Kip Powick

Doug Let's be fair . You are correct in your assumption that journalists are not experts versed in much of anything but do bear in mind that what they do write has been researched and most journalists have reliable sources. True, they may move on to another subject but putting out what their editor deems is information, controversial or not, is their job. In the same vein "your" author while on the pro side of the F35 debate, could just as well have been a reliable source for the "nay" side had he had an opposing opinion...yes?. I am also sure that "your" author does not spend his entire life defending the validity of the F35...he too must move on to other topics. While he/she may have more knowledge of "air power" it must be conceded that they too are protecting their "turf". In the end, you, me, Dagger, Peter, et al will be standing on the side watching the parade go by and hopefully we all can appreciate the fact that the clowns are mere mortals, providing entertainment for all.

Hmmmmmmmm... and more dripping here..... Globe and Mail http://www.theglobea...article1965633/

We're the same vintage av8tor but I guess I had a few unique twists and turns during my time in. I had the fun of flying everything in the inventory, (not fully qualified on every type), with the exception of the Aurora and the F-18. It was a blast and while in the USA managed the F4, F-15D, F102 and F106 as well as the T-38 and Tweet (T-37). A few helos were flown in as well,the Seaking, the twin Huey and a couple from Aérospatiale as my brother was the CEO, (Canada Division), of that company...... before they folded their tent and went to USA. It was real fun and an ego booster to know I had done some time in some of the best of that era. I understand the fun of fast flying, I enjoyed it and let's face it, the only thing bigger than a fighter jocks ego is his wrist watch . And yes, during my last tour instructing on the C130 we did have the beer call hoo-haa and it was us, (trashhaulers vs whizbangs), and bear with me for one short story.... A very young and junior time- in 'puke' was going on and on about the glory of being a F104 jock (he had been in Cold Lake for about a year I think). Differences in aircraft type came up and the young fella asked an older C130 driver what our final approach speed was. The 3rd or 4th tour pilot being converted to the C130 stated that it was 140kts. The young fighter jock started to laugh and guffaw about the speed and stated the last time he saw 140kts was on the flare with his super- sonic- lawn- dart. The old fella turned to me and said, " Hey, Skipper, that 140 kts is about as low as we go on approach, isn't it...at least that's what I saw on approach on the Hong Kong curve...or wait a minute, I flew the leg into Singapore or was in Sydney Australia...Skipper help me out here !!!" The young fella stood very quietly and said little else as the C130 pilots starting dropping world wide names...all in fun,....... to point out that their role was world wide, not restricted to an MFA and gunnery range !! Certainly we all knew of the 104 Squadrons overseas, Lord knows we were the ones who took their parts oversea and, on occasion, had a fighter jock "on the bunk " helping him get home to Canada. There was, and always will be a friendly rivalry between the Military pilots as to who has the better job and that is a good thing....at least when a tour was over and you "merged" with another different 'metal" Squadron there certainly wasn't the bitterness that can be evident when different factions of civilian airlines merge......or so I have been told The "dead-horse" I was referring to was anyone attempting to change my mind about the usefulness of the F35 in Canada's inventory...as you know.......just my opinion...I am not the King.... just doing my personal reality check. Have a nice week.

Peter... I don't think I specified a particular night, in fact no one in this thread did. There were/are F15E, F165, F18 and yes, even the A10 in combat and security flying in the air over and around Libya but I do not have specific dates nor do I intend to research them out. Re-Stealth Bomber...so what..?,.....we are not contemplating that aircraft as an addition to our air arm. Without beating a "dead-horse" I think I have made my POV very clear and you certainly have the right to disagree but I don't intend to get into a war of words/data aircraft types about the "first day", or any of the following days, of the action in Libya.

G'morning Handy... My opinion only............we do not need fighters in our inventory at all, and we do not need them to maintain our autonomy from the USA. Think back a few years during the cold war era....does anyone think that, had the "red hoard come over the poles that the USA would have sat back and said, "Let's wait and see how the Canucks handle the invasion before we get involved?" Think of the money expended since WW2 on "fighters" for Canada and the times we have actually used them. Let us assume we hung up our spurs when we brought the F-86s home.......would the past world events have been changed in any way shape or form? The answer is a resounding "No". Give me examples where the RCAF/CF utilizing the CF-100, CF101, F-5, CF104, F-18 made any real difference to world events...and yes I know that we were used as a "deterrent" during post WW2 eras but had we not been there........ would things have turned out differently??? It is time to state to the world that we do not want to be involved in a very expensive game just so we can "look" like we are ready for Armageddon. You and I both know that the strongest advocates of the "new" toys are those that were involved with the "old" toys but I feel it is time to change that attitude and realize that fighters should be scrapped from the CF and we can save money but still have an exceptional functional and tactical air arm at a much lesser cost. I would much rather we gave the CF ground forces better equipment than give the air arm some very, very expensive birds. Had we the best in the world,( ground vehicles), would we have saved any of the 155 we lost in Afghanistan.......? And finally, a single engine stealth fighter that will probably cost almost double the proposed acquisition numbers.......Canada doesn't need "stealth" airframes when there are drones and missiles, (ie: Tomahawk), available. World conflicts???........... yes, we can help but not with a few F35s and the multimillions it would cost to support them.......let's take a different path.. But as you know , I am not "King" and will have to live with whatever comes down the pipe ...happy or not.... (sorta like this %^$# election)

As I posted before """"I don't believe that anyone is advocating that we DO NOT NEED an Air Force with the top equipment. Much to the chagrin of some, others favour the POV that the F-35 stealth fighter is not required and that the Air Arm of the CF and government should seriously consider other options....that being a less expensive aircraft, or getting out of the air combat/air-to-ground role with whiz- bangs. The other sections of the Air Arm do have new and better equipment, for example the C-17 and the brand new C130s"""" Only my POV but in case you missed it....................we do NOT need stealth fighters in our inventory.....period. Have a great weekend....

That is correct...most of the Libyan IADS network was taken down by 110 Tomahawk Cruise missiles fired from ships, There were F15/F16/F18s as well as 'other' aircraft from the coalition in action and "no" I don't see it as ironic that other nations asked the USA which has a never ending inventory of whiz bangs to cough up.........even though only approximately 3-4% of Libya's oil goes west.

(snip)...Globe and Mail............. Previously, rebel fighters from the besieged city of Misrata told The Globe and Mail that government troops paused their bombardment of the city when they heard NATO jets overhead. After an hour or two, the soldiers resumed their attacks. That's a disadvantage of what soldiers call “fast air,” fighter jets capable of swooping down and destroying a target but not lingering overhead for many hours. Mr. Gadhafi's forces could hide and wait for the aircraft to go away. Britain and France had called for the Americans to deploy aircraft capable of so-called “low and slow” missions, such as the A-10 Thunderbolt and AC-130 Spectre gunships, which can deliver enormous firepower and intimidation. (The heavy cannon on the A-10 howls like a prehistoric beast.) But even the smaller Predators will almost certainly inspire fear. They have flown most intensively in recent years over the tribal areas of Pakistan, where locals call them “wasps” – a reference to the constant whine of their engines, somewhere far above – or “thunder.” The latter nickname refers to the sound of a Hellfire missile strike, a bolt from the sky with no warning. .........................(snip) Perhaps one could surmise that stealth, all purpose, etc. etc. (F35s) are not required in this case.........

I don't believe that anyone is advocating that we DO NOT NEED an Air Force with the top equipment. Much to the chagrin of some, others favour the POV that the F-35 stealth fighter is not required and that the Air Arm of the CF and government should seriously consider other options....that being a less expensive aircraft, or getting out of the air combat/air-to-ground role with whiz- bangs. The other sections of the Air Arm do have new and better equipment, for example the C-17 and the brand new C130s.

No, I don't think we should a Military in Canada that only looks after internal issues,................we should be involved in world affairs but in my mind there is no reason to have the F35. As I stated elsewhere, the CF is well known for our roles in SAR as well as global Humanitarian efforts, Global transport as well as Peace Keeping missions. The money expended on a stealth fighter can be better spent upgrading those arms of the Air Wing. As far as Libya goes, IMO we probably would not be there and it would be a US led 'conflict' but US public opinion concerning US Forces as well as US political thinking is against putting US Forces at "war" again, especially after Iraq and Afghanistan...besides.............. I believe Libya only accounts for 3% of oil exported to USA..... Like you Greg.............JMO.

Well, almost..... but modern aircraft, (assuming you mean aircraft NOT built for Military purposes), are not built for the roles we require,. For example the C130 is invaluable for TAL (Tactical Air Lift), and there is nothing in a civilian inventory that can do that job.(((In this case I am referring to the fact that one TAL role is to take "armament", (armed troops), into difficult access areas))) Similarly, armed helos can do the same job, (armed troop carriage), but are rather restricted in air-to-air role....helo air- to- ground is a feasible role though ...................But we have learned in Afghanistan that troops on the ground don't always come home......... I believe that the vast majority of the members of the CF killed overseas in Afghanista, during combat ops, was the result of an IED.....I don't believe any Mil equipment has been devised that can eliminate that threat.

Greg, Do you really think a Conservative MP would listen to a simple reason for NOT buying the planes?? I think I have been very clear on "why" I don't think they are needed and there is no point in droning on about the expense of each of these birds and the fact that we DO NOT need them. Do you, or any of the advocates of "new" fighters, really feel that NATO would be brought to its knees if we decided to get out of the fighter game and put 'some' of the money toward more reasonable military expenses? The fact that so many exMil individuals hang on to a military idea that is outdated in Canada is understandable, seeing that they had the privilege of flying the front lines birds ...............but never saw actual combat operations...They were living the dream of being on the fastest and best whiz-bangs we had............. but.................as the years moved on there was no real requirement to have them either. The threat generated by the Cold War has long past, post WW2 times are gone. Conflicts, if you can call Libya a conflict, is something we really don't need our aircraft in....surely other NATO countries can carry that load and we can contribute in many other ways. The airline industry has, and is changing, and it's time for the air arm of the Military in Canada to realize that there are facets of DND that should be changed. The only compromise I would be willing to put forth would be to wait a few years before actually buying the F35, and I mean after they have proven themselves and have all the 'bugs' out.......the F18 is due to be TXed in 2020. How about...if we have to............ we go for a new 'bug-free' aircraft in 2025. Edited for spelling

What else would you expect Laurie to write. ????..ex Mil, flew whiz-bangs, Conservative Party, and probably, at some time in his tenure......would like the role of Minister of National Defence.

Just wondering.....after you have read/listened to this book, perhaps you can terminate this thread.

Please let this thread die ..............

To be really honest...I am sooooo tired of this topic .....but decided to drop this in..cause...well ...we all know Sarah CNN)– In a late night posting on her Twitter feed, Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin continued to blast climate change believers Friday, calling the talks in Copenhagen, Denmark a representation of man's "arrogance," for believing people have an impact on nature. "Arrogant&Naive2say man overpwers nature," Palin tweeted. "Earth saw clmate chnge4 ions;will cont 2 c chnges.R duty2responsbly devlop resorces4humankind/not pollute&destroy;but cant alter naturl chng," the former Republican vice presidential nominee wrote. Palin's latest comments come after weeks of tangling over climate change with California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, former vice president Al Gore, and President Obama. In an op-ed in the Washington Post, Palin urged the president to boycott the climate talks, calling his presence at the conference a "political move." "The last thing America needs is misguided legislation that will raise taxes and cost jobs – particularly when the push for such legislation rests on agenda-driven science," Palin wrote. "Without trustworthy science and with so much at stake, Americans should be wary about what comes out of this politicized conference. The president should boycott Copenhagen." When Schwarzenegger questioned Palin's stance on climate change, Palin quickly hit back saying the actor-turned-governor was acting "greener than thou." And when former vice president Al Gore dubbed her a climate change "denier," Palin hit back at him too, accusing him of promoting "doomsday scenarios." "Climate change is like gravity – a naturally occurring phenomenon that existed long before, and will exist long after, any governmental attempts to affect it," Palin wrote on her Facebook page. During the vice presidential debate last year, Palin said she was for capping carbon emissions but did not elaborate on how she would do that.

Well there we go....over 10,000 views and I believe it is a record, especially when it really has little to do with aviation......how well rounded, (in a good sense..has nothing to do with weight, y'know), are AEF members?

Yes, it is true. The oceans of today are dumping grounds, however there are groups fighting the pollution and attempting to educate the masses. The areas that are popular with scuba divers are fairly clean as most of the reefs and surrounding areas are designated as Protected Habitation and fines for dumping are extremely high and in some cases ......prison . Having said the above I will say that even in the protected areas there are those that still "dump" and unfortunately the "dumpers" are mostly the local people. The attached picture is of a clean-up Scuba 02 and I were involved in the water surrounding one of our favourite diving areas. There were about 8 divers in our boat and about 5 boats participated, (all at our own expense), and the bags you see are what we dragged around as we collected debris on the ocean bottom. All the junk from our first dive is in the bags and the there is lots that does not show in the photo, tires, barrels, tanks, etc. We did two dives that day and happily there was not an excessive amount of trash but still it saddened all of us to see the debris in the water. In this case the government is on an "educational" program for the locals on the island and a clean-up is normally only required once every two year...with, hopefully, less trash each year. We did get a free lunch, free soft drinks, and a thank-you certificate from the government for our help. Until you spend a lot of time underwater do you appreciate how important it is to keep the waters, salt and fresh, free from pollution of all kinds......and I have even been known to yell at someone when I see them flick a cigarette butt in the water. Dive Safe...

Tourist attraction ?? Kingston Ontario, (Howe Island), is going to have 186 of those monsters going in the future...I believe they have about 85 up now and a good percentage of them are generating power at this time. Some of the residents, (Howe Island), are for them and some are not...

This is a courteous laugh PS..where's the article

A Quebec judge imposed a series of strict restrictions on schoolgirl killer Karla Homolka upon her release from prison next month, saying the Crown's fears she is still a threat to society with a risk to reoffend are valid. After two days of courtroom hearings--which marked Ms. Homolka's first public appearance in a decade - Quebec Judge Jean Beaulieu took only 10 minutes Friday to rule in favour of almost a dozen conditions suggested by crown prosecutors. The restrictions mean a big loss for Ms. Homolka and her lawyer, who argued that her client should have more freedom upon release, and a victory for the Crown and the families of the victims, who argued that Ms. Homolka is still potentially dangerous and should be made to follow stringent rules. Families expressed "enormous relief" at the ruling through lawyer Tim Danson but plan to retain a team of experts and prepare evidence to potentially renew the one-year restrictions in 2006. ""The conditions that have been imposed will go some distance to minimize the risk," he said. Ms. Homolka showed no emotion as Judge Beaulieu read out his ruling, according to a Canadian Press report from inside the courtroom. The ruling means she must tell authorities where she is living and who she is with after her release from prison. She must attend therapy for one year, abstain from drug use, have no contact with anyone under the age of 16 and give police 96 hours notice if she leaves plans to leave Quebec. She is also required to provide a court-ordered DNA samples. Ms. Homolka will also be forbidden from communicating with former husband Paul Bernardo and the families of victims Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffy. And she will be prohibited from communicating with anyone who has a criminal record. This includes convicted murderer Jean-Paul Gerbet, whom she has been romantically involved with in prison. Ontario Attorney-General Michael Bryant said the governments of Ontario and Quebec were "very, very pleased with the decision. "Today, Canada's justice system acted, not reacted, acted to prevent harm upon Homolka's release and to protect the public upon Homolka's release," said Mr. Bryant at a press conference. Ms. Holmolka must sign off on the conditions before she is released or she will face an additional year in jail. If she violates the conditions, she could face up to two more years in prison. The restrictions apply for one year, and Mr. Bryant wouldn't speculate on the possibility it could be renewed in 2006. The hearing has rekindled outrage over the case and left many again debating the so-called "deal with the devil" which led to Ms. Homolka being given a 12-year sentence in 1993 for the sex slayings of Ontario teenagers Kristen French and Leslie Mahaffy and the death of her own sister Tammy Homolka. During Friday's hearing, a psychiatrist called by the defence testified that Ms. Homolka suffers self-esteem problems but is not a psychopath and is not at a greater risk of reoffending than any other inmate now serving time. Montreal psychiatrist Dr. Louis Morissette also portrayed Ms. Homolka as a woman who has problems with self-esteem, but he testified that she is not a psychopath and does not have an anti-social personality. "The experts mostly agree, if she hadn't met [Paul] Bernardo, it would never have happened," he said, according to a Canadian Press report from inside the Quebec courtroom Friday. Ms. Homolka's sentence expires on July 5. Ms. Homolka was sentenced in 1993 after pleading guilty to two counts of manslaughter as part of an agreement with the Crown to testify against former husband Bernardo in the case. The agreement was made before the discovery of tapes depicting the French and Mahaffy killings. Those tapes raised questions about Ms. Homolka's role in the slayings and her claim that abuse by Mr. Bernardo led to her participation. But Tim Danson, the lawyer representing the French and Mahaffy families, balked Friday at Dr. Morissette's assessment of Ms. Homolka, arguing that she put her relationship with Mr. Bernardo ahead of the lives of the two slain schoolgirls or that of her own sister. "Now, if that doesn't strike you as being alarming," he told reporters outside the courthouse during a break in the hearing. "There are a lot of people in this world who have low self-esteem. They don't go out and murder their sisters and murder other people." He also said the assessment fails to take into the brutal nature of the crimes, which shocked the nation. "It's not just that she goes out because of low self-esteem and commits murders, but that she does it in a manner, with Paul Bernardo, that is sadistic and brutal," he said. He added that the psychiatrist also conceded that he felt Ms. Homolka needs further treatment. "It seems to me that her own witness was conceding that that kind of court order would be helpful for Karla Homolka and to protect the public interest," he said. On Thursday, Ms. Homolka's lawyer unsuccessfully tried to have the hearing dismissed, contending that it was an abuse of power and a violation of Ms. Homolka's rights. In her closing arguments, Ms. Homolka's lawyer argued that her client's rights would be violated if restrictions were placed on her freedom. "She's conscious of the fact that she does everything possible to never find herself in the situation she was in," said Sylvie Bordelais, adding that Canadians should learn to understand she has changed and is no longer dangerous. During the first day of the hearing, the court heard from Constable Brian Noble of the Niagara Regional Police, who detailed the circumstances of the killings and cited correctional records and psychiatric reports to argue that Ms. Homolka continues to pose a threat to society. Ms. Homolka's tearful response to Constable Noble's description of the killings sparked rage from Mr. Danson, lawyer for the French and Mahaffy families, who deemed it "a little bit late." Court also heard that corrections officials, who considered Ms. Homolka a conformist who followed the rules while incarcerated, also found a naked photo of convicted killer Mr. Gerbet, with whom Ms. Homolka has struck up a relationship. Mr. Danson called that revelation especially telling. "This is very, very significant," he said. "Even those psychiatrists who have given the opinion that Karla Homolka doesn't represent a threat public safety have conceded that that's conditional on the fact that she not associated with these kinds of people. "The very fact that she's doing precisely that means all bets are off." However, Dr. Morissette testified that Ms. Homolka - who was also involved with a female prisoner earlier in her incarceration - knows that she cannot have a relationship with Mr. Gerbet because he will be deported to his native France when he is released. Mr. Gerbet will be eligible for parole in 2008. He also said he was aware the two had exchanged letters but could not say whether they were continuing to write. "These are things that must be discussed," Dr. Morissette said. "She doesn't hide it. She discusses it."

Not reading anything into your post. I was merely having a "play" on one way her name appears in the media. I think I made that clear in the line with regard to the two different spellings. Personally I don't care how her name is written because everytime I see it I can only see EVIL

I guess you could call her a "Homolka" as she did have a lesbian affair while in prison but according to the news tonight "Holmoka" is in love with another guy serving 7 years for killing his girlfriend during "a fit of jealous rage". Coming to your neighbourhood soon........ PS...Homolka/Holmoka problem could have been fixed years ago for $0.19...now it would cost $0.24 (inflation).