Canadian F-111's

OK so I just had a brain wave.

The US has like ~290 F-111's sitting in the boneyard right? We take em, ship them to Bombardier or Bristol Aerospace, and start working over the airframes like crazy. Slap in a APG-79 and racks for AMRAAM's.

Ta dah! We got us a long range air defense plane that can loiter around the arctic and still shoot PGM's and do other things. Like a MiG-31. D:<

...How stupid am I being here?

http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-F-111-Supercruise-2001.html

Just to give some background.

IIRC the F-111's downfall was a large amount of technical and mechanical issues as a product of being a rather old aircraft. More generally it was replaced by newer or more specialised aircraft, the F15E and B1B.
I imagine it'd be the same logic as my idea of refurbing or building new airframes of Harriers to end the F-35 debacle.

Yeah. But we'd still probably be able to get a couple of decades out of them and bid time until proper aircraft become available.

I think they have structural problems. They tend to overhaul and maintain equipment if all they have to do is replace the lead bricks and shiny tabs, but when you have to replace structure wholesale, it tends to go to the boneyard.

Yeah. But we'd still probably be able to get a couple of decades out of them and bid time until proper aircraft become available.

If Iran can keep the F-14s and AIM-54s, then by-god, the Aussies should be smart enough to keep a few F-111s flying in America's face

All of my Wat?
I don't hate this idea; but the F-111 is actually a very nasty airplane to have anything to do with but fly. They use toxic, cancerous chemicals in the airframe and construction that have lead to alot of disability claims; so i don't think anyone would want to touch that with a ten-pole stick.

Now with that said; Canada actually having a military aerospace industry capable of producing combat aircraft would be great; alto Uncle Sam wouldn't like that at all.

Bombardier can do it. They produce nice aircraft as it stands, the hop to military wouldn't be so bad. (especially considering how much expertise they can probably ship from Lear too)

The problem is that Canada isn't going to be a steady customer, and the big budget customers (India, Brazil, Europe, US, Russia, China) have domestic capability or are farming out to someone already.

Right now would be a shitty time to get into that business.

Allot of stuff uses toxic crap tbh.

The military catches flak because its the military and when nobody wants to blame themselves they blame the EVOL MIRITARY COMPREX even though they signed up for it.

Also,



Canadian Future Fighter Concept 2013 :>

Airplanes are toxic. Military airplanes have to be very high performance, so they use high performance materials, regardless of their toxicity. The minimum level of heed paid in normal aircraft design goes out the window in that case.


don't lick the ailerons, dwi.

Chinese car companies have been getting away with using asbestos for years now. Toxic materials are everywhere.

The only remotely sane plan for a "Canadian" fighter would be to piggy back on South Korea's or Japan's programs. But that won't happen. Going alone would just put us in the same boat as Sweden or France.

Now if there was something Canada could and should get in on it's UAVs. There is a lot we could do with a MALE (or HALE) UAV at home and abroad, the market is there and the cost would be tolerable.

IDK if Britain has any plans for a home grown UCAV but that would be another worthwhile avenue.

IIRC, Britain's interest is typically in small manportable UAV reconnaissance drones.
If we want something attacked, we'll typically task some fast mover onto it or if a drone is expressly required, we'll probably just pass the information onto the Americans and wait for them to do it.

With all the air force sharing going on in Afghanistan, the British forces most likely haven't seen a desirable need for their own UCAV ability. When are we ever going to fight anything without the Americans by our side with their Global Hawk and Predator drones?

...
UAV operator is one of the few Royal Artillery roles that isn't being cut.

Not to mention that the RAF operates it's own larger drones.

The RN is also going to need a STOVL UCAV for use off the new carriers at some point in the not-too-distant future.

There is a 'British' UAV - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchkeeper_WK450 though turns it is built by foreign companies anyway for probably more than the off the shelf cost of a US drone.

Somewhat more extreme - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAE_Taranis

A STOVL UCAV is just silly. The carriers will either be upgraded to CATOBAR in due course or sold/run down respectively with the one retained primarily to show there is a capital ship on paper.