Derek 2.0 Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 More poor management by the Conservatives. The internal document says that they have already lost a couple ships. It doesn't say that none will be built... it says that not enough will be built to maintain the navy's capabilities. Ahh, no, it doesn't........"sources" tell CTV that they've likely lost 1 or 2 ships........of course, "sources" also told media that the Government would only be able to purchase 3-4 AOPS, yet, Irving signed a contract, and has started building, the planned six. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 There is some light at the end of the tunnel, Mulcair has said he will re-open the F 35 file and actually have a bidding process. And Trudeau has said he will scrap the F 35 altogether, seek bids for a more appropriate replacement for the F 18, and the money he saves from not buying the troubled "bomb truck" he will put into the navy. A win, win. Trudeau following along in Chretien's footsteps, I see. Exaggerate the problems and spend hundreds of millions to cancel a procurement project, then do nothing for years. The problem is and always has been that there is no viable alternative. Other planes touted are already deep into their lifespan, not that much cheaper, and are using technology from twenty and thirty years ago. These aircraft need to be flying forty years from now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 Trudeau following along in Chretien's footsteps, I see. Exaggerate the problems and spend hundreds of millions to cancel a procurement project, then do nothing for years. Furthermore, his pledge to cancel the F-35 program, in favor of a cheaper option (there aren't any) and redirect the funds into already budgeted shipbuilding is nothing more than smoke and mirrors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 Trudeau following along in Chretien's footsteps, I see. Exaggerate the problems and spend hundreds of millions to cancel a procurement project, then do nothing for years. The problem is and always has been that there is no viable alternative. Other planes touted are already deep into their lifespan, not that much cheaper, and are using technology from twenty and thirty years ago. These aircraft need to be flying forty years from now. There are a number of viable alternatives which will fit our needs. Why do we need stealth, (especially one that doesn't work) who are we planning to attack? Most are substantially cheaper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 There are a number of viable alternatives which will fit our needs. Why do we need stealth, (especially one that doesn't work) who are we planning to attack? Most are substantially cheaper. Name one generation 4.5 or 5 aircraft that will be cheaper.....That outperforms the F-35, in every aspect but stealth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 (edited) Name one generation 4.5 or 5 aircraft that will be cheaper.....That outperforms the F-35, in every aspect but stealth. F-16, F-18, Mig-29 Fulcrum, SU-27 Flanker. Oh, I forgot to include the Chinese SU-35. Edited September 22, 2015 by On Guard for Thee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 Name one generation 4.5 or 5 aircraft that will be cheaper.....That outperforms the F-35, in every aspect but stealth. So hold a competition that includes all competitors. If the F-35 wins, great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 F-16, F-18, Mig-29 Fulcrum, SU-27 Flanker. Oh, I forgot to include the Chinese SU-35. Sure. They wouldn't get in range to see the F-35, but why not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 So hold a competition that includes all competitors. If the F-35 wins, great. Which is what both opposition party's are suggesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 Sure. They wouldn't get in range to see the F-35, but why not. Problem is the F 35 can't see them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 Which is what both opposition party's are suggesting. And I agree. You seem to think I have to agree with everything Harper says. Problem is the F 35 can't see them. Uhh, sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 And I agree. You seem to think I have to agree with everything Harper says. Uhh, sure. Actually it can see them, just not at a suitable range to do anything about them. Again one of the reasons it must be escorted by something like an F 22 for protection while delivering it's bomb load. So by itself it's more or less a sitting duck. And apparently the Chinese have already hacked the hell out of the stealth system, so stay away from them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 Actually it can see them, just not at a suitable range to do anything about them. Again one of the reasons it must be escorted by something like an F 22 for protection while delivering it's bomb load. It serves the same function as the F-18, and it's maneuverability is not that different. That's the same situation we're in right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 Name one generation 4.5 or 5 aircraft that will be cheaper.....That outperforms the F-35, in every aspect but stealth. I put the question up again for you to read it..... F-16, F-18, Mig-29 Fulcrum, SU-27 Flanker. Oh, I forgot to include the Chinese SU-35. None of those are 4.5 or 5.0 generation aircraft, and none of those outperform all or most of the F-35 specs....Not to mention Canada does not buy Russian or chinese copies of Russian aircraft for good reasons....please keep you list to say western block aircraft..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 I put the question up again for you to read it..... None of those are 4.5 or 5.0 generation aircraft, and none of those outperform all or most of the F-35 specs....Not to mention Canada does not buy Russian or chinese copies of Russian aircraft for good reasons....please keep you list to say western block aircraft..... Typhoon, Rafale, and of course Super hornet. And of course what does this so called "5.0 generation" thingy really mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 This is the ship thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 This is the ship thread. Speaking of which.... The Royal Canadian Navy is expected to receive only eight to 10 ships out of a total 15 it had been promised as part of a multi-billion dollar procurement, CTV News has learned. http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/navy-expected-to-receive-fewer-ships-than-promised-1.2574698 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 Yeah, that sounds pretty close to right if the budget stays at $26B for procurement and sustainment. We need more money for it. I'd say we should maintain at least the 12 ships that we have (we have 13, but not really). Anything less than that is going to severely compromise readiness. On the other hand, almost every European country, including the UK has been shrinking their surface fleet. The RN is now down to 19 surface combatants, 13 of which need to be replaced soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 Speaking of which.... The Royal Canadian Navy is expected to receive only eight to 10 ships out of a total 15 it had been promised as part of a multi-billion dollar procurement, CTV News has learned. http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/navy-expected-to-receive-fewer-ships-than-promised-1.2574698 That's laughable......yesterday, they were reporting a loss of 1 or 2 ships........at this rate, the navy will be selling off ships by Friday.......interesting how CTV received this "inside info" the same day Trudeau announced his intention to fund an already budgeted program...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 That's laughable......yesterday, they were reporting a loss of 1 or 2 ships........at this rate, the navy will be selling off ships by Friday.......interesting how CTV received this "inside info" the same day Trudeau announced his intention to fund an already budgeted program...... There's clearly not enough money if we want 15 ships at our yards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 Yeah, that sounds pretty close to right if the budget stays at $26B for procurement and sustainment. Well no, it doesn't, unless the RCN is planning on purchasing Zumwalt like destroyers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 There's clearly not enough money if we want 15 ships at our yards. BS!!! $26 billion over 15 ships nearly equates to the purchase price of an equal number, of post development, Flight III Burkes........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 BS!!! $26 billion over 15 ships nearly equates to the purchase price of an equal number, of post development, Flight III Burkes........ Lets go to the F-35. The $26B number for the ships is like the $14 - 16B number for the jets. It's ships + spares, maintenance, and infrastructure. It's probably not enough for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 Lets go to the F-35. The $26B number for the ships is like the $14 - 16B number for the jets. It's ships + spares, maintenance, and infrastructure. It's probably not enough for that. Why? Egypt purchased a GP FREMM frigate, including spares, maintenance, infrastructure and munitions for ~$1.2 billion earlier this year from France......if our GP frigate (12 ships) are in that price range, that would equate to $15 billion of $ 26 billion budgeted, leaving $11 billion for 3 DDGs....The RAN is paying for its three over budget Hobart class destroyers, in 2015 USD, just under $6 billion..........so yeah, context is important, as is risk mitigation, which I was concerned about several years ago, prior to the announced industry partnerships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted September 22, 2015 Report Share Posted September 22, 2015 Why? Egypt purchased a GP FREMM frigate, including spares, maintenance, infrastructure and munitions for ~$1.2 billion earlier this year from France......if our GP frigate (12 ships) are in that price range, I don't have faith that your yards can do that. Maybe they'll prove different. 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.