Go Back   DefenceTalk Forum - Military & Defense Forums > Global Defense & Military > Air Force & Aviation

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence


Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) News and Discussions

This is a discussion on Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) News and Discussions within the Air Force & Aviation forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 1 Week Ago   #586
Defense Aficionado
Lieutenant General
StingrayOZ's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,672
Threads:
One of the original reports of Canada's interest in buying the came from ex-forum member Andrew. Andrew would not get these details confused.
Canada considering RAAF classic Hornets? | Australian Aviation

There was also a bit of discussion on linked in re this by people would would know.

I would totally believe the Andrew has it right and Janes has it wrong. Jane has conflated the Canadian Super Hornet procurement and the Canadian interest in older hornets into a new story.

Last I heard is the SH would be around for a while yet, and Australia would consider upgrades to advanced super hornet (at least some aspects) to help with F-35 integration). By all reports the Super hornets are well liked and are helping with the transition to F-35.

Given the current strategic situation I in no way think the Super Hornets are going anywhere in the short term, except maybe to be based out of Japan or South Korea.

I have heard that part of the reason for Canada's interest is they thought they would be phasing out of the Hornet program about now, so hadn't planned for lengthened operation of this platform. So they are short regular consumable and planned spares. Of which Australia has an operationally useful supply of, including air frames.

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Newman
"As a direct result of the upgrade of the Hornet monitoring program, the reprocessing of the entire fleet’s usage history indicates that fatigue is no longer the main driver to the planned withdrawal date,” says DSTO research leader Loris Molent."
Thanks for this info, this makes it a lot clearer. I remember the issues about it being more invasive but don't recall the issues about the frames being in better nick than thought.

Might as well get some coin out of the Canadians for whats left. I can't see the yanks being that impressed. But I don't think they are worried about the Canadians or worried about F-35 sales.
StingrayOZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #587
Junior Member
Private First Class
No Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: sydney
Posts: 96
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Newman View Post
I still have my doubts over the accuracy of the Janes report (they are not the authoritative publication they once were).

If you look at what Canada is trying to do, procure an 'interim' capability until they make a final decision (if ever!!), then the Classic fleet fits the bill, but the Super fleet doesn't.

RAAF Classic Hornets will start to be parked from next year (2018) through to the completion of the transition to F-35A by 2023.

On the other hand, a decision on replacing the Super Hornets is not due until the mid 2020's and replacement with the 4th operational Sqn of F-35A won't likely occur until the late 2020's.

And that would appear to be too late for Canada (unless this drags on for ever and a day!).

I just can't see the RAAF disposing of both Classic and Super Hornets during the same period of time.

Unless the world has tipped upside down, and I missed that happening, then it should be a progressive transition, Classics out first, replaced by F-35A, then once complete, transition out the Super's and replace with the remaining F-35A, if approved to happen, which it hasn't as yet.

I might be wrong, but I can't see it happening any other way.
Thanks for your reply. I guess like many I hope an early decision has been made to purchase the remaining 28 F-35As. I noted the Australian Aviation article also had a question mark in the title so even the professionals are confused!
Muar River is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #588
Senior Member
Colonel
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,318
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by StingrayOZ View Post
Thanks for this info, this makes it a lot clearer. I remember the issues about it being more invasive but don't recall the issues about the frames being in better nick than thought.

Might as well get some coin out of the Canadians for whats left. I can't see the yanks being that impressed. But I don't think they are worried about the Canadians or worried about F-35 sales.
Here's another link regarding 'reprocessing' of information on the structural life of the Classic Hornet fleet:

https://www.dst.defence.gov.au/news/...r-f/18-hornets

I wish I could find the more detailed report I read, but this enough.

One interesting paragraph in the attached article is:

"Over the last 20 years, research undertaken by DST supported by the RAAF and the broader F/A-18 international users community has built up an in depth knowledge of the critical fatigue damage locations of the F/A-18 and how fatigue damage accumulates in the structure."

Basically what that means, is that the international Classic Hornet user community, including Canada, received and benefitted from the work done by DST and could also apply that information to their respective fleets too. (Going back a number of years, it appeared that most Classic Hornets, not just here but overseas too, would be pretty shagged by the time 2020 arrived).

As it appears likely the Canadian Government will force the RCAF to continue operating their Classic Hornets until at least the mid 2020's (possibly a bit beyond too), you can see how they can get away with that, if they have the knowledge their Classic fleet still has a bit more 'life' left in the airframes that originally believed.

And it makes it even more sense to understand why they would want a number of airframes from the RAAF's Classic fleet, as our airframes are on average 2-3 years younger that the RCAF fleet.


Anyway, still think the Canadian Government should bite the bullet and make a permanent replacement decision, but not holding my breath on that one!!!
John Newman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #589
Senior Member
Colonel
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,318
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muar River View Post
Thanks for your reply. I guess like many I hope an early decision has been made to purchase the remaining 28 F-35As. I noted the Australian Aviation article also had a question mark in the title so even the professionals are confused!
Without wanting to pollute the RCAF thread with specific RAAF comments, I'll reply to this one elsewhere.
John Newman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #590
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,178
Threads:
There has been little news concerning the court challenge by Leonardo on the FWSAR award to Airbus. Airbus seems to be pushing ahead on delivery. Perhaps junior feels the judges will tow the line just like serving RCAF officers.

https://www.skiesmag.com/news/contract-challenge-fwsar/
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #591
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,178
Threads:
The US state department has approved the interim SH sale to Canada for 18 jets, 170 missiles, and other accessories for 5.3 billion US. It seems unlikely now that this order will happen.

The National Post link below is a depressing summary of our cluster $uck procurement efforts for replacement fighters.

NP View: The Liberals’ money-wasting, defence-shirking, politically craven jet circus gets worse | National Post
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #592
Just a bloke
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,211
Threads:
In the interests of fairness, I am choosing to use the ABJ and Giovanni De Briganti accounting method.

18 aircraft for USD$5.3b...

HOMG! Super Hornets cost $294m each!!!
ADMk2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #593
Defense Enthusiast
Lieutenant
No Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 510
Threads:
I can't understand why the Super Hornet has been selected as an interim fighter.

Why not just buy $5 billion worth of F-35s and call them interim?

That way you could actually gain first-hand experience in operating these aircraft to determine whether or not they are suitable.

The Superhornet on the other hand probably won't even be in production when the Canadians finally commit to replacing their Hornets. As it stands there are only orders for the Super Hornet out to the early 2020s. In fact the Canadian Super Hornets may well be the last Super Hornets ever built.
hauritz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #594
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,178
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADMk2 View Post
In the interests of fairness, I am choosing to use the ABJ and Giovanni De Briganti accounting method.

18 aircraft for USD$5.3b...

HOMG! Super Hornets cost $294m each!!!
Lefturds here only use those accounting methods for the F-35. They are currently falling over themselves stating the jets only cost 77 million each and all the extra money is accessories (NV, radar, gun, EW counter measures receiving sets, targeting pods, comms, engines, and a pile of missiles). There is a bunch of other stuff along with spares. Note the engines described accessories here, yet when the F-35's engine is listed as a separate item they scream in outrage, bunch of whining CSs!
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #595
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,178
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by hauritz View Post
I can't understand why the Super Hornet has been selected as an interim fighter.
Because a failed drama teacher, junior, is our PM and he knows best.

Quote:
Why not just buy $5 billion worth of F-35s and call them interim?
See my previous response above.


Quote:
The Superhornet on the other hand probably won't even be in production when the Canadians finally commit to replacing their Hornets. As it stands there are only orders for the Super Hornet out to the early 2020s. In fact the Canadian Super Hornets may well be the last Super Hornets ever built.
It's looking like used Hornets from OZ might be the fallback plan assuming Boeing's trade complaint is upheld (September 25 announcement on ruling). This could be the path forward for an eventual F-35 acquisition.
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #596
Just a bloke
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,211
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Fedup View Post
Lefturds here only use those accounting methods for the F-35. They are currently falling over themselves stating the jets only cost 77 million each and all the extra money is accessories (NV, radar, gun, EW counter measures receiving sets, targeting pods, comms, engines, and a pile of missiles). There is a bunch of other stuff along with spares. Note the engines described accessories here, yet when the F-35's engine is listed as a separate item they scream in outrage, bunch of whining CSs!
I know, apparently F-35's require infrastructure and POL's and weapons and whatnot in their prices, but other jets do not. That does not seem fair.

Hence why I have decided that the only thing that is fair, is that I will use their accounting methods to judge these acquisitions...
ADMk2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #597
Defense Enthusiast
Lieutenant
No Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 510
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Fedup View Post
It's looking like used Hornets from OZ might be the fallback plan assuming Boeing's trade complaint is upheld (September 25 announcement on ruling). This could be the path forward for an eventual F-35 acquisition.
Australia's F-18s have been flogged pretty hard. I don't imagine they would be good for much more than parts.

They were built between 1985 to 1990 so I think that makes them slightly newer than the CF-18s
hauritz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1 Week Ago   #598
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,178
Threads:
Yes, the RAAF Hornets are a few years newer so they would offer some extra time for our pollies to dither. Also, they would be a source of spares. This solution might cover the RCAF out to 2025.
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 Days Ago   #599
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
SpazSinbad's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 226
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by hauritz View Post
Australia's F-18s have been flogged pretty hard. I don't imagine they would be good for much more than parts.

They were built between 1985 to 1990 so I think that makes them slightly newer than the CF-18s
Graphic of Oz Hornet Deliveries from 1985-90: http://www.aph.gov.au/~/media/Commit...ter/report.pdf (1.1Mb)
Attached Images
File Type: gif TimeTableHornetsRAAFaspi1985-90.gif (74.2 KB, 17 views)
SpazSinbad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 Days Ago   #600
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,178
Threads:
Apparently used Hornets weren't the only items being investigated by the RCAF. Armed drones were of interest as well even before funding was made available. Like so many procurement exercises of late, no results although the reason seems to be no used drones were available for sale.

Canadian military hoped to buy second-hand drones even before getting the OK | National Post
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:45 PM.