Arrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2582 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 7666 times:
As someone who, as a child, watched the Avro Arrow take to the air a few times (my father was an Avro engineer), I certainly hope so. But governments here are not known for taking bold steps in the national interest these days, and it would take a very compelling case for them to commit. Remember, this bird hasn't been built yet.
On the other hand, we did build our own frigates for the Navy ...
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11708 posts, RR: 52 Reply 5, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 7522 times:
I agree that Canada is capable of modifing the CSeris into various military roles, but even in the story, they talk about the MRTT version only being a short ranged tanker, for domestic opertions, or tactical operations only. So, to me range of the tankers or ASW versions would be a killer of the overall projects of ASW and MRTT. Light and medium cargo/transport functions could easily be handled by these aircraft, freeing up the CC-130E/H/Js and CC-150s.
Arrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2582 posts, RR: 2 Reply 6, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 7515 times:
Quoting Spacepope (Reply 3): And specifically, what advantage would such an aircraft have over the already existing P-8?
Well, "specifically" it would be built by a Canadian company employing Canadians (I know, there's lots of foreign subcontracting). But given the current spat we're having with "Buy America" language in the US stimulus package, and given the battle being waged between Boeing and Airbus over that tanker project, maybe a "Buy Canada" clause isn't such a bad thing.
As the article points out, we used to do this kind of thing all the time. In the 50s, the RCAF flew a Canadian designed and built fighter -- the CF-100 -- and if they hadn't cancelled the Arrow, that would have continued well into the 70s and perhaps beyond. But when you combined the government's lack of vision with an outrageously expensive RCAF weapons requirement, the plane was doomed.
Whether it would have any operational advantage over the P-8 I don't know, since no one at Bombardier has addressed this possibility and drawn up any specs. Putting aside the rah-rah nationalism, I wouldn't expect the government to buy a Canadian product if it didn't meet the mission requirements and wasn't cost-effective. Unfortunately, we've had a sorry history of avoiding home-grown products even when they do meet the mission requirements.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
ThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1064 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 7449 times:
We don't want orphan fleets anymore. The current CF policy is to buy as much as it can off the shelf with little modifications, as maintaining the many orphan fleets is very expensive. Take the CP-140 Aurora. The base airframe is the good old USN P-3 Orion, but the avionics and sensors are taken off the S-3A Viking. While everyone else who flies standard P-3's are taking advantage of the USN's upgrades, we have been forced to develop our own upgrades and maintain unique systems at our own cost.
Spectre242 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 103 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 7418 times:
You may be on to something - the low, pointy nose and refueling probe on the maritime patrol aircraft on top seems very reminiscent of the Nimrods (even the color is a good match); makes it look very natural to my eye at least. If it was all down to looking the part, it would be a winner!
In seriousness though, a CSeries military aircraft looks good on paper at least. It gives an excellent, very modern airframe that is fits in a nice size between the larger 737-based P-3 and Wedgetail, and the much smaller biz-jet and ERJ sized mini-AWACSs, ASTOR, etc. Could suit the needs of many mid-sized air forces in multiple applications.
But I doubt Canada would likely kick-off the program alone, it would also need another large order from another ally to help get it going and spread the costs. Australia is already going with the 737-based platforms, and the UK is getting new Nimrods, which would have otherwise struck me as two good candidates for CSeries-based aircraft. Who else will need mid-sized patrol aircraft replacements in the next decade or so?
Also, didn't Bombardier start touting the Q400 earlier this year for potential military applications too?
StealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5430 posts, RR: 49 Reply 10, posted (3 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 7388 times:
Quoting Spectre242 (Reply 8): But I doubt Canada would likely kick-off the program alone,
Very valid point
Quoting Spectre242 (Reply 8): Who else will need mid-sized patrol aircraft replacements in the next decade or so?
With Australia going for P-8, Japan developing their own P-1 that leaves about 120 P-3 out in the wild that will need replacing in the coming decades, the trouble is most of them are relatively small operators. Canada would have to get several on board to make a program viable rather than just one other sizeable user.
Having said that many of them will have budget issues with a P-8 platform and the ERJ/Astor sized platforms too small so there could be some mileage in it.
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
Canada could conceivably get a land-based MP variant of that for its medium range requirements, or at least the systems that go into it (for integration into a Q300 or Q400) to avoid building the thing from scratch - and just supplement those with UAVs. For the longer-ranged missions, I think buying into the P-8A program would be more cost-effective for the number of platforms the CF require, than developing a dedicated version of the CSeries. It's a toss-up if national interests or fiscal and logistical realities would dictate the course of such a program - although it could be said that the latter two also fall under the former's mantle.