F-35 Purchase

[waldo]

simple cause and effect? Really? Nothing about the tea-party fueled GOP hot for spending cuts? Or is it just certain kinds of (non-defense related) cuts you're in favour of, hey? I've had numerous posts speaking to JSFail F-35 risk attachments related to potential U.S. defense cuts... of course, as is your way, you've just blown them all off. At some point Grover Norquist, apparently the guy actually running the U.S. government, will have his due and collect from your favoured bottomless pit U.S. defense spending. What... simply cause and effect? Really?

As demonstrated by President Obama’s (Continued and expanded from Bush) change in focus on defence strategy to a return of “gunboat diplomacy”, the future metric, cuts and all, will see the focus shifted to greater emphasis on air and naval power, with the bulk of Damocles Sword falling on the army......As to my view, I agree with such a strategy and would welcome such targeted defence cuts within Canada, with said end point being a reduction in our regular army somewhere between 1/3rd and one ½ it’s current size in terms of personal.

your bias shines bright... but at least you acknowledge those U.S. defense budget cuts are a reality. The eventual cut mix across its military branches will play itself out. Ultimately, if the F-35 survives, one can reasonably expect the respective military branch F-35 procurement number intentions will drop - significantly. Those outright reductions, most certainly, don't bode well for the overall JSFail program. In any case, there's a ton of pork in the U.S. Congress... liberally spread out across states with major U.S. Army bases - in terms of the eventual defense related budget cuts, we shall see, what we shall see.

I am keen to read our MLW's 'Army Guy' respond to your somewhat cavalier dispensing of the Canadian Army, particularly in favour of the fast-sinking F-35. As for the warm fuzzy you get over force projection... "gunboat diplomacy"... "AirSea Battle"... in that regard, I have four words for you: anti access & area denial. Given your self-proclaimed military understanding prowess, I was sure you had a more sophisticated palate in understanding real viable strategies - I guess not... apparently, it's hard to take the wannabe fly-boy out of ya, hey?

[bush_cheney2004]

....Surely if the Lightning II was a turkey, we’d see this made evident by partners leaving the program and we’d certainly not see additional nations expressing interest in joining said program………

Right..."U.S. GAO" reports are the usual cautionary tales of woe stating the obvious. Yet LockMart continues to build and deliver and test and fly F-35's. Pilots are reporting for type training. Partners are firming up contracts. Hell, even non-partners are firming up contracts.

[Moonbox]

Any "valid points" (imported from the U.S.) have been countered with the reality of firm contracts, continued development testing, and low-rate production. Are there any "valid points" to be offered with a truly Canadian context?

That most contracts, particularly non-US ones, are not at all firm, and as we saw with the Raptor and we are seeing already with the F-35, production numbers can end up being MUCH lower than previously expected.

[bush_cheney2004]

....your bias shines bright... but at least you acknowledge those U.S. defense budget cuts are a reality. The eventual cut mix across its military branches will play itself out....

And it continues....repeated references to the "U.S." and its "JSFail" program even as production and testing goes on. Fewer F-35's doesn't mean zero F-35's, or vindication for no F-35's in Canada. We've already seen that movie....as in Avro Arrow.

The United States has a military force structure and scale that is not comparable to Canada's for procurement or deployment. It scraps more aircraft each year than Canada will ever build/buy.

[waldo]

Esteemed member Waldo cut’s and pastes other members responses to edit the intent of said posts……Hardly the environment for a “healthy discussion”

you really should take esteemed and astute MLW member 'Moonbox's' comments to heart.

in any case, counter to your intellectual dishonesty, none of your words have been altered. Their/your intent was clearly expressed. Again, unfortunately for you, your attempt to falsely correlate testing to unavailable full system integrated functionality was pointed out for/to you. As before, as always, you could end this with a simple straight-forward explanation of what you interpret the offered U.S. GAO quote extract to mean, particularly in the context of your testing puffery... you know, that quote extract repeatedly presented to you... the one you've been repeatedly challenged to comment on... the one you won't touch with the proverbial '10 foot pole'.

[bush_cheney2004]

That most contracts, particularly non-US ones, are not at all firm, and as we saw with the Raptor and we are seeing already with the F-35, production numbers can end up being MUCH lower than previously expected.

Right...the Americans are allowed to do that. Is that OK with you? That does not mean the JSF program will be canceled.

[Moonbox]

Right...the Americans are allowed to do that. Is that OK with you? That does not mean the JSF program will be canceled.

The Americans can cancel their contracts, the Canadians can, the Japanese can, the British can...everyone can.

Also, I didn't say the program would be cancelled. I said it was starting to look like it maybe SHOULD be. As for contracts being firmed up, could you provide us some specific information on that? From what I've seen, nobody appears happy with the cost or progression of the program and everyone seems to be dithering about final numbers etc...

[bush_cheney2004]

The Americans can cancel their contracts, the Canadians can, the Japanese can, the British can...everyone can.

Yes...but the Canadians don't even have a firm contract to bitch about, just an MoU.

Also, I didn't say the program would be cancelled. I said it was starting to look like it maybe SHOULD be.

....and replaced with what? "Maybe should" doesn't cut it in the real world of defense procurements. It would cost more billions to shut it down.

As for contracts being firmed up, could you provide us some specific information on that? From what I've seen, nobody appears happy with the cost or progression of the program and everyone seems to be dithering about final numbers etc...

There are no "final" numbers...until it's final. What was the "final number" for the Gun Registry?

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/pri/2/pro-pro/ngfc-fs-ft/acqui-eng.asp

[Moonbox]

Yes...but the Canadians don't even have a firm contract to bitch about, just an MoU.

It's better to bitch about something before it happens and try to stop it rather than do nothing about it and bitch afterwards.

....and replaced with what? "Maybe should" doesn't cut it in the real world of defense procurements. It would cost more billions to shut it down.

That's bullshit sorry. Shutting it down now would save a ton of money. The argument, I suppose, is that USAF would be vulnerable to future foreign air threats and the cost of starting a new program after this one ends would end up being more. Unforunately, the F-35 is so far over-budget, and has so completely failed to live up to the original concept, that the question is irrelevant.

With a radar cross-section of a beach ball, this dog is less stealthy than existing 15+ year old designs. Its combat agility, at best, is comparable to legacy fighters from the 1970's and yet it's STILL far far far more expensive to build and maintain. By the time it's actually in full production, Russia will have had ~30 years to refine their radar and infra-red detection hardware to locate far stealthier planes than this one. By 2020, it's guessed that even the F-22 will be detectable within 20 nmi, so just imagine how easily the F-35 will be spotted. WVR, the F-35's going to get curb stomped.

There are no "final" numbers...until it's final.

I asked you who has firm contracts so far.

[Guest Derek L]

your bias shines bright... but at least you acknowledge those U.S. defense budget cuts are a reality. The eventual cut mix across its military branches will play itself out. Ultimately, if the F-35 survives, one can reasonably expect the respective military branch F-35 procurement number intentions will drop - significantly. Those outright reductions, most certainly, don't bode well for the overall JSFail program. In any case, there's a ton of pork in the U.S. Congress... liberally spread out across states with major U.S. Army bases - in terms of the eventual defense related budget cuts, we shall see, what we shall see.

The United States Army, the branch that will be cut the most, won’t be procuring the F-35.….

I am keen to read our MLW's 'Army Guy' respond to your somewhat cavalier dispensing of the Canadian Army, particularly in favour of the fast-sinking F-35. As for the warm fuzzy you get over force projection... "gunboat diplomacy"... "AirSea Battle"... in that regard, I have four words for you: anti access & area denial. Given your self-proclaimed military understanding prowess, I was sure you had a more sophisticated palate in understanding real viable strategies - I guess not... apparently, it's hard to take the wannabe fly-boy out of ya, hey?

Why would Canada (Or the United States) require a doctrine focused on “anti access” and/or “area denial”? Are you too concerned about the Russians coming?

As to the strategies themselves, two words, Maginot Line & Truk………

[Guest Derek L]

you really should take esteemed and astute MLW member 'Moonbox's' comments to heart.

in any case, counter to your intellectual dishonesty, none of your words have been altered. Their/your intent was clearly expressed. Again, unfortunately for you, your attempt to falsely correlate testing to unavailable full system integrated functionality was pointed out for/to you. As before, as always, you could end this with a simple straight-forward explanation of what you interpret the offered U.S. GAO quote extract to mean, particularly in the context of your testing puffery... you know, that quote extract repeatedly presented to you... the one you've been repeatedly challenged to comment on... the one you won't touch with the proverbial '10 foot pole'.

Source? Quote?

[Guest Derek L]

With a radar cross-section of a beach ball, this dog is less stealthy than existing 15+ year old designs. Its combat agility, at best, is comparable to legacy fighters from the 1970's and yet it's STILL far far far more expensive to build and maintain. By the time it's actually in full production, Russia will have had ~30 years to refine their radar and infra-red detection hardware to locate far stealthier planes than this one. By 2020, it's guessed that even the F-22 will be detectable within 20 nmi, so just imagine how easily the F-35 will be spotted. WVR, the F-35's going to get curb stomped.

Don't suppose you have a source other then a blogger?

[DogOnPorch]

Moonbox: That's bullshit sorry. Shutting it down now would save a ton of money. The argument, I suppose, is that USAF would be vulnerable to future foreign air threats and the cost of starting a new program after this one ends would end up being more.

That's exactly why. Look at the STS employees @ NASA for example. Retired or 'flipping burgers'. You'll never see that gang together again and they don't feel like training. Same goes for the evil nuclear weapons builders...especially 'modern' plutonium implosion devices. The guys/gals who make these are rare...and smart...and needed. Or we might simply 'forget' how to build them properly. Some may say that'd be a good idea...and I'd agree...if it t'was on a global scale.

[bush_cheney2004]

It's better to bitch about something before it happens and try to stop it rather than do nothing about it and bitch afterwards.

No, I suspect that you would prefer to bitch the whole time.

That's bullshit sorry. Shutting it down now would save a ton of money. The argument, I suppose, is that USAF would be vulnerable to future foreign air threats and the cost of starting a new program after this one ends would end up being more. Unforunately, the F-35 is so far over-budget, and has so completely failed to live up to the original concept, that the question is irrelevant.

Your conclusions are pure speculation. How many U.S. fixed price or cost plus contracts have you participated in? Your own nation is the poster child for laughable defense procurements and cancellation penalties. At least the Americans will actually have some new "jets".

.... By 2020, it's guessed that even the F-22 will be detectable within 20 nmi, so just imagine how easily the F-35 will be spotted. WVR, the F-35's going to get curb stomped.

Then how will outdated CF-188's ever hope to prevail?

I asked you who has firm contracts so far.

Lockheed Martin.

[waldo]

As demonstrated by President Obama’s (Continued and expanded from Bush) change in focus on defence strategy to a return of “gunboat diplomacy”, the future metric, cuts and all, will see the focus shifted to greater emphasis on air and naval power, with the bulk of Damocles Sword falling on the army......As to my view, I agree with such a strategy and would welcome such targeted defence cuts within Canada, with said end point being a reduction in our regular army somewhere between 1/3rd and one ½ it’s current size in terms of personal.

your bias shines bright... but at least you acknowledge those U.S. defense budget cuts are a reality. The eventual cut mix across its military branches will play itself out. Ultimately, if the F-35 survives, one can reasonably expect the respective military branch F-35 procurement number intentions will drop - significantly. Those outright reductions, most certainly, don't bode well for the overall JSFail program. In any case, there's a ton of pork in the U.S. Congress... liberally spread out across states with major U.S. Army bases - in terms of the eventual defense related budget cuts, we shall see, what we shall see.

The United States Army, the branch that will be cut the most, won’t be procuring the F-35.….

duh! Thanks Sherlock! You were the one that mentioned army, strategies and a presumption on a disproportionate level of pending U.S. defense cuts hitting the U.S. Army over other branches of the military. And yet... you don't think... you won't think... that the single largest military expenditure (ever), the JSFail F-35 program... somehow... won't be affected by budget cuts. Why, if that's the case, why would we have such posturing from Lockheed Martin, hey?

now... if you don't know about the impending U.S. budget sequestration... and what it particularly might mean for U.S. defense spending, see

here

:

well, hey now posturing Lockheed Martin, just what do you have to say? Oh my, is LockMart really prepared to enter into the U.S. election cycle. But, but... what might sequestration mean to the JSFail F-35!!!

Lockheed threatens big layoffs amid U.S. Defense cuts:

I am keen to read our MLW's 'Army Guy' respond to your somewhat cavalier dispensing of the Canadian Army, particularly in favour of the fast-sinking F-35. As for the warm fuzzy you get over force projection... "gunboat diplomacy"... "AirSea Battle"... in that regard, I have four words for you: anti access & area denial. Given your self-proclaimed military understanding prowess, I was sure you had a more sophisticated palate in understanding real viable strategies - I guess not... apparently, it's hard to take the wannabe fly-boy out of ya, hey?

Why would Canada (Or the United States) require a doctrine focused on “anti access” and/or “area denial”? Are you too concerned about the Russians coming?

As to the strategies themselves, two words, Maginot Line & Truk………

like I said, given all your posturing and bravado, one would think your understanding, your thinking... your sophistication... would be more advanced than... being stuck back in WWII. Do you even know what A2/AD are, how they can/will thwart your revered "gunboat diplomacy"... the impact they can/will have on the traditional 'U.S. force projection'? Clearly, your kind of thinking aligns with the cocoon mentalities of USAF/USN brass as they look/act to protect and preserve their own internal best interests - you know, the kinds of things that bring forward epic failures like JSFail F-35!

[waldo]

you really should take esteemed and astute MLW member 'Moonbox's' comments to heart.

in any case, counter to your intellectual dishonesty, none of your words have been altered. Their/your intent was clearly expressed. Again, unfortunately for you, your attempt to falsely correlate testing to unavailable full system integrated functionality was pointed out for/to you. As before, as always, you could end this with a simple straight-forward explanation of what you interpret the offered U.S. GAO quote extract to mean, particularly in the context of your testing puffery... you know, that quote extract repeatedly presented to you... the one you've been repeatedly challenged to comment on... the one you won't touch with the proverbial '10 foot pole'.

Source? Quote?

again, you've had your words, your correlation, re-quoted for you... several times now. Your same continued repeat bleat is most telling - a true testament to your trollish actions... you know, your troll actions being pointed out to you by other MLW members! Now, about that U.S. GAO extract quote you keep running/hiding from - just respond to it! Sure you can, hey?

[waldo]

With a radar cross-section of a beach ball, this dog is less stealthy than existing 15+ year old designs. Its combat agility, at best, is comparable to legacy fighters from the 1970's and yet it's STILL far far far more expensive to build and maintain. By the time it's actually in full production, Russia will have had ~30 years to refine their radar and infra-red detection hardware to locate far stealthier planes than this one. By 2020, it's guessed that even the F-22 will be detectable within 20 nmi, so just imagine how easily the F-35 will be spotted. WVR, the F-35's going to get curb stomped.

Don't suppose you have a source other then a blogger?

ha! Says the guy, you... who chooses to use blogs whenever they suit your agenda/purpose. Don't suppose you have any other sources than....... Lockheed Martin propaganda, hey? Aren't you the guy who keeps on about, 'actions speaking louder than... words'? Just how is that, 'on paper'... vapourware F-35 doing, hey?

no - the U.S. GAO reports are not opinion... they are factual based. Unfortunately, for you, the U.S. military branches themselves don't share your blind 'still lining up' allegiance... "

Since 2002, the total quantity through 2017 has been reduced by three-fourths, from 1,591 to 365

". Oh my... is there a problem? JSFail is said to have completed ~ 20% of testing... with the most difficult and comprehensive testing ahead; again, per the latest weeks old U.S. GAO report: "

Development of critical mission systems providing core combat capabilities remains behind schedule and risky. To date,

only 4 percent of the mission systems required for full capability have been verified

." Clearly, in your imaginary reality, as you say, "testing & schedules is clearly in Lockheed's court"!

June 5, 2012 --- F-35 production quality worries Senate panel

further to your

most ridiculous assertion

that, "testing & schedules is clearly in Lockheed's court"... again, from the latest, just weeks old, U.S. GAO report:

- Even with the progress in 2011, most development flight testing, including the most challenging, still lies ahead. Through 2011, the flight test program had completed 21 percent of the nearly 60,000 planned flight test points estimated for the entire program.

- According to JSF test officials, the more complex testing such as low altitude flight operations, weapons and mission systems integration, and high angle of attack has yet to be done for any variant and may result in new discoveries of aircraft deficiencies.

- Initial development flight tests of a fully integrated, capable JSF aircraft to demonstrate full mission systems capabilities, weapons delivery, and autonomic logistics is not expected until 2015 at the earliest. This will be critical for verifying that the JSF aircraft will work as intended and for demonstrating that the design is not likely to need costly changes.

- Initial dedicated operational testing of a fully integrated and capable JSF is scheduled to begin in 2017.

- The JSF operational test team assessed system readiness for initial operational testing and identified several outstanding risk items. The test team’s operational assessment concluded that the JSF is not on track to meet operational effectiveness or operational suitability requirements.

- Flight training efforts were delayed because of immature aircraft.

- Durability testing identified structural modifications needed for production aircraft to meet service life and operational requirements. Analysis of the bulkhead crack problem revealed numerous other life-limited parts on all three variants.

[Guest Derek L]

duh! Thanks Sherlock! You were the one that mentioned army, strategies and a presumption on a disproportionate level of pending U.S. defense cuts hitting the U.S. Army over other branches of the military. And yet... you don't think... you won't think... that the single largest military expenditure (ever), the JSFail F-35 program... somehow... won't be affected by budget cuts. Why, if that's the case, why would we have such posturing from Lockheed Martin, hey?

Lockheed is diversified to more then just the F-35

like I said, given all your posturing and bravado, one would think your understanding, your thinking... your sophistication... would be more advanced than... being stuck back in WWII. Do you even know what A2/AD are, how they can/will thwart your revered "gunboat diplomacy"... the impact they can/will have on the traditional 'U.S. force projection'? Clearly, your kind of thinking aligns with the cocoon mentalities of USAF/USN brass as they look/act to protect and preserve their own internal best interests - you know, the kinds of things that bring forward epic failures like JSFail F-35!

Again, you know not of what you speak……..Said “A2/AD strategy” is being countered with a reemphasis on such bases as Anderson AFB & Kadena AFB, ironically enough, said real estate both bases are on was obtained by the United States nearly 70 years ago after the Empire of Japan’s failed attempt at a “A2/AD” strategy.

[Guest Derek L]

again, you've had your words, your correlation, re-quoted for you... several times now. Your same continued repeat bleat is most telling - a true testament to your trollish actions... you know, your troll actions being pointed out to you by other MLW members! Now, about that U.S. GAO extract quote you keep running/hiding from - just respond to it! Sure you can, hey?

Still a no on providing said quote eh? Are you attempting an “A2/AD” strategy with this…….Surely if you had such quote, you’d provided dressed in one of your fancy replies with multiple indents & colors and all the associated trimmings

[Guest Derek L]

ha! Says the guy, you... who chooses to use blogs whenever they suit your agenda/purpose. Don't suppose you have any other sources than....... Lockheed Martin propaganda, hey? Aren't you the guy who keeps on about, 'actions speaking louder than... words'? Just how is that, 'on paper'... vapourware F-35 doing, hey?

further to your

most ridiculous assertion

that, "testing & schedules is clearly in Lockheed's court"... again, from the latest, just weeks old, U.S. GAO report:

Can you help said member Moonbox out with a link to all the F-35’s technical and performance data? After doing so, perhaps we could also forward it to the South Korean Government ……

[Topaz]

The feds should just drop this jet and get on with finding one for Canada and not one to rule the world. The lastest report out says the cost is up to 162 Million per plane and it has many problems. If the Tories really are watching taxpayers money, they will move on to something else. http://www.islandpacket.com/2012/06/29/2118331/generals-comments-an-ad-wrapped.html

[DogOnPorch]

What would you suggest as a replacement, Topaz?

[GostHacked]

Yet the F-22 is performing in airshows........

Roll your eyes all you want. It's been shown that some pilots are refusing to fly the F-22.

[Guest Derek L]

Roll your eyes all you want. It's been shown that some pilots are refusing to fly the F-22.

Ahh, but you implied it was grounded…….

[cybercoma]

What would you suggest as a replacement, Topaz?

How about a plane that will be ready in time and doesn't have the myriad problems that the F-35 seems to have? That would be a good start. Maybe an open tender process? You know... openness and transparency. The Conservative rallying cry. At least around election time.