F-35 v F/A-18 Shornet-play ground style

[JA Boomer]

Are they planning to lease the SHornets from Boeing? Sell them to the USN/RAAF at a significant discount after ~5 years?

I'm not sure how Canada is thinking they'll buy 18 "interim" SHornets without being stuck with them for the next 30 years.

I figure the plan is to acquire some SHornets now then hold the competition in a few years. When the SHornet loses, they can trot out the argument that a mixed fleet of aircraft is too expensive to maintain, and since they already own 18 SHornets they'll have to fill out the fleet with more to maintain commonality despite its lesser utility.

One of the suggestions that has already been floated is a USN buy-back program for the interim Super Hornets. If you read the government memo - "to supplement the CF-18s until the permanent replacement arrives" - it's clear to me that the Super Hornets would be retired when the new fighter was brought online (assuming the Super Hornet wasn't selected).

The important thing to note is that the government is EXPLORING this possibility, so they may very well find that it is not feasible for a variety of reasons but I also have no doubt Boeing will bend over backwards to make sure it happens. I wonder if it does happen, if that will effect the results of the fighter competition, reducing the cost of introducing the Super Hornet, and if that is the case, is that fair?

The memo also says "within its current mandate, an open and transparent competition" so I'm inferring the competition will begin within the next 3 years.

[SteveDaPirate]

Are they planning to lease the SHornets from Boeing? Sell them to the USN/RAAF at a significant discount after ~5 years?

I'm not sure how Canada is thinking they'll buy 18 "interim" SHornets without being stuck with them for the next 30 years.

I figure the plan is to acquire some SHornets now then hold the competition in a few years. When the SHornet loses, they can trot out the argument that a mixed fleet of aircraft is too expensive to maintain, and since they already own 18 SHornets they'll have to fill out the fleet with more to maintain commonality despite its lesser utility.

[JA Boomer]

Government thinking:
-buy the "cheap" new Hornets
-sell of the old ones
-delay proper decision for government 2025-30
-????
-political profit

I don't see it that way. This is not an interim replacement of the CF-18 with the Super Hornet, they are just going to look at "supplementing" the 77-plane strong CF-18 fleet with 18 Super Hornets (Super Hornets that would be returned to Boeing most likely should the Super Hornet not win the overall competition). Plus I would expect a decision on the winner in the early 2020's at the latest.

I will wait and see if they determine the supplemental Super Hornets are worth it. I know there's a lot of commonality between the legecy Hornet and the Super Hornet, but it will be quite an undertaking to add another fighter aircraft type to the RCAF. Does it need to happen? Does it really add value?

[jlvfr]

The government is holding a new competition to replace the CF-18 and will look into acquiring 18 Super Hornets to operate along with the CF-18s until the replacement fighter comes online (unless the Super Hornet is selected).

http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do;...69&crtr.tp1D=1

Operating 18 Super Hornets alongside 77 Hornets doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Government thinking:
-buy the "cheap" new Hornets
-sell of the old ones
-delay proper decision for government 2025-30
-????
-political profit

[JA Boomer]

The government is holding a new competition to replace the CF-18 and will look into acquiring 18 Super Hornets to operate along with the CF-18s until the replacement fighter comes online (unless the Super Hornet is selected).

http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do;...69&crtr.tp1D=1

Operating 18 Super Hornets alongside 77 Hornets doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

[Stitch]

Another way in which this could work out is if we bought 24 F/A-18F's plumbed for Growler wiring. The extra mass in the fleet will allow the remaining 80 CF-18's to last a few more years before the next fighter is selected. When the F-35 is selected and delivered, we can convert the Super Hornets to Growlers. Of course this also makes too much sense so will not happen, and the strain of mixed fleets on the RCAF should not be underestimated.

And, again, that's pretty much what Australia is (successfully) doing; IIRC, the last batch of F-18F's they bought were pre-wired to be converted into a "G" at a cost of $35 million per airframe. I know the Navy is planning on retiring the F-18E/F in about 2030, although I suspect the EF-18G will soldier on a bit longer than the F-18E/F, just like the EA-6B did.

[jlvfr]

Except what the Canadians are doing is dumb and what Australia did made complete sense. We bought the super bugs because our F111s were retired long before the F-35 would be available to replace it. We decided from the get go that we did not want to accept a reduction in airframes and as such we structured it so that the super bugs would be the last to go when the final batch of F-35s were delivered.

Yep, this. The RAAF bought them 7 years ago. Then, it made sense. Not today...

[chakos]

Except what the Canadians are doing is dumb and what Australia did made complete sense. We bought the super bugs because our F111s were retired long before the F-35 would be available to replace it. We decided from the get go that we did not want to accept a reduction in airframes and as such we structured it so that the super bugs would be the last to go when the final batch of F-35s were delivered.

We have 24 F models and are picking up 12 Growlers with 70 F-35s on order. The Growlers are not going anywhere and the F bugs are staying till the final batch of F-35s are ordered (as in a batch of 24-30 after the already ordered 70).

Long story short we maintain a combat force of 100-110 aircraft with no loss in capability.

One of the very few procurement programs that we didn't royally screw up.

[Officer of Engineers]

Know what? I am going to reserve my judgement. This really depends on how many planes we're going to buy and it ain't 65. 20 or less, than we can believe this Liberal lie. In the end, it's going to costs us more but not that much more. The other realistic number is 40, then, Trudeau and Sanjij deserves all the venom we give them.

[citanon]

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/blo...rcraft-forever

I'm guessing the national post is not a Liberal newspaper, but still good points.

Also, comparing like for like loadouts between the f35 and sh, guess which one is cheaper?

[JA Boomer]

So the Trudeau government is about to buy an older, less capable fighter at the same price as a newer and significantly more capable aircraft, deal with the older aircraft's shorter designed service life, carry the risk of being it's only operator in a couple of decades, expose themselves to multi billion dollar lawsuits, lose out on bidding rights to supply the new aircraft while still paying an annual fee to be a part of the f35 program?

Got it. The very cynical might say that this is politically motivated....

Crazy hey...except for the last part: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/stea...ment-1.3619469

The Trudeau government has missed the deadline for a multimillion-dollar payment that keeps Canada in the club of nations involved in the F-35 stealth fighter program, CBC News has learned.

The $32-million membership fee was due on May 31, but a spokeswoman for Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan confirmed late Monday that the U.S. project office overseeing development of the highly complex jet has not received the instalment.

But Jordan Owens cautioned not to read too much into the oversight and that Canada is still on the hook for the cash.

"We will honour our financial commitments," she said, responding for the minister who was in transit from a defence conference in Singapore.

It's unclear when the instalment will be made and whether there are any penalties associated with a late payment.

The policy issue is an uncomfortable conversation for the Liberals.

Who knows if they're lazy or incompetent. They appear to be risking penalties and contracts for Canadian companies in the largest defense project EVER.

[citanon]

So the Trudeau government is about to buy an older, less capable fighter at the same price as a newer and significantly more capable aircraft, deal with the older aircraft's shorter designed service life, carry the risk of being it's only operator in a couple of decades, expose themselves to multi billion dollar lawsuits, lose out on bidding rights to supply the new aircraft while still paying an annual fee to be a part of the f35 program?

Got it. The very cynical might say that this is politically motivated....

[JA Boomer]

The thing that worries me the most about Canada going the Super Hornet route is upgrades to keep it relevant over the lifespan of the fleet. The USN is scheduled to start dropping their Super Hornet fleet in the 2030s as the F/A-XX program ramps up production.

Assuming Canada starts taking deliveries of Superbugs in the early 2020s that's less than 10 years before the USN stops investing in any kind of improvements to the aircraft. At that point, Canada will have to pay to develop and integrate any potential improvements on it's own as opposed to just buying the new hardware the USN has already tested and installing it. Spreading those developmental and integration costs over ~500 aircraft is a lot easier than trying to spread it across ~65.

The end result is either a large financial burden on Canada to keep the fleet relevant or flying aircraft that stay at the 2020 standard for another 20-30 years without ongoing modernization.

------------------------------------------------------------------
If Canada truly does use the Super Hornet as an interim aircraft prior to acquiring the F-35 or F/A-XX somewhere down the line to replace remaining CF-18s, it sticks the RCAF with the logistical burden of managing a mixed fleet that is unlikely to share many components. Any advantageous bulk buys of spares, supplies, or maintenance equipment go out the window.

Canada will also require separate training pipelines that will have to be setup for all the different types of personnel that are involved in caring for and operating a mixed fleet of aircraft. The training issues might be somewhat offset by sending personnel to train in the US, but it won't change the fact that the RCAF will be unable to focus it's resources in a single direction anymore.

Hopefully a good solution is worked out, but I'm struggling to find a way this doesn't end up costing Canada in either money or capability going forwards.

Bang. You hit the nail on the head. And when we're forced to manage our own fleet upgrades we won't, and our jets won't be on any use to our allies because they won't be equipped for a joint fight. This might be just what the current government wants, as they see our military as a peacekeeping force, with no need for overseas fighter deployments at all.

Another way in which this could work out is if we bought 24 F/A-18F's plumbed for Growler wiring. The extra mass in the fleet will allow the remaining 80 CF-18's to last a few more years before the next fighter is selected. When the F-35 is selected and delivered, we can convert the Super Hornets to Growlers. Of course this also makes too much sense so will not happen, and the strain of mixed fleets on the RCAF should not be underestimated.

[Officer of Engineers]

Hopefully a good solution is worked out, but I'm struggling to find a way this doesn't end up costing Canada in either money or capability going forwards.

It's fucking Trudeau. He doesn't care about defence. That's what his pal Obama and girl buddy Clinton is for. We'll do what the CF has always done. Make do and when the time comes, die trying to punch above our weight.

[SteveDaPirate]

The thing that worries me the most about Canada going the Super Hornet route is upgrades to keep it relevant over the lifespan of the fleet. The USN is scheduled to start dropping their Super Hornet fleet in the 2030s as the F/A-XX program ramps up production.

Assuming Canada starts taking deliveries of Superbugs in the early 2020s that's less than 10 years before the USN stops investing in any kind of improvements to the aircraft. At that point, Canada will have to pay to develop and integrate any potential improvements on it's own as opposed to just buying the new hardware the USN has already tested and installing it. Spreading those developmental and integration costs over ~500 aircraft is a lot easier than trying to spread it across ~65.

The end result is either a large financial burden on Canada to keep the fleet relevant or flying aircraft that stay at the 2020 standard for another 20-30 years without ongoing modernization.

------------------------------------------------------------------
If Canada truly does use the Super Hornet as an interim aircraft prior to acquiring the F-35 or F/A-XX somewhere down the line to replace remaining CF-18s, it sticks the RCAF with the logistical burden of managing a mixed fleet that is unlikely to share many components. Any advantageous bulk buys of spares, supplies, or maintenance equipment go out the window.

Canada will also require separate training pipelines that will have to be setup for all the different types of personnel that are involved in caring for and operating a mixed fleet of aircraft. The training issues might be somewhat offset by sending personnel to train in the US, but it won't change the fact that the RCAF will be unable to focus it's resources in a single direction anymore.

Hopefully a good solution is worked out, but I'm struggling to find a way this doesn't end up costing Canada in either money or capability going forwards.