35. Just adding fuel to the discussion :whistle:

EDIT - Adding a photo, cause bitches love photos.

http://thepaperwall.com/wallpapers/w...3536c647e0.jpg

F-35 is a great idea, but poorly executed.

Canada should just buy the Eurofighter and be done with this whole thing.

has the RCAF operated any european aircraft? i do not follow their inventory well but it always seems to be something north american... politics again?

The Hawk, which has proven to be a huge failure. The reason is cost and supply. Imagine having to ship everything back and forth across the Atlantic.

Forgot about the Cormorant, that's a UK/Italian-built machine. But we only have 15.

oh yeah the comorant... i was not thinking helicopters :facepalm:


not sure if this has been posted before: Aircraft | Royal Canadian Air Force

Many other countries buy from supplies that are outside there general area.
The Eurofighter has proven to be very capable, would bring Canada into a more current fighting force and still be cheaper than F35's.

Oh god you used sprey as a source. :facepalm:

The eurofighter is already out of the running as are other euro aircraft. In the end it will be the f35 regardless what the kids playing video games want.

He's not a source for anything. His opinion, which is shared by a lot of people, is merely a discussion point.

Guys, I've got the perfect solution.

Let's buy up all the A-10 Warthogs recently decommissioned and use those instead. Sure, we may have to give up some distance and firepower capability, but who cares? They look freakin' awesome.

:fullofwin:



not srs

But you're serious about the bolded part, right? Cuz they do look sweet!

http://cdn.viralscape.com/wp-content...Dreamliner.jpg

http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/f...1643&mode=view

Just because I love the F16

Russian military jets flew within 100 kilometres of Canadian mainland - The Globe and Mail


more canadian arctic flyovers by Russia. this time within 75km of the mainland. but "Canada doesn't need fighters" says the hipsters.

I would argue that no one (generaly speaking) is against the procurement of a new fighter jet fleet. What raises questions is the cost of such an undertaking. The numbers in relation to the costs associated with the F35 have been explained ad nauseum. For a fraction of the costs, Canada could revamp its whole fleet with a set of combat aircraft capable of fulfilling Canada's air combat needs. Do we really need to embroil ourselves in an incredibly costly procurement program when less will do?

I vote for Super Hornets now and wait for 6th gen aircraft in 20-25 years, but I really dont know all the behind the scenes politics and business with the JSF program for the F35s. Its hard to be a major contributing partner and back out at the last second.

The trouble comes with predicting what will be needed in 25 years with technology in 25 years, and the massive cost for F35s current tech potentially becoming completely obsolete in a future of unmanned BVR laser beam shooters.

Regardless, we need something sooner than later.

http://i.imgur.com/hTX9Ho3.jpg

And I thought the C130 was a big looking plane


Also posted by the Navy from RIMPAC

http://www.forces.gc.ca/assets/FORCE..._700x394_1.mp4

Pretty sweet video not gonna lie

Wow, the C5 makes the F15s look like toys. What's the plane on the right side of the picture (tail only)?

KC-135 belonging to 100th Air Refueling Wing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tell me, what such combat aircraft could we procure for a fraction of the cost?

Lets just get 10000 A-4 Skyhawk's, its got 1000 more km in range than the F35. Then I might actually get to fly a plane!

10000 > 65 :concentrate: