Canada pays 9 billion for 65 x F-35

[Stofsk]

How would a maintenance regime work for these planes' acquisition? IIRC the RAAF has had a lot of experience maintaining the F-111 fleet we have had over the last several decades. I imagine getting a new plane like the F-35 would involve having to retool things, they'd need to learn about a new plane and it would need different components and so on, but I'm not in the know so that's why I'm asking. It seems incongruous to see the actual cost more than double when maintenance is taken into account, but what does that actually mean?

[Aaron]

Hmm, parts obviously, retraining for the techs, costs for the contractors (usually a certain amount of maintenance for x number of years is done by the company). Some of it is undoubtedly pork for some Provinces (we usually require a certain amount of work/production to be parcelled around, typically to Quebec).

[Ryan Thunder]

I'm all for modernizing our air capability--provided we have a use for it. Would the F-35 be of any use for policing our shipping lanes up North?

At that price, they better. I don't see them being useful for much else.

EDIT: Holy shit, I pay taxes now. I'm going to be paying for this!

[Shroom Man 777]

Well, F-35s can be equipped with anti-ship missiles, right?

[Sarevok]

Well, F-35s can be equipped with anti-ship missiles, right?

Other than the Naval Strike Missile the F-35 currently has no anti ship missile capability iirc.

[Stofsk]

Well what the fuck is the naval strike missile then?

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Well what the fuck is the naval strike missile then?

I believe it's a Norwegian missile: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_Strike_Missile

[Coyote]

Would it stand to reason that the Navy and Marine versions of the F-35 (the "-C" variant IIRC) would be able to equip an anti-ship missile, eh?

Which sort of doubles down on the silly; the version of the F-35 Canada could find most useful doesn't get purchased since they have no carriers or Marine assault ships.

You Canadians need at least one amphib assault ship, y'know? A "junior Carrier" would be cool at least. I know there was at least one carrier that "ran on maple syrup" ( ), an ex-UK ship, but that didn't stick around long, right?

Heh-- maybe Canada and Austarlia could work together and purchase a couple Varyag-class, just to see how high curious eyebrows could rise among international-defense armchair types.

[Aaron]

The Bonaventure? Yeah, she cost most of the Navy's budget to run at the time. The military has been pushing for an amphib/carrier for a while but I don't think we'll ever see one. The money isn't there.

[Kanastrous]

Heh-- maybe Canada and Austarlia could work together and purchase a couple Varyag-class, just to see how high curious eyebrows could rise among international-defense armchair types.

I see eyebrows crawling down the backs of analysts' necks...

...considering that the F-35 architecture is supposed to be open and flexible when it comes to new weapons and sensors integration...would it be that difficult to integrate a different suitable anti-ship weapon, should there be the call?

[tim31]

Heh-- maybe Canada and Austarlia could work together and purchase a couple Varyag-class, just to see how high curious eyebrows could rise among international-defense armchair types.

RAN is purchasing two LHDs; the keel has been laid on the first of them. HMAS Canberra(III) is set to be in service by 2012, with the hull construction happening in Spain, and outfitting being shared around Australian port cities. They'll log quite a few hours before it's even finished!

[Shroom Man 777]

That's what they're doing with the Naval Strike Missile. From the wiki, it says: "According to Kongsberg, this "multi-role NSM" is the only anti-ship missile that will fit inside the F-35's internal bays."

So it's not just a matter of programming or integration, but lubing it up and physically fitting it in.

[Sephirius]

Worst procurement decision ever.

How many F15 silent eagles could we have had for this? How many Reaper drones (which would be far better suited to a 'defend territorial waters' mission than the shortranged F-35?)

The F-35 is easily the worst 'new' fighter being produced, as it can have the crap beaten out of it in any real engagement by even early 4.5 gens.

Pics from opchan (gleaned from the Aussies) related.









Jesus Christ, even an Aardvark is a better strike aircraft!



So wait, we bought 'new' thunderchiefs?




tldr, we could have bought FIVE SUPERIOR Su-35s for every 1 F-35, which is basically a new F-105. Nice going Canada.

[Aaron]

I'm not sure what the government was looking for in it's decision but for the foreseeable future all the fighter force is likely to do is intercept suspicious aircraft and go on exercises. The arctic patrols are handled by maritime patrol aircraft and we rarely ever deploy the CF-18's as strike aircraft (Kosovo is the only thing that comes to mind, and the first Gulf War).

[Coyote]

It does make me wonder, wouldn't Canada have gotten a better deal by jumping with the UK's new drone figher? Or is that still too much of a "prototype" program for them to comfortably roll the dice on?

Actually, Canada and Australia both, with lots of land, low population base, and a less forgiving budget than the US, the idea of drone fighters (with the most irreplaceable components --the pilots-- safe and sound at a base) seems like a more serious proposition.

[Jim Raynor]

Worst procurement decision ever.

How many F15 silent eagles could we have had for this? How many Reaper drones (which would be far better suited to a 'defend territorial waters' mission than the shortranged F-35?)

The Silent Eagle is not comparable to the F-35. It's a 4th gen fighter with some modifications to reduce radar cross section. Even Boeing isn't claiming it to be as stealthy as the F-35, which is designed for stealth from the ground up. IIRC, the Silent Eagle isn't stealthy at all except from the frontal aspect, and surface-to-air radars are quite capable of picking it up. The price of the Silent Eagle is over $100 million anyway, so it's not even cheap. Reapers are something else entirely, and don't come anywhere close to any manned fighters. I seriously doubt the Canadians are procuring F-35s just for defending their waters. They probably recognize the possibility that they might be contributing to a future coalition war in the next few decades.

The F-35 is easily the worst 'new' fighter being produced, as it can have the crap beaten out of it in any real engagement by even early 4.5 gens.

An "early 4.5 gen" fighter is what, the Super Hornet? The F-35 would eat those alive, as well as any fighter not named the F-22. With a RCS estimated to be in the ballpark of 0.0015 sqm, it has a decisive advantage over other designs. If the PAK-FA is stealthy enough, it might be in the same weight class as the F-35 and F-22. But that's it for now. Any 4th gen fighter would be crushed.

[Simon_Jester]

Thing is, the F-35 is being bought to counter future fighters; it's so expensive that the Western air forces buying it aren't going to be able to replace it for decades. The fact that it's better than a bunch of fighters designed twenty years ago (ten in a few cases like the Eurofighter, maybe?) isn't all that informative given that it's supposed to be able to compete with fighters that are still on the drawing board today and that will be entering production some time around 2020.

[Marcus Aurelius]

An "early 4.5 gen" fighter is what, the Super Hornet? The F-35 would eat those alive, as well as any fighter not named the F-22. With a RCS estimated to be in the ballpark of 0.0015 sqm, it has a decisive advantage over other designs. If the PAK-FA is stealthy enough, it might be in the same weight class as the F-35 and F-22. But that's it for now. Any 4th gen fighter would be crushed.

If we look at his post, the point that Carlo Kopp is making is that the latest generation Russian IRST systems can (allegedly) detect the F-35 at greater range than the effective range of the AIM-120C and launch inertially guided IR seekers at it. This is a valid point assuming everything works like advertised, which I very much doubt. Kopp is not an idiot, but I would say that his taking the Russian claims too much at face value. Also, the picture seems to be from 2003, so it's possible that he has changed his mind about the matter.

[Phantasee]

Sephi is an idiot. What else would we buy? We have no other real choices, being part of NATO and with our extensive cooperation with the US. They aren't going to sell us the F-22, buying Russian fighters is politically retarded, and the Silent Eagle is a God damn concept plane at best.

Even his chart doesn't give any measurements, just some nice colour coded bullshit.

[Artemas]

Sephi is an idiot. What else would we buy? We have no other real choices, being part of NATO and with our extensive cooperation with the US. They aren't going to sell us the F-22, buying Russian fighters is politically retarded, and the Silent Eagle is a God damn concept plane at best.

Even his chart doesn't give any measurements, just some nice colour coded bullshit.

Pretty much.

And since we need fighter/bombers, that sort of limits the options. Besides, how long and how much did we spend on devlopment on this thing (from the article).

[Sarevok]

An "early 4.5 gen" fighter is what, the Super Hornet? The F-35 would eat those alive, as well as any fighter not named the F-22. With a RCS estimated to be in the ballpark of 0.0015 sqm, it has a decisive advantage over other designs. If the PAK-FA is stealthy enough, it might be in the same weight class as the F-35 and F-22. But that's it for now. Any 4th gen fighter would be crushed.

If we look at his post, the point that Carlo Kopp is making is that the latest generation Russian IRST systems can (allegedly) detect the F-35 at greater range than the effective range of the AIM-120C and launch inertially guided IR seekers at it. This is a valid point assuming everything works like advertised, which I very much doubt. Kopp is not an idiot, but I would say that his taking the Russian claims too much at face value. Also, the picture seems to be from 2003, so it's possible that he has changed his mind about the matter.

It's not just the evolving capabilities of the IRST. Kopp is highly concerned about F-35s sluggish agility and speed. A modern Russian jet can evade the F-35s AMRAAMs through kinematics alone. Meanwhile the F-35 would be much easier prey for long range Russian missiles due to its slow nature. Now the F-35 is advertised as a stealth plane and one might question the utility of a long range missile shot. But Kopp is dubious about quality of F-35 stealth. The F-35 is no F-22. Its stealth is "budget stealth" that does not provide all around protection and nor is it as sophisticated as the F-22. Kopp thinks F-35 would be hard pressed to hide in the frontal sector and wide open for attack from sides, top and below by latest radars. If he is correct these are indeed dangerous short comings. The F-35 is a slow airplane that relies on stealth features. If that stealth feature is so shoddy existing radar can compromise it how will it hold up to future radar ? Electronics is advancing rapidly, but the F-35s radar cross section will remain where it is.

[Sarevok]

Pretty much.

And since we need fighter/bombers, that sort of limits the options. Besides, how long and how much did we spend on devlopment on this thing (from the article).

Well the F-35 has problems in the bomber role. It can not carry as much as older fighter bomber planes such as the F-111 nor does it have the same range. The F-35s stealth from directions other than head on is questionable and that is very very risky when flying against ground based air defense which would be looking at the planes belly.

[MKSheppard]

Let me put it this way:



F-22A:
540 nm unrefuelled combat radius at Mach 1.5 cruising speed at 50,000 feet.

20mm Vulcan (480 rounds)

AtA:
2 x AIM-9
6 x AIM-120

AtG:
2 x AIM-9
2 x AIM-120
2 x 1000 lb JDAM

or 8 x SDBs

---------------------------

F-35A:
600 nm unrefuelled combat radius at Mach 0.95 cruising speed at 25,000 feet.

25mm cannon (180 rounds)

AtA:
4 x AIM-120

AtG:
2 x AIM-120
2 x 2,000 lb JDAM/JSOW

or 8 x SDBs

[Phantasee]

I'm not sure what your point was, there. If you're saying the F-22 was the better option, I'd like to see where Canada can acquire a few.

[MKSheppard]

I'm not sure what your point was, there. If you're saying the F-22 was the better option, I'd like to see where Canada can acquire a few.

I'm just pointing out that for an aircraft sold as the "cheaper" alternative to the F-22; the F-35 is rapidly approaching a Program Implosion Event (PIE) where costs skyrocket and units get cancelled.