Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next

What birds are you comparing?????

   

sorry, EF and the JSFC

   

F-35 and Typhoon...

Apple and Oranges as far as I am concerned.... THe typhoon and the F-18E would be better suited for Canada. The reason the Canadian flag is on the bird is because we paid millions to be involved in the project --> so Canadian industries can have its share of contracts.

   

Originally, neither did the CF-18 (a carrier plane), but we still bought it. I don't think Canada will find a single plane that will be a perfect match for us, simply because there are only two or three options, whereas we had almost a dozen back in the 1970s. It's either accept a plane that might not meet all our needs or spend $20 BILLION or so developing one that will, which just isn't an option.

   

3 words.... Avro Arrow Mach3

   

meh canada's biggest mistake

   

Yeah baby

   

In what way was The Avro Arrow Canada's biggest mistake?

   

   

because the scrapped it. they could have had air superiority at the time

   

Most important is that we get the best gear for the job, that we can afford, but it's pretty good to make money on it too.

   

Thanks for nothing Diefenbaker!

Hey, I'd be willing to pay for the Arrow Mk 2, but I'd guess about 15-20 million other Canadians wouldn't...that's the problem.

The Arrow cost Canada about $500 million back in the 50s (it would work out to roughly $5 Billion today adjusted for inflation), but costs would go up due to stealth technology, electronics, weapons systems, etc. If we make it multi-role, the costs go up again.

So say we do it on the cheap and can do it for $10 billion, If we order 100, that's $100 million for each plane, 200 is $50 million each and so on. If we get lucky, we maybe get a few export orders, but we could easily wind up like the French and their Rafale and not sell any...unless the government offers guarantees and gets Bombardier (or some other company) to do it, which Canadian company is going to take a $10 BILLION risk on its own?

Still, I wonder what would have happened had we kept the Arrow and not bought the crappy Voodoo...

   

I still go with the differentiated model of defense for Canada.

You go with a lot of low-tech, over-armed aircraft for close-in missions such as within 100km of the coasts and they can handle the grunt work of showing the flag and checking out coastal threats such as US subs transiting the NW Passage without your permission.

The trick is to arm such aircraft with fire-and-forget weapons since they'll be useless in head-on combat.

But then your varsity team will be a state-of-the-art (whatever) air-superiority platform that can take on whatever else head-on in a nice furball.

The USA is screwing up by concentrating on expensive platforms that we often cannot afford to use.

This problem became evident when the entire US eastern seaboard was protected by only two armed-and-ready F15 fighters out of Otis on 9/11.

Two planes for the whole east coast. We didn't learn DICK from Pearl Harbor.

Now imagine Canada with a lot of fancy aircraft that you can't afford to use.

You're better off hanging some warshots on a bunch of DeHavilland Beavers that actually spend time in the air defending Canada than to have a bunch of expensive hangar queens sitting around gathering dust.

   

Well they came to the right country seeing how Canada was the first to fabricate titanium blades 50 years ago, (see the Orenda Iroquois)

   

That was a problem of using to many of our planes in wargames at the time, not because we didn't have any aircraft or couldn't afford to use them.

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next