Could Canada Build

"Charles Talleyrand" wrote in message
om...
Could Canada build a complete modern jet fighter with missiles and
radar? Assume they have lots of money (10-20 billion dollars) and
seven or so years.


Not while they keep electing Liberals. Buying production helicopters, or
deciding to buy production helicopters, seems to be at the outer limit of
their ability under such leadership.

--
Scott

Imagine how the war would be different if the liberals were giving aid and
comfort to America.

tscottme wrote:
Charles Talleyrand wrote:

Could Canada build a complete modern jet fighter with missiles and
radar?

Not while they keep electing Liberals. Buying production helicopters,
or deciding to buy production helicopters, seems to be at the outer
limit of their ability under such leadership.

I don't see why Canadian engineers would be *incapable* of it.

The political considerations to which you allude are, of course,
relevant to whether such a project would be authorised, but my
brother-in-law would be more than a bit miffed by the suggestion that
they affect his competence as an engineer.

"Robert Briggs" wrote in message
...
tscottme wrote:
Charles Talleyrand wrote:

Could Canada build a complete modern jet fighter with missiles and
radar?

Not while they keep electing Liberals. Buying production helicopters,
or deciding to buy production helicopters, seems to be at the outer
limit of their ability under such leadership.

I don't see why Canadian engineers would be *incapable* of it.

The political considerations to which you allude are, of course,
relevant to whether such a project would be authorised, but my
brother-in-law would be more than a bit miffed by the suggestion that
they affect his competence as an engineer.

Heaven help us from miffed Canadian engineers. I re-read my reply and
didn't find the words engineering, competence, or incapable. Don't be so
defensive.

--
Scott

Imagine how the war would be different if the liberals were giving aid and
comfort to America.

tscottme wrote:
Robert Briggs wrote:
tscottme wrote:

Not while they keep electing Liberals.

I don't see why Canadian engineers would be *incapable* of it.

The political considerations to which you allude are, of course,
relevant to whether such a project would be authorised, but my
brother-in-law would be more than a bit miffed by the suggestion
that they affect his competence as an engineer.

Heaven help us from miffed Canadian engineers. I re-read my reply
and didn't find the words engineering, competence, or incapable.
Don't be so defensive.

You were clearly having a dig at the politicians.

That said, while you didn't explicitly malign the engineers, the nearest
you got to praising them was with that "Not while ..." bit.

Methinks we agree. :-)

in article , tscottme at
wrote on 6/28/04 4:23:


Not while they keep electing Liberals. Buying production helicopters, or
deciding to buy production helicopters, seems to be at the outer limit of
their ability under such leadership.

Let me remind you who killed the CF105 Arrow, that Conservative twit
John Dief-the-Chief! The Liberals don't have a track record to be proud of
since the demise of the Arrow either. Developing a modern effective fighter
is not practical for a single country these days. For example the latest
European Joint Strike Fighter is a multi-nation effort. On the other hand,
do we really need one! I am ex-air force and the days of a manned fighter
to the disgust of hot shot pilots is drawing to an end. The un-manned
fighter will before long take over these tasks according to some. The
Raptor will probably be the last U.S. manned fighter. Man can't handle the
stresses placed on him in modern airframes so un-manned versions will
probably dominate in the future.

Ed Majden wrote in message ..

snip

I am ex-air force and the days of a manned fighter
to the disgust of hot shot pilots is drawing to an end. The un-manned
fighter will before long take over these tasks according to some. The
Raptor will probably be the last U.S. manned fighter. Man can't handle the
stresses placed on him in modern airframes so un-manned versions will
probably dominate in the future.


I shouldn't have to say more...Manned combat aircraft will continue
for two reasons, one political, and the other biological if you will.
Politically they need a realtime human in the loop, and moreover, war
being the great sport of nations, the raison d'etre of the fighter is
largely to give the knight a mount for the jousting. Missiles don't
really require a high-G platform and if laser weapons replace guns,
they'll be turreted.


__________________________________________________ _______________

Putting MM on the dime would serve a lot of purposes. It would
displace the devious FDR, send a signal to the Islamist world, make
the currency more attractive, and be a thorn in the ass to the Kennedy
Family, to name four good ones