- Reaction score
- 20,119
- Points
- 1,160
Not to mention unnecessary and undesirable.I suspect that, with the CF-35's fancy coating, a dedicated aircraft with a bespoke paint job will either be impossible or prohibitively expensive

Not to mention unnecessary and undesirable.I suspect that, with the CF-35's fancy coating, a dedicated aircraft with a bespoke paint job will either be impossible or prohibitively expensive
Fair, but I will assume those personnel are from operational CF-18 and CP-140 Squadrons.CAF is beginning the F35 and P8 transition, posting crew to allies to get them experienced.
For a pilot the transition should not be an issue.The old A310s are not comparable to A330s; last I looked the largest users of A310s are in Iran, hardly a hotbed of aviation modernity.
nTACS is when? Unless the decision to go with the V-280/MV-55 has already been made, the Griffon / Tac Hel fleet isn’t seeing any changes for at least a decade. Also it looks like disciples of @Good2Golf have taken root and Army Aviation is coming (what that means in terms of RCAF and CA relationships IDK, I am always concerned the CA is not adult enough to look after Aviation - but perhaps it will mean infrastructure, as well as a PY and $ boost for the Tac Hel side of the house.).RPAS is also driving demand, nTACS will be transitioning from Griffon, modernized CH149 will be coming on line...
Or is it just that there hasn’t really been anything going on for 2-4 decades, and modernization is really frightening for some.Lots going on in the RCAF.
Yes, but it appears the conversation course is IVO 2.5 weeks. Which shouldn’t be terribly problematic.A310: hydraulic
A330: FBW
Not the same.
It will certainly easy the fighter force training/qualification challenges specifically and give more flex to instructor secondment load share across the various flying communities. For all intents, the PC-21 flies much more jet like than it does like an old school piston trainer like the Harvard (original). The digitally-controlled engine behave like a center-thrust jet, pus forward, go faster in a hurry. It won’t break the speed of sound, but neither could the Tutor.Pilot throughput seems to be the RCAF’s biggest challenge currently. I remain unconvinced that the Snowbirds flying a non operationally capable air craft will help with that at all.
Just like it shouldn't take long for a tank crew commander to go from a LEO 1 to a Abrams M1A2 and learn how to effectively fight it right?Yes, but it appears the conversation course is IVO 2.5 weeks. Which shouldn’t be terribly problematic.
www.thebeaverton.com
The delusion of Canadians regarding our Armed Forces and what they actual do is breathtaking.Just like it shouldn't take long for a tank crew commander to go from a LEO 1 to a Abrams M1A2 and learn how to effectively fight it right?
And, while the RCAF transitions to new fleets, we still need to maintain and fight the current fleets. The CP-140s, CC150s, CF18s, and the CH146 all still need to meet the operational demand with fewer people due to the retraining on new fleets. The only actual operational aircraft that we have sunset during this period is the CC130H, which should have been gone years ago.
And for the RPAS, that is a whole new capability that is taking away qualified pilots, ACSOs, and ground support from other fleets, further aggravating transition timelines, and depleting the number of trained personnel to do operations.
And then there is the statements coming from opinion writers who haven't spent a second thinking about joining the CAF that the Snowbirds are our most effective recruiting tool.
Actually sounds pretty damm cool
Seems pretty pricey... I know of cheaper alternatives.I like this low cost alternative to the jets for the Snow Birds. Id like to suggest the LdSH Mounted Troop follow suit:
View attachment 100491
I'm pretty sure that it's the RCN obsessed with all things British, not the Army or RCAF.Seems pretty pricey... I know of cheaper alternatives.
![]()