GWiz Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 Let's put this turkey to bed once and for all... The Harper Government wants to buy a totally UNPROVEN airframe for the Air arm of the Canadian Military for a cost that may be as high (or even higher) than $21 BILLION because the current fleet of CF-18 Fighter Aircraft are reaching or have reached the end of their proscribed service life... The former Liberal Government, to ensure "prefered" status in buying new Fighter Aircraft for the Canadian Forces became involved financially with the U.S. Government and Lockheed-Martin in the developement of the F-35 Stealth Fighter... This was prior to the resession and was not a contractuaral commitment to buy a specific number or type of aircraft... The Harper Government has now made a commitment to buy 65 of said F-35 Fighter Aircraft without any bidding process, suitability studies, or looking at any other competing possible airframes to replace the CF-18s Canada currently needs to replace... The first delivery of the first F-35s, since they are not yet in production, would be some 8 years down the road... It is my contention that there are much more viable and much less expensive options to replace Canada's current fleet of CF-18s... Prior to purchasing Canada's current Fighter, for the first time, a "needs" test was developed by Canada for what a Figher Aircraft should be to meet Canada's unique requirements in a Fighter Aircraft... Numerous aircraft were considered, from the U.S. alone, the F-15, the F-16, and the F-18 were matched against each other... The F-18 was chosen because it came closest to meeting all of Canada's criteria and offered the most benefits to Canada in maintenance and participatory contracts... One of the primary criteria that the F-18 offered was a twin engine design as a primary safety consideration when flying over Canada's vast northern areas... This was what eliminated the single engine F-16 even though the F-16 was considerably less expensive and more than met most of the other criteria Canada had... The F-16 was in fact my pick at the time... The F-35 is a single engine Fighter... - The United States intends to buy a total of 2,443 aircraft for an estimated US$323 billion, making it the most expensive defense program ever.[10] The United States Air Force (USAF) budget data in 2010, along with other sources, projects the F-35 to have a flyaway cost that ranges between US$89 million and US$200 million over the planned production of F-35s, depending on the variant.[11][12][13][14] Cost estimates have risen to $382 billion for 2,443 aircraft, at an average of $92 million each.[15] However, rising program cost estimates have cast doubt on the actual number to be produced for the U.S.[15] In January 2011 Defense Secretary Robert Gates expressed the Pentagon's frustration with the skyrocketing costs of the F-35 program when he said "The culture of endless money that has taken hold must be replaced by a culture of restraint." [15] Focusing his attention on the troubled VTOL F-35B Gates ordered "a two-year probation", saying it "should be canceled" if corrections are unsuccessful.[15] Private analysts say the whole F-35 program is becoming a money pit. "The incredibly unfortunate phrase 'too big to fail' applies to this aircraft more than any other defense program", said Richard Aboulafia, an aerospace industry analyst with the Teal Group.[15] - I have already posted my thoughts on what Canada should do in this thread, check it out... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 (edited) Let's put this turkey to bed once and for all... The Harper Government wants to buy a totally UNPROVEN airframe for the Air arm of the Canadian Military for a cost that may be as high (or even higher) than $21 BILLION because the current fleet of CF-18 Fighter Aircraft are reaching or have reached the end of their proscribed service life... The former Liberal Government, to ensure "prefered" status in buying new Fighter Aircraft for the Canadian Forces became involved financially with the U.S. Government and Lockheed-Martin in the developement of the F-35 Stealth Fighter... This was prior to the resession and was not a contractuaral commitment to buy a specific number or type of aircraft... The Harper Government has now made a commitment to buy 65 of said F-35 Fighter Aircraft without any bidding process, suitability studies, or looking at any other competing possible airframes to replace the CF-18s Canada currently needs to replace... The first delivery of the first F-35s, since they are not yet in production, would be some 8 years down the road... It is my contention that there are much more viable and much less expensive options to replace Canada's current fleet of CF-18s... Prior to purchasing Canada's current Fighter, for the first time, a "needs" test was developed by Canada for what a Figher Aircraft should be to meet Canada's unique requirements in a Fighter Aircraft... Numerous aircraft were considered, from the U.S. alone, the F-15, the F-16, and the F-18 were matched against each other... The F-18 was chosen because it came closest to meeting all of Canada's criteria and offered the most benefits to Canada in maintenance and participatory contracts... One of the primary criteria that the F-18 offered was a twin engine design as a primary safety consideration when flying over Canada's vast northern areas... This was what eliminated the single engine F-16 even though the F-16 was considerably less expensive and more than met most of the other criteria Canada had... The F-16 was in fact my pick at the time... The F-35 is a single engine Fighter... - The United States intends to buy a total of 2,443 aircraft for an estimated US$323 billion, making it the most expensive defense program ever.[10] The United States Air Force (USAF) budget data in 2010, along with other sources, projects the F-35 to have a flyaway cost that ranges between US$89 million and US$200 million over the planned production of F-35s, depending on the variant.[11][12][13][14] Cost estimates have risen to $382 billion for 2,443 aircraft, at an average of $92 million each.[15] However, rising program cost estimates have cast doubt on the actual number to be produced for the U.S.[15] In January 2011 Defense Secretary Robert Gates expressed the Pentagon's frustration with the skyrocketing costs of the F-35 program when he said "The culture of endless money that has taken hold must be replaced by a culture of restraint." [15] Focusing his attention on the troubled VTOL F-35B Gates ordered "a two-year probation", saying it "should be canceled" if corrections are unsuccessful.[15] Private analysts say the whole F-35 program is becoming a money pit. "The incredibly unfortunate phrase 'too big to fail' applies to this aircraft more than any other defense program", said Richard Aboulafia, an aerospace industry analyst with the Teal Group.[15] - I have already posted my thoughts on what Canada should do in this thread, check it out... Well, your links finally work! Anyhow, I'm not 100% sure of what you're advocating here. Apparently, you want us to study what aircraft are available to suit our needs. Surely the Liberals did this before? Or did they just pick the F-35 out of their butt when they signed us up? Of course, if we bail out of the program we lose all the money we've already put in. I don't think you're suggesting we do that! More likely, you must feel that there are indeed better and cheaper planes out there. Would you like to name one? I hope you don't mean some version of the F-18 that has no stealth capability. How would you like to be the only pilot on a battlefield that the enemy can see clearly? Even if detection capabilities improve, the F-18 will at least be the MOST visible plane in the air! Of course, Liberal support has never been much for our boys anyway, sending them off so Chretien could get a peacekeeping photo-op with bows and arrows against the lightning. From my POV, they don't seem much different from Dief's Tories. He gutted our aerospace industry but the Liberals gutted the entire military! So do you have any other options, or just anything but something during a Tory term of power? Me, I've long said that I would be very much against any son or daughter of mine serving in our forces. Not because I am some sort of pacifist. Quite the contrary. I just think that any country that doesn't properly value the lives of its soldiers to at least send them out with the right colour of camo gear doesn't deserve to be defended! Edited February 11, 2011 by Wild Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 ....This was what eliminated the single engine F-16 even though the F-16 was considerably less expensive and more than met most of the other criteria Canada had... The F-16 was in fact my pick at the time... Good pick...and if cost was the major consideration, the F-16 could have been better. Over 4,000 have been produced since way back then, and Block 60's are still rolling out of Fort Worth, Texas. So fast forwarding to today, we find that "two engine" paranoia is unfounded with modern engines, and in fact cost more to maintain for labor and depot logistics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 ESQ: This is just nonsense talk in not understanding the capabilities of current technology. Really because this are the very reasons the US airforce have encountered during it's research for new UCAV tech, and making this tech a reality.....I'm sure US airforces black programs have exhausted every possiabilty in finding solutions.....Some of which you mention if available today would revolutionize the entire air industry, it would change all forms of travel........imagine flying with no fossil based fuel at all....The money to be made on this tech would make it's inventor's rich beyond anyones dreams.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 Let's put this turkey to bed once and for all... This Turkey is put to bed, and will remain there until or if the liberals get in power.....and we will end up with a cheaper shit box airframe, waiting years for it to be delivered and when it is finally delivered it would cost more than the F-35.... thrown out because that is what was popular at the time..... The Harper Government wants to buy a totally UNPROVEN airframe for the Air arm of the Canadian Military for a cost that may be as high (or even higher) than $21 BILLION Why stop at 21 BIL why not just round it up to 30 bil, i mean those figures include just a 20 year maint costs....and we will have it atleast 30 years....i say make it 40 bil because all of us know that 65 aircraft is not going to be enoungh, and does not take into effect of aircraft lost or damaged....shit lets make it 50 bil because we will have to buy all those new fancy wpns packages we don't have now.....we can do this all day.....it is going to cost 9 bil dollars to purchase the aircraft....any other cost will come out of the already established OEM budget which pays for current maint costs of the F-18's....which the F-35 will be much much cheaper to maintain....adding those costs to the end purchase price is decieving the public.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 Well, your links finally work! Good, and I'm glad you looked and I also hope you went to the links on the posts there... Anyhow, I'm not 100% sure of what you're advocating here. Apparently, you want us to study what aircraft are available to suit our needs. Surely the Liberals did this before? Or did they just pick the F-35 out of their butt when they signed us up? They signed up to be one of the countries involved in the Joint Strike Fighter program, what became the X-35 program which resulted in the F-35... Nothing more... Would you have preferred that Canada had been left out of this program? Of course, if we bail out of the program we lose all the money we've already put in. I don't think you're suggesting we do that! More likely, you must feel that there are indeed better and cheaper planes out there. Would you like to name one? I would absolutely lose the money if it meant saving billions of dollars and getting more bang for the buck... My pick NOW is the F/A-18E/F "Super Hornet" in combo with the F/A-18G "Growler"... In essence mirroring the purchase by the U.S. Navy - - On September 28, 2010, Boeing C announced it had been awarded a new multi-year procurement contract valued at $5.297 billion from the U.S. Navy for 124 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler aircraft. Under the terms of the agreement, Boeing is to deliver 66 Super Hornets and 58 Growlers to the Navy from 2012 through 2015. - Depending on what penalties not proceeding with the F-35 Canada would need to pay, adjustments in the number and configurations would easily cover them... For example 100 planes in a 65-35 split would be the ideal for Canada's needs well into the future... Any arguement made about "30 year old planes or technology" is simply untrue as these are TODAY still NEW front line Fighter Planes and will remain so for quite some time to come... As simple proof the purchase of these planes by the U.S. Navy as well as other countries like Australia... The advantages for Canada, considering they are the NEWEST varient of Canada's current Fighter fleet, with all essential service infrastructure already in place throughout Canada should be obvious to everyone... The $10 to $20 BILLION dollars in savings could be directly applied to Canada's debt thereby reducing interest costs to Canada with a further advantage of if/when our economy recovers sufficiently in the future to procure state of the art Military equipment for Canada's armed forces... I hope you don't mean some version of the F-18 that has no stealth capability. How would you like to be the only pilot on a battlefield that the enemy can see clearly? Even if detection capabilities improve, the F-18 will at least be the MOST visible plane in the air! The main advantage of "STEALTH" is in a "first strike" scenario, ie - taking out radar and missile defence sites as was done in the attack on Iraq... Canada will never be in that position... In airial combat situations Canada will NOT be tasked to fly against superior aircraft with stealth capability but rather aircraft very inferior to the Super Hornet / Growler package... Playing "what if" scenarios is totally counter productive as well as being totally unrealistic... Of course, Liberal support has never been much for our boys anyway, sending them off so Chretien could get a peacekeeping photo-op with bows and arrows against the lightning. From my POV, they don't seem much different from Dief's Tories. He gutted our aerospace industry but the Liberals gutted the entire military! So do you have any other options, or just anything but something during a Tory term of power? Total BS... What I'm saying here has 0, nada, nothing, to do with any party or politics it has to do with what, in my considered opinion, is BEST for Canada... I'd be every bit as much against an untendered, uncompetative, ultra expensive, purchase like this if it were the Liberals or anyone else doing it... As I was TOTALLY AGAINST buying 4 used non-nuclear submarines... How did THAT turn out? Me, I've long said that I would be very much against any son or daughter of mine serving in our forces. Not because I am some sort of pacifist. Quite the contrary. I just think that any country that doesn't properly value the lives of its soldiers to at least send them out with the right colour of camo gear doesn't deserve to be defended! Your entitled to your opinion... My opinion of the Canadian Military is "never in Military history have so few done so much with so little"... It's TIME to give our Military what it NEEDS not what some politico or desk jockey wants to look "sexy" and show off a new toy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 I would absolutely lose the money if it meant saving billions of dollars and getting more bang for the buck... My pick NOW is the F/A-18E/F "Super Hornet" in combo with the F/A-18G "Growler"... In essence mirroring the purchase by the U.S. Navy - Ummmm...OK...but I don't think you know what a "Growler" is for. Canada would not/could not use such large numbers of F/A-18G aircraft without a lot more investment in electronic warfare suites and other EW platforms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esq Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 (edited) ESQ: Really because this are the very reasons the US airforce have encountered during it's research for new UCAV tech, and making this tech a reality..... Is this the same airforce with a whole bunch of pilots, and a 300 billion defence program for new manned aircrafts? Sadly this is because the US UCAV proposed didn't utilize AI, it utilized drone systems - this is because a drone system is not as efficient as an AI system. The US airforce doesn't want their most leathal technologies controlled by programmers. They want them controlled by airforce personnel. This has nothing to do with technological superiority, it has to do with politics within the military, and loss of military control to a small group of people. This trend in techology would all but eliminate US air superiority on a basis of trained flight personnel and remove the air force and replace it with technicians, not pilots. I'm sure US airforces black programs have exhausted every possiabilty in finding solutions.....Some of which you mention if available today would revolutionize the entire air industry, it would change all forms of travel........imagine flying with no fossil based fuel at all....The money to be made on this tech would make it's inventor's rich beyond anyones dreams.... --- its not about money. It is about control and access. Money is only one mechanism that provides that. You are basically saying I know better than the whole of the US airforce, and i think that is a problematic position. It is politically feasable solutions - not the best solution. The airforce wants to control themselves. It is a game breaker.. it changes the game, they don't want that, because it is a game they have been winning at. As soon as those rules change - it is who can produce technology, not who can produce a culture of pilots. This is the same question of why pay a for a couple of pilots to fly a 767 when an ai can do it just as well? Even if it is a redundant system - for whatever reason they want a human controlling it, not a machine. Skynet is not the greatest problem - computers are more dependable than humans. There is more of a risk when you have a person behind a mission rather than a mission operandi behind a mission. Humans are fallable, and perform worse. this is a small taste of the future. The 1 thing that does matter is operation recognition.. battlefield awareness and contingency priority recognition... or tactical and strategic awareness. AI is capable of those things... No one wants something they can't beat. Edited February 11, 2011 by Esq Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 .... This trend in techology would all but eliminate US air superiority on a basis of trained flight personnel and remove the air force and replace it with technicians, not pilots. Nope....the US has embraced the trend for even futher advantage in air superiority. You see...it can have both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esq Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 (edited) Nope....the US has embraced the trend for even futher advantage in air superiority. You see...it can have both. even in an age of restraint? also the tech is "inferior" in terms of the spending and what you are getting for it. The US is playing second fiddle as to AI systems if at all. How much is the most expensive ai/drone system anywhere near the 100 million price tag of the f35? Edited February 11, 2011 by Esq Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 Ummmm...OK...but I don't think you know what a "Growler" is for. Canada would not/could not use such large numbers of F/A-18G aircraft without a lot more investment in electronic warfare suites and other EW platforms. - The E/A-18G is the Navy's replacement for the EA-6B Airborne Electronic Attack aircraft and represents an entirely new way of looking at legacy aircraft replacement. Leveraging existing production capabilities at Boeing and Northrop Grumman, the Navy is using the F/A-18E/F MYC to buy an additional quantity of 'F' Aircraft, and marrying those airframes with Northrop Grumman's in-production Improved Capabilities (ICAP)- III Airborne Electronic Attack (AEA) system to produce the E/A- 18G to replace the aging EA-6B aircraft. This allows for the next generation Airborne Electronic Attack capability to be delivered at reduced cost and in the shortest possible timeframe. The Marine Corps is examining a range of possibilities that will provide the needed capability. - - The E/A-18G is the fourth major variant of the F/A-18 family of aircraft. The EA-18G will serve as the Navy’s replacement for the EA-6B providing a capability to detect, identify, locate, and suppress hostile emitters. The EA-18G will have the capability to operate autonomously or as a major node in a network-centric operation and will provide accurate emitter targeting for employment of onboard suppression weapons such as the High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM). Prime contractors are Boeing Aircraft Corporation of St. Louis, MO for the airframe and General Electric Company, Aircraft Engine Division of Lynn, MA for the engines. Northrop Grumman Corporation, Bethpage, NY is a major subcontractor. The EA-18 will perform full-spectrum electronic surveillance and electronic attack of enemy threat radars and communications nets. The EA-18 leverages the U.S. Navy's investment in the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet platform. A derivative of the two-seat F/A-18F Super Hornet - a platform which is in production today - the EA-18 is a highly flexible design that enables the warfighter to perform a broad range of tactical missions, operating from either the deck of an aircraft carrier or land-based fields. The EA-18 is 99 percent common with the Super Hornet and would be expected to significantly reduce support and training costs for the US Navy. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 even in an age of restraint? Yep...stealth aircraft, GPS guided munitions, and Link 16 were all developed in an age of "restraint". The rest of the world is playing catch-up, and that includes Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 ...The EA-18 will perform full-spectrum electronic surveillance and electronic attack of enemy threat radars and communications nets..... OK...nice copy and paste. Now I know it is unfair for me to expect you to know such things, but if you are going to spout off about specific platform variants of American military aircraft, then you should know what they do. For starters, Canada does not even have the necessary EW suite to use one effectively, and parts of that are not for sale. What is Canada's present tactical EW platform? Auroras (CP-140) don't count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 OK...nice copy and paste. Now I know it is unfair for me to expect you to know such things, but if you are going to spout off about specific platform variants of American military aircraft, then you should know what they do. For starters, Canada does not even have the necessary EW suite to use one effectively, and parts of that are not for sale. What is Canada's present tactical EW platform? Auroras (CP-140) don't count. Awww, ummm, but, 1. - The EA-18 will perform full-spectrum electronic surveillance and electronic attack of enemy threat radars and communications nets. The EA-18 leverages the U.S. Navy's investment in the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet platform. A derivative of the two-seat F/A-18F Super Hornet - a platform which is in production today - the EA-18 is a highly flexible design that enables the warfighter to perform a broad range of tactical missions, operating from either the deck of an aircraft carrier or land-based fields. - Hey, if it's ALL just F/A-18F Super Hornets I can live with that... It's not like Canada is going to war ON IT'S OWN anytime soon... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 Good pick...and if cost was the major consideration, the F-16 could have been better. Over 4,000 have been produced since way back then, and Block 60's are still rolling out of Fort Worth, Texas. So fast forwarding to today, we find that "two engine" paranoia is unfounded with modern engines, and in fact cost more to maintain for labor and depot logistics. OK... Thanks... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 ....Hey, if it's ALL just F/A-18F Super Hornets I can live with that... It's not like Canada is going to war ON IT'S OWN anytime soon... Well if you want both single and two seat trainers, you're gonna need E's and F's. This is just how it works in Fightertown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 Well if you want both single and two seat trainers, you're gonna need E's and F's. This is just how it works in Fightertown. Again, OK, and I know... Actually one of the mistakes Canada made last go round... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 11, 2011 Report Share Posted February 11, 2011 Again, OK, and I know... Actually one of the mistakes Canada made last go round... Really? They didn't order/build any trainers? Please do tell....inquiring Yankee minds want to know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 12, 2011 Report Share Posted February 12, 2011 Really? They didn't order/build any trainers? Please do tell....inquiring Yankee minds want to know. Umn, time for this PROUD Canadian to make like the 3 monkeys... Back then Pensacola Fl. became a very popular vacation spot for some really good Canadian pilots as I remember... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 12, 2011 Report Share Posted February 12, 2011 Umn, time for this PROUD Canadian to make like the 3 monkeys... Back then Pensacola Fl. became a very popular vacation spot for some really good Canadian pilots as I remember... For sure...P-Cola is a fine duty station. I got to fly T-2 Buckeyes there back in the 70's...two seater...of course. Don't remember seeing no Canadian aveeeaaaytooors in the BOQ, but that doesn't mean they weren't there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 12, 2011 Report Share Posted February 12, 2011 For sure...P-Cola is a fine duty station. I got to fly T-2 Buckeyes there back in the 70's...two seater...of course. Don't remember seeing no Canadian aveeeaaaytooors in the BOQ, but that doesn't mean they weren't there. Would've been late '80 and '81 first (2) CF-18Bs arrived at Cold Lake fall of '82... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 12, 2011 Report Share Posted February 12, 2011 This Turkey is put to bed, and will remain there until or if the liberals get in power.....and we will end up with a cheaper shit box airframe, waiting years for it to be delivered and when it is finally delivered it would cost more than the F-35.... thrown out because that is what was popular at the time..... Why stop at 21 BIL why not just round it up to 30 bil, i mean those figures include just a 20 year maint costs....and we will have it atleast 30 years....i say make it 40 bil because all of us know that 65 aircraft is not going to be enoungh, and does not take into effect of aircraft lost or damaged....shit lets make it 50 bil because we will have to buy all those new fancy wpns packages we don't have now.....we can do this all day.....it is going to cost 9 bil dollars to purchase the aircraft....any other cost will come out of the already established OEM budget which pays for current maint costs of the F-18's....which the F-35 will be much much cheaper to maintain....adding those costs to the end purchase price is decieving the public.... Replacing the fleet A number of different fighter aircraft have been considered by the Canadian Forces as replacements for the CF-18 with the F-35 Lightning II, Eurofighter Typhoon, SAAB JAS 39 Gripen, and the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet all having been promoted as contenders by their respective manufacturers.[28] According to Le Devoir, project costs without considering maintenance, training and spare parts, are estimated at $4 to $8 billion.[29] Boeing has indicated the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet, a derivative of the F/A-18 Hornet, is a less expensive alternative at an estimated total cost of $4 billion. [30] One of the manufacturers in contention: Boeing, BAE Systems and Saab Aerospace, has promised to assemble the entire aircraft in Canada although the name was not publicly disclosed.[30] Wikinews has related news: Canada announces $9 billion plan to purchase 65 F-35 fighters In July 2010 the Canadian government announced the replacement for the CF-18 will be the F-35 Lightning II. The Canadian government has been a partner in the Joint Strike Fighter Program from 1997 and a Tier 3 partner for the F-35 Lightning II since 2002.[31][32][33] The Canadian Forces plan to buy 65 F-35 with deliveries starting in 2016. The contract is estimated to be worth C $9 billion including aircraft and associated weapons, infrastructure, initial spares, training simulators, contingency funds and project operating costs.[34] Critics said 65 fighters is not enough to fill three complete squadrons and that the F-35 is not suited for arctic patrol since it has a single engine. [35] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_Douglas_CF-18_Hornet#Introduction_into_Canadian_service Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yuanyelss Posted February 12, 2011 Report Share Posted February 12, 2011 I think one of the reasons people get shocked at the high price of aircraft is that, unlike anything else bought, the price generally includes all the maintenance costs and parts over the life of the aircraft...... cheap wow gold,cartier necklaces,cartier pens Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted February 12, 2011 Report Share Posted February 12, 2011 I think one of the reasons people get shocked at the high price of aircraft is that, unlike anything else bought, the price generally includes all the maintenance costs and parts over the life of the aircraft...... cheap wow gold,cartier necklaces,cartier pens Go shlep your crap somewhere else... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esq Posted February 12, 2011 Report Share Posted February 12, 2011 (edited) I think one of the reasons people get shocked at the high price of aircraft is that, unlike anything else bought, the price generally includes all the maintenance costs and parts over the life of the aircraft...... cheap wow gold,cartier necklaces,cartier pens don't let anyone in the government especially the department of defence see that post!!! or this one... or any other post quoting that post. SOmeone call the site admin NOW and knock this thing down and do a full reformat... THIS MUST NOT LEAK!! Edited February 12, 2011 by Esq Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.