F-35 purchase undecided, Fantino says

[Wild Bill]

Partisan how?

By suggesting that he hates lefties! Hate is a strong and often irrational emotion. Why would he hate them?

Demonizing and actually hating your opponent seems to be mostly a lefty thing. Every morning my FB feed is full of sophomoric joke pictures of Mitt Romney, making him out to be some kind of retarded hillbilly thug. I get almost none doing the same with Obama.

Hell, the posts here on MLW will easily prove that point!

[eyeball]

By suggesting that he hates lefties! Hate is a strong and often irrational emotion. Why would he hate them?

If you feel so passionately about using the word hate in a politically connotative way, why did you just use it?

Some would say that Harper is doing it just because he hates Canada

[Wild Bill]

If you feel so passionately about using the word hate in a politically connotative way, why did you just use it?

In the context of my quote you cited, I was referring to "some" as some lefty posters on this board, including yourself, eyeball!

[waldo]

I wonder how long the Tories are going to drag this topic out and now they are trying to take the AG to court to stop him from bringing out documents that the Tories don't want brought out. Why? What are they hiding again?

http://thechronicleherald.ca/canada/134718-ottawa-taking-auditor-to-court

tis a simple lack of communication - the normally, "all-knowing/all seeing PMO" disavows any knowledge of the 'trial balloon' sent out by the House Legal Department!

INSTA-UPDATE -- Conspiracy theorists take note: According to this tweeted response from PMO communications director Andrew MacDougall, it would seem the move by the House to clamp down on the AG came as much as a surprise to the government as the rest of us:

We don't believe this is covered by parliamentary privilege. While we'll support a motion to waive parliamentary privilege we don't believe privilege should have been asserted in the first place

Over to you, House of Commons legal department!

[PIK]

By suggesting that he hates lefties! Hate is a strong and often irrational emotion. Why would he hate them?

Demonizing and actually hating your opponent seems to be mostly a lefty thing. Every morning my FB feed is full of sophomoric joke pictures of Mitt Romney, making him out to be some kind of retarded hillbilly thug. I get almost none doing the same with Obama.

Hell, the posts here on MLW will easily prove that point!

Ever since harper came on the scene, the big red machine and the media called him every name in the book and if you say it enough, people will believe. The left is who has dramticly changed over the last few years. A change I don't like seeing, very hate full and unapologetic. Everybody has a bad day ,but it seems every day is a bad day for them. Or are they still in shock over the fact that harper is PM?

Edited September 11, 2012 by PIK

[Guest Derek L]

This might surprise you Topaz but I too am starting to think there is a hidden agenda!

Not for goofy reasons, of course. Some would say that Harper is doing it just because he hates Canada and the Americans have bribed him with a guest spot to play Beatles tunes on American Idol. That sort of thing is just nuts!

Still, when they try to muzzle the auditor general and shoot down the idea of a revived Arrow so quickly, one can't help but start to think that they have made a commitment to the F-35 that cannot be broken, no matter what happens.

Why would they do this? Happens all the time! Two countries negotiate something and when it is a very expensive something one might feel the cost must be hidden, because they consider the "something" so critical to their country that they do not want to take any chances that domestic politics might cancel it.

It might be that something is brewing, probably in the middle East, where Canada is going to desperately need a competitive plane like the F-35. Or it could be that Uncle Sam has promised to buy billions of dollars of oilsands product that would save our economy and provide thousands of desperately needed jobs for Canadians.

My point is, SOME DEAL has been struck and our government feels that at all costs the deal must stand! Nowadays, opposition parties couldn't give a damn about what's good for Canada. They haven't for a long time. They care about what's good for THEM! If they can use such a deal to topple the government and get themselves into power they would in a heartbeat. The good of Canada be damned!

Remember how Chretien cancelled the EH-101 helicopter? And rigged the new tender to make sure it could not be considered again? When all the other choices sucked in comparison? Does anyone truly believe the Liberals cared about the best helicopter for Canada at that time?

So I would agree something is being hidden but I don't agree hiding it is guaranteed to be for nefarious reasons, although when you are talking politicians it is certainly possible. The chances of Steven Harper being the Anti-Christ are in reality much slimmer than some partisan wingnuts here on MLW would have us believe.

Just because someone is not in your chosen political party does not make him an agent of Satan, you know.

Bill, you’re sadly buying into the Arrow myth now? Aside from the false notion that you could just “upgrade it” with modern avionics, engines, radar, weapons etc (Of each aspect I’ll ask with what and who’s going to pay for the development and integration), the performance of the Arrow was surpassed with the F-4 Phantom………..And the Phantom could be refuelled in-flight………And wouldn’t require an entire Province to turn 90 degrees………Christ on a cracker, the Arrow was only about 10-15 feet shorter than a Boeing 737.……

Would you replace your current PC with a 1950s Remington Rand typewriter? I’m sure you could upgrade it with “modern technology” but why? It’s still a friggen typewriter.

[eyeball]

In the context of my quote you cited, I was referring to "some" as some lefty posters on this board, including yourself, eyeball!

Well I have to admit after reading this I realize now how much our Dear Leader actually adores some lefties, and the further left the better apparently.

The practice of sending work gangs abroad to raise cash has continued and expanded under Kim Jong-il’s son and heir, Kim Jong-un. South Korean and Chinese media have reported that a deal was struck earlier this year to send 20,000 North Korean labourers to factories in northeastern China.

Russian contractors say they like hiring the North Korean work gangs because – unlike many other migrant workers – they’re in the country on legal work visas under the arrangement between Pyongyang and Moscow. Local economists put the number of North Koreans working in Russia’s Far East at between 10,000 and 20,000, with at least 3,000 in Vladivostok alone.

“It’s the exploitation of the North Korean people to try and perpetuate a regime that at its core is rights-abusing and illegitimate,” said Phil Robertson, Asia researcher for New York-based Human Rights Watch. “These people – who I’m sure are working very long hours under very hard circumstances – are hostage to whatever situation they’re presented with when they arrive in Vladivostok.”

“The North Koreans are seen as the best foreign workers... They work intensely from morning until night. They don't require high payment, or demand decent food or living conditions," said Aleksandr Latkin, professor of economics at Vladivostok State University. "It's a form of slavery."

Bff's of your's too Bill? Harper seems to think we need to hinge our future on the likes of slavers and commies who are also bff's with, you know, the two most dangerous regimes in the known galaxy.

By the way WTF was it we needed these jets to protect us from against again? I've plum forgotten.

[Wilber]

Bill, you’re sadly buying into the Arrow myth now? Aside from the false notion that you could just “upgrade it” with modern avionics, engines, radar, weapons etc (Of each aspect I’ll ask with what and who’s going to pay for the development and integration), the performance of the Arrow was surpassed with the F-4 Phantom………..And the Phantom could be refuelled in-flight………And wouldn’t require an entire Province to turn 90 degrees………Christ on a cracker, the Arrow was only about 10-15 feet shorter than a Boeing 737.……

Would you replace your current PC with a 1950s Remington Rand typewriter? I’m sure you could upgrade it with “modern technology” but why? It’s still a friggen typewriter.

Amen

[Topaz]

Today, the Hill Times is reporting that all parties are backing away from the debate between the PMO and the AG. The PMO is saying they have nothing do to with the decision of the speaker to go to court to stop the process from the AG. http://www.hilltimes.com/news/news/2012/09/11/conservatives-ndp-liberals-distance-themselves-from-house%E2%80%99s-legal-team-fight/32095

[Wild Bill]

Bill, you’re sadly buying into the Arrow myth now? Aside from the false notion that you could just “upgrade it” with modern avionics, engines, radar, weapons etc (Of each aspect I’ll ask with what and who’s going to pay for the development and integration), the performance of the Arrow was surpassed with the F-4 Phantom………..And the Phantom could be refuelled in-flight………And wouldn’t require an entire Province to turn 90 degrees………Christ on a cracker, the Arrow was only about 10-15 feet shorter than a Boeing 737.……

Would you replace your current PC with a 1950s Remington Rand typewriter? I’m sure you could upgrade it with “modern technology” but why? It’s still a friggen typewriter.

Who suggested we would be just building a 60 year old design? Nice straw man, Derek!

If you had actually listened to General MacKenzie you would have heard that he actually suggested using little more than the basic shape of the airframe. The materials would be modern and so would be the rest of the design. Apparently, the basic shape holds most of the advantages. Why on earth would someone build a new one from old stuff?

MacKenzie believes and quotes people in the know who say that this could have great advantages for Canada. First of all, the performance specs of the F-35 don't come anywhere near the POTENTIAL of a modern Arrow! A new Arrow would have far greater range, speed and altitude. If an intruder came across Canada's border in the North a new Arrow could be there FAR faster!

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/09/10/avro-arrow-revival-plan.html

"While he initially thought the revival plan was "a joke," the more closely he examined it, the more he saw its potential merits for Canada's missions at home and abroad."

Apparently, the price would be cheaper and even better, 90% of the money would stay in Canada. There would be huge numbers of jobs! We have engineers of our own and there are lots of American engineers laid off from NASA, ironically being the reverse of the situation during the Apollo days, after the original Arrow was cancelled.

We would have a plane we could sell to OTHER countries, making a whole new export industry!

Our old friend Julian Fantino, hardly the CPC's best example of a technophile, shot the idea down so fast it was obvious his lips couldn't have moved fast enough to have even read it! One of his major objections was time frame, claiming that we could not ramp up fast enough to deliver a plane to our Air Force. MacKenzie points out that the F-35 keeps moving its delivery date out further and further. When are we going to get any anyways?

If you wanted a considered opinion on the worth and capabilities of a piece of military hardware, whose would you trust more? One from Maj-Gen Lewis MacKenzie or Julian Fantino?

Seems to me the idea deserves better consideration. Just keeping the money in Canada alone would go a long way to meeting some of the objections to the F-35 from critics here at home.

Edited September 12, 2012 by Wild Bill

[Guest Derek L]

If you wanted a considered opinion on the worth and capabilities of a piece of military hardware, whose would you trust more? One from Maj-Gen Lewis MacKenzie or Julian Fantino?

Lew Mack also wanted us to purchase A retired Royal Navy aircraft carrier, Sea Harriers and turn our army into a Marine Corp…………..But this, I’m truly surprised the retired (Army) General would attach his name to it………At least his book was a good read.

You don’t see the irony? As I said above, what are you going to put into the basic “shape” (Engines, avionics, radar etc)…………You either develop “new stuff” for the “basic shape”, or change the “basic shape” to fit modern “stuff”…………Or of course, search the deserts of Arizona and New Mexico for the “stuff” that we already know would fit inside, which of course would leave us with an underperforming aircraft of 1940 & 50s vintage, that was surpassed by the far superior F-4 Phantom……As I said, who’s going to pay for that?

You speak of the “potential” of the Arrow, of which it never came close to achieving and our military at the time was glad it was binned for cost of the further development would of come from the defence budget, hence the military had to choose, the Arrow or everything else………..And the design of the Arrow would have prevented it from ever achieving the designers dreamed potential (Of Mach 2.5+) as both the flight characteristics and build materials of the Arrow were lacking as it would later be confirmed by the Russian Mig-25 and American XB-70 and SR-71/YF-12 (Which some of the Avro designers worked on for Lockheed).………These aircraft did achieve what the designers promised in testing………..

The Arrow was a pig dressed in lipstick……..Then, and now.

[Wild Bill]

You don’t see the irony? As I said above, what are you going to put into the basic “shape” (Engines, avionics, radar etc)…………You either develop “new stuff” for the “basic shape”, or change the “basic shape” to fit modern “stuff”…………Or of course, search the deserts of Arizona and New Mexico for the “stuff” that we already know would fit inside, which of course would leave us with an underperforming aircraft of 1940 & 50s vintage, that was surpassed by the far superior F-4 Phantom……As I said, who’s going to pay for that?

Forgive me for saying this but your reaction seems kind of "knee jerk", Derek.

You start off by attacking the idea as if it was to make a copy of the original plane. I point out that is not the idea but here you are right back to it!

Of course any necessary changes would be made to the basic shape! The intent is to make a modern plane, not to pump out new copies of old ones!

Let's stay in the real world here!

The idea has merit in some circles of those qualified to hold a considered opinion. Meanwhile, the entire idea of Canada making its own gets shot down almost as fast as the idea can be spoken!

Is it truly that impractical? Or is something else going on here?

As I said, I have far more respect for Maj Gen MacKenzie. Fantino has always struck me as just a "southern Sheriff" - a rather dim southern sheriff at that.

I think that the shorter range and altitude capability of the F-35 is a large negative to a country the size of ours.

Somewhere someone is insisting Canada take the F-35, no matter if it is the best choice for us or not. Somewhere, someone insists that Canada never have the capability of making its own such plane again.

[Wilber]

I would have to see some real details of this proposal before it could be anything other than pie in the sky. If you want to go that route, the f-18E makes more sense to me.

[PIK]

Well I have to admit after reading this I realize now how much our Dear Leader actually adores some lefties, and the further left the better apparently.

Bff's of your's too Bill? Harper seems to think we need to hinge our future on the likes of slavers and commies who are also bff's with, you know, the two most dangerous regimes in the known galaxy.

By the way WTF was it we needed these jets to protect us from against again? I've plum forgotten.

You don't know because you can not see into the future. But to take a uneducated guess, china is hungry and china gets want it wants. Imagine if this senario happened, the chinese moves in to our north and they will have the same 5th gen fighter and we send up our super hornets, they would be shot down before they even got close enough to do anything. I imagine the same was said about the purchase of the F -18's.

[Wild Bill]

I would have to see some real details of this proposal before it could be anything other than pie in the sky. If you want to go that route, the f-18E makes more sense to me.

Well, I gave you a link and there's always google...

[cybercoma]

There's no reason we couldn't revive and update the Avro Arrow program. We have world class aerospace engineers here in Canada. The United States and Lockheed Martin would be pissed at the competition I imagine and we would have a hard time scraping up the capital to make it as viable as the American program, but I think some careful consideration is in order. Especially since this might be an opportunity to get manufacturing jobs back in this country to balance out the commodity sector. We need to start considering the full economy of Canada and stop focusing solely on the oil that Alberta sits on.

[eyeball]

You don't know because you can not see into the future. But to take a uneducated guess, china is hungry and china gets want it wants. Imagine if this senario happened, the chinese moves in to our north and they will have the same 5th gen fighter and we send up our super hornets, they would be shot down before they even got close enough to do anything. I imagine the same was said about the purchase of the F -18's.

Here's a more likely scenario.

China gets hungry...and simply eliminates it's hungry people.

[PIK]

Here's a more likely scenario.

China gets hungry...and simply eliminates it's hungry people.

Well they could use a little culling over there.

[Guest Derek L]

Forgive me for saying this but your reaction seems kind of "knee jerk", Derek.

You start off by attacking the idea as if it was to make a copy of the original plane. I point out that is not the idea but here you are right back to it!

Of course any necessary changes would be made to the basic shape! The intent is to make a modern plane, not to pump out new copies of old ones!

Exactly my point Bill………….Then you’re not building a “new Arrow”, but a new plane………..And with that, how is a country such as Canada, without the necessary experience in building modern fighters, going to do that cheaper then current aircraft producers? Lockheed, Boeing, Northrop, Dassault, BAE and the Eurofighter Consortium, all companies with decades of experience in designing, testing and producing modern fighter aircraft spend Hundreds of Millions or Billions of dollars to transform an idea to an actual aircraft……….And they propose creating a producer from scratch, with no experience, to create a modern aircraft, with a potential production of under 100 tails and a per plane cost, what was it, half of that of the F-35?

It’s fantasy land!!! Why not create a Canadian produced “X-Wing Fighter”? Their performance numbers, like those of the proposed Arrow are just as grounded in real life…………

The idea has merit in some circles of those qualified to hold a considered opinion. Meanwhile, the entire idea of Canada making its own gets shot down almost as fast as the idea can be spoken!

Is it truly that impractical? Or is something else going on here?

As I said, I have far more respect for Maj Gen MacKenzie. Fantino has always struck me as just a "southern Sheriff" - a rather dim southern sheriff at that.

No it doesn’t………..Those “circles” are laughing at the idea, and sadly Lewis Mackenzie.

I think that the shorter range and altitude capability of the F-35 is a large negative to a country the size of ours.

The F-35 has greater internal fuel capacity then both the Arrow and our current Hornet………..Unlike the Arrow, the F-35 can be refuelled in-flight and isn’t near the size of a small airliner…………As to Altitude, the performance numbers of the F-35 (and Hornet) are known’s………..The Arrow, unlike the designers at Avro had hoped (dreamed) with it’s actual flight testing, is that of the much smaller and manoeuvrable Phantom………..

Just the wing design/loading of the Arrow (Delta/~50lbs/ft2) would necessitate the incorporation of either/or canards and modern fly-by-wire technology so the Arrow wouldn’t have the flight characteristics of a cement truck………….You start adding those, and as I said, you have a completely different aircraft……..

What engines are you going to put into it? What radar? What avionics? Whose going to design, develop and produce those?

Somewhere someone is insisting Canada take the F-35, no matter if it is the best choice for us or not. Somewhere, someone insists that Canada never have the capability of making its own such plane again.

We could produce a Canadian “X-Wing fighter” if we through enough money at it………..But why?

That doesn’t translate into being cheaper than the products produced by current companies………….

And some thought the Bricklin was a bad idea……

[Wild Bill]

Exactly my point Bill………….Then you’re not building a “new Arrow”, but a new plane………..And with that, how is a country such as Canada, without the necessary experience in building modern fighters, going to do that cheaper then current aircraft producers? Lockheed, Boeing, Northrop, Dassault, BAE and the Eurofighter Consortium, all companies with decades of experience in designing, testing and producing modern fighter aircraft spend Hundreds of Millions or Billions of dollars to transform an idea to an actual aircraft……….And they propose creating a producer from scratch, with no experience, to create a modern aircraft, with a potential production of under 100 tails and a per plane cost, what was it, half of that of the F-35?

It’s fantasy land!!! Why not create a Canadian produced “X-Wing Fighter”? Their performance numbers, like those of the proposed Arrow are just as grounded in real life…………

No it doesn’t………..Those “circles” are laughing at the idea, and sadly Lewis Mackenzie.

The F-35 has greater internal fuel capacity then both the Arrow and our current Hornet………..Unlike the Arrow, the F-35 can be refuelled in-flight and isn’t near the size of a small airliner…………As to Altitude, the performance numbers of the F-35 (and Hornet) are known’s………..The Arrow, unlike the designers at Avro had hoped (dreamed) with it’s actual flight testing, is that of the much smaller and manoeuvrable Phantom………..

Just the wing design/loading of the Arrow (Delta/~50lbs/ft2) would necessitate the incorporation of either/or canards and modern fly-by-wire technology so the Arrow wouldn’t have the flight characteristics of a cement truck………….You start adding those, and as I said, you have a completely different aircraft……..

What engines are you going to put into it? What radar? What avionics? Whose going to design, develop and produce those?

We could produce a Canadian “X-Wing fighter” if we through enough money at it………..But why?

That doesn’t translate into being cheaper than the products produced by current companies………….

And some thought the Bricklin was a bad idea……

You do know that there are a lot of ex-NASA engineers now looking for work, thanks to Obama? There are also many working for branches of American companies here in Canada. I used to sell electronic parts to Litton Systems in Toronto. They make the heads up displays for American fighters. There is a LOT of that going on!

We would not be starting from scratch!

The other question, as MacKenzie pointed out, is that it is a moot question as to when we will ever get our F-35s anyway, since the factory keeps pushing out the delivery date.

We might have more time to develop our own option than you would think. It's entirely possible some Democrat might cancel the F-35 anyway, in favour of more money for food stamps.

[Guest Derek L]

You do know that there are a lot of ex-NASA engineers now looking for work, thanks to Obama?

So? The Space Shuttle was built by Rockwell (Now Boeing owned)………..The various Apollo parts by Grumman ……..The next generation of space vehicles by Lockheed and Boeing……….

There are also many working for branches of American companies here in Canada. I used to sell electronic parts to Litton Systems in Toronto. They make the heads up displays for American fighters. There is a LOT of that going on!

So it’s ok to contract out parts of the “Canadian Arrow” to American companies, but not American aircraft, that utilize Canadian subcontractors…………

As I said, who’s going to design (and pay for) the engines, avionics, radars and weapons for us? Near 50% of the total development cost for the F-35 was avionics…………….

The other question, as MacKenzie pointed out, is that it is a moot question as to when we will ever get our F-35s anyway, since the factory keeps pushing out the delivery date.

Several years after we put our money down.........Like everyone else that has got theirs to date....The F-35, with Billions spent has been in development since the mid 90s………The Eurofighter/Rafale since the 80s……….These are by aircraft makers with proven track records, and you think it viable to just “create” a entirely new company, producing a completely new aircraft(With a slight nod to a cancelled design from the 50s) and you can do cheaper, spread out over less then 100 aircraft, then Lockheed’s F-35.......And now you think we can do it faster then Lockheed?

Send me whatever you're smoking.

We might have more time to develop our own option than you would think. It's entirely possible some Democrat might cancel the F-35 anyway, in favour of more money for food stamps.

I'm not the slightest bit worried about that.

[Mingma]

I'm not sure if it was so much a lack of cautiousness. My thought is that the resolve they showed in sticking to the deal was more of a reaction to the sudden resistance the Liberals showed to their own deal, revealing their contradictory stance. Talk about flip-flopping; it was quite an about-face for the Libs to make a deal such as this and then take an offensive position against the Conservatives on the same deal.

[PIK]

I'm not sure if it was so much a lack of cautiousness. My thought is that the resolve they showed in sticking to the deal was more of a reaction to the sudden resistance the Liberals showed to their own deal, revealing their contradictory stance. Talk about flip-flopping; it was quite an about-face for the Libs to make a deal such as this and then take an offensive position against the Conservatives on the same deal.

Well said.

[waldo]

I'm not sure if it was so much a lack of cautiousness. My thought is that the resolve they showed in sticking to the deal was more of a reaction to the sudden resistance the Liberals showed to their own deal, revealing their contradictory stance. Talk about flip-flopping; it was quite an about-face for the Libs to make a deal such as this and then take an offensive position against the Conservatives on the same deal.

Well said.

which simply shows that neither of you know what you're talking about. The Liberals 'deal' was nothing more than signing as a participant country within JSFail - there was no attached obligation to purchase... there was no, there is no, as stated, "contradictory response". The sole (stated) intent of participation was to gain a first-hand (or supposed 'closer') accounting of the F-35... intended towards an actual legitimate open competition between any/all manufacturers wishing to bid.

[Wild Bill]

which simply shows that neither of you know what you're talking about. The Liberals 'deal' was nothing more than signing as a participant country within JSFail - there was no attached obligation to purchase... there was no, there is no, as stated, "contradictory response". The sole (stated) intent of participation was to gain a first-hand (or supposed 'closer') accounting of the F-35... intended towards an actual legitimate open competition between any/all manufacturers wishing to bid.

Interesting. I assume that lack of obligation is still in effect. So why so much criticism of the Tories while you now seem willing to defend the Liberals with the same point?

Incidently, I still don't recall you ever suggesting an alternative. Lots of talk about how "someone" should search for one, despite the lack of evidence that one exists.

Or do you have a specific alternative and I simply missed it? I am getting old, after all.