Atreides 144 Posted December 13, 2012 (edited) http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1301215--f-35-purchase-to-be-scrapped-by-ottawa Canadian Conservative government formally drops F-35, begins search for alternative. Anyone think the Super Hornet for us Canucks should have won all along ? Edited December 14, 2012 by Atreides Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FastCargo 412 Posted December 13, 2012 Frankly, I do. I never did understand the need for the F-35 for Canada. With the size of your budget, the 'huge tracts of land' you have to patrol/defend (where 2 engines might be nice to have), and the commonality of training and some parts with your current Hornets, the Supa Hornet seems a much more logical fit. FC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
raptorman 1 Posted December 13, 2012 I agree Fast. The Super Hornet seems a lot more of a logical choice. What would Princess Lucky think of this anyway? :) Still wonder what would've happened if we managed to get the F-14s from Iran... ? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lazarus1177 164 Posted December 13, 2012 Does'nt really come as a surprise.Canada had been promised too much but reality is always a bitch.The F-35 project was simply not quick enough for the Canadian government I guess.Also,judging by the large terrain Canada has,a double engined bird would be a better option.The Super Hornet seems like a good choice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CowboyTodd41 134 Posted December 13, 2012 Probably easier to transition everyone over as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+daddyairplanes 10,281 Posted December 13, 2012 agreed with the Super Bug. as for capabilities, when is the last time the Canadians went somewhere without the US? although its a ding to the national pride, two engines plus range makes more sense for the air soveriegnty mission with their territory, plus the coalitions they will likely be a part of overseas will see US stealth kick in the door so to speak on day one, with the Canucks following behind once the most dangerous EADS are down. seems to be the trend last few wars anyhow, why not tailor the budget to that fact? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Evildeadmeat 153 Posted December 13, 2012 I'm not very surprised. Considering the price of the F-35 and the fact that Canadian forces don't really need a stealth multirole fighter, it seems obvious they had to cancel the deal. I think the Super Bug could be the better choice for the RCAF. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+ST0RM 145 Posted December 13, 2012 Frankly, I do. I never did understand the need for the F-35 for Canada. With the size of your budget, the 'huge tracts of land' you have to patrol/defend (where 2 engines might be nice to have), and the commonality of training and some parts with your current Hornets, the Supa Hornet seems a much more logical fit. FC My thoughts exactly. Honestly, I'd expect that this will open up more countries to pull out also. No one wanted to be the first. -S Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JediMaster 451 Posted December 13, 2012 Except if they take a Super Bug they'll have to replace it sooner than if they went with 35s. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+daddyairplanes 10,281 Posted December 13, 2012 well their legacy Bugs are getting long in the tooth so they prob need something sooner than later anyhow Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Brain32 265 Posted December 13, 2012 I don't understand why Canada didn't go with the right stuff from the start and went Eagle on it's airspace. Too bad F-15 Silent Eagle is pretty much a concept only, that thing would be epic IMO... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+ST0RM 145 Posted December 13, 2012 Except if they take a Super Bug they'll have to replace it sooner than if they went with 35s. Fact or assumption? Is the service life less than the F-35? Is it based on hours flown or numbers purchased? For one F-35, you can purchase two Super Hornets. They've budgeted X amount of money already, based on their required number of F-35s. By purchasing more Supers, they coult reduce the amount of hours put on the whole fleet. So in a sense, they might get as much life. -S Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Brain32 265 Posted December 13, 2012 No to mention maintenance costs, SH will quite surely be much cheaper to maintain and take more hours in the air before maintnance not to mention that Canada does not use them on carriers, a fact that will decrease the tear and wear even more... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MigBuster 2,884 Posted December 13, 2012 conflicting stories in the press whatever next..... http://ca.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idCABRE8BB1NY20121212 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JediMaster 451 Posted December 14, 2012 Fact or assumption? Is the service life less than the F-35? Is it based on hours flown or numbers purchased? For one F-35, you can purchase two Super Hornets. They've budgeted X amount of money already, based on their required number of F-35s. By purchasing more Supers, they coult reduce the amount of hours put on the whole fleet. So in a sense, they might get as much life. -S Based on none of that. I was saying that the Super Hornet will be obsolete before the 35 will. Less survivable, less capable (fused avionics-wise), less effective. The SH is still 4th gen, even if you want to call it 4+ or 4.5 or whatever. By the mid-21st century it will be no better than flying a MiG-21 or F-4 today. It really depends on what their plans are. The SH will be a perfectly effective airplane in friendly territory or in an area with total air superiority for decades to come. However, in 2040 I don't think I'll be wanting to fly one into a modernized ADA network facing SA-600s or PAK-FAs or whatever. After all, Israel could've had them too, but they chose to wait for the 35. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thodouras95 25 Posted December 14, 2012 (edited) By the time Canada engages in serious aerial combat in the future, the F-35 will already be outdated.Super Hornet ftw. Edited December 14, 2012 by thodouras95 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+76.IAP-Blackbird 3,557 Posted December 15, 2012 Why comes the CF-105 in a more modern version into my mind?! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JediMaster 451 Posted December 15, 2012 By the time Canada engages in serious aerial combat in the future, the F-35 will already be outdated.Super Hornet ftw. Air to air combat is not the concern. Dropping bombs vs advanced SAMs is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thodouras95 25 Posted December 16, 2012 Air to air combat is not the concern. Dropping bombs vs advanced SAMs is. Same thing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
