F-35 Lightning II developments

[Coati]

A bit off topic, but here some background about the tankering issue, or the non-tankering issue (although it should be clear that a tanker fleet is a huge force multiplier, regardless of range of fighters).

Aerial Refueling, Northern Defence and the F-​35

By Richard Shimooka

Much has been written about the recent revelation that the Canadian Forces intended to buy F-​35s incompatible with its current aerial tanking fleet, including a recent editorial by the National Post on December 27, 2012. This is a somewhat arcane area of military capability that merits further discussion.

To start there are two systems for aerial refueling: boom, and probe and drogue. Currently the Royal Canadian Air Force’s CF-​18s use the probe method. The F-​35A uses the boom system, though Canada had previously contemplated modifying it to accept both. The RCAF only possesses probe and drogue refueling aircraft; two converted Airbus CC-​150T Polaris and five Lockheed Martin CC-​130H (T) Hercules transports. The latter are generally limited in their capability and will be withdrawn from service by 2017.

Thus the Polaris represents the core of RCAF effective air refueling capability, however they are not an essential part of its Northern defence strategy. In the North, the primary mission the Canadian CF-​18s face is intercepting Russian TU-​95 Bear bombers and electronic warfare aircraft seeking to probe Canadian and American airspace. For the most part, these operations are intended to test NORAD defences and ferret out specific electronic transmissions, such as the new radar systems being fielded on fighters like the F-​22 and F-​15C. However the frequency of Russian operations is not predictable and thus requires Canadian fighter aircraft to operate on alert.

With only two CC-​150T in service, it is impractical to permanently assign them to NORAD operations. Canada has never had more than two such tankers and not one between 1997 and 2009. This is partly why the Polaris fleet does not currently possess the avionics necessary to operate in the north, and will not until an upgrade scheduled to start later this year. Rather, the CC-​150Ts are generally used to support foreign operations, like the recent campaign over Libya. They accelerate the deployment of forces into a theater and add some refueling capacity to the joint effort. As such, they are not considered necessary for Canada to participate in foreign operations. In the North, most live intercepts of Bears occur without any aerial refueling, as CF-​18s operate from forward operating bases. When midair refueling is required in the North, a United States Air Force KC-​135 tanker usually provides fuel to CF-​18s. Much like how Canadian and American fighters jointly patrol our airspaces, tankers are shared through the NORAD treaty. This resource pooling for mutual defence was the original intent behind its creation in the 1950s.

With this in mind, the Canadian Forces’ decision not to install the fuel probe on the F-​35A was made on the basis of two factors. First, the F-35’s range exceeds that of our current CF-​18s and is around that of other fighters available to Canada. If selected, it will reduce the need for air-​to-​air refueling. Second, regardless of what fighter is chosen, Canada must replace its Polaris tankers by 2025, which will have reached the end of their service lives. The two models available for purchase (the KC-​46 and A330 MRTT) are both primarily equipped with booms. Another approach under consideration is to follow the United Kingdom and other allies’ lead and contract out this service to a private company. This is possible because tankers operate well behind the front lines and are at low risk from attack.

Transitioning towards the boom system will increase the Canadian Forces’ flexibility. It would allow Canada to refuel all its aircraft, including the CC-​177 transport, which is currently not possible with the Polaris. Moreover booms would enhance interoperability with allies, particularly the United States. The challenges of utilizing an incompatible system can be witnessed in the RCAF’s day-​to-​day operations. To support Canadian CF-​18s on a NORAD mission, USAF KC-​135s must be reequipped with a drogue basket and crewed with qualified personnel. Unfortunately, the latter is not always available, because only a few crews are capable of undertaking probe and drogue refueling compared to the nominal boom system. This can limit the RCAF’s ability to respond to threats against Canadian and American sovereignty. Looking forward, boom systems will become the most commonly used system among our non-​US allies, in large part due to foreign sales of the F-​35. Standardizing our refueling system with them will facilitate our ability to operate in a joint fashion, and enhance Canada’s security both at home and abroad.

Richard Shimooka is an independent consultant and analyst with the Conference of Defence Associations Institute. Between 2007 and 2012 he was a fellow at the Defence Management Studies Programme at Queen’s University. He is also a member of the International Institute of Strategic Studies. Richard has written several works that cover a diverse array of topics, including Canadian defence and foreign policy, procurement policy and organizational culture.

The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect those of the CDA Institute.

https://www.cdainstitute.ca/en/blog/ent ... d-the-f-35

[Piet Luijken]

WASHINGTON — A top ranking US senator slammed Canadian Prime Minister-elect Justin Trudeau's plan to abandon the F-35 joint strike fighter, less than 24 hours after elections handed the reins of power to the leader of the Canadian Liberal Party.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, who is president pro tempore of the US Senate, called the move "stupid" on Tuesday.

Hatch, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, has touted his own role in bringing the first operational F-35 squadron to Hill Air Force Base in Utah.

"That's to their detriment because it's the most important fighter plane ever built," Hatch said of Canada and the F-35, respectively. "They have the right to do whatever they want to, but it's stupid. If they want to have any kind of flight superiority, the F-35 gives it to them."

Canada committed to buying 65 of the fifth-generation fighters in 2010 as replacements for its fleet of CF-18s. However, in 2012, that buy was paused by then-Prime Minister Stephen Harper amidst accusations his government had lied about the true cost of the fighter program.

[PilotoRico]

WASHINGTON — A top ranking US senator slammed Canadian Prime Minister-elect Justin Trudeau's plan to abandon the F-35 joint strike fighter, less than 24 hours after elections handed the reins of power to the leader of the Canadian Liberal Party.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, who is president pro tempore of the US Senate, called the move "stupid" on Tuesday.

Hatch, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, has touted his own role in bringing the first operational F-35 squadron to Hill Air Force Base in Utah.

"That's to their detriment because it's the most important fighter plane ever built," Hatch said of Canada and the F-35, respectively. "They have the right to do whatever they want to, but it's stupid. If they want to have any kind of flight superiority, the F-35 gives it to them."

Canada committed to buying 65 of the fifth-generation fighters in 2010 as replacements for its fleet of CF-18s. However, in 2012, that buy was paused by then-Prime Minister Stephen Harper amidst accusations his government had lied about the true cost of the fighter program.

It makes me laugh... the same type of top senator that call the F-35 the right aircraft to replace the A-10 in CAS role... who is stupid...

[atla]

According to the Dutch paper Telgraaf, the F35 will be about 1 mjn dollar per plane more expensive if the Canadians don't buy them.

http://www.telegraaf.nl/binnenland/2464 ... ada__.html

[Coati]

So 27 million more for us (first 10 are already purchased). On a total of 4.5 Billion. Not really a big impact...
Well, one extra FMS order will reduce the cost again,...

[Coati]

And here a new potential order already might be in the air...New round new chances. After yesterdays news of the expected bail out of Canada, the next competition is opened (a Finnish order would nicely fill the gap of 65 open production slots...):

Finland launches HX fighter procurement program

The Finnish defence forces have been given a mandate from the country's government to begin procurement of a new fighter under the HX programme
The country is expected to look at the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, Dassault Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon, Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter, and the Saab JAS-39 Gripen as options
Finland's defence forces received authorisation from the country's defence minister, Jussi Niinistö, to launch a procurement programme to replace the country's Boeing F/A-18C Hornet fleet on 20 October.

It is expected that the current Hornet fleet will be phased out from 2025 onwards.
According to the working group's report, requests for information are currently being drafted for delivery in February 2016. Requests for quotes are to be issued in 2018, before a tender is issued in February 2019. Contracts are planned to be signed in 2021, with an initial operating capability being reached in early 2025. Full operational capability is to be reached around 2030.

more here:
http://www.janes.com/article/55405/finl ... -programme

[ehusmann]

Are the Fins still bound to fighter capability only, no strike capability? If so, I see little chance for the JSF. Simple overkill.

Erwin

[Coati]

No the want a multi role fighter platform this time.

"The report recommended that the country required a multirole fighter to replace the F/A-18 Hornet fleet, with the country's air defence to also be augmented by ground-based air defence systems."

[Richard from Rotterdam]

WASHINGTON — A top ranking US senator slammed Canadian Prime Minister-elect Justin Trudeau's plan to abandon the F-35 joint strike fighter, less than 24 hours after elections handed the reins of power to the leader of the Canadian Liberal Party.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, who is president pro tempore of the US Senate, called the move "stupid" on Tuesday.

Hatch, the top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, has touted his own role in bringing the first operational F-35 squadron to Hill Air Force Base in Utah.

"That's to their detriment because it's the most important fighter plane ever built," Hatch said of Canada and the F-35, respectively. "They have the right to do whatever they want to, but it's stupid. If they want to have any kind of flight superiority, the F-35 gives it to them."

Canada committed to buying 65 of the fifth-generation fighters in 2010 as replacements for its fleet of CF-18s. However, in 2012, that buy was paused by then-Prime Minister Stephen Harper amidst accusations his government had lied about the true cost of the fighter program.

It makes me laugh... the same type of top senator that call the F-35 the right aircraft to replace the A-10 in CAS role... who is stupid...

Most likely his re-election campaign was co-financed by Lockheed Martin. With the Ogden ALC chosen for major maintenance work on the F-35, it's the jobs he's trying to protect. But he's a politician so plays the technology card in stead of simply stating his own interest.

[ehusmann]

No the want a multi role fighter platform this time.

Apparantly the restrictions are no longer in place indeed. From what I could gather, the Finns were not allowed to have more than 60 combat aircraft (twin seaters count as trainers), no planes with internal bomb bays, no guided missiles and no offensive weapons. With buying 65 F-35s they would be in violation with all these. However, these restrictions were the result of a treaty with the Soviets which has been nullified

Erwin

[SquAdmin]

From what I gather on wikipedia, those restrictions were already lifted before Finland received its first Hornets in the mid-nineties.

[ehusmann]

Delivered maybe, ordered certainly not. The reason the Hornets are designated F-18C and not F/A-18C is precisely because of those restrictions. Also, Finnish hornets never trained in the attack role, although that may also have changed already.

Erwin

[Coati]

This year the Finnish conducted bombing practices with the F-18s for the first time since WWII using JDAMs (so now they should be named F/A-18 ). The aircraft are in the process of being modified (half the fleet already done)

Mon, 01 Jun, 2015 12:09:23 AM
Air Force to drop bomb at Rovajärvi during exercise

The Finnish Air Force intends to drop the first hard bomb since the Second World War during exercise next week, reported Finnish language daily Helsingin Sanomat.

The goal is to drop American precision bombs at the Rovajärvi artillery practice range.
The bombing is part of Hornet fighter jets second lifecycle update. Half of the Finnish Hornet jets have already been updated.
The Air Force was last enabled to fire air to ground bombs during the Second World War.

The F-18 Hornets are loaded with American made Jdam bombs during the test bombing

http://www.finlandtimes.fi/national/201 ... g-exercise

[SquAdmin]

Delivered maybe, ordered certainly not.

They were ordered in 1992 and the treaty was dropped in 1990. However, the F-18 designation could have been influenced by it.

[ehusmann]

Or Wikipedia is not entirely correct

Either way, restrictions by now at least are no longer in place, so will not influence decision for new fighter.

Erwin