bush_cheney2004 Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 Well, the first half of this year will be an interesting one. Those Countries could just as quickly run for the hills if any more setbacks occur. Possibly, but the opposite has been the case despite numerous program setbacks. F-35 is winning procurements far more than losing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris-b-crunch Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 Possibly, but the opposite has been the case despite numerous program setbacks. F-35 is winning procurements far more than losing. From what I understand, that's largely because Countries have invested in it and instead of taking losses, they will receive the first few aircraft. That is again, assuming the F-35 can make a case for itself and enter combat testing sometime before the mid-point of this year. There is all kinds of skepticism around the F-35 and beyond a few small orders to start, sustainability is still a big question mark. Countries can still back out of the larger orders and will gladly eat a total loss if it suffers any more setbacks. The current order info doesn't make the F-35 anything close to a solid bet. It just makes it a loss that Countries aren't willing to accept financially yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris-b-crunch Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 Hardly a ringing endorsement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 F-35 is also winning contracts from non JSF program partners. The only "solid bet" is to eat cancellation fees a la EH-101. Sea Kings forever ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris-b-crunch Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 F-35 is also winning contracts from non JSF program partners. The only "solid bet" is to eat cancellation fees a la EH-101. Sea Kings forever ! You forgot the current F up on helicopter procurement as well lol And those non member nations are all skeptical as well. Like I say, I'll happy take cancellation fees now to avoid a very, very expensive bigger loss down the road when this thing's maneuverability proves inferior and it says it's final good bye. Assuming more issues don't nix it first. I'll happily eat some penalties to see the F-35 actually earn it's orders by proving it is superior to the Gripen, Rafale, Eurofighter, Super Hornet and SU-35 even, in open competition. Buying the F-35 could be an error that will forever dwarf the helicopter procurement screw up and set us back financially for decades. Once proven, buy it. Until then, I've seen nothing aside from Lockheed-Martin's unconvincing sales pitch and fear of open competition to make me think this purchase is worthwhile Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 (edited) ...Buying the F-35 could be an error that will forever dwarf the helicopter procurement screw up and set us back financially for decades. Once proven, buy it. Until then, I've seen nothing aside from Lockheed-Martin's unconvincing sales pitch and fear of open competition to make me think this purchase is worthwhile Canada's ruling government and DND have already determined that an "open competition" would be just an expensive waste of time. Canadian jobs from program offsets are already in place. This is a done deal..... Edited January 7, 2015 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris-b-crunch Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 Canada's ruling government and DND have already determined that an "open competition" would be just an expensive waste of time. Canadian jobs from program offsets are already in place. This is a done deal..... I'd heard the opposite in December. Nothing has been set in stone yet. That's not to say the Cons won't go ahead full steam with it anyways but until it's 100% certain, I'll keep my mind open. If we end up with it, well, I have plans to leave this Country anyways at some point, hence why I'm back in school. Need a better education to do so. Canada is becoming more and more like United States 2.0 and that's sickening and scary. And I'm not an immigrant. I have roots that pre-date confederation here. This Country get's more and more pathetic by the year and looking at the election, Harper or Trudeau as Mulcair is likely a wasted vote. So we lose regardless, just like with the Provincial election. No hope. Would love to be wrong, but Canada just keeps getting worse. And this isn't anger at your debate, lol, in all likelihood, we are on the hook for this. you made some excellent points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthere Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 I'd heard the opposite in December. Nothing has been set in stone yet. That's not to say the Cons won't go ahead full steam with it anyways but until it's 100% certain, I'll keep my mind open. If we end up with it, well, I have plans to leave this Country anyways at some point, hence why I'm back in school. Need a better education to do so. Canada is becoming more and more like United States 2.0 and that's sickening and scary. And I'm not an immigrant. I have roots that pre-date confederation here. This Country get's more and more pathetic by the year and looking at the election, Harper or Trudeau as Mulcair is likely a wasted vote. So we lose regardless, just like with the Provincial election. No hope. Would love to be wrong, but Canada just keeps getting worse. And this isn't anger at your debate, lol, in all likelihood, we are on the hook for this. you made some excellent points. Interesting that you continue to accept a heavily subsidized education from a country you hate. Have a nice trip. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 The F-35 procurement is only a small part of any larger political discussion about Canada and foreign/domestic policies. The F-18 E/F/G are also very American and would be procured/used as strike fighters/trainers/ECM in the same way as the F-35. Canada also buys medium and heavy lift aircraft from identical manufacturers in the USA. Directed attack munitions, dumb bombs, missiles, etc. all from Uncle Sam....regardless of the ruling party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris-b-crunch Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 Interesting that you continue to accept a heavily subsidized education from a country you hate. Have a nice trip. Heavily subsidized? The high cost of tuition tells me otherwise lol. I've had several generations of family pay tax here. And this Government and it's people who support contracts like the F-35 keep screwing me over so no guilt here. I'll happily take that education and dip if things don't change. My choice and I've earned it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris-b-crunch Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 Canada has a shitload of potential that never gets seen. We could be a world leader in Green Energy, proper. We could be a beacon of how to properly control inequality and keep a healthy middle class and lower class that spends and helps create the demand we need, properly tax corporations and use the extras to fund infrastructure and help create jobs. I want Canada to flourish, but from what I'm seeing, that ain't happening any time soon. And me leaving isn't set in stone. I would love to get into Parliament at some level and actually try to change things. Again, need an education and this supposedly heavily subsidized education system is going to be tough to actually fully afford to get through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris-b-crunch Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 Anyways, the F-35 is just another example of the idiocy this Country demos. I'm off to find some other subjects because beyond this one, there are so many things that need changing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 Canada has a shitload of potential that never gets seen. We could be a world leader in Green Energy, proper. We could be a beacon of how to properly control inequality and keep a healthy middle class and lower class that spends and helps create the demand we need, properly tax corporations and use the extras to fund infrastructure and help create jobs. Sure...but Canada has purposely and directly pursued foreign investment and ownership as a strategy to offset a lack of domestic capital. This has been true for a very long time going back to the beginning of confederation. Can't have it both ways.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris-b-crunch Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 Sure...but Canada has purposely and directly pursued foreign investment and ownership as a strategy to offset a lack of domestic capital. This has been true for a very long time going back to the beginning of confederation. Can't have it both ways.... Foreign investment isn't a bad thing, nor is ownership. But the way we've been doing it the past while is just plain wrong. Plus, it isn't like we can't change things. Personally, I'd love to see Canada try and join with BRICS. Sadly we'd end up being cannon fodder to the U.S. if we did and I doubt we'd be welcomed in. So what's your idea to actually improve this economy? And if it's the "nobody is suffering really"mindset please spare me lol I'm genuinely curious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 Let's see now, slightly over $160 million apiece and you can't even fire the guns? Kinda gives a whole new meaning to the old saying about "Rest in Peace" which is what this turkey ought to do. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11319455/F-35-stealth-jet-will-not-be-able-to-fire-its-guns-until-2019.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris-b-crunch Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/f-35-purchase-cost-could-rise-by-1b-to-replace-lost-aircraft-1.2868894 http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/new-fighter-jet-options-mean-ottawa-could-avoid-buying-f-35s/article22036016/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 Foreign investment and ownership carries additional burdens and loss of autonomy. Canada left the UK/Euro sphere to join the U.S. because it was rejected economically and culturally. When faced with limited options and choices, it was not a bad idea to integrate with the largest and growing economy on the planet just across the border, instead of longing for love from across an ocean. World events over the past 100 years cemented the relationship...good or bad. Canadians enjoy a high standard of living and social services that draw the attention of emigres around the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 Foreign investment is fine, but still, for $161 million I want to be able to fire a gun at something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris-b-crunch Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 Foreign investment is fine, but still, for $161 million I want to be able to fire a gun at something. I was so happy to read that article. I still have hopes the F-35 will fail. America needs that slap in the mouth and we don't need that headache. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted January 7, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 (edited) So once attacked, the South Koreans would just put together a nuclear arsenal...........but they don't need to, because they fall under the American nuclear umbrella........I thought you the South Koreans could take care of themselves? They can, and the only reason they don't have a nuclear arsenal is because the Americans actively persuade them not to. What is the number of artillery pieces able hit Seoul, from behind the DMZ? And how do you know that 25% of the North's artillery shells are duds..........My god, you seem better informed than Western intelligence services!!! My god, maybe it's just that you don't actually have any clue what western intelligence knows. As for how many pieces can hit Seoul, it's generally estimated at less than a thousand, with the doctrine being that around 25% of them are held in reserve. These guns would be spread across the DMZ line, many of them out of range of Seoul, although greater concentrations likely in range. In terms of dud rates, the Yeongpyong Do island shelling incident saw only ~75/100 actually explode...a testament to North Korean expertise. I never suggested the North could "carpet bomb" Seoul.......they don't need too. You brought up the Allied bombing campaigns as valid comparisons. They weren't, since carpet bombing yields entirely different results, but whatever you say! During the Second World, a single B-17 could drop on a Germany city upwards of 10000 lbs of HE bombs, versus a typical artillery piece, with a sustained rate of fire of anywhere between 30-50 rounds an hour.......Now using the low end estimate of 30 rounds per hour, and the weight of a NATO 155mm shell (I don't know the weight or size of North Korean artillery) ~80 lbs we have: 30 x 80 lbs = 2400 lbs of ordinance an hour That's not how it works Derek, and any respectable armchair general with half a clue would know better. Larger and more concentrated ordinance magnifies the effect. Firing fifty 80 lb shells over an hour or two does not produce the same effect as a single 4000 lb high-capacity bomb. Look up why Hamburg and Dresden burned down, maybe a few quotes from Arthur Harris (heard of him?), and you'll start to understand. Right now, it's painfully obvious you don't. How do you know the North Koreans are incapable of maintaining a sustained bombardment for weeks, if not months? because it assumes that they have a near-endless supply of ammunition, that their air defense is impenetrable, that their thin-skinned supply convoys wouldn't be mangled, that their already-terrible logistic capacity wouldn't be targeted (roads, bridges, depots etc), that their artillery is immune to counter-fire and that the DMZ would be impenetrable along its entire length despite the North Koreans focusing their artillery on attacking civilian targets instead of military ones. All of this needs to be assumed when we know Pyonyang has trouble even feeding its people and keeping the lights on. Likewise, what do South Koreans have, in their arsenal capable of counter-battery fire against North Korean artillery, buried in hardened positions, likewise, how does unprepared South Korean artillery defend against counter-battery fire from the North? Unprepared!? What? They've had 50 years to prepare, and they're much better equipped, trained and technically capable. They'd also have FAR better aerial and satellite recon, better counter-battery radar and despite your claims their artillery is not immune to counter-attack. Their hardened artillery defenses are far from invulnerable, which is why a large portion of their long-range artillery is mobile, most of it being this technical marvel: Edited January 7, 2015 by Moonbox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris-b-crunch Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 http://www.telegraph...until-2019.html No opinions on this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 I was so happy to read that article. I still have hopes the F-35 will fail. America needs that slap in the mouth and we don't need that headache. I don't understand this sentiment....America designs, builds, and cancels aircraft/projects for lunch. Go visit the boneyard at Davis-Montham AFB. Do you really think that canceling Canada's F-35 procurement will "slap" America "in the mouth", all while begging the same nation for approval of the Keystone XL pipeline ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris-b-crunch Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 http://www.telegraph...until-2019.html No opinions on this? I do love how the Pentagon is being ball squeezed by Lockheed-Martin and it's supporters Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris-b-crunch Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 I don't understand this sentiment....America designs, builds, and cancels aircraft/projects for lunch. Go visit the boneyard at Davis-Montham AFB. Do you really think that canceling Canada's F-35 procurement will "slap" America "in the mouth", all while begging the same nation for approval of the Keystone XL pipeline ? We should veto that Keystone pipeline and ship it elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 Let's see now, slightly over $160 million apiece and you can't even fire the guns? Kinda gives a whole new meaning to the old saying about "Rest in Peace" which is what this turkey ought to do. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11319455/F-35-stealth-jet-will-not-be-able-to-fire-its-guns-until-2019.html Your article is factually wrong........the F-35A's gun (and the gun pod for the B and C) will be integrated with the Block 3F software in Spring-Summer of 2017........unlike current types that use for air-to-air mode the aircraft's radar and avionics to process several dozen calculations based on both the aircraft/targets range, speed, deflection etc, then a ballistic computer for air-to-ground, the F-35 will incorporate both modes into its avionics aided by the aircraft's DAS.........making the F-35's guns, both mounted and podded, far more accurate then current types....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.