[Jabberwalker]

It would be ths logical rsplacement for the extremely successful CF-18 that has served us so well over four decades. Reports on the F-35 are dodgy, they are very expensive, single engined and pretty much an experiment. We don't need the VTOL version that the Royal Navy has designed their carriers around and the only plus to the F-35 is it's supposed smaller radar profile.

[DrCaleb]

Liberals miss membership payment to stay in F-35 consortium

Is it just me, but doesn't it seem silly to pay 'membership' fees to be in the running to buy a plane that might never meet it's design specifications? Imagine if it was you, buying a car that just never seems to get built.

Would you pay into that club?

If so, can I borrow $100?

[BartSimpson]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Liberals miss membership payment to stay in F-35 consortium

Is it just me, but doesn't it seem silly to pay 'membership' fees to be in the running to buy a plane that might never meet it's design specifications? Imagine if it was you, buying a car that just never seems to get built.

Would you pay into that club?

If so, can I borrow $100?

I'd say this is a subtle statement of intent to withdraw from the F35 program. If so, good on the Liberals.

[Thanos]

Yup. Whatever it takes to get out of a really bad deal. Too bad Lockheed already made their money off this scam. It would have been sweet to see them go down from what a debacle it's been.

[BRAH]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

Liberals miss membership payment to stay in F-35 consortium

Is it just me, but doesn't it seem silly to pay 'membership' fees to be in the running to buy a plane that might never meet it's design specifications? Imagine if it was you, buying a car that just never seems to get built.

Would you pay into that club?

If so, can I borrow $100?

Depends on the club.

[BartSimpson]

The USAF is sounding like they want to restart production of the F22. Too bad Canada can't pick up a few of these things because they absolutely scare the shit out of Ivan.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /84971806/

[Winnipegger]

Canada and the US of A are supposed to be partners in NORAD. That's North American Air Defence. We're supposed to have unified air defence. So why did Congress treat Canada like any other country, include us in the ban on export of F-22 fighters?

This is why many of us would like to see Canada purchase the Typhoon. If America snubs us like that, then why would we want to purchase our next fighter from the US? Canada is still part of the British Commonwealth, technically the Queen is still our Head Of State. So why would we dismiss a British built fighter? Yes, Typhoon is built by Britain, Germany, and Spain, but Britain is in there. The Typhoon is the best performing fighter available to Canada. One simulation by the British RAF showed Typhoon defeated the MiG-35 10:1, while Rafale only 1:1. But Rafale carries a larger bomb load. And many of the engineers were laid-off from the Avro Arrow. NASA got first pick of Arrow engineers, Gemini was developed entirely by Canadian engineers from the Avro Arrow allowing American engineers focus on Apollo. Some Arrow engineers went to Europe to work on the Concord. When the Concord was finished, some of them worked on the Typhoon while others on the French Rafale. There's a reason Typhoon and Rafale look like an updated Arrow.

Thanos dismisses the idea of any European fighter. But when Congress banned Canada from F-22, they cut off their nose to spite their face.

[Thanos]

At a $100 million each we're not getting into the F-22 game either.

[Winnipegger]

There is that.
Wikipedia: Unit cost US$150 million (flyaway cost for FY2009)

[Thanos]

Like the original article says there's massive political reasons to buy-American. Like it or not we aren't going to buy-European, period. Given the debacle with the former British subs we should stay far away from anything Mother England is involved in, even if it's for a co-project item involving less suspect countries like Germany.

[BartSimpson]

Winnipegger Winnipegger:

Canada and the US of A are supposed to be partners in NORAD. That's North American Air Defence. We're supposed to have unified air defence. So why did Congress treat Canada like any other country, include us in the ban on export of F-22 fighters?

No offense, but despite our mutual interests in NORAD and NATO Canada has never been a consistently reliable ally. The post-Thatcher UK (Tory or not) has also been unreliable and thus the restriction on F-22 exports applies to them as well.

The low-water mark for the US-Canada relationship in our time was 1995 when Quebec was possibly going independent and becoming a hostile, anti-US nation on the US border.

The US Department of Defense asked your MoD to move sensitive equipment from Quebec - such as your CF-18 fighters - and when that request was met with crickets a less diplomatic note was sent indicating that any such aircraft left in Quebec would be subject to seizure or destruction. No, I can't prove that this occurred but I can note where the issue was noted:

http://researchbriefings.files.parliame ... P13-47.pdf

$1:

Separatists wanted to maintain Quebec’s membership of NATO and NORAD, the bi-national air defence organisation with the US. But an independent Quebec would have sought to re-orientate NATO towards UN-authorised operations and would have reduced expenditure on defence, re-directing the money towards support of international organisations. The Bloc Québécois said that it would dismantle two F-18 squadrons dedicated to NATO duty and end the financial contributions to the AWACS system.

From my understanding of the matter the Bloc was shopping the avionics software, hardware (spares), and possibly whole aircraft to China.

So, no, the DoD doesn't trust you with the crown jewels. Shit, they don't even trust the office of the President. The fact that there can even be a discussion about restarting the F-22 means that someone somewhere ignored Bush's Presidential Directive ordering the cessation of F-22 and that order also required the destruction of sensitive plans and the Holy Grail of the milling equipment for producing the primary framing of the aircraft. Instead of destroying it all someone wisely mothballed it.

The public excuse is that the DoD doesn't want to share the stealth tech on the plane but the truth is that the avionics package is far more critical than the stealth tech which is reportedly very simple and 'elegant' in an engineering sense. Meaning the engineers came up with some very simple solutions that are probably not so secret these days anyway.

At least part of the avionics package is critical for making the vectored thrust tech work. This seems to be the deal killer for both the Russian and Chinese version of the F-22 is they can't figure out how to make vectored thrust work without tearing the plane apart.

It stands to reason that 1990's tech has been eclipsed by now and that a new F-22 might be made available to Canada. If the production restarts we'll see.

[Winnipegger]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

The US Department of Defense asked your MoD to move sensitive equipment from Quebec - such as your CF-18 fighters - and when that request was met with crickets a less diplomatic note was sent indicating that any such aircraft left in Quebec would be subject to seizure or destruction. No, I can't prove that this occurred but I can note where the issue was noted:

http://researchbriefings.files.parliame ... P13-47.pdf

$1:

Separatists wanted to maintain Quebec’s membership of NATO and NORAD, the bi-national air defence organisation with the US. But an independent Quebec would have sought to re-orientate NATO towards UN-authorised operations and would have reduced expenditure on defence, re-directing the money towards support of international organisations. The Bloc Québécois said that it would dismantle two F-18 squadrons dedicated to NATO duty and end the financial contributions to the AWACS system.

I am truly hoping you are wrong. Threatening to seizure or destruction of Canadian assets is serious. Just the threat can be considered a declaration of war. Why would the United States declare war on Canada? If true, the American government flunky responsible needs a flogging.

I remember media reports that the leader of the Parti Québécois at the time tried to claim that a separate Quebec would assume ownership of Canadian military bases in Quebec, including CF-18 fighter jets stationed there. Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien said no, all military bases including CF-18 fighter jets will remain Canadian no matter what. That mirrors what happened at Fort Sumter leading to the American Civil War. But Jean Chrétien was smart, rather than taking precipitous action, he focused on winning the Referendum. Some members of this forum told me soldiers at CFB Bagotville would never switch allegiance to a separate Quebec. It was never an issue.

Parti Québécois was the provincial party that attempted to become a separate country. Bloc Québécois is the federal counterpart, attempting to promote issues of Parti Québécois in federal Parliament. Statements at the time by the leader of Parti Québécois were that he didn't want to dismantle CF-18s, he wanted to assume ownership of them.

[Jabberwalker]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

The USAF is sounding like they want to restart production of the F22. Too bad Canada can't pick up a few of these things because they absolutely scare the shit out of Ivan.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /84971806/

Why can't we? We defend North American airspace together. Your problem is our problem.

I'd bet that the Americans would make an exception due to NORAD.

[Sunnyways]

I take it they won't be pre-owned like some of our wonderful submarines?

Sounds a sensible decision, more in tune with our modest military ambitions.

[bootlegga]

Winnipegger Winnipegger:

Canada and the US of A are supposed to be partners in NORAD. That's North American Air Defence. We're supposed to have unified air defence. So why did Congress treat Canada like any other country, include us in the ban on export of F-22 fighters?

This is why many of us would like to see Canada purchase the Typhoon. If America snubs us like that, then why would we want to purchase our next fighter from the US? Canada is still part of the British Commonwealth, technically the Queen is still our Head Of State. So why would we dismiss a British built fighter? Yes, Typhoon is built by Britain, Germany, and Spain, but Britain is in there. The Typhoon is the best performing fighter available to Canada. One simulation by the British RAF showed Typhoon defeated the MiG-35 10:1, while Rafale only 1:1. But Rafale carries a larger bomb load. And many of the engineers were laid-off from the Avro Arrow. NASA got first pick of Arrow engineers, Gemini was developed entirely by Canadian engineers from the Avro Arrow allowing American engineers focus on Apollo. Some Arrow engineers went to Europe to work on the Concord. When the Concord was finished, some of them worked on the Typhoon while others on the French Rafale. There's a reason Typhoon and Rafale look like an updated Arrow.

Thanos dismisses the idea of any European fighter. But when Congress banned Canada from F-22, they cut off their nose to spite their face.

Thanos Thanos:

At a $100 million each we're not getting into the F-22 game either.

Frankly, both planes are too rich for us, but the Super Hornet fits two requirements - it's affordable and it has two engines, which is a win-win in my books.