Topaz Posted March 16, 2011 Report Posted March 16, 2011 The cost would be more than Australia by this article. The Tea party would probably cancel the F-35 and questions are being asked if they really need to spend billions for this plane. BTW, it mentions in the articles that each plane cost 90 Million. Question, Canadian Defense Parl. Sec. said he thought it would be 70-75 mil for Canada. Would the US charge Canada 70-75 Mil and they pay 90Mil for their own? http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/03/the-f-35-a-weapon-that-costs-more-than-australia/72454/ Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 16, 2011 Report Posted March 16, 2011 The US would not "charge" Canada anything, as negotiations would be directly with the contractor as a non FMS program nation. Canada will have to negotiate a price irrespective of what US costs may be per unit delivered. Like American pharmaceuticals, Canadians may be able to get a lower price with the Americans paying for all the R&D. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
GWiz Posted March 16, 2011 Report Posted March 16, 2011 The cost would be more than Australia by this article. The Tea party would probably cancel the F-35 and questions are being asked if they really need to spend billions for this plane. BTW, it mentions in the articles that each plane cost 90 Million. Question, Canadian Defense Parl. Sec. said he thought it would be 70-75 mil for Canada. Would the US charge Canada 70-75 Mil and they pay 90Mil for their own? http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/03/the-f-35-a-weapon-that-costs-more-than-australia/72454/ And the beat goes on, and the beat goes on... F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Lightning II Program - CAPE estimated in January 2011, that the unit cost of JSF, averaged over variants, had almost doubled since the program began (from $50 million in FY02 dollars to $92 million). This cost growth was deemed unacceptable and the Department of Defense determined that it had to be reversed. A rigorous "should cost" effort was underway at that time between the JPO and the JSF contractors to reverse JSF cost growth. Some progress towards cost reduction was made in Low Rate Initial Production 4 (LRIP4), an FPIF contract with a target cost substantially lower than the CAPE ICE estimate and 50/50 share line. The TBR gave the Department of Defense the best basis it had had in years to plan and manage the JSF program. - F/A-18E/F "Super Hornet" - 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. - - The F/A-18E/F aircraft are 4.2 feet longer than earlier Hornets, have a 25% larger wing area, and carry 33% more internal fuel which will effectively increase mission range by 41% and endurance by 50%. The Super Hornet also incorporates two additional weapon stations. This allows for increased payload flexibility by mixing and matching air-to-air and/or air-to-ground ordnance. The aircraft can also carry the complete complement of "smart" weapons, including the newest joint weapons such as JDAM and JSOW. The Super Hornet can carry approximately 17,750 pounds (8,032 kg) of external load on eleven stations. It has an all-weather air-to-air radar and a control system for accurate delivery of conventional or guided weapons. There are two wing tip stations, four inboard wing stations for fuel tanks or air-to-ground weapons, two nacelle fuselage stations for Sparrows or sensor pods, and one centerline station for fuel or air-to-ground weapons. An internal 20 mm M61A1 Vulcan cannon is mounted in the nose. - EA-18G Airborne Electronic Attack Aircraft F/A-18G "Growler" - 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 There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
GWiz Posted March 16, 2011 Report Posted March 16, 2011 The US would not "charge" Canada anything, as negotiations would be directly with the contractor as a non FMS program nation. Canada will have to negotiate a price irrespective of what US costs may be per unit delivered. Like American pharmaceuticals, Canadians may be able to get a lower price with the Americans paying for all the R&D. Uh huh... Gotta love those GENEROUS Americans, eh... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 16, 2011 Report Posted March 16, 2011 And the beat goes on, and the beat goes on... Why would Canada buy E/A-18G? Does it have an existing electronic warfare capability? How is this relevant to "US spending on its F-35"? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
GWiz Posted March 16, 2011 Report Posted March 16, 2011 Why would Canada buy E/A-18G? Does it have an existing electronic warfare capability? How is this relevant to "US spending on its F-35"? Hey, let's live a little, about TIME Canada tries out some NEW capabilities and technologies, who knows, we may LIKE playing games with the "big boys"... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
M.Dancer Posted March 16, 2011 Report Posted March 16, 2011 Hey, let's live a little, about TIME Canada tries out some NEW capabilities and technologies, who knows, we may LIKE playing games with the "big boys"... ...so along with the E/A capability you want a tactical strike force that plays along with it? Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
GWiz Posted March 16, 2011 Report Posted March 16, 2011 ...so along with the E/A capability you want a tactical strike force that plays along with it? Wrong terminology... I personally don't want anything... To detail all the reasons, many of which I've stated on that other F-35 thread, for my line of thing, would take more TIME and effort to post here than I'm prepared to do... Nor do I actually care a whole lot about what happens in regards to this whole matter... But since you asked nicely, here's my answer... My thinking on the matter is of the advantages the E/A 2 person Fighter brings and is rather futuristic thinking in that IT will be best suited to incorporate the "packages" in fighter aviation of the not too distant future... I'm the type of person that looks at ALL options, both now AND into the future, since this subject matter spans several decades into the future... No good reason to limit one's thinking is there? Especially when one is starting out with 2x the planes at 1/4 (or less) of the price tag... Whether or not Canada want's to be a "player" or not in the future is not a decision I'm empowered to make... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
Topaz Posted March 16, 2011 Author Report Posted March 16, 2011 Why not save all the countries money and get rid of ALL the jet fighters. I know, it'll never happen. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 16, 2011 Report Posted March 16, 2011 Why not save all the countries money and get rid of ALL the jet fighters. I know, it'll never happen. OK....but can we keep the bombers? Boom! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
GWiz Posted March 16, 2011 Report Posted March 16, 2011 OK....but can we keep the bombers? Boom! Nope... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
M.Dancer Posted March 16, 2011 Report Posted March 16, 2011 Why not save all the countries money and get rid of ALL the jet fighters. I know, it'll never happen. Yeah...think of the money we would save with biplanes....you know, they go both ways so even the NDP could get behind that.. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 16, 2011 Report Posted March 16, 2011 Yeah...think of the money we would save with biplanes....you know, they go both ways so even the NDP could get behind that.. Think of all the money that could be saved by slashing health care.....then there would be plenty of money for shiny new strike fighters. I love that new strike fighter cockpit smell! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
GWiz Posted March 17, 2011 Report Posted March 17, 2011 I love that new strike fighter cockpit smell! Sure ya do! An ol' fart like you wouldn't be allowed near one 'cause you'd stink it up more than it already is... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
Bonam Posted March 17, 2011 Report Posted March 17, 2011 I love that new strike fighter cockpit smell! I got to see an F-22 take off and land at Fort Richardson/Elmendorf base in Alaska yesterday. That was sweet. Quote
punked Posted March 17, 2011 Report Posted March 17, 2011 Anyone who thinks crazy conservative Republicans would cut a weapons program no matter how dumb doesn't understand a thing about American politics. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted March 17, 2011 Report Posted March 17, 2011 Anyone who thinks crazy conservative Republicans would cut a weapons program no matter how dumb doesn't understand a thing about American politics. ..and anyone who thinks "crazy" Democrats in key districts would cut the program knows even less. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
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.