Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

RCAF Hornet replacement.

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

RCAF Hornet replacement.

Old 20th Nov 2018, 20:36
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 1
Fall 2018 Auditor General report Canada's fighter fighter force

Declining combat capability of CF-18's not as big an issue as too few aircraft technicians and pilots. The interim Super Hornets would not have addressed this issue neither will buying used Australian hornets.
cf100mk5 is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 20:47
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Up and away in the mountains of Canada
Posts: 52
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ag-cf-18s-1.4912813

F-35's primary sin in Canada is Justin did not choose it!
Grizzz is offline  
Old 20th Nov 2018, 22:00
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Here
Posts: 1,393
Originally Posted by Grizzz View Post
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ag-cf-18s-1.4912813

F-35's primary sin in Canada is Justin did not choose it!
Sounds like the EH101 in the Maritime Helo contract
Davef68 is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2018, 08:51
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: In a happy place
Posts: 12
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
IIRC the wing pylons were originally planned to be wet, but the piping was removed as part of the weight saving program.

I believe the IAF F-35s have the piping installed and that Cyclone have a contract to provide 480g underwing tanks and Elbit to provide conformal fuselage tanks.

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/336925615844218041/
Why would a stealthy aircraft want huge external tanks? The only reason is for a ferry, but if you are AAR capable the justification weakens. How much gas does it take to lift 960g to ferry altitude? More than you might think... How much additional drag do large tanks add during a ferry (even 'coke bottle' tanks)? Quite a lot ... How much additional cost, complexity and weight does installing wet pylons & buying the tanks incur? Definitely some... How much additional range does 2 x 480g tanks give you? Not very much at all! Are external tanks worthwhile? Most people would say, Nope...
Phil_and_Sand is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2018, 11:11
  #65 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: UK
Age: 39
Posts: 476
Originally Posted by Phil_and_Sand View Post
Why would a stealthy aircraft want huge external tanks? The only reason is for a ferry, but if you are AAR capable the justification weakens. How much gas does it take to lift 960g to ferry altitude? More than you might think... How much additional drag do large tanks add during a ferry (even 'coke bottle' tanks)? Quite a lot ... How much additional cost, complexity and weight does installing wet pylons & buying the tanks incur? Definitely some... How much additional range does 2 x 480g tanks give you? Not very much at all! Are external tanks worthwhile? Most people would say, Nope...
There are a lot of assumptions about variables in that post. I think I would like the option to choose if a particular profile worked better with external tanks. I might only have AAR close to home, so I might launch with empty tanks and I might want to fuel them up at the start of the cruise, for example.
unmanned_droid is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2018, 12:15
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Not lost, but slightly uncertain of position.
Posts: 13
Originally Posted by Phil_and_Sand View Post
Why would a stealthy aircraft want huge external tanks? The only reason is for a ferry, but if you are AAR capable the justification weakens.
Seriously? Most missions flown will not require stealth. And in most scenarios flown, longer legs or increased loiter capability will be a force multiplier. I would like the flexibility. Tanks off for first strike missions, and then tanks mounted for everything else once air superiority is established and stealth is no longer needed. If the need arises during the mission, tanks can always be jettisoned (even though some part of the tank pylon will remain on the wing, stealth to some degree will be re-established).
F-16GUY is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2018, 12:43
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 2,007
Phil_and_sand

Are you, or were you ever a, FJ pilot?

I would love to watch you try and convince every FJ pilot that ever lived that they would have been better off without drop tanks.

I think we could all give you numbers from previous aircraft types to convince you otherwise. I’m pretty sure that, if F35 were to ever be fitted with drop tanks, it would follow a similar pattern.

F16 Guy and UD, I agree with your points about stealth vs DTs.

BV
Bob Viking is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2018, 12:46
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 3,726
Bob is right - it would be interesting to list fighters that HAVEN'T had drop tanks since they were invented - - maybe the F-22 is the only one that springs to mind.............
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2018, 12:50
  #69 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 12,356
There are times stealth matters.




Other times not so much........

ORAC is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2018, 13:49
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Not lost, but slightly uncertain of position.
Posts: 13
Originally Posted by Asturias56 View Post
Bob is right - it would be interesting to list fighters that HAVEN'T had drop tanks since they were invented - - maybe the F-22 is the only one that springs to mind.............
It too have tanks...

https://theaviationist.com/wp-conten...s-jettison.jpg

Well the above does not have them any more, but those in the link below still have them....

Got pictures of the F-22 with drop tanks? - General F-22A Raptor forum
F-16GUY is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2018, 14:10
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Not lost, but slightly uncertain of position.
Posts: 13
Originally Posted by johnwill View Post
The hooks are not deployed in flight. Flight manual procedure is to land, lower the nose gear to the ground, then deploy the hook.
johnwill,

That has changed at some point between the time when you worked it and now. For as long as I have been flying the F-16, in case you plan on an arrested landing or in case of some electrical failures, the -1 and -1 Checklist states that the hook is to be lowered before landing. In case of some electrical issues it even states that the pilot is to lower the hook early, to avoid the possibility of loosing that capability due to later on loss of DC power (partial electrical failures with loss of some/all of the battery buses, which might also render the wheel brakes unserviceable).
F-16GUY is offline  
Old 1st Dec 2018, 16:45
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Not of this world
Posts: 44
Originally Posted by Bob Viking View Post
Are you, or were you ever a, FJ pilot?

I would love to watch you try and convince every FJ pilot that ever lived that they would have been better off without drop tanks.

I think we could all give you numbers from previous aircraft types to convince you otherwise. I’m pretty sure that, if F35 were to ever be fitted with drop tanks, it would follow a similar pattern.

F16 Guy and UD, I agree with your points about stealth vs DTs.

BV
BV,

While I'm not of that breed (I chose the far more glorious life of engineering ), even I can see what they offer in terms of flexibility.
spannermonkey is offline  
Old 9th May 2019, 08:03
  #73 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 12,356
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2019...r-competition/

US, Canada talks underway to decide if the F-35 will be pulled from Canada’s fighter competition

VICTORIA, British Columbia — The U.S. is threatening to pull the F-35 from Canada’s fighter jet competition if the ally to the north doesn’t change requirements for the winning bidder to stipulate specific industrial benefits for domestic firms. The U.S. government is arguing that since Canada is a partner in the F-35 program it cannot request guaranteed industrial benefits for its companies.......

The Canadian government plans to purchase 88 new jets to replace its aging CF-18 fighter aircraft fleet. Canada will require that a robust package of guaranteed industrial benefits or offsets be provided by the winning bidder, government officials have said. But the U.S. government has objected to that, as Canada is still a partner in the F-35 program, which does not guarantee participating nations a set number of contracts. Work on the F-35 program is based on best value and price.

U.S. Navy Vice Adm. Mathias Winter, program executive officer for the Joint Strike Fighter, wrote Canadian procurement officials Dec. 18, 2018, pointing out that the F-35 agreement prohibits partners from imposing requirements for industrial benefits. “We cannot participate in an offer of the F-35 weapon system where requirements do not align with the F-35 Partnership," he noted in his letter.......

The letter has prompted ongoing discussions between Canadian and U.S. procurement officials in an effort to work out some kind of solution, multiple industry and government sources told Defense News. But the Canadian government will also respect any decision by the U.S. to not bid the F-35 if an agreement can’t be reached, sources added.......




ORAC is offline  
Old 11th May 2019, 07:42
  #74 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 12,356
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/feds...ints-1.4416420

Feds look to ease requirements for fighter-jet makers after U.S. complaints
ORAC is offline  
Old 11th May 2019, 16:00
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Ferrara
Posts: 3,726
TBH I doubt the US cares WHAT the Canadians buy - sure it would be good for LM and everyone in the F-35 programme to sell a few more but for the USA it doesn't matter as they will just buy more F-18's instead

In factt here's probably a significant number of US military who would like to see the F-18 programme continued as long as possible - it gives them an alternative, it's lower cost and it keeps the pressure on LM
Asturias56 is offline  
Old 11th May 2019, 16:09
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 2,007
Asturias

I will admit that I haven’t been keeping up to date on the RCAF fighter issue and I am too lazy to read back through the thread. However, I believe I am right in saying that, due to a prior dispute, Boeing are currently not planning to enter the process.

I have talked previously about the Canadian obsession with twin engined jets. As it stands, the only twin engined jet expected to enter the process is Typhoon.

BV🤭
Bob Viking is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2019, 08:15
  #77 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 12,356
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/air...ters-1.5265665

Airbus pulls out of Canada's fighter jet competition

One of the companies in the race to replace Canada's aging fleet of CF-18 jet fighters has dropped out of the competition.

Airbus Defence and Space, which was pitching the Eurofighter Typhoon, notified the Liberal government Friday that it was not going to bid. The decision was made after a detailed review of the tender issued by the federal government in mid-July.

The move leaves only three companies in the $19 billion contest: Lockheed Martin Canada with its F-35; Boeing with the Super Hornet; and Saab, which is offering an updated version of its Gripen fighter.

Simon Jacques, president of Airbus Defence and Space Canada, made a point of saying the company appreciated the professional dealings it had with defence and procurement officials. “Airbus Defence and Space is proud of our longstanding partnership with the Government of Canada, and of serving our fifth home country's aerospace priorities for over three decades," Jacques said in a statement. "Together we continue in our focus of supporting the men and women of the Canadian Armed Forces, growing skilled aerospace jobs across the country and spurring innovation in the Canadian aerospace sector."

In a statement, Public Services and Procurement Minister Carla Qualtrough said she accepted Airbus's decision. “We understand that participation in this competition represents a significant commitment for suppliers, and we respect this business decision," she said. "We would like to thank the U.K. Government and Airbus Defence and Space for their participation and thoughtful feedback during this process."

Airbus decided to withdraw after looking at the NORAD intelligence security requirements and the cost it imposes on companies outside of North America. It also said it was convinced that the industrial benefits regime, as written in the tender, "does not sufficiently value the binding commitments the Typhoon Canada package was willing to make.".........

One defence expert said few people who have been following the file are surprised by the decision. Dave Perry, a military procurement specialist at the Canadian Global Affairs Institute, said that at times Airbus appeared to be "the least enthusiastic of the remaining four" bidders. “I do have the sense they had reservations," he said.

The company's reference in its departure statement to NORAD security issues is significant, he said.

Saab is now the only European bidder among the competitors. Sweden, where Saab is based, does not have a preferred intelligence-sharing arrangement with Canada and the U.S. If Britain, which backed the Eurofighter bid, believes it cannot meet the stringent NORAD intelligence-sharing measures without significant cost, Perry wonders what that does to Saab's bid.

"It'll be interesting to see if they can put forward a proposal that the Canadian government thinks is workable," Perry said.......

ORAC is offline  
Old 31st Aug 2019, 15:55
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 93
Posts: 1,947
Pity. I was thinking Rafale for Quebec and Typhoon elsewhere.
Willard Whyte is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2019, 06:22
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Great South East, tired and retired
Posts: 3,573
Must be a nuisance, having to make every label in the cockpit in English and French, take up a lot of space...
Ascend Charlie is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2019, 01:52
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Here
Posts: 1,393
Have the Candians and Boeing made up yet?
Davef68 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.