Iggy : I will cancel the F=35

[nicky10013]

Not the case.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Canada-Investing-in-F-35-Related-RD-05056/

Not quite. This article was only pertaining to Canadian contracts towards the development of the plane. If Canada cancels the contract, they won't be affected because of the investment the Liberals made to get them those contracts in the first place. It has absolutely nothing to do with the amount of planes we buy.

[Keepitsimple]

Here's a link to an interesting site......all the detailed airforce fleets for every country.....as a reference, Swedens' airforce is larger than Canada's:

Air Forces of Canada

Aircraft Quantity

Airbus Industrie CC-150 [A310] 5

BAE Systems CT-155 [Hawk Mk 11 10

Bell CH-139 [Jet Ranger] 13

Bell CH-146 [412] 99

Boeing CF-18A [F/A-1BA] 65

Boeing CF-18A [F/A-1BB] 15

Boeing Vertol CH-113A [CH-46] 12

Canadair CC/CE-144 [Challenger 6

Canadair CT-114 88

Canadair CT-133 [T-33] 29

De Havilland Canada CC-115 [DH 6

De Havilland Canada CC-138 [DH 4

De Havilland Canada CC/CT-142 4

Lockheed Martin CC-130E 19

Lockheed Martin CC-130H 6

Lockheed Martin CC-130H-30 2

Lockheed Martin CP-140 [P-3] 18

Lockheed Martin CP-140A [P-3] 3

Lockheed Martin KCC-130H 5

Raytheon CT-145 [super King Ai 2

Raytheon CT-156 [T-6A-1] 10

Raytheon King Air C90 18

Sikorsky CH-124A [sH-3] 23

Sikorsky CH-124B [sH-3] 6

Sikorsky T-67M 12

Total Air Forces 480

Link: http://www.newportaero.com/home/airforces/search?country=Canada&aircraft=

[wyly]

Thats a fair question , have you've every flown a fighter, are you a pilot, every had your life depend on a fighter, so what is your knowledge based on....I eman from reading your posts on the topic, you must have some inside info, more than DND has access to....

and what's your expertise? are you a pilot? reports from DND say the process for selecting the plane was flawed, a quick look through other Nato countries show a selection process that considered a number of planes confirms that...and miltary also lies to us, telling us helicopters are going to cost X amount of dollars when they know it will greatly exceed X...

I think your Airforce General has already passed judgement of sorts , you can't compare both have been designed and purchased for different reasons.....you can't compare a gen 4 aircraft again'st a gen 5...

Who has said the Typhoon is a better plane....

who indeed...United States Air Force Chief of Staff General John P. Jumper said after flying the Eurofighter, "I have flown all the air force jets. None was as good as the Eurofighter." Jumper is the only man to have flown both the F22 and the Typhoon...and now I track down some reports that one on one the Typhoon outperformed the F22 in actual excerises gaining lock on the F22's at range, the F22's apprently sacrificed too much to gain stealth that is being overcome by new technology. if the Typhoon can overcome the F22 then the F35 is not in the same league, and F35 now virtually the same price as the Typhoon the Typhoon is the far better purchase...which casts a lot of doubt on DND's selection process how do you compare a plane that's not even in production with one that is?

The experts in the matter of fighter jets , in this case the Canadian airforce have studied the problem, for more than 10 years now, they've looked at gen 4 aircraft, UCAV, gen 5 aircraft and they have come up with the best aircraft for there needs is the F-35 right now.....why is that so hard to fathom or accept....

how do you do a comparison between planes 10 years ago when the plane never flew until 4 years ago with a plane that first flew in 1994 that is tested and flying and come to a conclusion that the plane that's never flown is a better plane? it's impossible...besides that they never did a comparison, they based it purely on what the USA built and the political rules in the USA ruled out any competitor from outside the USA...

because it does not fit in with your vision....do you even wear a uniform, no....But your screaming it's my tax money....well here is a news flash every member of DND pays taxes as well, and yet they don't have a say in what i can watch on CBC, how our health care looks like or the long waiting periods, in fact those decisions like it or not we have very little say in.....Thats life....

really you know for sure I never wore a uniform? naval reserves...and here's a flash for you, the military is dead weight economically it adds nothing to the GDP of the country it operates at a loss, statistically you're not even considered as employed...I wish I had your healthcare benefits, the rest of us should be so well looked after...

This is not about money....it's about politics....and playing with lifes....use to be at one time lifes meant more, now it's all about show me the money......what ever it is we buy, i hope one day you, or your son is laying next to me in some foreign land waiting for an air strike to come in....and 50 sopwith camels come over the ridge, i can turn and smile at you...see your tax dollars at work boy...great ain'nt it...don't worry they won't all fall out of the sky, some are going to crash on the target....

I tell my son everyday not to join the military...if he did something so stupid as to enlist I'd rather the forces would have an A10 do ground support, a far better plane than the F35 in that roll, and far less expensive ... Edited October 28, 2010 by wyly

[dre]

We need to cancel the purchase and take a wait and see approach. You almost NEVER get good value buying brand new tech. Youre better off with a platform that might not be as modern but is fully battle tested, has had the bugs worked out of it, and has a performance record you can review, and empirical data available that you can evaluate. Has the F35 ever even flown a single mission? Unless it has a record, then we are buying it completely based on a sales pitch.

Heres what one US defense insider said about the plane...

But expert Winslow Wheeler of the Center for Defense Information in the U.S. told PBS, "The history of multi-role fighters, even for single services, is terrible. They do nothing well. ... The F-35 never will be able to fulfil its mission, because it is too heavy to fight other aircraft in the air, but too fast, thin-skinned and lightly armed to support troops on the ground."

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/07/16/f-f35-faq.html#ixzz13fnZnUDg

Even in the US theres an argument about the effectiveness of this platform... but you if you raise concerns youre likely to get fired, because at this point so much has been invested.

Buying brand new technology is almost ALWAYS a bad idea no matter what Industry youre in. When LCD TVs came out I HAD to have one right away... So I paid 1500 for 27 inch TV. I should have bought two years later... then I would have gotten a 52 inch for the same price.

Same goes for buying a new vehicle... only suckers buy the first production run of a new model.

Canada should buy a cost effective PROVEN platform to fly routine patrols over our cities and airspace, shoot down rogue airliners, etc. Thats the safest option for our pilots, and our tax payers. Chance are those planes would also satisfy our NATO and UN obligations but if they dont then we could look at complimenting that with some 5th gen stuff... or we could re-evaluate our membership on those global socialism projects.

[DogOnPorch]

The F-86 is the choice for you! Tried and true.

[bush_cheney2004]

.....Even in the US theres an argument about the effectiveness of this platform... but you if you raise concerns youre likely to get fired, because at this point so much has been invested.

The JSF is a multi-national development program which guarantees conflict and concerns on top of normal challenges associated with a new type. I was on the A-12 Avenger program when it was cancelled, and I can assure you that the checkbook is not unlimited nor are critics hard to find inside a program.

The Americans already have an advanced air superiority platform in production and deployed, it doesn't need the JSF to do everything from soup to nuts like Canada.