Canadian figther (why have we stop making figther)

[toxicfreak]

 hello im new here . finally a excellent  forum on  figther . ( english is not my first launguage )

welll well i always ask myself why Canada stop making there own figther ,
could someone throw me a bone here ..... ( bombardier could make a very nice figther)

we make the cf-100 and the arrow   and after nothing more but  expensive usa figther  at the exception of the f-5 ( we should have keep those over the over priced and  defective f-18 (cf-118) .

Maybe the Hawk should become the new canadian figther .


toxicfreak

[Webmaster]

Developing a fighter is very expensive and takes a lot of technology, knowledge and experience. The Arrow was cut because of politics changed their view on the need for a manned interceptor. This basically killed Canada's military aircraft development prospects. Canada could have joined development of fighter aircraft along the way, but Canada's needs (capability-wise) have always been different than the other partners in the programs. Today it is even worse, the government (as far as I know) would rather cut the fighter force altogether than invest in development. However it did become a third tier partner in the JSF program, for 150 million investment, so Canadian industry should benefit a bit from it. I think if the current government stays in place, the number of JSFs eventually ordered will be quite small, probably not enough to make big commitments to NATO... and that's where the Hawk comes in. The NATO flying course on the Hawk in Canada will make up for that big time, as Europe gets more densely populated and defence cuts forcing members to reconsider training facilities.

Welcome to the forum, by the way.

[Viggen]

Hi Toxicfreak..!

As a Swede i kind of know about your dissapointment. Here we developed the Gripen-fighter. Not to many people are happy about it nor is the many poltitions. They have an excuse that it costs to much, Sweden is not involed in any conflicts and so on. (I wonder why that is)?  That its expensive is pretty right, but thats the way it works today.

One good thing  about developing your own fighter is the export capabilities. But that aint easy either since many countries preffer tried out, reliable fighters such as the F16´s and F/A18´s, Migs and Sukhois. Development-costs rises all the time when you want to upgrade your fighter (mostly avionics, radar and weapons), so it can compete with all other types out there on the market.

What some people seem to forget is that developing your own aircraft gives you the best tailormade fighter for your own country.  Both Sweden and Canada are similar when it comes to the nature and the cold. I wonder if the F16 or a Mig29 can spend a night out in minus 30 degrees celsius and then get airborne within five minutes and complete a mission.

The Hawk is a great jet, Canada should buy the Gripen or develop their own fighter. 

[toxicfreak]

well viggen
i would personally prefert  the J-35  DRAKEN that the most neat looking thing ever build
and the last so call J35 MOD concept  prototype, must be a  real monster with canard and  the rest .

even if this a real old figther   it cannot be worst that the cf-118 (f-18) that we are stuck with .....

a other one crash today   


see ya

[Viggen]

That J35 prototype is cool, but that was thought of before they agreed to  build the Gripen fighter. They where thinking of keeping the J35´s and 37´s incase  they dident get the go ahead with Gripen. Then called JAS 39.

Im not very found of Gripen, preffer the old ones like Viggen and Draken. This new fighter looks like it would break up in supersonic flight and it has no personality.  But sure, its defenetly a better fighter then the two oldies. However it does not gain your respect buy it looks but insteed buy its preformance. Something they should show off better at airshows. Saw one recently and i got very disapointed, i know it can do much better. Mayby our pilots cant handel it right...??

Maybe you guys should buy our old Viggen´s??  Then i´ll move to Canada...

[Webmaster]

The Gripen may have been expensive to develop it, but to operate it, it sure will be a lot cheaper than the Viggen! Also the prices at which they are offered on the export market or for lease contracts are not that bad either.

Airshow displays aren't everything. I saw the Gripen couple of times in the past, can't remember a bad show, but it couldn't compete with the F-16/MiG-29/Typhoon/Rafale...and the last two were only flown carefully back then, maybe the Gripen was too. My guess is the pilot or display team just kept it simple, maybe the pilot is not the most experienced around or they don't want to risk anything. Maybe Swedish regulations have changed? Anyway, read the RIAT report, the USAF came with a F-16 display but that didn't mean they were as good as the Dutch/Belgian displays. And then again, it is just a show, I can imagine a combat loaded Gripen will still do much better than a loaded Tornado in real life, although it may seem the other way around at an airshow.

[Viggen]

You have a point there, but displaying your aircraft at an airshow like Gripen is mostly to impress potential buyers. Sure they are perhaps careful, but why fly it out of the country to display it if you just going to "fart around". Then it would be better to display it  here in Sweden under controlled circumstances for buyers and special guests. Really impress them with a hell of a show. But this is just my own oppinoin. 

And yes, it is much cheaper to maintain/service and upgrade then the Saab 37 system. Gripen is a better fighter or they wouldent have replaced the old Viggen. But its sooo small ! !