CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Edmonton Oilers
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8561
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 10:57 am
 


uwish wrote:
CF-116 (do you think Canadians know what that is??)


It's a MiG-28.


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3037
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 10:59 am
 


try again! Just emphasizing the point about Canadian AF designation to the public really means nothing. It's a F-5, the predecessor of the CF-118. Officially designated the CF-116 in the CF.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Edmonton Oilers
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8561
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:00 am
 


uwish wrote:
try again! Just emphasizing the point about Canadian AF designation to the public really means nothing. It's a F-5. Officially designated the CF-116 in the CF.


And the F-5 was used in Top Gun to represent the fictional MiG-28.


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3037
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:01 am
 


ok..I see your analogy. Fair enough :)


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14760
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:02 am
 


That totally spoiled Top-Gun for me......


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
Profile
Posts: 20757
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:03 am
 


EyeBrock wrote:

Its not an attack on him because he is/was a Dipper. He was blatantly wrong in so many areas I checked out his bio.

When people comment on things they know fuck-all about, I check why they are making the comments.

His article, besides being wrong and misleading, has an obvious political agenda.

This guy is a radical and is blatantly anti the Tory government. That's fine, but get your facts right Mr NDP Byers. Then you look credible. As it is, he's just another lefty trying to undermine ANYTHING the Tory's do.


So you say but you have your bias as well.

EyeBrock wrote:
I'm not going to debate the obvious partisan slant this article has because you are not really that open to input on these things.


And you are? We both know better. I say he makes a fair number of points and I think he is dead on that Canada was bullied into purchasing the F35 (and the Aussies). His article provides a very reasonable explanation and quite frankly I think its the truth. The US needed to sell that plane.

EyeBrock wrote:
The F18E/F is yesterdays aircraft. The Aussies know that. Whatever you say about the Aussies, they have managed to fund a very effective fighting machine with bits of kit we lack. For the same cash.


No it isn't yesterdays aircraft. Its todays and even the ones we would get would be an improvement on that and they further developing it to the F18X. I might be making Hypers arguement concerning the Typhoon or Rafele or Grippen but I don't think we could get them for the price.

As for the F35 I've been doing a little research and there are serious questions about its performance. In fact the Aussies have been grappling with this question for years which is why their purchase has been postphoned, cancelled, and then reinstated at a smaller number and is still under some threat.

EyeBrock wrote:
The F35 is like any other large procurement program, politically loaded. We don't want to be doing an EH101 on this. All our main defence partners are on board with this program, including the Aussies, Brits, Dutch and the Great Satan.


They are also on board with the F18E. Its certainly good enough to be the main aircraft of the US navy. Lets also not forget a few other facts, namely that our other allies are buying the Typhoon and Grippen, both much more cost effective fighters.

Funny you should mention the EH101 yet not mention the political porking we got over the C17s in term of additional cost and political problems. The same problem can certainly happen for an aircraft not yey fully proven unlike the other aircraft mentioned.

EyeBrock wrote:
I have said before that we should take a good look at the RAAF/RAN and Aussie Army as a 'best practices' role model.


Why? Just because you personally feel affection for them? I'd rather we look to our own needs since they are different. You should also be reminded of our different financial situations compared to them.

EyeBrock wrote:
I take a great interest in defence matters and you know I spent 10 years in the RAF. I have a good idea what I'm talking about. Mr 'I can't even get the Herk's number right' Byers doesn't. He calls the Herk a C135 on his blog too.


Oh? You spent 10 years in the Royal Air Force? Hyperion spent 10 years in the Canadian Navy and he has been insulted left and right on this thread.

EyeBrock wrote:
He has no clue what he's talking about. Do you?


I'll remind you of that the next time you post your opinion about the state of healthcare in Ontario since I am well aware that we have opened many new hospitals including a larger and better equipped one in my town. In addition we have hired more doctors and nurses and related workers. That doesn't prevent you from posting your opinion on the subject.

I know what I'm talking about when I say we can get 3X the aircraft for less then the price we are paying for the F35s. I can certainly read the criticisms by experts concerning the performance of the F35.

Again, we can purchase a comparable aircraft in the F18E for 1/3 the price. That means we either get many more aircraft or we have much more money to purchase other equipment.


Last edited by DerbyX on Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:20 am, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3037
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:05 am
 


EyeBrock wrote:
That totally spoiled Top-Gun for me......


WAIT! you mean those WERE NOT REAL MIGS??

8O 8O


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3037
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:06 am
 


DerbyX the current production of Superhornets is due to end next year I think (or 2013 can't remember). They don't plan on making anymore from what I have read.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Ottawa Senators


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 17114
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:09 am
 


EyeBrock wrote:
Arctic_Menace wrote:
EyeBrock wrote:

The CF doesn't use the C130 as a tanker, we use the the CC150 Polaris (Airbus).


Actually...

Image



That isn't a CF Herk. It actually looks like RAF. The CC130 can be kitted out as a tanker but the CF don't use it in that role, so wrong AM.


:roll:

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/sh ... nnes/page6

That's where I got it from. Care to try again old chap? :P

Hey look! Another part!

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/sh ... nnes/page5

And now another picture that absolutely shows that I and Boot were right. :P

Image


Last edited by Arctic_Menace on Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:20 am, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14760
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:10 am
 


uwish wrote:
EyeBrock wrote:
That totally spoiled Top-Gun for me......


WAIT! you mean those WERE NOT REAL MIGS??

8O 8O


I was in the movie theatre watching it with my other mates who were fellow Senior Aircraftsmen.
It was going good. Tomcats and Skyhawks whizzing about the screen and then these F5's come into view. I thought they were 'aggressor' squadron guys, then they were supposed to be Migs.....it just didn't cut it and relegated the film a bit.

It's like movies that use American tanks and pretend that they are Panzer SS Tigers. Just not good!


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
Profile
Posts: 20757
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:11 am
 


uwish wrote:
DerbyX the current production of Superhornets is due to end next year I think (or 2013 can't remember). They don't plan on making anymore from what I have read.


How do you figure that?

Quote:
In early 2008, Boeing discussed creating a Super Hornet Block III with the U.S. and Australian militaries. It would be a generation 4.75 upgrade with extra forward stealth capabilities and extended range, to be succeeded in 2024 by a sixth-generation fighter (F/A-XX).[16]

Development of an improved F414 engine version with better resistance to foreign object damage, and a reduced fuel burn rate is underway in 2009. Work is also being done on possible performance improvements to increase thrust by 20%


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3037
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:14 am
 


because the US Navy has their's and the current production run is just to fill the RAAF orders. When I read an article in a defence magazine that quoted the Boeing dude who was in charge of orders saying the AU units are the last. They never got any other foreign orders for the superhornet.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Toronto Maple Leafs


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
Profile
Posts: 20757
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:17 am
 


uwish wrote:
because the US Navy has their's and the current production run is just to fill the RAAF orders. When I read an article in a defence magazine that quoted the Boeing dude who was in charge of orders saying the AU units are the last. They never got any other foreign orders for the superhornet.


Which would obviously change if they received new orders right? What would they say? No we don't want the 6 billion?

They are obviously working at improving current models and working on the next gen.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14760
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:19 am
 


Arctic menace said;

That's where I got it from. Care to try again old chap? :P[/quote][/quote][/quote]


Ok, I was wrong! They just don't use CC130's in that role anymore and that is a pretty old picture!

But I was wrong. I say again, I was wrong.


Last edited by EyeBrock on Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:25 am, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
 Montreal Canadiens


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 6138
PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:23 am
 


EyeBrock wrote:
It's like movies that use American tanks and pretend that they are Panzer SS Tigers. Just not good!


True, but it's not really easy to find fully working Tigers to be used as props. Haha. And Top Gun was made in 1986. Certainly not the Cuban Missile Crisis, but I have a feeling the Soviets wouldn't turn over military aircraft for a US production...

However, weren't the Soviet tanks in Red Dawn actually quite close to resembling the originals?


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 109 posts ]  Previous  1 ... 4  5  6  7  8  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.