F-35 Purchase Cancelled; CF-18 replacement process begins

[cybercoma]

I'm misunderstanding the life cycle costs....more like the rest of the country is misunderstanding the whole concept as well.That includes the media....which repeatily tout the cost for new F-35 is over 44 bil....when in reality the total cost to put CF-35 on our airforce bases is 9 bil, that is the additional cost to tax payers( payable to lockmart).....the O&M portion comes out of DND ann budget and would be the same if we operated F-18 or F-35 or any other modern jet fighter. ( which includes wages for pilots, maint crew, fuel etc etc) and is based over a 42 year space....and while this end all figure is a nice to know for planning purpose, it Has nothing to do with the intial purchase of these fighters.....it is the cost of having Fighter Aircraft.

This is all correct and I take issue with the media not properly describing the figures that they're reporting. The thing is you say that the ongoing O&M would be the same regardless of the fighters, while true, the point is that the ongoing costs would be different if we decided not to have fighter jets at all. A stupid position to be sure, but the point is that buying any fighters is committing long-term finances to their operation and maintenance. The decision about which fighter to buy is beyond just that. It's about the entire air force and what kind of military we want to have. Do we expand it? Do we keep it the same? Do we downsize and focus on something else instead? These are the political decision at hand. So the ongoing costs are not certain. They're only certain if we maintain what we have. Those costs could go up if we buy more jets. They could go down if we buy less. Otherwise they will stay the same.

As i stated before the life cycle costs are being mis represented and are being touted as the price of the contract and project....

Yes they are, but that's a problem with reporting. It doesn't take away from the fact that Parliamentarians asked for these costs so they could consider and debate the ongoing costs of the DND.

Parliment and treasury know exactly the break down of DND budget, of each piece of equipment DND owns. and it is required to know how much over the life cycle , but it is not the cost of this project....O&M costs are already captured, such as pilots& maint crew wages....fuel costs, etc etc these expenses are already taken into account yearly.....

That was precisely the problem. Parliament asked for those costs. They wanted to know how much Canadians were spending. The Conservatives have those numbers, but refused to release them. They don't have the luxury of withholding financial information from our parliamentary representatives. That's what the concept of responsible government is about. While the reporting of the costs is misleading, it's up to the government to clearly correct those misinterpretations. Instead, they went on a campaign to completely deny them, which makes them look like they have something to hide even though they don't. They could have and in my opinion should have said, "These are the costs over the life of the equipment. It's necessary to have this many jets for reasons x, y, and z." They didn't do that though. They also tried fudging the numbers by changing the length of the lifecycle and other shady misleading political nonsense.

You know, this comes down to a fundamental problem with politics in general. I really wish all the parties would just put their cards on the table and take a stand for what they believe. Instead, they try to mislead the public into voting for them with double-talk and spin. You want x number of jets for the next x years. Then come out and say it and defend your position as to why they're necessary. If the NDP or opposition thinks we don't need those jets, then explain why we don't need them and offer a clear alternative. Then let the voters decide. Instead we get this misleading crap about this is "how much it costs to buy the jets," when most people don't think of lifecycle O&M as the cost of buying something. But you also have the Conservatives on the other side, claiming that the life of the vehicles is a hell of a lot shorter than what's generally accepted accounting for these things. Everyone should use the same numbers and make it clear what they're talking about and let the voters pick sides, but that's wishful thinking.

Below is link discribes everything that everyone needs to know about pricing and costs for this project....Yes it is from DND

The auditors have already criticized the DND's numbers. They're interest is in getting this equipment at all costs. I can't trust them anymore than I can trust the politicians on the issue.

[Moonlight Graham]

I'm impressed there's 2000+ replies in this thread and it's still on-topic. Good job folks!

[Army Guy]

This is all correct and I take issue with the media not properly describing the figures that they're reporting. The thing is you say that the ongoing O&M would be the same regardless of the fighters, while true, the point is that the ongoing costs would be different if we decided not to have fighter jets at all. A stupid position to be sure, but the point is that buying any fighters is committing long-term finances to their operation and maintenance.

Hence why i said they are being accounted for twice, once in the media "as they have said this is what it is going to cost Taxpayers to purchase F-35's, However when we cut the check to Lockmart is for the 9 bil no more or less.....the other 35 bil will come out of DND Ann budget over the 42 year period....which is really under a bil a year....

Canada as a nation does have that choice NOT to have a fighter, and like you said it would be a retarded choice....it would put the other elements at grave risk...Buying anything has a long term commitment in regards to O&M costs...But adding these costs to the actually cost of the program is nuts....

The decision about which fighter to buy is beyond just that. It's about the entire air force and what kind of military we want to have. Do we expand it? Do we keep it the same? Do we downsize and focus on something else instead? These are the political decision at hand. So the ongoing costs are not certain. They're only certain if we maintain what we have. Those costs could go up if we buy more jets. They could go down if we buy less. Otherwise they will stay the same.

Every Dept can change in a blink of an eye, including DND. that being said is there are really 3 basic componets to a military, and the defense of a nation, Ships, Fighters, and ground troops....our miltary has already been whittled to the bone, but not funding one of those basic componets and you might as well colaspe the whole organization....and pray that someone else fills that role.

Any purchase by the government is dictated by COST, sure their is the little details that will be looked at such as need, defense agreements, etc...but in the end it all comes down to money....and then having a politician with the will to spend it....

That was precisely the problem. Parliament asked for those costs. They wanted to know how much Canadians were spending. The Conservatives have those numbers, but refused to release them. They don't have the luxury of withholding financial information from our parliamentary representatives. That's what the concept of responsible government is about.

Thats a crock of shit, every year DND lets treasury know what it's costs are going to be every year.....nothing changes in DND....Treasury has access to all the files or so i'd hope....they know what our expenditures are before DND does.....The cons knew exactly what would happen if they provided that info.....and they were right....the Canadian public believes that this F-35 project is going to cost 44 plus bil dollars and the Canadian public now have sticker shock....all they hear now is LA la la la la....

The auditors have already criticized the DND's numbers. They're interest is in getting this equipment at all costs. I can't trust them anymore than I can trust the politicians on the issue.

DND's numbers are not that far off the company who provided the intial report....in fact they are greater because DND added some things that were not counted....

And you right DND is concentrating on getting this equipment as they have another agenda, bringing Sailors , Airmen, and grunts home to their families....having the best equipment saves lives....WOW i could see it if they got a bonus for spending the most, or pocketed the difference ....those cases i'd say ya, throw their asses in jail....but getting the best equipment for your troops is not a reason not to trust them.....I don't want the public deciding what equipment i need to do my job.....instead the public should be listening to what DND has to say.....and telling DND you have X to spend this year.....

[PIK]

Thanks to the media another project screwed up.

[Smallc]

That's about right in this case...on the other hand, it doesn't appear that the Harper government can explain their way out of a paper bag.

[On Guard for Thee]

Thanks to the media another project screwed up.

I'm sure Harper would like to do the same thing. All the media's fault. Ho Ho

[Army Guy]

That's about right in this case...on the other hand, it doesn't appear that the Harper government can explain their way out of a paper bag.

I agree 100 % , they and DND did little to set the record right.

[Derek 2.0]

That's about right in this case...on the other hand, it doesn't appear that the Harper government can explain their way out of a paper bag.

Simply put, like the Liberals and NDP, the current Government doesn’t fully understand the accounting minutia from within the puzzle factory that is the Department of National Defence……

If there are failings in selling the program, both within Canada and the partner nations, that is the “fault” of both Lockheed and the respective nation’s militaries…

[kimmy]

The new, improved Derek?!

-k

[Derek 2.0]

I know one country has backed out of the deal. But I cannot find it...

Not a single member has left the program…….but various nations have joined.

Italy and the UK backed out of acquiring the F-35B variant. So the countries that are involved are reducing the numbers they are able to afford because of the overruns in costs of this technologically problematic aircraft.

No they didn’t…..too add, both nations have (or are currently building) aircraft carriers tailored to the F-35B.

[Derek 2.0]

The new, improved Derek?!

-k

10 feet taller and factory equipped with a plate carrier

[Derek 2.0]

DND's numbers are not that far off the company who provided the intial report....in fact they are greater because DND added some things that were not counted....

And you right DND is concentrating on getting this equipment as they have another agenda, bringing Sailors , Airmen, and grunts home to their families....having the best equipment saves lives....WOW i could see it if they got a bonus for spending the most, or pocketed the difference ....those cases i'd say ya, throw their asses in jail....but getting the best equipment for your troops is not a reason not to trust them.....I don't want the public deciding what equipment i need to do my job.....instead the public should be listening to what DND has to say.....and telling DND you have X to spend this year.....

This is very true, the stars numbers are starting to align.

And yes, the partner nations air forces, navies and marines understand that going forward into this century, the attributes the F-35 brings to the table (stealth, synergies within net-centric warfare etc) will make legacy aircraft akin to Victorian era infantry adorned in colourful uniforms and relying upon message runners to communicate between formations.

Edited May 10, 2014 by Derek 2.0

[Derek 2.0]

Not likely, as the Boeing supplier base for long lead items is shutting down now for Super Hornet production. They may be able to stretch production barely into 2017 if slowed to a snail's pace. Canada always waits until very late in the game, and this has removed options from the table.

Yes indeed…..as will the F-15 line, coupled with LockMart shutting down the F-16 line very soon.

[Derek 2.0]

Well one of th4 main problems is LockMart can't provide by the time we need. Too many "back to the drawing board" items.

That’s not true. Lockheed can start deliveries of our initial tranche of aircraft within three years of us signing the contract.

[Derek 2.0]

Great...let the political side-show continue as long as anybody wants. But "at the end of the day", Canada will procure the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

Yup.

[On Guard for Thee]

That’s not true. Lockheed can start deliveries of our initial tranche of aircraft within three years of us signing the contract.

What are they 7 years behind sked and how many billions over budget? I doubt Canadian taxpayers are that dumb. Plus Harper will be long gone before they could ever hopt to deliver one.

[Derek 2.0]

What are they 7 years behind sked and how many billions over budget? I doubt Canadian taxpayers are that dumb. Plus Harper will be long gone before they could ever hopt to deliver one.

The “B” and “A” have entered (training) squadron service with the USAF and the Marines, displacing Hornets (of the same vintage or newer then ours), Harriers and F-16s.

As to the current government “being gone”, I doubt it, but none the less, would you suggest that a hypothetical Trudeau Liberal Government won’t select the F-35?

[On Guard for Thee]

The “B” and “A” have entered (training) squadron service with the USAF and the Marines, displacing Hornets (of the same vintage or newer then ours), Harriers and F-16s.

As to the current government “being gone”, I doubt it, but none the less, would you suggest that a hypothetical Trudeau Liberal Government won’t select the F-35?

I certainly hope they won't. We don't need what it purports to provide, and we don't need somethiong pilots are afraid of. Harper dug himself a hole and now he just hope it goes away. But he seems to be good at digging holes.

[Derek 2.0]

I certainly hope they won't. We don't need what it purports to provide, and we don't need somethiong pilots are afraid of. Harper dug himself a hole and now he just hope it goes away. But he seems to be good at digging holes.

What pilots are afraid of it?

As to any conjured “Harper dug holes”, our involvement with the JSF program begin during the Chrétien era.

[On Guard for Thee]

What pilots are afraid of it?

As to any conjured “Harper dug holes”, our involvement with the JSF program begin during the Chrétien era.

Ah American pilots. And I know when it started and it seemed a fair idea at the time. (Not because I'm particularly a Chretien fan) get all the potential buyers on board to share some of the development costs, then let them share in the proceeds of production contracts. Not a bad plan. It just fell apart so badly. One problem is Harper allowed the DND a basic carte blanche to go shopping for a new fighter, and that is tantamount to handing your 16 year old a blank check to go get whatever car he wants nowe he has a drivers license. Not such a good idea.

[Derek 2.0]

Ah American pilots.

What American pilots?

And I know when it started and it seemed a fair idea at the time. (Not because I'm particularly a Chretien fan) get all the potential buyers on board to share some of the development costs, then let them share in the proceeds of production contracts. Not a bad plan. It just fell apart so badly.

The F-35 program? Then why have no members left and new nations have joined and others are inching towards the program? Seems odd for a program that you claim has "fallen apart".

One problem is Harper allowed the DND a basic carte blanche to go shopping for a new fighter, and that is tantamount to handing your 16 year old a blank check to go get whatever car he wants nowe he has a drivers license. Not such a good idea.

Again, the Canadian involvement in the program began under Chrétien and was continued by both the Martin and Harper Governments.

With your analogy, that I take exception to, are you suggesting that the RCAF isn’t capable of defining the requirements of a modern fighter force, to carry out it’s mandate instilled by the elected Government?

Edited May 10, 2014 by Derek 2.0

[On Guard for Thee]

What American pilots?

The F-35 program? Then why have no members left and new nations have joined and others are inching towards the program? Seems odd for a program that you claim has "fallen apart".

Again, the Canadian involvement in the program began under Chrétien and was continued by both the Martin and Harper Governments.

With your analogy, that I take exception to, are you suggesting that the RCAF isn’t capable of defining the requirements of a modern fighter force, to carry out it’s mandate instilled by the elected Government?

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/03/06/f-35-design-problems-make-night-flying-impossible-increase-risk-of-being-shot-down-u-s-pilots-warn/

[Derek 2.0]

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/03/06/f-35-design-problems-make-night-flying-impossible-increase-risk-of-being-shot-down-u-s-pilots-warn/

"Make night flying impossible"........strange:

[On Guard for Thee]

Superhornet does all we need, and we have been flying them for years. Nobody's nervous, and the cost savings!

What more do you need to know?

[Derek 2.0]

Superhornet does all we need, and we have been flying them for years.

Aside from a few exchanges with the USN, we haven’t been flying the Super Hornet…..at all.

Of course, the more apt question, would the Super Hornet meet requirements once it’s retired by the USN and RAAF in the early 2030s and we still have a requirement for a modern fighter out to the 2050s.......simply put, it won't.

Nobody's nervous, and the cost savings! What more do you need to know?

Who is nervous? All the respective F-35 user's armed forces are awaiting both the improved and in many cases, completely new capabilities that the F-35 will bring to the table for their force structures.