[JD¹³]

We lost another bird late lastnight about 11km from CFB Cold Lake. No news or even rumours as to what went wrong. Pilot ejected safely, jets are all grounded at the moment.

Bring on the F35's please.

[roastpuff]

Yowzers. Do you think it's mechanical failure or something else?

[heero78]

"17 November 2010: Captain Darren Blaikie ejects from his CF-18 on approach to CFB Cold Lake. The aircraft crashes 13 kilometres from the base"

seriously...these birds are old...time for them to retire after almost 30 years.

[EmperorIS]

so now we got 3 left?

[FN-2199]

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/edmonton/story/2010/11/18/canada-jet-crash.html
A Canadian Forces pilot ejected from his fighter jet moments before it crashed near Cold Lake in northern Alberta overnight.
The CF-18 went down near CFB Cold Lake, 300 kilometres northeast of Edmonton.The CF-18 went down near CFB Cold Lake, 300 kilometres northeast of Edmonton. (CBC)

A military spokesman says Capt. Darren Blakie was at the controls when his CF-18 went down in a field 13 kilometres northwest of Canadian Forces Base Cold Lake a few minutes before midnight Wednesday night.

Blakie ejected from the twin-engine plane and was recovered close to the crash site by a military helicopter crew about two hours later, said Lt. David Lavallee.

Blakie — a member of the 409 Tactical Fighter Squadron at Cold Lake — was taken to hospital and was expected to be released following an examination.

The jet was returning to CFB Cold Lake from a mission and was trying to land when something went wrong, said Capt. Keith Hoey of the Joint Rescue Co-ordination Centre at CFB Trenton in eastern Ontario.

"At approximately seven miles [11 kilometres] from landing, something happened and the pilot was forced to eject out of the aircraft," Hoey said. "We're not sure what it was. At this time, it would be purely speculative."

Hoey said the pilot was found safe following a 90-minute search.

"The weather and the fact that it was dark just made it difficult to find him," he said.

Blakie was rescued after he set off a flare to draw the attention of the helicopter team.

The rescue crew and the RCMP worked together to pinpoint the scene, said Capt. Nicole Meszaros, a spokeswoman at CFB Cold Lake.

"That effort to get everybody involved in finding the downed aircraft and finding the downed pilot was obviously critical in making sure Capt. Blakie survived after the crash."

Bone-chilling cold

It was cold, but Meszaros wasn't sure if it was snowing. It was –13 C around that time, with the wind chill making it feel like a bone-chilling –22 C.
Capt. Riel Erickson, a CF-18 pilot, returns from a recent mission in Hawaii. A CF-18 went down in a field 13 kilometres northwest of Canadian Forces Base Cold Lake a few minutes before midnight Wednesday night.Capt. Riel Erickson, a CF-18 pilot, returns from a recent mission in Hawaii. A CF-18 went down in a field 13 kilometres northwest of Canadian Forces Base Cold Lake a few minutes before midnight Wednesday night. (DND)

But Blakie would have been well-prepared, she suggested.

"One thing about flying in northern Alberta, our pilots are well-equipped and well-trained to deal with the elements, so when they go flying, they certainly wear the right military equipment to ensure their safety in the event of a crash," she said.

"We have an extensive program run by our flight safety staff on the base," she said. "Cold weather is something that members of the Canadian Forces operate in."

The jet was destroyed on impact. A flight safety team from National Defence Headquarters in Ottawa was to examine the wreckage and determine what caused the crash.

This is the second crash of a CF-18 jet in 2010. In late July, a pilot survived a crash during an air show at the airport in Lethbridge, Alta.

[StylinRed]

according to the RAND Corporation (the world renowned think tank group) the F35s are garbage (losing to SU-35s)

They received so much shit from this from the govt. that they had to "clarify" they didn't consider certain aspects :rolleyes:

and this

US defense specialist Winslow T. Wheeler and aircraft designer Pierre Sprey who called the F-35 "heavy and sluggish" as well as having a "pitifully small load for all that money", and went on to criticize the value for money of the stealth measures as well as lacking fire safety measures. His final conclusion was that any air force would be better off maintaining its fleets of F-16s and F/A-18s compared to buying into the F-35 program.

China also says it sucks but they do have their own motives however when coupled with the US's own RAND corp and experts saying the same....

[tofu1413]

just because we're neighbours with the US.. we buy the F35.

there are better options out there.

I think canada would be better off with the Saab Gripen. theyre small, cheap, well armed, NATO weapons friendly, have good range and the best thing is.. they can take off on highways!

http://www.cas2.com/images/JAS39Gripen_000.jpg

[daytona675]

just because we're neighbours with the US.. we buy the F35.

there are better options out there.

I think canada would be better off with the Saab Gripen. theyre small, cheap, well armed, NATO weapons friendly, have good range and the best thing is.. they can take off on highways!

http://www.cas2.com/images/JAS39Gripen_000.jpg

the F35 is STOL aircraft with vectoring thrust. it will be able to take off on highways :thumbsup:

[rsx]

^^but this looks bad ass!!

[tofu1413]

not sure if we're buying the conventional model, STOL model.. or the VTOL model..

hmm...

[belka]

Yowzers. Do you think it's mechanical failure or something else?

Mechanical failure was ruled out already. Jets are no longer grounded.

not sure if we're buying the conventional model, STOL model.. or the VTOL model..

We are buying the A model.

[JD¹³]

I think we'll be getting the 'Navy' version of the F35 with larger control surfaces and beefed up landing gear. No STOVL versions at this time.

EDIT - I stand corrected by Belka.

[gars]

just because we're neighbours with the US.. we buy the F35.

there are better options out there.


We're also getting the F35 for a really good price as well though... Compare how much the US has spent on it, and look at how much we're spending on it; and we're also getting contracts for our canadian companies, which helps our economy.

[Ronin]

^^but this looks bad ass!!

That's a good looking plane but the F35 is no slouch in the looks department either.

I don't care which we get really but buying new planes is a necessity after these "mechanical failures".

[CorneringArtist]

I think there was talk of wanting fifth-generation aircraft in the thread about the F-35. I think the Gripen is a 4.5-gen. I personally would rather opt for the Gripen, or even the Eurofighter Typhoon or carrier-based Dassault Rafale M at the least. F-35 is fine, if the government is really gonna pony up for them.

[StylinRed]

they're probably just not upkeeping them as much since they decided to go for new ones

but even the experts say, like i quoted, we'd be better off just maintaining our f18s but since they went thru with it the f35 is okay to look at (i think the f18s look better still)

[dachinesedude]

on a side note, how many F-22's does Canada have? cuz those things are sexy as hell

[JD¹³]

on a side note, how many F-22's does Canada have? cuz those things are sexy as hell
0 and never will, they won't be exported out of the US to anyone.

[seakrait]

f-35s are single-engined craft. not the best for arctic patrol. look what happened to the older two-engined f-18s.

i think we should have purchased the F-18E/F Super Hornets (Rhinos). cheaper (two-thirds the price), vaguely more compatible with our current inventory/skill sets than the f-35, twin-engined, etc

it's the US Navy's current air superiority fighter. should be good enough for our armed forces.

f-35:

General characteristics
Crew: 1
Length: 51.4 ft (15.67 m)
Wingspan: 35 ft[nb 1] (10.7 m)
Height: 14.2 ft[nb 2] (4.33 m)
Wing area: 460 ft²[82] (42.7 m²)
Empty weight: 29,300 lb (13,300 kg)
Loaded weight: 49,540 lb[51][nb 3][191] (22,470 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 70,000 lb[nb 4] (31,800 kg)
Powerplant: 1× Pratt & Whitney F135 afterburning turbofan
Dry thrust: 28,000 lbf[192][nb 5] (125 kN)
Thrust with afterburner: 43,000 lbf[192][193] (191 kN)
Internal fuel capacity: 18,480 lb (8,382 kg)[nb 6]

Performance:
Maximum speed: Mach 1.6+[77] (1,200 mph, 1,930 km/h)
Range: 1,200 nmi (2,220 km) on internal fuel
Combat radius: over 590 nmi[nb 7] (1,090 km) on internal fuel[194]
Service ceiling: 60,000 ft[195] (18,288 m)
Rate of climb: classified (not publicly available)
Wing loading: 91.4 lb/ft² (446 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight:

With full fuel: 0.87
With 50% fuel: 1.07
g-Limits: 9 g[nb 8]

Armament

Guns:
1 × General Dynamics GAU-22/A Equalizer 25 mm (0.984 in) 4-barreled gatling cannon, internally mounted with 180 rounds[nb 9][77]
Hardpoints: 6 × external pylons on wings with a capacity of 15,000 lb (6,800 kg)[77][82] and 2 × internal bays with 2 pylons each[82] for a total weapons payload of 18,000 lb (8,100 kg)[52] and provisions to carry combinations of:

Missiles:
Air-to-air: AIM-120 AMRAAM, AIM-132 ASRAAM, AIM-9X Sidewinder, IRIS-T, Joint Dual Role Air Dominance Missile (JDRADM) (after 2020)[196]
Air-to-ground: AGM-154 JSOW, AGM-158 JASSM[88]

Bombs:
Mark 84, Mark 83 and Mark 82 GP bombs
Mk.20 Rockeye II cluster bomb
Wind Corrected Munitions Dispenser capable
Paveway-series laser-guided bombs
Small Diameter Bomb (SDB)
JDAM-series
B61 nuclear bomb[197]

Avionics:
Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems AN/APG-81 AESA radar


F/A-18E/F:

General characteristics
Crew: F/A-18E: 1, F/A-18F: 2
Length: 60 ft 1¼ in (18.31 m)
Wingspan: 44 ft 8½ in (13.62 m)
Height: 16 ft (4.88 m)
Wing area: 500 ft² (46.45 m²)
Empty weight: 30,600 lb (13,900 kg)
Loaded weight: 47,000 lb (21,320 kg) (in fighter configuration)
Max takeoff weight: 66,000 lb (29,900 kg)
Powerplant: 2× General Electric F414-GE-400 turbofans
Dry thrust: 14,000 lbf (62.3 kN) each
Thrust with afterburner: 22,000 lbf (97.9 kN) each
Internal fuel capacity: F/A-18E: 14,400 lb (6,530 kg), F/A-18F: 13,550 lb (6,145 kg)
External fuel capacity: 5 × 480 gal tanks, totaling 16,380 lb (7,430 kg)

Performance:
Maximum speed: Mach 1.8+[12] (1,190 mph, 1,900 km/h) at 40,000 ft (12,190 m)
Range: 1,275 nmi (2,346 km) clean plus two AIM-9s[12]
Combat radius: 390 nmi (449 mi, 722 km) for interdiction mission[93]
Ferry range: 1,800 nmi (2,070 mi, 3,330 km)
Service ceiling: 50,000+ ft (15,000+ m)
Wing loading: 94.0 lb/ft² (459 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.93
Design load factor: 7.6 g[94]

Armament

Guns:
1× 20 mm (0.787 in) M61 Vulcan nose mounted gatling gun, 578 rounds

Hardpoints:
11 total: 2× wingtips, 6× under-wing, and 3× under-fuselage with a capacity of 17,750 lb (8,050 kg) external fuel and ordnance

Missiles:
Air-to-air missiles:
4× AIM-9 Sidewinder or 4× AIM-120 AMRAAM, and
2× AIM-7 Sparrow or additional 2× AIM-120 AMRAAM
Air-to-surface missiles:
AGM-65 Maverick
Standoff Land Attack Missile (SLAM-ER)
AGM-88 HARM Anti-radiation missile
AGM-154 Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW)
Anti-ship missile:
AGM-84 Harpoon

Bombs:
JDAM Precision-guided munition (PGMs)
Paveway series of Laser guided bombs
Mk 80 series of unguided iron bombs
CBU-87 cluster
CBU-78 Gator
CBU-97
Mk 20 Rockeye II

Others:
SUU-42A/A Flares/Infrared decoys dispenser pod and chaff pod or
Electronic countermeasures (ECM) pod or
AN/ASQ-228 ATFLIR Targeting pods or
up to 3× 330 US gallon (1,200 L) Sargent Fletcher drop tanks for ferry flight or extended range/loitering time or 1× 330 US gal (1,200 L) tank and 4× 480 US gal (1,800 L) tanks for aerial refueling system (ARS).

Avionics:
Hughes APG-73 or Raytheon APG-79 Radar

[tofu1413]

i dont think we really need all those fancy stealth capabilites. the 4.5 gen planes carry greater payload than the F35. I wouldve opted for the euro counterparts too actually.



hmm.. i swear lockheed must've gave a politician a free bbq set with the purhcase of 100 F35's.

seakrait// i almost forgot about the super hornet.. :facepalm: that would be a good option too.. its more of a proven design, and its all what canada really need..

[belka]

they're probably just not upkeeping them as much since they decided to go for new ones

but even the experts say, like i quoted, we'd be better off just maintaining our f18s

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. :rolleyes:

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.

f-35s are single-engined craft. not the best for arctic patrol. look what happened to the older two-engined f-18s.

Why are they not the best for arctic patrol, because of the single engine? What happened to the older two-engined f-18s? With the last few CF-18 crashes, the number of engines didn't matter. Look at the Lethbridge crash, it lost one engine and couldn't recover even with the other one perfectly fine.

its more of a proven design, and its all what canada really need..

How do you know what Canada needs or not, because the idiots at the CBC told you so? The Super Hornet is already an old design that will be long gone before the F-35. This is called getting the best bang for the buck.

LOL @ suggestion that Russian fighters are better. :rofl:

[too_slow]

they're probably just not upkeeping them as much since they decided to go for new ones

but even the experts say, like i quoted, we'd be better off just maintaining our f18s but since they went thru with it the f35 is okay to look at (i think the f18s look better still)

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

[Hondaracer]

im asuming that those speeds the F35 cannot achieve mach speeds without afterburners as the 22 can?

[adambomb]

Hmm... An USAF F-22 went down yesterday... :willnill:

An aerial search is underway in the Alaskan wilderness after a U.S. fighter pilot crashed during a training exercise.
A single-seat F22 fighter jet - the most sophisticated in the U.S. Air Force fleet - left Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage on a routine training run but crashed after 80 minutes of flight on Tuesday evening.

Wreckage of the high-speed aircraft has been found about 100 miles north of Anchorage but officials hope the as-yet-unnamed pilot could have survived the crash


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1330786/Search-pilot-F-22-fighter-jet-crashed-remote-Alaska.html#ixzz15giQfsKi

[tofu1413]

. How do you know what Canada needs or not, because the idiots at the CBC told you so? The Super Hornet is already an old design that will be long gone before the F-35. This is called getting the best bang for the buck.

LOL @ suggestion that Russian fighters are better. :rofl:



its one of those why not opinions. sure, i dont run the canadian military, but if the super hornet is proven to serve the USN well, why couldnt we use it..?

its an updated, slightly larger and slightly more capable Hornet. we'll just use it just like the current Hornet.

something tells me Canada is gonna end up buying something more than we could afford.... but we would be equipped though, with a limited number of 5th generation fighters.

too bad we've been good neighbours to the Americans.. it'll be nice to shop for Russian hardware too.. :D although a 4.5 gen, a SU-30MKK or SU35 wouldnt be too bad.

too bad Sukhoi didnt decide to make a production SU47...

http://sportscarforums.com/gallery/data/731/Su47_clouds.jpg

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

[StaxBundlez]

http://www.shingallon.com/starscream_color.jpg

[SkunkWorks]

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

... About a Russian airstrike? Fuck that.

[tofu1413]

patrolling canadian skies. :facepalm:

http://www.ivansanchez.com/blog/aoz/zetacomplete.jpg

[CorneringArtist]

Yes, a Veritech is based off an F-14 already, but while on the subject of ridiculous sky patrollers...
http://www.advancedanime.com/pictures/normal_robotech_valkyrie.jpg

[tofu1413]

Yes, a Veritech is based off an F-14 already, but while on the subject of ridiculous sky patrollers...
http://www.advancedanime.com/pictures/normal_robotech_valkyrie.jpg

http://images.toywizard.net/0001/macross-frontier-vf-25g.jpg

VF 25G Messiah. (sniper variant) :thumbsup:

[darkfroggy]

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

:troll:

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

[StylinRed]

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. :rolleyes:

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. :rofl:

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) :rolleyes:

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:

http://www.militarypictures.info/d/953-3/avro_arrow.jpg

:D

[belka]

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) :rolleyes:

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)

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

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]

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

http://www.militarypictures.info/d/953-3/avro_arrow.jpg

:D

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

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]

http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080628185046/starcraft/images/9/96/VikingAirMode_SC2_Game1.jpg

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]

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...



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

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]

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! :D

[tofu1413]

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. :thumbsup:

[Jackwimmer]

haha ya, but i think because of the u.s. embargo they cant get any other planes...so they just keep trying to keep these things from falling apart

[Senna4ever]

just because we're neighbours with the US.. we buy the F35.

there are better options out there.

I think canada would be better off with the Saab Gripen. theyre small, cheap, well armed, NATO weapons friendly, have good range and the best thing is.. they can take off on highways!

http://www.cas2.com/images/JAS39Gripen_000.jpg

I've always loved SAAB jets! One question though... is the engine start button between the seats? :p

[tofu1413]

I've always loved SAAB jets! One question though... is the engine start button between the seats? :p

http://captionsearch.com/pix/2rub7eoeem.jpg

[JD¹³]

SAAB's are cool, but I still think this is our best option.

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/94/20100716newscanadaf35a1.jpg

[tofu1413]

its our only option. LOL


the only other 5th gen in service is the Raptor... which has been made illegal to be sold outside the USA.

its either the F35 or nothing when it comes to 5th gens.. and we're all blabbing about how canada shouldnt/ wouldnt buy 4.5 gens (lots of options)

[Corey Darling]

.

[StylinRed]

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

its alleged that Iran has SU-30s J10s JF-17s and they have their homegrown F-5s

it's all about the missile these days anyhow

[Kamui712]

they just wont let them go..

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

they probably weren't paying attention when halfway through the movie, the F-14 malfunctions... then malfunctions again on ejection killing one of it's pilots....

or maybe that's the idea... "you kill me?! I KILL ME!"

[CP.AR]

F35s sucked in Battlefield 2. J-10s is where it's at

[Kamui712]

^
by that logic... the military should stop investing $$$ in tech... and just get noob tubes + one man army + danger close.

for air support: pavelow since it stays in the air longer, takes 2 rockets to knock down, and with danger close would get more kills.


we could watch the Russians rage quit our air space.

[tool001]

lol u guys pushing a 4-4.5 gen saab?
these new birds are suppose to last another 20-30 years. so while other countries will be flying 5+ gen aircrafts (f35 and PAK-FA) Canada will by flying 4 gen saab?


also not all F35 are VSTOL only a certain type of F35 (dont remember the variant type).

I believe US is the only country with a functional AESA radar, none of the other jets, Grippen, eurofighter or SU family, have a funtional AESA radar.
EU-2000 is best choice after F35....

[tofu1413]

invest money into one unstoppable unit. imagine a plane that could pull off dynsaty warriors calibre of destruction... that'd be mad.

[tofu1413]

lol u guys pushing a 4-4.5 gen saab?
these new birds are suppose to last another 20-30 years. so while other countries will be flying 5+ gen aircrafts (f35 and PAK-FA) Canada will by flying 4 gen saab?


also not all F35 are VSTOL only a certain type of F35 (dont remember the variant type).

that'll be the F35B.

F35A- base
F35B- VSTOL
F35C- Navy

[StaxBundlez]

F-22 = air superiority


and this is still the best movie / theme song

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8rZWw9HE7o

[dogeatcookie]

the F35 is STOL aircraft with vectoring thrust. it will be able to take off on highways :thumbsup:

It'll even be able to take off from your backyard :blush:

[CP.AR]

F-22 = air superiority


and this is still the best movie / theme song

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8rZWw9HE7o

Royal Canadian Air Cadets theme song right there... at least for us guys in Richmond

[JD¹³]

Belka - Any word on the pilot's condition or more details on the incident?

[belka]

Belka - Any word on the pilot's condition or more details on the incident?

Pilot is fine, he was only in the hospital for a few hours. I can't release details until the official investigation is over, which might take months. If you are interested feel free to PM me.

[JD¹³]

Pilot is fine, he was only in the hospital for a few hours. I can't release details until the official investigation is over, which might take months. If you are interested feel free to PM me.
Got the basics from my dad today as he was there with Top Aces at the time :)
Royal Canadian Air Cadets theme song right there... at least for us guys in Richmond
If you guys haven't seen this one yet this is a great documentary with some of the best aerial cinematography since Top Gun. Also available in decent quality torrent on PirateBay.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie2vb2TKfcE&feature=related

[heero78]

Top Gun is the shit!!:thumbsup:

[heero78]

Got the basics from my dad today as he was there with Top Aces at the time :)

If you guys haven't seen this one yet this is a great documentary with some of the best aerial cinematography since Top Gun. Also available in decent quality torrent on PirateBay.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie2vb2TKfcE&feature=related

Thanks for the vid btw!
good stuff! :thumbsup:

[Spectre_Cdn]

Just heard high-speed jet aircraft flying over Cambie/Shell in Richmond... couldn't see anything once I got to the window

[seakrait]

If you guys haven't seen this one yet this is a great documentary with some of the best aerial cinematography since Top Gun. Also available in decent quality torrent on PirateBay.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie2vb2TKfcE&feature=related

great vid. thanks! :D