Don Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 In this case the "so called experts" are linking and providing proof to actual experts. Most recently the Danes, who rejected the Super Hornet and picked the F-35. The F-35 is undefeated in competition and has once again defeated the Super Hornet. And the Danes were even nice enough to release their findings for the world to see. The short conclusion is that the super Hornet cost more, would not work as long, and was inferior. This before we get into many Canadians who are involved with the F-35 who would be considered "Experts" that favor the F-35. Every study or evaluation the RCAF or DnD has ever conducted has found the F-35 to be the winner. Which is why we are seeing an attempt at getting super hornets with no studies, evaluations or competition. Conversely, we have never seen a super hornet win a single competition. The Navy said it was a Hornet variant, so there was no need for competitive fly off like the LWF comp, battle of the X-planes, or YF-23/YF-22. It was sole sourced by Australia as an F-111 stop gap. Every competition SH's participate in, they lose. In India, Brazil, and lost directly to the F-35 in Japan and Denmark not even a month ago. If you want to debate rather than insult, bring some facts and lets go. I've provided plenty of sources to back my claims including official Canadian documents, and Canadian analysis. Again, you would be hard pressed to read any of the above ^^^ in the Canadian media and if you did it would be shouted down because most people (it seems) are believing and completely buying into the garbage being fed to them from "Sunny ways" and his cronies and the Canadian media. It's kind of scandalous when you think of it. Link to post Share on other sites
Emvar Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Again, you would be hard pressed to read any of the above ^^^ in the Canadian media and if you did it would be shouted down because most people (it seems) are believing and completely buying into the garbage being fed to them from "Sunny ways" and his cronies and the Canadian media. It's kind of scandalous when you think of it. Problem is there are way too many so called experts the media go to get information from that no one knows what is the truth or fiction. I will say the procurement of the CF-18 went through the same slamming in the media as the F-35 is today...... same unproven airframe.....wasn't going to handle the cold.....yadda yadda yadda..... My only criticism is I don't believe 65 is enough. Link to post Share on other sites
Gordon Shumway Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 My only criticism is I don't believe 65 is enough. I agree. Figuring the RCAF will likely fly them as long or longer than we will CF-18 (about 35+ years) with attrition due to inevitable accidents/crashes, wear and tear and who knows what conflict(s) Canada may employ such during these 35+ years, I think we can find the funds for at least 80 as in to match the final number of upgraded CF-18s the govt of the day chose to pay for about a decade ago. BTW same goes (getting 80) if Canada does go F-18E/F. Aussies are going to fly 24 F-18E/F and still plan to by 100 F-35. In terms of landmass Australia is not much smaller than Canada and has likely as few proper air fields. Where as they have a hotter avg. climate, Canada is colder. IMO if "Sunny Ways" goes with F-18E/F, I think the RCAF should add a sqd. of F-18G to work with the E/F models (say a mix of say 70 E/F models and 10 G models). But I'm again just tossing around thoughts. Here is me :huh:/> The next guy :stupid:/> Link to post Share on other sites
Don Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Access to news, sources, and information has come a long ways since the early days of the Cf-18. I think the problem is the media in Canada is just recycling and regurgitating whatever comes out of Ottawa and the PM's office or using the same "go to" source(s). Honestly, this thread and the F-35 thread has links to numerous and far better and more factual info (positive and critical) then what the tax payer in Canada is reading in the Canadian newspapers or hearing on the Canadian TV news sources. The problem is it contradicts what "Sunny" and his cronies are trying to sell. If...if...someone in the mainstream Canadian media really wanted to they could easily paint a vastly different picture of the F-35 then what the government is peddling. But alas that can't be done as it would make Mr. GQ look bad. Image is everything with him remember ;). Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 I agree. Figuring the RCAF will likely fly them as long or longer than we will CF-18 (about 35+ years) with attrition due to inevitable accidents/crashes, wear and tear and who knows what conflict(s) Canada may employ such during these 35+ years, I think we can find the funds for at least 80 as in to match the final number of upgraded CF-18s the govt of the day chose to pay for about a decade ago. BTW same goes (getting 80) if Canada does go F-18E/F. Aussies are going to fly 24 F-18E/F and still plan to by 100 F-35. In terms of landmass Australia is not much smaller than Canada and has likely as few proper air fields. Where as they have a hotter avg. climate, Canada is colder. IMO if "Sunny Ways" goes with F-18E/F, I think the RCAF should add a sqd. of F-18G to work with the E/F models (say a mix of say 70 E/F models and 10 G models). But I'm again just tossing around thoughts. Here is me :huh:/>/> The next guy :stupid:/>/> I would love is Canada went like Australia, that would be great. But I just don't think they are willing to spend the money. So you have to be realistic. Growlers are an extra 10-12 million more than a Super hornet and that is before you add all the gear and equipment. The latest cost for the Super Hornet Flyaway is $78 million according to US Navy budget documents. Danes put the cost at $92 million Flyaway. The cost is escalating because production is slowing. Super hornets are getting more expensive while F-35s are getting less expensive. (perfect timing to look at buying them BTW...) I am Assuming Any Canadian order is not going to be large enough to drive the cost back down. Then there are FMS and R&D fees that required by the US Government. I just don't see a government that was talking about spending 9 billion on the CF-18 replacement throwing away a few billion on a interim aircraft. Which is what everyone is screaming about. Whatever they buy isn't something they can afford to replace if its temporary. For Contrast the KPMG report put the cost of the F-35 at $88 million Flyaway for Canada for their orders majority coming the 2020s, and being a partner nation would not have to pay FMS fees, and they have been paying for R&D by being a partner. F-35s are currently under $100 million flyaway. If Canada leases Super Hornets from the US, and then gets back to an open process the F-35 will be picked and life goes on. However, if they actually buy them- things get really sticky. And if they buy them, they need to reassure Canadian industry by also basically committing to the F-35 and making it clear that this really is only a small stop gap. Because buying Super Hornets, and then going quiet is going to see the Canadian F-35 contracts go elsewhere. So they are making a critical decision, make no mistake. They could theoretically buy Growlers, and get the expensive jamming stuff late. and use those with the idea that they would augment the F-35 well into the future, but again those cost more, so that needs to be taken into consideration Very poor timing for JT really. As the Danes just announced they are Go on their F-35s (Danish government = 145 yes votes out of about 180 voters) and the program appears to be on the upswing overall. This super bug deal would have made a lot more sense about 5-10 years ago... as for 65 aircraft there will probably be attrition replacements. The F-35 line is supposed to be going until at least 2037, so lots of countries are expected to buy additional aircraft. Link to post Share on other sites
aerofan Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 (edited) I think Justin PM Bieber, oh yeah it's Trudeau, should just get Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan to dust off the remaining CF-116's and put them back in service so that Justin can use the money saved to get the extra help his American Idol wannabe wife Sophie Gregoire Trudeau giving her free time to mingle with Hollywood A listers. :lol: Getting a little serious, I heard the US Marines don't want anything to do with the Super Hornets because they're waiting on the F-35. Maybe Canada can do a Operation Peace Wings 2.0 with the US and swap the legacy Hornets for the Super Hornets. Yeah like that would ever happen. Best thing Canada could do is ask the US for help in unloading their legacy Hornets and use the cash to help pay for some of that interm Super Hornet. Yeah another unlikely scenario. Maybe it's better just to solder on with the legacy Hornets until UCAV's come into military service. It'd be nice to see the Super Hornet in Canadian military service and not just because I have a Super Hornet in my stash being built as a Canadian what-if at the moment. But does Canada have the capability to afford such expendatures on both the Super Hornet and F-35? It's like the Diefenbaker government having to spend funds on the CF-105 Arrow, Bomarc and DEW line. Something that didn't happen. Just hope Justin doesn't pull off a dud like Dief the chief did with the Bomarc. Hell, I think it's time to call Bob Diemert and get his Defender in production as an interm fighter. For your enjoyment: Edited June 10, 2016 by aerofan Link to post Share on other sites
Scooby Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Problem is there are way too many so called experts the media go to get information from that no one knows what is the truth or fiction. I will say the procurement of the CF-18 went through the same slamming in the media as the F-35 is today...... same unproven airframe.....wasn't going to handle the cold.....yadda yadda yadda..... My only criticism is I don't believe 65 is enough. Totally, when I'm PM we'll have 300 plus F-35's. They'll be carrier and land based. I'm forming my own party, the Common Sense Party of Canada. Link to post Share on other sites
Scooby Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Access to news, sources, and information has come a long ways since the early days of the Cf-18. I think the problem is the media in Canada is just recycling and regurgitating whatever comes out of Ottawa and the PM's office or using the same "go to" source(s). Honestly, this thread and the F-35 thread has links to numerous and far better and more factual info (positive and critical) then what the tax payer in Canada is reading in the Canadian newspapers or hearing on the Canadian TV news sources. The problem is it contradicts what "Sunny" and his cronies are trying to sell. If...if...someone in the mainstream Canadian media really wanted to they could easily paint a vastly different picture of the F-35 then what the government is peddling. But alas that can't be done as it would make Mr. GQ look bad. Image is everything with him remember ;)/>. The problem with the media, and not just with military matters, is they no longer research their subjects. They just print as fast as they can, the art of journalism is lost. It is all about sensationalism. They also protect their favourites while painting others into the corner. Link to post Share on other sites
Don Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 ...They also protect their favorites while painting others into the corner. BINGO! ;) Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Glad to see the mods have eased off their heavy handed no-politics enforcement. I've seen more political slagging here than in all the combined threads started in the last 6 months. Not saying it's a bad thing, just a random observation! Link to post Share on other sites
Emvar Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Totally, when I'm PM we'll have 300 plus F-35's. They'll be carrier and land based. I'm forming my own party, the Common Sense Party of Canada. I'm in on the common sense party!!! Link to post Share on other sites
Emvar Posted June 11, 2016 Share Posted June 11, 2016 http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/politics/stealth-fighter-contracts-1.3629403 Well LM has shot a warning across the bow.... Link to post Share on other sites
john53 Posted June 11, 2016 Author Share Posted June 11, 2016 Thread turned out more enlightening and entertaining than I expected. Just out of curiosity what happens if tomorrow all Canadian Legacy Hornets are grounded? Totally hypothetical but does Canada have DM boneyard where you could unwrap a mothball fleet? And a mothball fleet of what, Cf-100s?---John Link to post Share on other sites
Don Posted June 11, 2016 Share Posted June 11, 2016 (edited) http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/politics/stealth-fighter-contracts-1.3629403 Well LM has shot a warning across the bow.... Good! I hope they follow through should sugar-ray T go with the SH. Would Canadians expect Something different? Honestly? EDIT: And once again...look at the comment section...wow...entertaining.... Edited June 11, 2016 by Don Link to post Share on other sites
Gordon Shumway Posted June 11, 2016 Share Posted June 11, 2016 (edited) as for 65 aircraft there will probably be attrition replacements. The F-35 line is supposed to be going until at least 2037, so lots of countries are expected to buy additional aircraft. I would accept an attrition replacement programme for such as that will keep the RCAF at 65 aircraft at any one time. Edited June 11, 2016 by Gordon Shumway Link to post Share on other sites
Gordon Shumway Posted June 11, 2016 Share Posted June 11, 2016 The problem with the media, and not just with military matters, is they no longer research their subjects. They just print as fast as they can, the art of journalism is lost. It is all about sensationalism. They also protect their favourites while painting others into the corner. I tend to agree, the western world has lost credible journalism on all too many topics and issues in the MSM. Edward R Muro, rolls over in his grave. Link to post Share on other sites
Don Posted June 11, 2016 Share Posted June 11, 2016 I tend to agree, the western world has lost credible journalism on all too many topics and issues in the MSM. I could not agree more! Yet...we allow it to continue... Link to post Share on other sites
Emvar Posted June 11, 2016 Share Posted June 11, 2016 I tend to agree, the western world has lost credible journalism on all too many topics and issues in the MSM. Edward R Muro, rolls over in his grave. Well.....reality is that whom ever owns the media outlet really makes the rules on what is reported. Usually you rarely see any negative reports on advertisers.....or even the owners. Now wouldn't you all think that influence would come from whatever the owner supports? Link to post Share on other sites
Gordon Shumway Posted June 11, 2016 Share Posted June 11, 2016 Well.....reality is that whom ever owns the media outlet really makes the rules on what is reported. Usually you rarely see any negative reports on advertisers.....or even the owners. Now wouldn't you all think that influence would come from whatever the owner supports? Ownership has always played a role in some way or other but in the more distant past the media ownership did not care so much about op eds and even what was reported in the news, but as long as product (newspaper, new magazines) or air time (radio/t.v) was being sold for fair profit. Link to post Share on other sites
Raceaddict Posted June 11, 2016 Share Posted June 11, 2016 EDIT: And once again...look at the comment section...wow...entertaining.... I have long since given up reading "Comments" sections of news websites. If there's one thing even less informative than mainstream media, it's slack-jawed yokels with opinions. Link to post Share on other sites
Don Posted June 11, 2016 Share Posted June 11, 2016 I have long since given up reading "Comments" sections of news websites. If there's one thing even less informative than mainstream media, it's slack-jawed yokels with opinions. Indeed...couldn't agree more. But what portion of vocal society do they represent? Multiply one news commentary section by however many and that's a lot of useful idiots! Link to post Share on other sites
TaiidanTomcat Posted June 11, 2016 Share Posted June 11, 2016 Even if LM was determined to keep contracts in Canada the pressure from partner nations would be enormous. I'm not going to try and be overly political but I will say this and try to keep it pertinent. Trudeau has said that canada doesn't need first strike and thus stealth is uneeded and it's showing that he doesn't realize thay 5th generation capability is just as useful in the air (ever heard of the F-22?) And I think him wieghing in like that and especially saying the F-35 doesn't work is undue influence on a process he promised would be by the book. Anyway play stupid games, win stupid prizes, cant have your cake and eat it too etc etc Link to post Share on other sites
Scooby Posted June 11, 2016 Share Posted June 11, 2016 (edited) Even if LM was determined to keep contracts in Canada the pressure from partner nations would be enormous. I'm not going to try and be overly political but I will say this and try to keep it pertinent. Trudeau has said that canada doesn't need first strike and thus stealth is uneeded and it's showing that he doesn't realize thay 5th generation capability is just as useful in the air (ever heard of the F-22?) And I think him wieghing in like that and especially saying the F-35 doesn't work is undue influence on a process he promised would be by the book. Anyway play stupid games, win stupid prizes, cant have your cake and eat it too etc etc Lockheed Martin just announced they will pull the roughly 1 billion in contracts if we cancel our F-35 participation. https://ca.news.yahoo.com/lockheed-martin-warns-pull-825m-230009191.html?nhp=1 The truth is, Trudeau made this promise when he had no idea he was going to win the election. At the last minute Toronto and the Maritimes voted for him And the end result is he was stuck with his un-educated promise. Edited June 11, 2016 by Scooby Link to post Share on other sites
Emvar Posted June 11, 2016 Share Posted June 11, 2016 Lockheed Martin just announced they will pull the roughly 1 billion in contracts if we cancel our F-35 participation. https://ca.news.yahoo.com/lockheed-martin-warns-pull-825m-230009191.html?nhp=1 The truth is, Trudeau made this promise when he had no idea he was going to win the election. At the last minute Toronto and the Maritimes voted for him And the end result is he was stuck with his un-educated promise. Reality is what happens on the election March isn't reality. They are not privy to information until elected. Not defending junior but it is reality. Same as H's promise to reform the Senate......didn't have a clue and gave up.... Link to post Share on other sites
Don Posted June 11, 2016 Share Posted June 11, 2016 Sugar coat as you want, but backing yourself and the nation into a corner is negligent at best (at best!). If you don't have the answers or a clear picture then you at least leave the door open. That's just bloody street smarts. "Selfie" didn't do that whatsoever and now people (media?) are covering for him and who may pay the inevitable price? The RCAF and the Canadian tax payer. There's no denying this, he and his cronies left themselves no options. That's on them 100%! Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts