The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)

[ArmyRick]

I am a big fan of the F15X, but yea a decent sized chunk of the F35 is made here, I think we would need some F15X parts contracts and new POTUS that loves Canada to make our government even think about it.

Agreed. At this point, the sooner we run out the Trump clock, the sooner we can move forward with US relations. Am I not mistaken but we also have P8 Poseidons and MQ9s on order from the US of A?

 

[Good2Golf]

Thanks for that, wait and see I guess.

Any idea how they decide what the fourth number in the sequence will be?

For example, CC-177 701. How did they decide the Globemaster should have 701 as its number instead of 501 or 901 or what have you? The Kingfisher is 5, the Aurora is 1, the Chinook is 3, I could go on. Makes no sense.

I know the CF-18 single seats are 7, and two seats are 9 and the Aussie museum pieces are 0. Just never made sense to me.

Yes, there is some logic to it. DGAEPM overall, the DAEPMs and DTAES (Aerospace Engineering PMs or fleet managers, and the Technical Airworthiness and Engineering Support) in particular, with a bit of 1 CAD A3 OA (Operational Airworthiness) thrown in there. The intent is to separate as much as possible, the blocks of fin numbers across the RCAF and also to clearly separate sub-types of a particular aircraft type. C-130s are an example like 3## for E/H models and 6## for J models. Chinooks win the most-types awards at three: 0## for original C-models, 2## for interim D-models in AFG and 3## for the current F-model fleet.

 

[dapaterson]

Chinooks win the most-types awards at three: 0## for original C-models, 2## for interim D-models in AFG and 3## for the current F-model fleet.

Yeah, look at the project leadership there... no wonder they're all over the place

 

[Good2Golf]

Yeah, look at the project leadership there... no wonder they're all over the place

One should always question the sanity of anyone okay with flying something that has six pieces of flappy fiberglass careening between each other at over 750km/h.

 

[OldSolduer]

One should always question the sanity of anyone okay with flying something that has six pieces of flappy fiberglass careening between each other at over 750km/h.

I actually kinda like those guys.

 

[armrdsoul77]

One should always question the sanity of anyone okay with flying something that has six pieces of flappy fiberglass careening between each other at over 750km/h.

 

[ytz]

We wouldn’t be in the mess of having to buy fighters right now (with our backs against the wall), if successive governments, supported by the now “elbows up people”, had not continually kicked the fighter replacement project down the road…

I have special contempt for Fuhr.

Guy went from being one of us to a shill for Boeing because he thought the SH would be an easy transition. Swore up and down we needed two engines in Arctic. After the SH plan blew up, he's now trying to sell the Gripen while memory holing all his past talk about needing two burners.

Amazing how much he forgot about why we have fighters and what it takes to win in one.

 

[ytz]

I am a big fan of the F15X

Why?

Like I get the bomb truck appeal. But what's the point of another fighter fleet?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Bomb truck is one element, Chances of both fleets being grounded for issues is limited. Less issues with maintenance and I suspect less security requirements.
The F15x is faster and flies higher. Carries significantly more payload, has a far greater airframe life and and lower maintenance costs. Designed to compliment the F35 and having it reduces the air frame hours on the F35 fleet, on missions not requiring stealth.

 

[ytz]

Bomb truck is one element, Chances of both fleets being grounded for issues is limited. Less issues with maintenance and I suspect less security requirements.
The F15x is faster and flies higher. Carries significantly more payload, has a far greater airframe life and and lower maintenance costs. Designed to compliment the F35 and having it reduces the air frame hours on the F35 fleet, on missions not requiring stealth.

Guess you're just going to ignore the massive overhead of a second fleet.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Guess you're just going to ignore the massive overhead of a second fleet.

Yea well I was in we flew 3 different types of fighters and most of that part stocking and maintenance records were done by hand or on computers that barely had any memory. But somehow we managed.

 

[YZT580]

Guess you're just going to ignore the massive overhead of a second fleet.

Except for training massive extra overhead is by and large a red herring. To maintain a fleet any vehicle or aircraft you require X number of spares that is lineally linked to the number of vehicles in that fleet. When you double the fleet you more or less double the number of spares you need on hand. The same goes for staff. You need Y number of ground personnel per aircraft. I don't care if it is an F35 or a CF100 although the simpler a/c probably needs fewer hours spent on it so in that way you actually save a bit. In this case the a/c actually perform different functions and are better at different things. Buying all F35 is a compromise on some aspects of our requirements. It is in the training where we would have to spend the extra bucks and that doesn't come cheap but you would end up with a more usable air force in the end