Canada Intercepts Bears

[+Erik 1,812]

 

Canadian aircraft intercept Russian bombers

 

Canadian fighter jets have scrambled to repel Russian bombers that intruded into Canadian airspace.

 

The Russian Tupolev-95 is a long-range bomber capable of carrying nuclear warheads.

 

Canadian defence minister Peter MacKay says CF-18s were sent to intercept two of the bombers that made several attempts to enter Canadian airspace.

 

Military officials say there was no advance warning and Mr MacKay says all such incursions will be met with a swift response.

 

Intelligence analysts say the frequency of these attempts has been increasing, especially as Canada and Russia are in a race to lay claim to huge sections of the Arctic seabed believed to hold vast reserves of oil and gas.

 

The incursions also come during the debate over whether Canada needs a new generation of high-tech military fighter jets.

 

 

 

 

ABC News

[exhausted 55]

How many Hornets does Canada operate?

[harryleith 12]

One less than last week, unless i miss my guess...

[+Erik 1,812]

Yep. Practicing for an air show a recently upgraded CF18 was lost. An investigation of the crash is currently underway. Regardless it's an expensive way to EOL your aging fleet.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfiCyVKnSSw

[UK_Widowmaker 571]

Bear's are a very common occurance in UK airspace...The RAF's main job is intercepting the snoopers

[Gr.Viper 131]

Those are Care Bears

[+JonathanRL 974]

And Like all Care Bears, you purge them by fire.

[MigHound 0]

How many Hornets does Canada operate?

 

The original numbers were 98 CF-188A and 40CF-188B two seaters, for training purposes. Totaling, some 138 Hornets deployed to the 409th and 410th TFS in CFB Cold Lake AB and the 421st TFS in CFB Bagotville PQ. Approximately 20 of those have been lost in training, air show or ferrying exercises.

Zero have been lost in actual combat. ...as far as I know.

 

Unfortunately, Hornets are to be replaced by 65 Lightning II fighters, most likely designated CF-355A. I have a number of reservations concerning adopting the F-35 for Canadian defense requirements. What concerns me the most is the fact that, the requirement has traditionally been for twin engine fighters, and this has been overlooked in the case of the F-35. The resurgence of Russian Bear Foxtrots appearing over the polar cap forces our fighters to travel vast distances to intercept these incursions. The failure of one engine on existing Hornets will be worrisome for the pilot, as he/she hobbles back to home plate. Should the engine fail on an F-35, you can scratch one plane, and in the worst circumstances, considering the harsh conditions of the vast Canadian Tundra, scratch one pilot. These odds are too costly for families of pilots, and indeed the Canadian tax payer.

 

The F/A-18E/F series are again the most viable, modern airframe for Canadian defense requirements, and continued NATO participation requirements. Albeit, a 20% larger airframe, the Super Hornet is very much the same aircraft Canadian pilots have been flying since the mid ‘80s, with the latest Avionics suites available. I’m no economist, but just playing with some facts and figures, the Canadian Govt. at per unit cost, could procure some 90 F/A-18E/F aircraft for approx. 5.5 Billion in USD. I’d be curious to know the service life costs and weapons deployment costs would be, for these airframes over a 30+ year life span.

[JediMaster 451]

I don't know what the stats are for the Hornet fleet, but unless it's a simple problem most catastrophic engine failures are likely to knock out the 2nd engine on the Hornet as well since they're so close. I've no idea how often a Hornet has suffered a single-engine failure and been able to RTB vs it resulting in eventual ejection. However, the F-16 has sold a lot better than the Hornet over the last 3 decades, so my guess is that they looked at its stats of reliability (not available in any quantity when Canada chose the Hornet) and determined it wasn't that big a risk.

After all, the USN went with the Hornet instead of the F-16 originally because of the same dual-engined safety reason (despite operating single-engined fighters for decades like the A-1, A-4, A-7, F-8, and all those pre-Nam era ones that didn't serve past the 50s) but has also chosen the F-35C for itself.

[MigBuster 2,884]

Yes good reply Mr Jedi - the people in the know certainly are not too bothered about single engined jet reliabilty anymore.

 

The CAF also want the superior 5th Gen capability the F-35 will bring and who can blame them.