F-35 issues - Page 26 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums
 2Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

post #376 of 387 (permalink) Old 2014-06-09, 02:32 PM
OTA Forum Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 24,878
Angry Reuters: Canada poised to buy 65 Lockheed Martin F-35s

I posted this Reuters story to /. a few days ago in case some of you have already seen it there: Canada is poised to buy 65 Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jets. Round and round we go, the silliness never stops. As I've said here repeatedly, this government is hell-bent on buying that plane.



stampeder is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #377 of 387 (permalink) Old 2014-12-28, 05:39 PM
OTA Forum Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 24,878
F-35 Unable To Properly See Battlefield Below

Here's another item to add to the "What a piece of junk!" list of F-35 shortcomings:
Quote:
When the Pentagon’s nearly $400 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter finally enters service next year after nearly two decades in development, it won’t be able to support troops on the ground the way older planes can today. Its sensors won’t be able to see the battlefield as well; and what video the F-35 does capture, it won’t be able to transmit to infantrymen in real time.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...lder-jets.html

So, in order to be stealthy (which we don't need, and which the Chinese and Russians have overcome with L-band radar anyways) the F-35 uses an internally mounted technology that is 10 years behind the capability of the newest external-pod-mounted gear on today's F-18s and other similar fighters. But, putting those newest external pods on an F-35 defeats the whole point of the stealth technology, so round and round we go on a hideously expensive piece of junk.



stampeder is offline  
post #378 of 387 (permalink) Old 2019-05-06, 09:08 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Toronto - Rogers 8300HD PVR
Posts: 3,660
So it appears Trump is upset with Canada and guy in charge of the F-35 program has written that the F-35 program "does not allow the F-35 to participate in a fair and open competition".

Easy solution then - don't bid. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/f35...orce-1.5125009
nfitz is offline  
 
post #379 of 387 (permalink) Old 2019-08-17, 07:18 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 4,864
Wow. This old thread still has legs? Alrighty then. The Lockheed Martin F-35's per unit cost has dropped to $80M, still has defects, but more and more countries are buying. Canada's competition will be interesting. The new Super Hornet Block III will challenge with a number of very effective upgrades. The Airbus Eurofighter might be in the mix as it too has a number of effective upgrades and last but not least the Saab Jas-39 E/F Gripen is flying three prototypes that has all the bells and whistles.

It should be interesting, but barring Canada re-establishing a domestic industry to manufacture a fighter jet (Eurofighter and Gripen), I think it will come down to the F-35 and the SH. I believe Canada will choose the Super Hornet and its Electronic Warfare Variant, the Growler.
nfitz likes this.
Nanuuk is offline  
post #380 of 387 (permalink) Old 2019-08-18, 12:35 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 4,864
I say Canada may go with the Super Hornet option, but would add the caveat that it would have to be in the price range of the F-35. The cost of operations would be lower for the SH and current spare parts and weapons inventories could be used from what I understand. The cost of the EF and Gripen are unknowns, but I would hazard a guess that they'd be higher simply because not as many are being manufactured. The Gripen has the lowest operating cost of the group.
Nanuuk is offline  
post #381 of 387 (permalink) Old 2019-08-18, 04:46 PM
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 231
Been following this thread for a while. Old man flew cf 100's '59-61 out of North Bay as a back seater. 433 Squadron A.W. Interceptor 2 engines were a must. Still are.
pinto is online now  
post #382 of 387 (permalink) Old 2019-08-19, 11:23 AM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 4,864
I don't necessarily subscribe to that theory. Single engine safety records are quite good and some article I've read believe just as good as two engines. Of the four a/c in the competition, two have two engines (Super Hornet and Eurofighter) and two have single engines (F-35 and Jas39 E/F). There are a number of plus's for each aircraft that will make this an interesting competition.
Nanuuk is offline  
post #383 of 387 (permalink) Old 2019-08-30, 04:21 PM
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Gatineau and Ottawa
Posts: 11,115
Airbus is out.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/air...ters-1.5265665
Quote:
Airbus Defence and Space, which was pitching the Eurofighter Typhoon, notified the Liberal government Friday that it was not going to bid.

The decision was made after a detailed review of the tender issued by the federal government in mid-July.

The move leaves only three companies in the contest: Lockheed Martin Canada with its F-35; Boeing with the Super Hornet; and Saab, which is offering an updated version of its Gripen fighter
Jake is offline  
post #384 of 387 (permalink) Old 2019-09-22, 09:07 AM
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 64
Quote:
Clearly, the Auditor General doesn't know what the heck he's talking about. cr927, I am eagerly anticipating your response to this.
Clearly. Current flyaway cost is $81M USD in 2019. Clearly the AG didn't know what he was talking about. I decided rather than waste time debating articles written by people who haven't a clue on the subject, I'd let time prove me right.

Quote:
When the Pentagon’s nearly $400 billion F-35 Joint Strike Fighter finally enters service next year after nearly two decades in development, it won’t be able to support troops on the ground the way older planes can today. Its sensors won’t be able to see the battlefield as well; and what video the F-35 does capture, it won’t be able to transmit to infantrymen in real time.
One thing at a time:

nearly two decades in development - A typical timespan of a fighter program

it won’t be able to support troops on the ground the way older planes can today - It does it better than the older planes can today

Its sensors won’t be able to see the battlefield as well - Because the current EOTS is old? Thanks to the new OTS architecture, integrating newer hardware is nearly plug and play. EOTS upgrade will be done in block 4.2. Even without modernization, the onboard sensor fusion and processing is leaps and bounds ahead of any targeting pods.

and what video the F-35 does capture, it won’t be able to transmit to infantrymen in real time. - Coming very soon in block 4.1

Even without it, the F-35 can sweep the battle space far better than traditional targeting pods, which required manual search and identification.

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

All that being said, cancelling the purchase was a mistake. I hope you guys that argued against me can man up to that fact. F-35 is our only viable option for the next few decades. The only survivable option, and the most cost effective option.
cr9527 is offline  
post #385 of 387 (permalink) Old 2019-11-09, 01:45 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 4,864
There is no doubt that the F-35 is a very capable aircraft. And there is no doubt its per unit cost is dropping to the $80M range. That in itself will make it difficult for the Super Hornet Block III to compete on price (unless Boeing can by-pass the Foreign Military Sales mark-up). The SH will be in the $75M range without it last I heard. The Gripen JAS-39E/F beats both on price ~61M. Take all these prices with a huge grain of salt, because spare parts, training, weapons can skew the final number.

Both the SH and Gripen have very high capabilities. Low RCS (not in the F-35 sense), advanced EW sensors, advanced long range AESA radars, advanced IRST, good range, and good weapons load. The Gripen being a light fighter less so.

The Gripen is my current favourite even if the E/F is still under development. Of all the aircraft it boasts a lower operating cost, short take-off and landing capability (meaning no parachute drag or extending runways), can super cruise (no after burners needed to achieve supersonic speed), is faster than the JSF and SH, can pull 9G (SH cannot), and is arctic ready. It meets the mission requirements of air superiority (interception) and can perform close air support. It is cheap enough for Canada to consider increasing the size of its fleet beyond the stated 88 fighters.
Jake likes this.
Nanuuk is offline  
post #386 of 387 (permalink) Old 2020-01-02, 01:04 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 8,076
I just came across this today:

Will the Avro Arrow fly again?

I haven't lost my mind. It's around here...somewhere...
JamesK is online now  
post #387 of 387 (permalink) Old 2020-01-02, 03:09 PM
Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 4,864
That segment was from 2012 and my read on it (apart from the Arrow proposed capabilities) was that Bordeaux Industries was looking for the government to bankroll development and eventual production. Aircraft development (even if based on previous blueprints, etc.) is fraught with pitfalls and potential cost overruns. Today, there are 3 aircraft in the running for the CF-18 replacement. The Boeing Super Hornet Block III F/A18 E/F(and maybe electronic warfare variant, the Growler), the Saab Gripen JAS39 E/F, and the F-35A.

There have been no Super Hornet Block III aircraft produced to-date, but Block II aircraft are in the queue for upgrades to the Block III standard. New Block III aircraft will start to be manufactured in 2020 I believe. The SH is faster than the F-35, but only has a turn rate of 7.5G verses the F-35 and JAS39's 9G's. Boeing has a future upgrade plan for additional capabilities for the Super Hornet and Growler. It hopes to pay for future upgrades because of the sheer number of aircraft used by the USN ~500 and potential international sales to Canada, Finland, Germany, Kuwait, and a number of other countries looking to replace their aging fleets. Boeing also has a wide foot print in Canada for a wide economic benefit.

There have been 3 prototype JAS39 E's (single seat) made fo testing and demonstration purposes and one production aircraft produced by Brazil to-date. Saab is the only country to offer the transfer of technology to a purchasing country and the only one to offer to partner with domestic companies to build and operate manufacturing facilities. They already partner with Bombardier on the Global Eye Early Warning and Control Platform (think mini AWACS) based on Bombardier's Global 6000 business jet air frame. Saab also has designed the Gripen to be easily upgraded in an efficient and cost effective manner. Their feeling is that most future upgrades will be software based. The Gripen is typically the first aircraft to be certified for new weapons systems too.

The F-35A's world wide fleet is growing yearly and it's production cost is dropping. Down to about $80M a plane. This makes them very competitive at least with the Super Hornet. It has all the capabilities of the SH and then some. It can't compete the the Gripen on price or operating costs. The Gripen is loaded with capabilities found in both the sH and F-35A. Its major weakness is that it can't carry the bomb load and its range is lesser.

But I digress. If the the Arrow were to be resurrected, it would have to beat the Gripen at a lower cost with no risk. The Gripen has been de-risked already in terms of development. The larger risk would be keeping the production lines going in order to upgrade aircraft over time and at a reasonable cost (less aircraft produced worldwide). Any resurrection of the Arrow would also face that. Cost of upgrades over a low number of produced aircraft means expensive upgrades.
Nanuuk is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome