Comments by "" (@RedXlV) on "Found And Explained" channel.

  1.  @Eidolon1andOnly  The fact that Dief the Thief simultaneously considered the Arrow to be rendered obsolete by ground-based missiles and yet also so advanced that the Soviets had to be stopped from copying it at all costs just shows how full of shit he was.
    49
  2.  @criticalevent  I was under the impression that Canada cancelled buying the F-35 and is more likely to go with either the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet or the Saab JAS 39E/F Gripen. Both of which are vastly more suited to Canada's needs. The Gripen for its lower operating costs and being optimized from day one for arctic conditions, and the Super Hornet for its ease of transition (literally the same cockpit as the CF-18) and the twin-engine reliability that the RCAF has always liked.
    8
  3. What put the L-1000 ahead was that it was an axial-flow turbojet.
    3
  4. The problem with the F-16XL is that for purely the strike fighter role, the F-15E Strike Eagle was better. And for a multi-role fighter...it's a lot more expensive than the standard F-16.
    3
  5.  @vincentgoudreault9662  I would agree that the Super Hornet would be the best choice out of the 3 that Canada is choosing from. The F-15EX seems like an amazing fighter, but it might be more capability than Canada actually needs. Which in and of itself isn't a bad thing (certainly far better to have a plane that goes beyond what you need it to than one that's inferior to your needs), but I'm pretty sure it's also more expensive than the Super Hornet.
    3
  6. Boeing. No wonder this hasn't gotten off the ground.
    1
  7. A pity that the XF5U wasn't preserved. Imagine if somebody took it up to fly now.
    1
  8. Had it not been cancelled, the CA-23 might arguably have been a bit dated by the time it entered service. Four AN/M3 .50 cal machine guns and some unguided rockets under the wings might have been sufficient in 1949, but just a few years later you really needed better than that. But given how CAC's version of the Sabre (the CA-27) replaced the .50 cals with a pair of 30mm ADEN cannons and soon added underwing pylons for AIM-9B Sidewinders, it's not unreasonable at all to think that the same design team would've made those alterations to the CA-23. Though given its size (twice as big as the Sabre), it probably wouldn't have been as agile. But most early supersonic fighters weren't especially agile in general. And its size would've given it the growth potential to add a radar later, something that wasn't possible with the CA-27. (As the USAF's F-86D shows, putting a radar on a Sabre requires a pretty radical redesign.)
    1