Canada may become the first country to ditch the F-35 fighter jet

[Zoibert the Bear]

First, they beat up mentally ill people; and now, they reject this marvellous piece of modern engineering.

What a disgrace.

[Deleted]

The F35 is a crappy fighter jet.
It's overpriced, riddled with software bugs and even lost from an F16 in a dogfight.

A good choise wouldve been the Dassault Rafale, the French fighter that once beat an F22 in a dogfight training.

[glo]

We have one of the most respected world leaders. We'll be okay.

Respected by who? Honestly, nobody cares about Canada on the world stage. No military prowess, no economical impact and no meaningful trade outside of some oil.

[Deleted]

Respected by who? Honestly, nobody cares about Canada on the world stage. No military prowess, no economical impact and no meaningful trade outside of some oil.

Ive only seen a report on Canada once in the news in the last years. It was about the PM hooking that lady in the face >.<

[Deleted]

Skroe, you are truly naive to think Ru controls or even trust that flip-flopper Trump. They just know 100% that Hillary is a crazy bitch who always votes for war, She's demo version of Sen McCain.

[belfpala]

Respected by who? Honestly, nobody cares about Canada on the world stage. No military prowess, no economical impact and no meaningful trade outside of some oil.

Nah, the unforeseen US/Canada war happens as a result of off-shore drilling in the arctic. Russia steps in, then Iceland, Norway, and UK step in... on which side, who knows.

[Hooked]

The F-22 and F-35 are designed for completely different purposes. The F-22 is on average two to four times more expensive than the F-35. The F119 engine and it's F-35 successor, the F135, are designed around two entirely different performance targets.

Furthermore the F-22 is riddled with fundamental design flaws and technological obsolencence. Where the F-22 to re-enter production, huge amounts of F-35 tech would need to be retrofitted. The F-22 is a very successful jet, but it certainly represents a "first pass" at mass producing a true stealth fighter compared to teh F-35's far more sophisticated design.

What some examples? The F-35 features all angle sensors, including IRST. It features a sophisticated artificial inelligence and sensor-fusion system. All of these work together and are operated with by the F-35's helmet. The F-22 has none of these things, not even forward looking IRST.

Even from a systems perspective, the F-35 software is written in C++, is designed around security and extensibility, and uses modern components. The F-22 uses late 1990s components, and its software is poorly document and written in Ada. One of the reasons it wasn't exported to Japan a decade ago, was because the USAF basically gave up making it's software secure against a cyber attack.

Furthermore consider that the F-35 program was designed as a global replacement to the F-16. The F-16 started as a US only program, but was the exported in the 1980s, and became fantastically popular. However the US fleet is about 10-15 years older, on average, than most of the rest of the worlds, which are also old. The F-16 needed a simultaneous global replacement program, or the users of it would be flying old aircraft or buy not-American. The F-35 was the catch-all solution to that. The F-22 was never going to be what was exported. First and foremost because of the engines. The F-22 has two engines, the F-35 has one. The US has 507 F119 (for the F-22) engines for 183 raptors, each at a cost of $10 million. That's 366 engines in use at any time and 141 spares. The US can afford that. The F-35 is a single engine aircraft. By being so, it will allow smaller countries with smaller tax bases (and defense budgets), to buy fewer engines and fewer spares than if it were two engine. It's plainly cheaper to own.

This is by the way, the same reason that although the F-16 was popular, the F-15 was considerably less so despite being the superior air superiority fighter. While it was better, only a handful of very rich countries could afford to own a sizeable fleet of two engine fighters with spares. We see this again with the Eurofighter Typhoon, a European two engine aircraft. The countries that bought them are all the richest and largest (by population) countries in Europe, not the middle income ones or the ones with small populations (small populations = small tax bases). The F-35 isn't just a solution for the USAF... it's a solution for Denmark, which has to finance buying fighters on the back of 4.3 million taxpayers (out of a population of 5.6 million).

You don't know what you're talking about.

- - - Updated - - -



Trump supporters are turning into Putin apologists. It's amazing. But this has nothing to do with Putin. This is just another liberal going after another defense industrial complex boogeyman, that really isn't one anymore.

2016 - the year Vladmir Putin made the dejected and desperate American extremist right his bitch.

Nice wall of text for someone who is wrong. The f-35 is an embarrassment, it is gone. Maybe we will have an f-36, but the f-35 is money pit, sorry. I know how much you love to waste taxpayer money on your endless bs projects, but the f-35 is a waste of money that is already outdated before it even could be considered finished and reliable. Its a piece of shit, the f-35 is a piece of crap. Its worthless.

- - - Updated - - -

Skroe, you are truly naive to think Ru controls or even trust that flip-flopper Trump. They just know 100% that Hillary is a crazy bitch who always votes for war, She's demo version of Sen McCain.

You are naïve if you think we care about what Russia thinks. I like the Russians but they aren't going to tell us what to do.

[Ulmita]

If we assume that the F-35 will be as good as they say it will (which i doubt) countries will still have to buy air superiority airplanes.
So when you talk about Denmark you have to include in your calculation the cost of buying the typhoons for air dominance (primary) and (secondary) will be protecting the F-35s.

In all honesty there is absolutely no reason for any country other than USA to get F-35.

[caervek]

A good choise wouldve been the Dassault Rafale, the French fighter that once beat an F22 in a dogfight training.

As have the Eurofighter, F-15, F-16, F/A-18, etc. If the F-14 was still around it would have too, because it's training.

Hell even the 1960's T-38 shot down an F-22 in training lol:

[Dadwen]

Over 8 years. That's not that many at all. Plus PM Trudeau had arguably the most high profile one.

Sureee.... pat pat (on the head)... he's special

*I didn't hear about any of em so they could not have been too high profile.


**Regan was a man who didn't like Dinners he only had 4 and 2 of them were with Thatcher


- - - Updated - - -

Ive only seen a report on Canada once in the news in the last years. It was about the PM hooking that lady in the face >.<

That's been my point too...

[Rennadrel]

Good, I'm all for upgrading our military, but the F35's are a huge waste of money. If we're going to waste that much I would rather we invest it in our own aerospace industry to develop our own.

Shame our government fucked the dog on the Avro Aero, it would still be a good fighter jet today.

- - - Updated - - -

There was an intention to buy 65 of them for about $19B (obviously this number is much higher today). There is no contract to purchase any at all, never was. This isn't just a conservative thing either, the JSF program goes back the 90s. The Liberal party in 97 pledged $10MM to become an informed partner in the JSF program, and an additional $150MM (100 of which is over 10 years) in 2002 to become a level 3 partner in the JSF program. In 2006 there was the signing of the memorandum of understanding which committed ~$550 Million to cover development and maintenance from 2007 to 2051. To date this is the only money put forward by Canada towards the JSF Program, total of around $310MM. The memorandum makes no guarantees that Canada would buy the F35, however it maintains our level 3 partnership and thus continued development contracts for our industry.

Contrasted with what it has benefited Canadian Aerospace firms with contracts, worth around $700MM by the time of last year's election, with estimates of over $9B in total contracts a few years ago by the time it's in the air. Contracts that despite the current government's insistence won't disappear, Lockheed Martin has made it clear that they will if we back out now or purchase anything other than the F-35. To date this has been a pretty good deal for our aerospace firms, long term would be as well though the inflated costs of the F-35 due to the shitty development phase probably won't look as nice on paper if we do buy them, unless we scale back the purchase quite a bit.

I hope this helps with understanding how we got where we are...

TIL

I still think it was a mistake to even consider buying them, but I still blame the government for destroying our aerospace industry by killing off the Avro Aero project. Had we gone with those, we probably wouldn't be buying new fighters today.

[Ulmita]

You guys don't really understand what is the F-35.... This isn't an air superiority war plane.
You are basically buying glorified and shiny A-10s useful for anything from CAS in contested airspace to deep infiltration missions.

This isn't the plane you will send out to intercept the Flankers or any other plane that flies towards your borders.
You will still need to buy F-15s or Typhoons or w/e.

[W1sp]

Should by the new Generation of Swedish JAS fighters ;D

[Shibito]

Funny how you spot Tennisface threads because of the emoticons on the post.

[Pengekaer]

The F-35 isn't just a solution for the USAF... it's a solution for Denmark, which has to finance buying fighters on the back of 4.3 million taxpayers (out of a population of 5.6 million).

You don't know what you're talking about.

Yeah, but we're going to operate about 20 F35s only (less than half the size of our current F16 A/B fleet of ca. 45) and we have some obligations to patrol the baltikum airspace as well. So it will be really tight with 20, also considering that we oftentimes send the planes off to the ME.
And the politicians have yet to sort the financing. I think they will have to realize that 1 % of gdp for a country our size isn't going to cut it: there's just no room in the budget for modernization. The 27 F35s that we will purchase (of which 20 or 22 will reach DK), are going to cost about 3.5 bn $ and that is our entire defense-budget for a year (and most of this being upkeep costs like wages, fuel, ammo, training of staff across all fields etc.), leaving very little headroom for the purchasing of new equipment: fitting the F35 in here, even a paltry 27, is not really possible. There is currently a running joke that upgrading to the F35 will modernize (but also shrink) the airforce, but prevent new equipment across all other sectors for many years (army, navy, vehicles) and essentially sending most of the military to its coffin, at least techwise lol. If it's really that bad I am not certain, but that's what's being claimed by several military officials.

I myself think the F35 is getting too much criticism for "being an expensive piece of junk" or whatever people say about it. My point is that countries like DK/Canada/Germany/NL, with a 1 % gdp spending on nation-security, will have difficulties affording any new plane really and as such the financing issues of obtaining a new plane is not a specific problem with the F35 . Buying the Eurofighter wouldn't be any easier for Canada lol: it is just as expensive.

Anyways, aircraft choice really is a matter for people experienced in it. I can't even imagine the complexity of such a decision making process. I merely wanted to point out that 1 % gdp spending is ridiculous and resorting to the Eurofighter or anything else will not change the underlying problem: lack of funding. It escapes me why most of Europe's nato-members still aren't near 2 % of gdp, I think it's unfair to rub the defense costs on the US, France and UK lol.

[Independent voter]

New fighters always have problems, it's always been that way.

The headline Tennisauce didn't show is this from cbc.ca

Liberals pay $33 million to stay in F-35 program, despite not committing to buy them

[caervek]

aircraft choice really is a matter for people experienced in it. I can't even imagine the complexity of such a decision making process.

Lockheed throw a party, invite important government people, important government people come to party, Lockheed wines and dines them, offers money/incentives and/or jobs when they leave government, Lockheed wins contract.

[Pengekaer]

Lockheed throw a party, invite important government people, important government people come to party, Lockheed wines and dines them, offers money/incentives and/or jobs when they leave government, Lockheed wins contract.

But every aircraft manufacturer will do this. Also, if DK were to purchase the F18, Boeing promised us 10.000 jobs at some point but our politicians mostly laughed at that (thankfully). At least they could have conjured a realistic number, what do they take us for, illiterates? Anyways, point is that our politicians do have a sense of skepticism, still.

I hope the decision-process has more to it than company-swaying, but a part me dreads that you are right. :P

[Reeve]

Nice wall of text for someone who is wrong. The f-35 is an embarrassment, it is gone. Maybe we will have an f-36, but the f-35 is money pit, sorry. I know how much you love to waste taxpayer money on your endless bs projects, but the f-35 is a waste of money that is already outdated before it even could be considered finished and reliable. Its a piece of shit, the f-35 is a piece of crap. Its worthless.

I see a bunch of name calling and very little refuting of his points.

- - - Updated - - -

This isn't the plane you will send out to intercept the Flankers or any other plane that flies towards your borders.
You will still need to buy F-15s or Typhoons or w/e.

That may not be the stated intention of the plane, but it'll likely do that just fine as well, simply because of its stealthiness and armament making it so that they can fire on their opponents before their opponents even know they're there.

The Eurofighter is a great dogfighter, but most air battles won't be dogfights.

[Ulmita]

That may not be the stated intention of the plane, but it'll likely do that just fine as well, simply because of its stealthiness and armament making it so that they can fire on their opponents before their opponents even know they're there.

The Eurofighter is a great dogfighter, but most air battles won't be dogfights.

EW can defeat BVR. The F18 Growler has demonstrated that with the F-22.
I am willing to bet that in a massive brawl you will see TONS of dog fighting.

"Stealth" is a dying technology thus why everyone and their grandmothers are racing to develop hyper sonic planes.

- - - Updated - - -

Edit: read this http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...ike-fredenburg