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

Derek 2.0 · July 23, 2014

Quite applicable in the broader context of defense development and cost containment . A lot of our dear members do not know just how troubled the MBT70 and XM1 main battle tanks programs were back when West Germany and the Soviets still existed. Chrysler and later GD had one helluva time with criticism about the weight, turbine engine, and high fuel consumption. West Germany and the U.S. canceled the MBT-70 program outright, leading to the Leopard 2 and Abrams.

Certainly and ironically, several of the F-35’s most vocal critics in the press today, chastised the resulting Abrams tank back then……

There are limits to what Congress will tolerate for defense program excesses, and the F-35 has not reached the relative levels seen for these MBT programs back in the 1970's. Ditto A-12 Avenger II...canceled because of severe program issues and unbounded cost growth.

I still think the A-12 was a victim of the times, and if it wasn’t fore the eventual Cold War draw down, we’d see the Dorito aboard carriers today…..None the less, there have been far more successful developments then abject failures.

On Guard for Thee · July 23, 2014

And if I recall correctly there was something or other about that at the top of the page.

Derek 2.0 · July 23, 2014

naval related procurement has it's own thread (several, in fact... you probably started them)... perhaps you should start a tank related thread, possibly expanding it more broadly to encompass your other "(non-aviation flights of fancy". This thread has an aviation focus, one particularly dedicated to the F-35, with natural extensions to include supposed other planes being short-listed as candidates for Canada's replacement/next, uhhh... 'bomb truck'!

As I said, if you’re not interested in a given exchange, don’t partake……..If you want to further discuss something more focused, post something and if others are interested, they will take part in your avenue of discussion…….some are more then capable of following differing sub-themes.........If you feel left out or slighted (for whatever reason) over the varying depths of this discussion, by all means report it in an attempt to stifle discourse amongst differing members……..

Derek 2.0 · July 23, 2014

Here we go again.

U boys have funb now ya hear

We intend to, fore entertainment and discourse is the purpose of this website……….If you feel the contributions to this forum that I (or any other members) make infuriating or cluttering your ability to converse with others, as directed by the site moderator, there is an ignore feature:

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=usercp&tab=core&area=ignoredusers

waldo · July 23, 2014

As I said, if you’re not interested in a given exchange, don’t partake……..If you want to further discuss something more focused, post something and if others are interested, they will take part in your avenue of discussion…….some are more then capable of following differing sub-themes.........If you feel left out or slighted (for whatever reason) over the varying depths of this discussion, by all means report it in an attempt to stifle discourse amongst differing members……..

it's nothing more than thread focus versus thread drift/derail.

Derek 2.0 · July 23, 2014

it's nothing more than thread focus versus thread drift/derail.

A subjective perspective……..As I indicated to the OGFT:

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=usercp&tab=core&area=ignoredusers

waldo · July 23, 2014

A subjective perspective……..As I indicated to the OGFT:

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=usercp&tab=core&area=ignoredusers

so you would rather continue to, now purposely given your continued obstinance in this matter, derail this thread away from it's purpose in focusing on the F-35 and Canada's related procurement? You're now telling 2 other members who have been somewhat active in this thread... who became quite inactive in this thread, given its derail... to ignore you. That you're hell bent to purposely continue derailing this thread. Have I captured that accurately?

bush_cheney2004 · July 23, 2014

USMC training squadron receives first F-35B:

BEAUFORT, S.C. - The first F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter assigned to Marine Fighter Attack Training Squadron 501(VMFAT-501) arrived at Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, July 17. The aircraft is the first to join VMFAT-501 at MCAS Beaufort since relocating from Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. late last week.

http://www.wsav.com/story/26048468/first-f-35b-arrives-at-marine-corps-air-station

http://www.islandpacket.com/2014/07/17/3215305/mcas-beauforts-first-f-35b-arrives.html

On Guard for Thee · July 23, 2014

Tanks

USMC training squadron receives first F-35B:

BEAUFORT, S.C. - The first F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter assigned to Marine Fighter Attack Training Squadron 501(VMFAT-501) arrived at Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, July 17. The aircraft is the first to join VMFAT-501 at MCAS Beaufort since relocating from Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. late last week.

http://www.wsav.com/story/26048468/first-f-35b-arrives-at-marine-corps-air-station

http://www.islandpacket.com/2014/07/17/3215305/mcas-beauforts-first-f-35b-arrives.html

But what if they had to go up into Canada and be near the Beaufort Sea? It's cold there most of the time. The F 35 doesn't seem to like that when it's not working. And then when it is working it seems to get too hot. Get the marshmellows out.

Derek 2.0 · July 23, 2014

so you would rather continue to, now purposely given your continued obstinance in this matter, derail this thread away from it's purpose in focusing on the F-35 and Canada's related procurement? You're now telling 2 other members who have been somewhat active in this thread... who became quite inactive in this thread, given its derail... to ignore you. That you're hell bent to purposely continue derailing this thread. Have I captured that accurately?

As I said, one persons “derail” is another persons “wider” and more “encompassing” discussion………As mentioned, clearly a subjective point of view…………

If said members feel my contributions and discourse (with other members) clutters and obstructs their ability to discuss the F-35 in a manner that they feel more comfortable and confined……..I see no other alternative for them, then to follow the direction of the moderator:

Ignore & report

waldo · July 23, 2014

Back on topic it is then:

after raised concerns you yourself acknowledged you were off topic. And now... you seem to want to keep digging your derail hole... deeper. Go figure.

Derek 2.0 · July 23, 2014

USMC training squadron receives first F-35B:

BEAUFORT, S.C. - The first F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter assigned to Marine Fighter Attack Training Squadron 501(VMFAT-501) arrived at Marine Corps Air Station Beaufort, July 17. The aircraft is the first to join VMFAT-501 at MCAS Beaufort since relocating from Eglin Air Force Base, Fla. late last week.

http://www.wsav.com/story/26048468/first-f-35b-arrives-at-marine-corps-air-station

http://www.islandpacket.com/2014/07/17/3215305/mcas-beauforts-first-f-35b-arrives.html

Another milestone, so now both coasts have an active Marine squadron assigned that has turned in their legacy Hornets (of the same vintage as ours) for F-35Bs and will become deployable next year……….The Great Santini would be proud…..

Also, I’ve come to understand that the F-35C will began sea trials in the next few months aboard the Nimitz….What’s not certain is if the CARQUALS will take place up here in the Pacific Northwest……..

Edited July 23, 2014 by Derek 2.0

bush_cheney2004 · July 23, 2014

As I said, one persons “derail” is another persons “wider” and more “encompassing” discussion………As mentioned, clearly a subjective point of view…………

Agreed...once these very complainers broadened the discussion to F-35 variants that Canada will never buy along with the procurement decisions and options of other nations, all bets are off. It's not like the U.S. panics over budgets and cost because of Canada's National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy.

waldo · July 23, 2014

But what if they had to go up into Canada and be near the Beaufort Sea? It's cold there most of the time. The F 35 doesn't seem to like that when it's not working. And then when it is working it seems to get too hot. Get the marshmellows out.

that USMC reference must be one of those claimed "operational" F-35s... that can't actually do anything... yet.

Derek 2.0 · July 23, 2014

Agreed...once these very complainers broadened the discussion to F-35 variants that Canada will never buy along with the procurement decisions and options of other nations, all bets are off. It's not like the U.S. panics over budgets and cost because of Canada's National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy.

And of course the irony is not lost with their derailment of the alleged and in question derailment.

bush_cheney2004 · July 23, 2014

Another milestone, so now both coasts have an active Marine squadron assigned that has turned in their legacy Hornets (of the same vintage as ours) for F-35Bs and will become operational next year……….The Great Santini would be proud…..

Right....F/A-18 C/Ds that are arguably more capable than part of Canada's existing CF-18 fleet, will be turned in for the F-35B. Three active and two training squadrons will be at MCAS Beaufort.

waldo · July 23, 2014

Agreed...once these very complainers broadened the discussion to F-35 variants that Canada will never buy along with the procurement decisions and options of other nations, all bets are off. It's not like the U.S. panics over budgets and cost because of Canada's National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy.

when is trying to bring a thread back on track... complaining? This is a thread about Canada's procurement - what you claim the U.S. panics about has no relevance in that regard. All F-35 variants are relevant to any discussion on Canadian F-35 procurement... this has been noted many times over, particularly in regard to commonality within and across variants and the impact on procurement decisions of respective variants to the program, at large. What does "Canada's National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy" have to do with this thread?

Derek 2.0 · July 23, 2014

that USMC reference must be one of those claimed "operational" F-35s... that can't actually do anything... yet.

I wouldn’t call the ongoing conversion of a squadrons worth of Hornets pilots nothing……perhaps you have differing standards and a focused opinion on how the Marines conduct both flight and conversion training?

bush_cheney2004 · July 23, 2014

I wouldn’t call the ongoing conversion of a squadrons worth of Hornets pilots nothing……perhaps you have differing standards and a focused opinion on how the Marines conduct both flight and conversion training?

Indeed....these neophytes would have us believe that new tactical aircraft go straight from the paint booth to forward deployed squadrons like a new Chevy pickup truck.

waldo · July 23, 2014

I wouldn’t call the ongoing conversion of a squadrons worth of Hornets pilots nothing……perhaps you have differing standards and a focused opinion on how the Marines conduct both flight and conversion training?

how many LRIPs to go? What can that current plane actually do?

Derek 2.0 · July 23, 2014

Right....F/A-18 C/Ds that are arguably more capable than part of Canada's existing CF-18 fleet, will be turned in for the F-35B. Three active and two training squadrons will be at MCAS Beaufort.

Actually the bulk of the transitioning Marine Hornets are A/Bs, a testament to the center barrel upgrade and disbanding of several active squadrons (VMAF-332 & VMAF-134) and reshuffling the deck…….And why the F-35B (and some F-35Cs) will replace Hornets and Prowlers prior to that Harriers….......

The West Coast squadron is slated to rotate to Japan once deemed deployable.

Derek 2.0 · July 23, 2014

how many LRIPs to go? What can that current plane actually do?

As mentioned, conduct the conversion of Hornet pilots to the F-35B currently…….They will be deployable, like the Hornets they replaced, next year……..

Derek 2.0 · July 23, 2014

Indeed....these neophytes would have us believe that new tactical aircraft go straight from the paint booth to forward deployed squadrons like a new Chevy pickup truck.

Exactly......Any conversion between types, for an entire squadron, will take time…..and not to be forgotten, the non-commissioned maintainers that actually run the squadron.

bush_cheney2004 · July 23, 2014

Exactly......Any conversion between types, for an entire squadron, will take time…..and not to be forgotten, the non-commissioned maintainers that actually run the squadron.

It's a big challenge from basic supply system logistics to depot repair to flight line maintenance, often while keeping parallel support for existing aircraft. Canada is watching all this activity for the U.S. and other partners...the clock is ticking.

waldo · July 23, 2014

As mentioned, conduct the conversion of Hornet pilots to the F-35B currently…….They will be deployable, like the Hornets they replaced, next year……..

which is simply you avoiding the question as to what the plane is actually capable of today? That trumped up USMC IOC date is meaningless in terms of the existing problems, the numerous LRIPs still to go, retrofits to bring current, etc.. Notwithstanding, it presumes on no additional compounding problems surface - ain't concurrency a biatch?

I think I asked you recently what deployable actually meant in terms of so-called "combat ready"... I do believe you ignored that question. Probably no sense in me asking it again, right?