The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)

[Journeyman]

The Professor ….

From his LinkedIn profile, it appears that he is unemployed ("Looking for new Opportunities'), having just graduated from Calgary's Master of Public Policy program.


...although he may have acquired some military insights as an Air Cadet 2Lt "2007 CFB Trenton 'Masters of the Felt' Crud Champion."  ;D

 

[Dale Denton]

Why are you going into the authors background???

I thought it was well written and provided a decent argument. Certainly did their research.

What's so wrong with the Grippen? Alittle older in some ways but I don't understand the hate.

 

[RDBZ]

Oh, you thought the aircraft we were buying are airworthy? Surprise.

The deal includes seven (of 25 total) aircraft that are to be broken down and used for spares.  Might as well do that in Aus.

 

[Kirkhill]

Plot twist - the posting is Tindal, the Cold Lake of Australia  :rofl:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAAF_Base_Tindal

And in keeping with the spirit of that upside down and backwards country - it is neither cold nor does it have a lake. 

Corks might be required.

 

[RDBZ]

And in keeping with the spirit of that upside down and backwards country - it is neither cold nor does it have a lake. 

Corks might be required.

The only folk ever to be seen in Australia wearing hats with corks are foreign tourists. So yes, a hat like that will certainly let the locals know you’ve only just arrived in country...  ;D

 

[dapaterson]

Pshaw.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh66yZj3qlk

 

[RDBZ]

Pshaw.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh66yZj3qlk

Yes, the Brit tourist in Aus; not a style you really want to copy....,,

 

[dimsum]

The only folk ever to be seen in Australia wearing hats with corks are foreign tourists. So yes, a hat like that will certainly let the locals know you’ve only just arrived in country...  ;D

Clearly the way to blend in is with a XXXX/VB/Coopers singlet, zinc nose, boardies and thongs. 

Thongs as in flip-flops, for the folks about to swan-dive into the gutter.

 

[a_majoor]

Meanwhile, in the real world, the arguments against the F-35 get thinner and thinner:

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/31-air-force-pilots-reveal-why-they-love-f-35-stealth-fighter-40427

Of course I would actually advocate for the F-15X, not because I am some sort of dinosaur, but because the Eagle has one huge advantage over the "Panther"; long range. Canada needs to patrol the arctic and two long coastlines. We also have a history of force projection over continental distances, so having a fighter with long legs is very important. If the F-15X has or can be given the same sort of capabilities as the F-15E Strike Eagle, then we have a platform which can fulfill multiple roles for us (a Strike Eagle could carry weapons capable of striking ships at sea, such as a SDB that can glide over 100km to target, for example), plus in the new environment, a Strike Eagle can serve as the "arsenal aircraft" for Alliance F-35's slipping ahead to scout, identify and mark targets. Even if things go badly, the F-15 is still an actual fighter aircraft, so can fight its way in or out if necessary. Other mods to the Eagle platform include things like carrying 16 AAM's, so a few Eagles clearing a path for the rest of the force is also a possibility.

And future upgrades to the F-15X might even include the sort of sensor fusion technology which is the actual strong suit of the F-35.

 

[Journeyman]

Why are you going into the authors background???

Have you ever checked the profile of a site member here?  (… and not just the ones who consistently make  "WTF?!!  :stars:" posts ) 


There are all sorts of peripheral factors that can help consideration of a book or article.  Information about author's background can provide insight and/or context into their writing, which can aid critical  readers in more effectively judging the work. (critical, as in objective analysis and evaluation, not incessantly bitchin' )  The info may help understand the author's purpose in writing.  Does the author have a track-record of strong bias, such that 'unhelpful' facts are routinely ignored to strengthen their argument?  Despite apparently writing well in this instance, is the author competent in the subject (eg: see the clarifying comments on the government's fiscal system by Good2Golf  here )?  Is there anything interesting, unusual, or significant in when and how they grew up?  Is the particular school and/or professor's mentorship noteworthy in potentially affecting their writing?  What else has the author written, and how received?  Consider the audience of the author's writing.  Are there any significant external events influencing the timing and context of the writing?

I find this background material can be even more helpful if you're not a SME  (like me with fighter a/c acquisition -- which is also why I hesitate to post in topics where I don't really have a clue, but that's a separate rant).  Otherwise, if you do a lot of reading in a particular field or subject, you begin to recognize 'trends.'  For example, when I get a new book on one or two particular topics, one of the first things I do is check the author's bio (to help determine the stuff above);  then look at the bibliography, which can suggest if the author is informed by a particular 'school of thought.'


All this to say, while my military career has been pretty high-speed, I can also be a thorough and discerning info geek (anything worth doing is worth doing to excess  ;D );  considering the author is just another part of considering the publication.
It works for me. 

 

[Quirky]

Of course I would actually advocate for the F-15X, not because I am some sort of dinosaur, but because the Eagle has one huge advantage over the "Panther"; long range. Canada needs to patrol the arctic and two long coastlines. We also have a history of force projection over continental distances, so having a fighter with long legs is very important. If the F-15X has or can be given the same sort of capabilities as the F-15E Strike Eagle, then we have a platform which can fulfill multiple roles for us (a Strike Eagle could carry weapons capable of striking ships at sea, such as a SDB that can glide over 100km to target, for example), plus in the new environment, a Strike Eagle can serve as the "arsenal aircraft" for Alliance F-35's slipping ahead to scout, identify and mark targets. Even if things go badly, the F-15 is still an actual fighter aircraft, so can fight its way in or out if necessary. Other mods to the Eagle platform include things like carrying 16 AAM's, so a few Eagles clearing a path for the rest of the force is also a possibility.

And future upgrades to the F-15X might even include the sort of sensor fusion technology which is the actual strong suit of the F-35.

I hate to say this, but I'd take a posting back to Cold Lake just to get my hands on a F-15X.

 

[Dale Denton]

Have you ever checked the profile of a site member here?  (… and not just the ones who consistently make  "WTF?!!  :stars:" posts ) 


There are all sorts of peripheral factors that can help consideration of a book or article.  Information about author's background can provide insight and/or context into their writing, which can aid critical  readers in more effectively judging the work. (critical, as in objective analysis and evaluation, not incessantly bitchin' )  The info may help understand the author's purpose in writing.  Does the author have a track-record of strong bias, such that 'unhelpful' facts are routinely ignored to strengthen their argument?  Despite apparently writing well in this instance, is the author competent in the subject (eg: see the clarifying comments on the government's fiscal system by Good2Golf  here )?  Is there anything interesting, unusual, or significant in when and how they grew up?  Is the particular school and/or professor's mentorship noteworthy in potentially affecting their writing?  What else has the author written, and how received?  Consider the audience of the author's writing.  Are there any significant external events influencing the timing and context of the writing?

I find this background material can be even more helpful if you're not a SME  (like me with fighter a/c acquisition -- which is also why I hesitate to post in topics where I don't really have a clue, but that's a separate rant).  Otherwise, if you do a lot of reading in a particular field or subject, you begin to recognize 'trends.'  For example, when I get a new book on one or two particular topics, one of the first things I do is check the author's bio (to help determine the stuff above);  then look at the bibliography, which can suggest if the author is informed by a particular 'school of thought.'


All this to say, while my military career has been pretty high-speed, I can also be a thorough and discerning info geek (anything worth doing is worth doing to excess  ;D );  considering the author is just another part of considering the publication.
It works for me.

Understood, I do the same at times. Just seemed out of left field criticizing a students employment status.

Can anyone weigh the pros and cons of the F-15X vs its (F-35) competitors?

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Understood, I do the same at times. Just seemed out of left field criticizing a students employment status.

Can anyone weigh the pros and cons of the F-15X vs its (F-35) competitors?

Here's a few posts from our resident fighter SME: 

https://army.ca/forums/threads/120786/post-1557393.html#msg1557393

and

https://army.ca/forums/threads/120786/post-1557416.html#msg1557416

 

[Good2Golf]

And for those interested in understanding better how Canadian federal funds are planned, allocated and expenses for Defence purposes, a reference to Dr. Perry’s piece in the Canadian Global Affairs Institute archives makes for informative reading.  Perry remains one of the most well-informed academics regarding Canadian Government Defence budgeting and procurement:

The New Defence Policy Needs to Focus on Procurement, Not Prose

The general description of fiscal framework, accrual space, investment cash and Defence budgeting is approx. mid-way through the op-ed piece.

Regards
G2G

 

[MilEME09]

Other mods to the Eagle platform include things like carrying 16 AAM's, so a few Eagles clearing a path for the rest of the force is also a possibility.

Boeing has a new ordnance pod that jacks that number upto 24, combined with the F-15's endurance a six pack of F-15X's equipped for Air to air combat have enough missiles to take down the entire combat inventory of a small to medium sized country. If we don't purchase the F-35 we are probably out of the first strike game, however given China and Russia are claiming to have radars that can pick up the F-35, if those start getting sold to others, then I'd think payload would become important to take the fight to the enemy and keep them on their back foot. This is only my opinion however and I fully admit I only know as much as I read and have no experience working with fighter craft.

 

[MarkOttawa]

First day of war matters aside, does not the F-15X' very large missile load, range, and burst speed make it the best fit for the NORAD mission--the only one that is absolutely critical for RCAF and Canada (called defence against er, USAF, help, i.e. sovereignty)? For F-35As to do decent air defence role would they not have to carry external AAMs, so their stealth no longer relevant?

Real question.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Colin Parkinson]

If we went with purely modern F-15's, we could still contribute to both NORAD and expeditionary events. Against a near peer, the US/UK and other F35 operator push into the contested areas, with the F-15 loaded to the max coming in, with the F-35 targeting and the F-15's using up their payload and the F-35's taking out remaining aircraft/defenses.

 

[a_majoor]

Something like the weapons pod demonstrated by the Advanced Super Hornet could likely be developed for the F-35 as well, allowing it to carry more ordinance on the first day of the war. 

Of course if the actual job is clearing the skies, the F-22 should have a pod developed so it can slide in and use its stealth and air superiority advantages coupled to a much larger weapons load out. The F-15X arsenal plane's role in this could be to fill the sky with decoys like the MALD, giving the enemy a much more difficult time to figure out where the F-22s and other fighters are (assuming the claims for counter stealth radar are true: the Russians were said to have anti stealth radar as far back as the late 1980's, but this didn't stop the development of the F-22, F-35 or B-21).

And the RCAF could take the lead role with F-15X's in the second day of the war, as enemy sensors, missiles and planes have been attritted, preserving the stealth aircraft for the highest priority targets.

 

[Baz]

If we wanted to be a player in the first day, we could give the Navy TLAMs...

 

[a_majoor]

If we wanted to be a player in the first day, we could give the Navy TLAMs...

There you go, bringing logic to the argument again.....