Vanguard Magazine

20 APRIL/MAY 2016 www.vanguardcanada.com J JsF Program alterNatIveS aNd CompromISeS F-35: chris Black is a regular contributor to Vanguard. Chris has been an avid aviation enthusiast his entire life and a former Air Cadet at the 618 Queen City, based at HMCS York. His love for all things aviation, coupled with missing out on becoming a fighter pilot led him to begin writing as a way to share thoughts and ideas with fellow enthusiasts. His blog, on Final and its accompanying Facebook and Twitter accounts, can be found here: onfinalblog. com| facebook.com/onfinalblog| twitter.com/onfinalblog Y ou wouldn't know it based on the lack of news on the matter but the debate on the choice of fighter aircraft for the Royal Canadian Air Force is still bubbling in the background. Will the Rafale be chosen to replace Canada's fleet of aging CF-18s? Is it go- ing to be the Super Hornet, the Typhoon or the Gripen? Of course, it's also very likely that the RCAF's next primary fighter plane will be Lockheed Martin's F-35. stealth vs. maneuverability Although the aircraft is starting to look more and more combat-ready, many still have lingering doubts due to setbacks faced by the F-35 program. Despite these setbacks, low observable (LO) and stealth properties (key advan- tages of the F-35) rank among the highest priorities of Canada's requirements for a new fighter aircraft. Many insist that maneuverability isn't as essential anymore in modern air battles as aircraft like the F-35 can get close enough to fire their own missiles while remaining undetected. My issue with this claim is that rapid and continued development of advanced Infrared Search and Track (IRST) systems are enabling the tracking and even target- ing of aircraft with the use of heat signa- tures at increasingly farther distances. No matter how you slice it, an aircraft will still generate a certain amount of heat due to friction generated at higher speeds as they travel through the air. Clouds and other environmental factors are also be- coming less of an issue for IRST systems. Missiles are also becoming faster. It's true, many missiles can pull more G's than an aircraft can, but they also have very small control surfaces and thus need a larger turning radius. Pilots who are adequately trained in Air Combat Maneuvering (ACM) can gener- ally evade most missiles fired at them from longer to medium ranges. This is why the assertions that beyond visual range (BVR) is the future of combat are somewhat overstated. The high BVR kill ratio for the F-15's during Operation Desert Storm in is often used as the shining example of BVR success. However, when you take into consider- ation the fact that most of those shots were within 30 kilometers and against poorly trained pilots, the claim falls apart. Protecting the arctic One of the key roles of the Royal Canadian Air Force is protecting our Arctic sover- eignty. One of the biggest reasons for the op- position to single engine-aircraft such as the F-16, F-35, and Saab Gripen E is that if that engine were ever to fail over the Arctic, there's a big chance that any pilot forced to eject over the frozen expanse will die of exposure before rescue arrives. Single-engine aircraft like the F-16 and older Saabs have solid service records, but one engine is still one less than two – there's no way to get around that fact that if that engine fails, a human life could be lost in the Arctic. On the other hand, single-engine planes are cheaper to maintain and generally see a significantly less maintenance downtime compared to planes with two engines. I guess the argument comes down to what's more important to those making the decision – the lives of our pilots, or tax dollars saved? the rafale My choice for a CF-18 replacement would be the Rafale. For starters, it meets the two engine re- quirement. Dassault is also currently look- ing hard for customers so it would be quite possible to negotiate a solid deal with the company. The Rafale is truly a multi-role aircraft. It has all of the agility of the earlier F-16's but it also has many of the electronic war- fare systems and bells and whistles that the F-35 and F-22 have. The Rafale differs from the F-35 and F-22 in that Dassault opted to go for a bal- ance of low observable (LO) and superior aerodynamics blended with modern avion- ics and electronics. The F-22 is air dominance with air-to- ground being an afterthought while the F-35 is an all stealth aircraft that makes use of advanced electronics and weapons sys- tems as opposed to high maneuverability. Many insist the F-35 can indeed perform well in an air-to-air role but the plane's stubby, almost missile like body makes me think it will share more traits with missiles than traditional aircraft. Even at 9Gs it would need a significantly larger turning radius than the F-18 it will be replacing. The F-35's weight will make sustaining momentum in a 9G turn all the more difficult. This is where the Dassault aircraft stands out.

• Cover