Can. Govt. intends to upgrade CF188s for service until 2025

[OldSolduer]

Here is a vid of an airshow from 2009.

THAT was awesome. I remember 104s screaming overhead at an altitude of maybe 500 feet, balls to the wall, when they used to fly from Cold Lake to Winnipeg (I think) when I was about 11 or 12 (1968/69) IIRC. Very cool.

 

[Cloud Cover]

I'm assuming you mean the F/A-18E (single seat) instead of the F variant (dual-seat, with a Weapons Systems Officer at the back)?  If you mean F (fair enough), we need to train ACSOs as WSOs, etc.  Not impossible (and I'm sure some would welcome it) but it'd take some time, even if we piggy-backed on the USN or RAAF WSO training system.

No, I think this is a newer or at least a different version than that of the E/F models. Boeing seems to make the differentiation themselves at their website: http://www.boeing.com/boeing/defense-space/military/fa18ef/


The Super Hornet is built by a team that includes Boeing, Northrop Grumman, GE Aviation, and Raytheon.

For more information on the Super Hornet, read the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet overview (PDF) or Product card (PDF)

For more information on the Advanced Super Hornet, read the overview (PDF) or Product Card (PDF).

 

[AlexanderM]

No, I think this is a newer or at least a different version than that of the E/F models. Boeing seems to make the differentiation themselves at their website: http://www.boeing.com/boeing/defense-space/military/fa18ef/


The Super Hornet is built by a team that includes Boeing, Northrop Grumman, GE Aviation, and Raytheon.

For more information on the Super Hornet, read the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet overview (PDF) or Product card (PDF)


For more information on the Advanced Super Hornet, read the overview (PDF) or Product Card (PDF).

You mean the Advanced Super Hornet??  Conformal fuel tanks, weapons pod, etc.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/navy-pleased-with-quotadvancedquot-super-hornet-tests-wants-more-397927/

 

[Cloud Cover]

Yes, as per the pdf that I attached in my last posting.

 

[Kirkhill]

W601

Maybe they don't need to lease 70 or 80 Super Hornets.  Maybe 24 would get them by until the next decision point.

 

[a_majoor]

The problem with leasing a small number of Super or Super-Duper Hornets will be the same problem we have in the Army written large: multiple micro fleets which are not logistically comparable with each other, and having a logistics cost that consumes all available resources. If it is crippling with relatively simple kit like trucks, imagine what will happen when you do this with multi million dollar aircraft......

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Yet the Aussies intend to do just that with 24 SH, 12 Growlers and 72 F-35's. Frankly I think the RCAF is capable of such a feat as well.

 

[CougarKing]

From last month...

*Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Source: National Post

Matt Gurney: We don’t have enough fighter jets to whip out

Excerpt:

Whatever the current state of our fighter force, however, there is something that can’t be denied. We need a much, much bigger air fleet than we currently have, or that we are expected to have after we purchase our next fighter jet to replace the aging CF-18s. As I have detailed in a previous column, our current Air Force fields four operational squadrons (Air Force geeks: Yes, I know they’re only grouped into two administrative squadrons) of 12 CF-18s each, for a total of 48.

There are more planes than that, close to 80, at last count, I believe, but some are always out of service. We need jets for training missions, for long-term maintenance and upgrades, and some jets are even put at the disposal of our space agency for research purposes. Of the 48 jets actually assigned to combat squadrons, only about 34 are available at any given moment. This is because the CF-18, like any advanced fighter jet, is not always mission ready. The CF-18 has a decent availability of about 70%. Crunch the numbers: 48 x .7 = 33.6, or, rounded up to the nearest fighter.

(...FULL ARTICLE AT LINK ABOVE)

 

[YZT580]

rounded up?  Bet that .6 is a tricky beast to land.

 

[Danjanou]

rounded up?  Bet that .6 is a tricky beast to land.

it doesn't

 

[smale436]

It's all well and good for them to quote how many are "available". Serviceability is a whole other story and based on the last 2 of my 7 years working on this airframe, I honestly hope I'm not working on them in 2016 let alone 2025. Even not counting manpower issues, the supply system will be the nail in the coffin. (And that's no fault of the individuals who work in the supply system.) So many jobs held up for weeks waiting on washers and bolts that seem to only be kept at depots in Montreal or Halifax or wherever. Or even if you have get the part you need immediately, other problems happen in the repair process that delay things even further.

But I digress. We do what we can. The pilots and bosses are grateful. And if I was a pilot, I'd have full confidence strapping in. But things will only get worse before they get better.

 

[observor 69]

"Canada Wades Into The Fight Against ISIS With Dated Weaponry"
A pair of CF-18 Hornets, a CC-150 Polaris tanker-transport and a CP-140 Aurora took to the skies above Iraq yesterday as part of the international mission that is now known officially as Operation Inherent Resolve. This was Canada's first aerial foray into the battle against ISIS militants in Iraq.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/canada-wades-into-the-fight-against-isis-with-dated-wea-1653657537/+pgeorge

Some interesting reading and photos about our CF-18s in Operation Inherent Resolve.

 

[Kirkhill]

Interesting points about platform vs weaponry.

Especially with this "USAF Strike Chief Urges B-52 Engine Replacement "

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20141019/DEFREG02/310190014/USAF-Strike-Chief-Urges-B-52-Engine-Replacement

Also the point about the AIM-9X could be juxtaposed with this "Lockheed Martin to upgrade F-22 for AIM-9X missile"

http://army.ca/forums/threads/116766/post-1335418.html#msg1335418