Skip to comments.Canada Near $8.2 Billion Buy of 65 Lockheed Fighter Jets -Reuters
Posted on 06/05/2014 3:01:25 PM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
Lockheed Martin Corp. ( LMT ) is expected to sell 65 of its F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jets to Canada in a deal worth more than $8.2 billion, Reuters reported Thursday on its website, citing people familiar with the process.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper's cabinet still must approve the transaction, although people told Reuters that key members of Harper's cabinet support the purchase from Lockheed following an 18-month review of the country's needs.
A spokesman for Harper's office told Reuters the
(Excerpt) Read more at nasdaq.com ...
In return, we will refuse them the Keystone Pipeline.
Here’s my prediction. The F-35 is going to have a very short useful life. It is slower than the F-16, not as maneuverable, has a shorter range and carries less armament. It relies on the “magic” of stealth. But stealth is a short-lived capability. As computing speed and networking proliferates more and more radars will be integrated and interconnected with smarter defenses. These fighters will lose the one advantage that they now, for some time into the future, have.
Other planes, like the F-4 and F-15 have lived on way past their best-by dates because they had speed, firepower and were easily upgradable with improved avionics. They were, in a word, good platforms.
But all the F-35 has is good marketing.
The future is moving towards drone only air forces and they’ll come in sizes so small that air superiority will be neigh on impossible to achieve. We are wasting our resources.
Maybe Canada will let us borrow them some day.
It is also built by Lockheed-Martin, a company that consistently under achieves, and then gouges the client.
If I were president, you would be my first choice for Secretary of Defense. I’d try to get it called the War Department though.
I have similar problems with the Littoral Combat ships. They were designed as if there were no mines, no shore launched missiles, no fire and forget munitions and, literally, nobody and nothing that could touch them.
Let’s not even talk about the Army and the so-called Future Combat Systems. What a colossal waste.
I’m afraid for our military future. We’ve lost our edge to politically motivated but militarily useless programs that will leave the soldiers, airmen and sailors in great danger.
“If I were president, you would be my first choice for Secretary of Defense. “
I laughed. Thank you. The best Secretary of Defense was Rumsfeld. It’s a political job rather than a technical one. Rumsfeld managed to get a few golden turkeys cancelled, like the largest cannon since WWI, which was too big to move anywhere. But it eventually cost him his job.
I could not survive the politics of the job. It’s really a constant fight with congressmen who want jobs for their states or districts even if those are jobs producing 21st century blunderbusses. It’s a constant fight about who controls the purse, the Secretary or Congress. Eventually, the Secretary loses.
To all- please ping me to Canadian topics.
planes are so expensive these days
All based on assumptions that our enemies won’t shoot back or something like that.
“Whatever happens, we have got
The Maxim gun, and they have not. “
That seems to be our current attitude.
The F-35 Dodo might end up being what this thing is remembered as.
Yep. They should have bought F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets.
Or Westernized SU-37s.
My old man flew for both the RCAF and USN in WWII. I'm guessing he would not think highly of either's acquisition policies.
The F35 is a “system”...a significant difference from the F16
So let’s compare...
F16 MGTW - 42,300 lbs
Max Level Speed (at altitude)- 1,350 mph (2,175 km/h) at 40,000 ft (12,190 m), Mach 2.05
Max Level Speed (at sea level) - 915 mph
Internal Fuel - 7,200 lbs.
Combat radius - 340 mi (295 nmi, 550 km) on a hi-lo-hi mission with four 1,000 lb (450 kg) bombs
Hardpoints: 2× wing-tip Air-to-air missile launch rails, 6× under-wing, and 3× under-fuselage pylon (2 of 3 for sensors) stations with a capacity of up to 17,000 lb (7,700 kg) of stores.
F35 MGTW - 70,000 lbs. (Variant dependent but sticking with CTOL for comparison’s sake)
Max Speed - 1.6M
Internal Fuel - 18,100 lbs.
Combat radius - 584 nm (1,080 km) on internal fuel
Hardpoints: 6 × external pylons on wings with a capacity of 15,000 lb (6,800 kg) and two internal bays with two pylons each for a total weapons payload of 18,000 lb (8,100 kg)
Mission 1 ) Stealth CAS/SEAD: Internal Aim-120’s for self defense x 2, 2 x 2000 Lb or other weapons (SDB’s, JDAM’s, JSOWS etc)
Mission 2) Semi Stealth: Internal 2x Aim-120’s for self defense , 2x 2000lb bombs or other weapons + 2x Aim-9x’s externally
Mission 3) Air superiority: Stealthy: 4 x Aim-120’s Internally or 2xAim120’s + 2xAim-9x block iiis (Future) or 3 x Aim-120D’s + 1x Aim-9x blk III
Mission 4) Air superiority: Semi stealth 4 x Aim-120 D’s internally + 2x AIm-9x’s externally
Just for giggles, a full Air Superiority loadout here:
So in order to carry the full 17k of stores, the F16 gives up combat radius whereas the F35 doesn’t. In addition, to have any anti anything capability (EW), the F16 must give up one or more stations to a pod(s). To increase range, it must give up 3 stations, one of which is a pod station. Thus, the jet is now down to 6 weapons stations.
Oh, and the almost 2 - 1 advantage in Combat radius the F35 has over the F16.
The F35 gives nothing up to the F16 except speed and that is conditional based on external configuration(s).
The aircraft doesn’t “rely on the magic of stealth” either...it relies on a combination of sensors and stealth.
It is clearly understood in the aviation community what the limitations of stealth are, not so much for folks outside the community apparently.
I hope you are correct. This is different from what I have read on the F-35 over the years. But, as you say, I am not in the know anymore.
Given the prices of modern manned fighters I think we are getting closer to the end of large fleets. I recall reading in the ‘70’s that eventually the entire budget would be consumed by a relative handful of planes, the loss of any of which would be economically devastating. Notice we’ve barely used the B-1’s. (Although, I don’t know how their utility may have been degraded by keeping the design but dropping their speed.)
So basically it's a solution searching for a problem.
Again, another mediocre overpriced product by Lockheed-Martin.
“We should’ve gone for the Super Hornet IMO.”
Best jet for Canada would have been the SAAB GRIPEN.
Much cheaper, easier to maintain, thought to work at real cold temperatures, not a black box, proven aircraft.
runway requirement: 600 m (http://youtu.be/WoW4OXenm0Y)
runway width: 8 - 9 m (every damn paved road)
runway condition: snow or ice
higher speed than F-35
better thrust to weight than F-35