- Reaction score
- 27,539
- Points
- 1,090
The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
- Thread starter WingsofFury
- Start date
I tell you I am shocked, SHOCKED. My my what would have possessed this government to come to its senses. Justin probably had the riot act read to him last week and no one wanted to see his socks.
- Reaction score
- 1,858
- Points
- 1,260
It only took 11yrs and over 8 months for this to happen.
If this was just a one off, it wouldn't be so sad, but this is the norm.
- Reaction score
- 4,166
- Points
- 1,120
The thing that few people recall is that this is NOT the first competition for this aircraft....the competition for the F-35 started almost 20 years ago with the JSF Project where the XF-32 and the XF-35 competed against each other.
It makes me ponder what things would have looked like if Boeing had ended up winning that competition with their F-32 airframe. To be honest, the F-32 in a non-S/VTOL platform would probably still make a decent attack bird, and with Boeing's experience in mass production, it would probably have been cheaper in just a 'fixed wing' non-carrier based platform than the F-35.
That said, the goal of the JSF program was to have a 'everything to everyone' airplane, so that would go directly against the grain...but suppose Boeing resurrected the F-32 as a Stealth-ish 5th generation platform for land basing only....and pursued that as their next generation Growler platform...capable of interacting with the F-35.
It makes me ponder what things would have looked like if Boeing had ended up winning that competition with their F-32 airframe. To be honest, the F-32 in a non-S/VTOL platform would probably still make a decent attack bird, and with Boeing's experience in mass production, it would probably have been cheaper in just a 'fixed wing' non-carrier based platform than the F-35.
That said, the goal of the JSF program was to have a 'everything to everyone' airplane, so that would go directly against the grain...but suppose Boeing resurrected the F-32 as a Stealth-ish 5th generation platform for land basing only....and pursued that as their next generation Growler platform...capable of interacting with the F-35.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,740
- Points
- 1,040
Helicopters, fighters, whatever. Did we at least manage not to pay half-a-billion in extra costs this time?
- Reaction score
- 1,858
- Points
- 1,260
No, but we still have time.
Happy Guy
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 601
- Points
- 810
The Public Services and Procurement Canada website for the Future Fighter Capability Project has now been updated to reflect that the GOC has entered the final phase of the procurement process with the US Gov't and Lockheed Martin. The earliest delivery date is 2025. I wonder when we might hear news that the contract has been signed?
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,740
- Points
- 1,040
Tuesday, for sure.
IKnowNothing
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,193
- Points
- 990
Any chance that the 3 year time frame will be expedited with a lease and replace with the US similar to when we added the Leo 2's?
- Reaction score
- 22,058
- Points
- 1,360
You shouldn’t add the RAAF buy…that stunt (aside from a waste of time and effort) was pure Maskirovka-like drama and ass-covering politics to try to feebly justify the government’s 2015 election ‘promise’ to not buy the F-35.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,390
- Points
- 1,260
So we don't need the F35, JT cancels our order for 65. Now not only was it the right plane in the first place but we're buying 88.
What a circus.
What a circus.
- Reaction score
- 21,958
- Points
- 1,260
Extremely unlikely - you maybe able to get some training time on some down here - but everyone who wants them isn't going to want to wait.
Unlike the Leo2 no one has any F-35's just sitting around collecting dust -- that would be like trying to get a Leo 2 today when Germany is going to take everything they can build for the next 5-10 years...
IKnowNothing
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,193
- Points
- 990
True. But I wonder about a backroom deal with the States specifically. A squadron or two out of their stock as a good faith/ quid pro quo to upping defense investment (with some strings tied to something like NORAD committments, a NATO deployment, or maybe spilling into that ground kit arrangement you keep bringing up..
- Reaction score
- 1,858
- Points
- 1,260
But if you don't include the Aussie planes, then our current level of 72 operational planes would be 72-X = ? operational planes - this strengthens the argument to buy more than 88 planes.
- Reaction score
- 21,958
- Points
- 1,260
I'd be more interested in whether the delays will cost any lives --
Yes I thought of that also but i was hoping it won't. Unlike the Seaking fiasco.
That was actually my motivation for asking, if we didn't save any money then it makes the risk less worth it. I guess part of me still holds hope the GOC will smarten up someday. Stupid me I know.
Any chance they cancel the expensive radar upgrade now? Has the work started yet?
- Reaction score
- 21,958
- Points
- 1,260
Not just pilots - anywhere the RCAF didn't go due to having an old dog where they could have had a role...Yes I thought of that also but i was hoping it won't. Unlike the Seaking fiasco.
That was actually my motivation for asking, if we didn't save any money then it makes the risk less worth it. I guess part of me still holds hope the GOC will smarten up someday. Stupid me I know.
- Reaction score
- 6,284
- Points
- 1,040
Why save money when the GoC wants to increase spending? This method requires no extra procurement/technical staff.
If your only metric is how much you spend as part of your GDP, procurement inefficiencies is a great way to bump up your stats.
