# Why don't we buy the other aircraft?



## Batrakio (9 Sep 2007)

When Canada bought the CF-18, did they look at the option of buying a Russian Aircraft?
Don't they match the American made ones?
Do they cost more?


----------



## Kat Stevens (9 Sep 2007)

When Canada bought the CF-18, the Russians were still the bad guys.  It's in most of the history books, and was in the papers too.


----------



## KevinB (9 Sep 2007)

NATO aircraft tend to follow NATO standards...

 Russian/Warsaw Pact stuff is not.


----------



## observor 69 (9 Sep 2007)

I was in CFB Baden at the time worrying about being attacked by one if that's any help!


----------



## Good2Golf (9 Sep 2007)

Batrakio said:
			
		

> When Canada bought the CF-18, did they look at the option of buying a Russian Aircraft?
> Don't they match the American made ones?
> Do they cost more?



*_sigh_*....please put some effort into using all that this board offers, including the Search function and a few minutes from your schedule.

*Good example* (threads "on point" such as this one): "Lets buy these aircraft - Please Read" .   Note how the DS has done most of the work for you already here and conveniently stickied the thread so it shows up nicely at the top of the "Air Force General" sub-forum.

*Fair example* (subject approached tangentially): "New Russian Fighter.  Some interesting things come out of the discussion.

*Bad example* (ouch, analejectaspeech pretty evident here): "Kids Hijack Canada, Australia, U.K. Sign JSF Agreements Thread".  Note that staff moved portions of a once good thread into "Radio Chatter", a.k.a. white noise.

Locked

*The Milnet.ca Staff *


----------



## armyvern (9 Sep 2007)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Locked



OK ... I'll lock it!!  >


----------



## Batrakio (22 Dec 2008)

At first it seemed that the JSF would be perfect for Canada, but increasing costs and lack of performance had many nations thinking twice. Even though we have invested in it's research we are not commited.

What we need is a multi-role fighter, with good range, preferably with supercruise to be able to cross the arctic fast. I don't believe a 4.5 Gen fighter should be chosen, for stealth is a factor when intercepting an unaware Bear bomber over the arctic thinking it owns the place.

I also belive that fighter training shouldn't be all made in simulators, that is why our pilots are among the best trained. So if there was to be a Dual-Seat 5th Gen aircaft, it should be considered.

Nowadays there are many fighter programs from countries like Japan, Korea, India, Russia, China,...
Saab sent this fighter concept to South Korea













We should definitely take consideration for these aircraft, and remember we are a free nation and are not obligated to buy US aircraft.

Your opinions:


----------



## George Wallace (22 Dec 2008)

15 months later and you are basically asking the same questions.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (22 Dec 2008)

As has been stated, there's enough threads the same as this one. Go there. Read what they have to say, and see if you have a point for discussion, not already made.

This one can stay locked.

Milnet.ca Staff


----------



## Michael OLeary (22 Dec 2008)

Batrakio said:
			
		

> Your opinions:



My opinion.

1.  You need to start here. (Make sure you scroll down to the second post.)

2.  Most major equipment acquisitions are based on more than a 3-page PowerPoint presentation.


----------



## Michael OLeary (22 Dec 2008)

I should have been more clear:

2.  Most major equipment acquisitions *from foreign countries* are based on more than a 3-page PowerPoint presentation.


----------

