F-35 Opinion paper.

[KevinB]

He makes sense to me.

For F-35, Congress must heed history

Opinion: America stands at a crossroads with the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, retired Air Force Gen. Philip Breedlove argues.

www.defensenews.com

 

[childs56]

He makes sense to me.

For F-35, Congress must heed history

Opinion: America stands at a crossroads with the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, retired Air Force Gen. Philip Breedlove argues.

www.defensenews.com

The problem is it does not do what it is suppose to do. It seems no matter how much money, how much tech/ how many threats get thrown towards it. This will not change. They can't or wont make it work. Either way it is dead in the water so to speak until they can.

it will be interesting to see how the current and future block updates will work out. How many orders will be made.

I wish Canada would just order 100 F15 Super Eagles, 100 F16s and 80 Growlers/ Griphens.

 

[Quirky]

wish Canada would just order 100 F15 Super Eagles, 100 F16s and 80 Growlers/ Griphens.

I support this. The national debt will balance itself.

 

[markppcli]

I just can’t wait to see how well the Super Eagle goes, us building our own F15 variant could only ever end well.

 

[KevinB]

I just can’t wait to see how well the Super Eagle goes, us building our own F15 variant could only ever end well.

I was thinking you could call it the Arrow…

 

[Kirkhill]

The problem is it does not do what it is suppose to do. It seems no matter how much money, how much tech/ how many threats get thrown towards it. This will not change. They can't or wont make it work. Either way it is dead in the water so to speak until they can.

it will be interesting to see how the current and future block updates will work out. How many orders will be made.

I wish Canada would just order 100 F15 Super Eagles, 100 F16s and 80 Growlers/ Griphens.

What is the end state of a system designed with Continuous Improvement in mind?

The F35 was built to be continually upgraded.

The B52 wasn't but is still flying because it was capable of being continuously upgraded.

IMO the F35 does stuff and it does stuff well. It is constantly being upgraded to do more stuff. New production does new stuff and old production can be retrofitted to do the same stuff the new production does.

AFAIK that was the intent of the programme - to ensure that all airframes could be upgraded on the Ship of Theseus principle and never become obsolete.

 

[ArmyRick]

I have heard of a strike eagle and a super hornet. Did the two have a baby called Super Eagle?

 

[childs56]

I have heard of a strike eagle and a super hornet. Did the two have a baby called Super Eagle?

presumptive spelling, should have been "strike" not super.

I just can’t wait to see how well the Super Eagle goes, us building our own F15 variant could only ever end well.

lol

I was thinking you could call it the Arrow…

ROTFL.

 

[KevinB]

Honestly I’d be a fan of a 48’ish F-35 buy and a 64 ish F-15EX buy, but I’m not sure if two fleets is practical for Canada.

The F-35 does so many different things, that it is hard to to argue for a pure fleet especially given the very limited number of platforms.

Has the F-35 had issues, yes, partially due to the Navy and USMC forcing unnecessary shit into it - but the hiccups currently are due to new innovations, not actual issues with the system itself.

As for the Canadian aerospace industry, it’s a subcontract environment. It isn’t a full platform setup, unless you want another Griffon…

That debacle should be enough to cut that pipeline off at the knees.

 

[childs56]

Honestly I’d be a fan of a 48’ish F-35 buy and a 64 ish F-15EX buy, but I’m not sure if two fleets is practical for Canada.

The F-35 does so many different things, that it is hard to to argue for a pure fleet especially given the very limited number of platforms.

Has the F-35 had issues, yes, partially due to the Navy and USMC forcing unnecessary shit into it - but the hiccups currently are due to new innovations, not actual issues with the system itself.

They are having further issues then just stuff added to it. Even the manufacturer has stated they can not get the latest system to work properly. Those are critical to the jet hitting mission state.
That does not mean it is not an effective aircraft. It does mean that the aircraft may not reach full potential stated in the agreements. IF one can integrate similar sensers, hardware and software into other airframes then why not. I think thats where the F15EX program has gone to.

As for the Canadian aerospace industry, it’s a subcontract environment.

Nothing wrong with subcontract environment, especially when it involves the important pieces that make everything else work.
We do have two solid aircraft manufactures in Canada who historically have history of manufacturing various aircraft.

It isn’t a full platform setup, unless you want another Griffon…

What is wrong with the Griffon? Other then the politics behind the program the chopper itself is pretty capable of what it is designed for. Just because we cant put a bambi bucket or other slung load underneath it, or they wouldn't land on anything besides approved airfield in Bosnia, or the pilots thought they would out fly British Chinooks .

That debacle should be enough to cut that pipeline off at the knees.

Pipelines can always be added, rebuilt and extended.

 

[KevinB]

They are having further issues then just stuff added to it. Even the manufacturer has stated they can not get the latest system to work properly. Those are critical to the jet hitting mission state.

Yes latest system is the upgrades. The current ones are flying fine.

That does not mean it is not an effective aircraft. It does mean that the aircraft may not reach full potential stated in the agreements. IF one can integrate similar sensers, hardware and software into other airframes then why not.

You aren’t following the program well if you think it’s not working, the upgrades are issues but like every other one before they will get fixed. This isn’t the first block.

I think thats where the F15EX program has gone to.

Entirely different platform with different capabilities

Nothing wrong with subcontract environment, especially when it involves the important pieces that make everything else work.
We do have two solid aircraft manufactures in Canada who historically have history of manufacturing various aircraft.

What is wrong with the Griffon? Other then the politics behind the program the chopper itself is pretty capable of what it is designed for. Just because we cant put a bambi bucket or other slung load underneath it, or they wouldn't land on anything besides approved airfield in Bosnia, or the pilots thought they would out fly British Chinooks .

Add the fact it didn’t meet the capability requirement- and pork barrel political decision

Pipelines can always be added, rebuilt and extended.

Time, money and experience are all required

 

[childs56]

Yes latest system is the upgrades. The current ones are flying fine.

Are they?

You aren’t following the program well if you think it’s not working, the upgrades are issues but like every other one before they will get fixed. This isn’t the first block.

But how many were built and parked right now?

Entirely different platform with different capabilities

Yes and no. Different mission yes, similar capabilities built into the platform.

Add the fact it didn’t meet the capability requirement- and pork barrel political decision

Poltics aside the helicopter flys and does a decent job within its capabilities. It wasnt what we needed but its what we got. The helicopteris not a piece of junk. Its just not the correct one.

Time, money and experience are all required

We can get all of that or already have it. We just need to divert some dental

 

[KevinB]

Are they?

But how many were built and parked right now?

Current Rev being built are parked awaiting software fix. The already delivered are flying.

Yes and no. Different mission yes, similar capabilities built into the platform.

The EX can’t do a lot of what the F-35 does, and likewise the F-35 can’t carry the payload of the EX.

Poltics aside the helicopter flys and does a decent job within its capabilities. It wasnt what we needed but its what we got. The helicopteris not a piece of junk. Its just not the correct one.

It’s a junk Mil helicopter in this day. If Canada had got the Blackhawks it would’ve been way better off.

We can get all of that or already have it. We just need to divert some dental

True

 

[markppcli]

The Griffon was purchased to replace 3 air frames. I can do what one of those air frames did. It’s a failure.

 

[Good2Golf]

The Griffon was purchased to replace 3 air frames. I can do what one of those air frames did. It’s a failure.

No, it was a misinterpretation of a Harvard Graphics slide (PowerPoint didn’t exist…yet), that many believed implied with three helicopters on the left side (a Kiowa top, Twin Huey center, Chinook bottom) and a single arrow center height pointing from the Twin Huey towards the right to a single Griffon center-height on the right.

The intent of the original form of the slide had been to message that only the Twin Huey’s UTTH role would continue, assumed by the Griffon.

I know the creator of the slide, and he said regretfully that his first version (with a beside both the Kiowa and the Chinook) was not approved by 10 TAG HQ. He said if it had, it would have been patently clear that the LOH and MTH roles were ceasing and only the UTTH role would continue, transitioning from the CH-135 to the CH-146.

The misinterpretation of the amended slide with a single arrow (intended to imply only Twin Huey to Griffon) resulted in the lore built up as ‘the Griffon will do all three roles [LOH, UTTH, MTH]’…a clearly impossible task.

As for how well the CH-146 has conducted the UTTH role, compared to the CH-135? Personally I’d take the CH-146 in most situations.

 

[KevinB]

As for how well the CH-146 has conducted the UTTH role, compared to the CH-135? Personally I’d take the CH-146 in most situations.

but would you have preferred the Blackhawk…

 

[FJAG]

I quote from a service paper by a LCol at staff college back in 2015/16:

The Griffon procurement project replaced three platforms, namely the CH-136 Kiowa, the CH-135 Twin Huey and the CH-118 Iroquois. The CH-147Chinook fleet was divested during the same period. https://www.cfc.forces.gc.ca/259/290/318/192/macrae.pdf

I can understand the interpretation and misinterpretation of that slide, but the reality of the situation was that rather than having three helicopters performing three distinct roles (light observation, utility and medium lift) only one capability would remain in the CAF by way of the Griffon. While no one expected that it would make a decent light observation helicopter, and it was abundantly clear it couldn't do a Chinook's job, people expected that it would at least do the CH-135's job. It couldn't either. The CH-146 lifts about 3,100 lbs while the CH-135 could mange around 4,400. (all weights approximate - I base the CH-146 lift on the service paper as I can't find a specific reference anywhere else on the web - I assume they are too ashamed to post it)

The upshoot was that the Griffon was expected, by the troops on the ground, to do the best it could in all helicopter tasks necessary within its limited specification. Artillery lost two capabilities - aerial observation and transport of light howitzers. The latter comes about with the switching out of the L5 pack howitzer (2,840 lbs which can be reduced by stripping components) and the LG1 (3,350 lbs). An LG1 can be lifted for very short distances if the Griffon reduces fuel and everything possible, including the breech block is stripped.

IMHO the acquisition of the CH-148 saved the Griffon from what should have been the scrap heap. With a Chinook you have the capability to lift the guns and logistics that the Griffon can't and its reduce lift of infantrymen can be compensated for. Drones now very adequately, if not more than adequately, replace the light observation role. The army can now get by with the Griffons but it won't thrive.

 

[KevinB]

There was some discussion about the Griffon transmission being derated. It theoretically is a more capable bird than the older Twin Huey’s - but years ago one of the 148 pilots was telling a few of us, that in order achieve greater longevity of the airframe the transmission was limited — not sure if I’m recalling it correctly but the 412 should be a more powerful 4 bladed version of the 212…

 

[FJAG]

There was some discussion about the Griffon transmission being derated. It theoretically is a more capable bird than the older Twin Huey’s - but years ago one of the 148 pilots was telling a few of us, that in order achieve greater longevity of the airframe the transmission was limited — not sure if I’m recalling it correctly but the 412 should be a more powerful 4 bladed version of the 212…

I'm just reading specs off a book here - anyone knowledgeable chip in - Wikipedia says the CH-146 has a Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6T-3D Twin-Pac coupled turboshaft engine, 1,250 shp (930 kW).

The CH 1-35, on the other hand, had a 1,800 hp Pratt & Whitney Canada T400-CP-400 Twin-Pac turboshaft. Bell CH-135 “Twin Huey” | Canada Aviation and Space Museum

Not sure if the shp v hp rating matters here.

 

[KevinB]

@Good2Golf