F-35 Purchase

[Guest Derek L]

Per my link that 65-75 million is for the airplane shell. You better go on to read past page 61 where they include the costs of the engine and weapons. I would like to buy a plane that can fly when or if we buy a plane not a 75 million dollar paper weight.

Airplane shell?

And what has been budgeted for the acquisition of 65 aircraft? What does 9 billion translate into a per plane cost?

[eyeball]

I want an airplane that can get off the ground and has an engine...that has weapons systems...

What use have you got for one?

Bombing Russian oil-rigs, strutting the global cock-walk, appearances sake, what?

[punked]

What use have you got for one?

Bombing Russian oil-rigs, strutting the global cock-walk, appearances sake, what?

Well if we buy one it should fly right?

[Guest Derek L]

Actually, that was a purposeful strategy by Canada to reduce the number of trainer aircraft needed in Canada. Sending Canadian pilots to the US is a lot cheaper than buying more aircraft.

Another reason you can't use American budgets.....apples and oranges comparisons. Wanna try Russian PAK FA budgets too?

Exactly, as is cutting an entire squadron………..We’ll save tons of money……..

[punked]

Airplane shell?

And what has been budgeted for the acquisition of 65 aircraft? What does 9 billion translate into a per plane cost?

Look I am just pointing out the price you are using and the price the government used during the last election is for a plane that has no engine.

[bush_cheney2004]

....What is getting expensive and running in short supply is spare parts, since the largest previous operator (USN) has retired their fleet……

Right....sounds like Canada needs to make trips to Davis-Montham AFB on a regular basis. When I was kid, I loved to go to the junk yard and salvage parts....still do!

[cybercoma]

What use have you got for one?

Bombing Russian oil-rigs, strutting the global cock-walk, appearances sake, what?

China is a resource hog and the vast majority of its people are little more than peasants right now. The coming resource war is already heating up on the African continent between China and the United States. Unless we begin siding with the Chinese, we're going to need the equipment to assist the United States against China. The latter, by the way, is working on their own 5th gen jet. Believe me. We need these planes.

[Shady]

Look I am just pointing out the price you are using and the price the government used during the last election is for a plane that has no engine.

No you're not. You're just playing politics, the same way the left played politics with the Sea Kings. It ended up costing tax payers more in the long run, as well as Canadian military lives. But that's no suprise. If it means putting Canadians in the seats of more "flying coffins" again for your political gain, so be it.

[Guest Derek L]

Look I am just pointing out the price you are using and the price the government used during the last election is for a plane that has no engine.

The Government has been unequivocal in the 9 billion dollars budgeted for acquisition costs……

65 aircraft at ~75 million per is ~4.8 billion

Now add say 96 engines at 30 million per which is ~2.9 billion

So we’re at ~7.7 billion of the 9 billion budgeted……

[Guest Derek L]

Right....sounds like Canada needs to make trips to Davis-Montham AFB on a regular basis. When I was kid, I loved to go to the junk yard and salvage parts....still do!

Hardly any left:

http://maps.google.ca/maps?um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=Davis-Monthan+AFB&fb=1&gl=ca&hq=Davis-Monthan+AFB&ei=vheDT-bBOsXViALDm8mtAw&sa=X&oi=local_group&ct=image&ved=0CAgQtgM

I have found a couple Super Hornets though…….

[waldo]

Which document? Are you suggesting that you’ve provided the above link, I quoted from, knowing it has questionable data?

Or is that once the data you provide to support your “argument” has in fact proved the inverse, you question it’s utility?

This is like trying to nail Jello to the wall…….

you clearly are full aware of the most recent cost estimates... you simply chose to leverage the (now) dated link reference for your own ends/purpose. MLW member punked didn't post that particular link to highlight acquisition costs; clearly, MLW member punked explicitly referenced that (now) dated link to showcase that the costing being done included both acquisition and operational costs. Why are you playing such a dickwad game here?

[Shady]

Why are you playing such a dickwad game here?

Please post according to forum rules. It would be a shame if you were suspended.

[Guest Derek L]

you clearly are full aware of the most recent cost estimates... you simply chose to leverage the (now) dated link reference for your own ends/purpose. MLW member punked didn't post that particular link to highlight acquisition costs; clearly, MLW member punked explicitly referenced that (now) dated link to showcase that the costing being done included both acquisition and operational costs. Why are you playing such a dickwad game here?

He posted it to demonstrate a unified approach by the partner nations in accounting for the F-35.……Which is clearly not the case.

[bush_cheney2004]

Hardly any left:

Well, there's always eBay! I found a cable length deployed indicator:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Cable-out-indicator-for-Sea-King-helicopter-/190655618702?pt=UK_CPV_Aviation_SM&hash=item2c63f5de8e

Does Canada have a PayPal account?

[Guest Derek L]

Please post according to forum rules. It would be a shame if you were suspended.

Don't worry, I've got thick skin

[punked]

you clearly are full aware of the most recent cost estimates... you simply chose to leverage the (now) dated link reference for your own ends/purpose. MLW member punked didn't post that particular link to highlight acquisition costs; clearly, MLW member punked explicitly referenced that (now) dated link to showcase that the costing being done included both acquisition and operational costs. Why are you playing such a dickwad game here?

It doesn't matter anyway because Derek is quoting the price of a plane with out an engine from that link because he wants a plane that can fly. As soon as you add the engine, weapons, and software or know what you need to fly a plane we are much closer to my number then his.

[bush_cheney2004]

clearly, MLW member punked explicitly referenced that (now) dated link to showcase that the costing being done included both acquisition and operational costs. Why are you playing such a dickwad game here?

Are you MLW member punked's attorney?

[punked]

Are you MLW member punked's attorney?

We are still in the negotiation phase, I think he wants to much for a retainer but that is beside the point of this thread.

[Shady]

Are you MLW member punked's attorney?

Good question MLW member bush_cheney2004.

[bush_cheney2004]

It doesn't matter anyway because Derek is quoting the price of a plane with out an engine from that link because he wants a plane that can fly. As soon as you add the engine, weapons, and software or know what you need to fly a plane we are much closer to my number then his.

Planes can fly without weapons....just like your subs can dive without any torpedoes!

[waldo]

He posted it to demonstrate a unified approach by the partner nations in accounting for the F-35.……Which is clearly not the case.

if I recall correctly, MLW punked was specifically asked to provide references from U.S., UK, France, etc. Again, the focus of that request was one asking to present examples where a clear delineation of acquisition versus operational costing was being presented by other countries/militaries.

again, you are fully aware of the most recent increases to the cost estimates. Why would you purposely revert back, repeatedly, to the dated cost numbers that have no bearing/relevance to today's cost? Why would you do that... why did you do that - repeatedly?

[bush_cheney2004]

Good question MLW member bush_cheney2004.

Thank you esteemed MLW member Shady!

[Guest Derek L]

Well, there's always eBay! I found a cable length deployed indicator:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Cable-out-indicator-for-Sea-King-helicopter-/190655618702?pt=UK_CPV_Aviation_SM&hash=item2c63f5de8e

Does Canada have a PayPal account?

http://maps.google.ca/maps?um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=Davis-Monthan+AFB&fb=1&gl=ca&hq=Davis-Monthan+AFB&ei=vheDT-bBOsXViALDm8mtAw&sa=X&oi=local_group&ct=image&ved=0CAgQtgM

If one goes to the intersection of Yuma st and Zapper drive and scrolls above, I count about 40 Sea Kings left……..shrink wrapped and in various conditions…….Though it looks like they’re sans a Jesus nut, I can’t really tell if the engines have been removed, which I’d assume they have been….

[eyeball]

Well if we buy one it should fly right?

With a huge emphasis on the if. I've yet to see a single cogent reason why we even need the damn things.

Defending ourselves against the threat of an invasion across 3 oceans is just about the very last thing I'm concerned about. In addition to our geographical advantage is the certain knowledge that no country on Earth could afford to even try. Defending our sovereignty in this context is the least of our concerns.

What we should be deeply concerned about however is the intent to use these planes offensively, while invading or other wise interfering in other countries and regions of the world.

[Guest Derek L]

Planes can fly without weapons....just like your subs can dive without any torpedoes!

And (American) planes can fly with weapons that we’ve already purchased