I believe you. But could your fancy gear also maintain tolerances under extreme G-forces and temperature swings from –50C to +150C?
Yes and add torsion, compression, tension, kentic force, static force, resistance, spring,
From initial concept to first delivery it took 13 years. Not sure if that's good or bad though?
Is that normal for boats? I would think that reinforces the criticism that the modules were nowhere near acceptable tolerances when they were brought together. But I'm closer to being a pilot than a ship captain.
It's great to hear from someone who worked both in the automobile industry and areospace industry. I'm just googling shit trying to make heads or tails of the responses.
You like that eh?
Saying automotive tolerances are on the same level as modern fighter aircraft tolerances doesn't seem accurate to me?
Isn't the entire nature of the manufacturing, materials, the QA processes, and the certification requirements worlds apart between the auto and aerospace industry?
Inspections and certifications QC and QA are more stringent on aircraft parts. (for the most part). Those same and or similar parts can be used for a multitude of different industries.
Bolt manufacturing for example, AN hardware will have a higher quality control testing then a regular bolt. All this means is that the AN bolt had for example every 100 bolt tested for tolerances, failure torsional, compression, dimensions for tolerance fit bolts etc. Bolts for aircraft and automotive can come off the same assembly line. Batch one is certified and batch two, three and four are not.
For example I'm reading in the auto sector, a millimeter off is often acceptable. In aerospace don't they measure in microns?
Depends on what you are talking about, a mm on a bearing surface is in most cases going to cause you issues automotive or not.
On a modern fighter, wouldn't a tiny deviation in the airframe, skin contour, or radar absorbent coating change aerodynamic performance, stealth signature, structural integrity, or weapons alignment? Not that stealth applies to Gripers but still.
LOL, some time a scratch in composite materiel can render a part unserviceable or a lot of man hours to fix, repair and recertify a part.. At the same time leaking almost all your hydraulic oil out is deemed acceptable.
India took over a decade to prepare to build Su-30s under license. Japan took years to establish local F-35 production, and they already have a top-tier aerospace sector. Brazil took around a decade to build facilities for the Gripen E/F even with Saab’s direct support.
A lot of that will have to do with local decisions and regualtions.
If countries with existing fighter aircraft manufacturing need 8 to 12 years, do you really believe Canada could do it in 3? Even if we put our elbows up?
If SAAB sent us the jigs, tools, instruction manuals, parts and a few experienced assemblers I would say 6 months to set up the factory from when equipment shows up. Meanwhile we are training our workers in the Current SAAB facilities. So 1 year from first equipment hits the ground until we could be assembling a product.
I would honestly look at De Havilland as being a good choice to actually partner with and Bombardier with some sort of spin off, they are building a facility East of Calgary with their own runway. This could be a great opportunity to expand their program and get the government to invest in more then themselves.
Sure good pay can attract workers. It can’t create an aerospace industry out of thin air. I'm reading fighter jet production is going to need decades built supply chains, certified facilities, specialized tooling, and security clearances (just ask the CAF about these). You can’t solve those with higher wages or by pulling workers out of the woodwork.
We already have a very experience Aerospace industry in Canada. To expand it will take some time, but not as much as some think. Especially since we would not be starting off fresh. We would have backing of skilled workers directly involved in the program already who would train and work along side skilled workers who would be hired.
Are Canada's supply chains anywhere near what’s required for full fighter production.
Why would they not be?
Didn't mechanics in the CAF have to order parts of ebay?
Not sure, I know I went to parts and ordered what I needed. It would show up hopefully right away or after a week for restricted and or limited parts.
When I was fixing private aircraft, I went to Canadian Tire one day and bought s Specific Alternator that was Certified by TC for small aircraft use.
Expanding and optimizing also doesn't seem like a 2 to 3 year task. I'm reading it will mean building entirely new certified lines for composites, titanium, avionics, weapons integration, ITAR secure facilities, flight-test infrastructure, and more. That’s a decade+ scale industrial buildout. No?
Not really we already have most of this in Canada currently. ITAR secure facilities specifically is something that would have to be determined.
Or they could be big bullies and kindly tell smaller countries FAFO. Prime Minister Carney apologized pretty damn fast.
Lol, when your in his back pocket what else does one do.
Are countries going to go to bat for beloved Canada if Trump goes on the warpath? I wouldn't count on it.
ahh who knows, they have been scared for years but now are realizing how unreliable the US can be,.
See my point about Brazil, India, and Japan.
You can't throw a Nusmista without it landing on unceded traditional land. I don't imagine First Nations will sit idly by while a multi-billion dollar facility(ies) gets built on their land. How many hundreds of millions of dollars will consultations take? How many years will that put us back.
Just do it and deal with forgiveness later. Politics and greasing palms is what causes multi year delays to projects. Not the actual capability to do so itself.
Manufacturing jets (and 84mm rockets and CV90s) in Canada would be awesome.
That would be good,
Pushing a 3-5 year time frame just seems like more lies. We should respect ourselves more.
I think it is realistic. Saab is looking at Canada's manufacturing potential overall.
It was a response to the position that our automotive or general manufacturing industry can quickly pivot to aviation, apparently in mere months.
It depends on what the tooling and requirements specifically are.
The point being on the first AOPS was that the quality control was off and over time it got substantially better.
I heard QC and QA was almost non existent. When they were challenged about it they said mind your business we know what were doing. 1+1 does not equal 1.5 or 2.25 unless your a Eastern Shipyard trying to fake it until you make it.
www.ctvnews.ca
aeronewsglobal.com
