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; Originally Posted by RobWilliams 2 within a fortnight plus a briefing document to help us remember. I hate ITAR briefs. ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old October 1st, 2015   #76
Grumpy Old Man
General
gf0012-aust's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 17,997
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobWilliams View Post
2 within a fortnight plus a briefing document to help us remember. I hate ITAR briefs.
The last one I had involved a bloke from State who just lived and breathed it....

it was like going to an accountants xmas party....
________________
A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
http://cofda.wordpress.com/

gf a.k.a. ROBOPIMP T5C
gf0012-aust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1st, 2015   #77
Just a bloke
Major General
No Avatar
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 2,264
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by t68 View Post
Don't think he was impolite to such a basic question. Of more importance to the budget is what percentage of the funding is allocated to each service and percentage of funding Personel and equipment serviceability, does replacement kit come out of a fixed defence budget or a supplement etc etc which with research will give you general idea how it works
Politeness has nothing to do with it. He was lazy and asked a basic question easily answered with the most basic level of research possible. Canadian budget papers are online for 2015 and I now know from my three seconds worth of Googling that they have been so since the 21st of April 2015 and the answer to his question is very easily found.

The point of this website, as the name (obliquely I admit...) suggests is to talk about defence matters, not answer every question for anyone who thinks so little of their own question they can't even be bothered apparently trying to find the answer themselves.

All the ideas you pose are similarly addressed in the budget papers. Now, what do we think of the allocated budget, for the RCAF, for 2015? Sufficient? Barely passable? Insufficient?

Lets have a good old chat on the topic, shall we?

That's what I am here for...
ADMk2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1st, 2015   #78
Defense Aficionado
Lieutenant General
No Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 2,726
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADMk2 View Post
Politeness has nothing to do with it. He was lazy and asked a basic question easily answered with the most basic level of research possible. Canadian budget papers are online for 2015 and I now know from my three seconds worth of Googling that they have been so since the 21st of April 2015 and the answer to his question is very easily found.

The point of this website, as the name (obliquely I admit...) suggests is to talk about defence matters, not answer every question for anyone who thinks so little of their own question they can't even be bothered apparently trying to find the answer themselves.

All the ideas you pose are similarly addressed in the budget papers. Now, what do we think of the allocated budget, for the RCAF, for 2015? Sufficient? Barely passable? Insufficient?

Lets have a good old chat on the topic, shall we?

That's what I am here for...
Agree. On rereading my post I can see it can be misconstructed I was actually agreeing with you. I suppose that's what I get for not taking more time with my post and doing a quick reply whilst at work.

Cheers AD
t68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 1st, 2015   #79
Defense Professional / Analyst
Sergeant
Blackshoe's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 273
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gf0012-aust View Post
The last one I had involved a bloke from State who just lived and breathed it....

it was like going to an accountants xmas party....
Few things are as terrible as someone deeply interested and involved in a specific process briefing/training nubs.
Blackshoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 9th, 2015   #80
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver and Toronto
Posts: 2,337
Threads:
CASR has an article discussing the possibility of a joint Canadian-Danish purchase of Typhoons. As usual, obsolete information concerning F-35 pricing is used to discredit this jet while no mention is made that the Typhoon only now is getting its first AESA radar. While exchange is an issue, even with the high US dollar, I have not seen any pricing for Typhoon that gets near the current 90-95m US for a F-35. No mention of stealth, sensor fusion, or its massive internal fuel load advantages. Oh...and hears the kicker....they could be assembled by Bombardier in Montreal, like that's going to decrease costs. LMFAO

Canadian Fighter Aircraft - Eurofighter Typhoon - Next Generation Fighter Capability - CASR Modest Proposal - Canadian American Strategic Review - NGFC Project - CF-18 Hornet - F-35 Affordability - Canadian Defence - NATO Cooperation - Danish Defence
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 9th, 2015   #81
Defense Aficionado
Lieutenant General
No Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NSW
Posts: 2,726
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Fedup View Post
CASR has an article discussing the possibility of a joint Canadian-Danish purchase of Typhoons. As usual, obsolete information concerning F-35 pricing is used to discredit this jet while no mention is made that the Typhoon only now is getting its first AESA radar. While exchange is an issue, even with the high US dollar, I have not seen any pricing for Typhoon that gets near the current 90-95m US for a F-35. No mention of stealth, sensor fusion, or its massive internal fuel load advantages. Oh...and hears the kicker....they could be assembled by Bombardier in Montreal, like that's going to decrease costs. LMFAO

Canadian Fighter Aircraft - Eurofighter Typhoon - Next Generation Fighter Capability - CASR Modest Proposal - Canadian American Strategic Review - NGFC Project - CF-18 Hornet - F-35 Affordability - Canadian Defence - NATO Cooperation - Danish Defence

Well that's interesting considering the current exchange rate from CAD-USD=$0.77 & CAD-EUR=€0.68
AUD-USD=$0.73

If my math is correct that's a $10,000 in every million. If you take the Australian estimate of an average aircraft cost alone of $75m aircraft alone that's $750000 towards your support costs alone with the exchange rate
9 billion was always never going to be on the money when you include support costs

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2014-0...ghters/5405236

Last edited by t68; October 9th, 2015 at 04:59 PM.
t68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2015   #82
Potstirrer
General
Todjaeger's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: not in New England anymore...
Posts: 3,823
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Fedup View Post
CASR has an article discussing the possibility of a joint Canadian-Danish purchase of Typhoons. As usual, obsolete information concerning F-35 pricing is used to discredit this jet while no mention is made that the Typhoon only now is getting its first AESA radar. While exchange is an issue, even with the high US dollar, I have not seen any pricing for Typhoon that gets near the current 90-95m US for a F-35. No mention of stealth, sensor fusion, or its massive internal fuel load advantages. Oh...and hears the kicker....they could be assembled by Bombardier in Montreal, like that's going to decrease costs. LMFAO

Canadian Fighter Aircraft - Eurofighter Typhoon - Next Generation Fighter Capability - CASR Modest Proposal - Canadian American Strategic Review - NGFC Project - CF-18 Hornet - F-35 Affordability - Canadian Defence - NATO Cooperation - Danish Defence
Actually what I would be more concerned about, is the availability of standoff and CAS or strike munitions. As I understand it, Tranche III should start introducing such munitions so that the Typhoon can have the multi-role capability that the RCAF has already had with the existing Hornets.

Also of concern with respect to a Typhoon buy, is whether any of the existing Canadian munitions could be utilized, and if so, how much would it cost? Given that the Typhoon is a Euro design, I doubt most US munitions would have been prioritized by the manufacturer for integration and clearance for deployment. At least, not with a customer specifying said munitions and paying for the integration, testing, etc.
________________
Beware of Mr. Grumpy...
Todjaeger is online now   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2015   #83
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver and Toronto
Posts: 2,337
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Todjaeger View Post
Actually what I would be more concerned about, is the availability of standoff and CAS or strike munitions. As I understand it, Tranche III should start introducing such munitions so that the Typhoon can have the multi-role capability that the RCAF has already had with the existing Hornets.

Also of concern with respect to a Typhoon buy, is whether any of the existing Canadian munitions could be utilized, and if so, how much would it cost? Given that the Typhoon is a Euro design, I doubt most US munitions would have been prioritized by the manufacturer for integration and clearance for deployment. At least, not with a customer specifying said munitions and paying for the integration, testing, etc.
The other Euro contender, although Quebec compatible, is even less compatible with regards to weapons currently in stock. Neither jet will be purchased IMO. The contest will be between the F-35 and Superhornet (with some Growlers). The current election is too close to call at the moment so a minority government is likely. It will be difficult to get any agreement on a selection with such an outcome anytime soon.

Last edited by John Fedup; October 10th, 2015 at 07:22 AM. Reason: Spelling
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2015   #84
Super Moderator
Lieutenant General
RobWilliams's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,757
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Todjaeger View Post
Actually what I would be more concerned about, is the availability of standoff and CAS or strike munitions. As I understand it, Tranche III should start introducing such munitions so that the Typhoon can have the multi-role capability that the RCAF has already had with the existing Hornets.
Yeah, I cringed when I read that Typhoon was a fully multirole aircraft. It just isn't, but that's driven by only the UK and Saudi Arabia currently being interested in enhancing A2G capability.

Saudi are particularly keen, on one day Paveway IV got announced as being integrated and then on the next the RSAF were dropping them in Yemen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Todjaeger View Post
Also of concern with respect to a Typhoon buy, is whether any of the existing Canadian munitions could be utilized, and if so, how much would it cost? Given that the Typhoon is a Euro design, I doubt most US munitions would have been prioritized by the manufacturer for integration and clearance for deployment. At least, not with a customer specifying said munitions and paying for the integration, testing, etc.
There's not a whole lot that Typhoon can carry which is in Canadian service apart from the basic AAMs and a couple guided bombs (some Paveway/JDAM variants).

Someone's pushing to get SBD II onto it.
RobWilliams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 10th, 2015   #85
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver and Toronto
Posts: 2,337
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobWilliams View Post
Yeah, I cringed when I read that Typhoon was a fully multirole aircraft. It just isn't, but that's driven by only the UK and Saudi Arabia currently being interested in enhancing A2G capability.

Saudi are particularly keen, on one day Paveway IV got announced as being integrated and then on the next the RSAF were dropping them in Yemen.



There's not a whole lot that Typhoon can carry which is in Canadian service apart from the basic AAMs and a couple guided bombs (some Paveway/JDAM variants).

Someone's pushing to get SBD II onto it.
Like I said, I don't think either Euro option is likely to happen. However, the best way for an anti-F-35 government to promote the Typhoon as a true interceptor for Canadian sovereignty operations only. Easy for them as they don't really believe in NATO commitments anyway. The Typhoon AFAIK is a decent interceptor but for Canadian multi role operations the F-35 would be better and likely less expensive in the long run and more benificial to Canadian aerospace companies.
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 11th, 2015   #86
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 226
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Fedup View Post
Like I said, I don't think either Euro option is likely to happen. However, the best way for an anti-F-35 government to promote the Typhoon as a true interceptor for Canadian sovereignty operations only. Easy for them as they don't really believe in NATO commitments anyway. The Typhoon AFAIK is a decent interceptor but for Canadian multi role operations the F-35 would be better and likely less expensive in the long run and more benificial to Canadian aerospace companies.
I am surprised the "french Canada" didn't proposed the Rafale.
rockitten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 11th, 2015   #87
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver and Toronto
Posts: 2,337
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockitten View Post
I am surprised the "french Canada" didn't proposed the Rafale.
You can bet Dassault and Bombardier would like that option. Bombardier is a whore operation so the Typhoon group will be just as welcome.
John Fedup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 12th, 2015   #88
Super Moderator
General
swerve's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Reading, Berkshire
Posts: 6,667
Threads:
"Whore operation"? Same as any other commercial firm. It'll sell whatever sells, & bid for any work that's going. Do you think any other aircraft maker would turn down work?
swerve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 16th, 2015   #89
New Member
Private
Delta204's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 42
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by t68 View Post
For the strategic circamstances what would the bare minimum number of aircraft purchased, do you need a one for one considering the advances in simulation.
If we go with the planned number of 65 fighters, here's how they'd likely be used.

~35 would be committed to meeting Canada's NORAD obligations
~15 would likely be in deep maintenance / training&certification

leaving the RCAF with ~15 fighters MAXIMUM that could be deployed for international operations on any given day... so there's not a lot of wiggle room especially when you consider attrition rates ect.

I've read one commentator who described Canada's usage of airpower as "six pack diplomacy" whenever NATO or other multinational group decides to undertake a bombing campaign Canada shows up with it's token half dozen fighters... like someone who gets invited to a house party would show up with a six pack - just enough for people to see that they at least made an appearance.

Anyway, things will be more clear after the election on Monday... the Liberal Party (currently polling in the lead) has stated they would cancel the F-35 acquisition in favor of a more affordable option - whatever that may be.
Delta204 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 17th, 2015   #90
Defense Aficionado
Major General
John Fedup's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Vancouver and Toronto
Posts: 2,337
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta204 View Post
If we go with the planned number of 65 fighters, here's how they'd likely be used.

~35 would be committed to meeting Canada's NORAD obligations
~15 would likely be in deep maintenance / training&certification

leaving the RCAF with ~15 fighters MAXIMUM that could be deployed for international operations on any given day... so there's not a lot of wiggle room especially when you consider attrition rates ect.

I've read one commentator who described Canada's usage of airpower as "six pack diplomacy" whenever NATO or other multinational group decides to undertake a bombing campaign Canada shows up with it's token half dozen fighters... like someone who gets invited to a house party would show up with a six pack - just enough for people to see that they at least made an appearance.

Anyway, things will be more clear after the election on Monday... the Liberal Party (currently polling in the lead) has stated they would cancel the F-35 acquisition in favor of a more affordable option - whatever that may be.

6-8 fighters maximum for international operations regardless of what we buy. The election will most likely result in minority gov't so no jet decision will happen until a follow-up election or put another way, no purchase this decade.
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 10:52 PM.