Search results

I totally understand that and I agree with your second point. My point is that direct URF comparisons (which the media is fond of) a false impression to lay Canadians, because that price isn't available for us and a "basic" Super Hornet is a lot further (in cost terms) from a Canadian IOC than...

No, they are very relevant. Much of the dissimilarity between the two aircraft are in its structural and propulsion elements. While they may result in some production and sustainability issues, that really ignores the primary cost and capability drivers of the airframe: Avionics. The core of...

Thats not an accurate price for the F/A-18E: you're missing a whole whack of costing, including the non-recurring research fee, ancillary equipment (Tgt/Nav pods, Fuel tanks, pylons, adapters), and possible cost for twin seaters (and this doesn't even get into initial spares purchases). The...

I wouldn't go by first flight, rather time until IOC in this case to understand maturity: Canada decided to purchase the CF-18 in April 1980, USN IOC was in April 1983. If Canada decided today on the F-35 we'd be basically a year after USMC IOC, and a few months before the USAF IOC. In reality...

Biggest problem with this is the CF-18, which we decided to buy at a much earlier stage comparatively to where the F-35 is now. 

I'm not 100% on this, but the Full Rate ProductionDecision Review can only occur after DOT&E has completed its work and the design is complete, so there are statutory elements to it. Then again people think DOT&E is a political body, so.... However it has significant effects on the program...

That wasn't the manufacturer's graphic or claims. It was done by 388th at Hill AFB after (I believe) green flag. I agree with you that its not clear what the setup was, and the particulars, which makes it difficult to draw specific conclusions. That being said,  I'd suggest that in my research...

Unfortunately this is incorrect. Its not a question of "obsolete" as in the F/A-18E is now starting the process to become being increasingly relegated to secondary roles. DOD has already stated the aircraft is vulnerable in a range of scenarios. The future CONOPS that is being developed under...

There are few pilots currently in the pipeline who are "new pilots." A significant proportion of USAF F-22 pilots have only flown that specific type as well.  (edit I see mick has made a comment on that). The false premise your argument rests on is that a fighter is a fighter is a fighter...

Yes, and that reflects what I've been saying and DoD's thinking. Its important to note that the Navy has said nearly the same thing as the USAF, and even suggested that they may consider teaming with them for the program. Nevertheless, the US is on the cusp of this transition and the end state...

The reality is that the idea of "roles" is starting to change significantly. Mark's links/comments really reflect the old thinking of programs that is less and less relevant to how the US Military perceives its future aerospace (and arguably battle space) operations. Arguably there are three...

No, absolutely not. If it was "cheap" then Boeing would have just eaten the EMD costs and offered such a package on the Super Hornet to the United States Navy. Perhaps the most relevant antecedent is the F-22. Back in 2004 it was foreseen that to produce more F-22s (after 200 or so) they would...

No, that's largely a congressional effort that will fail for a number of reasons. The most significant is the line startup costs, which  would be exorbitant. Right off the bat they will likely require a massive EMD effort to get the F-22 a new avionics system. The F-22 is a closed loop system...

This attitude is starting to change within the US Navy significantly, driven heavily by the F-22 in Syria. Even in its limited communications abilities, the sensor fusion avionics has operated better than expected. In specific instances the F-22's has reduced the potential role the US Navy has...

Except that report was quickly discredited by using 2010 CAPE Numbers (the whole 1.5 trillion dollar figure), which since have been revised downwards. If you utilize some of OSD's current estimates and compare it to RAND's estimates for what three program may cost, they are already 15% below...

Probably less. The RAF Typhoons are the most heavily used of all the consortium members, and the aircraft has experienced a higher number of structural defects than one would reasonably expect at this stage. Remember that the Typhoons that will last to 2040 haven't left the production lines...

Sorry for the late reply Baz... been busy and thinking about how to reply. I think perhaps a bit of focus is needed on the Polaris. It wasn't like Canada went out and purchased a brand new tanker aircraft specific to this role. Basically the RCAF saw that the Luftwaffe had developed a...

I think the fighter force has had to make due for a lot of years with scraps... and, with the exception of maybe a couple of years in the 1950s (with the Sabre) and the mid 1980s (immediately after we deployed the CF-18), we were never on the cutting edge of capabilities. I think the past decade...

F-35s can refuel from boom only. In reality the KC-135 will probably be out of service before we get the F-35 or any other aircraft, so much of this is moot. I never claimed otherwise... I'm not really sure why this is an issue. Sure if we get the F-35 we won't be able to boom with our CC-130H...

No, there will likely be no training squadron aircraft. Basically the use of simulators and operational aircraft loaned from squadrons will replace the OTU portion as it is currently established. This is very much in flux however.... due to the government's pause on this file. A lot of questions...