Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is Canada Considering A Replacement...  
User currently offlineAC340 From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 337 posts, RR: 0
Posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 3443 times:

...for their aging CF18 aircraft? These are the first generation 'A' model, if I am not mistaken, which arent' equiped for complex message encrytion or the use of laser guided bombs. My question is, will Canada order a replace for these aircraft in the near future, say the next 5-10 years? Anyone with any insight?

20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLt-AWACS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3392 times:

well I was just up at Cold Lake for Maple Flag and controlled and spoke with many of hte CF-18 guys (and I fly with Canadians here as well) most of them said the replacement is not coming anytime soon- but they are hoping for the Joint Strike Fighter.

They might try to buy some J-TIDS kits for the aircraft now and maybe up grade some radar. Other than that they told me status quo for now. The Newer Hawk trainers are coming into service now. While the T-33s (T-133s Stars) just retired and that part of training has been contracted out.

I will see if I can get anymore info and post it.

Ciao and Hook 'em Horns,
Lt-AWACS


User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13192 posts, RR: 77
Reply 2, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3355 times:

I think some limited upgrades have been carried out on CF-18's, though not to the extend that the Australians have done and are doing to their aircraft.


User currently offlineFlyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3362 times:

I had a pretty in depth conversation with a CF-18 pilot about this once. The summary of it was that he (and most of his coworkers), although not positive, believed the CF-18 will be the last fighter aircraft the Canadian military ever purchases.

User currently offlineVonRichtofen From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 4627 posts, RR: 36
Reply 4, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 3305 times:

Joint Strike Fighter


Word
User currently offlineAC340 From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 337 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3289 times:

Thanks for the insight everyone.

User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 6, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3288 times:

You mean the Canadian AF thinks the politicos will go ahead with the dismantling of the military?
I've seen that coming for a while now, but if the troops themselves are openly saying so it must be serious.
Another nation falling for the 'there is no enemy so we need no defense' way of thinking which costed Europe so dearly in 1940.



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineFlyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3261 times:

One of the things he mentioned that I remember cleary was stating that they had the US to do their dogfighting for them (or something along those lines). Don't know if he was joking or serious though...

User currently offlineJ-bird From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 108 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (12 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3243 times:

Joint Strike Fighter? I think you must be dreaming... the way Canada funds the military, we would be able to buy a total of 8-10, and that spread over 5 years!

I agree with the poster who said that the CF-18 is probably the last fighter aircraft the CAF will ever operate. Have also heard the same comment from people who are in.

Sad but true. Canadian politicos just have never learned that it's a "pay to play" world, and without a meaningful contribution to shared security, the Canadian voice will continue to get smaller and smaller. Looking at it the other way though, defence has never been a priority to the Canadian people and as such, the loss of political/economic influence that comes with having a seat at the decision-making table is what we all deserve. Again, sad but true.



User currently offlineVonRichtofen From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 4627 posts, RR: 36
Reply 9, posted (12 years 2 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3206 times:

I think it depends on if the Liberals stay in power. They'd rather spend money on shitty paintings or pay 3 times for the same thing to help their little french buddies.


Word
User currently offlineTomh From United States of America, joined May 1999, 960 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (12 years 2 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3202 times:

Isn't this situation the reason armed trainers are becoming popular in so many countries?

User currently offlineLY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, RR: 10
Reply 11, posted (12 years 2 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3197 times:

RCAF CF-18's are fully capable of dropping and guiding LGB's, which they succesfuly performed in Kosovo, for example.

LY744.



Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
User currently offlineBriboy From Canada, joined Jul 2001, 366 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (12 years 2 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 3219 times:

Canada has signed on to an extent with the JSF project.

From http://www.jast.mil, in the Program / International section:

"Negotiations with Canada were completed in May 1997. MOU was signed in December 1997. Canadians entered the program as Informed Partners [1] in January 1998."

[1] Informed Partner -- Allowed access to JSF project information in order to better understand and evaluate the utility of the JSF family of aircraft for their use. Unable to influence requirements.



next up: YYC, SFO, SYD, AKL, WLG, CMB, BKK, SIN, FRA, VCE, JFK
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29795 posts, RR: 58
Reply 13, posted (12 years 2 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3201 times:

If Canada is made a partner the following will happen.

They will contribute a large sum of tax payer money to help develop the aircraft. In return a portion of the work may be farmed out to build Canadian variants of the aircraft.

The parliament will start screaming that it is taking too much money away from their traumatized health care system and will force the PM to cancel it.

Because of the cancellation of their participation there will be no Canadian built versions and therefore no jobs will come from it, Massive layoffs result in more money going out for unemployment and other aid.

Meanwhile the heavily utilized CF-18 fleet will be getting older and older and less and less reliable.

After several years and deaths because of that fact, the government will eventually purchase a small number of foreign built JSF aircraft. This will be in spite of trying to rig the bidding process so that the aircraft that they cancelled will not win and put a large amount of egg on the faces of the politicians who canceled it in the first place.

The small purchase will cost much more then it would have been if they had stuck with the original plan and there will be no work brought to Canadian aviation workers for building Canadian variants.

off course this is just a fairy tale and never could happen in real life

*Cough!*EH-101*Cough!*EH-101*Cough!*

Excuse me, Don't know what got into me there  Innocent



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineVonRichtofen From Canada, joined Nov 2000, 4627 posts, RR: 36
Reply 14, posted (12 years 2 months 5 days ago) and read 3161 times:

L-188 took the words right out of my mouth.


Word
User currently offlineTomh From United States of America, joined May 1999, 960 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (12 years 2 months 6 hours ago) and read 3118 times:

Or, recall the CF-101 non-program, which essentially saw the Canadians getting overly-mature ex-USAF fighters as a result of a scenario somewhat like that described by L-188. Consider that if there is a quantity USN/USMC purchase of F-18Es, then many tired, old F-18As will become available for the CAF to use as attrition replacements for their original issue Hornets.

This way we free up some acreage at Davis-Monthan and keep the CAF stick-shakers (pilots) in the air a decade longer. Why its a win-win plan for everybody. Except the guy in the cockpit.


User currently offlineArrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2676 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (12 years 2 months 2 hours ago) and read 3135 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

My father was one of the systems engineers on the Avro Arrow. If he were still alive, he'd have a good laugh at all the failed attempts, since 1959, to give the RCAF the kind of fighter it needs to carry out its mission, starting with the CF-101. Even the CF-18, as good as it is, couldn't perform the way the Arrow 1 was capable of performing.

L-188 painted a very sad, but very true picture of the last 40 years of military procurement in this country. It goes well beyond the Air Force and impacts both the army and the navy. I'm always amazed that young Canadians are still prepared to put their lives on the line in antiquated and in some cases crumbling equipment, while the politicians who send them off to war blow money on new Challengers they don't need.

But I guess we keep electing them, so we get what we deserve.



Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
User currently offlineTomh From United States of America, joined May 1999, 960 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (12 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3114 times:

The Mig-31 is said to be one of the hottest jets around. I can't help but notice there are more than a few similarities between its predecessor, the Mig-25, and the CF-105 Arrow. But then, form fits function.

The zenith of Canadian Aerospace efforts was 25 March 1958, when the Arrow lifted off at Malton for the first time. It was a long, long, way from being an operational fighter, but what a beautiful ship. It had the greatest potential of any design of its day.


User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 18, posted (12 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3092 times:

Pretty soon they should be able to get some of our "OLD"(?) C/D version.

User currently offlineArrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2676 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (12 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3097 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I have a large, framed original picture of the Arrow's first flight hanging on my office wall. The plane is about to land, with speed brakes extended. As a child, I watched it fly many times.

Amazing how we destroy our own accomplishments.



Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
User currently offlineAC183 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 1532 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (12 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3086 times:

Unfortunately L-188's thoughts also came to my mind...

...and of course also the Arrow. Sure, the Arrow was big, ambitious, and expensive. But getting it to the verge of production and cancelling - and then messing around with CF101's, CF5's, CF104's, stretching CF100 ops - that was more expensive than it would have been to just build the CF105. The moral here - have a plan and stick with it.

...whether those messes happen (again) is anyones guess. I personally think we'll end up buying replacements eventually. But I think it would only be a token handful, and would be years (maybe decades) away. Bottom line is that replacing the Herks is a higher priority in the military right now (and probably should be), and even that doesn't appear likely to happen until around 2008-2012. So don't expect the government to be looking for fighters until at least 2015, maybe 2025.

IMO the way partisan politics turns out is less than ideal. Nobody is interested in making good decisions, just in opposing and attacking any decisions that are made. I have to say I'm irritated by the way the Victoria class (nee Upholder) subs are being grilled out by parliament and the media. There's no consideration of whether it's the right choice, or needed, it's just like "oh, a little problem, lookey here it must be a scandal or lets make it a scandal." Sure, fine, we should be informed of the problems, but I don't think there's anything of a fair analysis of what constitutes a problem, just stirring up a mess for political appearances.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Is Canada Considering A Replacement...
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Is The U.S.C.G. Considered "Military" posted Sun Nov 12 2006 19:19:37 by UH60FtRucker
CDN CT-114 Tutor Replacement posted Sun Nov 12 2006 04:38:51 by Kearney
CDN Forces C-130 Replacement posted Sat Nov 11 2006 07:47:25 by Kearney
What Is A Usaf U-60 posted Thu Nov 2 2006 16:25:19 by Wannabe
Polaf Helo Replacement posted Sun Oct 22 2006 07:24:18 by Cancidas
Who Is ATC Out There? posted Thu Oct 19 2006 17:13:36 by Avsfan
Is This AN AA 747 Carrying A Space Shuttle? posted Wed Oct 18 2006 02:25:45 by Fll2993
Air Force One Replacement? posted Mon Oct 16 2006 08:06:42 by TUSaadvantage
How Capable Is The North Korean Military? posted Mon Oct 9 2006 11:01:50 by CHRISBA777ER
Replacement For The Superhornet posted Fri Sep 29 2006 17:50:02 by 747400sp

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format