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

F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sharpey
  • Start date Start date
The CDS has already stated that we're not joining the big US training package...410 will be continued.

I think you've missed deep maintenance as well. We found out with the Sea Kings what a "max effort" will cost later on as all that deferred maintenance catches up.
 
drunknsubmrnr said:
The CDS has already stated that we're not joining the big US training package...410 will be continued.

Would love to see your source for that one...

I think that, in order to save money, they'd participate in the training package in the US which will be set up similarly to what the NFTC setup is up here.  Then they might still keep 410 as an advanced training cadre before being deployed to a gun squadron.

The below article from last year is interesting, as it would create an international training centre at 4 Wing - similar to what NFTC is at 15 Wing.

CFB Cold Lake eyed as F-35 training site

OTTAWA — Defence planners are examining a proposition that would see Canada run an advanced multi-national training course for the F-35 if the contentious stealth fighter program gets the go-ahead from the Harper government, industry sources say.

Canadian Forces Base Cold Lake, a sprawling, isolated air force facility in northern Alberta, would serve as a training school for pilots already qualified on the aircraft to learn to use the plane’s weapons systems.

The airfield is already home to an air-to-ground weapons school for the country’s current fleet of CF-18s, but the proposition would see Canada transition to the F-35 and open up instruction to other countries that are part of the program.

“So this allows Canada to run a graduate level training centre, which brings resources into Canada, which brings countries in to fly; that brings revenue and a whole bunch of other things and capabilities that are augmented by these countries who don’t have this kind of airspace,” said a defence source with knowledge of the scenario.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/canada/139933-cfb-cold-lake-eyed-as-f-35-training-site
 
Would love to see your source for that one...

My mistake, it was Deschamps, not Lawson. Fantino pretty much overrode him though, and said everything will be done in Canada.

http://www.1310news.com/2011/12/13/moving-f-35-training-to-canada-depends-on-money-and-buildings-air-chief/

OTTAWA – Canadian fighter pilots will be training on the F-35 jet in Florida for almost a decade and the military will have to study how to set up a similar program at home, says the country’s top air commander.

The comments by Lt.-Gen. Andre Deschamps stand in contrast to the iron-clad assurances Julian Fantino, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s associate defence minister, gave the House of Commons last month when it was first revealed stealth fighter instruction would take place in the U.S.

“At some point, we would like to repatriate the training to Canada in whatever shape or form that would be suitable for us,” the chief of air staff said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

But Deschamps said there is a lot of homework to be done before that would happen, including a detailed assessment of how the U.S. and other allies strike a balance between airtime and simulator training on the highly advanced, multi-role fighter.

The goal would be to continue fighter pilot instruction at Canadian Forces Base Cold Lake, Alta. However infrastructure and cost will be among the considerations as the military adopts the new jets.

“All of these things we have to learn and then we’ll be able to make a more rational decision on if we want to repatriate that training and how do we keep it within the current affordable boundaries of training expenditures,” said Deschamps.

Fantino was much more categorical on Nov. 4 when he dismissed NDP questions about the training program.

“The member should know that in order to get traction (on a story), he should have his facts straight,” Fantino told New Democrat defence critic David Christopherson.

“Long-term training on the F-35s will take place in Canada, just as currently is done with the CF-18s. It is reasonable that Canadians will do initial training with those from whom we purchase the aircraft, which has always been the case.”

In fact, air force internal documents also contradict his assurances and state there is the “potential for NO pilot training in Canada,” and suggest that a “pooled” training system with international partners is likely the most cost-effective plan.

Indeed, that is how the U.S. manufacturer, Lockheed Martin, sees instruction unfolding and it has poured millions of dollars into a state-of-the-art centre at Eglin Air Force Base.

The regime, according to internal Defence Department documents, would see all instruction take place at the centre and each nation’s operational squadron equipped with simulators to hone skills and practise missions.

New Democrat critic Matthew Kellway accused Fantino of being misleading and said taxpayers deserved straight answers on what will be the country’s most expensive individual military procurement.

“There needs to be a consistent story told to Canadians about what the plan is for the F-35,” Kellway said Tuesday. “There is a lot this government has to answer for. There is a lot it needs to tell Canadians.”

A spokesman for Fantino says the cost of buying flight simulators is part of the estimated $9 billion purchase cost.

But Chris McCluskey was asked if the government would guarantee funding to upgrade and maintain the existing centre to accommodate full-fledged F-35 training. He would only say that “the RCAF will continue to explore the optimum timing for repatriating pilot training in Canada.”

“Decision on the timing for the training will be made in due course,” said McCluskey.

“All decisions must ensure the best results for the Canadian Forces, Canadian workers and Canadian taxpayers.”

The prospect that advanced flight training — with its economic spin offs — could end at Cold Lake is political trouble for the Conservatives, especially in Alberta, the heartland of their support.

Questioned about the implications last month, staff in Defence Minister Peter MacKay’s office said closing the decades-old centre “was not something a Conservative government is willing to consider.”

With a population of 13,000, the air base, including the training centre, is one of the town’s economic pillars.

Deschamps told the House of Commons defence committee on Thursday that inviting allies to do training is one option for Cold Lake, similar to what was offered for years at CFB Goose Bay, N.L.

The air force isn’t expected to begin receiving the new fighter-bombers until 2016 and even then there will only be handful of planes for Canadian pilots to fly by 2020.

Repeated production delays have pushed back delivery.

Note to readers: This is a corrected story. An earlier version carried an incorrect spelling of Lt.-Gen. Andre Deschamps’ last name.
 
drunknsubmrnr said:
The CDS has already stated that we're not joining the big US training package...410 will be continued.

I think you've missed deep maintenance as well. We found out with the Sea Kings what a "max effort" will cost later on as all that deferred maintenance catches up.

Deep maintenance operates a bit differently with the F-35 than previous programs. The prognostic management system identifies parts that require replacing real time, rather than usual practice of time limited parts. Its also a modular design, so that major components are easier to remove and replace. Those components then go to the depot or OEM to repair, rather than having it done in the back of the hangar... which should reduce the amount of work on personnel. Consequently, the F-35 shouldn't have as much deferred maintenance. Furthermore, all maintenance done on the aircraft happens in its bay until the 4000 hour refurb, and then it might be flown to L3 at Mirabel for a check out.

This support model is what we use on our J model Hercs (PBL + ALIS) and is becoming increasingly common on new model civil aircraft.


 
I've heard promises like that a few times. Sometimes they work out, but not always.

Usually it seems to break down on just how many LRU's are stocked and how long actual MTBF is vs projected.
 
Korea, Singapore, Japan . .  .  Seems the closer you are to the danger zone, the more sense it makes.


"WASHINGTON, April 3, 2013 – The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress March 29 of a possible Foreign Military Sale to the Government of Korea for 60 F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Conventional Take Off and Landing (CTOL) aircraft and associated equipment, parts, training and logistical support for an estimated cost of $10.8 billion.

The Government of the Republic of Korea has requested a possible sale of (60) F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Conventional Take Off and Landing (CTOL) aircraft. Aircraft will be configured with the Pratt & Whitney F-135 engines, and (9) Pratt & Whitney F-135 engines are included as spares. Other aircraft equipment includes: Electronic Warfare Systems; Command, Control, Communication, Computer and Intelligence/Communication, Navigational and Identification (C4I/CNI); Autonomic Logistics Global Support System (ALGS); Autonomic Logistics Information System (ALIS); Full Mission Trainer; Weapons Employment Capability, and other Subsystems, Features, and Capabilities; F-35 unique infrared flares; reprogramming center; F-35 Performance Based Logistics. Also included: software development/integration, aircraft ferry and tanker support, support equipment, tools and test equipment, communication equipment, spares and repair parts, personnel training and training equipment, publications and technical documents, U.S. Government and contractor engineering and logistics personnel services, and other related elements of logistics and program support. The estimated cost is $10.8 billion. "



http://www.dsca.mil/pressreleases/36-b/2013/Korea_13-10.pdf

Will be interesting to see how the government hating media in Canada reports this news, if they even do.



 
drunknsubmrnr,

You forget a big piece of the puzzle:  we are in 2013.  NORAD, while still our primary job at home, is not the same as it was when the Voodoos were operating.  We don't need 10 bases with 10 jets on alert each.  Not getting into details, but the numbers are not quite the same.

We don't have NORAD squadrons.  Neither should we.  We have multi-role squadrons.  We cannot afford, as a small Fighter Force, to divide ourselves into specialities (24 pilots per operational squadron + 20 IPs at 410 plus a handful of staff positions... That's at most 100 fighter pilots total in Canada.  All ranks included).  We need to be able to operate the aircraft in its whole spectrum of missions.  I see 4 squadrons at 2 bases (15 jets per unit + 5 at OTU in US).  2 in Bagotville and 2 in Cold Lake.  Vanguard would be handed over to a squadron of the other wing every year.  The 2 squadron per wing purely for morale and task division: while 1 squadron is going on a training deployment down in the US, the other squadron stays back and mans the QRA.  This way, the WHOLE squadron would deploy, forging camaraderie, and more importantly, getting used to operate with each other all the time.  If the Vanguard squadron deploys, the WHOLE SQUADRON deploys. 

I honestly don't think you are in a position to judge what we should get.
 
Haletown: Only half the DCSA picture, there's also the F-15SE:
http://cdfai3ds.wordpress.com/2013/04/03/mark-collins-s-korean-fighter-competition-us-administration-oks-possible-sale-of-f-35a-f-15se/

Is that reporting fair?

As for the Asians a good point--but not exactly Canada's situation:

"...
Go figure where it’s all heading if you can.  It’s almost as if the plane is remaining too expensive for many Western countries whilst the Asians (South Korea may also buy) have the money and the immediate threats–China, Russia, North Korea–to justify the expense for what they hope will be important and impressive new capabilities."
http://cdfai3ds.wordpress.com/2013/04/01/mark-collins-f-35-how-low-can-the-dutch-go-plus-japanese/

Mark
Ottawa
 
NORAD, while still our primary job at home, is not the same as it was when the Voodoos were operating.  We don't need 10 bases with 10 jets on alert each.  Not getting into details, but the numbers are not quite the same.

There were only 6 Voodoo bases, with 2 QRA aircraft at each. That's not that different from what we have to supply now, and that was when the rest of the military had ways of dealing with aircraft they didn't like much. The F-35's or whatever we actually get are going to be the ONLY air defences for the entire country, minus a small bubble around each frigate that's actually at sea.

We don't have NORAD squadrons.  Neither should we.  We have multi-role squadrons.  We cannot afford, as a small Fighter Force, to divide ourselves into specialities (24 pilots per operational squadron + 20 IPs at 410 plus a handful of staff positions... That's at most 100 fighter pilots total in Canada.  All ranks included).  We need to be able to operate the aircraft in its whole spectrum of missions.

Why do you need to operate the aircraft in its entire spectrum when you're going to spend almost your entire career doing one mission?

I honestly don't think you are in a position to judge what we should get.

That's fine. I don't think you are either.
 
drunknsubmrnr said:
There were only 6 Voodoo bases, with 2 QRA aircraft at each. That's not that different from what we have to supply now, and that was when the rest of the military had ways of dealing with aircraft they didn't like much.

Well, you are way off mark.  Our NORAD commitment is not nearly as much as it used to be in those days... But nope, that's not it.

drunknsubmrnr said:
The F-35's or whatever we actually get are going to be the ONLY air defences for the entire country, minus a small bubble around each frigate that's actually at sea.

It is what we have right now and we are doing just fine...

drunknsubmrnr said:
Why do you need to operate the aircraft in its entire spectrum when you're going to spend almost your entire career doing one mission?

If you were to count the missions that Canada did in response to a sovereignty threat vs missions flown in an oversea theatre of operations (Desert Storm, Allied Force, Unified Protector), any way you calculate (Weapons expanded, hours flown, missions, flown, intercept conducted, etc, etc), you would see that we actually spent most of the CF-18's operational career overseas.

drunknsubmrnr said:
That's fine. I don't think you are either.

I have operationally flown pretty much anything the CF-18 can do, minus CAS (DCA, QRA, AI, ISR, which is pretty much our complement of missions).    I intercepted aircraft at home an abroad, dropped bombs, ID'd baddies.  I could well be posted to NGF office next year and have an impact on our next procurement.  While I may not make the decision, I am pretty confident I am more in a position to have an impact on it than you are.  And I definitely have the background to back it up.  What do you have to offer?
 
drunknsubmrnr said:
My mistake, it was Deschamps, not Lawson. Fantino pretty much overrode him though, and said everything will be done in Canada.

LOL....sorry, but I really only go by what DND states because as I've stated before this acquisition was handled poorly on the political side of things.
 
WingsofFury said:
LOL....sorry, but I really only go by what DND states because as I've stated before this acquisition was handled poorly on the political side of things.


This acquisition is a wholly political thing ... as most military acquisition projects in the Anglo-American world have been since about 1550. It is rare to find any procurement project, even in wartime, that does not have major political implications. Whether or not the RCAF gets the F-35 will be a political decision ~ no one gives a damn what generals or engineers or even accountants and auditors think. It is all about how retail politicians perceive their constituents' views.
 
WingsofFury said:
Obviously not, but I do speak with them on a daily basis.

You?
Nope I'm not a fighter pilot.

Have the fighter pilots you speak with every day been in combat situations against an enemy force?
 
E.R. Campbell said:
This acquisition is a wholly political thing ... as most military acquisition projects in the Anglo-American world have been since about 1550. It is rare to find any procurement project, even in wartime, that does not have major political implications. Whether or not the RCAF gets the F-35 will be a political decision ~ no one gives a damn what generals or engineers or even accountants and auditors think. It is all about how retail politicians perceive their constituents' views.

I'm not saying it's not political.

I am saying that the only people I trust to speak on the matter surrounding the technology and capabilities being discussed are the those in the military who are familiar with the project or at the very least have experience in a fast air environment.  Which is why I'm surprised when I see people not giving credence to what people like Supersonic Max have to say about this whole matter.
 
ObedientiaZelum said:
Nope I'm not a fighter pilot.

Have the fighter pilots you speak with every day been in combat situations against an enemy force?

They've participated in both the Yugoslavian campaign and more recently in Libya.  They also have experience conducting intercepts in Canada's north. 
 
SupersonicMax said:
It is what we have right now and we are doing just fine...

We just got rid of ADATS...they were the last AD platform out there. Now it's down to just the fighter force. Next G-20 meeting? It's all you. Next national emergency involving air threats? All you. Next time the US president wants to visit? Again, all you.

SupersonicMax said:
If you were to count the missions that Canada did in response to a sovereignty threat vs missions flown in an oversea theatre of operations (Desert Storm, Allied Force, Unified Protector), any way you calculate (Weapons expanded, hours flown, missions, flown, intercept conducted, etc, etc), you would see that we actually spent most of the CF-18's operational career overseas.

That may be true, but there aren't going to be the airframes or the flexibility to do much of that any more. Things are going to have to change.

SupersonicMax said:
I could well be posted to NGF office next year and have an impact on our next procurement.  While I may not make the decision, I am pretty confident I am more in a position to have an impact on it than you are.

The CDS is going to have to suck it up and accept what Cabinet sees fit to buy. What makes you think you're any different?
 
An update: US reveals F35A bid for South Korea.

Flight Global link
US reveals details of F-15SE, F-35A bids for South Korea

The US Department of Defense formally notified the US Congress of potential sales of the Boeing F-15SE Silent Eagle and Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter to South Korea on 29 March. The two aircraft are on offer to the Asian nation as part of South Korea's F-X III fighter competition. The Eurofighter Typhoon is a third contender for the 60 aircraft tender.

For the potential F-35 sale, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) says that South Korea could order 60 conventional A-model aircraft and associated support equipment for $10.8 billion. There would also be provisions for spares including nine additional Pratt & Whitney F135 afterburning turbofans. The package would also encompass training-including simulators.

Lockheed Martin says that it is pleased that the formal Congressional notification process is now under way, but notes that the competing bids are still being evaluated by Korea and price discussions are "on-going".

(...)

dscakorea2.jpg


document source: DSCA link


Also note the parallel update at the F15 Silent Eagle thread
 
Back
Top