Senior serving British officers certainly are much more open and frank than ours:

Air Vice-Marshal Greg Bagwell, commander of the RAF’s No 1 Group, which controls all Britain’s fast jet combat aircraft, said that Britain was likely to end up with only six fighter and bomber squadrons, half its current number.

He warned: “That might not be quite enough.”

Air Vice-Marshal Bagwell’s remarks, in a briefing last week to Defense News, a trade journal, are among the most outspoken by any senior RAF commander.

He warned that even the reductions that have been publicly announced — from 12 fast-jet squadrons to eight — would leave the RAF only “just about” able to do its current tasks, with no leeway for the unexpected…

In the medium-term, over the next seven to 10 years, Air Vice-Marshal Bagwell said, the RAF “will be a six-squadron world; that’s what’s on the books”. He said he expected there to be five squadrons of Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft and just one of the Harrier’s long-term replacement, the Joint Strike Fighter. “I expect a single [JSF] squadron in 2020 and that’s it,” he said [more on the UK's F-35 plans here, plus the RAF's giving up aerial maritime patrol].

Asked whether this left the RAF on the same level as Belgium, he replied: “I think we’re slightly above Belgium, and we are not a Belgium-minded country.”

He added: “I might, over the next few years, argue that that might not be quite enough.” As recently as the 1990s the RAF had 30 front-line fast-jet squadrons [emphasis added]…

An RAF comprising six fast-jet squadrons would be smaller than at any point since its foundation in 1918. It would take British combat air power back to the pre-RAF days of the Royal Flying Corps.

Belgium no longer has a stand-alone air force, but an “air component”, with five fast-jet squadrons. In squadron terms the RAF of 2020 will be only slightly larger, but will still have significantly more aircraft, with an estimated minimum of 135 fast jets to Belgium’s 70.

Air Vice-Marshal Bagwell said that one way around the shortages was to collaborate more with the French [emphasis added, more here: "Good froggies!"].

“It looks like we are going to twin 3 Squadron [a Typhoon squadron] with one of the [French] Rafale [fighter-bomber] squadrons. I’ll make a prediction we will have British officers flying Rafale from a carrier within a few years. I’m quite sure of it.”..

Meanwhile:

U.K. Harrier’s Farewell
…

(All Pictures: UK MOD Crown Copyright 2010)
[Note the snow.]

Earlier on the Harrier:

Harrier’s last sea jump

By the way, the Canadian Air Force has two operational fast air squadrons (CF-18 Hornet “gun squadrons”): 409 at Cold Lake, Alberta, and 425 at Bagotville, Quebec.

The Royal Navy, for its part, is also fading fairly fast:

The Royal Navy’s new flagship is a ferry…

Lots more here on the recent UK big defence cuts.

Update: A pilot from 425 Squadron is flying Tornados in Afstan on exchange with the RAF (via Milnews.ca and the Spotlight on Military News and International Affairs).

Upperdate: A version of this post is at the Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute’s 3Ds Blog.

Mark
Ottawa

…whilst waiting for the F-35C.  A new order for Super Hornets running until 2015.  Will Canadian governments really need fighters more capable than the US Navy for our future foreign policy and expeditionary military deployments?  All the some 20 we might actually send:

Boeing lands $5.3 billion fighter jet contract with Navy

Boeing landed a $5.3 billion contract Tuesday to build more than 124 fighter jets over the next four years.

The latest deal calls for the delivery of 66 F/A-18 Super Hornets and 58 EA-18G Growler aircraft from 2012 to 2015…

More:

…
This puts the per-unit price at about $43 million, not including engines, though each variant would have slightly different pricing…

It seems to me the Canadian government would be in a rather strong position, in terms of negotiating prices in a competition for a Canadian fighter purchase, given Boeing’s obvious interest in keeping the line going.

Further discussion here at Milnet.ca.  While they would say that, wouldn’t they?

Liberals’ objection to fighter-jets deal puts high-calibre jobs at risk, industry warns

More here on that, and earlier:

F-35: Norwegians deploy air brakes

Please people, on all sides, think about what new fighters might realistically be called upon by future governments to do rather than just being presently political.

Update: What our government is not telling us:

…
None of the eight countries that committed $4.5 billion to F-35 development has placed an order for production jets, although Australia and Canada have said they plan to.

The U.S. and Lockheed would like to secure orders to help lower the production costs of new airplanes. Israel will buy 20, but those will be paid for with U.S. military aid [more here]…

Meanwhile the Super Hornet’s price has been steadily declining:

…
I researched Boeing’s press releases to find out how much the Super Hornet’s price has changed over the last decade. Even as the company introduced the Block II Super Hornet/Growler with active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, the price has steadily declined. Keep in mind these figures don’t include ‘actuals’ — Congressional plus-ups make true cost comparisons impossible. But the trend is clear.

• MYP 1 (June 2000) — orders 222 aircraft for $8.9 billion, or $40.09 million per copy. Adjusted for inflation based on consumer price index: $49.45 million (2009 dollars)
• MYP 2 (December 2003) — orders 210 aircraft for $8.6 billion, or $40.95 million per copy. Adjusted for inflation based on consumer price index: $47.65 million (2009 $), a 7.6% decrease
• MYP 3 (September 2010) — orders 124 aircraft for $5.3 billion, or $42.72 million per copy, a 10.4% decline compared to MYP-2 and 13.6% decline compared to MYP-1

* Boeing MYP contracts exclude government furnished equipment, which includes engines [emphasis added]

Mark
Ottawa

I wonder if our government will comment (hah!), and whether our opposition or media will notice.  The Norwegian government, quite unlike ours, is actually discussing F-35 program realities seriously.  From a Defense Technology (Aviation Week) blog:

Norway Delays JSF Purchase

Ignoring a stern warning from Joint Strike Fighter program leaders this summer, Norwegian defense minister Grete Faremo announced earlier today that Norway would delay its acquisition of the F-35A to take account of delays in the systems development and demonstration (SDD) program announced in March.

Norway now plans to acquire no more than four aircraft for delivery in 2016 (contract year 2014), for training purposes, but main-force deliveries will not start until 2018. Previous plans called for 20 deliveries in 2016-17.

Faremo says that the most important issue is to make sure that the F-35 is fully operational before it replaces the F-16 and implies that Norway wants to buy more aircraft at multi-year-production prices. Norway is changing its schedule, she says, to “ensure operational maturity and optimum cost of production on the Norwegian aircraft.” (Under previous plans, Norway would be byuing most of its aircraft from low-rate initial production batches.)

The minister also notes that the re-scheduled SDD program “should [put] more emphasis on risk management, cost control, staffing of critical positions, test plans and monitoring by the vendor”, and adds that all additional costs due to the delay will be absorbed by the US.

This is probably not what JSF program leaders have been looking for, given Lockheed Martin executive vice-president Tom Burbage’s warnings at Farnborough that backsliding partners would incur higher prices:  Norway appears to have concluded that the opposite is the case.

Of other early JSF customers, Denmark has deferred its decision and the Netherlands has officially confirmed that cost increases are likely to have a “considerable” effect on its program.  In the FY2011-2015 order years – LRIP batches 4 through 8 – well over one-third of JSFs are destined for non-US customers, and program managers have repeatedly said that disruptions to the ramp-up will cause unit cost targets to move out of reach.

Earlier:

The F-35 and Canadian industry: What does the 2006 MoU say?/US Upperdate–plus Dutch

Pentagon response to Bears over Calgary, Toronto, Montreal/F-35 fact check [Norway] Update

Looks like it will take quite a bit of time before Canadian companies start making much of the big money the government is touting from F-35 international sales:

F-35: Video of Gov’t ministers before Commons’ national defence committee/Real reason for decision Update

Mark
Ottawa

From the Canadian Air Force:

…
10:15 a.m. – 11:30 a.m.

Canada Aviation and Space Museum
Aviation and Rockliffe Parkways
Ottawa, Ontario

70^th Anniversary Battle of Britain Ceremony

» Poster (JPG 170KB)

…
Canada’s Air Force in association with the Air Force Association of Canada, Canada Aviation and Space Museum, Vintage Wings Canada and Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum, invites the people of Ottawa to show their appreciation to veterans and especially the Canadians who participated in the Battle of Britain, by attending this stirring and highly visual event.

• View/download this year’s poster (JPG 170KB)
  
• View/download past year’s posters

Features

This year’s Battle of Britain Ceremony will feature:

• Fly-pasts* by Vintage Wings of Canada and Spitfires and Hurricanes, Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum’s Avro Lancaster and by Canadian Forces aircraft such as the CF-18 Hornet fighter jet, CC-130 Hercules, and CC-177 Globemaster III
• The Central Band of the Canadian Forces, Air Command Pipes and Drums
• Canadian Forces and Air Cadet members on parade alongside veterans

* Fly-pasts are dependant on weather and aircraft availability. This is not an air show.

Weather Conditions

• Weather permitting; the ceremony will proceed as planned with fly-pasts. Should it rain, the ceremony will be held inside the Museum without fly-pasts. If weather conditions are in question, recorded updates will be provided at 613-945-7701.

Admission and Seating

• Admission to the ceremony is free.
• Please note that lawn chairs are not permitted and seating is limited and will be available on a first come first serve basis. Spectators should be seated by 10:15 a.m.

…

Parking info and directions follow at link.

History of the battle here, lot’s more on the ceremony including, photo and video galleries, at left on main link.

RAF Battle of Britain 70th Anniversary site here.

More on Canadians in the battle here, and here featuring the “Canadian” RAF 242 Squadron, which flew Hawker Hurricanes and was commanded by Douglas Bader (a particular hero of mine).  Stan Turner, much more here, was one of the squadron’s leading Canadian pilots; I knew him when he was Canadian Air Attaché in Moscow in the mid-50s and I was eight and nine–he kindly gave me copies of some Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft and Jane’s Fighting Ships from the 40s and 50s, which I still have:

…

RAF & RCAF  G/C   -   DSO, DFC & Bar,
War Cross (Cz) & Medal for Bravery (Cz)
…

The squadron:

Battle-hardened pilots of No.242 (Canadian) Fighter Squadron pose in front of the Commanding Officer’s Hawker Hurricane Mk.I at RAF Station Duxford. (L- R) D.W. Crowley-Milling (RAF), P/O Hugh Norman Tamblyn from Yorkton, Saskatchewan-killed in action 3 April 1941, F/L Stan Turner from Toronto, Ontario, P/O Norman Neil Campbell from St.Thomas, Ontario-killed in action 17 October 1940. P/O William ‘Willie’ Lidstone McKnight from Edmonton, Alberta-killed in action 12 January 1941, S/L D.R.S ‘Douglas’ Bader-Commanding Officer of No. 242 (Canadian) Fighter Squadron, F/L G.E. Ball (RAF)-killed in action after Battle of Britain, P/O M.G. Homer (RAF)-killed in action 27 September 1940, P/O M.K. Brown of Kincardine, Ontario – killed in flying accident on 21 February, 1941.

Earlier on the Blitz that continued, with a Noel Coward music video, “London Pride” (do listen), from Publius.

Update thought: Note the fatalities amongst those in the photo immediately above. This is Duxford today: a truly great aviation museum which I’ve visited with our son, thanks to my English brother-in-law:

IMPERIAL WAR MUSEUM DUXFORD
WAR SHAPES LIVES

From its Battle of Britain webpage:

…

“Never was so much owed by so many to so few” The Prime Minister
…

Mark
Ottawa

Something our government or Air Force does not mention.  From the International Institute for Strategic Studies on the UK and the F-35 (links added, the British are conducting a serious defence review–unlike us):

…
Combat capabilities

As well as equipping the carriers, the F-35 [more in this article on the F-22] is planned to be a key element of the RAF’s future combat capability, providing it with a stealthy platform for first-day-of-war operations in contested air space, probably in concert with US forces [emphasis added]. For high-end operations the F-35 would be used to penetrate defended air space, with the aircraft’s low-observable characteristics degrading the engagement range of surface-to-air missiles (SAM) such as the Russian-made S-300/S-400 families of weapons.

The Typhoon [more here], equipped with stand-off air-to-surface weapons, could operate in support of the F-35 in prosecuting strike missions where the SAM threat could be avoided or negated. The Typhoon was originally designed for air-to-air combat against the Soviet bloc, though with a secondary air-to-surface capability. Since then military needs have changed with the growth of far-flung ground operations and an increased requirement for air support. Arguably, however, one effect of the RAF’s focus on trying to sustain its requirement for 232 aircraft was to slow the pace of development of the Typhoon‘s air-to-surface capability. Within the RAF force structure the Typhoon is still seen as the primary air superiority platform – tasked in the air-defence role both in the UK and in the Falkland Islands – with a secondary air-to-surface capability. This is presently limited to precision-guided bombs, but will be expanded with additional air-to-surface weaponry.

The planned introduction of an active electronically scanned array radar in combination with the Meteor beyond-visual range air-to-air missile for the Typhoon will also enhance it as an air superiority platform. This could allow the aircraft to be used to provide fighter support for the F-35 at stand-off range, without penetrating SAM engagement zones…

Here’s what I wrote when the government first announced its intention to buy the F-35:

…
Another thing the government isn’t mentioning is the primary role of the F-35 for the US. This is how the US Navy sees it (USAF is no different):

…the true introduction of a next-generation weapon system capable of providing joint, coalition striking power on Day One…

That’s why stealth is so important, to shield the aircraft in an initial attack against targets protected by a heavy and effective air defence system. How likely is it that Canada will ever participate in such an attack (think the start of the two wars with Iraq)?..

Yet the only role our government and Air Force tout for the F-35 is defence of Canadian air space–especially our “Arctic sovereignty“. See also, and “Related Posts”:

“Own the air”

Update: Post is the basis for this in the National Post’s “Full Comment” (the commenters hate it, one describes me as “another formal [sic] Liberal public servant”–but I was a Rhino, dammit)!

Upperdate thought: My main point is that for the mission the government, and the CAS, are touting stealth is no particular advantage.  And that we are most unlikely to take part in any initial air strikes against a major enemy with a heavy and effective air defence.  If our fighters ever operate abroad again it will be as a (very small) part of a coalition fighter force; I would think ours could take on tasks that do not require stealth in that situation.

The French and Germans are not acquiring stealth fighters; are we that much more likely to need the capability than they?.  Without a real competition based on realistic mission requirements approved by the government, we will not know if the F-35 is in fact good value for the large amount of money.

Uppestdate: If you’re seriously interested in the subject, rather than the politics, take a look at the discussion at Milnet.ca.

Beyond Uppestdate: In the Spotlight on Military News and International Affairs:

…
Canadian Commentary
…
Mark Collins — Unambiguously Ambidextrous
What the F-35 is mainly about – More…

Further beyond…: From The Economist, on the shrinking the UK armed forces are facing:

…The order for F-35 jets, which are to be shared between the navy and the air force, looks certain to be more than halved to around 60…

Heavens to Betsy! We could have more Lightning IIs than the Brits.

Mark
Ottawa

Further to the Upperdate at this post,

Why we need F-35s, or, do the Russians have a radar that can reach Cold Lake?/Nuclear Voodoo Update thought/Boys in blue ties Upperdate

the government sure keeps trying to get those votes in Québec:

Deal keeps Mirabel firm aloft
$468-million accord with fees Contract to maintain CF-18 fighter jets would save 500 jobs, L-3 MAS says

L-3 MAS (Canada) Inc. of Mirabel pocketed a $468-million cheque from Prime Minister Stephen Harper yesterday for the last contract to maintain Canada’s aging fleet of 78 CF-18 fighter jets.

The deal runs to 2017, with possible extensions to 2020 that would add $86 million to the contract’s value and maintain 500 jobs at L-3 MAS’s Mirabel plant.

After the elaborate photo op and announcement ceremony -at which Harper answered briefly to only five questions -L-3 MAS president Sylvain Bedard told reporters that without the agreement, his company would have had to fire 500 employees…

But the bigger prize by far still eludes L-3 MAS, the Canadian subsidiary of New York City-based L-3 Communications, a major global provider of aircraft maintenance and modernization services.

That would be a deal to service the CF-18′s successor, the 65 Joint Strike Fighter CF-35s the federal government recently agreed to buy from Lockheed Martin for $9 billion. The maintenance and servicing clause of that deal is worth another $7 billion.

In a brief interview, National Defence Minister Peter Mackay said L-3 MAS “certainly has the inside track (to snag the CF-35 deal), especially after the job they’ve done (on the CF-18) all these years.”

“The great thing is that they would be in line not just for the 65 (CF-35s), but possibly for other armed forces as well. I mean, (Lockheed Martin) sold 3,000 of those things.”..

Via Spotlight on Military News and International Affairs.

I mean, those jet fuel fumes really are getting to poor Peter’s brain if he thinks other countries are going to give up their own pork to have their F-35s maintained in Canada Québec. And if he believes Lockheed Martin has actually sold 3,000 F-35s he’s truly in cloud cukoo land; he might do well to read this post:

Fighter sales prospects

Plus the “…F-35 fact check Update” here.

Update: More Conservative pork-o-mania here and here, via John Robson.  Dig the audio of his weekly Friday morning interview at CFRA Ottawa this morning, today on the nth resurrection of the Palestinian peace “process”, Iraq, Afstan, health care run by central planning–plus the federal government’s seeming insatiable propensity for pushing pork.  Mr Robson is a rare Canadian who can speak with real knowledge, fierce intelligence, and wicked wit.

Upperdate: I won’t link to this Ottawa Citizen story,

Russian planes don’t often fly into Canadian territory: Documents

since the only “expert” it quotes is St. Steve Staples.

Mark
Ottawa

Or Bagotville?  That seems to be what the Chief of the Air Staff is suggesting:

Canada needs stealth fighter jets so its military can sneak up on an adversary at the edges of domestic airspace and use that potential for surprise as a deterrent, the head of the air force says.

Lieutenant-General André Deschamps, the chief of the air staff, responded to critics of the government’s planned purchase of high-tech F-35 stealth fighters by asserting that the aircraft will provide a needed capability for defence at home, and not just for fighting air battles abroad.

“If they can’t detect us and don’t know where we are, it dramatically changes their potential tactics. So it is a deterrent,” Gen. Deschamps said in an interview with The Globe and Mail…

The Harper government has pointed to recent flights of Russian long-range bombers near Canadian airspace in the Arctic and off the east coast – intercepted by CF-18s [more here, here, and here]– to assert the need for top-notch fighters.

Gen. Deschamps said he’s not seeking to amplify “the noise around the Russians,” but pointed to the interceptions to argue that the F-35s will let the Canadian Forces observe foreign planes unseen, and the potential surprise will deter interlopers.

“Nobody expects somebody to come in and roll ashore here in the next little while,” he said. “But it’s a question of being able to exercise your sovereignty. And you can’t do that sitting on the runway saying, ‘I wish I could go out there without these guys knowing I’m going to be there two hours before the intercept point [emphasis added].’”..

Now our fighters are based at Cold Lake, Alberta, and Bagotville, Quebec–and will continue to be stationed there when we get new ones. I do not think the Russians have any radars capable of detecting aircraft on the those runways–nor even at, say Yellowknife, N.W.T, if temporarily stationed there. Nor do I think any Russian radars are likely to detect Canadian fighters en route to an interception near our nothern, and particularly, our eastern, or western airspace approaches (see this superb site).

Russian Bear bombers themselves do not have a radar system to search for approaching fighters. Its emissions would be simply suicidal, drawing fighters right to their target.

So why the need for stealth in the air defence/sovereignty protection role? I don’t see it.  Neither does the RAF, which will be using its Eurofighter Typhoons for air defence, not F-35s (whenever it gets them).  In any event our fighters’ radar that tracks the bomber will likely alert the bomber, so stealth is simply irrelevant.

More from the CAS:

…
Deschamps said Canada is expected to pay between $70 million and $75 million per aircraft and the price will be locked in once Ottawa signs a final agreement, likely in 2014.

The air force examined other choices, including an improved version of the CF-18 and the Eurofighter [more on those planes, and some F-35 info here], but the Lightning II proved to be the best all-round aircraft, he said.

However, the chief of air staff would not say what the price difference between the various aircraft might be, citing the confidentiality of the competing aircraft makers…

There’s also been concern that the Lightning II is not suitable for close air support bombing [those are stupid critics, after all it's the Joint Strike Fighter and attacking ground targets is its primary mission], a critical role given the country’s recent experience in Afghanistan ["critical" for our Air Force?-- the government has not even been willing to deploy CF-18s to Afstan to support the CF and allied forces there].

The F-35 can bomb and strafe targets on the ground, but Deschamps said unmanned combat aerial vehicles are increasingly taking on that function.

He said the primary role of the new jet will be to control the country’s airspace.

For which I just do not see the requirement for stealth.  Meanwhile some sense from Jack Granatstein:

In a slow summer for serious political matters, the announcement that Canada will buy 65 F-35 fighter jets at a cost (including maintenance) of $16-billion has upset the opposition parties and critics of the government’s defence policy. For its part, the Harper government did little to help itself by having the Defence Minister talk about how pilots like fast aircraft and that acquiring them would help recruiting [more here]. The Prime Minister’s press secretary also didn’t help much when he announced that, if it hadn’t been for Canada’s CF-18s, two Russian bombers would have invaded across the Pole. It really is the summer silly season.

…if we don’t mount sovereignty patrols in our airspace, who will? The answer is all too clear: the U.S. Air Force. Does anyone want to have American pilots flying over Canada to check out Russian bombers? Can Canada be a sovereign state if the defence of its most basic national interest is provided by another country? We will surely require some aircraft to do such patrols for the foreseeable future…

I don’t know whether the F-35 is the best fighter for our needs. But I do know that Canada has national interests and that these will always need to be defended and advanced. I do know that Canada must always be able to undertake surveillance over its own territory and to be prepared to turn away Russian bombers on training missions today or some other nation’s aircraft on more mischievous operations tomorrow. And I accept that, at some point, Canada may again decide to send its military abroad to work with our allies…

J.L. Granatstein is a historian and a senior research fellow at the Canadian Defence and Foreign Affairs Institute.

Earlier, with great detail:

Canada’s new fighter, the F-35: What the government is and isn’t saying

Update thought: If the government were really concerned about effective air defence–as opposed to scarifying ursine PR ops–they might remember (hah!), from a time when air defence was taken seriously: the CF-101B, non-stealthy, Voodoo with nuclear-armed Genie missiles. From a previous post:

…
We don’t in fact need the capabilities of the F-35 to intercept subsonic Bears. Our current Hornets–which will need replacing, lot’s more here–seem to be doing just fine, do they not?  Then there was the CF-101 Voodoo which our Air Force flew for a quarter century:

…F-101B’s based in alert hangars were sent out on air defence missions. These were usually in reply to unknown intrusions into the air defence identification zone by wayward airliners or Soviet reconnaissance aircraft such as the Tu-95 Bear. Aircraft were usually sent out in pairs. One aircraft would do an identification pass on the unknown while the second one stayed behind, ready to employ the AIM-4 if required. With respect to Soviet reconnaissance flights, one Bear would encounter several different pairs of NATO and NORAD interceptors during it’s flight from the western USSR to Cuba…

E.g:

Not that one is suggesting we should have kept the Voodoo (more photos here) in service.

Update: …

Plus some comment at Milnet.ca on the other, more modern, Russian strategic bomber (a few more may be produced) which the comparatively clueless Conservatives forgot (or did not know about) to mention as part of their threat hyping.

Upperdate: Meanwhile photo op and a whiff of political pork:

Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper sits in the cockpit of a CF-18 fighter jet with Major Daniel Dionne in Mirabel, Quebec, September 1, 2010.
SHAUN BEST/REUTERS

And some speculation on what will happen to the UK’s plans for the F-35. Not a subject the government appears to be interested in.

Mark
Ottawa

Wish I could be there (links added):

Aircraft tribute to the navy

Photo by photo courtesy Peter Handle [actually Attila Papp, hotrampphotography.com]

Two vintage warbirds from Vintage Wings of Canada will soar into Victoria and be on static display for aviation enthusiasts, veterans, and current serving military members on Aug. 7 and 11.

“Hawk One,” a Royal Canadian Air Force F-86 Sabre 5 [more here] in the colours of the legendary Golden Hawks aerobatic team will be the first plane to arrive, followed by the “Gray Ghost,” which is a Goodyear FG-ID Corsair fighter [more here and here]. The Gray Ghost Centennial Tour is a tribute to Canada’s naval aviators during the ongoing celebration of the Canadian Navy Centennial.

“The appearance of both of these aircraft is a rare and significant event,” said Dan Dempsey, Hawk One team historian and event organizer. “Having these planes on display here provides a unique opportunity for Victorians to learn about Canada’s aviation heritage since many of the airmen who flew these and other similar aircraft in the RCAF and RCN are now retired in Victoria. This includes pilots who flew on each of the RCN’s aircraft carriers – HMC Ships Warrior, Magnificent and Bonaventure.” Both aircraft are the sole remaining flying examples of their type in Canada today.

After Vintage Wings purchased and restored the Sabre to celebrate the 100th anniversary of powered flight in Canada last year, they searched the world for a Goodyear FG-1D Corsair that they could adorn in the markings of the aircraft flown by Lt Robert Hampton Gray of the Royal Canadian Navy Volunteer Reserve. Gray lost his life during the war in the Pacific while serving aboard the Royal Navy aircraft carrier HMS Formidable and was awarded the Victoria Cross posthumously, the last Canadian to be honoured with that medal. On Aug. 9, 1945 with his engine on fire, the 27-year-old native of Trail, B.C., dropped his one remaining bomb on a Japanese escort ship before his plane plunged into the ocean just a few days before the war ended.

“He is the only foreign serviceman to have a memorial in Japan,” said Dempsey. “We’d really like people to come and have a look at this plane. This may be the only time in history the Gray Ghost is on display in Victoria.”

An arrival date for Hawk One is still pending but it will be plainly evident when it flies over the city sporting a glimmer of gold and red in the sky before it touches down on the tarmac at Victoria International Airport. It will be flown in by Vintage Wings general manager Rob Fleck. The jet will go on display at the airport’s B.C. Aviation Museum (1910 Norseman Road in Sidney) from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. on August 7…

More from a Maritime Forces Pacific e-mail:

…A classic vintage naval warbird will make a special appearance in Victoria 10 – 11 August to help commemorate the Navy’s 100th anniversary and pay tribute to Canada’s naval aviators.

The Goodyear FG-1D Corsair, owned and operated by Vintage Wings of Canada (Gatineau, Quebec), will fly overhead CFB Esquimalt and the Pacific Fleet at 4 p.m. on 10 August followed by a flyover of downtown Victoria at 4:10 p.m. prior to landing at Victoria International Airport.

The general public is invited to see Gray Ghost One on static display on 11 August from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the Victoria Flying Club…

Date: 11 August
Time: 10 a.m. to 3 p.m.
Event/Location: Gray Ghost Static Display – Victoria Flying Club, 101 – 1852 Canso Rd, Sidney, BC…

The Vintage Wings Corsair is owned and operated by Vintage Wings of Canada and is fully restored to airworthy condition. In its day during the Second World War, the Corsair was widely considered the most capable of all carrier-based fighters. Its distinctive “bent” wings were designed to keep the landing gear short and robust for carrier landings and give clearance for the enormous 13′ 4″ diameter propeller required to pull the aircraft to over 600 KPH. Its performance was considered equal to many other fighters, such as the North American P-51 Mustang, but its short range kept it either carrier-based or land-based in the South Pacific war. Trained in the US, Corsair pilots flying with the Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Navy (RNFAA), including Canadian Lt. Robert Hampton Gray, were deployed on carriers such as HMS Formidable and Victorious and carried out daring fighter escort and attack operations in the North Atlantic.

For more information on the Hampton Gray Corsair visit www.vintagewings.ca/grayghosts…

Gray Ghost One:

Peter Handley / Vintage Wings of Canada

More on Hawk One and a nice photo:

Peter Handley / Vintage Wings of Canada

This photo I particularly like (more photos at link):

The Sabre was the RCAF’s last fighter armed with guns alone. 1184 Sabres flew with various units from 1950 until 1970, in Canada and Europe. This Sabre is having its guns harmonized at RCAF Station Uplands [Ottawa, at today's airport] in 1953…

And note this from last year:

…
At the height of the Cold War, Canada had more jet fighters stationed at five European wings than it currently operates at home. Our F-86 Sabres, CF-100 Canucks, CF-104 Starfighters and CF-101 Voodoos contained Soviet communism and kept the peace for 40 years…

Robust wording, I’d say.

Mark
Ottawa

Well, it’s actually more a vote-buying policy (or so it all too often seems):

Standards for navy choppers dropped in exchange for $80 million in local contracts

Government news release here, more on the new CH-148 Cyclone helicopters at this Milnet.ca topic thread (or, as Defense Industry Daily puts it: “…Better Late Than Never?”).

And note a major part of the government’s sales pitch for its F-35 acquistion:

…
“Canadian participation in the Joint Strike Fighter program will bring high-value jobs and other economic benefits to our country,” said Jacques Gourde, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Works and Government Services and to the Minister of National Revenue and Member of Parliament for Lotbinière-Chutes-de-la-Chaudière. “This government is delivering on our plan to strengthen Canada’s defence industry, leverage Canada’s competitive advantage and work with industry to help position Canadian companies for success in the global marketplace.”..

“The Joint Strike Fighter program allows Canadian companies to build on existing strengths and establish strategic capabilities,” said the Honourable Tony Clement, Minister of Industry. “Canadian companies will have direct involvement in the design of equipment in the short term, while also setting in motion opportunities for decades to come.”..

The government is also offering this piece of Florida swampland:

…
Now that Canada has committed to purchasing the F-35, Canadian industrial opportunities could exceed CAD$12 billion for the production of the aircraft [note that "could", good luck on the total]. Sustainment and follow-on opportunities for Canadian industry are emerging and will be available over the 40-year life of the program…

More on the F-35 here and here.  At least the F-35 is a real airplane–if a troubled program–whereas the Cyclone was a paper aircraft when the Liberals bought it in 2004.  A military version, that did not yet exist, of a civilian helicopter–a version no other country has since bought.  Then the Conservatives have continued our troubled program resulting from that purchase of paper–at no cost to Sikorsky (see the DID piece linked to above).

Mark
Ottawa

Holy embarrassing coincidence!  Strange bedpersons indeed:

Byers:

$16 billion for the wrong planes

Me:

Canada’s new fighter, the F-35: What the government is and isn’t saying

Almost scrarifying to find the good professor and me making some similar points. But fear not, he can still be rather economical with the truth…or inexcusably ill-informed. As well as self-contradictory. A letter sent to the Toronto Star and not published [Update: The Star did print the letter, along with several others, July 22] :

Re: $16 billion for the wrong planes, July 8

Michael Byers writes that “Canada’s most desperate procurement need is for fixed-wing search-and-rescue aircraft that could be built in Canada by Bombardier.”  While a new aircraft of that sort is certainly required by the air force, Bombardier is not the company to build it.  Such planes require a rear ramp for the rapid and accurate release of rescue materiel and personnel.  Unfortunately the only aircraft Bombardier might offer for the role is an adapted version of its Q Series turboprop airliner–which has no rear ramp and cannot be fitted with one.

Professor Byers goes on “…opportunities for Canadian industry would be created by sourcing search-and-rescue planes here.” A major thrust of his piece is to argue against the sole-sourcing on our military aircraft, yet here he sees to be advocating it.  Does he not want a fair competition that Bombardier would be free to enter.  What gives?

Indeed he criticizes the government for the purchase of the air force’s new C-17 strategic airlifters and C-130J tactical airlifters.  He states that “…sole-sourcing ensured that the planes would be purchased from American firms [emphasis added, quelle horreur!] ratherthan Europe’s Airbus.”

The A400M is the Airbus plane that might have been considered.  But it is several years behind schedule and is still in flight testing.  The first delivery, to France, is now not expected until 2013.  Any aircraft for Canada would be some time after that and we needed our new transports rather sooner.

Our first C-17 was actually delivered in 2007, all four by 2008.  Our first C-130J arrived at Trenton early this June.  Does Prof. Byers really think Airbus was such a good idea?

I’m criticizing the government’s method in selecting equipment.  Prof. Byers (a firm NDPer, though almost never identified as such in our major media, check the end of the Star piece) would, I think, really prefer that the CF not be well-equipped at all–at least for combat roles. In which case they would not be true armed forces at all: rather another gendarmerie, suitable only for selected UN peacekeeping missions–simply more heavily armed than the RCMP.

Earlier at Daimnation!:

Afghanistan: Bilge from Byers

Fisking Michael Byers’ bilge

Why I say “no” to Byers

Plus Adrian has, er, issues on the Tamil front with the prolific prof.

Back to the Lightning II.  Defense Industry Daily round-up:

Canada Preparing to Replace its CF-18 Hornets
…
Canada has been an active Tier 3 partner in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, participating in both the Concept Demonstration Phase ($10 million) and the System Development and Demonstration Phase ($150 million). This USD $160 million has included funding from both the Department of National Defence, and from Technology Partnerships Canada (TPC [more here]). In the Production, Sustainment and Follow-on Development Phase of the F-35 program, it is estimated that Canada’s contribution will exceed C$ 500 million (currently about $435 million) over 44 years [emphasis added]. Now, the F-35 is Canada’s official choice to replace its Hornets…

July 16/10: Canada’s Conservative Party government declares that it will buy the F-35A, without a competitive process. The jets would begin to enter service around 2016, and the initial budget is C$ 9 billion for 65 F-35 aircraft and associated weapons, supporting infrastructure, initial spares, training simulators, contingency funds and project operating costs. That budget has not been confirmed by an actual contract, however, something that reportedly led to unpleasant surprises when Canada bought C-130Js from Lockheed Martin. DND statements indicate that an F-35 contract would not be negotiated until about 2014-2015 [emphasis added, so how the heck do we know what the total price will be for those 65 aircraft?].

The government’s defense of its decision revolves around economic and industrial benefits:

“To date, Canada has invested approximately CAD$168 million in the JSF program. Since 2002, the Government’s participation in the JSF program has led to more than CAD$350 million in contracts for more than 85 Canadian companies, research laboratories, and universities – meaning that Canada has already seen a two-to-one return on its investment.

Now that Canada has committed to purchasing the F-35, Canadian industrial opportunities could exceed CAD$12 billion for the production of the aircraft [emphasis added, note that "could", good luck on the total]. Sustainment and follow-on opportunities for Canadian industry are emerging and will be available over the 40-year life of the program. For instance, in accordance with the industrial participation agreements, all 19 Canadian companies manufacturing items for the F-35 will also repair and overhaul those components for the entire global fleet.”

The government needs that defense…

Meanwhile other partners are not moving very fast, some at least doing formal comparisons–from AW&ST, June 10, 2009:

Norway To Begin F-35 Negotiations

Norway’s defense ministry is to begin negotiations on the purchase of up to 56 Lockheed Martin F-35As after parliament voted to accept its recommendation of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) over the Saab Gripen NG.

Negotiations are expected to take two years, and the government is required to return to parliament in the spring for authorization to begin negotiating the final contract. Norway is already a partner in the JSF program…

The defense ministry does not know when a contract will be signed, or how many aircraft will be ordered, but beginning negotiations this year keeps the program on track to allow first deliveries in 2016 and full operational capability in 2020…

Denmark is going though a three-step process, first to decide whether it needs a new fighter, then which one, and finally how many and when. The first two decisions were planned before its parliament recesses at the end of this month, but are expected to slip.

With a requirement for 48 aircraft, JSF program partner Denmark still is hoping to decide between the F-35A, Gripen NG, and Boeing F/A-18E/F before year-end, Burbage says…

Among the other international JSF partners, the U.K. has ordered its first two test F-35Bs as part of the 17-aircraft third production lot just awarded. A single test F-35A for the Netherlands also is included, but the Dutch will not make a final decision until 2010.

A third test aircraft for the U.K. and a second for the Netherlands are planned as part of the 32-aircraft LRIP [low-rate initial production] 4 contract to be awarded next year.

Australia has confirmed plans to buy 100 F-35As, beginning with an initial tranche of 75, but has slipped its first purchases by a year to 2012, as part of LRIP 6. Italy, with a requirement for 131 F-35As and Bs, and Turkey, with 100 F-35As, also expected are to begin their purchases in LRIP 6, [Tom] Burbage [Lockheed executive vice-president and general manager, F-35 program integration] says…

More on Euros, I wonder about impact on F-35:

Analysis: Defense in firing line as Europe begins budget cuts

For European policymakers desperate to cut spending, the defense budget looks an appealing option. But military chiefs and arms firms will lobby hard, arguing that jobs and geopolitical clout are on the line…

Britain’s new government is already pushing through a comprehensive defense review, making it clear that military budgets will come under particular pressure. Other European governments have frozen key decisions.

Across the continent, the main choice will be whether to scale back or axe major projects — warships, aircraft, new vehicles…

On one level, analysts perceive a drive to high-tech new solutions: drones, satellites, robots and cyberwarfare. But powerful vested interests protect the status quo…

Amusing update: The results of a Google search: “Michael Byers F-35″.

Mark
Ottawa