Canada, Australia, U.K. Sign Joint Strike Fighter Agreements

[SeaKingTacco]

The reason we need air force bases, Peaches, is: DLAs (Designated Loading Areas).

You cannot load and unload weapons, or store armed aircraft at civilian airfields in Canada, because we simply do not have the explosive safe distances (the distance you need in case things go catastrophically wrong with a bomb/missile-I seem to recall that the minimum) distance starts at 1000 feet and goes up from there, depending how big a boom the weapon can make- I think you can find the answer in Div Orders online at work, if you look) from civilians or civilian infrastructure at any civilian aerodrome in Canada, that I am aware of.  Even our remaining Air Force bases that have DLAs are getting crowded by the civvies building up to our fence lines.

This is what saved Comox- unless you want to go to NAS Whidbey Island (and depend on the US Navy), the only place you can arm a CF aircraft on the west coast is Comox.

So, yeah- we could base all of our aircraft at Edmonton International, or Vancouver or Halifax or Montreal- but we couldn't arm them, so what's the point?

 

[peaches]

I am just thinking of way that perhaps we could better use our AF dollars.  Just thinking out loud.  Not 100% sure how USAF ANG/RES does it, as I am sure you all know they have bases everywhere. 

My thougth process is that if we did not own the airport, just used a corner of it, maybe it would reduce our operating costs and increase our footprint across Canada.  How does the USAF hold NORAD alert with armed F15's at Portland OR IAP, Great Falls Montana AP, Duluth Minn, Atlantic City NJ, Jacksonville FL etc..... 

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Good question- you would have to ask the USAF how they manage.

I'm guessing that- different countries, different rules.

 

[aesop081]

Peaches......

Only 4 CP-140 in Comox

 

[peaches]

Sorry about the YQQ mis-count, thought the DEMONS had 5.  No more CP140A's, is that why??

My whole point here is that the AF, & CF for that matter has a large infastructure budget, just thinking of ways to cut it down, more $$ for ops. less for paying electric bills, snow removal, runway repair & upkeep, us civi ATC etc... If closing a base and co-locating to a civi airport bought us 5 more CP140's (or in future P8's) or a few more fighters, might be worth it.

I know from my time on exchange in the US that their Guard bases were for the most part on civi airports.  Arming of a/c is something I never thought of I admit, thanks for the info.  I know here in NB with the armed alert fighters, itI is a big deal to put them down on a civi airport, even for them to do approaches into one.  Each airport however does have a dangerous cargo plan, perhaps that could be used.

I can assure you all that if it came down to a confilct where Canada itself was under attack, and God forbid it may happen in the future, our CF bases would be gone quickly, and we would be operating what was left off civi airports.

 

[Navy_Blue]

We are looking at 10 yrs here.  Does anyone think UAV technology could come to a level where it can really provide support to maned fighters??  To become an extention of there operational capability.  If you have a aircraft with attack capabilities (speed, firepower, ect) with the ability to linger on station north of 60 for 24+ hrs does this not negate the need for several manned Aircraft and there pilots and there trainers??  I hate to say it but UVA tech is good now what will it be in 10 to 15 years??

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Then shake up the Air Force so it has a warfighting mentality like the US has (+1 peaches on that) - I don't care what colour uniform the pilots have as long as they are warfighters and know how to follow orders to support the mission without getting any "well the Bde Comd can't order us to fly because we belong to 1 CAD, etc etc etc..."

Command-Sense-Act,

While I am clearly not privy to your experiences dealing with the Air Force, I can tell you that this whole arrangement is a two-way street.  I have had a ship's Captain order me to do stuff with my crew and aircraft that not only violated 1 Cdn Div Orders, but also National Defence Flying Orders, the laws of physics and aerodynamics, and every precept of good airmanship known to mankind.  In short- he gave orders that were impossible to follow without killing myself, my crew and destroying the airplane, not to mention burning his ship to the waterline. 

I fell back on telling him that, if he wanted me to violate my orders that badly, he could put it in writing.  He backed off every time.

I usually attempt to short-circuit this by sitting down with a Captain and discussing with him what I can and can't do for him, before we get into a difficult situation.  Most listen- some won't.

The point of my mini-rant:  It would be nice if some people in the Navy and the Army accepted that we know more about flying than they do.  Watching Blackhawk Down does not make you an expert.  We in the Air Force (for the most part- there is always the odd idiot out there) are not trying to get out of flying in support of the Navy or the Army. Often, however, we are limited by the equipment that the government has seen fit to give us, the experience levels of our crews, our spare parts supplies, or (probably most often), the weather.  If you think we are saying "no" to supporting you on a particular day in an off-hand manner, I can assure you that is not (usually) the case.  We have done a risk assessment and most times have discovered that what you are asking is not possible without (potentially) killing lots of people.

Another thing that I have seen that still shocks me is that many commanders don't actually understand the limits of the "CHOP" message that cuts us to a ship.  There are things that they are allowed to order- and many that they are not, precisely because they do not have the expertise to understand the ramifications of those orders.

And rather than bitch about how we do business without understanding our business, it would not hurt of few more of you to read 1 Cdn Air Div Orders, as well as National Defence Flying Orders.  If you are going to someday command an operation that includes aviation- at least have a cursory understanding of the rules we live with (which, BTW are mostly written in blood).

In summary- I love flying for the Navy (mostly).  I believe in serviceable helos, competent crews, risky missions and finding a way of making the rules work for you.  I do not believe in killing crews and destroying aircraft for no possible pay off.

My two cents worth.

 

[aesop081]

Sorry about the YQQ mis-count, thought the DEMONS had 5.  No more CP140A's, is that why??

Nope......we never had CP-140A over here.....all of them in YZX

SKT :

+1 on all counts.

 

[matt mcc]

i was just wondering if anyone could tell me if the f-35 is a twin. I know that was a major selling feature in the deal for the F-18s because of the vastness of the north so it seems kind of stupid that all i can find are singles.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Butting in here in something I know little about: Airplanes.

So now that this admission of ignorance is out of the way, I just want to correct some apparent misconception on historical aspects.

Someone proposed a return to the old pre-unification RCN, RCAF, Canadian Army structure for air assets, while others asked why everything belongs to the boys in blue.

Just to make things historically correct, I would like to point out that, in Canada, as opposed to the US, the army has never operated its own aircraft, pre and post unification, this was handled by the boys in light blue.

As for the Navy, contrary to the US and the UK, it had no air assets prior to the beginning of WWII. Early in the war, it became clear that the Battle of the Atlantic would ultimately be won in the air by ASW planes, be they short, medium or long range maritime recce birds. In Canada, these planes all belonged and were operated by the RCAF, but under the operational control of the Navy, in what ultimately became joint operations centers. Towards the end of the war, Canada was given operational command of a few escort carriers. At first, the airmen were "borrowed" from the British Naval Air Arm, but slowly, pilots of the RCAF were substituted in and ask to become naval pilots. As Canada decided to stay in the Carrier business after the war, this separation of duties remained in place: Shipborne flying would be the province of the naval aviators while the maritime patrol task, flown from land, would remain in the hands of the Air Force, with both under the operational control of the Maritime Air Group. This is why you still see lots of pictures of the old Argus in RCAF livery.

While the naval air arm of Canada's Navy did extremely well and earned a well deserved great reputation, it had a short history (about 25 years) as the retirement of our last carrier almost coincided with the unification. All in all, this means that  the Navy has, at all time, exercised control over air assets that belonged to the Air Force and has never been the worse for doing so.

As for the number of planes we need, I am no air expert, but I know geographic size, and particularly that of my country. Only planes in sufficient numbers can provide for its proper defence. Nowadays, neither navies nor armies can safely operate without air cover on any  battlefield. IMHO, Canada needs the following air capabilities, in that order:

1- Patrol and Surveillance from the air - both over our oceans and land mass;
2- Capacity to then intercept and destroy air intrusions;
3- Capacity to intercept and destroy intrusion on (or under) our oceans;
4- Capacity to deploy the army and its equipment to points of encounter of our own choosing in Canada as may be required to counter land intrusion;
5- Capacity to provide combat air support to the army;
6- Capacity to provide combat air support to the Navy;
7- Airlift in Canada;
8- Airlift abroad;
9- SAR.

IMO, 2, 3, 5 and 6 require acquisition of the F-35, I think in both the A and C versions and 5, 6 could also see the useful employment of a number of "Apache" style Helos, especially, for the 35C's and "attack helos", if the government ever decides to come through with the "Big Honking Ships", which we interpreted in the Navy as amphibious assault ships of some description.

My 2 cents worth.

 

[airforcemissingthearmy]

peaches, I can't but only wonder about your tough process WRT using civilian airports. By believing we would not have to pay for such thing has snow removal... I'm sorry to say it that way, but in 2010, notting is free. I've been working in or around contracting for the Defence Team for 7 years and I would like to shed some light on your reply. PWGSC, the all mighty body that looks after the moneys we spent and how, will require a new lease contract every year, and believe me, it takes months to get the job done. Further to this, it may come as a shock to many of you, but DND/CF do not pay a cent of insurance on their infra. That would be an added cost. I recall an incident in Cold Lake were a $3 000 000 was lost into a fire... lots of paperwork to explain that one and to fix the bill with the asset owner. We have what we call standing offer on many goods or services including fuel and maintenance.Were would your fuel come from and who would replenish your aircraft's? I can assure you it would have to be from contractors. Of course, since I am part of the purple support trades, I will preach for my church. Logistics, Engineering and TIS and many other support trades would be the first one to suffer from this type of AF assets spreeding and they would be redistributed were needed. What to do in case of deployments witch by the way are getting more and more frequent up North? Recall all members to a civilian airfield for training? Centralization of units was a way used in the 90's to reduce cost. This is how the AF in Edmonton moved to Cold Lake, PPCLI/LDSH/1 CER moved from Calgary and Chiliwak to Edmonton after they closed Griesbach and CFSME moved from Chiliwak to Gagetown to join the CTC with the Infantry/Artillery/Armoured schools. Has for contact with Canadian population, I agree with you at 100%. I was a "combat clerk" at Quebec recruiting centre and the numbers are only but amusing. Quebec itself, most of the applicants are going Army. Chicoutimi, most of the applicants would go...surprise! surprise! Air Force!