My thoughhts on this topic is we've been down this road before buy or not> The RCAF want the plane though most people believe it's not the right fit for our country and give many reasons to that effect.I can't say they know what their talking about and that's what shows , distance , who hasn't heard that argument before as I believe the Arrow fell into the same fate yet how many aircraft can fill that requirement . What we as citizen's think we need and what the RCAF think look to be two different aircraft so what do youthink will win out us or them.If I had my way I'd put them in the Arrow as I believe they didn't want to fly a bomber not a jet pilot where's the bragging right's top gun and all.
Bill Beecraft - 12 years ago
The last thing
The last thing Canada needs is an inferior aircraft. You have to set priorities and do long range planning in order to play with the big boys. Cancelling the order is not only costly but reduces us to second rate status. Remember the helicopers.....How Canadians risk their lives flying worn out aircraft, trying to provide normal search and resque and the extra cost we paided because of a lack of Liberal foresight!!!!! Are you prepared to allow it to happen again?
c
Bill Beecraft - 12 years ago
The last thing
The last thing Canada needs is an inferior aircraft. You have to set priorities and do long range planning in order to play with the big boys. Cancelling the order is not only costly but reduces us to second rate status. Remember the helicopers.....How Canadians risk their lives flying worn out aircraft, trying to provide normal search and resque and the extra cost we paided because of a lack of Liberal foresight!!!!! Are you prepared to allow it to happen again?
c
Dr. Franklin - 12 years ago
Let's buy a fleet of washing machines instead!
It's a good thing most people here don't get to make any important decisions.
John Chernenkoff - 12 years ago
Not only should we drop the purchase of the F-35 Jets but also the politicians that support the purchase.
Jean-Luc - 12 years ago
Ah, I was wondering how long it would take till the Arrow showed up. Not long, apparently ;-)
For those who think the F-35s are a need-to-have in order to meet today's missions, you should consider whether today's missions need this aircraft. They don't and it is not designed for it either. You should also consider how much the rest of Canadian weapons procurement will have to be bled to pay for it.
Clearly the F18s need replacement. But the F35 is an aircraft that was designed for too many roles, by too many paymasters. Aircraft-by-committee, where everybody gets his pet feature, are often a problem, and also aircraft that try to be too innovative. The F35 is a STOL aircraft, a carrier aircraft, a regular fighter. Risky? You bet and not necessarily just financially.
It is a fair bet that by the time this aircraft is midway through its operational lifetime, say, around 2030-40, the role of manned fighters will be called into question because of weaponized drones. We should buy an aircraft available today, for today's missions, at a good price. And we should keep enough ooomph in the procurement budget to switch aircraft again if needed in the 2030 timeline.
Al - 12 years ago
When we bought the CF-18's we ordered 138!!!
We are buying 65 of these F-35's!!
What does thatr tell you right away?
We are going to have a fleet half the size of the fleet we had when we first got the CF-18's SO this means we will be putting more flying hours on these F-35's (because we have less aircraft with still the same job to do) SO we will be wearing out these birds faster than we did the CF-18's!!
IS THAT TOO COMPLICATED FOR YA> The super hornets cost about half as much as these F-35's do !!!!!!!
We could buy 130 Super Hornets for what these F-35's cost. Our pilots wouldn't have to wait in line for a turn to go flying. LIKE HELLO no pilot likes to see his flying hours reduced.
HINT: How much better trained is a pilot with loads of cockpit time compared to one with fewer hours of cockpit time???
WAKE UP!!
adsteeves - 12 years ago
This has 2 issues, overall cost of the planes and requirement. The planes are not 25 Billion it is the total cost of the project, which include cost not specific to the F35 as any other plane would have theses cost, the only cost that should be of concern is the cost to have the plane arrive in Canada. The requirement if needed to be explained than you do not have the educational background to understand and should stick to your specialty, buthers do not conduct brain surgery for a reason.
As for the thoughts of Bernard Donnally if the Eurofighter was a reliable option than Eurofighter countries would not be on the project.
Gabriel Ellison-Scowcroft - 12 years ago
Wow. 8,615 people need a reality check. Why do we need ANY new fighter jets? Russian Invasion? There are so many other options! Even if we did need to beef up our military, why not build them ourselves? We have the technology & the know-how. But we don't need them. Why on Earth should we waste 25$ billion on 65 planes? We have plenty of domestic issues that need resolving & there is absolutely no need for us to defend ourselves or get involved in conflicts elsewhere in the world.
Joel Bourne - 12 years ago
Harper is cutting back on public internet funding to save a paltry 15 million dollars.
You still think Harper cares about average Canadians ?
How much jet fuel does 15 million dollars buy ?
Jackie42 - 12 years ago
In 2007, it would have taken $12.6 billion to give the 3.5 million Canadians living in poverty enough income to live above the poverty line. And yet, that year, Canadians spent at least double that amount treating the consequences of poverty, says the National Council of Welfare [...] in its report, The Dollars and Sense of Solving Poverty
[Autumn 2011; for details, see Poverty in Canada: News & Reports].
1941 Senior - 12 years ago
Canada built the most advanced jet of its time....the Arrow.....which Dieffenbacker scrapped because the "Americans" told him to scrap it!!!! Why can't Canada build its own jets "our way" again.......homemade.......after all, we have the expertise & technology!
common sense - 12 years ago
If Canada is to spend $25B, then let use develop our own domestic "made in Canada solution".
Once developed we will have a significant advantage over the US manufactures due to the US ITAR regulations.
Let us spend our money at home to the benefit of Canadian industries and the 1000's of jobs that would be created.
The only problem - Harper government is arrogant to understand the benefits.
Elise - 12 years ago
We should drop the F-35 and NOT start over, because we don't need a ridiculously expensive war machine to fight impoverished Third World countries to prop up the US regime. In fact, the US don't need them either, but since their economy is based on war and war machines, they're making us buy them as a way to create the illusion of legitimacy when they demand our money. Read Chomsky.
Guest - 12 years ago
Hello Marc B.
I strongly agree that this plan to purchase the F-35 should be scrapped altogether and a lot of people of course are recommending to look for alternate fighters.
With your question. "What about the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Block 2, wouldn't it be the perfect replacement to our CF-18"?
No. I don't see the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Block 2 to be a viable option to replace the CF-18A/B Hornet fleet. The reason why the Super Hornet is not a perfect replacement for the existing Hornets is because the aircraft has a similar performance deficiences to the F-35 JSF which means the aircraft has a short range and does not have the performance envelope of a true air superiority fighter. The Super Hornets will be outclassed by the Su-27/30 Flanker family of fighters by most regional nations in all key performance parameters, aerodynamic, bigger armament, range, radar and sensor performance by widely available fighters.
The perfect replacement for the CF-18A/B fleet is the Advanced F-15 Strike Eagle.
With 3 new variants of the Eagle can be considered either:
1. F-15E+
2. F-15SE
3. A new proposed F-15F (a single-seat variant of the two-seat F-15E) which can be emailed to Boeing Co. to develop the new single seater of the Strike Eagle.
The F-15 is a combat-proven aircraft the Canadian's should be considering to fulfill their air force requirements.
The F-15 can be modified with the APG-82 AESA radar, F110-GE-132 engines with 2-D or 3-D thrust vectoring nozzles and supercruising mode (without using afterburners which saves fuel) which needs to be considered as a replacement for the expensive to maintain and older 23k lbf PW engine, DEWS (Digital Electronic Warfare System), NG (Next Generation) 3-D touch screen cockpit display, digital fly-by-wire flight control system, IRST sensor pod etc.
The reason why the F-15 is a combat proven aircraft is because, during action in the Persian Gulf, Kosovo, Balkans and recently in Afghanistan the F-15 showed its superior ability to perform missions required of the F-X (Fighter Experimental).
The F-15 family of aircraft has a perfect air-to-air combat record of more than 104 victories and zero defeats. F-15s shot down four MiG-29 fighters during the Balkan conflict and 33 of the 35 fixed-wing Iraqi Air Forces aircraft lost in air combat during Operation Desert Storm. During the Balkan conflict, the F-15E was the only fighter able to attack ground targets around the clock, in all weather conditions. The F-15 aircraft are used by the Air Force against terrorist targets.
The F-15 has a fantastic long range endurance, bigger weapons payload and speed capabilities than its F-X competitors. The aircraft will get into a fight, strike with a lethal mix of air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons, and return more effectively than the other (small airframes with short range such as F/A-18 Super Hornet, Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale, SAAB JAS-39 Gripen, F-16 Fighting Falcon and F-35 JSF) F-X aircraft.
The F-15 is in production. Boeing has built more than 1,500 of all its F-15 models and the company has extended the F-15 production line well into the 2020s to attract and satisfy new and existing customers.
The single-engine SAAB JAS-39 Gripen NG or F-16V Viper are not really the right choice for Canada to replace the CF-18A/B fleet is because the Canadian's had a fleet of 112 CF-104G/D Starfighters. At the time their was on-going controversy over the Starfighter's safety record still persists at time of writing. To date they've lost 37 fatalities from the fleet of 238 aircraft operated appears to be extremely high ratio. The Spanish Air Force never lost the F-104 or pilot. They maintained 21 aircraft for 7 years as a high altitude interceptor, from one base with predominately excellent weather and an extensive bird hazard control program, with very experienced fighter pilots and with medium utilisation. The CF-104 on the other hand, is heavily utilised, ope
george - 12 years ago
I am a Conservative and proud of it. This government has screwed up. Prime Minister Harper, the Minister of Defence and the Minister of Public Works should resign. They blew and should fall on their swords.
It seems that we're all concerned about the purchasing process and that it reports responsibly to our Ottawa government. The media accounts of our purchase of British submarines have been inflammatory and made us all wonder if our Defense Dept. is thinking & acting to the best interests of our country. How many of those purchased (subs) are on active duty right now and how long before they're obsolete?
We need the best equipment money can buy for our military and we also need various levels of oversight like the Auditor General to hold those accountable who would imperil our military with inferior armaments. If the F 35 is the right choice, then we should go with it. But, I think those responsible for being secretive about full costs of the F 35 program should be prosecuted.
kelly fitch - 12 years ago
don,t know what some peaple are thinking but we do need better fighters but being pushed in to a bad deal is crazzy. there are more than enuff fighters out there open bid look at them pick best one and get on with it fak . stop tossing our cash out the window head need to roll imo
The Doctor - 12 years ago
We need serious airpower to defend our resources in the future including fresh water, oil and and living space among others. I say buy the best fighter jets out there and that may very well be the F-35. Nice to always be able to slag the US while their taxpayers have effectively been subsidizing our national defence since the Second World War. At some point we have to start taking full responsibility for being able to defend our borders. The coming thirst, hunger and oil shortage will make the world a very different place .
Al - 12 years ago
We can only buy 65 of these expensive untried F-35's!!
We bought over a 100 CF-18'S!!!
Will our fighter pilots be standing in a line-up for their turn to fly?
Buy cheaper buy more!!
Scrap this order!! WE DO NOT NEED SINGLE ENGINE AIRCRAFT!!!
britbikerbabe - 12 years ago
Seriously folks, our F18s are seriously out of date (some are considered museum worthy) with more flying hours logged than is usually the norm - all due to our amazing technicians. That being said, they have been upgraded ad nauseum to better allow us to fly with our coalition friends. Whatever jet we buy, we do need them - we will start to lose lives if we do not start a replacement program now! Look what happened with the Sea King for crying out loud - cancel the contract, start losing lives. I agree that everything appears to not be above board, and there's all kinds of problems, but I can't remember a single defence contract that didn't have problems, nor do most government contracts play out problem free. Cutting this program is going to cost us lives - human lives! It should be audited and revised, but we should go ahead with replacement jets.
mattthepilot - 12 years ago
Aldo Sfalcin....shutup. Do you even know what you are talking about??
EricB.. "Maybe Russian" are you serious?? We would buy a Russian jet...so that when we use it...most likely in a location supported by the Russians...(aka...Iraq...Iran...Syria all of which fly Russian Jets) The whole point about using a new weapon is that the other country does not know the intricate details of that weapon. So wouldnt that be lost?
R.Edwards - 12 years ago
I think the intention of all parties involved in the evaluation, and purchasing of the next Canadian fighter were looking at the fact that the f35 is one of only a small number of Operationally ready fifth generation aircraft available. The sukhoi, mikoyan, shin shin, Black eagle (china) are all in development and are not ready until 2015-2020. However, do we want to be buy these planes from these countries anyway. Isn't a big threat in the arctic from two of the countries with stealth planes? The euro fighter is undeniably a great plane but it is not stealth. The f18 superhornet is comparable to the euro fighter and cheaper alternative. Stealth is the key advantage that puts the f35 at the front of the pack. Another advantage the f35 offers is a fully integrated air space information system. The pilot in one f35 can see what other f35's are seeing. With the huge expanse of area our pilots are tasked to monitor, isn't an integrated information system the best option for them? Granted the f35 has wrinkles it needs to iron out, but the other countries that are going 5th generation don't even have a plane in service yet.
It would be quite a Message to those who contemplate challenging our geographical sovereignty with having a stealth fleet of fighters. Finally, why would anyone think it's a good idea to get public works to govern the purchasing of the next batch of fighters. Why would we not give the people who fly these planes on a daily basis the position to do so. Our pilots are renowned to be among the best in the world and we give authority to some smuck in an office in Ottawa in the PUBLIC WORKS dept to govern this.........WTF!!!
mattthepilot - 12 years ago
Oh...good research all of you!! Eurofighter...really?? The Brits spent more than £215m on each and are having loads of contract problems. Furthermore according to the DERA simulation against a postulated Su-35 threat the Eurofighter doesn't even come close to what a Lighting or Raptor would score. (For all you "experts on here" a Lighting is the F-35s name). But I do agree with those saying there are other options...well, there is one...the F-22 Raptor. If the US were to make this A/C available to its close allies it would be stupid of us not to accept it.
...Marc B....has wikipedia made you an expert on fighters now? The superhornet should not even be an option. If we want to maintain a relevant military we need to keep up with the Russians and there so called 5th Gen the T-50 and China and the J-20 not buying already outdated aircraft. So Im going to refuse to pay attention to your comments unless that is you wrote this comment with a Commodore-64. If you get new tools...why can't our military get new ones when they are the ones allowing you the freedom to prove your stupidity on this website.
EricB - 12 years ago
I am a conservative and think we should scrap the purchase as it stands. While I defended it for a long time, this whole thing has turned into a fiasco. We need new fighters, no denying that unless your head is in the sand and live in a lala land. We will always need some offensive capability as we don't know what we'll be doing in 5 let alone 20 years. I do however think that we have to re-examine this purchase and open it to all contenders. Including Boeing, the Europeans and MAYBE even Russian aircraft.
Aldo Sfalcin - 12 years ago
We don't need those jets. Canada does not need an offensive military and should get out of the OBSOLETE NATO that has us (lucky, resource rich Canadians) embroiled in unnecessary wars.
The US is the only country that could invade us and if it wants to we can't do anything about it but just let them in.
How about having a quasi-military force that can be hired (for a profit) around the world to keep the peace as in between two countries like Greece and Turkey or North and South Korea etc.
This would make more sense for Canada and we would hire and educate all these Canadian 18 and 19 yearolds that can't get a civilian job.
Norman Amirault - 12 years ago
At what point do we need to re-evaluate our Defence policy, in this changing world and cost restrictions do we need fighter aircraft or is the money better spent in other Defence priorities or infrastructure programs ?
Marc B. - 12 years ago
Allot of people, I agree with this to, that this plan to purchase the F-35 should be scrapped. Also, allot of people are saying to look to alternate fighters. But what about the F-18 super hornet??? Wouldn't it be the perfect replacement to our CF-18? I just looked at the super hornet's specs on Wikipedia and this would be a perfect replacement aircraft for our air force. I just can't understand why not go with these ones.
But like ormelie just commented, we need new ships now to protect our coastlines way more then state of the art aircraft that are full of problems.
ormelie - 12 years ago
We are a maritime country with a very long coastline, west, east and north. We have enormous Arctic interests, already being challenged by shrinking ice. And I suspect that our rather old-fashioned Pearson view of peace keeping (and now possibly peace making) may be changing.
So... what on earth are we doing even thinking about JSFs? It's our Coast Guard that should be elevated with the kind of money that the JSFs would cost us.
And as someone else has already pointed out, there are other fighter
aircraft we should examine. I object to our taxes so cavalierly being thrown around.
PinebearDaddy - 12 years ago
We should've never let them scrap the AVRO Arrow. We would've had a viable alternative that is built by us and that is suited for our country. Now we have to buy someone else's crap that is not made for our requirements. Shame on the politicians for always doing what the U.S. wants us to do.
Shame.
Will - 12 years ago
That is a very close minded assumption that everyone against the F-35 is against any replacement jet. Of course they need to be replaced. The whole article is about whether or not we should find something better to replace the F18s with. Not whether or not we should keep going with the F18s.
Bernard Donnelly - 12 years ago
There are other frighters available, like the Eurofighter that are as good and cheaper to maintain. The research has beeb completed and they are readily available.
Bernard Donnelly - 12 years ago
There are other frighters available, like the Eurofighter
Bernard Donnelly - 12 years ago
There are other frighters available, like the Eurofighter
Big Daddy - 12 years ago
The Canadian Air Force has been asked with increasing frequency to participate in anti-terror, Arab spring as well as NATO operations in many countries and is faced with the daunting task of protecting this great huge country of ours. The multi-role F18 jets are now 40 years old and while still functional, in need of replacement. In air operations it is very important to have an edge over your opponents by striving for the best possible equipment. For this reason, we should strongly support the F35 purchase. The 80% of people who voted for scrapping the purchase must think that freedom is some type of automatic entitlement or have forgotten that people's lives are on the front lines every single day 24x7.
My thoughhts on this topic is we've been down this road before buy or not> The RCAF want the plane though most people believe it's not the right fit for our country and give many reasons to that effect.I can't say they know what their talking about and that's what shows , distance , who hasn't heard that argument before as I believe the Arrow fell into the same fate yet how many aircraft can fill that requirement . What we as citizen's think we need and what the RCAF think look to be two different aircraft so what do youthink will win out us or them.If I had my way I'd put them in the Arrow as I believe they didn't want to fly a bomber not a jet pilot where's the bragging right's top gun and all.
The last thing
The last thing Canada needs is an inferior aircraft. You have to set priorities and do long range planning in order to play with the big boys. Cancelling the order is not only costly but reduces us to second rate status. Remember the helicopers.....How Canadians risk their lives flying worn out aircraft, trying to provide normal search and resque and the extra cost we paided because of a lack of Liberal foresight!!!!! Are you prepared to allow it to happen again?
c
The last thing
The last thing Canada needs is an inferior aircraft. You have to set priorities and do long range planning in order to play with the big boys. Cancelling the order is not only costly but reduces us to second rate status. Remember the helicopers.....How Canadians risk their lives flying worn out aircraft, trying to provide normal search and resque and the extra cost we paided because of a lack of Liberal foresight!!!!! Are you prepared to allow it to happen again?
c
Let's buy a fleet of washing machines instead!
It's a good thing most people here don't get to make any important decisions.
Not only should we drop the purchase of the F-35 Jets but also the politicians that support the purchase.
Ah, I was wondering how long it would take till the Arrow showed up. Not long, apparently ;-)
For those who think the F-35s are a need-to-have in order to meet today's missions, you should consider whether today's missions need this aircraft. They don't and it is not designed for it either. You should also consider how much the rest of Canadian weapons procurement will have to be bled to pay for it.
Clearly the F18s need replacement. But the F35 is an aircraft that was designed for too many roles, by too many paymasters. Aircraft-by-committee, where everybody gets his pet feature, are often a problem, and also aircraft that try to be too innovative. The F35 is a STOL aircraft, a carrier aircraft, a regular fighter. Risky? You bet and not necessarily just financially.
It is a fair bet that by the time this aircraft is midway through its operational lifetime, say, around 2030-40, the role of manned fighters will be called into question because of weaponized drones. We should buy an aircraft available today, for today's missions, at a good price. And we should keep enough ooomph in the procurement budget to switch aircraft again if needed in the 2030 timeline.
When we bought the CF-18's we ordered 138!!!
We are buying 65 of these F-35's!!
What does thatr tell you right away?
We are going to have a fleet half the size of the fleet we had when we first got the CF-18's SO this means we will be putting more flying hours on these F-35's (because we have less aircraft with still the same job to do) SO we will be wearing out these birds faster than we did the CF-18's!!
IS THAT TOO COMPLICATED FOR YA> The super hornets cost about half as much as these F-35's do !!!!!!!
We could buy 130 Super Hornets for what these F-35's cost. Our pilots wouldn't have to wait in line for a turn to go flying. LIKE HELLO no pilot likes to see his flying hours reduced.
HINT: How much better trained is a pilot with loads of cockpit time compared to one with fewer hours of cockpit time???
WAKE UP!!
This has 2 issues, overall cost of the planes and requirement. The planes are not 25 Billion it is the total cost of the project, which include cost not specific to the F35 as any other plane would have theses cost, the only cost that should be of concern is the cost to have the plane arrive in Canada. The requirement if needed to be explained than you do not have the educational background to understand and should stick to your specialty, buthers do not conduct brain surgery for a reason.
As for the thoughts of Bernard Donnally if the Eurofighter was a reliable option than Eurofighter countries would not be on the project.
Wow. 8,615 people need a reality check. Why do we need ANY new fighter jets? Russian Invasion? There are so many other options! Even if we did need to beef up our military, why not build them ourselves? We have the technology & the know-how. But we don't need them. Why on Earth should we waste 25$ billion on 65 planes? We have plenty of domestic issues that need resolving & there is absolutely no need for us to defend ourselves or get involved in conflicts elsewhere in the world.
Harper is cutting back on public internet funding to save a paltry 15 million dollars.
You still think Harper cares about average Canadians ?
How much jet fuel does 15 million dollars buy ?
In 2007, it would have taken $12.6 billion to give the 3.5 million Canadians living in poverty enough income to live above the poverty line. And yet, that year, Canadians spent at least double that amount treating the consequences of poverty, says the National Council of Welfare [...] in its report, The Dollars and Sense of Solving Poverty
[Autumn 2011; for details, see Poverty in Canada: News & Reports].
Canada built the most advanced jet of its time....the Arrow.....which Dieffenbacker scrapped because the "Americans" told him to scrap it!!!! Why can't Canada build its own jets "our way" again.......homemade.......after all, we have the expertise & technology!
If Canada is to spend $25B, then let use develop our own domestic "made in Canada solution".
Once developed we will have a significant advantage over the US manufactures due to the US ITAR regulations.
Let us spend our money at home to the benefit of Canadian industries and the 1000's of jobs that would be created.
The only problem - Harper government is arrogant to understand the benefits.
We should drop the F-35 and NOT start over, because we don't need a ridiculously expensive war machine to fight impoverished Third World countries to prop up the US regime. In fact, the US don't need them either, but since their economy is based on war and war machines, they're making us buy them as a way to create the illusion of legitimacy when they demand our money. Read Chomsky.
Hello Marc B.
I strongly agree that this plan to purchase the F-35 should be scrapped altogether and a lot of people of course are recommending to look for alternate fighters.
With your question. "What about the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Block 2, wouldn't it be the perfect replacement to our CF-18"?
No. I don't see the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Block 2 to be a viable option to replace the CF-18A/B Hornet fleet. The reason why the Super Hornet is not a perfect replacement for the existing Hornets is because the aircraft has a similar performance deficiences to the F-35 JSF which means the aircraft has a short range and does not have the performance envelope of a true air superiority fighter. The Super Hornets will be outclassed by the Su-27/30 Flanker family of fighters by most regional nations in all key performance parameters, aerodynamic, bigger armament, range, radar and sensor performance by widely available fighters.
The perfect replacement for the CF-18A/B fleet is the Advanced F-15 Strike Eagle.
With 3 new variants of the Eagle can be considered either:
1. F-15E+
2. F-15SE
3. A new proposed F-15F (a single-seat variant of the two-seat F-15E) which can be emailed to Boeing Co. to develop the new single seater of the Strike Eagle.
The F-15 is a combat-proven aircraft the Canadian's should be considering to fulfill their air force requirements.
The F-15 can be modified with the APG-82 AESA radar, F110-GE-132 engines with 2-D or 3-D thrust vectoring nozzles and supercruising mode (without using afterburners which saves fuel) which needs to be considered as a replacement for the expensive to maintain and older 23k lbf PW engine, DEWS (Digital Electronic Warfare System), NG (Next Generation) 3-D touch screen cockpit display, digital fly-by-wire flight control system, IRST sensor pod etc.
The reason why the F-15 is a combat proven aircraft is because, during action in the Persian Gulf, Kosovo, Balkans and recently in Afghanistan the F-15 showed its superior ability to perform missions required of the F-X (Fighter Experimental).
The F-15 family of aircraft has a perfect air-to-air combat record of more than 104 victories and zero defeats. F-15s shot down four MiG-29 fighters during the Balkan conflict and 33 of the 35 fixed-wing Iraqi Air Forces aircraft lost in air combat during Operation Desert Storm. During the Balkan conflict, the F-15E was the only fighter able to attack ground targets around the clock, in all weather conditions. The F-15 aircraft are used by the Air Force against terrorist targets.
The F-15 has a fantastic long range endurance, bigger weapons payload and speed capabilities than its F-X competitors. The aircraft will get into a fight, strike with a lethal mix of air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons, and return more effectively than the other (small airframes with short range such as F/A-18 Super Hornet, Eurofighter Typhoon, Dassault Rafale, SAAB JAS-39 Gripen, F-16 Fighting Falcon and F-35 JSF) F-X aircraft.
The F-15 is in production. Boeing has built more than 1,500 of all its F-15 models and the company has extended the F-15 production line well into the 2020s to attract and satisfy new and existing customers.
The single-engine SAAB JAS-39 Gripen NG or F-16V Viper are not really the right choice for Canada to replace the CF-18A/B fleet is because the Canadian's had a fleet of 112 CF-104G/D Starfighters. At the time their was on-going controversy over the Starfighter's safety record still persists at time of writing. To date they've lost 37 fatalities from the fleet of 238 aircraft operated appears to be extremely high ratio. The Spanish Air Force never lost the F-104 or pilot. They maintained 21 aircraft for 7 years as a high altitude interceptor, from one base with predominately excellent weather and an extensive bird hazard control program, with very experienced fighter pilots and with medium utilisation. The CF-104 on the other hand, is heavily utilised, ope
I am a Conservative and proud of it. This government has screwed up. Prime Minister Harper, the Minister of Defence and the Minister of Public Works should resign. They blew and should fall on their swords.
It seems that we're all concerned about the purchasing process and that it reports responsibly to our Ottawa government. The media accounts of our purchase of British submarines have been inflammatory and made us all wonder if our Defense Dept. is thinking & acting to the best interests of our country. How many of those purchased (subs) are on active duty right now and how long before they're obsolete?
We need the best equipment money can buy for our military and we also need various levels of oversight like the Auditor General to hold those accountable who would imperil our military with inferior armaments. If the F 35 is the right choice, then we should go with it. But, I think those responsible for being secretive about full costs of the F 35 program should be prosecuted.
don,t know what some peaple are thinking but we do need better fighters but being pushed in to a bad deal is crazzy. there are more than enuff fighters out there open bid look at them pick best one and get on with it fak . stop tossing our cash out the window head need to roll imo
We need serious airpower to defend our resources in the future including fresh water, oil and and living space among others. I say buy the best fighter jets out there and that may very well be the F-35. Nice to always be able to slag the US while their taxpayers have effectively been subsidizing our national defence since the Second World War. At some point we have to start taking full responsibility for being able to defend our borders. The coming thirst, hunger and oil shortage will make the world a very different place .
We can only buy 65 of these expensive untried F-35's!!
We bought over a 100 CF-18'S!!!
Will our fighter pilots be standing in a line-up for their turn to fly?
Buy cheaper buy more!!
Scrap this order!! WE DO NOT NEED SINGLE ENGINE AIRCRAFT!!!
Seriously folks, our F18s are seriously out of date (some are considered museum worthy) with more flying hours logged than is usually the norm - all due to our amazing technicians. That being said, they have been upgraded ad nauseum to better allow us to fly with our coalition friends. Whatever jet we buy, we do need them - we will start to lose lives if we do not start a replacement program now! Look what happened with the Sea King for crying out loud - cancel the contract, start losing lives. I agree that everything appears to not be above board, and there's all kinds of problems, but I can't remember a single defence contract that didn't have problems, nor do most government contracts play out problem free. Cutting this program is going to cost us lives - human lives! It should be audited and revised, but we should go ahead with replacement jets.
Aldo Sfalcin....shutup. Do you even know what you are talking about??
EricB.. "Maybe Russian" are you serious?? We would buy a Russian jet...so that when we use it...most likely in a location supported by the Russians...(aka...Iraq...Iran...Syria all of which fly Russian Jets) The whole point about using a new weapon is that the other country does not know the intricate details of that weapon. So wouldnt that be lost?
I think the intention of all parties involved in the evaluation, and purchasing of the next Canadian fighter were looking at the fact that the f35 is one of only a small number of Operationally ready fifth generation aircraft available. The sukhoi, mikoyan, shin shin, Black eagle (china) are all in development and are not ready until 2015-2020. However, do we want to be buy these planes from these countries anyway. Isn't a big threat in the arctic from two of the countries with stealth planes? The euro fighter is undeniably a great plane but it is not stealth. The f18 superhornet is comparable to the euro fighter and cheaper alternative. Stealth is the key advantage that puts the f35 at the front of the pack. Another advantage the f35 offers is a fully integrated air space information system. The pilot in one f35 can see what other f35's are seeing. With the huge expanse of area our pilots are tasked to monitor, isn't an integrated information system the best option for them? Granted the f35 has wrinkles it needs to iron out, but the other countries that are going 5th generation don't even have a plane in service yet.
It would be quite a Message to those who contemplate challenging our geographical sovereignty with having a stealth fleet of fighters. Finally, why would anyone think it's a good idea to get public works to govern the purchasing of the next batch of fighters. Why would we not give the people who fly these planes on a daily basis the position to do so. Our pilots are renowned to be among the best in the world and we give authority to some smuck in an office in Ottawa in the PUBLIC WORKS dept to govern this.........WTF!!!
Oh...good research all of you!! Eurofighter...really?? The Brits spent more than £215m on each and are having loads of contract problems. Furthermore according to the DERA simulation against a postulated Su-35 threat the Eurofighter doesn't even come close to what a Lighting or Raptor would score. (For all you "experts on here" a Lighting is the F-35s name). But I do agree with those saying there are other options...well, there is one...the F-22 Raptor. If the US were to make this A/C available to its close allies it would be stupid of us not to accept it.
...Marc B....has wikipedia made you an expert on fighters now? The superhornet should not even be an option. If we want to maintain a relevant military we need to keep up with the Russians and there so called 5th Gen the T-50 and China and the J-20 not buying already outdated aircraft. So Im going to refuse to pay attention to your comments unless that is you wrote this comment with a Commodore-64. If you get new tools...why can't our military get new ones when they are the ones allowing you the freedom to prove your stupidity on this website.
I am a conservative and think we should scrap the purchase as it stands. While I defended it for a long time, this whole thing has turned into a fiasco. We need new fighters, no denying that unless your head is in the sand and live in a lala land. We will always need some offensive capability as we don't know what we'll be doing in 5 let alone 20 years. I do however think that we have to re-examine this purchase and open it to all contenders. Including Boeing, the Europeans and MAYBE even Russian aircraft.
We don't need those jets. Canada does not need an offensive military and should get out of the OBSOLETE NATO that has us (lucky, resource rich Canadians) embroiled in unnecessary wars.
The US is the only country that could invade us and if it wants to we can't do anything about it but just let them in.
How about having a quasi-military force that can be hired (for a profit) around the world to keep the peace as in between two countries like Greece and Turkey or North and South Korea etc.
This would make more sense for Canada and we would hire and educate all these Canadian 18 and 19 yearolds that can't get a civilian job.
At what point do we need to re-evaluate our Defence policy, in this changing world and cost restrictions do we need fighter aircraft or is the money better spent in other Defence priorities or infrastructure programs ?
Allot of people, I agree with this to, that this plan to purchase the F-35 should be scrapped. Also, allot of people are saying to look to alternate fighters. But what about the F-18 super hornet??? Wouldn't it be the perfect replacement to our CF-18? I just looked at the super hornet's specs on Wikipedia and this would be a perfect replacement aircraft for our air force. I just can't understand why not go with these ones.
But like ormelie just commented, we need new ships now to protect our coastlines way more then state of the art aircraft that are full of problems.
We are a maritime country with a very long coastline, west, east and north. We have enormous Arctic interests, already being challenged by shrinking ice. And I suspect that our rather old-fashioned Pearson view of peace keeping (and now possibly peace making) may be changing.
So... what on earth are we doing even thinking about JSFs? It's our Coast Guard that should be elevated with the kind of money that the JSFs would cost us.
And as someone else has already pointed out, there are other fighter
aircraft we should examine. I object to our taxes so cavalierly being thrown around.
We should've never let them scrap the AVRO Arrow. We would've had a viable alternative that is built by us and that is suited for our country. Now we have to buy someone else's crap that is not made for our requirements. Shame on the politicians for always doing what the U.S. wants us to do.
Shame.
That is a very close minded assumption that everyone against the F-35 is against any replacement jet. Of course they need to be replaced. The whole article is about whether or not we should find something better to replace the F18s with. Not whether or not we should keep going with the F18s.
There are other frighters available, like the Eurofighter that are as good and cheaper to maintain. The research has beeb completed and they are readily available.
There are other frighters available, like the Eurofighter
There are other frighters available, like the Eurofighter
The Canadian Air Force has been asked with increasing frequency to participate in anti-terror, Arab spring as well as NATO operations in many countries and is faced with the daunting task of protecting this great huge country of ours. The multi-role F18 jets are now 40 years old and while still functional, in need of replacement. In air operations it is very important to have an edge over your opponents by striving for the best possible equipment. For this reason, we should strongly support the F35 purchase. The 80% of people who voted for scrapping the purchase must think that freedom is some type of automatic entitlement or have forgotten that people's lives are on the front lines every single day 24x7.