Author Topic: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)  (Read 293197 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jmt18325

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 14,790
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 908
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #1525 on: April 11, 2017, 13:44:26 »
Do you think the Liberals had that much influence on the FWSAR? I was inclined to give that to the previous gov't?

I was under the impression that everything was basically done by the time the Liberals got there.  The specs were drawn out, the selection committee was made up, and the fairness monitor was in place.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 51,080
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,355
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #1526 on: April 19, 2017, 12:45:55 »
Very likely F-35A win in Belgium (interoperability with Netherlands' F-35As)--meanwhile RCAF?

Quote
Boeing withdraws from Belgium's F-16 fighter replacement competition

The US-based aircraft manufacturer Boeing announced this morning [April 19] that it will not compete for Beligum's F-16 fighter jets replacement program. Boeing was supposed to answer the RfGP issued last month with its F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet.
         
"Boeing informed the Belgian government that it will not participate in its bidders conference today, nor respond to the request for proposals for a new fighter aircraft," (the "Request for governmental Proposal", RfGP), sent last month by the Belgian Ministry of Defense to five state agencies - two American and three European - each representing a type of aircraft, the US company said in a statement to the Belgian news agency Belga.

"We regret that after reviewing the request we do not see an opportunity to compete on a truly level playing field with the [...] F/A-18 Super Hornet." the company added, describing the aircraft as "extremely capable" for its cost effectiveness.

Belgium approved in last December the purchase of 34 new fighter aircraft to be acquired from Spring 2018 for an amount of 3,573 billion euros.

Only four platforms are still competing: Lockheed Martin’s F-35A stealth fighter, the Rafale F3R from Dassault Aviation, the Eurofighter Typhoon proposed by the eponym European consortium, and the JAS 39E/F Gripen manufactured by the Swedish company Saab.
http://airrecognition.com/index.php/archive-world-worldwide-news-air-force-aviation-aerospace-air-military-defence-industry/global-defense-security-news/global-news-2017/april/3408-boeing-withdraws-from-belgium-s-f-16-fighter-replacement-competition.html

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 51,080
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,355
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #1527 on: April 19, 2017, 12:46:42 »
Very likely F-35A win in Belgium (interoperability with Netherlands' F-35As)--meanwhile RCAF?

Quote
Boeing withdraws from Belgium's F-16 fighter replacement competition

The US-based aircraft manufacturer Boeing announced this morning [April 19] that it will not compete for Beligum's F-16 fighter jets replacement program. Boeing was supposed to answer the RfGP issued last month with its F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet.
         
"Boeing informed the Belgian government that it will not participate in its bidders conference today, nor respond to the request for proposals for a new fighter aircraft," (the "Request for governmental Proposal", RfGP), sent last month by the Belgian Ministry of Defense to five state agencies - two American and three European - each representing a type of aircraft, the US company said in a statement to the Belgian news agency Belga.

"We regret that after reviewing the request we do not see an opportunity to compete on a truly level playing field with the [...] F/A-18 Super Hornet." the company added, describing the aircraft as "extremely capable" for its cost effectiveness.

Belgium approved in last December the purchase of 34 new fighter aircraft to be acquired from Spring 2018 for an amount of 3,573 billion euros.

Only four platforms are still competing: Lockheed Martin’s F-35A stealth fighter, the Rafale F3R from Dassault Aviation, the Eurofighter Typhoon proposed by the eponym European consortium, and the JAS 39E/F Gripen manufactured by the Swedish company Saab.
http://airrecognition.com/index.php/archive-world-worldwide-news-air-force-aviation-aerospace-air-military-defence-industry/global-defense-security-news/global-news-2017/april/3408-boeing-withdraws-from-belgium-s-f-16-fighter-replacement-competition.html

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Quirky

  • Member
  • ****
  • 4,855
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 160
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #1528 on: April 19, 2017, 13:01:00 »
Very likely F-35A win in Belgium (interoperability with Netherlands' F-35As)--meanwhile RCAF?

Mark
Ottawa

Boeing couldn't find anyone stupid enough besides us to buy the damn thing.

Offline YZT580

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 15,480
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 467
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #1529 on: April 19, 2017, 13:41:16 »
Boeing didn't come looking for us, Trudeau and company went to them begging to make a deal.  No sales pitch required

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 177,185
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,978
  • Freespeecher
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #1530 on: April 19, 2017, 17:08:58 »
Well, that's not too promising for training. OTOH, we could lease the entire RCAF inventory of F-18s to the USAF, Navy or Marines to operate as adversary forces. They might even be willing to pay for maintenance so they can have a large enough adversary fleet....

http://seapowermagazine.org/stories/20170418-F35.html

Quote
F-35 Needs More Potent Adversary Services
 
ARLINGTON, Va. — The F-35 Lightning II strike fighter is easily able to counter the adversary services aircraft thrown at it in numbers, said an official of an adversary services contractor, who added that the industry is facing challenges in coming up with a realistic threat aircraft for training for high-end combat.

“Nothing gets close to these things [the F-35s]” said Jeffrey Parker, a former Air Force fighter pilot and chief executive of ATAC LLC, a Textron company that provides opposing aircraft for U.S. fighter squadrons and electronic threat simulation against Navy strike groups. “I’ve flown against the [Marine] F-35Bs down at [Marine Corps Air Station] Beaufort [S.C.] It’s an impressive airplane. Even in the hands of students, it’s a very capable fighter.”

Parker also said that increased adversary services are needed by the Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps to reduce the fatigue-life toll on use of the services’ own front-line fighters and their limited flight hours in the adversary role.

The Navy “has a shortage of readiness training, so they’re reaching out to industry to try to solve that problem,” Parker said. “They’re using too much ‘gray air’ [warfighting aircraft].”

He said each adversary aircraft that flies 250 hours a year is the equivalent of freeing an F/A-18 Super Hornet for fleet use for a year. Ten ATAC aircraft in use for 250 hours each can extend the lives of 10 Super Hornets per year.

The Navy has three squadrons of dedicated adversary aircraft with third-generation F-5 or fourth-generation F/A-18 fighters and the Marine Corps fields one squadron of F-5s. The Navy’s Topgun school also uses F/A-18 and F-16 adversary aircraft. The Air Force operates two adversary F-16 squadrons. Companies like ATAC use foreign-built aircraft such as the supersonic F-21 Kfir and slower Hawker Hunter to supplement with adversary services.

“The Navy squadrons are hurting on aircraft,” Parker said. “They don’t have enough. They’re also trying to upgrade their training from third-generation aircraft like F-5s to fourth-generation aircraft like F/A-18s and F-16s.

“The aircraft shortages in training are made worse by the F-35 fifth-generation aircraft, which you need a lot of ‘bad guys’ for,” he said.

Parker told Seapower that more fourth-generation fighters are needed to meet the increasing demand for adversary services, but that “not enough fourth-gen aircraft in the world are available to industry. Nobody can provide it all, nor can all of us [the adversary companies] provide it together, at least in the next five years or so.”

Because of restrictions in U.S. law, the adversary contractors cannot purchase or lease fourth-generation fighters from the U.S. aircraft in desert storage. As such, they go to foreign nations like Israel for retired jets to bring to the United States.

The Navy has issued a draft Request for Proposals for fourth-generation adversary services for the Naval Aviation Warfighting Center at Naval Air Station Fallon, Nev., looking for F-16- or SU-27-like capability with an upgraded radar.

“There’s only one category of radar [that can meet specifications] — an AESA [electronically scanned array radar],” he said.

For cost reasons, Parker said, single-engine jets are needed, rather than two-engine aircraft.
 The ability of the F-22 Raptor and F-35 to track and engage large numbers of aircraft means that large numbers of adversary aircraft are needed to provide a realistic scenario for training the pilots. For example, the Air Force stations a number of T-38 supersonic trainers at Langley Air Force Base, Va., to provide enough bogeys to challenge the F-22s based there.

“The Raptor is such an uneven fight, that if you send out two Raptors against anything else, there’s no challenge, no work for the pilots to do. For a ‘two-ship’ they want 12 bandits.

“What we see going on is a maturation of the industry” he said. “By going to the fourth-generation level, the Navy is acknowledging that these programs are going to be around and integrated at the highest levels, because now they have radar; pulling 9 gs [nine times the force of gravity] at the merge; [and] helmet off-boresight capability.”
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.