Iggy : I will cancel the F=35

[dre]

In any case this contract should most definately be canceled, and we should start with procurement 101. Define and document our business requirements and then do a cost benefit analysis against all platforms that fullfill those requirements.

Iv seen no evidence that the government/military did any of the rigorous due diligence that virtual any private company has to do during a procurment process. Thats because they operate like they have unlimited money. They should compile a database of all the missions flown by the airforce in the last 20 or 30 years, and take an honest look at what equipment is required to do that job.

If this basic business analysis is above the capabilities of our government/military then we should look at outsourcing that role.

[DogOnPorch]

The PPCLI enjoyed a 100-1 kill ratio at Kapyong...some with bayonettes. Ric-A-Dam-Doo

Dam-Doo, Dam-Doo.

[Saipan]

And so were the British.

Yes, they too thought people are cheaper than equipment and good training.

[dre]

Toyotas are decent vehicles if you survive 'til the recall(s) are completed. GM Hummers are no longer manufactured as of June 2010.

Toyota is not the only car company to have recalls, and the fact is theres generally less problems with Toyotas than either domestic or european cars.

I remember a while back, after the taxpayers bailed out US companies that make shit vehicles, and suddenly every toyota recall was front page news, I went and looked at the recalls for companies like Chrysler and GM... there had been literally dozens of them. The only difference was they didnt make front page news. Japanese makes still have better design, better technology, better reliability and in most cases better fuel economy.

As for Hummers... as far as Im concerned they stopped making them about 10 years ago when they switched to the H2, which was really nothing more than a tricked out chevy blazer. Junk. The origional hummer was actually pretty cool... made by AM General, formerly known as Standard Wheel Company. Once GM got involved though the project went to seed, and the H2 is really just a piece of shit.

[bush_cheney2004]

In any case this contract should most definately be canceled, and we should start with procurement 101. Define and document our business requirements and then do a cost benefit analysis against all platforms that fullfill those requirements....

Ummmm...that is the problem...Canada has done the analysis and wants a single platform to perform as a Swiss army knife.

[DogOnPorch]

Ummmm...that is the problem...Canada has done the analysis and wants a single platform to perform as a Swiss army knife.

The F-35's cork screw is located aft of the refueling probe.

[bush_cheney2004]

The F-35's cork screw is located aft of the refueling probe.

...roger that.

[dre]

Ummmm...that is the problem...Canada has done the analysis and wants a single platform to perform as a Swiss army knife.

I think that IS maybe a problem. Iv tried doing some research on what our Airforce does in a typical year... I think last year we flew 500+ routine patrol missions. I consider buying the F-35 for these missions the equivalent of buying a Ferrari F40 to go to the store to get bread and cheese.

Beyond those routine patrol missions we obviously have some commitments and obligations to do the bidding of various global socialist entities like NATO and the UN. The problem is that Ive heard these obligations thrown around as a reason but Iv never seen them documented anywhere. Can you view those contracts somewhere? Id like to read the part that says Canada has to buy 5th generation planes. My guess is we will remain a member in good standing in the UN and NATO regardless of whether we buy the planes or not. We are one of the only countries that shows up to fight for fuck sakes and a lot of the time Canadian forces get more than their share of the risky dangerous work as well. I think we do PLENTY for a relatively small nation.

Im not sure though... Maybe buying 16 billion dollars worth of high tech planes is absolutely vital to our survival! Fucked if I know. But from what I can tell the government did less research into this purchase than I did when I bought my last car.

Wheres the Cost Benefit Analysis? Where is our list of functional requirements, and where are the risk assessments studies done on the use of various different platforms to fullfill our requirements?

Where I work (in the real world) I have to produce these documents to even purchase a bank of servers, or a router, or some work stations.

[Saipan]

I think that IS maybe a problem. Iv tried doing some research on what our Airforce does in a typical year... I think last year we flew 500+ routine patrol missions. I consider buying the F-35 for these missions the equivalent of buying a Ferrari F40 to go to the store to get bread and cheese.

Why do you think National Defence is just for that?

Why spend years training for Olympics - which is only a game - and just couple weeks or less in hurry before sending our troops against Germany - for example? Games are not life and death situation. One week training should be OK. No?

[Handsome Rob]

I think that IS maybe a problem. Iv tried doing some research on what our Airforce does in a typical year... I think last year we flew 500+ routine patrol missions. I consider buying the F-35 for these missions the equivalent of buying a Ferrari F40 to go to the store to get bread and cheese.

Beyond those routine patrol missions we obviously have some commitments and obligations to do the bidding of various global socialist entities like NATO and the UN. The problem is that Ive heard these obligations thrown around as a reason but Iv never seen them documented anywhere. Can you view those contracts somewhere? Id like to read the part that says Canada has to buy 5th generation planes. My guess is we will remain a member in good standing in the UN and NATO regardless of whether we buy the planes or not. We are one of the only countries that shows up to fight for fuck sakes and a lot of the time Canadian forces get more than their share of the risky dangerous work as well. I think we do PLENTY for a relatively small nation.

They plan for the future, not the past.

It's more than just a "Stealth" (Fancy) airframe. Their is communications technology, surveillance, data links, etc, etc, etc. There are requirements to participate in NATO/NORAD, we just spent $2.6 billion (17.5% of F-35 cost) to upgrade the CF-188's for this for the remainder of their operational life. Gives this nasty feeling that were we to go with a Super Hornet, etc...we'd more than likely be traveling this road again.

But forget about NATO and Kosovo, our commitment to NORAD. If we can't demonstrate the capability to defend the artic's sovereignty, the Yanks will be more than happy to do it for us. Personally I consider $350 Million (Low) to $500 Million (High) [Cost of the program amortized] to be a drop in the bucket to protect Canadian sovereignty from the yanks.

Edited October 28, 2010 by Handsome Rob

[dre]

They plan for the future, not the past.

It's more than just a "Stealth" (Fancy) airframe. Their is communications technology, surveillance, data links, etc, etc, etc. There are requirements to participate in NATO/NORAD, we just spent $2.6 billion (17.5% of F-35 cost) to upgrade the CF-188's for this for the remainder of their operational life. Gives this nasty feeling that were we to go with a Super Hornet, etc...we'd more than likely be traveling this road again.

But forget about NATO and Kosovo, our commitment to NORAD. If we can't demonstrate the capability to defend the artic's sovereignty, the Yanks will be more than happy to do it for us. Personally I consider $350 Million (Low) to $500 Million (High) [Cost of the program amortized] to be a drop in the bucket to protect Canadian sovereignty from the yanks.

Thats fine... but all youre doing is raising some of the concerns that need to be taken into account. Those are just a few of the many things that should be covered during the due diligence phase of a procurement.

Whats missing though is all the work youre supposed to do... all the comparative analysis of different platforms, and risk assessments and cost benefit analysis for each one?

Why does the government not even have follow the basic business practices that a company with 5 employees often has to do?

Where the %#$@& is all the data?

[Moonlight Graham]

i recommend people here read the actual story. To be fair, Iggy didn't say he wanted to scrap the purchasing of new planes altogether: http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/10/27/ignatieff-f35-fighter-jets.html

from the article:

Michael Ignatieff says a Liberal government would cancel the Conservatives' multibillion-dollar purchase of F-35 fighter jets and hold an open competition to replace Canada’s CF-18s.

...

Ignatieff also insisted there would be no penalties accrued under the accord for the F-35 purchase if it were cancelled.

[Jack Weber]

Thanks for that clarification. I thought so. I never heard he would cancel the contract. He is not as dumb as some would have us believe, lol.

There is a contravery over the nature in which the F-35 contract was tendered not just here but also in

Israel, Australia and in Europe.

The process was done behind closed doors and in a rush. Some of the complaining may be coming from

competitors for sure, but in this situation the contravery is not so much over whether we

need a new fighter as much as it is the TYPE of fighter.

I am no military expert but some argue its the best craft available while others say its not the right

fit for Canada which needs a longer range craft and two engines, etc.

I think most Canadians if I may be so bold as to say are like me. We are in the middle. We are not comfortable with either Harper or Iggy and we are certainly not NDP-we are smack in the middle. We

see a lot of broken promises and questionable dealings by Harper's government and the longer he stays in power the more like the very Chretien regime he claimed he would never be down to the arrogance and questionable Ministers and back room deals and fudging of the economy.

With Iggy we have no idea what he stands for. When he does give talks he seems to say very little and both he and Harper are with due respect poor public speakers and not very dynamic.

Neither captures the imagination or presents a clear vision. Harper likes to use the negative and divide and conquer tactics and appeal to the negative in people, and darned if I can figure out what Iggy stands for other than he looks bored and out of touch with me and you the average shmuck on the street.

Who does that leave me to vote for? Russell Peters I guess.

Could you imagine Question Period with Russell Peters???

[bush_cheney2004]

....Wheres the Cost Benefit Analysis? Where is our list of functional requirements, and where are the risk assessments studies done on the use of various different platforms to fullfill our requirements?

There is a dog and pony show summary description here:

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/119320/canadian-official-defends-f_35-purchase.html

Critics are actually changing the role and requirements, changing those that have been established by DND for the next 40 years:

Instead of purchasing the F35, the report recommends the government:

- Curtail the expeditionary role for Canadian fighter aircraft.

- Stretch the life of Canada's existing CF-18 fleet by restricting the aircraft to the North American/domestic air surveillance and control role.

- Investigate the acquisition of the next generation of unarmed long-range, long-endurance pilotless aircraft.

- Use the money saved by the above measures to contribute to Canadian and global security in more effective ways.

http://www.policyalternatives.ca/newsroom/news-releases/f-35-stealth-fighter-purchase-pilot-error-report

[DogOnPorch]

There is a dog and pony show summary description here:

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/119320/canadian-official-defends-f_35-purchase.html

Critics are actually changing the role and requirements, changing those that have been established by DND for the next 40 years:

Instead of purchasing the F35, the report recommends the government:

- Curtail the expeditionary role for Canadian fighter aircraft.

- Stretch the life of Canada's existing CF-18 fleet by restricting the aircraft to the North American/domestic air surveillance and control role.

- Investigate the acquisition of the next generation of unarmed long-range, long-endurance pilotless aircraft.

- Use the money saved by the above measures to contribute to Canadian and global security in more effective ways.

http://www.policyalternatives.ca/newsroom/news-releases/f-35-stealth-fighter-purchase-pilot-error-report

If the CF-18s stay on the ground, their life should be pretty much unlimited.

[M.Dancer]

- Curtail the expeditionary role for Canadian fighter aircraft.

- Stretch the life of Canada's existing CF-18 fleet by restricting the aircraft to the North American/domestic air surveillance and control role.

- Investigate the acquisition of the next generation of unarmed long-range, long-endurance pilotless aircraft.

- Use the money saved by the above measures to contribute to Canadian and global security in more effective ways.

IOn other words, curtail our abilities and our committments and hope for the best.

[bush_cheney2004]

IOn other words, curtail our abilities and our committments and hope for the best.

Correct....Canada would essentially become like Singapore flying upgraded F-5 Tigers....at least until the parts supply holds out from Davis-Montham AFB. Lots of fun at summer air shows too!

[DogOnPorch]

Correct....Canada would essentially become like Singapore flying upgraded F-5 Tigers....at least until the parts supply holds out from Davis-Montham AFB. Lots of fun at summer air shows too!

Good Top Gun targets...

[M.Dancer]

Correct....Canada would essentially become like Singapore flying upgraded F-5 Tigers....at least until the parts supply holds out from Davis-Montham AFB. Lots of fun at summer air shows too!

If someone could say, instead of 65 F-35s...we will have 300 F-5s...I would say yes.

[Wilber]

If someone could say, instead of 65 F-35s...we will have 300 F-5s...I would say yes.

You would need a couple dozen tankers to give them enough range to operate in the arctic.

[DogOnPorch]

If someone could say, instead of 65 F-35s...we will have 300 F-5s...I would say yes.

Make some fighter jock out there the next Bubi Hartmann? The F-5 is a tad dated...and slim on the capabilities. Dogfighter-lite.

[M.Dancer]

Make some fighter jock out there the next Bubi Hartmann? The F-5 is a tad dated...and slim on the capabilities. Dogfighter-lite.

Not like I am saying this is the plane we need..but in sufficiant numbers any fighter from the 70s would suit our needs for air defense (the arctic) and ground support.

Hell....1000 huricaines and we are ready to go

[DogOnPorch]

Not like I am saying this is the plane we need..but in sufficiant numbers any fighter from the 70s would suit our needs for air defense (the arctic) and ground support.

Hell....1000 huricaines and we are ready to go

Maybe...Bloody April testifies otherwise.

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

[bush_cheney2004]

Make some fighter jock out there the next Bubi Hartmann? The F-5 is a tad dated...and slim on the capabilities. Dogfighter-lite.

Got no love for the F-5E....errrr....MiG-28? It protects Switzerland! I think Canada just needs more bad ass music in the promotion videos.

Edited October 28, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[DogOnPorch]

Got no love for the F-5E....errrr....MiG-28? It protects Switzerland!

I'd love to own one in a Travolta-like way. But once the USN didn't want it, it was literally the budget fighter for tin-pot nations...errr...like Canada.

Can't afford a real fighter? Try the Tiger! New for '65!