A-10 Warthogs for the CF ??

[Kirkhill]

Is that what they said?  Eeeeh.

 

[DJL]

Have a boo:

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNe...71576966_82380776?s_name=election2004&no_ads=

 

[JBP]

Say, does anyone actually know when we will get new aircraft? The F-18 is going to be serviceable until 2020 it says on DND's airforce website. But what about after that? Would they be upgraded to the F/A-18E Superhornet standard of the US Navy? Or would we get some type of European fighter like the new EF-2000???

Anyone have any idea/heard anything? I was quite dissapointed when I looked for any hope of a replacement jet since there is no official word I've been able to find!

 

[DJL]

I'd say the most likely replacement for the Hornet would be the JSF (your guess is as good as mine when or if that would be)......I'm not sure that the Superhornet or Eurofighter will still be in production in 2020.

 

[Kirkhill]

As I understand it the F18-E/F SuperHornet is a completely new airframe.  From what I can gather they took the F18 drawings and hit the scale button.  All dimensions are bigger.

If it is going to be anything the JSF is likely going to be it.  Other options might be the Swedish Grippen or the Typhoon.  You might get a bargain on those.  The Brits apparently don't want all of them that the ordered (of course they are having difficulty getting them to fly properly).

 

[DJL]

If it is going to be anything the JSF is likely going to be it.  Other options might be the Swedish Grippen or the Typhoon.  You might get a bargain on those.  The Brits apparently don't want all of them that the ordered (of course they are having difficulty getting them to fly properly).

Well if they are British and don't work properly, i don't see why we won't get them 

 

[tabernac]

Harriers can't pack the same amount of armour as an A-10 since they already require so much fuel to take off and land vertically.

The Harrier does not require much more fuel for VTOL, just lots of water. The engines when running on full power overheat too quickly, hense the water. The Harrier carries around 250-300 L of water, it uses around 90L of water per minute, and it takes at least 2 minutes to slowdown, then land safely. This is if the pilot knows that there is cold water on the ground for his/her jet. I'm sure that some pilots try to speed it up a lot so they have some water for taking off.(if there was no cold water)

 

[JBP]

On the new Superhornet, they did increase size in almost all aspects of the airframe. The wings are long enough to have an additional 2 hardpoints compare to any previous model! This new F-18 can carry a motherload of weapons it would seem then. Also, if you look at nice close crisp pictures of the F-18 and then the F-22, you'll notice they have the SAME air intakes! Nothing too significant but interesting to say the least. Also, the new hornet is suppose to be a lot faster, new engines and all. Anyway, nuff bout that!

 

[tigersqn]

Why dont we get attack helos instead?   I think the US is replacing the AH-64   with RAH-66 in the near future, so why not buy them?

The RAH-66 program was cancelled a while back

 

[tigersqn]

If we want a helicopter for the army that can actually carry out its mission, then why not do what the brits have done? EH-101 can carry far more than any Blackhawk variant - 30 or so people if I remember correctly - and has also proven itself capable in theatre over the past little while. This would also keep things cheaper and easier for the supply system/maintenance trades with common parts.

And therein lies the problem. They've already missed their IOC date of March 1, 04. Besides, civvie contractors do the maintenance on them.

 

[Goober]

Lockhead Martin won the JSF contract over Boeing mainly because it could take off in less than 500 meters, go supersonic, and land vertically all in one configuration. Boeing's plane on the other hand had to be reconfigured for supersonic flight, and couldn't land vertically while configured that way.

The contract was estimated to be approximately 200 billion dollars, the US said it will probably be the last maned fighter plan they will buy.

Since then the US already said they are going to buy less than they originally thought.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Just a couple of quick thoughts:
1)   If I was procuring a runway-based (as opposed to helicopter carrier-based) CAS
solution, I would lean towards Predator-B with hellfire.  

Low operating costs.
Can fire hellfire at target.
Can also provide targetting information for Artillery with Precision-Guided Shells
Could even transmit video to the guys they're protecting.

2)   If I was procuring a carrier-based CAS solution, I would likely wait for JSF-C,
or a STOVL UCAV.   My own take is the age of attack helicopters is just about over
and to procure them now is simply a bad investment.

That's just me....

Cheers all,



Matthew.  

 

[Garry]

someone was asking about the Canadian air to mud role being gone- not so. The low level delivery has been replaced by high level delivery. In the "old" days, pilots stayed alive by going low level, under radar coverage, and being faster than the missiles fired at them. Worked well, but we lost a lot of people due to the inherent risks of low level/high speed flight. As equipment progressed, we were able to suppress enemy air defences to the point that low level radar avoidance was no longer necessary, and have dropped the capability. Air wars are now fought from high level.

Close air support is a role that is still being carried on today, but insted of roaring in low level, troops are suported by high altitude drops. The Mission hasn't changed, the Air Force still exists solely (as we all do) to support the 19 year old with muddy boots and a bloody bayonet hold the ground we helped him win.

As for airframes- the USAF got rid of the A-10 many years ago- the Reserves fly them now. They do very well when air superiority has been gained. As for the Harrier/AV8-B - no thanks. It's not as "field compatabile" as they make it out to be.

The Apache is a superb platform, but needs maintenance regularly. Spare parts and a clean maintenance facility will keep it airborne, but you need both, along with down time, to maintain a long push.

In my opinion, Army helo's need simplicity and durability. The Kiowa and Single Huey were great examples of what the Army really needs- simple, robust aircraft that are easy to fly and maintain, and have enough capability to do the job.

Cheers-Garry

 

[Slim]

I noticed that you didn't mention the "Supermarine Seacobra". What's you opinion on that aircraft?

Slim

 

[ramy]

The wart hog is good, reliable and effective, yet, they were retired because they are extremely vunerable to missles. Poor manouverability, porr speed, these add up to a huge number of loses if the enemy has any radar-guided missles. Heat seekers have a tough time locking on since the twin tails helps to hide the exhaust..but still they're tough, but too easy to hit.

They're using them in Iraq right now.   How many have been hit?   I've heard of only one hit, and it returned safely to base.   Maybe they're only using them on less vulnerable taskings though?

I remember seeing seeing footage of one shot down  over baghdad the day the regime fell... or maybe a day or 2 before i forgot.

 

[Pugnacious]

Personly I think for the cost, and low risk to the operator that remote a combat UAV ie..Predator Drone is a good idea.
Think of all the X-boxers out there in the CF that could do the job. ;D

http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=122

I'd jump on that job line in a second.

Cheers!
P.

 

[Kilted Mayhem]

What about some Russian choppers such as the Ka 52 Alligator or the Mi 24 Hind? The Ka 52 is state of the art and could be a great assault chopper.

 

[canuck101]

If you are looking for a attack helo then i think the  The Tiger UHT by eurocopter is the best option.  The Australians are buying them.

Cheers

 

[Inch]

Everybody keeps coming back to how great the Blackhawk is, it's a 30 year old design and it's been in service since 1979. Don't get me wrong, I think it is a great helo but it's time for something new, and don't anyone mention "if it ain't broke...", I'd like to think there's far better stuff on the horizon that stuff that was designed when disco and platform shoes were all the craze. Everybody is so pumped to replace the Sea King so why not a 25 year old Black Hawk?  The Griffon while not suited to to the job we bought it for is less than 10 years old and we won't be replacing it anytime soon. We've got more pressing concerns like, well, the rest of our inventory.

By the way, those G-Wagons are pretty sweet looking, I saw a bunch down by Shearwater the other day all wrapped up, not sure if they were incoming or outgoing but they looked sweet nontheless.

Cheers

 

[canuck101]

If it is a money issue, just upgrade 10 Griffons so they can handle heaver weapons and then we have our ligth attack helos.  It shouldn't cost us to much to only do 10. ;D



Cheers