/notasamod
With an eye towards NATO interoperability, this is potentially good news. all but guarantees |
The RCAF doesn't currently have a tanker which can refuel the F-35A, so will they go for the -B, -C? Or hand LM a blank cheque to fit a probe to the F-35A?
A small but significant factor when trailing RCAF fighters up to the Arctic to defend Canada's northern border. |
New Air Refuelling Tanker requirements would accomodate any version of the F-35: Strategic Tanker Transport Capability project - Canada.ca
|
So there are TWO threads about Canada & F-35s? I'll plonk this official DOGma here:
Canada Moves Closer to Delivering 88 Fighter Jets for the RCAF March 28, 2022 - Gatineau, [is that a cake?] :} Quebec - Public Services and Procurement Canada and National Defence Canada Moves Closer to Delivering 88 Jets for the RCAF (f35.com) ""...The multi-step assessment process took into account a wide range of factors, including capabilities, cost, as well as economic benefits and impacts. Recognizing that these fighter jets must effectively serve the RCAF and Canadians over the coming decades, Canada evaluated these aircraft against typical scenarios familiar to NATO and NORAD allies, which were further tailored to meet the needs of the RCAF, including Canada’s unique northern geography. We are confident that this competitive process will deliver the best results for the Canadian Armed Forces and for Canadians. During this process, the government has concurrently been preparing the 2 main operating bases for Canada’s future fighter aircraft, 4 Wing Cold Lake and 3 Wing Bagotville, by awarding 2 contracts to undertake infrastructure upgrades to support the delivery of these future fighters. On August 27, 2020, National Defence announced a $9.2-million contract to EllisDon in Edmonton for the design of a new fighter jet facility at 4 Wing Cold Lake. On October 2, 2020, National Defence announced a $12.1-million contract to EllisDon-EBC Inc. Joint Venture of Ottawa for the design of a new fighter jet facility at 3 Wing Bagotville. This infrastructure will support the long-term maintenance and operation of these new aircraft and brings Canada another step closer to delivering the infrastructure our aviators need for the future.... ...Quick facts The Government of Canada launched an open and transparent [LIKE FAN DANCING] competitive process to acquire new fighter jets in 2017...." |
Salute!
Some grumbling about tankers. Well.... considering the F-35 has batter range than the VooDoo that Canada used for years without refueling, I am not worried. The Hornet was a gas guzzler, and used as much or more than the F-15 cruising, even in the A2A role. Hang some iron on the pylons and it needed lottsa refueling support. . I flew the USAF VooDoo from Grand Forks and the Canadian CF-101 VooDoos flew way up north. Our normal profile was about 200 miles north and the CF-101 guys went another 200 miles north. We cruised at a decent speed and then "held" until the threat showed up. The good news is the "A" has the refueling port whether Canada wants to use it or not for air defense of the homeland as we trained for back in the 60's. But when employed in joint force scenarios nowadays, it will fit right in with other country assets. Gums sends... |
Originally Posted by gums
(Post 11207654)
Salute!
Some grumbling about tankers. Well.... considering the F-35 has batter range than the VooDoo that Canada used for years without refueling, I am not worried. The Hornet was a gas guzzler, and used as much or more than the F-15 cruising, even in the A2A role. Hang some iron on the pylons and it needed lottsa refueling support. . I flew the USAF VooDoo from Grand Forks and the Canadian CF-101 VooDoos flew way up north. Our normal profile was about 200 miles north and the CF-101 guys went another 200 miles north. We cruised at a decent speed and then "held" until the threat showed up. The good news is the "A" has the refueling port whether Canada wants to use it or not for air defense of the homeland as we trained for back in the 60's. But when employed in joint force scenarios nowadays, it will fit right in with other country assets. Gums sends... |
MRTT has the boom boom baby as standard fit out AFAIK - meanwhile....
FULL FILM: McLaren Speedtail vs F35 Fighter Jet | Top Gear |
MRTT has the boom boom baby as standard fit out AFAIK - meanwhile.... |
KC-46 Cleared To Operationally Refuel F-22s, F-35As | Aviation Week Network 01 Apr 2022 [is this a joke for April Fool Day?] wotabout da boom scraping da stealph? :}
|
Salute!
We prolly had more damage to the fighters from the probe system than a poor boom op using the receptacle. Problem with the new tanker is the stoopid visual system versus a human looking out the station at the rear. Even so, they seem to be getting that issue ironed out. I made hundreds of hookups in SEA and did not have to do all the hard work myself. Just snuggle up, stabilize and shazam! Used the probe a few times in the A-37, but I guess I would have gotten used to it. Gums sends... |
Its a good point gums - I never understood WHY they needed an automated system to replace an operator in the first place - It seems to have worked pretty well over the years
|
Salute!
Asturias56 Problem is using cameras versus human eyeballs 20 or 30 feet away. It is not automated a lot more than what USAF has used since the 50's and 60's. The traditional system had a human boom op that saw me and even scolded me if I was too rough or outta place. The dude would control the boom and things worked great, even in terrible weather and such. The new plane uses a camera or two with the boom controlled 40 feet away near the cockpit by a human and is having problems. Other problem things on the new plane exist, but the thing that bothers most of we users and ex-users was a camera and not a human eyeball. Gums sends... |
One way to transit 'any old iron' without worries about MID OCEAN refuellin'. Caption says: "USNS Card T-AKV-40 with F-102 delta daggers aboard". I'll guess these Daggers are going to HAWAI'I? Photo just in by e-mail - that is all I know.
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....47144d1626.jpg |
Originally Posted by SpazSinbad
(Post 11210655)
One way to transit 'any old iron' without worries about MID OCEAN refuellin'. Caption says: "USNS Card T-AKV-40 with F-102 delta daggers aboard". I'll guess these Daggers are going to HAWAI'I? Photo just in by e-mail - that is all I know.
|
Originally Posted by sandiego89
(Post 11210843)
Or Vietnam. F-102's served there, but Hawaii is a good guess. I recall reading that the bolt on probe on the F-102 made quite a distinctive and loud whistling noise.
|
Photo via E-mail caption: "USNS Card T-AKV-40 at Subic Bay with F-4 Phantoms destined for Vietnam"
https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....b1ebde7017.jpg |
A few F35s returning to San Diego this morning
|
Originally Posted by gums
(Post 11209794)
Salute! Asturias56 Problem is using cameras versus human eyeballs 20 or 30 feet away. It is not automated a lot more than what USAF has used since the 50's and 60's. The traditional system had a human boom op that saw me and even scolded me if I was too rough or outta place. The dude would control the boom and things worked great, even in terrible weather and such. The new plane uses a camera or two with the boom controlled 40 feet away near the cockpit by a human and is having problems. Other problem things on the new plane exist, but the thing that bothers most of we users and ex-users was a camera and not a human eyeball. Gums sends...
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....3de09730c3.jpg https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....47dd045b29.jpg |
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:08. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.