F-35 Purchase

[Smallc]

You fail to address that whole Kevin Page thing with your version of reality.

Kevin Page's numbers were simply wrong (as they so often are) If I understand correctly, he wasn't including operational costs, overestimated the firm acquisition budget, and way overestimated the maintenance. He was just wrong.

[cybercoma]

Kevin Page's numbers were simply wrong (as they so often are) If I understand correctly, he wasn't including operational costs, overestimated the firm acquisition budget, and way overestimated the maintenance. He was just wrong.

Three independent peer reviewers verified his report and the AG corroborates these numbers, but he was simply wrong. Whatever.

Edited April 8, 2012 by cybercoma

[punked]

Three independent peer reviewers verified his report, but he was simply wrong. Whatever.

They aren't even trying anymore.

[Signals.Cpl]

They aren't even trying anymore.

you seem to not understand, the AG is counting the salaries for the 1,000 pilots and support members in the price plus operating costs, while the government is not counting those, BECAUSE the DND has already accounted for them in their 20 billion dollar budget. The AG wether knowing or by accident is misleading the public that the project costs an extra 11 billion dollars. If he tells the public that 11billion is to be added to the price tag, then he should inform the public that the budget is debited for the 11billion over the 20 years.

Because now it seems that the cost of the plane plus the budget is 425billion over the next 20 years while it is only 414billion.

[Smallc]

Three independent peer reviewers verified his report and the AG corroborates these numbers, but he was simply wrong. Whatever.

The numbers are similar, but derived at quite differently. See the post two below yours.

[punked]

you seem to not understand, the AG is counting the salaries for the 1,000 pilots and support members in the price plus operating costs, while the government is not counting those, BECAUSE the DND has already accounted for them in their 20 billion dollar budget. The AG wether knowing or by accident is misleading the public that the project costs an extra 11 billion dollars. If he tells the public that 11billion is to be added to the price tag, then he should inform the public that the budget is debited for the 11billion over the 20 years.

Because now it seems that the cost of the plane plus the budget is 425billion over the next 20 years while it is only 414billion.

You don't seem to understand parliament asked for all the documents DND had about the costs of this program and the AG just said they had these documents when parliament asked for all the documents but until now the AG is the only who has seen them. Ie. The government with held information from our elected parliament. That is not right.

[Signals.Cpl]

You don't seem to understand parliament asked for all the documents DND had about the costs of this program and the AG just said they had these documents when parliament asked for all the documents but until now the AG is the only who has seen them. Ie. The government with held information from our elected parliament. That is not right.

Those documents are on the site of the DND, have been there for a long time. Besides, it was public knowledge that the DND paid for the salaries of the Pilots and Aircrew that would operate the fighters.

Listen lets agree then that we need new planes and will open a bidding process. But before we even look at the planes, the price tag is 11 billion dollars then we actually add the price of the planes and cost over their lifespan. Would that make you feel better?

[cybercoma]

The numbers are similar, but derived at quite differently. See the post two below yours.

Yeah. I know. That's why parliament asked to see how the Conservatives derived their numbers, to which the Conservatives replied, "go pound sand." I'm paraphrasing. You obviously think that's an acceptable response for the government to give to parliament. I disagree.

[punked]

Those documents are on the site of the DND, have been there for a long time. Besides, it was public knowledge that the DND paid for the salaries of the Pilots and Aircrew that would operate the fighters.

Listen lets agree then that we need new planes and will open a bidding process. But before we even look at the planes, the price tag is 11 billion dollars then we actually add the price of the planes and cost over their lifespan. Would that make you feel better?

Not until someone accepts the blame for dropping the ball and lying to parliament. That is not something you get caught in and everyone says "Oh you guys we gotcha this time but next whatevskies". You get caught in that and someone has to go or it could happen again and again and again. A democracy can't work like that.

[Signals.Cpl]

Not until someone accepts the blame for dropping the ball and lying to parliament. That is not something you get caught in and everyone says "Oh you guys we gotcha this time but next whatevskies". You get caught in that and someone has to go or it could happen again and again and again. A democracy can't work like that.

The blame for what?

When the military buys new trucks, do they account for the salary of the drivers? Or the fuel cost? Or Recovery? Or the fact that new soldiers have to get a Military drivers licence? What about the soap we need to wash the trucks? Or what about the price for the covered garage that is already present?

The AG should either tell people the price is 14 billion dollars, or explain that the 11billion dollars added to his figure are expected to be deducted from DND's budget.

What happens when we buy new rifles? There are roughly 100,000 Regular Forces and Reserve soldiers, sailors, aircrew and rangers, do we say that the price for 100,000 rifles is 200 billion dollars over 20 years because we have to account for everyone's salary? Since everyone in the military has a rifle, that means that my rifle costs 1million dollars over 20 years, and thats not even accounting for the price of the rifle. Then you add the price of the ammunition and the cleaning kits. The repairs that the Weapon Technicians , which would actually count the person twice as he operates the rifle and then fixes the rifle so all weapon techs are added together and their salaries are multiplied by 20 years to add to the total. When we are done with every piece of kit that we own, the CF would cost the military 10 trillion dollars over 20 years. Because when you put a uniform at 200 billion, and a bayonet at 200 billion it adds up. Im sure this is the most efficient way to do this.

[punked]

The AG should either tell people the price is 14 billion dollars, or explain that the 11billion dollars added to his figure are expected to be deducted from DND's budget.

"The AG should do whatever the Conservatives say!!!"- I bet Conservatives would have loved during Adscam for the sitting government to say this right?

[Signals.Cpl]

"The AG should do whatever the Conservatives say!!!"- I bet Conservatives would have loved during Adscam for the sitting government to say this right?

Read my previous post, if you don't get it, then you are just out to get the conservatives, nothing else.

[DogOnPorch]

The change that Russia is experiencing is bringing its military more in line with those of Western nations. During the cold war, the professionals in their military were officers, while most of the non commissioned members were conscripts, while now they are creating a professional force of NCMs with a sizeable force of conscripts to reinforce the military. If anything, they are increasing the efficiency of the military while cutting the size.

Meh...the Russians still think in terms of division or higher. It's just the nature of the scorpion. I do see their attempts at change, though. Especially in the VVS.

[Topaz]

Here's an article that even somone in the US government doesn't have anything good to say about the F-35 cost. BTW, whatever it will cost the US, other countries HAVE to pay more, not less than the US, that's the law in the US. http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/government+auditor+slams+cost+overruns/6332651/story.html

[Argus]

no - nice try. The discussion centered upon you creating a Russian boogeyman actively intent on "raping and pillaging" Canadian resources. Again, unfortunately for your crafted "reality", Russia is not presently engaging you.

I see. But no one has claimed Russia is 'presently engaging' us. Is it then your contention that if we find a need in say ten years for fighter jets we can just go to Wal-Mart and buy them off the shelf, along with the pilots to fly them and the bases to operate them from?

[Argus]

about that so-called "defence"... just how does, effectively, a F-35 light-bomber provide that, uhhh... Canadian defence? For all it's vaunted (suggested) might, everything critical I've read suggests the F-35 is a sorry match to true fighter interceptors... that much was sacrificed for the lofty (now questionable) stealth capability, notwithstanding it's limited range, AWAC and aerial fuel requirements. By the by, will Canada also have it's own AWACS and air-fuelers? Oh... who has those?

defence? Just what kind of so-called defence?

Are you now claiming an expertise in fighter jet operations which surpasses that of the air forces of Canada, the United States, and six other nations?

[Argus]

You guys the Hawks made this arguments during the 80s. We all bought in and ponied up, we cut cut investment in education to fund war machines. Now when we look back we can easily see you were lying about the who were the Soviets then just as you are lying now.

The Soviets were a pretty nasty bunch. In what way were people being unkind to them?

[Argus]

So you are saying that someone is more likely to attack if we have F18's rather than then new F35's? I would suggest our deterrent to a military attack by the evil Russkies is just south of our border.

You are aware of how old those F-18s are, right?

[Argus]

No that is a serious question. Who are we going to deter with this jet?

Why don't you read Matt Fisher's column I posted earlier.

[Smallc]

that much was sacrificed for the lofty (now questionable) stealth capability, notwithstanding it's limited range,

A limited range...almost twice that of our current jets.

AWAC and aerial fuel requirements. By the by, will Canada also have it's own AWACS and air-fuelers? Oh... who has those?

Canada has air to air refuelling capability. We don't have AWACS, but there is ground radar support in the north.

[Argus]

and what about the rest of it... the massive Navy upgrade, the Coast Guard upgrade, Search & Rescue requirements, ice-breakers, etc., etc., etc. Is there an unlimited military budget in your world? Or, are you advocating the $25B with a trade-off to other 'requirements' being dropped? Where's the priority in your world? What are you willing to drop?

The CBC?

You pacifist types really make me laugh. Despite all the evidence of history, despite the brutality of the world around us, you still defiantly believe in unilateral disarmament on the basis that nobody would ever want to be mean to us.

[Argus]

an irrelevant, nonsensical comment that has no bearing on this discussion

Seems to be relevent to me. I pay insurance every year, have for along time, even though I've never used it, and quite likely never will. Hell, I even have earthquake insurance. By your way of figuring things I should get rid of insurance. Since I haven't needed it in the past I CLEARLY won't have any need of it in the future either.

[Argus]

Guns or Butter it was always why Russia could never build the Military the US officials in the 80s told us they had. You spend money on guys or you spend it on Butter. So let them starve they say. I pick butter then guns which is why we need this argument.

The Swiss seemed to get by rather well with their butter, despite the fact they had a huge military.

[punked]

The CBC?

You pacifist types really make me laugh. Despite all the evidence of history, despite the brutality of the world around us, you still defiantly believe in unilateral disarmament on the basis that nobody would ever want to be mean to us.

Just would point out Iceland has been around as a country for about 200 years and has never had an army here.

[Argus]

Again Parliament didn't ask for one figure DND did it asked for all of them which the government didn't give them do you not see something wrong with that?

It got them all, it just didn't seem to realize what it wanted. If it wanted to include the prices of the runways, hangars and pilots uniforms all it had to do was check the DND spending statements.