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

[Underway]

.....I agreed with you up until the peripheral vision part.  If the fighter is using a Sniper (or other) pod, then the pilot has just as much peripheral SA during the attack run itself as an RPA - ie. not a lot.  I wouldn't bet that a pilot, even with 20/20 vision, would be able to spot a bike at 6 miles away. 

Also, the cameras on RPAs do zoom in and out.  Not going to go into details but it's not like the sensor operator is constantly only using max zoom and staring at the ground.  Huge advantages of RPAs include endurance - staring at the ground for hours on end pre-, and just as importantly, post-strike - and near-real time analysis and forwarding of information to higher. 

As for UCAVs, they aren't cruise missiles.  Obviously all theoretical at the moment, but crews are still needed, etc.

Yah I realize all that but there are more eyes with bino's in a LRPA looking out.  Even with a sniper pod a pilot still might see something moving through the cockpit window and take a look real quick with the sniper pod to confirm.  UAV's don't have those options at least with the current camera loadout. 



How did I miss this?  F-35 back in the competition??

Well wonders never cease.  Might get that fighter after all.  Though really they are just following through on what the Tories did and holding an open competition.  I don't think its really going to damage the Liberal brand in any way if they come out and pick the F-35.  Most Canadians hardly pay attention to this stuff.

 

[SupersonicMax]

.....I agreed with you up until the peripheral vision part.  If the fighter is using a Sniper (or other) pod, then the pilot has just as much peripheral SA during the attack run itself as an RPA - ie. not a lot.  I wouldn't bet that a pilot, even with 20/20 vision, would be able to spot a bike at 6 miles away. 

During real missions, I would start by looking out the window and pick up unusual activity around POIs that way.  Once I saw something worthy of looking at, I would make a designation and take a closer look through the Sniper.  Yup, I was abke to spot bikes from 6 miles out.  Espcially with binos.  Because you have a sensor (ie: Sniper) doesn't mean you use it 100% of the time.  A lot of my strikes in CAS were originated by looking out the window.

 

[Furniture]

Anyone suggesting the Scaneagle for use in the arctic does not have experince working with them. Weather keeps larger manned aircraft grounded up there a lot, a small RPA would not stand a chance.

As for fighters, I just hope we don't end up with another Sea King scenario where 20 years after they were due to be replaced they are still the operational MH.

 

[Good2Golf]

As for fighters, I just hope we don't end up with another Sea King scenario where 20 years after they were due to be replaced they are still the operational MH.

Hope isn't a great planning method, WD. 

The Hornet will easily be pulling a four-decade tour.  :nod:


G2G

 

[Edward Campbell]

Hope isn't a great planning method, WD. 

The Hornet will easily be pulling a four-decade tour.  :nod:


G2G

And that, you see, is why I think some Liberal political insiders, senior advisors to Prime Minister designate Trudeau, think cancelling the F-35 is an "easy" promise to keep. They cancelled the EH-101 and the world didn't come to an end. DND found ways and means to keep the Sea Kings in the air, no one died, etc, etc, etc ~ surely they (DND) can do the same again. There are precious few aerospace engineers, probably none who know about Reliability-Availability-Maintainability, amongst the key Liberal political insiders ... they expect that DND can, somehow, manage, as it has in the past.

 

[PuckChaser]

I think we're onto something. The Liberals can drop there promise of a competition and just not sign a F35 contract. That'll appease most Canadians. In 4 (hopefully) or 8 years when they're worn out their welcome in government, they will have successfully punted this political football to the next government, while claiming the moral high ground.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

And that, you see, is why I think some Liberal political insiders, senior advisors to Prime Minister designate Trudeau, think cancelling the F-35 is an "easy" promise to keep. They cancelled the EH-101 and the world didn't come to an end. DND found ways and means to keep the Sea Kings in the air, no one died, etc, etc, etc ~ surely they (DND) can do the same again. There are precious few aerospace engineers, probably none who know about Reliability-Availability-Maintainability, amongst the key Liberal political insiders ... they expect that DND can, somehow, manage, as it has in the past.

Actually, two pilots did die near Saint John, NB in 1995 when 425 caught fire...

 

[Edward Campbell]

Actually, two pilots did die near Saint John, NB in 1995 when 425 caught fire...

Yes, I'm so sorry, I forgot that ... and it was when the "Zero 'elicopters" thing was still fresh in our minds, stil sticking in our collective craw.

 

[Good2Golf]

Actually, two pilots did die near Saint John, NB in 1995 when 425 caught fire...

SKT, they were good men, for sure, especially when you read the crash investigation report and how their actions saved the lives of the Nav and Flight Engineer.  That said, the EH-101 would not have been delivered at that time. 

One could reasonably place contributing blame to successive governments, PC and Liberal alike, that failed to appreciate and act decisively on the message that the CF was briefing them regarding the ever increasing risk (in many cases to the operators, sometimes to non-military persons collaterally) to extending platforms beyond originally planned lifetimes.  Sea King was one.  AORs another.  Time is ticking on the CC-115 Buffalo.  CT-114 Tutor - ejection seat and other systems are incredibly long in the tooth (almost Sea King aged).  The list continues.

Engineers try their best to make things last, but that challenge only increases with time and becomes more and more expensive, eroding the Department's ability to re-direct investment onto new programs and moving beyond expensive legacy maintenance.  The Hornet may even beat the T-33's current 2nd-place RCAF/CAF record for in-service life (46 years) if things continue the way the next Government appears headed.

"On verra..."

G2G

 

[Fishbone Jones]

We're dragging well off thread now -  perhaps a split?

Was thinking about it. However, I don't have the hours available to unjumble the myriad of tangents and off topic posts that are either irrelevant (to the thread) or bleed across too many topics, as to be useful on their own.

The best way for people to avoid this and prevent splits is to stay on topic.

Tanks!

---Staff---

 

[Kirkhill]

Was thinking about it. However, I don't have the hours available to unjumble the myriad of tangents and off topic posts that are either irrelevant (to the thread) or bleed across too many topics, as to be useful on their own.

The best way for people to avoid this and prevent splits is to stay on topic.

Tanks!

---Staff---

As a frequent offender..... will do what I can.  :nod:

 

[Eye In The Sky]

FWIW, most of the 'wild bologna chasing' has still been indirectly related to the thread and it does always seem to wind it's way back to discussing the different type of fighters (that we won't be getting  >) , their caps and lims and what may/may not be good for Canada.

Good discussion and no one is chucking crap at each other so not all is lost...yet.  8)

 

[PuckChaser]

Not so fast on canning the F-35. This from the Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/scrapping-f-35-fighter-jets-may-not-lead-to-big-savings-experts-say/article27012886/

Defence experts are skeptical that Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government will reap any significant windfall from buying a warplane that is cheaper than the controversial F-35 fighter.

The Liberals promised during the election campaign to look elsewhere for a plane and plow the savings into more ships for the Royal Canadian Navy. But military experts say different aircraft might not be a bargain when the costs of buying, operating and maintaining them over 20 to 30 years are tallied up.

“I don’t think it will produce the magnitude of savings that they think will fund the shipbuilding program,” said George Petrolekas, a retired colonel with the Canadian Global Affairs Institute.

“I don’t think there will be a significant savings in acquisition and I suspect there probably won’t be a significant savings in operating costs either,” Mr. Petrolekas said, referring to expenses such as fuel and staffing.

The sticker price of a fighter aircraft is a small portion of the overall cost of owning and operating it over decades.

Glad the media is starting to ask questions now, after they hammered the Tories over "full lifecycle costing" when the PBO released the numbers a few years back. Unless we're significantly cutting the number of fighters we operate, we're not going to see this large influx of cash into the RCN that Trudeau thinks.

 

[Good2Golf]

Not so fast on canning the F-35. This from the Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/scrapping-f-35-fighter-jets-may-not-lead-to-big-savings-experts-say/article27012886/

Glad the media is starting to ask questions now, after they hammered the Tories over "full lifecycle costing" when the PBO released the numbers a few years back. Unless we're significantly cutting the number of fighters we operate, we're not going to see this large influx of cash into the RCN that Trudeau thinks.

Yes, Minister - 2:29  "Surely a decision's a decision?"

We may revisit this part of the thread in a few weeks/months time...  :nod:

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

Not so fast on canning the F-35. This from the Globe and Mail:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/scrapping-f-35-fighter-jets-may-not-lead-to-big-savings-experts-say/article27012886/

Glad the media is starting to ask questions now, after they hammered the Tories over "full lifecycle costing" when the PBO released the numbers a few years back. Unless we're significantly cutting the number of fighters we operate, we're not going to see this large influx of cash into the RCN that Trudeau thinks.

I firmly believe that there are people in the LPC (a former CLS for example) that were well aware of the capabilities of the F35 and the costs of buying a different jet to the F35. So, the cynic in me says that the LPC will simply continue with the purchase of the F35 (knowing it's the top option) and blame the conservatives for it and the inability to put money into the navy. It's a win in that they can talk about delivering the F35 and destroy the conservatives in the east coast by making the people there blame the conservatives for the lack of navy funding.

 

[dimsum]

I firmly believe that there are people in the LPC (a former CLS for example) that were well aware of the capabilities of the F35 and the costs of buying a different jet to the F35. So, the cynic in me says that the LPC will simply continue with the purchase of the F35 (knowing it's the top option) and blame the conservatives for it and the inability to put money into the navy. It's a win in that they can talk about delivering the F35 and destroy the conservatives in the east coast by making the people there blame the conservatives for the lack of navy funding.

Maybe I need to learn more poli-speak, but how would the LPC possibly end up selecting the F-35, esp as they had slammed the CPC for years over it and it was a very public campaign promise to cancel it, and possibly dress it up as anything other than "....uh, Harper was right after all."  ???

 

[PuckChaser]

I firmly believe that there are people in the LPC (a former CLS for example) that were well aware of the capabilities of the F35 and the costs of buying a different jet to the F35. So, the cynic in me says that the LPC will simply continue with the purchase of the F35 (knowing it's the top option) and blame the conservatives for it and the inability to put money into the navy. It's a win in that they can talk about delivering the F35 and destroy the conservatives in the east coast by making the people there blame the conservatives for the lack of navy funding.

The Navy is getting $40B in new ships over the next 20 years. I don't think funding will be the Navy's problem in the future.

 

[AlexanderM]

The Navy is getting $40B in new ships over the next 20 years. I don't think funding will be the Navy's problem in the future.

Is that going to happen now though??  That is the question.

 

[PuckChaser]

Is that going to happen now though??  That is the question.

The money is happening, the contracts are signed. The ship count is the question, and whether we have the political will to hold Irving and Seaspan to the promised numbers of CSC and AOPS.

 

[Ostrozac]

Is that going to happen now though??  That is the question.

The bulk of the shipbuilding for the RCN is to occur in Nova Scotia, and the Atlantic Provinces went solidly Liberal, so odds are that the ships are safe. At least for now.