F-35 Purchase

[Guest Derek L]

And one more thing to add to help further the context of economies of scale:

With just the sole USAF planned purchase of 1763 F-35A aircraft, (The same version we’ll purchase) and not counting any planned purchases by the other partners of this version, or planned purchases of the Carrier and STOVL versions, alone will surpass total airframe numbers of current, underproduction and planned variants of the Super Hornet, Eurofighter, Rafale, Gripen and upgraded versions of the F-15 combined.

Anyone who believes we’ll achieve the same economies of scale with a purchase of a 4th generation aircraft as we would with the F-35 is truly delusional.

[login]

An opinion piece on why John Ivison feels we won’t get the F-35, from yesterday’s National Post:

http://fullcomment.n...of-fighter-jet/

Though I obviously disagree with Mr Ivison’s commentary on defence maters ( I do enjoy his more political pieces) he does make two points that I’ve been harping on here for months:

1st point:

A I’ve said numerous times, when the same accounting methodology is applied to the Navy and Coast Guards entire fleet renewal, the final figure will soar well past 100 billion (Of today’s) dollars……..When operating cost include personal costs, as the Auditor General’s figures do when calculating F-35 costs, and we contrast this with the navy, we should see figures soar when calculating the Shipbuilding Strategy. For instance:

The personal directly involved in operating a single Tactical Fighter Squadron of 24 F-35s will equal roughly the personal associated with crewing just two of the RCN’s future Frigates……..We’ll operate just two Tactical Fighter Squadrons of F-35s, but 15 future surface combatants, 6-8 patrol craft and two tankers……..Or operating cost like fuel. One TFS of F-35s will use in one week of sustained combat operations, similar amounts of fuel as a single frigate within the same timeframe, as such, if we deployed a single RCN task group of 3 frigates and a tanker for one week, the personal costs will equal that of deploying our entire planned fleet of two TFS of F-35s and double the costs in terms of fuel.

This is also a valid point that I make and is often ignored by many……….For example, the Eurofighter currently costs more per plane then what the fifth batch of low rate initial production F-35s will cost, let alone final production aircraft what we’ll be buying………..Or look at the Australians, the RAAF paid nearly 7 billion dollars for 24 Superhornets and twenty years of support………..

I truly hope Public Works garners other manufacturers cost comparisons so such figures will become “public knowledge” and put the F-35 costs into context…………It’s telling that DoD has estimated, and reported by the CBO, that operating the current legacy airframes (F-16, F/A-18, Harrier, A-10) that will be replaced by the F-35 out into the 2050s will cost nearly four times the projected costs of operating the F-35.…..

As I said prior, the only serious flaw I find with the entire F-35 program is that they performed piss poorly in public relations and have allowed bloggers and other aircraft manufactures lobbyists to define the narrative………Still, many have demonstrated the lack of critical thinking skills required to make the leap as to why those that actually know the “facts” of the entire F-35 program, Government, militaries and the manufactures, still fully support the program.

And released less then an hour after Mr Ivisons piece:

http://www.reuters.c...E8AT04420121130

Talk about missing the boat

There is a slight difference with the Navy Contracts -- they are made in Canada.

Although I do question the specifics of the program they are a step up from buying American jets for the Canadian Forces.

The Americans would never buy Canadian jets for the US military's fighter. So I don't see why Canadians should pay for American equipment if the Americans won't reciprocate it.

The US is all take and no give.

The American contracts are too restricted to use them as a sole source of fighter support.

Canada doesn't need 65 of them.

Edited November 30, 2012 by login

[bush_cheney2004]

....As I said prior, the only serious flaw I find with the entire F-35 program is that they performed piss poorly in public relations and have allowed bloggers and other aircraft manufactures lobbyists to define the narrative………Still, many have demonstrated the lack of critical thinking skills required to make the leap as to why those that actually know the “facts” of the entire F-35 program, Government, militaries and the manufactures, still fully support the program.

It doesn't really matter, as the U.S. DoD still needs to field a new strike aircraft. Programs are either funded or canceled, and right now the F-35 is in low rate production with more appropriations in the out years, even if that is for reduced numbers. Carter canceled the B-1A only to have the same mission requirements come back to be satisfied by Reagan and the B-1B Lancer.

The political song and dance in Canada is largely irrelevant to the American program.....65 potential units won't make or break it either way.

[bush_cheney2004]

...The Americans would never buy Canadian jets for the US military's fighter. So I don't see why Canadians should pay for American equipment if the Americans won't reciprocate it.

What does this mean? Does Canada have a 5th gen strike fighter to sell ?

[DogOnPorch]

What does this mean? Does Canada have a 5th gen strike fighter to sell ?

We have your old Voodoos in crates, I'm sure.

[login]

What does this mean? Does Canada have a 5th gen strike fighter to sell ?

Sure if a factory is built to put the parts together at here in Canada.

Hoarding all Intellectual property through takeovers and buying up the physical infrastructure of the Canadian defence sector doesn't help Canada build its own planes or sell them to the US.

Edited November 30, 2012 by login

[bush_cheney2004]

Sure if a factory is built to put the parts together at here in Canada.

The Americans already have "factories" in Canada producing aircraft parts. For instance, the transmissions for Apache attack helicopters are made in Canada.

Canada doesn't even have a domestic car make anymore.....it builds "foreign" cars.

Hoarding all Intellectual property through takeovers and buying up the physical infrastructure of the Canadian defence sector doesn't help Canada build its own planes or sell them to the US.

Then don't sell such firms to foreign buyers. Do you think the U.S. would let Ilyushin buy Boeing ?

Canada did build a high speed interceptor (with US help), but never got any production orders, not even from itself.

Edited November 30, 2012 by bush_cheney2004

[login]

The Americans already have "factories" in Canada producing aircraft parts. For instance, the transmissions for Apache attack helicopters are made in Canada.

Canada doesn't even have a domestic car make anymore.....it builds "foreign" cars.

Then don't sell such firms to foreign buyers. Do you think the U.S. would let Ilyushin buy Boeing ?

Canada did build a high speed interceptor (with US help), but never got any production orders, not even from itself.

I didn't say parts I said production full assembly of the F-35 in Canada and export it to the US.

Sounds good?

[Fletch 27]

I didn't say parts I said production full assembly of the F-35 in Canada and export it to the US.

Sounds good?

NorthStar in Milton COMPLETELY assembles the gear-sets and emplys 130 peopel

Honeywell in MIssissauga COMPLETELY designs and assembles the 1553 Tranciever design employing 490

Messier in Ajax COMPLETELY designs and assembles the landing gear employing 390 people

ATS in Waterloo COMPLETELY designs and assembles the defrosting and de-fogging systems employing 180

I could go on an on...

And you want us to be an "assembly house" like China? Im glad we have the home grown knowledge and expertise as opposed to assembly....

[login]

NorthStar in Milton COMPLETELY assembles the gear-sets and emplys 130 peopel

Honeywell in MIssissauga COMPLETELY designs and assembles the 1553 Tranciever design employing 490

Messier in Ajax COMPLETELY designs and assembles the landing gear employing 390 people

ATS in Waterloo COMPLETELY designs and assembles the defrosting and de-fogging systems employing 180

I could go on an on...

And you want us to be an "assembly house" like China? Im glad we have the home grown knowledge and expertise as opposed to assembly....

Don't be stupid you know what I mean.

[bush_cheney2004]

Don't be stupid you know what I mean.

No, it is not clear what you mean. Do you mean licensed manufacture of F-35s in Canada for Canadian Forces? Or do you mean a U.S. subsidiary like Lockheed Martin Canada making F-35s for Canada and export ?

The Americans have set up foreign military sales (FMS) programs to other nations for licensed manufacture of military aircraft, notably the F-16. That's one reason why over 4,000 have been built. But as of today, Canada is only a Tier 3 member of the F-35 consortium, which is good enough to get parts and subsytem contracts as described above.

You gotta spend more money to run with the big dogs.

Edited November 30, 2012 by bush_cheney2004

[login]

No, it is not clear what you mean. Do you mean licensed manufacture of F-35s in Canada for Canadian Forces? Or do you mean a U.S. subsidiary like Lockheed Martin Canada making F-35s for Canada and export ?

The Americans have set up foreign military sales (FMS) programs to other nations for licensed manufacture of military aircraft, notably the F-16. That's one reason why over 4,000 have been built. But as of today, Canada is only a Tier 3 member of the F-35 consortium, which is good enough to get parts and subsytem contracts as described above.

You gotta spend more money to run with the big dogs.

No I mean pumping the suckers out and the US buying from Canadian manufacturers, that put all the parts together, as well as the Canadian Government.

The point is the US would NEVER allow the planes to be produced in Canada. They control the technology, it is their project. This plane is not Canada's plane. Canada has no reason to go all in on a plane it can't build in its own territory, and can't modify without permission to do so. It is just stupid that is my point. We both clearly know it is a US project and a US plane, with the US having first and last say on what happens with it, even after the point of purchase.

I don't give two sh1ts about licensing and all this crap that is just other words for raping the tax payer and lining pockets of rapists.

Its no suprise the programs of countries like Russia and China are a fraction of the cost of the f35 as well production is a fraction of the cost. It is just a US money grab for the American military industrial complex, Canadian tax payers shouldn't be flushing their money down the toilet like that if they can't control their use of technology and build the whole plane within Canada, repair the plane fully within Canada, and modify the technology and adapt it as they want. This is the same IP bs that Canada faces because of IP law that unfairly disadvantages Canadians, and other small nations that can't rule the global IP world. The federal government is a bunch of stooges they should be blocking IP takeovers instead they are handing it out.

Edited December 1, 2012 by login

[Fletch 27]

And employing thousands upon thousands.... Simply for engineering... We won't even bother with maintenance contracts. Sounds like "plane envy" to me.

[login]

And employing thousands upon thousands.... Simply for engineering... We won't even bother with maintenance contracts. Sounds like "plane envy" to me.

Its not, its too much money for too little control.

I support a partial gradual buy but not a bulk throw the entire 40 year airforce aquistion budget into it deal.

It is a massive waste of tax payer funds for a mediocre jet 10 years from now.

If Canada owned modification and production rights it might be a different situation but as is, it is just a sink hole and a white elephant.

Even Lawson is saying McKay is wrong (already...)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/11/30/pol-lawson-committee-f35-stealth-options.html?cmp=rss

Edited December 1, 2012 by login

[Guest Derek L]

It doesn't really matter, as the U.S. DoD still needs to field a new strike aircraft. Programs are either funded or canceled, and right now the F-35 is in low rate production with more appropriations in the out years, even if that is for reduced numbers. Carter canceled the B-1A only to have the same mission requirements come back to be satisfied by Reagan and the B-1B Lancer.

The political song and dance in Canada is largely irrelevant to the American program.....65 potential units won't make or break it either way.

I’m not worried about the Obama administration cancelling the program, like the various other partner nations, the F-35 has “outlived” various “Right” & “Left” wing governments of all the partner nations and the only political entities that appear to seriously oppose the program have been extreme left wing parties like the NDP and various socialist parties in other countries that wouldn’t likely purchase combat aircraft anyways…….Even the Australian Labour party, that wished to purchase the more expensive Raptor (Even though it’s not available for export), when given the big chair, reversed course…….Or many of the center-left Dutch parties that realized that withdrawing from the program to spite the Americans would only devastate the Netherlands aerospace and defence industries……….

Perhaps the NDP would support the purchase, if like the Royal Netherlands Air Force, our Air Force members were dues paying union members

[Fletch 27]

All the other buys were! Why is this one different? too little control? We are dictating to the manufacturer what type of AirInc or 1553 protocol devices are implemented.. Fuel reserves and climactic controls... much more... This will be a custom bird made for the Canadian environment and flight details! Extended range, double redundancy, t-thype FLIR, etc.etc.

Every buy for the past 70 years has been based on a 40 year.

[login]

All the other buys were! Why is this one different? too little control?

see the end

We are dictating to the manufacturer what type of AirInc or 1553 protocol devices are implemented..

In what year?

Fuel reserves and climactic controls... much more... This will be a custom bird made for the Canadian environment and flight details! Extended range, double redundancy, t-thype FLIR, etc.etc.

And what happens if something newer comes along..

Every buy for the past 70 years has been based on a 40 year.

And that is idiocy in todays technological environment

Fact is its not manufactured in Canada, Canada doesn't control it.

Canada needs to be able to control its capacities not have its defence policy dictated by the USA.

It needs full servicability of its own equipment. The f35 doesn't provide for that so it looses its sovereignty.

Edited December 1, 2012 by login

[bush_cheney2004]

Fact is its not manufactured in Canada, Canada doesn't control it.

Canada needs to be able to control its its capacities not have its defence policy dictated by the USA.

Does Canada own and control the design and manufacture of engines, avionics, fire control, nav, comms, IFF, radar, weapons, GPS, tankers, and even ejection seats ? Nope.

Build your own jet....again.....just for laughs.

[login]

Does Canada own and control the design and manufacture of engines, avionics, fire control, nav, comms, IFF, radar, weapons, GPS, tankers, and even ejection seats ? Nope.

Build your own jet....again.....just for laughs.

I would.

I'm sure your words wouldn't be so nice when you figured out what I was laughing at.

Edited December 1, 2012 by login

[bush_cheney2004]

I would.

I'm sure your words wouldn't be so nice when you figured out what I was laughing at.

How would "you" do this ? By violating the IP rights of manufacturers in other nations? Great plan.

[Guest Derek L]

How would "you" do this ? By violating the IP rights of manufacturers in other nations? Great plan.

You mean you didn’t read his dissertation on his proposed nuclear powered aircraft armed with neutron bombs?……….According to him, he could do it faster and cheaper than the F-35.…….All from the comfort of home

[Bonam]

You mean you didn’t read his dissertation on his proposed nuclear powered aircraft armed with neutron bombs?

Or his proposal to replace our airforce with a fleet of unpowered gliders that are deployed from a Canadian-built space elevator?

[Guest Derek L]

Or his proposal to replace our airforce with a fleet of unpowered gliders that are deployed from a Canadian-built space elevator?

It pains me to admit, but my mere real world experience associated with an actual aircraft (re)design program was with Boeing IDS on the CH-46 DCU…………Of course we never had to involve ourselves with Nuclear powered bombers, Imperial Star Destroyers, drop ships and psychic early warning systems……We were quite obviously on another plane (pun intended) then William login and only contended with swashplates, PH 13-8 Mo and Jesus nuts…………I bow to his greatness.

[Bonam]

It pains me to admit, but my mere real world experience associated with an actual aircraft (re)design program was with Boeing IDS on the CH-46 DCU…………Of course we never had to involve ourselves with Nuclear powered bombers, Imperial Star Destroyers, drop ships and psychic early warning systems……We were quite obviously on another plane (pun intended) then William login and only contended with swashplates, PH 13-8 Mo and Jesus nuts…………I bow to his greatness.

Well the reality is that the basics of the technology to build a nuclear powered aircraft do exist, if we wanted to. It's been done before, and we have the technology today to do it better than it was done in the past. And we could arm it with neutron bombs too, if we wanted to (though I don't know why we would; normal thermonuclear armaments seem more widely applicable than neutron bombs). Of course, such a program would be monstrously expensive, and does not at all fall within the specs of what the Canadian military wants for its next aircraft. But I can sympathize with William's desire to fantasize about the technological possibilities. I for one would love to work on a project to develop a modern nuclear ramjet for Canada's airforce

Edited December 1, 2012 by Bonam

[bush_cheney2004]

Canadian Forces star cruiser built by Bombardier: