Derek 2.0

And you base your opinion on what? Both Irving and SEASPAN have completed their portions of FELEX to date on budget.

What of it? ~$ 4.5 billion for large, modern, supply ships, built to military standards and 30 years in-service support is aligned with other such purchases

He stated he would rule out the F-35 by name (this is also confirmed in the Liberal's defense platform) The F-35 has a longer range, on internal fuel, then our current Hornets and the Super Hornet, both carrying drop tanks........The United States, Norway and Denmark have been using the single engine F-16 in the Arctic since the 1970s. In the case of the USAF, their single engine F-16s have a higher engine safety rate than their twin engine F-15s. Also, the USAF will be basing F-35s in Fairbanks Alaska, which is just outside the Arctic circle, likewise Norway, which will continue to base the majority of its force in Bodo, which is also an arctic environment. Stealth is but a form of camouflage, its as critical as providing our army with CADPAT uniforms instead of neon colors......to add, with the Russians now basing their own modern fighters in the Arctic, stealth will provide a significant advantage and measure of safety to our own forces conducting NORAD missions. The F-35B just entered operational service with the USMC this summer, the Marines have already stated its a vast improvement over its Harrier and Hornets, Hornets that are the same vintage as our current Hornet fleet.

Why? Egypt purchased a GP FREMM frigate, including spares, maintenance, infrastructure and munitions for ~$1.2 billion earlier this year from France......if our GP frigate (12 ships) are in that price range, that would equate to $15 billion of $ 26 billion budgeted, leaving $11 billion for 3 DDGs....The RAN is paying for its three over budget Hobart class destroyers, in 2015 USD, just under $6 billion..........so yeah, context is important, as is risk mitigation, which I was concerned about several years ago, prior to the announced industry partnerships.

So you don't expect the Canadian dollar to effect the purchase of Super Hornets?

All Kuwaiti purchases are cash, as they (and Qatar) don't receive DoD FMF on purchasing.

BS!!! $26 billion over 15 ships nearly equates to the purchase price of an equal number, of post development, Flight III Burkes........

Well no, it doesn't, unless the RCN is planning on purchasing Zumwalt like destroyers

That's laughable......yesterday, they were reporting a loss of 1 or 2 ships........at this rate, the navy will be selling off ships by Friday.......interesting how CTV received this "inside info" the same day Trudeau announced his intention to fund an already budgeted program......

You don't have to, that is not to say you can't determine the actual purchase price........If you, myself and the City of Winnipeg all bought a new pick-up cash, we'll all pay them same amount. The difference is in annual usage, expected lifetime and ancillary costs etc and how we then account for lifetime usage.

No, as modern and near term UAVs have major challenges facing them in terms of progression. With that said, they will complement manned aircraft in some roles going forward, but not replace them in likely in of our lifetimes.......this is evident by the Americans new bomber program and 6th generation fighter that will both be manned. Missile technology and countermeasures will be an endless race, of course, the Americans are generations ahead of any potential foes, and still ahead of their own allies.

Right now, we currently pay ~$1 billion a year to operate our current Hornet fleet, or 5% of our defence budget. Whatever we purchase (F-35, Super Hornet, Eurofighter etc) we'll continue to pay ~$1 billion a year for, as these are sunk costs that include everything from salaries of personal to maintenance of the airbases. To purchase the F-35, spares, training aides etc to operate through its life will cost us ~$15 billion in new funds, the real debate, is what it would cost for a similar purchase of a different aircraft, is what another type would cost. Right now, today, the Eurofighter, Rafale, F-15 Silent Eagle and Gripen NG cost more than the low rate initial production F-35As. Inversely, today, the Super Hornet and latest version of the F-16 cost less than the F-35A, but once the F-35 enters full production in ~2017-2018, it will cost the same as, then less than, the Super Hornet and F-16, likewise, the price of the Super Hornet and F-16 will begin to increase as their production ceases......as linked to above, the US Government, as of today, will not be purchasing either Super Hornets or F-16s next year, as such, their production lines will end once they are complete their current orders (unless they received more orders in the interim). So to answer your question, to purchase and operate the the F-35 for ~30 years will cost us ~$15 billion + ~$30 billion out too the later 2050s. Aside from stealth, in simple language, generational change and advancement in technology. Simply put, the F-35 is the iphone 6 and the others are analog flip phones. ~30+ years. The reality is, fighters are expensive to operate, and without them, we will be shown the door from NORAD and the Americans will defend North America how they see fit, including safeguarding the approaches to the United States, over Canada, with their own F-35s..........The question to ask yourself, do you want Canadian or American F-35s defending Canada?

I’m sure they would if they deemed it in their National Security interests……Kuwait (and Qatar) get “free” US Military training, infrastructure improvements and military assistance & support in exchange for subsidized fuel sales and logistic support to the DoD, unfettered basing agreements (including tens of thousands of US personal) and use of military training areas, in addition to consent to the United States to conduct any and all military and intelligence operations from their soil……oh and preferential bidding, on all Kuwaiti Government and private contracts, by US corporate interests. Seems like a wonderful idea, sell our own National sovereignty to the United States in exchange for reducing our own commitments to our national defense. Freedom isn't free

Ahhh no, it does, as Kuwait, like numerous other nations that benefit from US military aide, only pay the purchase list price......the Kuwaiti air force has been maintained by the United States Navy since 1991. But thanks for coming out.

No, just a good foundation in it: In 2014 DoD paid ~$7.5 billion for 29 LRIP F-35s and spares In 2015 DoD paid ~$8.5 billion for 38 LRIP F-35s and spares In 2016 DoD will pay ~$11 billion for 57 LRIP F-35 and spares Kuwait paid $3 billion for 28 Super Hornets through a DoD FMS agreement, that since 1991 has seen the various branches of the US military maintain Kuwaiti aircraft in exchange for basing rights for US Forces..........What is also telling, form the 2016 budget request, the Americans will no longer be purchasing the Super Hornet (or the Growler) for itself or any other nations through FMS agreements......

And what is your point? Are you suggesting that the DoD's 2016 planned purchase of 57 LRIP F-35s (including F-35B and C models), including spares, support and funds allocated to R&D, for ~$11 billion is a bad thing? Our own Government budgeted ~$15 billion for the procurement of 65 (cheaper) production F-35As, so your link would suggest that our Governments budgeted amount from several years ago is aligned with current program funding and will remain on budget with our planned production purchase. Thanks for proving my point. What of it? Your link is dated and incorrect, but mentions a purchase of 40 Super Hornets for $3 Billion, but as it turned out, Kuwait (as I demonstrated from this Summer's purchase) ended up paying $3 billion for just 28 Super Hornets...... Thanks for confirming the reduction in pricing of the F-35 versus the increase in pricing of the Super Hornet........

Your use of sentence structure: So what are you getting at? Did you have a point? I'm not sure what your above response to me meant.

With Samoa beating the Americans, the Boks are now sitting on the outside looking in......We'll need the Scots to knock off Japan this Wednesday, and a rebound against Samoa this weekend.......

Give it another go in English.

Right, how about old enough to feel the déjà vu all over again with Trudeau’s disjointed policy on the F-35? As I said, though I personally disagree with holding a competition, I will give Mulcair credit for not precluding any manufactures from such a process …..an indication that Mulcair knows what he doesn’t know, likewise a realization on his part that numerous nations have signed onto the program for a reason.

Technically not naval (not that old), but close enough

Yes, for nearly 20 years.

The RCAF---> our NORAD and NATO partners (namely the Americans)---> Canadian industry----> Lockheed/Northrop Grumman/P&W. In that order.

No it won't, as JSF partners, we're already getting the "better deal" when compared to those on the outside of the program looking inwards......to say nothing of the fact, assuming the process took several years, it could result in lost contract bidding rights for Canadian industry, that wouldn't be made whole by any of the other "contenders".