Do we really need the F35? - Page 8 - ehMac.ca
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Advertise


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old Dec 19th, 2011, 05:41 PM   #71
peek-a-boo
 
groovetube's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,869
Quote:
Originally Posted by CplHoward View Post
Pretty much man. I pay taxes too.. (Around 1/4 of my total pay a month) so I complain just like anyone else.

It was like as soon as we pulled out of Afgan the money went with it. Or so it seems. Probably reallocated or something.

But I will admit that this is probably one of the best times there has been to be in the forces.

I wonder how many doctors/nurses/etc that money from the g8/20 could have hired on?

Back to the topic.. Yes. The CF18 is aging. She's a good solid bird, but it is getting old. Do I think the F35 is a valid replacement? No. I don't personally see why we need brand new fighters when we have subs sitting in dry-dock waiting moneys for repairs and the sea kings being patched together with gun tape.

Each aircraft costs $90m ish (Ref:The F-35 jet cost controversy: now we're getting somewhere - Capital Read, John Geddes - Macleans.ca )

90 million dollars. Each.

Im looking at the LAV3 (Its our primary fighting vehicle, each unit costs roughly $1.4mil to #1.5 million each.

So for each F35 we purchase. We could have bought 60 LAV3 fighting vehicles. And probably have enough change for a whole slew of new personal equipment. Boots, rucksacks, nice warm coats, etc...

I see the reasoning behind replacing the CF18, but personally I think they need to take a deeper look into what the CF really needs instead of listing to pilots whining and crying.
h ha I think I heard my dad say the same thing.



__________________
using: 2013 retina 15" MBP 16gigs of ram/1tb ssd, iphone5, 2 appleTV 3s.
groovetube is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old Dec 19th, 2011, 05:46 PM   #72
Honourable Citizen
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,076
Quote:
Originally Posted by CplHoward View Post
I see the reasoning behind replacing the CF18, but personally I think they need to take a deeper look into what the CF really needs instead of listing to pilots whining and crying.
The CF-18 is definitely getting old, but there's no reason we can't replace it with the Super Hornet.

Half the price, 30 years newer tech, and they wouldn't have to redesign the unit patches.
John Clay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19th, 2011, 06:27 PM   #73
Army Mac
 
CplHoward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: CFB Petawawa, Ontario
Posts: 25
Send a message via MSN to CplHoward
My opinion does not reflect the opinion of the CF, but is my own personal opinion.

Another interesting point to chew on.

The only times where I get to be around aircraft or work with them is refuelling and SNIC operations. (Snow removal, Ice control, basically caring for the runways)

Now one thing I know is fuel. Canadian F-37 grade fuel is more then capable of being useable way up in the frozen north. It works. The f-35 carries about 18 thousand pounds of it in its internal fuel tanks, which gives it a very appreciable combat range of roughly 2200km. Exactly how they figure out the range, I don't know. I assume combat range would mean a full payload of weaponry, and cruising at top speed without afterburner and some fighting.

Another thing I know is, that wherever this aircraft takes off from, its gotta have enough fuel to get back home. So half that range. 1100km.

The closest Air force base we have capable of taking these fighters is Cold Lake Alberta. Thats pretty far north. Now if you happen to have google earth on your mac, you can use the wonderful ruler tool to measure out just how far this fighter can reach. And for those who don't, Ill fill you in.

The f35 won't reach all of our northern territory. In face you can get to almost 3/4 of the way up the hudson bay, and maybe 2/5ths of the way to CFS Alert our northernmost base.

So if theres an 'enemy' aircraft coming in over the north pole, they are pretty much going to be most of the way in Canada before the f-35 can even reach it.

Sure, you could put wing tanks on the f-35 for a bit more fuel to go, but the extra 2000pounds of fuel isn't going to go far in a combat scenario.

The only alternative that I can see is to have the f-35's launch from some point even more north, which translates into a new airbase. Thats going to be an expensive option.

Even if you consider, maybe there is oh.. I don't know. non canadian whaling ships up there or something. What will the f-35 do? Fly past at high speed? Maybe something more viable is to have some attack helicopters in the fleet. (We have 0) Have them posted in alert if northern sovereignty is a huge priority. Id bet that maybe a Canadian Helicopter company would be more then happy to whip something up for less money then 90m an aircraft.

Sorry if its a rant. When I go our on the road in uniform, the Canadian public do not see Mr. Howard, they see a representative of the military that serves them. I take pride in what I do because I enjoy working for the Canadian public, and it disappoints me when politicians make me look like more of a moron then what I do all by myself. XD
__________________
Please support me and the rest of your Canadian troops. It means more to us then you might think.
CplHoward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19th, 2011, 06:33 PM   #74
Hoes R US
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,925
Welcome Cpl Howard.

Good to see members of the military questioning idiotic expenditures here on ehMac. I have several neighbours who work either directly or indirectly for DND and they all have severe reservations about investing in piloted planes when drones are the future.

It looks like whatever deal NATo thought they had is quickly unravelling due to the expense.
jimbotelecom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 19th, 2011, 07:04 PM   #75
Army Mac
 
CplHoward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: CFB Petawawa, Ontario
Posts: 25
Send a message via MSN to CplHoward
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbotelecom View Post
Welcome Cpl Howard.

Good to see members of the military questioning idiotic expenditures here on ehMac. I have several neighbours who work either directly or indirectly for DND and they all have severe reservations about investing in piloted planes when drones are the future.

It looks like whatever deal NATo thought they had is quickly unravelling due to the expense.
I'm not sure about the drones myself, just because Ive never dealt with them and don't know a thing about them, other then the fact that they are pretty neat looking.

The thing I'm getting at is that the f-35 might be a viable replacement for the aging cf-18, but it shouldn't be purchased under the guise of protecting canada's north and I think there are other, cheaper alternatives that will work better, like the Eurofighter Typhoon, Superhornet, etc..

My uneducated thought on it is, this is just a thinly disguised US economic stimulus package.
__________________
Please support me and the rest of your Canadian troops. It means more to us then you might think.
CplHoward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30th, 2012, 09:48 PM   #76
Honourable Citizen
 
CubaMark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 17,687
Send a message via AIM to CubaMark
The news of the F-35's future continues to grow bleaker...

Australia reviews F-35 purchase timetable

Quote:
Australia is reviewing its timetable for buying 12 troubled F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, the defence minister said Monday after the United States announced a rethink of its purchase schedule for the futuristic warplanes.
Quote:
Australian Defence Minister Stephen Smith said Monday that Canberra is only contractually obligated to take delivery of two of the warplanes. They will be based in the United States and be available from 2014 for training Australian pilots.

Smith said Australia is reconsidering its schedule of buying another 12 during the following three years.
Quote:
...the cost of the program has jumped to $385 billion US from $233 billion. Some estimates suggest that it could top out at $1 trillion over 50 years.

Australia had planned to buy as many as 100 of the fighters for $17 billion.
Quote:
Australia last year took delivery of the last four of 24 F/A-18F Super Hornets.
(CBC)
__________________
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The Cuban Revolution as Socialist Human Development Brill Books (Amazon Paperback)
CubaMark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30th, 2012, 10:46 PM   #77
peek-a-boo
 
groovetube's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 15,869
It's so'kay they founds teh moneys under teh seniors mattresses.



__________________
using: 2013 retina 15" MBP 16gigs of ram/1tb ssd, iphone5, 2 appleTV 3s.
groovetube is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 30th, 2012, 11:05 PM   #78
Honourable Citizen
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 17,489
Quote:
Originally Posted by CplHoward View Post
My opinion does not reflect the opinion of the CF, but is my own personal opinion.

Another interesting point to chew on.

The only times where I get to be around aircraft or work with them is refuelling and SNIC operations. (Snow removal, Ice control, basically caring for the runways)

Now one thing I know is fuel. Canadian F-37 grade fuel is more then capable of being useable way up in the frozen north. It works. The f-35 carries about 18 thousand pounds of it in its internal fuel tanks, which gives it a very appreciable combat range of roughly 2200km. Exactly how they figure out the range, I don't know. I assume combat range would mean a full payload of weaponry, and cruising at top speed without afterburner and some fighting.

Another thing I know is, that wherever this aircraft takes off from, its gotta have enough fuel to get back home. So half that range. 1100km.

The closest Air force base we have capable of taking these fighters is Cold Lake Alberta. Thats pretty far north. Now if you happen to have google earth on your mac, you can use the wonderful ruler tool to measure out just how far this fighter can reach. And for those who don't, Ill fill you in.

The f35 won't reach all of our northern territory. In face you can get to almost 3/4 of the way up the hudson bay, and maybe 2/5ths of the way to CFS Alert our northernmost base.

So if theres an 'enemy' aircraft coming in over the north pole, they are pretty much going to be most of the way in Canada before the f-35 can even reach it.

Sure, you could put wing tanks on the f-35 for a bit more fuel to go, but the extra 2000pounds of fuel isn't going to go far in a combat scenario.

The only alternative that I can see is to have the f-35's launch from some point even more north, which translates into a new airbase. Thats going to be an expensive option.

Even if you consider, maybe there is oh.. I don't know. non canadian whaling ships up there or something. What will the f-35 do? Fly past at high speed? Maybe something more viable is to have some attack helicopters in the fleet. (We have 0) Have them posted in alert if northern sovereignty is a huge priority. Id bet that maybe a Canadian Helicopter company would be more then happy to whip something up for less money then 90m an aircraft.

Sorry if its a rant. When I go our on the road in uniform, the Canadian public do not see Mr. Howard, they see a representative of the military that serves them. I take pride in what I do because I enjoy working for the Canadian public, and it disappoints me when politicians make me look like more of a moron then what I do all by myself. XD
Believe me you are not coming across as a moron. Our politicians are of course another matter entirely.

BTW excellent post.
__________________
Ad links appearing in my posts were not placed there by me. I do not endorse any products which may be linked to my posts. Do not click on those links.

I retain all rights to photo-images I have posted on ehMac. They were posted that other members of the community could enjoy them. They may not be used or sold in any other way without my written consent.

Social Distancing is an Oxymoron. The correct term is Social Demonization or Social Repression
eMacMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 31st, 2012, 09:01 AM   #79
Honourable Citizen
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,415
Send a message via AIM to bryanc
Quote:
Originally Posted by CplHoward View Post
Sorry if its a rant.
Not at all rant-like. And even if it was, your informed opinion is very valuable to me.

Quote:
When I go our on the road in uniform, the Canadian public do not see Mr. Howard, they see a representative of the military that serves them. I take pride in what I do because I enjoy working for the Canadian public, and it disappoints me when politicians make me look like more of a moron then what I do all by myself. XD
Something I wish I could communicate to all of our soldiers is that I have the utmost respect for you and the sacrifices you are willing to make on behalf of our country. So please understand that when I say I don't support some specific mission, it's not *you* that I'm not supporting, it's the brain-dead decisions about how you're being deployed.

I think what makes this very hard is that, in order to do your job, you have to be convinced you're doing the right thing. So you've all been trained to have faith in your chain of command. Unfortunately, at the top of that chain is politics. So when you folks are put in harm's way, and you hear that many Canadians are not convinced you should be there, it may feel like your countrymen are not supporting you. But that's not what's going on.

It's entirely possible to support the troops without supporting the missions.
bryanc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 31st, 2012, 10:08 AM   #80
Seriously?
 
Joker Eh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Mississauga, Ontario
Posts: 4,442
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Clay View Post
The CF-18 is definitely getting old, but there's no reason we can't replace it with the Super Hornet.

Half the price, 30 years newer tech, and they wouldn't have to redesign the unit patches.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CplHoward View Post
Even if you consider, maybe there is oh.. I don't know. non canadian whaling ships up there or something. What will the f-35 do? Fly past at high speed? Maybe something more viable is to have some attack helicopters in the fleet. (We have 0) Have them posted in alert if northern sovereignty is a huge priority. Id bet that maybe a Canadian Helicopter company would be more then happy to whip something up for less money then 90m an aircraft.
I like both ideas.
Joker Eh is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:08 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999 - 2012, ehMac.ca All rights reserved. ehMac is not affiliated with Apple Inc. Mac, iPod, iTunes, iPhone, Apple TV are trademarks of Apple Inc. Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 2

Tribe.ca: Urban living in Toronto!