bush_cheney2004 Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 ...This TIME could be it... Too bad I'm not in a position to call that shot tho, anything could happen... Maybe...but the politics of this dance have always proven to be quite flakey. That's why Canada is still flying refurbed F-18 A/B after all these years. You better hope that PM Harper gets a majority....that's why you have those nice C-17's instead of a number in line for an Antonov rental. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
TTM Posted April 8, 2011 Author Report Posted April 8, 2011 I'm sorry, but that's incorrect. The biggest unknown is actually the cost of the F-35. The other fighters have values that are easy to locate. Yes the costs of other fighters are known, within a certain range. The exact cost to supply the specific needs of the Canadian Military would not be known unless there was a tender. Competition, or lack thereof would also have some effect on price. But my main point was the unknown cost of the F-35 vs the known prices of its competition. That and the further unknowns on the delivery timeline. We did this once already. We still have no helicopters. There is no excuse to not have an open tender. Quote
GWiz Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 Maybe...but the politics of this dance have always proven to be quite flakey. Yup... Maybe by the TIME the F-35 hits the line we can buy it's Chinese "knock off" at a good price... That's probably the plane Harper is counting on to meet his cost projection... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
Jack Weber Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 I don't think it is at all. It wasn't the government that made the spending decisions, it was the RCMP. The same RCMP would have made the decisions under the Liberals. I'm saying the plane needs to be replaced in 10 years. I personally don't want the F-35, but if we go with something else, we have to get more, meaning the cost won't change much if at all. The RCMP made the spending decisions based on the poor and haphazzard planning of our current federal government surrounding the logistical problems they created... Put the blame where it belongs regarding the G-8/G-20...Two-Tier Tony Clement and Stevie 4 Questions... Yes,the plane needs to be replaced... Should'nt the bidding process be open for competiton?? This is the usual MO of the free market types,is it not? Why the non-compete bid? Why was parliament not given the numbers when they asked? Why are there HUGE discrepencies between the gov't estimates and the PBO's/Pentagon's? Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Smallc Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 The RCMP made the spending decisions based on the poor and haphazzard planning of our current federal government surrounding the logistical problems they created... That may be somewhat true, but the G8 had already been set when the G20 came on the scene as being important. The G20 couldn't fit in Huntsville, and the G8 was already promised there. Yes,the plane needs to be replaced...Should'nt the bidding process be open for competiton?? This is the usual MO of the free market types,is it not? Why the non-compete bid? I don't know. I think it should be. The costs still won't change. Why was parliament not given the numbers when they asked? Because the Conservatives are a bunch of assholes. Why are there HUGE discrepencies between the gov't estimates and the PBO's/Pentagon's? I don't know, but I will say that Kevin Page has been wrong when it comes to the deficit, so I don't really trust his numbers. The Pentagon, well, I don't know. Quote
Tilter Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 Yes the costs of other fighters are known, within a certain range. The exact cost to supply the specific needs of the Canadian Military would not be known unless there was a tender. Competition, or lack thereof would also have some effect on price. But my main point was the unknown cost of the F-35 vs the known prices of its competition. That and the further unknowns on the delivery timeline. We did this once already. We still have no helicopters. There is no excuse to not have an open tender. But my main point was the unknown cost of the F-35 vs the known prices of its competition When you go into a Ford dealership & inquire about the cost of a new car the salesman quotes you the sticker price. That is the price (less about 35 undisclosed costs you don't know about but he skips as a "natural" part of getting a new car He does not tell you how much the car will cost you in maintenance over the next year much less the next 35 years as is with most Canadian Air equipment. The PRICE was stated. 2nd point: as of today, there is no real competition for the F35 with the possible exception of a soon to be flown Fighter/Bomber from China which is somewhat close to matching the F35. I would wonder at the acrimony coming from the Liberal party about this, they started the quest for the plane while in office and like many things proposed by the Liberals, was never fully actioned. Are we going to waste another 5 billion on a signed & cancelled contract? Sort of like paying 5 billion bux for more hot air as we did with the Helicopters Quote
GWiz Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 2nd point: as of today, there is no real competition for the F35 That's like saying a Maserati has no competition to go to Safeway to buy a week's worth of groceries... (pssst, ANY car can do that and a LOT of cars can do it BETTER than a Maserati, and so too goes CANADA'S NEED for a CF-18a replacement) Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
cybercoma Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 (edited) If you think that buying any other jet will cost us much if any less, you're delusional. The Eurofighter Typhoon and F/A-18E/F are not all that much less. I don't know if it would cost less and you don't know that it would cost the same because the Conservatives broke the rules by hiding the costs and not having an open bid for the contract. That's the point. Billions are being spent on a contract that was agreed to illegally. Edited April 8, 2011 by cybercoma Quote
cybercoma Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 Stevie 4 QuestionsCan I just say that I don't like Stephen Harper as much as the next socialist, but it really annoys me when anyone calls him by the diminutive "Stevie". He has served as Prime Minister of this country. At the very least, he deserves to be referred to by name, if you're not going to call him by his proper title the "Right Honourable Stephen Harper". Quote
ToadBrother Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 Can I just say that I don't like Stephen Harper as much as the next socialist, but it really annoys me when anyone calls him by the diminutive "Stevie". He has served as Prime Minister of this country. At the very least, he deserves to be referred to by name, if you're not going to call him by his proper title the "Right Honourable Stephen Harper". Let's compromise and call him the "Right Honourable Stevie"! Quote
cybercoma Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 (edited) Did you hear my teeth grind when you clicked Add Reply? Edited April 8, 2011 by cybercoma Quote
Jack Weber Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 Can I just say that I don't like Stephen Harper as much as the next socialist, but it really annoys me when anyone calls him by the diminutive "Stevie". He has served as Prime Minister of this country. At the very least, he deserves to be referred to by name, if you're not going to call him by his proper title the "Right Honourable Stephen Harper". How 'bout Stephen 4 questions? Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
ToadBrother Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 Beats 62 cents Jean Not if you were in the resource sector it doesn't. Quote
cybercoma Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 "What Changed in 17 Days?" An interesting take on "Conservative economic competence": Link: http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/08/what-changed-in-the-last-17-days/ Tory Promises Oct 2008: No deficit... ever. Nov 2008: 2013-2014 surplus Jan 2009: deficit 2012-2013, surplus 2014-2015 Oct 2010: deficit 2014-2015, surplus 2015-2016 Two Weeks Ago: deficit 2014-2015 ($300-Millions), surplus 2015-2016 ($8,200-Millions) Today: surplus 2014-2015 ($3,700-Millions), surplus 2015-2016 ($8,200-Millions) Quote
Saipan Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 Not if you were in the resource sector it doesn't. Always does. Brish pound, for example, suffered along with their economy, now that they are almost broke.. Quote
Scotty Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 Think about it though. It's brilliant. When the next left-leaning party gets into power, they'll be so far in debt that they won't possibly be able to implement any of their social policies. This will make them ineffectual and lead people back into the arms of the Conservatives. Genius. Are you saying that Dalton McGuinty is a conservative? Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 Excellent thread TTM Two of Harpers big wig economic specialists are Clement and Flarety who have a bad track record out of the Harris mess up. Because Harris cut our taxes so much? Harris had a balanced budget. It was Eves who went into deficit, and not very far. Then came Dalton McGuinty, who first exagerated the size of the deficit, then built it to the highest point in Ontario history. Congratulations Bob Rae supporters. Thanks to Dalton, nobody really thinks back on Rae's era as all that bad. Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Jack Weber Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 Because Harris cut our taxes so much? Harris had a balanced budget. It was Eves who went into deficit, and not very far. Then came Dalton McGuinty, who first exagerated the size of the deficit, then built it to the highest point in Ontario history. Congratulations Bob Rae supporters. Thanks to Dalton, nobody really thinks back on Rae's era as all that bad. Eves was also Finance Minister... Both Harris/Eves and Flaharty left us with a well hidden 2 billion dollar deficit in much better times than these... Nevermind the public debt the Harris years left us... Quote The beatings will continue until morale improves!!!
Scotty Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 (edited) This thread suddenly has all sorts of speculation about the costs of alternate fighters compared to the F-35. But thats all it is...speculation. Unless an actual tender process is carried out we will never know how the costs compare. And what other reason is there for not following that process? Well, such a process will take YEARS, and thus greatly increase the eventual cost of whichever fighter we buy. Also, the Liberals have already paid close to $200 million to help develop the F35. I don't know why they did that if they didn't intend to buy the plane... Edited April 8, 2011 by Scotty Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
Scotty Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 Eves was also Finance Minister... Both Harris/Eves and Flaharty left us with a well hidden 2 billion dollar deficit in much better times than these... Nevermind the public debt the Harris years left us... The debt was piddling, and made up largely of temporary measures taken during a bad year. I believe that was the year of SARS, the mad cow thing, and the big blackout, among others. Then along came McGuinty, raising spending by something like 60%, and the deficit kept growing and growing and growing, despite tax hikes, BEFORE the recession arrived! What was it last year, $20 billion? And you think anyone is going to look back and worry about Eves or Harris and their piddling little $2 billion? McGuinty has done the impossible. He's made Ontarions long for the sound fiscal management of Bob Rae! Quote It is an inverted moral calculus that tries to persuade the world to demonize one state that tries its civilized best to abide in a difficult time and place, and rides merrily by the examples and practices of dozens of states and leaderships that drop into brutality every day without a twinge of regret or a whisper of condemnation. - Rex Murphy
GWiz Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 Well, such a process will take YEARS, and thus greatly increase the eventual cost of whichever fighter we buy. Also, the Liberals have already paid close to $200 million to help develop the F135. I don't know why they did that if they didn't intend to buy the plane... To have the opportunity to buy the plane IF it panned out as projected, it was a pretty small commitment without obligation to buy and therefore no cancellation fees apply if no purchase is made... BTW, the plane is NOT panning out as projected AND it's only because Harper is in bed with Lockheed Martin (Navy Ship refurbish - Canada Census - F-35) that an actual purchase is on the table NOW instead of after a "mission ready" fully tested plane comes out in MAYBE 2016... Canada being the ONLY entity (even the US Navy and Australia are buying F-18e/fs because of the doubling of costs and unknown performance and delivery) to commit to a FULL contractual purchase... Quote There are none so blind, deaf and dumb as those that fail to recognize, understand, and promote TRUTH...- GWiz
bush_cheney2004 Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 To have the opportunity to buy the plane IF it panned out as projected, it was a pretty small commitment without obligation to buy and therefore no cancellation fees apply if no purchase is made... Nope...Canada just wanted to blow $200 million up front instead of waiting for the $500 million cancellation fee! BTW, the plane is NOT panning out as projected AND it's only because Harper is in bed with Lockheed Martin (Navy Ship refurbish - Canada Census - F-35) that an actual purchase is on the table NOW instead of after a "mission ready" fully tested plane comes out in MAYBE 2016... The "plane" is in Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) ...now. Canada being the ONLY entity (even the US Navy and Australia are buying F-18e/fs because of the doubling of costs and unknown performance and delivery) to commit to a FULL contractual purchase... False....US Navy is buying both. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Smallc Posted April 8, 2011 Report Posted April 8, 2011 Canada being the ONLY entity (even the US Navy and Australia are buying F-18e/fs because of the doubling of costs and unknown performance and delivery) to commit to a FULL contractual purchase... You don't know what you're talking about. The USAF was always planning to buy more F/A - 18E/Fs, and Australia bought their's to replace the F-111, not the F/A - 18A/B. Quote
Saipan Posted April 9, 2011 Report Posted April 9, 2011 Nevermind the public debt the Harris years left us... Mike Harris paid off half the debt Bob Rae left. And McGuinty paid off NOTHING so far. Made it worse. Quote
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.