Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
F-35 v F/A-18 Shornet-play ground style
Collapse
X
-
The replacements
Originally posted by SteveDaPirate View PostZraver,
Seems like Boeing is feeling a little petulant. My understanding was that the Navy was not planning to replace the Superhornets with F-35s anyway. I seem to recall the plan is to operate them alongside each other.
The 3:1 cost ratio I think is greatly exaggerated.
Comment
-
Originally posted by SteveDaPirate View PostZraver,
Seems like Boeing is feeling a little petulant. My understanding was that the Navy was not planning to replace the Superhornets with F-35s anyway. I seem to recall the plan is to operate them alongside each other.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JA Boomer View PostIt's a commercial by a Canadian company. I don't think the US Navy gives a rats ass, but the average Canadian taxpayer might...
Any idea on which way the wind is blowing in Canada at the moment as far as a sticking with the F-35 buy or having a full blown fighter competition? I could see a competition between the Adv. Super Hornet, F-35, Eurofighter Typhoon, Rafael, and Gripen potentially taking place.
Comment
-
It's been pretty quiet lately actually. In 2010, Canada announced it would purchase 65 F-35A fighters. In 2012 the Auditor General came out with a report that indicated the government had not been accurately representing the life cycle costs of the F-35 purchase, because of this, the process of acquiring new fighter jets was restarted. I don't believe we've been told what jets are included in the evaluation, the timetable for the evaluation, or if their will be a public RFP for the jets.
There seemed to be a large public outcry when the original Auditor General's report came out, but it fizzled out. Of course the general public doesn't understand the capability difference between the two jets.
I know there's a lot of people who aren't big on the F-35, and I realize it has it's shortcomings, being a plane of compromise by trying to fulfil so many roles with one airframe. However, buying a 4+ generation fighter plane at this point in time doesn't make sense to me, so I would think the F-35 is the only realistic option.
To be honest I suspect the next federal election will determine whether the Conservatives finally take delivery of the F-35, or whether the Liberals order Super Hornets and slap themselves on the back despite what plane the RCAF determines it requires to meet it's obligations.
Comment
-
From what I have seen, the F-35 costs around a third more than the Advanced Super Hornet being pitched by Boeing. But if the RCAF wants a 5th generation fighter the F-35 is really the only game in town at the moment. The Advanced Super Hornet is a definite upgrade of the CF-18, but I imagine it is pushing the limits of how much you can improve a 1980s airframe.
Another possibility might be to take the Australian approach and buy a few Super Hornets now to fill in the gaps prior to taking delivery of the F-35 around 2020. I would imagine most of the growing pains would be sorted out by that point, and we might be seeing the F-35 block II rolling off the line with a list of improvements like a more powerful engine, improved radar, etc.
Comment
-
The non-political reality is that they are contemplating the 2 engine requirement which might be the thing that dooms the F-35. Personally I'd rather see F-35's in the RCAF than F-18Es, but that's just me.
Originally posted by JA Boomer View PostI know there's a lot of people who aren't big on the F-35, and I realize it has it's shortcomings, being a plane of compromise by trying to fulfil so many roles with one airframe. However, buying a 4+ generation fighter plane at this point in time doesn't make sense to me, so I would think the F-35 is the only realistic option.
To be honest I suspect the next federal election will determine whether the Conservatives finally take delivery of the F-35, or whether the Liberals order Super Hornets and slap themselves on the back despite what plane the RCAF determines it requires to meet it's obligations.
Comment
-
Originally posted by GGTharos View PostThe non-political reality is that they are contemplating the 2 engine requirement which might be the thing that dooms the F-35. Personally I'd rather see F-35's in the RCAF than F-18Es, but that's just me.
The good news is an F-15SE would cost (roughly) about half as much as an F-35.
Attached Files"There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge
Comment
-
Originally posted by GGTharos View PostThe non-political reality is that they are contemplating the 2 engine requirement which might be the thing that dooms the F-35. Personally I'd rather see F-35's in the RCAF than F-18Es, but that's just me.
The RCAF has come out and said the it requires the F-35, that no other air plane can meet its current or future mission requirements. It's not the government who wants to spend more money on the F-35, I'm sure they'd be thrilled to order something less expensive.
Originally posted by Stitch View PostI mentioned a while ago that Canada might want to consider the F-15SE since it, too, has two engines, but that would involve a whole different logistics train than the F-18E/F/G, so it probably isn't worth it.
The good news is an F-15SE would cost (roughly) about half as much as an F-35.
If we had x amount of dollars to spend on fighters than I may be swayed to your point. But at this point it sounds like we are going to buy 65 F-XX's. So I would prefer to go with the aircraft that's going to be relevant for the next 40 years.
I've always thought it would be sweet to have 48 F-18's (12 training, 24 F's, 12 G's) and 48 F-15's (12 training, 24 E's, and 12 SEAD/DEAD specialized). A pipe dream haha.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JA Boomer View PostI really don't think the 2 engine requirement is an issue any more.
Regarding the F-18E or F-15SE .. I dunno. Yes, both options would be cheaper. I think the F-18E might come close to half price vs the F-35, but I think the F-15SE will be somewhere in the middle. That being said, I still think you have to look into the future, in 20 years how hard are F-15 parts going to be to come by, and will it still be relevant in a high-threat environment, and will it still be inter-operable with NATO allies in a strike package?
I've always thought it would be sweet to have 48 F-18's (12 training, 24 F's, 12 G's) and 48 F-15's (12 training, 24 E's, and 12 SEAD/DEAD specialized). A pipe dream haha.
Hopefully we'll get F-35's but they're not a done deal.
Comment
-
Originally posted by GGTharos View PostBecause it doubles the logistic chain, at minimum. :)"There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge
Comment
Comment