• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

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

Oldgateboatdriver

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
308
Points
880
AlexanderM said:
The Rafale is not a single engine fighter.

Quite right A.M.  My mistake there.

So I agree with jmt18325 that it makes it a contender. Possibly a leading contender.

After all, Dassault has promised that if selected, it could do a 100% technology transfer to Canada by having the planes built in Quebec under license with parts procured locally.

What would be in it for Dassault? First, the adoption of Rafale by Canada would help them bolster their sales around the world : "if its good enough for Canada, who has to satisfy the US of its capabilities, its good enough for you!" Second, it would, on top of that, create a plant where they can be built away from the notoriously difficult French labour unions, thus helping to reduce the cost on the international market.

Maybe some S.M.E. can chime in here, but my understanding is that Rafale has the best Thrust to weight ratio of all the available fighters on the market currently - something that fighter jocks appreciate in a dog fight (I have been told that push-come-to-shove, a Rafale M could be backed up to the stern of the Charles-de-Gaule and take off without catapults if need be. Anybody seen that also?)
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
3,153
Points
1,060
and we would end up paying to have it certified to carry US made weapons, which would also help oversea sales.
 

AlexanderM

Sr. Member
Reaction score
47
Points
280
Oldgateboatdriver said:
my understanding is that Rafale has the best Thrust to weight ratio of all the available fighters on the market currently - something that fighter jocks appreciate in a dog fight (I have been told that push-come-to-shove, a Rafale M could be backed up to the stern of the Charles-de-Gaule and take off without catapults if need be. Anybody seen that also?)
The current version of the fighter does not have the best thrust to weight ratio, although not bad, but for the contract to India, which may not happen, they were to develop a more powerful version of the engine, with an afterburner thrust of 90 kN, which would make it equal with the Typhoon in a smaller airframe. If we did go with the Rafale I would hope we would also go with the 90 kN engine, although I'm not entirely certain of the status of that engine, as to where they are in terms of development.

 

MarkOttawa

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
112
Points
710
Cheap (single-engine) F-16V with AESA radar anyone--maybe then some money for RCN ;):
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense-news/2015/10/21/lockheeds-new-f-16v-flies-advanced-aesa-radar/74319238/

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/lockheeds-enhanced-f-16v-makes-first-flight-418014/

http://www.janes.com/article/55400/adex-2015-f-16v-takes-first-flight

http://www.airforce-technology.com/news/newslockheed-completes-maiden-flight-of-f-16v-aircraft-4699541

Mark
Ottawa
 

jmt18325

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
360
MarkOttawa said:
Cheap (single-engine) F-16V with AESA radar anyone--maybe then some money for RCN ;):
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense-news/2015/10/21/lockheeds-new-f-16v-flies-advanced-aesa-radar/74319238/

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/lockheeds-enhanced-f-16v-makes-first-flight-418014/

http://www.janes.com/article/55400/adex-2015-f-16v-takes-first-flight

http://www.airforce-technology.com/news/newslockheed-completes-maiden-flight-of-f-16v-aircraft-4699541

Mark
Ottawa

I would think LM would still want to make a sale.  Don't be surprised if they submit this with the F-35 locked out of competition.  There will be a lot of F-16 parts around for a very very long time.
 

blacktriangle

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
253
Points
880
A question for SupersonicMax and others in the know...

What's the ballpark minimum number of airframes that would be required to meet our NORAD commitments while factoring in training and maintenence?
 

jmt18325

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
360
Spectrum said:
A question for SupersonicMax and others in the know...

What's the ballpark minimum number of airframes that would be required to meet our NORAD commitments while factoring in training and maintenence?

I'm not in the know, but if I were to guess, somewhere from 40 - 50.
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,572
Points
940
I hope the fighter sqn's get more than 40.  We had what, 130'ish CF-18s at the get go.  In the tradition of replacement we in Canada tend to face (replace 40 of the old with 20 of the new...then use them beyond the intended date), I hope it is more into the 60 range at least.

But, going off recent (last 2 decades) history of getting needed replacement tails for the RCAF, I think the Hornet Sqn's might want to start designing their "50th Anniversary" patch like the Sea King community had the...'opportunity'...to do.  And then pass it onto us 140 folks, so we don't have to start from scratch either.

Mr Trudeau might present a different public face to the LPC, but I'll wait for proof that the party overall isn't the 'same bunch of folks from before'Early indications aren't giving me a warm and fuzzy

chretien_gomery_ball.jpg
 

jmt18325

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
0
Points
360
Eye In The Sky said:
I hope the fighter sqn's get more than 40.  We had what, 130'ish CF-18s at the get go.  In the tradition of replacement we in Canada tend to face (replace 40 of the old with 20 of the new...then use them beyond the intended date), I hope it is more into the 60 range at least.

But, going off recent (last 2 decades) history of getting needed replacement tails for the RCAF, I think the Hornet Sqn's might want to start designing their "50th Anniversary" patch like the Sea King community had the...'opportunity'...to do.  And then pass it onto us 140 folks, so we don't have to start from scratch either.

Mr Trudeau might present a different public face to the LPC, but I'll wait for proof that the party overall isn't the 'same bunch of folks from before'Early indications aren't giving me a warm and fuzzy

chretien_gomery_ball.jpg

There was nothing scandalous about Gagnier, other than what was manufactured. 
 

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
1,400
Points
1,060
jmt18325 said:
There was nothing scandalous about Gagnier, other than what was manufactured.
Hahahaha... Oh, you were serious?
 

Altair

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,439
Points
1,110
PuckChaser said:
Hahahaha... Oh, you were serious?
I hope so.

I'm a unapologetic liberal and I found a lot wrong with that email. Especially the pure stupidity of it.
 

Retired AF Guy

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
150
Points
710
Spectrum said:
A question for SupersonicMax and others in the know...

What's the ballpark minimum number of airframes that would be required to meet our NORAD commitments while factoring in training and maintenence?

I've being out of the field for a long time but I would say what you are asking for is probably classified.
 

Humphrey Bogart

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
4,006
Points
1,360
Retired AF Guy said:
I've being out of the field for a long time but I would say what you are asking for is probably classified.

Yep, definitely classified
 

a_majoor

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
30
Points
560
If anyone seriously believes the RCAF will get a new fighter to replace the CF-18 once the CF-35 is cancelled, then you are smoking something that you should share with the rest of us.

The CF-18 replacement will be on infinite hold like the Sea King replacement, and eventually the RCAF will be a global favourite at air shows with its "historic aircraft" flypasts.

Being unable to interoperate effectively with allies, much less be able to fight in the interconnected "networked nodes" forms of high end warfare (or defend against the peer enemies who also fight that way) is of little concern to politicians who rarely pay in blood or treasure for the results of their decisions.
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
6,975
Points
1,360
There was nothing scandalous about Gagnier, other than what was manufactured

I took EITS' comment to refer to the theme of Liberal election-related posturing using Defence capabilities as the pawns, ie like Chretien's Red Book: "I says zero 'elicopters! Zip! Nada! Zilch!"  This time: "We'll hold a fair and transparent competition...that will exclude the F-35."

Maybe it was me, though, and EITS was referring to Gagnier? ???

G2G
 

blacktriangle

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
253
Points
880
Retired AF Guy said:
I've being out of the field for a long time but I would say what you are asking for is probably classified.

Fair enough. I asked for a ballpark, not an exact breakdown of how the fleet is distributed, readiness levels etc.

The answer is obviously less than 65. It will become "unclassified" once the Liberals announce how many (if any) new aircraft we will actually get...

 

dimsum

Army.ca Legend
Mentor
Reaction score
3,386
Points
1,260
Thucydides said:
If anyone seriously believes the RCAF will get a new fighter to replace the CF-18 once the CF-35 is cancelled, then you are smoking something that you should share with the rest of us.

The CF-18 replacement will be on infinite hold like the Sea King replacement, and eventually the RCAF will be a global favourite at air shows with its "historic aircraft" flypasts.

Being unable to interoperate effectively with allies, much less be able to fight in the interconnected "networked nodes" forms of high end warfare (or defend against the peer enemies who also fight that way) is of little concern to politicians who rarely pay in blood or treasure for the results of their decisions.

When it goes that way, let the Russian Bears cross the ADIZ and "leak" it to the press.  Something with a tagline like "Canada can no longer protect its borders" should fire up the outrage bus enough...

:whistle:
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,572
Points
940
Good2Golf said:
I took EITS' comment to refer to the theme of Liberal election-related posturing using Defence capabilities as the pawns, ie like Chretien's Red Book: "I says zero 'elicopters! Zip! Nada! Zilch!"  This time: "We'll hold a fair and transparent competition...that will exclude the F-35."

Maybe it was me, though, and EITS was referring to Gagnier? ???

G2G

A little bit of both but mainly towards the fact someone close to Mr Trudeau had go on time-out before the election even happened.  Chretien tossed $500 million away for not so much as a bolt; that picture to me represents the mockery the liberals made of our democratic system and how they used  the coffers.  Corruption is like an iceberg, you likely only see a small part of the whole thing . 

I should have put more thought into my previous post for clarity...overall I am concerned for both the CAF and Canada as a whole.  I think the old ways" will return because some of "them" are still around.  I think the average Canadian voted for a smile and a name not anything of substance.

Directly related to the fighter issue, like I said earlier;  might as well start designing your 50th Anniversary patches if you are part of the 18 community...
 
Top