http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/sajjan-refuses-to-rule-out-f-35-from-fighter-jet-replacement-competition-1.3375507
So what will the Canadian government say if they do pick the F-35 again? Should Lockheed even bother selling them the plane to them after all the grief they caused?
>>28293088
Lockheed doesn't need to say a thing, the mere fact that Canada will wind up buying it anyway after Dudeweed shit the bed says more than they ever could.
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/f-35-not-ruled-out-of-canadian-fighter-competition-420264/
>In a conference call from Erbil in northern Iraq today, Harjit Sajjan said replacing the nation’s 77 Boeing CF-18A/Bs in a “timely manner” is his focus, not ruling a particular aircraft in or out.
>“My focus is about replacing our CF-18, and we’re going through a proper process to make sure we have the right requirements so we have the right capability, not only for our country but for how we relate to NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) and our commitments to NATO,” says Sajjan, who assumed the role in November following a change of government.
>“We’re going to do this in a responsible manner.”
>Sajjan indicated that the new government would not actively block the F-35 from participating.
>“The question always comes up about whether it’s F-35 or another type of aircraft,” he says. “This is not about the F-35. My mandate and my role is about replacing the F-18.
>“We are committed to replacing the F-18s in a timely manner so that we do not create a capability gap that has been created in the past with our ships.”
>>28293114
This pretty much. It just goes to show how retarded dudeweed is.
>>28293088
>Should Lockheed even bother selling them the plane to them after all the grief they caused?
Don't be so fucking stupid.
Canada actually has very little use of a single engine multirole 5th gen fighter. They need an interceptor more than anything.
But this would good news for the Canadian aerospace industry at least. If they don't get the F-35 I'm pretty sure all those contracts will be fucked.
>>28294901
Not this bullshit again
>>28294909
>no arguments
Typical /k/
>>28294901
The F-35 does a fine job as an interceptor.
>>28294909
There are very little arguments I can aim at your level
>>28293135
Sikh Cunt is the only one in the fucking Its 2015 meme cabinet with his head screwed on right
>yfw the shitskin picks a MiG or Su like his countrymen in pooland did
>>28294919
It is not ideal when you have an airspace as large as Canada's
>>28294919
Not him, but you'd think that with a border as long as the Canadians have, and considering they're right up there on the arctic circle with Russia, that they could use a high speed dedicated interceptor that's on par with the MiG-31 in terms of speed and service ceiling, in order to more adequately cover their border.
>>28294968
Canada participates in coalition activities such as bombing the fuck out of sandniggers, so a multiroll would see more active use rather than an interceptor rusting away waiting for russia to try some dumb shit
>>28294980
>Canada participates in coalition activities
lol no not since weedman took power
>>28294968
>need a heavy obsolete interceptor to protect nothing from non existant bombers
You'd be better off arguing they'd need maritime strike to deal with the russians in the arctic circle.
>>28294968
The arrow will never fly again and your aerospace industry is dead, get over it.
>>28294964
The F-35 has good ferry range, good missile range, and it seems unbeatable in a defensive air-to-air scenario because you need ground-based radars in order to actually detect it from a reasonable distance.
The F-35 is just as fast as the legacy hornet, (maybe a little faster) which is what Canada is using right now. If the F-35 isn't fast enough, then that means that Canada has been using inadequate planes for the past three decades.
>>28294901
If Canada really wanted an interceptor they would have bought Tomcats or Eagles in the first place instead of a light strike fighter.
>>28294913
>>28294922
not him but
>muh cold weather
f-35 already did cold weather test and passed with flying colors, fuck it was better than f-15 at that
>muh range
heh f-35 already got plenty of range its not like most of possible contenders (ef, gripen, rafale, super bug) got that amazing range without fuel tanks to begin with
> muh single engine reliability
yep this meme again, some of best track record aircraft in us service were single engines ones
>They need an interceptor
cool and what will those interceptors be ?
is there even any interceptors in the production ? no
and what ef or f-15 could do better in interceptor role than f-35 ?
>But this would good news for the Canadian aerospace industry at least.
what so good about it ? nothing really changes
they still produce f-35 components as they did before bailing
and there is hardly any long term benefit in setuping assembly line of alternative aircraft
>>28295005
>that means that Canada has been using inadequate planes for the past three decades
This is actually true and goes for their entire air force (and navy fleet too).
>>28295026
Literally no one said anything about cold weather/range/single engine reliability. This paranoia is hilarious.
Canada could do with a cheaper (and preferably faster) plane, that is all.
>nothing really changes
Those contracts would run out in the future and it is unlikely that Canada would get new contracts of the same size when they're not even operating F-35s.
>>28295089
>Literally no one said anything about cold weather/range/single engine reliability.
>>28294901
>single engine
>>28295089
>Literally no one said anything about cold weather/range/single engine reliability.
It's literally in the top five list of "Things people say about the F-35."
>>28295107
Doesn't say anything about single engine RELIABILITY. There are more downsides to a single engine, you know?
>>28295114
And no one mentioned any of them.
>>28295089
i best be fucking kidding me
you know why i posted about weather/blah blah things, cos they are relevant to discussion and cos there was hardly anything to discuss about ridiculous interceptor claim
so you wanted so arguments and when you got hem backing out with insult is the best choice eh ?
>could do with a cheaper
basically all ALL of possible contenders would be in same price range with exception of gripen and gripen would have no chances of wining anyway
>and preferably faster
for extreme range interception you want fighter that can supercruise, rafalle can, ef sort of as f-35 can
your mach2.5 does fuck all in long ranges when you have to run afterburners
so look how much contenders you have left
honestly rafalle is a great alternative and one of the more mature systems
>those contracts would run out in the future and it is unlikely that Canada would get new contracts of the same size
canada produces components that most if not all 2500+ f-35 will use
and lets say ef, or rafalle would not run out of the future just as fast or even faster ?
and do you think canada will even consider setuping assembly line for such a small contract and this is not even talking about some sort of production
>>28295140
>And no one mentioned any of them.
You have to understand, that's covering all bases based on previous patterns of conversation.
Why can't the Canadians make up their mind?
>>28295159
>they are relevant to discussion
No and no one mentioned them.
>ridiculous interceptor claim
It is literally what Canada needs the most. See their airspace? Noticed how Weedman pulled out of Syria/Iraq already?
>basically all ALL of possible contenders would be in same price range
No. See at what price Boeing offers the Super Bug.
>as f-35 can
No.
>canada produces components that most if not all 2500+ f-35 will use
Lockheed literally said in 2013 already that when Canada pulls out they're not giving them more contracts.
Look dude, I am not going to debate you when you really honestly believe the F-35 is the best fit for Canada's AF.
>>28295159
>with exception of gripen and gripen
>“Although I advocate co-operation with Sweden, we should not acquire Swedish JAS fighters when we could acquire American F-35 stealth fighters for roughly the same price. Performance must take precedence in the investment,” emphasises Haglund.
http://www.helsinkitimes.fi/finland/finland-news/politics/10310-haglund-advises-against-jas-fighter-acquisition.html
I met the guy while shit faced several times before he got elected. I think he tricked me into eating a birds eye chili.
Also went to his celebratory banquet. Dude had a hard time confirming Trudeau's retarded policies in his speech
>>28295215
But the F-35 is the best fit. The primary duty of any fighter is to win air-to-air battles, and nothing else out there can compete with the F-35 in that regard.
>>28295235
It's possibly even better at air superiority than the F22.
>>28295235
Can you tell me the last time the Canadian Air Force was engaged in an air-to-air battle?
>>28295241
The F35, while an amazing jet, isn't as good as the F22 for pure A2A.
However, the F35 can easily hold its own when it comes to A2A.
>>28295283
If you just consider the Stealth/Radar capabilities the F35 is better, if you throw in IRST/Sensor fusion/communications, F35 has a significant advantage. The F35 is not going to be engaging in maneuver dogfights when it can avoid it, and it can avoid it.
>>28295278
No, actually, I cannot tell you that. It frankly doesn't even matter. If you don't want A2A then at that point you might as well buy A-29s or some shit like that. This is a long-term purchase centered around preparing for the future. If you're gonna buy new fighters, you might as well buy the ones that will stay relevant for the longer period of time.
>>28295215
>No and no one mentioned them.
so lets ignore everything and cherry pick something that fits my agenda
>It is literally what Canada needs the most. See their airspace?
so we are coming back to what anyone can do better in interception than f-35
>No. See at what price Boeing offers the Super Bug.
did you ever owned a car ? do you think after you paid so said car its all the money you will spend ?
basically unit price (such a loved discussion on /k/) is irrelevant and money spent per air frame lifetime is (taking all the logistics and doctrinal changes into account )
look i am sure f-35 will be one of the most expensive ones in this regard and super bug/ gripen would one of the most cheap ones
hell if actual performance of legacy systems is ok with canada they can buy what ever they want
>No.
f-35 can supercruise for 1.2 mach for 200 miles
and if we are talking about real supercruise as LM definition goes, only f22 can do that
to add more ef never even demonstrated ability to suprecruise with any meaningful payload
>Lockheed literally said in 2013 already that when Canada pulls out they're not giving them more contracts.
i did read recent article that component production will continue if canada will pull out, if someone can please provide link
and all my googling end up to f-35 cant climb/turn peirce spray bs
so i will give you that
>Look dude, I am not going to debate you when you really honestly believe the F-35 is the best fit for Canada's AF.
lalala i cant hear you lallalla
f-35 is the best fit aircraft for canada
even if we forget everything, its a platform canadas closest ally, who they share border and mutual defense agreement, is banking future on
benefits from same logistics and infrastructure are huge
>Noticed how Weedman pulled out of Syria/Iraq already?
and canada will not be involved in anything else than guarding their own borders ?
wishful thinking much?
>>28295241
I sincerely doubt that, especially based on what the guy who flew both had to say about it.
>>28295458
Source?
>>28295458
this better not be about that fucking gun test
Canada is going to end up buying the F-35. Because it is the best multirole jet you can buy.
>>28295562
>>28295593
The video has been posted on here multiple times. It's the USMC guy giving a presentation on the F-35. He was an exchange F-22 pilot in addition to flying the F-35. It's just a short little remark in it.
>>28295631
I have seen the video I don't remember him say that.
>>28295647
It was just a short little remark somewhere between a fifth and a third of the way through. I think.
>>28295393
Shill harder you worthless cunt.
The F35 is a turd and we Canadians aren't going to consider them.
>>28294901
>They need an interceptor more than anything.
Canada is not the US. Nobody today can really afford to mantain a dedicated interceptor fleet anymore, as its not the cold war. What they EXACTLY need, them and pretty much all other countries that aren't the US or Russia, is a multirole that does everything well so their military expenses can be kept under control on a single airframe.
Since 99% of missions now and for the near future are going to be against nations without competent air forces, an interceptor would be a glorified hangar queen for the next 30 years, and if it did see action then, it'd be outdated. Nice thinking.
>>28296126
>all this denial
>>28295626
canada doesn't need a multirole jet. canada needs a long range air superiority fighter. f-35 isn't one, no matter what the lockheed shills say.
>>28293088
>Jump in F35 crashes because dumb Canadian pilots are smoking their legal weed
Yeah, no. Don't sell
>>28296291
>Canada has been using the wrong aircraft for the last 40 years
>>28295393
>f-35 can supercruise for 1.2 mach for 200 miles
No. F-35 can only accelerate to supersonic speeds using afterburner, turn it off and coast few hundred miles while the plane slows down back to subsonic. That is not by definition supercruising. In comparison all the eurocanards can with your typical air-to-air loadout fly at sustained supersonic speeds of Mach 1.2-1.4 with dry engine power alone. That is supercruising.
Now, I'm no air warfare tactics specialist so I can't tell how useful a token 20-40% higher cruise speed actually is, but just like thrust-to-weight ratios above 1.0, being able to cruise above Mach 1.0 does tell something about the sophistication of the planes aerodynamic design and its engine power to drag characteristics.
>>28296291
Then why did Canada buy the CF-18 in the first place? And please, the F-35 can handle A2A more than adequately. The winner of a modern dogfight is whoever scores the first missile hit. The F-35's unique combination of stealth and sensors (and by unique, I mean, "not present on any other plane") makes it the best fighter for doing that, right now and the foreseeable future.
>>28296126
you need to calm yourself m8
>>28293088
>In a conference call from Erbil in northern Iraq today, Harjit Sajjan
>Northern Iraq
What was Sikh bro doing in Iraq? Does Canada still have a presence there?
>>28296977
Uh, Canada has been fighting ISIS for a year. They had the first ground kill.
>>28296571
>all the eurocanards can with your typical air-to-air loadout fly at sustained supersonic speeds of Mach 1.2-1.4 with dry engine power alone
Nope.
>>28296571
Do
You
Have
A
Source
>>28296571
In transonic flight, there's huge drag associated with getting past the speed of sound, that's why it's a big deal, because mach 1 is this cap on everything hurts speed most of the time. Also, here's the parasite drag equation.
Parasite Drag = 1/2 * air density (rho) * Velocity^2 * surface area * Coefficient of Parasite Drag
Now note the velocity is squared, so the turbine has to generate 4 times the thrust for twice the speed, and so on. This is why super cruise is a big deal, being able to make an aircraft that can bypass it's own critical mach number, and maintain dry thrust in an efficient manner. Source, I'm a pilot and getting a degree in aeronautics.
Here's an aerodynamics video about the critical mach.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvfX6mLAhdQ
>>28295114
Don't you mean, things that stupid people say about the F-35
>>28293088
>Should Lockheed even bother selling them the plane to them after all the grief they caused?
Will lockheed turn down a pile of cash? You really haven't been paying attention to the F35 programme up to now, have you?
>>28300034
You mean like how Lockheed has to eat any cost overruns on their contracted LRIP prices?
>>28296291
shut thef uck up
ITT no one really knows shit about the F-35 but what they read on mongolian cartoon message boards
>>28295221
Really no kidding. How much is a Grippen for Finland.
>>28300215
Congressional Reports available to the public tell a story of a very frustrating and expensive JSF program riddled with delays. They also tell us how much the program is expected to cost, and it is definitely not cheaper than a Gripen NG, which is the best choice for a country that only needs a basic air policing/interceptor unit.
US base in Alaska will probably detect and intercept any airspace violations into Canada before the Canadians themselves are even aware of it. Weedman is right, Canada doesn't need the F-35.
>>28293088
Unless Weedman wants to lose a bunch of liberal votes, the 35 is not going to be bought.
I assume it's in the comptetition to keep the 35 part production lines in Canada as long as possible. If the sunk cost is large enough, America won't be able to retaliate by choosing new contractors outside of Canada.
A strategic decision that buys the Canadian aero-industry vote, but will likely not lead to a 35 decision because it was a HUGE liberal promise to not buy the 35.
>>28300468
>Contracts? They don't count.
>Pilot testimonials? They don't count.
>Test results over the last few years? They don't count.
>A POGO article with cherrypicked and misrepresented pieces of a congressional report? Now we are talking!
>>28293088
Random question
Why do anons here think that Russian designs are inherently shit when we know what they were capable under bumfuck communism?
Isn't it at least a little concerning now that they aren't completely starving(on vodka) and their government is arguably less incompetent than ours?
>>28300468
>depending on an outside force to do your interception and policing for you
It's shit like this that makes me hate the rest of the world.
>inb4 we allies 'n shit
Still no excuse to slack on your OWN self defense systems.
>>28294919
About as well as an F-16.
Other than added stealth the projections show that they perform similarly.
Actually...I think they perform similarly in ground combat as well.
Makes sense, after all it is replacing the f16 and supposedly f-18 on naval carriers.
I would still rather prefer a dedicated 4+th gen air superiority fighter over an f35 though.
They're cheaper so you can fill the skies with more and cover your ass better.
2 typhoons>1 f-35
Once the f35 engages his stealth advantage is gone. He's revealed himself. And if there's others nearby? probably them as well
>>28300468
Yes. Those reports are factually accurate. I don't dispute those. And hell, I'm not going to defend program management either, because many of those people are not nice human beings.
But I would contend that unless you're inside the program you still really don't know about the plane at all. You get what I mean? It's the difference between reading a book about something as compared to actually doing that thing.
>>28300592
Russia was far more capable of developing technology before the 90's brain drain.
>>28300468
Here's a better idea, you submit to American annexation and then we'll be glad to provide you with you defense.
>>28300592
Because anon, when the cold war ended and berlin was unified, we had info from pilots the other side of the wall tell us how their MiGs were shit, and actually got a nice stockpile of information on russian fighter design. So, no anon, soviet designs were mediocre at best during the cold war, and still are mediocre today.
>>28300626
Choosing an aircraft that is 75% the price but only 50% the capability is a huge fuckup.
>>28300637
I would think they have even more capable scientists and engineers now that they don't have to roll out a carpet and to pray to Stalin 5 times every day
>>28300661
Are you forgetting that Mig29s made swiss cheese of our f16s during German drills?
No, they're not shit. They're actually more advanced in some ways.
There's a fucking reason the cold war never went hot.
It would've been a bad time. Even without nukes
I mean, sure, we could rely on around 30% of pilots and general vehicle crews crashing into the ground because they're too fucking drunk but that still leaves 70% of crazy Russian assholes to deal with
>>28300592
>Russian kleptocracy more competent than the U.S. Republican Democracy
>Russians moving from one autocracy to another a change of the political landscape
>The Russian's still aren't facing an insurmountable tech gap with the west
>>28300687
>I would think they have even more capable scientists and engineers now that they don't have to roll out a carpet and to pray to Stalin 5 times every day
Meanwhile in reality they have been making Flanker variants for the last 25 years, even the PAK-FA appears to have been derived from it.
And that is not getting to manufacturing that is simply gone, like large ships.
>>28300613
>Still no excuse to slack on your OWN self defense systems.
Might as well develop nukes then by this logic.
>>28300636
I'm not saying the plane is bad at all. I am confident the F-35 is the best in the world actually, but unless it prints money, might as well buy the poorfag options and save the money. Canada hasn't engaged in real war since the 1800s. It has just been under-appreciated sidekick to US, and it will be in the future.
>>28300642
Okay, but Weedman becomes permanent leader in exchange. Still up for it?
>>28300669
I think 50% of the capability is a big stretch.
Like I said, without stealth the f35 performs similarly to an f16.
Not exactly spectacular against the more nimble 4th gen fighters.
Nothing wrong with it, it's just not the most optimal for that role.
f35s are supposed to engage air targets as a last resort more or less. f22s are the big guns when you need to clear the skies.
Obviously it helps that f35 has great avionics but those can apply to 4th gen as well...
>>28300834
>Canada hasn't engaged in real war since the 1800
So you don't know your own history but feel that you have the knowledge to judge what Canada's military needs are.
>>28295206
>Why can't the Canadians make up their mind?
They elected a guy running on faulty info.
>>28300871
>Like I said, without stealth the f35 performs similarly to an f16.
No.
>Stealth isn't really the big game changer, it's a necessity now. The big game changer is the huge pile of passive sensors, sensor fusion, and data sharing that turns it into a mobile data gathering monster.
>>28300834
>Might as well develop nukes then by this logic.
I'm not too savvy on nuclear diplomacy, but yes, as a NATO member you fucking should have some nuclear capability to deter other nuclear powers, the US included.
But back on topic: Why would you leave such a critical piece of your security (critical by your account), to an outside actor?
>>28300912
>Stealth isn't really the big game changer, it's a necessity now.
For what we use our planes for nowadays? I couldn't agree more.
But when shit hits the fan? No amount of stealth and information is gonna save your ass if you're outnumbered 4 to 1 unless you have some serious skills.
But they don't teach those anymore supposedly.
Those tactics are now "outdated" because the conflicts we get ourselves into these days aren't like that.
Things like the f35 are for little problems that are hiding in the mountains or shouting allah akbar in their jacked a1 Abrams in the middle of Nowhere Iraqistan.
I assure you if the US was ever in any real trouble
We wouldn't waste time with this stealth shit. We'd send out twenties of f15s and carpet bomb fuckers with b-1s all day
>>28300912
It always gives me the warm fuzzies when you repost that.
>>28301014
>But when shit hits the fan? No amount of stealth and information is gonna save your ass if you're outnumbered 4 to 1 unless you have some serious skills.
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/don-t-think-the-f-35-can-fight-it-does-in-this-realistic-war-game-fc10706ba9f4#.c5bacvoxt
>Even War is Boring can't generate an F-35 vs Russian scenario that isn't a total curbstomp win for the lightning.
>>28293088
FUCK YES
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAH, First they waver on pulling out the fighters, now they waver on scrapping the F35. God bless you Sajjan.
Now if they don't touch guns i'll be content with "ayy lmao its 2015"
How the fuck did I not hear about this sooner?
>>28301014
>I assure you if the US was ever in any real trouble
>We wouldn't waste time with this stealth shit. We'd send out twenties of f15s and carpet bomb fuckers with b-1s all day
The US has ~450 F-15s, we will have that many F-35's by 2020.
>>28301033
Because David Axe and his crew are fucking hacks who don't understand aircraft. I would love to punch his fucking face in
>>28293088
>First strike offensive weapon system
>For fucking Canada
Why, again, are we doing this?
>>28300930
>But back on topic: Why would you leave such a critical piece of your security (critical by your account), to an outside actor?
Because only real threat is from Russia, who will be intercepted and engaged by America before we even know about. US Alaska base protects the entire West coast of Canada. East Coast is just Eurotards who barely have the capabilities, let alone the balls, to invade Canadian aerospace.
>>28301170
>relying on others for our security
>not being able to force project properly and relying on other countries for that
neorealism my fellow syrupsucker; Why do people carry guns? They have the police!
>>28301170
why do you even have military to begin with ?
fuck why do you even exist ?
>>28301191
Force projecting is absolutely nowhere in our national defense legislation.
>>28300879
no they elected mah weed
>>28301141
Except Axe hates the F-35, and this writer can't do anything but F-35 wins.
>>28301193
>fuck why do you even exist ?
Because you tried to annex us before and we kicked your ass.
>>28301226
Either viewpoint just means they aren't doing their research
>>28301198
not him but; the ability to force project can in itself be a deterrent. Besides, we do air policing in the Baltic states, in the event that shit hits the fan, having first strike offensive weapon systems can be extremely useful.
Also; in Libya we had to face a nation state that had air defenses. Sure they were absolute shit. But they were in fact air defenses. Plus to assume that Canada will always piggy back off NATO is absurd. Nothing is eternal and at some point in the future we will have to protect ourselves without any external help. Developing a well rounded military that can operate on its own is the first step.
Neo realism my syrup sucker
>>28301241
Or it's the fact that the stealth, passive sensors, and the data links are massive advantages that the 4/4.5 gens can't come close to matching.
>>28294980
>Stealth technology
>Required for bombing Mudslime cave dwellers
>Epic weedman participating in these follies
>>28301281
eh, diversify our air force.
Get a few CAS or COIN (SUPER TUCANOOOS) airplanes to take over the F35's job once air defenses are gone when we attack the next shithole
>>28301281
>This meme that we have to plan only for unopposed airstrike operations
>>28301170
lol no a first strike weapon system is something like the f-22 or b-2 with comprehensive stealth.
the f35 is a multi role like the f-18. why did your country purchase those then?
>>28301171
You realize the principal attack route for russia into canada would be over the pole, right?
>>28301307
>Planning for operations in a high-intensity war with complex radio-electronic countermeasures, radar and a sophisticated adversary air force capable of challenging airspace
>While being in a defensive and pact and next door to the largest military budget on the planet, which dwarfs all others combined together.
Your argument is not tenable, and basically stupid.
>>28301355
>Russian adversary
Look everyone, an idiot.
I thought you armchair mastrubators/strategists all claimed that Russian shit was inferior and incapable of threatening anyone?
>>28301377
>Regularly fight overseas in joint ops with said nation
>Not wanting to have parity and ease planning
>>28301352
Then if the stealth is not an important feature, there are better options than the F-35.
Why would we pay for the stealth trim when we can get a no-frills aircraft like the Gripen or Super Hornets?
>>28301377
>world makes fun of America for no social programs and immense defense spending
>while living comfortably under America's immense military umbrella
>complains when countrymen think of taking up even a tiny bit of the slack
America's not gonna be around forever, you syrup-drinking pussy.
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-f-35-cant-beat-the-plane-its-replacing-in-a-dogfigh-1714712248
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-f-35-cant-beat-the-plane-its-replacing-in-a-dogfigh-1714712248
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-f-35-cant-beat-the-plane-its-replacing-in-a-dogfigh-1714712248
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the-f-35-cant-beat-the-plane-its-replacing-in-a-dogfigh-1714712248
F35 IS OUT PERFORMED BY A 40 YEAR OLD PLANE.
CAN'T WIN HEAD ON AGAINST AN A-10 THUNDER-CAT
GOVERNMENTS CONTINUE TO SPEND TRILLIONS ON THIS PLAINE.
Why is obummer pushing this plane so hard?
>>28301428
What has better avionics than the F-35?
>>28301405
Correction:
>Harper goes to Libya without consulting parliament claiming he has the public mandate
>Provides CAS for Al Qaeda turning Libya into a Mad Max like scenario where war lords and chieftains on SUVs enforce Sharia with DShKMs while millions of niggers transit to Europe unopposed.
I guarantee we are not fucking doing that again. Not with weedman at least.
>>28301452
What do you need? An altimeter? A moving map display?
Shit's available off-the shelf. You can update anything with new avionics. None of that shit is proprietary to Lockmart.
>>28301450
>Article parroting David Axe's biased, intentionally wrong article
>>28301439
Take your F-35 cunt, stow it up the ass. I promise you weedman will not allow the commission to settle on the F-35. If the Harper government wavered on the purchase, it ain't happening with epic weed government.
>>28301504
you do realize hes trolling, right?
>>28301452
Nothing yet.
>>28301481
>AN/ASQ-239 Barracuda Passive EWO suite
>AAQ-40 EOTS
>AN/AAQ-37 Distributed Aperture System (DAS)
>AN/APG-81 AESA radar
>Just pop it in like an aftermarket stereo
>>28301604
>Any of that shit
>Proprietary to the F-35
They are literally boxes that can be mounted in my Volvo or in fairings in planes.
>>28301686
>F-35 specifically designed with the equipment distributed throughout the airframe
>They are literally boxes that can be mounted in my Volvo or in fairings in planes.
The haters are getting more and more delusional these days.
>>28301273
...I never said otherwise
>>28298880
thats a weird looking guy
>>28301515
Unless he's literally a traitor, the capabilities and cost of the F-35 will speak for themselves.
>>28301439
Canada are parasites, annex when?
>>28301170
Because first strike is not the only thing it is good at.
>>28294992
>Canada
>Dead Aerospace industry
You idiot, that's one of Canada's biggest industries.
>>28302655
Let's have Confederacy, share president and armed forces and that's it. Youd be wasting money annexing us when you consider how interlinked we are with everything else
>>28297032
>>28296977
While the jets have stopped bombing runs, we still have our ELINT, transport, and tanker aircraft there doing support for our CSOR / JTF2 guys.
>>28300687
Meanwhile in the real world the F-16s have actually killed Mig-29s.
>>28303074
Not Russian, so it's a monkey model and doesn't count.
>>28301604
>>AN/APG-81 AESA radar
>Over a decade old contraption
>Still uses GaAs modules
>60° field of view
MUH BESTEST AVIONICS
>>28301452
>Muh touchscreens
>>28301604
>Take an RWR
>Take a FLIR/designator system
>Take a MWS
>Give them all fancy new names
It's totally new and different, guise!!
>>28301171
Again, depending on an outside force to handle YOUR security is indicative of poor defensive doctrine. It would be the same thing if the USN relied on another navy to handle its logistics, or certain peacekeeper duties. It's just bad doctrine to depend on others. Although, by your accounts, such defensive policy is acceptable, and requiring your own forces to handle such a task is moot anyway because big brother 'murrica will always be there to handle all the heavy lifting anyway, so why even have an air force at this point? Just more money wasted on the MIC, right?
Canada should buy the better F-35 from China, it is the most original one anyway.
>>28303172
Now take a computer, have it stitch together all the data those sensors are collecting, make it output it into some coherent interface that the pilot can quickly read and blammo, now you've got a good avionics suite.
All you have to do now is find some software engineers, and maybe a few hardware engineers to get said computer system to understand all the data your sensors are picking up. Can't be -too- hard, right?
>>28303231
>2015
>Still thinks burgers are first to do sensor fusion
>>28303383
>2015
>thinking anyone else has sensor fusion on the F-22's level, let alone the F-35's level
>>28303137
Ok compared to what exactly?
> CAPTOR, lol mechanically scanned
> IRBIS-E, PESA
> RBE-2, also PESA
So what exactly is kicking APG-81's ass?
>>28303445
>F-22
>Most advanced sensor fusion in the galaxy
>Can combine data coming from its radar, the only sensor it has, to form a single picture
>>28303383
Where did I say Americans were the first, where did I even specify American aircraft?
You made the argument that modern avionics could just be plopped in willy nilly, my response was to inform you that such sophistication takes more than just sensors sprinkled on an air frame. You need to make room for a lot more computer power, as well as make sure you have a place on the air frame to physically add the sensor and not compromise its performance.
>>28303598
There a re a total of 4 known sensor packages in the F22. The engineers though that was a challenge to bring together. So I am not exactly sure, how you think you are going to stitch together the gazillion packages from the F35 and have it do any meaningful communication between each other. Hell let alone effectively driving the individual sensors themselves.
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=9268&sid=1a687da1915802643098e170e7b40bd1
>>28304706
Lots and lots of mission systems testing, that's how. Or rather, that's what. The actual how is classified and you will never know without needing to know.
>>28304722
>Lots and lots of mission systems testing
Which they won't be doing in Canada.
The US had difficulty, with experience, an actual R/D budget and extensive testing. Canada can't do it because it has none of those things.
>>28304744
Yeah the Canadians (or anyone else) won't be doing integration testing.
>>28300056
Good, they should
>>28300687
>Are you forgetting that Mig29s made swiss cheese of our f16s during German drills?
Do you know why? Because it had off-boresight missiles and the F-16s didn't. When they weren't using those, they got slaughtered. So say the men who actually flew them.
>>28305199
Not to mention it's quite easy to install JHMCS in an F-16
>>28305257
This was before NATO had them. Now that they exist and are pretty prevalent, the sole advantage that Soviet military aviation had is gone.
>>28303445
eurofighter and rafale have more advanced sensor fusion than f-22
the one in f-35, while supposedly more advanced, is still buggy as fuck
>>28305282
>eurofighter and rafale have more advanced sensor fusion than f-22
I HIGHLY doubt that.
>>28305316
doubt as much you like but the fact is that f-22's computing power is weak as shit.
>>28301198
Bullshit, from our own national defence policy:
Roles
>Contributing to International Peace and Security - As a trading nation in a highly globalized world, Canada's prosperity and security rely on stability abroad.
Missions
>Lead and/or conduct a major international operation for an extended period
>Deploy forces in response to crises elsewhere in the world for shorter periods
>>28305451
Computing power is required for sensor fusion, but computing power =/= sensor fusion.
>>28305264
tru.dat
Why doesn't Canada just buy some Strike Eagles?
Why doesnt canada just join USA as the 54th state and quebec join France as the new luis vuiton?
>>28305860
because the US won't take us in if we keep Quebec, and nobody will take Quebec from us, even if paid.
We are working on a sneaky genocide so we can do this.
>>28305540
well duh. but sensor fusion is computationally intensive and there's only so much you can do with a computer slower than a playstation 1.
can't easily be upgraded, systems integration on a fighter is hard work.
the actual code that does the fusion is the simplest part. you can hire programmers that can do that just about anywhere. the hardest part is all the paperwork needed to get the software certified.
>>28300475
literally no one is a single-issue voter for cancelling the F35 program
>>28305860
our whole country would literally be more left wing than california
>>28293088
The entire opposition to it was based on cost. That means the only real alternative is the Super Hornet.
>>28306063
If so they can enjoy their mediocre 4th gen aircraft
>>28306063
>The entire opposition to it was based on cost.
Which is funny, because only '70s designs are cheaper right now.
>>28305812
>why doesn't Canada buy a more expensive and less capable aircraft?
Gee whiz I dunno champ
