F-35 Purchase

[Guest Derek L]

ah, yes... that imaginary "sweet spot", hey? Where is that "sweet spot" today? You know, the one predicated upon a contract signed by the Harper Conservatives... oh, wait... what contract? So, you don't expect any ongoing LRIP development costs or costs associated with managing "B" & "C" versions within JSF to be passed on down to JSF partners? Is there something you can point to that supports such a presumed Canadian isolation to continued cost increases due to ongoing development, ongoing testing, ongoing re-design/re-development/re-testing?

Sure, Mr Williams MoU and the larger framework of the program. How many "B" and "C" versions are we purchasing again?

[dre]

Of course you did.

I did. Im the only fiscal conservative here on MLW, and Iv opposed the majority of big spending by our government both in terms of social and defense spending. Im also the only advocate here for both government and people trying to only spend money they have in hand, and the only consistant opponent of deficit financing, and the "magic money" system of economics.

Edited April 29, 2012 by dre

[Guest Derek L]

Yah a full on 20-35 year costing of operational costs from this day forward for F-35 alternatives is in the budget. For some reason I don't believe you.

Define full on costing…………Are you suggesting if we purchased a different aircraft, the wages of the pilots would differ as would the cost to push snow at CFB Cold Lake?

[DogOnPorch]

I did. Im the only fiscal conservative here on MLW, and Iv opposed the majority of big spending by our government both in terms of social and defense spending. Im also the only advocate here for both government and people trying to only spend money they have in hand, and the only consistant opponent of deficit financing, and the "magic money" system of economics.

Of course you are.

[DogOnPorch]

Define full on costing…………Are you suggesting if we purchased a different aircraft, the wages of the pilots would differ as would the cost to push snow at CFB Cold Lake?

Well they do have one less engine.

[dre]

Of course you are.

I objectively am, yes. You on the other hand are a garden variety borrow and spend Liberal. Youve fixated on this shiny object, and lets face it... You would cheer on this aquisition no matter WHAT it cost. All the same arguments youve made here over this 20 billion dollar purchase could be made if it was a 50 billion or 80 billion dollar purchase.

And once we have the plane, you will gleefully support its use as an instrument of global socialism and world policing.

Edited April 29, 2012 by dre

[bush_cheney2004]

Well they do have one less engine.

..and no more condoms in the pilot survival kits!

[DogOnPorch]

I objectively am, yes.

Yes, Khan. You are superior.

[Guest Derek L]

Well they do have one less engine.

Here's DND breakdown of the Acquisition cost:

Equipment Procurement

[DogOnPorch]

..and no more condoms in the pilot survival kits!

Is it time? Yes its time.

[punked]

Define full on costing…………Are you suggesting if we purchased a different aircraft, the wages of the pilots would differ as would the cost to push snow at CFB Cold Lake?

There are plenty of life cycle costs that have nothing to do with wages of the pilots. Sorry.

[punked]

Well they do have one less engine.

They have no engine according to our governments figures who keep saying 75 Million which is the price with out the engine. So you would wrong on that one.

[bush_cheney2004]

There are plenty of life cycle costs that have nothing to do with wages of the pilots. Sorry.

Show us the "life cycle costs" for the CBC.

[Guest Derek L]

There are plenty of life cycle costs that have nothing to do with wages of the pilots. Sorry.

Such as?

[DogOnPorch]

They have no engine according to our governments figures who keep saying 75 Million which is the price with out the engine. So you would wrong on that one.

Moron. The F-35 has one engine while the F-18 has two. Count 'em.

[punked]

Such as?

You think the only other money we will put into these planes after they are bought are the costs of the pilots salaries?

[DogOnPorch]

You think the only other money we will put into these planes after they are bought are the costs of the pilots salaries?

He's asking what those costs are.

[punked]

Moron. The F-35 has one engine while the F-18 has two. Count 'em.

Moron. The F-35 has no engine according to our governments figures. Maybe if they stop quoting the price of the plane with out the engine I'll stop pointing out how dumb it is to buy into a cost of a plane with no engine included.

[DogOnPorch]

Moron. The F-35 has no engine according to our governments figures. Maybe if they stop quoting the price of the plane with out the engine I'll stop pointing out how dumb it is to buy into a cost of a plane with no engine included.

I don't care what your Mr Harper says or does not say. But, I can count engines on aircraft.

[Guest Derek L]

You think the only other money we will put into these planes after they are bought are the costs of the pilots salaries?

I’m obviously not in tune, on military acquisitions or expenditures at Squadron level, as you are………please explain the other life cycle costs.

[waldo]

ah, yes... that imaginary "sweet spot", hey? Where is that "sweet spot" today? You know, the one predicated upon a contract signed by the Harper Conservatives... oh, wait... what contract? So, you don't expect any ongoing LRIP development costs or costs associated with managing "B" & "C" versions within JSF to be passed on down to JSF partners? Is there something you can point to that supports such a presumed Canadian isolation to continued cost increases due to ongoing development, ongoing testing, ongoing re-design/re-development/re-testing?

Sure, Mr Williams MoU and the larger framework of the program. How many "B" and "C" versions are we purchasing again?

are you certain... can you quote the specifics from the MOU to support your assertion? Why are the AG and the PBO speaking of increased costs in line with increasing U.S. GAO costs? You're either saying the AG/PBO don't understand/recognize your asserted MOU price-protections... or increasing U.S. GAO costs have nothing to do with ongoing and increasing F-35 development costs. Which is it... or is it something else? My understanding was that the MOU... supposedly... meant that F-35 purchases via the MOU were exempt from "foreign military fees", were exempt from "development recovery costs"... costs that would be applied to purchases by non-JSF partner nations.

[Guest Derek L]

Moron. The F-35 has no engine according to our governments figures. Maybe if they stop quoting the price of the plane with out the engine I'll stop pointing out how dumb it is to buy into a cost of a plane with no engine included.

DND's F-35

What's $5.58 billion divided by 65 (aircraft)=?

[punked]

DND's F-35

What's $5.58 billion divided by 65 (aircraft)=?

Geee I wonder which set of books this link is from.

[Guest Derek L]

are you certain... can you quote the specifics from the MOU to support your assertion? Why are the AG and the PBO speaking of increased costs in line with increasing U.S. GAO costs? You're either saying the AG/PBO don't understand/recognize your asserted MOU price-protections... or increasing U.S. GAO costs have nothing to do with ongoing and increasing F-35 development costs. Which is it... or is it something else? My understanding was that the MOU... supposedly... meant that F-35 purchases via the MOU were exempt from "foreign military fees", were exempt from "development recovery costs"... costs that would be applied to purchases by non-JSF partner nations.

Have you stopped beating your wife?

Where in the MoU framework does it state, outside of monies already spent during the initial develop phase ten years ago, that we’ll pay for additional costs of development? And base a purchase on said costs, including two other versions of aircraft that we’re not buying?

[Guest Derek L]

Geee I wonder which set of books this link is from.

One of the few sources that has total access to the program information, unlike bloggers or the MSM.