Comments by "LRRPFco52" (@LRRPFco52) on "CBC News" channel.

It was a major missed opportunity to build the training squadrons while awaiting arrival of Block 4 F-35A a few years from now.
1
Russia has invaded more nations than any, then rapes and pillages those nations. Russia has been violating or testing Canadian airspace with nuclear bombers for the last 6 decades, with plenty of recent examples of Bears having to be intercepted by Canadian and US fighters from NORAD. Lots of Russian bots in these comments.
1
@granddukeofmecklenburg The F-35C that the Navy has is superior to them all. It brings back Tomcat fleet air defense stand-off range + another 100nm, with surface detection capabilities no aircraft has had before, with the ability to provide terminal guidance over the horizon for ships and aircraft in the battle group.
1
@granddukeofmecklenburg F-16 is best advised never to get slow with a Hornet. As long as the Viper driver stays above 250kts, he'll beat the Hornet.
1
@WalrusWinking F-22 & F-35 are omnirole, not multi role.
1
@WalrusWinking F-35 flights perform interception missions better than any previous interceptor design could dream of doing. Guys out of conversion training with no real fighter experience are humiliating seasoned F-15C vets in BVR, and doing very well in BFM. The F-35 can then pivot and go decimate the airfield and hardened shelters where threat air came from, eliminate C4 nodes, jam early warning and SAM platforms, and put bombs into the mobile launchers that shut off RF xmit and scooted, because it's still tracking them on IR spectrum interleaved with other F-35s.
1
@WalrusWinking Roger. The problem with 4th Gen multirole fighters is the training it takes to be good at the two main areas of focus between AA and AG. JDAM made that a lot easier to focus on AA, but OPTEMPO has been almost totally AG until OIR opted up, so no there is more AA focus in CENTCOM. F-22 has been doing Air Dominance, Stealth intercepts JDAM delivery in denied space, EW, Airborne Warning and Control quite well...and in ways no 4th Gen could ever hope to do. F-35 extends those capabilities while adding more with the IR suite and a better data link network.
1
Then ask the question, “Why does Russia not want Canada to have the JSF?”
1
The main drivers in F-35A Unit Flyway and Program Costs have been volume and the design itself. RCAF already knew this and presented it to National Defence, who relayed it to Parliament. Canadian parliamentarians have about zero influence in that, since so many other nations have been ordering and operating F-35s already.
1
@stickdownman Block 3 has been in production for years now. F-35As in operational USAF, RNoAF, and other operators regularly return from sorties 100%-up, ready to re-launch after refueling at higher rates than any existing or previous fighter design in the 4th Generation. Break rates are 6% with Block 3 F-35As, whereas the next lowest break-rate fighter, the F-16C, is at 10%. RCAF could have already been training on F-35A for the past 6 years instead of Parliament throwing advanced AESA Radars into rust bucket CF-18s. One of the most capable AESA radar systems in the world has been installed in scores of F-18s built in the 1980s, which was a colossal waste of resources.
1
@Paying more will save the planet. Canada is one of the biggest industrial sectors that has the capacity to manufacture critical systems for JSF, and has been doing so for many years now. The list of Canadian companies making JSF subsystems and components is huge, yet never part of the discussion in Canadian presstitute spigots.
1
@pauly5418 The lowest prices on F-35As was in Lot 14. Those numbers will never be seen again due to inflation and all the TR3 and TR4 that are part of Block 4. Good news is the Unit Cost increase isn’t that much, so it’s still lower cost than any other Western design on the market Canada was looking at, including the failure that is the Gripen E.
1
@ferleychery7540 You don’t need Block 4 F-35As to do conversion training for pilots and the RCAF infrastructure, which takes years to accomplish. Canada is way behind the power curve in that regard right now. There is no need to do the hardware upgrades to Block 3s used as conversion trainers, and most of the TR3 is software anyway.
1
@swh0rd682 The entire series of JSF variants are hardened against extreme cold more than any Gripen. Sweden doesn’t have a fraction of the capacity to harden fighters for that climate, and Sweden is warm compared to the northern bases for RCAF NORAD mission sets. The F-35A, B, and C all underwent extreme climatic testing and hardening at the Climatic Test Center at Eglin AFB, Florida, which can generate temps and extremes on-command within the facility. Gripen is a non-starter in that argument.
1
For its targets and their crews, yes.
1
@Bomber_Boi Didn't Canada just have one of the worst mass shootings in history? Not to be gloated upon as it is a terrible thing, but internal crime of a nation is found everywhere and has nothing to do with this topic.
1
@xmlthegreat As to major sub assemblies, no single State has the industrial capacity to make even half of the F-35's components. When you look at: * Engine * Radar * EOTS * DAS * RF antennae suite * Quad CPU bank * Fiber optic lines * Servo-pneumatics * Fuselage * Wings * Tails * Fuel pumps * Canopy with stealth coating * Composites You start to see why.
1
@xmlthegreat F-35A costs $80 million. People overlook the fact that there are actually 3 different aircraft, not 1, so when you compare it to the development of 3 4th Gen fighters and their ancillary systems that are integrated into the F-35 from the start, then adjust for inflation, the numbers make sense. As to performance, we're Looking at a generational leap that we've never seen before across-the-board.
1
@xmlthegreat F-35 Carries a heavier payload than the F-22.
1
Presstitutes are part of a coordinated disinformation campaign against US and allied defense systems since they were influenced by Soviet agents working as college professors. The Russians pushed very aggressively to get agents of influence in our academia for this reason, since they knew they could never match the US military industrial and training capabilities.
1
Dmitri Kozlowsky When we talk about F-35 systems and subcomponents industrial base distribution and infrastructure, I ask, "What few States have the manufacturing capacity to provide: * F135 engine with subcomponents * Rolls Royce lift fan for the B model * APG-81 Antenna, TRMs, power amps, etc. * Ejection system * Cockpit * Advanced Airframe assemblies * Wings * Stabs * Fiber optic lines * Compartmentalized control surface actuators * Fuel pump * Integrated Central Coolant unit * Quad computing central bank * MADL * EOTS * DAS with all the optics, VLO glass apertures * Helmet Mounted Display * Landing gear shafts and struts * Brakes * Wheels & tires * IR signature reduction systems I could go on and on. It takes not only all the States in the US to produce these systems, but international partners as well. Not even half the US States could produce all these systems without moving critical industrial bases to them.
1
Gripen lacks the combat radius and endurance compared to pretty much every other fighter in production right now. The Gripen E cost is higher than the F-35A currently, so you would have to go before the Canadian parliament and argue that case and see what happens. On one hand, you have an Omnirole fighter with better than AWACS coverage for NORAD and Canadian air space (the prime mission of Canadian Air Force), that can also fulfill overseas coalition employment commitments better than any other fighter in existence. On the other hand, you have a lightweight fighter meant to defend Swedish airspace and be exported to nations that are unable to buy F-35As, that has nowhere near the sensor capabilities, with a shorter combat radius and combat air patrol sector.
1
@britishmalayasociety Thailand has been looking into F-35As.
1
The US and Canada have the NORAD agreement dating back for the better part of the last century. It only makes sense that the fighter aircraft that participate in NORAD are able to work together well with sensor and comms commonality. The F-35A provides better-than-AWACS level Situational Awareness not only against incoming Russian bombers, but missiles and overflying low earth orbit satellites as well. It would have been nice if Canada could have been brought in on the F-22 program, but F-22s were too expensive for anyone but the US to purchase, and the F-22 does not have the endurance and loiter time that the F-35A does.
1
@grahamdrew5512 Airborme radar/sensor web can see farther than ground-based. JSF MADL web is unparalleled in this aspect. Gripen is an offense to mention next to it from a purely technical standpoint. Gripen absolutely isn't STOL. It's a LTOL, Long Take-Off and Landing weak T/W ratio platform. F-35A takes off in as short as 550m as demonstrated in Finland in Turku. Gripens took the whole runway, 19-21 second rolls. F-35As in the same sequence only took 9-12 seconds, 1/4 the runway. I measured out all the distances, as well as the times. Gripen time-to-climb when configured is sad. Combat radius with weapons is also shorter. If you see hard numbers for radius, it isn't an accurate number. You can get a long radius with 3 EFTs on Gripen, but weapons and performance will be significantly degraded. Gripen does better with 1 EFT, but is short duration then. F-35A climb rate is world-class. It has high T/W with no parasitic drag, tons of fuel fraction with 0 stores points allocated for sensors or pods. Start-up for F-35s is easier and faster than any other fighter. Start sequence only has a few switches. Gripen is a legacy design in that respect. F-35s have all been subjected to more extreme climatic hardening and ruggedization than the Gripen ever will. Gripen is poorly-funded, poorly-conceived, and poorly-executed as a program. The engine is too small for the airframe, opposite of the Viggen and Draken. Viggen had excellent take off and landing for STOL. Riksdag didn't want to fund it.
1