The F-35.There have been so many words written and spoken with so much political heat and so little light I would like bring some practical information and context relating to it's military role. The information is skimmed from many aircraft publications on news stands.
The issue of procurement should be expanded to include drone aircraft as well as used Super F/A-18. The US only, stealth F-22 would be an ideal aircraft for Canada at a price of $450 million.
From reading political stories this new aircraft may appear in the public's eye looking like a very hot potato with wings and flaming Loonies coming out it's tail .Instead, let us look at this as a choice Canadian pilots will depend on in future conflicts. Conflicts our politicians will get our pilots involved with.
A primer for Canadian journalists. The F-35 is already in the air with Dutch, Norwegian, Italian and US pilots. The Australian Air Force has ordered 72 F35A's to replace it's F-18 Hornets. According to Air International 2015 (has a large F-35 supplement with stories from every country making a purchase except Canada) says that the Aussies are considering getting rid of their Super F/A-18's bought in 2011 to increase their total F-35 numbers to 100 aircraft.
Maybe Canada should look into buying nearly new Super Hornets from countries upgrading to the newest technology. The F-35 Lightning 2 are now coming off the production line. Buying used is not unusual, Norway purchased used CF-104's from Canada years ago.
These Super F/A-18 replaced older Australian F-111's and the US Navy F-14 Tomcats , so it is a formidable aircraft.
The current aircraft technology is designed to defeat surface to air defenses. With the high cost of the fifth generation aircraft maybe a mobile anti aircraft /anti missile defense is in order. Obviously these systems are pretty good if offensive aircraft require stealth to defeat them. It is just a cost of one over the other to be considered. Just a thought.
So what then of the F-35 and when did Canada last fly first line fighters?
Not in WW2. Canadian fight pilots flew “hand me down” Hurricane fighters when the British kept top of the line Spitfires for themselves until more Spits became available. Canadians also flew outdated“low and slow” Halifax bombers that caused the death or capture of many Canadian air crews.
In the 1950's Canadian fighters flew top fighters in the F-86 Sabre fighters considered the best dogfight aircraft of their era with a 11-1 kill ratio. The Sabre flew from 1950 to 1977.
Also during the 1950's ,with WW2 a close memory Canada produced it's own aircraft , specifically designed to fly in the arctic. The Avro CF-100 , all weather , high altitude , short takeoff all Canada engine and air frame. Over 692 were built. A Canadian aircraft built for Canada when a domestic aerospace business was considered a strategic asset. These were hard lessons learned from WW2. Lest We Forget.
Canadians also designed their own air superiority aircraft from scratch the Avro Arrow in 1958 , and discontinued in 1959 , only 5 were built. The high tech , advanced plane was scrapped for political and practical reasons. The missile age negated the flying high and fast doctrine of the day ,led to the rethinking of defense against Russia with aircraft dropping nuclear bombs from planes. Cancellation of the Arrow and down grading of delta winged US aircraft like the B-58 Hustler. Sweden built it's own delta wing fighter and maintained it's own aerospace industry as a result. France , England and Italy maintained a military aircraft industry building fighter jets, fixed wing bombers and helicopters in many cases as a consortium. Canada lost it's engineers to NASA and other countries during the same time.
In the 1960's Canada flew first line CF-101 Voodoos to defend the north 692 were built in Canada and never fired a shot during the Cold War. They carried nuclear bombs to be detonated over Canadian territory to kill waves of attacking Russian bombers. Not a great plan for Canada. These were expensive top line planes .The Voodoo flew from 1963 -1990.
Canada's and the Free World's top fighter was the F-104 Starfighter , Canada built 200 single engine aircraft and lost 110 to crashes. The plane was nicknamed the“widow maker” because it's jet engines had a knack for shutting down unexpectantly , it became RCAF policy to buy planes with two engines. The CF-104 flew from 1961-1988. Never fired a shot in anger, but killed many Canadian pilots by crashing.
A pacifist's fighter.
When faced with purchasing a new fighter, Canada in 1968 choose the technologically “regressive” CF-5 over the US top of the line F-4 Phantom. The CF-5 never fired a shot in anger but was cheap and looked good. It was kind of a sports car of the air and many countries bought it. It also had an end of life extension “super”updated version for countries that already bought it with the F-5 Tiger 2.
Canada opted for second best when it chose to procure the two engine CF-18 over the single engine F-16 and the top of the line F-15 Eagle in 1982 .
Today the F-35 the long delays in development, cost over runs, and the devalued Loonie work against this purchase even though procurement thinking originated when the Canadian dollar was near par.
As a footnote Canada also bought carrier planes , the McDonnell F-2H3 1955-62 to fly off the Canadian Navy's HMCS Bonaventure aircraft carrier. The CF-18 was also a carrier plane and retained it's carrier hook for emergency landings on short fields in the Arctic.
Drones have now entered the equation because they are low cost to procure and operate. The drone debate is going on around the world. Politicians and journalists hate the high priced jets, the Air Force generals (former pilots) hate drones.
There are some surprising facts. The F-35 is an expensive and stealthy , 5th generation war plane that can identify the enemy on it's own, it's sensors can see the battle space (air space above the battle ground) like the way new cars can see in 360 degrees circles, but in vertical and horizontal views with itself in the centre. The plane can see long distances and can id the enemy and launch an attack shooting down the enemy sooner than conventional fighters . In simple terms it can shoot further, a sniper like weapon with the pilot in control.
The F-35 also saves the expense of owning other support aircraft that are also aging out in recon & jamming roles, and can shoot down fighters , bombers as well as attack the ground supporting troops. Some say it is too expensive to have near the ground supporting combat soldiers. Line of sight and an assault rifle negates stealth. During the Vietnam war factory workers in the north laid on their roof tops and shot straight up with rifles in the hope of striking an attacking fighter-bomber. They say they got some in the hail bullets. Even a blind squirrel can find a nut , comes to mind.
Norway's WW2 experience may have influenced the purchase of the F-35,it is a country with a norther border similar to Canada. Norway's procurement mirrors Canada's since WW2. It differed slightly in the selection of the F-16 purchase over that of Canada's F-18 (CF-18). Note that Norway and Holland both have an ethos of being invaded and occupied by the Nazis in WW2 have decided to buy the F-35 along with Italy, Australia and the US.
The ethos of WW2 is still strong. The WW2 experience with Norway who's pilots fled to England with their outdated planes , eventually ended up in the Toronto area training on Canadian built RAF Hurricanes to reenter the fight against the Germans. These pilots were young enough to influence Norway's air power choices right up the the end of the century.
Total war fighting is a different matter. What kind of wars does Canada expect to be fighting in the next 30 years? Why are our allies rearming with 5th generation fighters. Who do they expect to fight. A war with countries that do not have an air force does not require F-35's. Countries that could put a billion boots on the ground and is also developing a 5th generation fighter of it's own , that looks a lot like a F-35, might muddle the choice. Muddled , not for pilots but for politicians and media.
Patrolling the Canada's North may fall to a drone air force backed up by advance fighters. It should be considered. Drones can also do drug interdiction on the left and right coasts as well as surveillance,border and maritime patrols. They can stay in the air for very long periods of time at a low cost with their pilots safe on the ground in easy chairs.
A war with countries that are supported by Russia or China the F-35 or Super Hornet would be in order. The small numbers of cheaper Canadian Super F/A-18 a 4.5 generation fighter or more expensive 5th generation F-35 would simply be a puzzle piece in any coalition arsenal.
*The F-16 and F-18's were designed on Col. John Boyd's energy-maneuverability theory (1960-70's)that light and less expensive planes would perform well in combat. It is the idea that a big engine in a smaller plane has turning and performance advantages. This proved to be the right choice in the air a wars that fallowed .The numbers of planes could be produced in massive numbers in the case of total war compared to the F-14 and F-15's,and today F-35's.
The newest electronics are in suitcase like packages that be plugged into 4 th generation F-18 aircraft turning them into 4.5th generation “Super” versions. Other modifications are also part of the Super version.
Something no one seems to be asking about is just who or what is the enemy of Canada or the F-35. Traditionally, fighters attack bombers and escort fighters protecting them as in a WW2 scenario. The ego battles involve fighter vs fighters as in the movie Top Gun have not happened in decades. These dog fight senerios haven't happened in reality since the Vietnam War for the US , but more recently 1973 with Israeli war planes.
The F-35 is not one plane but 3 that serve a multi role function (F-35A at $102.1million each) that in theory replace ,fighters, fighter-bombers,close air support ,vertical and short take off from airfields(F-35B at $131million each) or Navy planes small ski jump carriers and large aircraft carriers to withstand hard take offs and landings (F-35C at $132.2 million each) .
Surprisingly the F-22 Raptor would be a good choice for Canada and it's northern border. The planes are costed at $412 million each and can see targets 320 miles away. The F-22 always fly in pairs because they have sensors that can see the entire battle space without the need of AWAC support. The Raptor is already built and deployed , but it is a US only aircraft for security reasons.
Questions from F-22 pilots. Every story about stealth technology reveals that the aircraft are not invisible to anti aircraft radars. The planes are designed with a “low visibility” shapes and coatings. The coatings do wear off and radar signatures will become known as the planes appear more and more combat zones. The F-22 was kept out of combat for many years to presumably preserve the secrecy of it's radar signature.
Basically countries from the beginning of a new program like the F-35 are buying technology that hasn't been invented yet. They are buying involvement and economic benefits. The last versions should be less than $100 million.
The new fifth generation F-35's planes are built in 4 plane lots . Each lot is an improvement of glitches from former lot. Technology is built in suitcase like packages that are made to be easily plugged into older and upgraded.
There was much controversy over the price of the airplane, the information was always their but somehow during the last government's answers were not heard. The F-35's have been sold to various countries who also had elections and political controversy surround the planes muddled the waters over price because the delivered aircraft came with an extra engine each an tech support.
One of the selling points is that the engine can be quickly replaced. Jet engines routinely flame out or stop functioning. Combat readiness is simplified with quick change engines.
Controversy surrounds all brand new aircraft because it takes decades to develop, several elections pass before the “not yet”developed technology of the future becomes combat ready. The time lag was used to produce much theoretical election “left”, “right”fodder in every country that signed up for the Joint Strike Fighter. (and every jet fighter ever developed in peace time)
The question of which plane to buy is both political and military as well as practical. Political and practical usually go out the window in case of total war.
Opinion Ken Gigliotti
------------------------------------------------------------
Topic: F-35 or Super 18's - Burning Loonies from Afterburners (Read 1306 times)