- Reaction score
- 7,533
- Points
- 1,260
Yes, 40, so far.Pretty sure we are sticking with a significant numbers of F-35
MAS and Lockheed Martin Announce F-35 Sustainment Partnership in Quebec
Press Release + Noah Notewww.truenorthstrategicreview.ca
The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
- Thread starter WingsofFury
- Start date
I think it's 30 - 16 initial order, plus long-lead items ordered for a further 14.
armrdsoul77
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 865
- Points
- 960
Do we know how many A.V. Roe Canada Saab Arrow II Gripens yet?
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,898
- Points
- 1,160
Sarcasm, yes?
armrdsoul77
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 865
- Points
- 960
If we could manufacture some of the parts in Canada for our domestically assembled fleet (including parts for other operators),get technology transfer/sharing that could be leveraged into partnering on a 6th generation manned/unmanned fighter/air combat system,buy enough airframes to have more frequent deployments to FOL's I think the Gripen could be used in the NORAD role. The per unit cost would obviously be higher(maybe it would be offset by the lower operating costs?).I don't think we have enough time before we need to start receiving airframes and there is an aircrew/technician shortage for the current single-type fighter fleet.
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,898
- Points
- 1,160
Have you been following the general opinion here? Gripen is way out of its league vs F35, to which we are already committed to. And we manufacture parts for it NOW.
armrdsoul77
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 865
- Points
- 960
As important as it is to conform to general opinion I think the Gripen would be fine for use in the NORAD role but would only make sense under the conditions I listed above.We can continue to build parts for the F35(ours and others).
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,898
- Points
- 1,160
OK, you have your views and I suspect its TDS based. There is a whole lot here and a LONG list of very valid reasons why its F35 over Gripen by a long mile.
Gripen shouldn't even be a consideration.
armrdsoul77
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 865
- Points
- 960
What's tds?
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,898
- Points
- 1,160
Trump Derangement Syndrome. Many people are so desperate to not buy American products that they think we should be other products of sub-par quality and capability.
Carney didn't help things last spring when he put the F35 order "under review" but is now quietly buying them.
I hope thats not your motivation for rooting for the 1988 era Gripen?
armrdsoul77
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 865
- Points
- 960
Sarcasm,yes?
ArmyRick
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,898
- Points
- 1,160
Good luck convincing me that we should purchase the Gripen over the F35
- Reaction score
- 13,120
- Points
- 1,160
L3Harris highlights AERIS X surveillance aircraft as allies seek new airborne early warning capabilities
L3Harris Technologies said its AERIS X airborne early warning and control platform is positioned to meet growing demand from allied nations seeking faster and more affordable air surveillance capabilities.
defence-industry.eu
How about the L3Harris AERIS X base on a Bombardier Global 6500?
- Reaction score
- 6,733
- Points
- 1,160
The key for any Bombardier-based platforms is integrating Air-to-Air refueling into their platformsL3Harris highlights AERIS X surveillance aircraft as allies seek new airborne early warning capabilities
L3Harris Technologies said its AERIS X airborne early warning and control platform is positioned to meet growing demand from allied nations seeking faster and more affordable air surveillance capabilities.
How about the L3Harris AERIS X base on a Bombardier Global 6500?
KevinB
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 29,932
- Points
- 1,260
I still don’t see the legs being viable for Canada.L3Harris highlights AERIS X surveillance aircraft as allies seek new airborne early warning capabilities
L3Harris Technologies said its AERIS X airborne early warning and control platform is positioned to meet growing demand from allied nations seeking faster and more affordable air surveillance capabilities.
How about the L3Harris AERIS X base on a Bombardier Global 6500?
Even if the below.
The airframe isn’t big enough as ai understand it for spare crews. So the ToS is limited not just by fuel range (which can be expanded by AAR) but also crew hours. The E-7/P-8’s have enough cabin space for a spare crew to hot swap.
- Reaction score
- 13,120
- Points
- 1,160
There's always this alternative.
No crew on board to swap. They're on the deck by the coffee pot.
MQ-9B Airborne Early Warning Variant Could Fill Major Aerial Surveillance Gaps
The early warning MQ-9B is being pitched in carrier-based form to the Royal Navy, but could have wider appeal, including for land-based use.
www.twz.com
Pretty sure this has already been mentioned.
If Bombardier really wants to make a buck it should be figuring out UAVs.
E7 Wedgetail costs somewhere between 588 and 724 MUSD apiece.
I can buy 2 or 3 spaceports for that.
An A330 MRTT costs another 300 MUSD each.
Something between 900 and 1000 MUSD to keep an eye in the sky.
Cost of an MQ-9B is about 25 MUSD apiece. Even if I doubled the cost to 50 MUSD to accommodate all the gadgetry I could afford to replace that one sensor platform and supporting tanker with 18 to 20 sensor platforms.
Even with a tanker how often do I have to bring that sensor and its crew down and replace it with another sensor at 588 to 724 MUSD.
Each sensor will buy me a squadron of 12 to 16 MQ-9Bs.
Assume I need three E7s and crews to maintain situational awareness 24/7 along with at least one tanker
Call it 3x 600 + 1× 400 = 2200 capital
Allow 50 MUSD for each MQ-9B
44x MQ-9Bs instead?
How many of those can you keep in the air concurrently? Without tanker support? And how much more area can you cover? How many more troops on the ground can you serve?
How many more targets can you keep under observation?
Even if the GCS and the flying crew is a wash financially.
