$9 Billion No-Bid Contract for 65 F-35s

[DogOnPorch]

Good bird, yet too many issue for my likes. Wings too short, small combat radius, single engine, bad stall speeds, low weapons payload etc.

Yes...strictly a short range high-speed interceptor, the advantage being its incredible rate of climb. At least it didn't have the MiG-21's fuel/balance/trim problems.

[DogOnPorch]

I was never an F18 fan. I prefer the F15 or even the F16 to it. The F20 was damned interesting, yet not good enough. As it stands I would rather a couple of squadrons of F22's but that isn't going to happen. The F35 is about right for us, even if I am not a fan.

The F-18 was never the glamor-bird that the F-14 and F-15 were. The F-16 still rocks...but it is mainly a dogfighter.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

The F-18 was never the glamor-bird that the F-14 and F-15 were. The F-16 still rocks...but it is mainly a dogfighter.

I always thought there were a few Russian birds worth looking at. At this point the one that interests me he most is the SU30. Production costs appear to be somewhere between 22.5 and 42.5 million per bird. At least that is what they are saying in India, where they plan to build them on licence. Supposed cost to import them off the rack is 77.5 million. Nice bird!

[DogOnPorch]

I always thought there were a few Russian birds worth looking at. At this point the one that interests me he most is the SU30. Production costs appear to be somewhere between 22.5 and 42.5 million per bird. At least that is what they are saying in India, where they plan to build them on licence. Supposed cost to import them off the rack is 77.5 million. Nice bird!

If you've followed the "Your Favorite Aircraft" thread, you'll know I'm a big fan of Russian aviation (the Pe-2,

and

in particular). But, due to numerous compatibility problems running from voltage to refueling, it's not a sound idea logistically to mix east and west in one air force. Sukhoi has been in the business since WW2 (Su-2) and used to stick to ground attack aircraft like the Su-7. Only in the last while (since the fall of the Soviet union, I suppose) have they branched out into the export fighter biz.

Edited October 8, 2010 by DogOnPorch

[Alta4ever]

The F-18 was never the glamor-bird that the F-14 and F-15 were. The F-16 still rocks...but it is mainly a dogfighter.

I loved the look the f-14 it just oozed power a beautiful aircraft that has always been my favorite.

[DogOnPorch]

I loved the look the f-14 it just oozed power a beautiful aircraft that has always been my favorite.

Aye...Iran still operates a few left over from the Shah days. Otherwise it was USN all the way.

[bush_cheney2004]

Grumman F-14 Tomcat fix:

[Topaz]

Who is right and who is wrong and will Canadians really find out. Harper is now attacking former assistant deputy minister of materials, Alan Williams. Williams tesified in a committee meeting, that there should be a an open bidding and that McKay logic was "flawed". As he went on to tell his side, I wonder if those little white lies are resurfacing again from the Tories. http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/10/07/don-martin-harper-facing-dogfight-over-fighter-jet-deal/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[YEGmann]

Just watched Alan Williams on CTV Power Play.

The man said no substanse. Just ridiculous crap. He gave a clear example of a liberal partisan.

What tender is he talking? Since when military aircraft operational requirements, mission profiles are public domain?

He wasn't able to name an alternative aircraft. Why does he thinks the public should select the aircraft, not military experts? Why we need a tender if no aircraft except F-22 can even closely match the radio signature (RCS) of F-35. Does he understand what it means?

The US has conducted the tender. Lockheed's X-35 has beat Boeing's X-32. Is that Mr. Williams has no knowledge of the subject? He could have googled this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II#JSF_Program_history

Does he want Canada to repeat the tender? And so on, on and on... This man has no shame or he is merely incompetent.

[Topaz]

Just watched Alan Williams on CTV Power Play.

The man said no substanse. Just ridiculous crap. He gave a clear example of a liberal partisan.

What tender is he talking? Since when military aircraft operational requirements, mission profiles are public domain?

He wasn't able to name an alternative aircraft. Why does he thinks the public should select the aircraft, not military experts? Why we need a tender if no aircraft except F-22 can even closely match the radio signature (RCS) of F-35. Does he understand what it means?

The US has conducted the tender. Lockheed's X-35 has beat Boeing's X-32. Is that Mr. Williams has no knowledge of the subject? He could have googled this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II#JSF_Program_history

Does he want Canada to repeat the tender? And so on, on and on... This man has no shame or he is merely incompetent.

You should have watched him on CBC. He was very clear about this process of buying the jets. Simon is very good in asking the right questions and he digs for the answers. I like CTV's but since Tom Clark left is not the same. I think you may be able to watch the interview online at cbc.ca

[Wild Bill]

You should have watched him on CBC. He was very clear about this process of buying the jets. Simon is very good in asking the right questions and he digs for the answers. I like CTV's but since Tom Clark left is not the same. I think you may be able to watch the interview online at cbc.ca

Obviously, you didn't know much about the situation BEFORE the CBC interview! If you did, you would have instantly known that he was deliberately talking through his hat!

This man knows the truth and yet he deliberately twisted things to take advantage of the typical Canadian viewer's ignorance to make the Tories look bad! I watched the interview myself and wondered why Simon never mentioned how the Liberals had committed us with some millions of dollars towards the development of the new jets, so that we would have a better price when the time came to place an order. Simon never mentioned that the buy was sole-source because no other company in the world makes a plane that comes close to the specs of this fighter!

Simon also never mentioned that the money the Liberals had spent for development would be wasted if we bought some other plane, just like when Chretien cancelled the EH101 helicopter deal to spite Mulroney and cost us $500 MILLION DOLLARS in cancellation fees!

The Liberals will twist anything for a political advantage, even if it means having to ignore something they themselves began! They have no morals or ethics at all! I don't think Harper's boys are the greatest but I'd vote for a skunk before I'd vote for this Liberal team!

[Argus]

You should have watched him on CBC. He was very clear about this process of buying the jets. Simon is very good in asking the right questions and he digs for the answers. I like CTV's but since Tom Clark left is not the same. I think you may be able to watch the interview online at cbc.ca

Topaz, I'm not sure where you're calling in from, but here in Ottawa, we couldn't help giggle at the thought of a DND procurement honcho demanding the government follow the right process for bidding.

You might not know it, but large government procurement efforts are almost the cliche of bureaucracy gone mad. You would not believe the number of meetings, reports, and sign-offs required for even a middling size purchase. It's staggering. And yet, even with all that taken as the norm, the rest of the federal bureaucracy looks at DND procurement with something like awe. It takes years, literally, YEARS of work for DND to manage to bring a large scale purchase to the point of actually signing off on the contract. That's why the Liberals and now the Tories, have bypassed the normal channels in purchasing important equipment for Afghanistan, for example.

[Topaz]

F-35 fifth generation? Comparison to others. http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-081109-1.html

[Topaz]

Topaz, I'm not sure where you're calling in from, but here in Ottawa, we couldn't help giggle at the thought of a DND procurement honcho demanding the government follow the right process for bidding.

You might not know it, but large government procurement efforts are almost the cliche of bureaucracy gone mad. You would not believe the number of meetings, reports, and sign-offs required for even a middling size purchase. It's staggering. And yet, even with all that taken as the norm, the rest of the federal bureaucracy looks at DND procurement with something like awe. It takes years, literally, YEARS of work for DND to manage to bring a large scale purchase to the point of actually signing off on the contract. That's why the Liberals and now the Tories, have bypassed the normal channels in purchasing important equipment for Afghanistan, for example.

Giggle? Must be that water in Ottawa and isn't there some toxic in into the Ottawa River? Canada has one year to get a fair bidding in, like or not. It doesn't change the deliver date. These are not my words but the words of someone more experienced than you or I.

[Topaz]

A gentleman from the US who has been studying the F-35 says it the wrong jet for Canada and that other countries are now starting to think twice before committing and that the maintenance on this jet will be 3x the price, which could end up to One trillion dollars. So with a government that has given us the largest deficit, would you trust their decide about this jet without others bidding and see what is out there?

[DogOnPorch]

If you're into aircraft, you already know what's out there...not much. Canadian pilots should be flying the best combat aircraft available...not the second best...not the cheapest.

Here's what happens historically to those flying second rate machines into combat against top shelf aircraft with good pilots at the sticks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody_April

[GostHacked]

F-35 fifth generation? Comparison to others. http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-NOTAM-081109-1.html

http://militarystrat.wordpress.com/2010/01/07/chinas-5th-generation-j-14-stealth-fighter/

China even thinks the F-22 is a 4th Gen fighter. It's all how a country classifies the aircraft. Some countries may have different criteria when judging the F-35's abilities.

Even if we have the chance to purchase the Chinese fighter, we are going to be waiting 10- 15 years before that happens. So since we are looking at replacing them NOW, the Chinese fighter is out of the question. And that is under the impression that China would actually sell this new fighter abroad. It's still in development while we can have the f-35 now.

But again, because of NATO requirements, you won't see Chinese or Russian fighters in our inventory. So those are not even options we can consider unless we want to revamp and completely overhaul NATO/NORAD.

All you people can still try to promote the Russian and Chinese planes, but your efforts will be fruitless. So why are these options even being discussed?

[DogOnPorch]

It's a bit of that 'anything but the USA' mentality, me thinks, GH.

[GostHacked]

If you're into aircraft, you already know what's out there...not much. Canadian pilots should be flying the best combat aircraft available...not the second best...not the cheapest.

Here's what happens historically to those flying second rate machines into combat against top shelf aircraft with good pilots at the sticks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody_April

Sounds like the Sherman Tank. The only reason the tanks were a success was the numbers that were produced. However they suffered huge losses compared to the German tanks because they were inferior to the German tanks.

So if a country is able to mass produce a sub-par product it has the potential to overwhelm any new fighter. Simply because of the numbers of these aircraft that will be produced. How many Cf-18s do we have in service? And will 65 F-35s be enough?

[GostHacked]

It's a bit of that 'anything but the USA' mentality, me thinks, GH.

We don't have any other option. That is the whole thing. People seem to ignore that. And the other options they propose are simply a no-go if you understand how we are tied into NATO and the obligations requirements that alone demands.

We'd could be better off with the SAABs. The JAS 39 is an amazing craft. And would serve us well. They are operated in almost the same climates we have, and would have little to no issues integrating into out military and to our NATO requirements.

[DogOnPorch]

We don't have any other option. That is the whole thing. People seem to ignore that. And the other options they propose are simply a no-go if you understand how we are tied into NATO and the obligations requirements that alone demands.

We'd could be better off with the SAABs. The JAS 39 is an amazing craft. And would serve us well. They are operated in almost the same climates we have, and would have little to no issues integrating into out military and to our NATO requirements.

The JAS 39 is also getting pretty old...first flight 1988. Nice machine but I don't think it has mid-air refueling, though.

[Topaz]

The bad news about this jet keeps oming in. http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/10/13/costs-are-soaring-too/

[wyly]

The bad news about this jet keeps oming in. http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/10/13/costs-are-soaring-too/

and it gets worse...the Russian SU50 is already flying and will be in production by 2015/16...a superior plane to even the F22 and it has a L-Band radar to detect stealth aircraft, stealth planes such as the F22 and F35 are designed to avoid X-Band radar...so what good is paying mega bucks for stealth technology that every nation will be able to detect...

[Smallc]

Actually, we don't know if that plane will be superior to anything, and we don't know what it will do. It's doubtful that a russian plane will be better than the F-22.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Actually, we don't know if that plane will be superior to anything, and we don't know what it will do. It's doubtful that a russian plane will be better than the F-22.

Pretty sure about that are you?