Much as it would have been awesome, the F-14 and F-15 are much larger, more expensive planes than the -16 and -18, both to buy and operate. The prospect of us being stuck with -A model Tomcats for ~40 years is pretty scary as well.
Welp, the Iranians have made pretty good use of their F14A's. Without the embargoes on parts and upgrades like those imposed on Iran the F14 would've been fine in Canadian service.
First, awesome edit. The shade thrown at Canadian procurement in the CF-5 acquisition is a chef's kiss, they really knew how to dish it out back then. Second, we should have went with the F-15, and then stuck with the F-15. Canadian territorial defence should have taken lead over NATO obligations, and seeing how history has turned out for the F-15 it would have been very little difference to the F-18.
The Canadian Armed Forces also at one point tested out the MIG-21. I think it was in the running against the F-5. A USAF master sergeant was on vacation in Canada and saw one fly over, so he reported it to the USAF. Canada ended up scrapping the MIG-21 plan to maintain relations with the US, even though they ended up getting screwed on several of their aircraft purchases, the F-104 in particular.
I am impressed. For them to be so frank and factual with the pros and cons of the aircraft as understood at the time is not only eye opening, it has stood up well in the 5 decades since the video must have been made. Ultimately Canada went forward with the Hornet, which was not even close to it's final form at the time the video was made. The Hornet has served Canada well, but I am a Tomcat fan and my bias says the F-14 could have been a better choice with it's ability to better cover large amounts of airspace more quickly than the Hornet. Fortunately for everyone that ability was never put to the test. The selection of a tactical jet in this video shows how the process is as political as it is technical. Seems as though little has changed in that regard.
indeed, its great when you have this kind of straight forward and honest reporting, there is not much of this anymore this much transparency and informing the public anymore think but indeed the f18 was a good choice, i think the f-14 would have been cool and the f-15 although ideal for the large ranges of the canadian airspace.. alaska airbases provided that coverage anyway
It would never had happened, but I always thought a fleet of f-15 single and double seaters ( more two seaters than singles) would have served well. The dilemma that the RCAF has always faced (and still is) that there is no way it will be allowed a mixed fighter fleet to meet the NORAD and NATO commitments even though it would have technically been the most effective solution. A Fleet of F-15Cs and D/Es would have lots of commonality while having the speciality to address both very different mission needs. Would have cost a boatloads though!
At the time, the F-18L was still a thing. It was going to be a Northrop product. But state department shenanigans and lawsuits later, Canadians had to go with the Hornet. I am not even sure if the F-15 prices quoted in this video would be remotely what they turned out the be. Eagles and Tomcats ended up very expensive. Hornet was cheaper and fully filled both roles. But it definitely rose in cost. Canadians should made their own fighter and not cancelled that project.
Which is funny in a world where Canada is now buying F-35s, I would have preferred the "cheaper" F-15EX which other than not being stealth is a much more capable platform than the F35 while being less expensive. Funny how things change, the "expensive" F-15 is now the "cheap" F-15EX, while the F-35 which was pitched as a cheaper alternative to the F-22 is still VERY expensive.
@@plazma1945 I agree, the F-15E would be a much better match for Canada's current needs (at least most of them) but it's not a 5th Gen fighter. Undoubtedly the RCAF, since it can only choose one aircraft type, will want its front line fighter to be on the cutting edge of technology. Unfortunately, despite its advanced nature, the F-35 seems to be a step back in many ways from these 4th Gen fighters.
The F15 at the time was a superior aircraft to the F18. Canada didn't need a carrier aircarft since they didn't have one. I met a CAF guy in 2017 that was retired and was on the procurement team. He told me the CAF wanted the F15 but the F18 won due to politics.
Canadian top gun, Eh? So Shatner would be Maverick and Eugine Levy would play Goose. Rick Moranis as Ice Man, John Candy would play Viper, and instead of Kelly McGillis as Charlie it would be Catherine O'Hara.
The usaf had a lightweight fighter or LWF cometion for something cheaper to compliment the F15. The YF16 fighting Falcom and the YF17 Cobra from Northrop faced off and the f16 won. The USN looked for something similar for the F14. Northrop asked McDonel Douglas to help with the design since MD had carrier plane experience. The took the YF17 Cobra and turned it into the YF18 Hornet.
I very much doubt the Canadians could have afforded f14 or f15s on their military budgets. and single engine aircraft over the expanse of wilderness they have is not a great idea from a safety pov. So the twin engines and navy required "legs" of an F-18 would seem the best choice.
I always thought canada should have bought the f fifteen. And to find out it was a contender. To also find out We could have built it here. There goes canada's government always the decision. Tom cat probably would have been nice to.
Frankly, usually when it's a woman talking about these subjects, it's pretty "plane" she knows nada. This individual however appears to have done her "homework"
This is in depth reporting of 1980s 1970s whbe you had to go to university research and speak on subjects in the news. Now the standards are lax and pathetic in journalism
Back seater would literal be a Canada goose (Branta canadensis)
I am more of a mustella vision fan myself Esp crazy ones 🤣
Much as it would have been awesome, the F-14 and F-15 are much larger, more expensive planes than the -16 and -18, both to buy and operate. The prospect of us being stuck with -A model Tomcats for ~40 years is pretty scary as well.
Lol ok good point. But the coolness factor
Welp, the Iranians have made pretty good use of their F14A's. Without the embargoes on parts and upgrades like those imposed on Iran the F14 would've been fine in Canadian service.
@@plazma1945 the new F-15 upgrades look great
First, awesome edit. The shade thrown at Canadian procurement in the CF-5 acquisition is a chef's kiss, they really knew how to dish it out back then. Second, we should have went with the F-15, and then stuck with the F-15. Canadian territorial defence should have taken lead over NATO obligations, and seeing how history has turned out for the F-15 it would have been very little difference to the F-18.
Agree n F15 one hundred percent
I can see the patch now… Felix, the F-14 mascot, leaning against the RCAF roundel, with the words “Anytime, eh?” underneath.
0:17 Ryan Reynolds
The Canadian Armed Forces also at one point tested out the MIG-21. I think it was in the running against the F-5. A USAF master sergeant was on vacation in Canada and saw one fly over, so he reported it to the USAF. Canada ended up scrapping the MIG-21 plan to maintain relations with the US, even though they ended up getting screwed on several of their aircraft purchases, the F-104 in particular.
Nonono the mig 21 thing is a hoax mig21 were never available in Canada ever ever
Canada never looked at buying MIG-21's
@gryph01 goodman
I am impressed. For them to be so frank and factual with the pros and cons of the aircraft as understood at the time is not only eye opening, it has stood up well in the 5 decades since the video must have been made.
Ultimately Canada went forward with the Hornet, which was not even close to it's final form at the time the video was made. The Hornet has served Canada well, but I am a Tomcat fan and my bias says the F-14 could have been a better choice with it's ability to better cover large amounts of airspace more quickly than the Hornet. Fortunately for everyone that ability was never put to the test.
The selection of a tactical jet in this video shows how the process is as political as it is technical. Seems as though little has changed in that regard.
indeed, its great when you have this kind of straight forward and honest reporting, there is not much of this anymore this much transparency and informing the public anymore think
but indeed the f18 was a good choice, i think the f-14 would have been cool and the f-15 although ideal for the large ranges of the canadian airspace.. alaska airbases provided that coverage anyway
It would never had happened, but I always thought a fleet of f-15 single and double seaters ( more two seaters than singles) would have served well. The dilemma that the RCAF has always faced (and still is) that there is no way it will be allowed a mixed fighter fleet to meet the NORAD and NATO commitments even though it would have technically been the most effective solution. A Fleet of F-15Cs and D/Es would have lots of commonality while having the speciality to address both very different mission needs. Would have cost a boatloads though!
Ahh it's true it's true... The Hornet is a good plane a tomcat or eagle airforce would have been a show off clout
RIO should be James Doohan or Scotty to most people. Why - he's Canadian, a pilot, and works with your Kirk theme.
At the time, the F-18L was still a thing. It was going to be a Northrop product. But state department shenanigans and lawsuits later, Canadians had to go with the Hornet. I am not even sure if the F-15 prices quoted in this video would be remotely what they turned out the be. Eagles and Tomcats ended up very expensive. Hornet was cheaper and fully filled both roles. But it definitely rose in cost. Canadians should made their own fighter and not cancelled that project.
Aye and also the f5 puechase and dumbing down of them made no sense a waste
Which is funny in a world where Canada is now buying F-35s, I would have preferred the "cheaper" F-15EX which other than not being stealth is a much more capable platform than the F35 while being less expensive. Funny how things change, the "expensive" F-15 is now the "cheap" F-15EX, while the F-35 which was pitched as a cheaper alternative to the F-22 is still VERY expensive.
Martin Short for Goose or better yet the McKenzie brothers as Maverick and Goose eh 😂😂😂
actually, yes good call, just throw in the whole SCTV cast in there
@plazma1945 John Candy as Viper 🤣🤣🤣
Bob and Doug still have their side gigs also, working at the local beer store. Hehehe
all the finest planes
the best of the best.. they just dont make em like that anymore
Now we are stuck with having to buy the F-35 which is less than ideal for all of our commitments.
Yeah the f35 is advanced but I think the f15eagle which was recently restarted for usa buy / production would have made a better choice maybe
@@plazma1945 I agree, the F-15E would be a much better match for Canada's current needs (at least most of them) but it's not a 5th Gen fighter. Undoubtedly the RCAF, since it can only choose one aircraft type, will want its front line fighter to be on the cutting edge of technology. Unfortunately, despite its advanced nature, the F-35 seems to be a step back in many ways from these 4th Gen fighters.
The F15 at the time was a superior aircraft to the F18. Canada didn't need a carrier aircarft since they didn't have one. I met a CAF guy in 2017 that was retired and was on the procurement team. He told me the CAF wanted the F15 but the F18 won due to politics.
Canadian top gun, Eh? So Shatner would be Maverick and Eugine Levy would play Goose. Rick Moranis as Ice Man, John Candy would play Viper, and instead of Kelly McGillis as Charlie it would be Catherine O'Hara.
rick moranis would be a good example for the guy who gets coffee spilled on him all the time
John Candy, a.k.a. Canadian goose
Aye eject the jokes lol
John Candy could have been Goose!
The F-5 a "dive bomber"? The F-18 Cobra? Who wrote this bilge?
in 1978, the f-18 they showed would have been a Northrop YF-17. nicknamed "Cobra".
f-5 can do bombing after the canadian stripped air to air capability from it. and yes the F18 was the COBRA
thank you for support! :)
The usaf had a lightweight fighter or LWF cometion for something cheaper to compliment the F15. The YF16 fighting Falcom and the YF17 Cobra from Northrop faced off and the f16 won. The USN looked for something similar for the F14. Northrop asked McDonel Douglas to help with the design since MD had carrier plane experience. The took the YF17 Cobra and turned it into the YF18 Hornet.
F-16 is the sexiest jet to ever fly :)
I very much doubt the Canadians could have afforded f14 or f15s on their military budgets. and single engine aircraft over the expanse of wilderness they have is not a great idea from a safety pov. So the twin engines and navy required "legs" of an F-18 would seem the best choice.
But like the lottery it's nice to imagine
I always thought canada should have bought the f fifteen. And to find out it was a contender. To also find out We could have built it here. There goes canada's government always the decision. Tom cat probably would have been nice to.
Agreed I think for norad duties the eagle would have been best Esp with the size of Canada to cover
Dam Canada has been hunted by castro kid and his father for a while
It's all coming full circle!!! Lol. Well we got the f35 this time.
She said the US navy would have 800 f16s... f16s are not navy they are airforce
Hey it's Canada we don't knowlol
Frankly, usually when it's a woman talking about these subjects, it's pretty "plane" she knows nada. This individual however appears to have done her "homework"
This is in depth reporting of 1980s 1970s whbe you had to go to university research and speak on subjects in the news. Now the standards are lax and pathetic in journalism
Americans have airplane graveyards and Russia still uses a frame from the 80s. SU
hey its a good airframe design, if it aint broke dont fix it.. f16, mid s70s, f15 mid/late 80s. still flying
Spock of course. Or maybe Jim.
Haha right on