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

[Good2Golf]

Loyal Wingman?

Yes-ish.

CCA (collaborative combat aircraft) is a more accurate description since the autonomous aircraft may (likely) not act as a classic ‘wing man’ following/supporting a lead aircraft.

We would be crazy not to be looking at this.

This.

 

[Kirkhill]

One of those "you can't get there from here" articles demanding a do-over.

Forget the F-35. Buy the F-47. A Chretienite dream.

The Hard Truth About the F-35 That No One Wants to Admit

The F-35 is already becoming obsolete. The 6th-gen F-47 is the only way for America to avoid losing air superiority to China and Russia.

nationalsecurityjournal.org

This one line jumped off the page at me...

What sets the F-47 apart isn’t just stealth or speed, though both will matter. It’s the shift toward modularity and adaptability. This aircraft won’t be frozen in time, unlike many legacy systems, such as the F-35. It will evolve rapidly. Open architecture will allow for plug-and-play updates.

I thought that was the F-35 blurb. There was no end-state. It would be continually improved.

And in that continual improvement lay the accountant's nightmare. There was no end-state against which the project could be measured.

...

The F-47: Not like the F-35. The same as the F-35.

 

[OldSolduer]

Sopwith Camels would have been a better investment.....

 

[Colin Parkinson]

There were 24 marks of Spitfires and sub-variants on top of that. It's not like evolving aircraft is anything new and was done with pencils and sliderulers.

 

[Greene]

Sounds like the F-35 review has been completed, and says there's no military value in splitting the fleet. No official word from the government in the article, except the MND confirming the requirement for 88 aircraft. Hopefully the nonsense will be over soon.

Canada’s defence review makes case to stick with F-35 jets: report - National | Globalnews.ca

The F-35 is the most advanced fighter of its type, and buying another jet from a European rival would incur extra costs in training, supplies, and maintenance.

globalnews.ca

 

[KevinB]

Sounds like the F-35 review has been completed, and says there's no military value in splitting the fleet. No official word from the government in the article, except the MND confirming the requirement for 88 aircraft. Hopefully the nonsense will be over soon.

Canada’s defence review makes case to stick with F-35 jets: report - National | Globalnews.ca

The F-35 is the most advanced fighter of its type, and buying another jet from a European rival would incur extra costs in training, supplies, and maintenance.

globalnews.ca

Makes sense, plus you'd need a lot more than 88 of a mixed fleet anyway do to needing to duplicate training on all pipelines that would service or operate the aircraft.

 

[MTShaw]

Makes sense, plus you'd need a lot more than 88 of a mixed fleet anyway do to needing to duplicate training on all pipelines that would service or operate the aircraft.

Politics always wins. That’s the reason it took us so f@*king long to get the F-35. What defence wants and what defence gets are to different things and the full report is yet the come in.

 

[calculus]

Sounds like the F-35 review has been completed, and says there's no military value in splitting the fleet. No official word from the government in the article, except the MND confirming the requirement for 88 aircraft. Hopefully the nonsense will be over soon.

Canada’s defence review makes case to stick with F-35 jets: report - National | Globalnews.ca

The F-35 is the most advanced fighter of its type, and buying another jet from a European rival would incur extra costs in training, supplies, and maintenance.

globalnews.ca

And some promising news showing continued efficiencies in the production process, further cementing this as a good option for Canada:

Northrop Grumman’s F-35 Fighter output highlights industrial power behind US air dominance

Northrop Grumman’s F-35 Fighter output highlights industrial power behind US air dominance

armyrecognition.com

 

[Kirkhill]

And here's one for the Gripen crew...

Pilot spent 50 minutes on call to engineers before F-35 crash

Airman forced to eject from $200m fighter jet before it plummeted to the ground

www.telegraph.co.uk

A US Air Force pilot spent 50 minutes on a conference call with engineers before his F-35 fighter jet crashed and exploded earlier this year.

The pilot joined the call with five engineers from Lockheed Martin, the manufacturer, shortly after take-off on Jan 28, an air force accident report said.

Freezing temperatures had ruptured his aircraft’s hydraulic lines and main landing gears.

The pilot suffered an “in-flight malfunction” but was able to safely eject before the $200m (£149m) F-35 Lightning II jet plummeted to the tarmac below and erupted in flames at US Eielson Air Force Base, Fairbanks, south-east Alaska.

An inspection of the wreckage found that about one-third of the hydraulic systems in both the nose and right main landing gears had been contaminated by frozen water – the temperature at the time of the crash was -1F (-18C), the report said.

A second F-35 suffered from hydraulic freezing just nine days after the crash, the investigation added, but that aircraft was able to land safely.

So, somehow, somebody allowed water into the hydraulics. Fair enough. Operator error and revise your maintenance procedures.
Two ships in 9 days though?

And at Eielson.

-18C isn't even cold.


.......

The American crash report said the pilot attempted two “touch and go” landings to try to recentre the jammed nose gear, but the frozen hydraulic liquid prevented both the left and right landing gears from fully extending.

Incorrectly thinking it was already on the ground, the F-35’s sensors transitioned to “automated ground-operation mode”, rendering the jet uncontrollable and forcing the pilot to eject, the report said.

In an April 2024 maintenance newsletter, Lockheed Martin warned that F-35 sensors could glitch in extreme cold weather, making it “difficult for the pilot to maintain control of the aircraft”.

Glitching? In cold weather? A known issue?

.....

In June, Britain bought 12 of the Lockheed Martin F-35A planes, capable of firing tactical nuclear weapons, in what Downing Street called the biggest expansion of its nuclear deterrent since the Cold War.

But delivery delays, serious staff shortages and significant cost overruns have so far spoilt these grand plans – fewer than 40 F-35B aircraft are so far in service.

The UK F-35 fleet has only achieved around one third of the MoD’s target for full mission-capable rate – the time during which aircraft are in fully ready to fly.

In Britain, a damning report from the National Audit Office said the country’s £11bn F-35 programme had led to a “disappointing return” in investment, with only a third of the fleet available to perform tasks required by the Ministry of Defence (MoD).

30% availability.....

.....

Maybe we do need an Arctic fleet.

 

[Rainbow1910]

So, somehow, somebody allowed water into the hydraulics. Fair enough. Operator error and revise your maintenance procedures.
Two ships in 9 days though?

And at Eielson.

-18C isn't even cold.

The full report can be found here.

On 28 January 2025, at approximately 12:49:16 local (L), the mishap aircraft (MA), an F-35A aircraft, tail number (T/N) 19-5535, crashed after completing a touch-and-go landing to Runway (RWY) 32 at Eielson Air Force Base (AFB), Alaska (AK). The MA was operated out of Eielson AFB, AK, by the 355th Fighter Squadron (FS) and assigned to the 354th Fighter Wing (FW). There were no fatalities. The mishap pilot (MP), assigned to the 354th FW, ejected safely before impact. He sustained minor, non-life-threatening injuries. The MA was destroyed upon impact, with a total loss valued at $196,500,000. The MA debris was contained within airfield boundaries on Eielson AFB.

The MA was flying as the #3 aircraft in a flight of four F-35A aircraft. After initial takeoff, the MA’s nose landing gear (NLG) did not retract properly due to hydraulic fluid contaminated with water that froze, preventing full strut extension and resulting in the NLG being canted to the left. After running initial checklists, the NLG was still turned approximately 17 degrees to the left. The MP initiated a conference call with Lockheed Martin engineers through the on-duty supervisor of flying (SOF). The MA held for approximately 50 minutes while the team developed a plan of action. The MP accomplished two touch-and-go landings attempting to recenter the NLG wheel. While both attempts failed to center the NLG wheel, the right main landing gear (MLG) strut and then left MLG strut did not fully extend after takeoff due to ice forming inside the strut. After the second touch-and-go, all valid Weight on Wheels (WoW) sensors indicated the MA was on the ground, and the MA transitioned to the “on ground” flight control law (i.e., automated ground-operation mode causing the MA to operate as though it was on the ground when flying). However, because it was actually airborne, the MA was uncontrollable. The pilot successfully ejected and emergency responders were at the scene within a minute.

The accident investigation board (AIB) president found, by a preponderance of the evidence, the cause of the mishap was hydraulic fluid contaminated by water that froze in the NLG and MLG struts. The ice prevented the struts from full extension that led the WoW sensors to declare the MA was on the ground when it was airborne. Additionally, the AIB president found, by a preponderance of the evidence, that crew decision making including those on the in-flight conference call, lack of oversight for the Hazardous Materials program, and lack of adherence to maintenance procedures for hydraulic servicing were substantially contributing factors.

If you read the report, it is not just "allowing water into the hydraulics", it is some pretty substantial debris and water that entered the landing gear. There was double the amount of allowable particulates and water levels inside the hydraulic fluid containers was something like 1/3 total volume, or like 33% at times. Various standards were clearly broken by staff to a frankly worrying degree, although it seems like some software problems need to be worked out as well.

Because of incomplete records, there was insufficient information to confirm whether the barrel used to service hydraulic fluid the MA on 23 January 2025 was the same hydraulic barrel that was left outside in inclement weather at Kadena Air Base for at least six weeks (Tab BB-199-200). This was in direct violation of Air Force regulations, which require that hydraulic fluid be stored in a “container tightly closed in a dry and well-ventilated place.” in accordance with AFI 91-203 and OSHA Safety Data Sheets (Tab BB-14, 22). Additionally, the hydraulic barrel that was used to service the MA had been marked “empty/consumed” in April 2024, but had not been disposed of (Tabs D-15, BB-199-200). Even so, it was in-use at the 355 FGS and, when tested, contained about 33 percent water (Tab J-13).

 

[Maxman1]

Looks like tye drinking water from the USS Nimitz.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Except that the water from Nimitz also glows in the dark.

 

[Dana381]

So, somehow, somebody allowed water into the hydraulics. Fair enough. Operator error and revise your maintenance procedures.
Two ships in 9 days though?

Hydraulic tanks need to be vented, I don't know how they accomplish that on aircraft but Its possible the vent failed and let water in from outside. Whether from flying in wet weather or another source.

 

[Quirky]

Maybe we do need an Arctic fleet.

For all our Arctic operations and bases?

 

[Kirkhill]

For all our Arctic operations and bases?

Anyplace it gets cold enough to cause glitches in the software?

Pretty sure it gets to -18C in Cold Lake and Bagotville.

 

[KevinB]

Anyplace it gets cold enough to cause glitches in the software?

Pretty sure it gets to -18C in Cold Lake and Bagotville.

It wasn’t the temperature. It was the crap in the fluid.

The other issue isn’t the software, it’s inputs to the software, as the software takes the input from various sensors, and clearly something was off with the sensors. Maybe that is related to the contaminants, or maybe it is a design flaw, that needs to be tweaked - but F-35’s have been flying is a lot colder and worse weather and haven’t had issues / so I’d be putting money on it linked to the contamination.

 

[dapaterson]

From what I have read it appears the software could not be overriden. So sensors / inputs convinced the software of something incorrect, and there was no ability for the pilot to say "Sorry, Clippy, that's not what I want to do".

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Anyplace it gets cold enough to cause glitches in the software?

Pretty sure it gets to -18C in Cold Lake and Bagotville.

I'm Cold Lake, in January, -18 is suntanning weather.

 

[Quirky]

Anyplace it gets cold enough to cause glitches in the software?

Pretty sure it gets to -18C in Cold Lake and Bagotville.

An Arctic fleet of Gripens would be somehow less glitchy?

 

[Kirkhill]

An Arctic fleet of Gripens would be somehow less glitchy?

I don't know. But they likely wouldn't have the same glitches at the same time.

Might could get half your fleet in the sky.