waldo Posted August 5, 2014 Report Share Posted August 5, 2014 Are you implying a level of “apparent corruption” or legal lobbying as defined by US laws associated with campaign financing? like I said, "just doing bidness, hey"! Clearly you have no qualms, no reservations, no ethical conflicts in how influence is metered out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 5, 2014 Report Share Posted August 5, 2014 like I said, "just doing bidness, hey"! Clearly you have no qualms, no reservations, no ethical conflicts in how influence is metered out. Not at all when within the law…….Lockheed’s competitors exert influence in much the same manner……In the end, the X-35 beat the (Boeing) X-32 on merit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 5, 2014 Report Share Posted August 5, 2014 Not as you suggest......... was the head guy out trying to secure sales offering volume pricing incentives... or not? Has been provided many time through the various threads over the years..... what a total BS response. If you're not prepared to cite the LockMart pricing that drives your uber-support for low(er) pricing then, again, the latest U.S. appropriations pricing must become the current reference benchmark. Step up or accept your current statements on pricing have no foundation. Is there a problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 5, 2014 Report Share Posted August 5, 2014 Not at all when within the law…….Lockheed’s competitors exert influence in much the same manner…… nice to read you have nothing more than "they all do it" to fall back on! How ethical! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 5, 2014 Report Share Posted August 5, 2014 was the head guy out trying to secure sales offering volume pricing incentives... or not? Under the framework of the program........not 2 for 1 as you suggested. what a total BS response. If you're not prepared to cite the LockMart pricing that drives your uber-support for low(er) pricing then, again, the latest U.S. appropriations pricing must become the current reference benchmark. Step up or accept your current statements on pricing have no foundation. Is there a problem? Canada, like Australia, is a tier III partner........The Americans are a tier I partner.........You can pick whatever benchmark you want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 5, 2014 Report Share Posted August 5, 2014 nice to read you have nothing more than "they all do it" to fall back on! How ethical! What's wrong if it's legal? Does the Green industry not partake in influence peddling lobbying? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 5, 2014 Report Share Posted August 5, 2014 Under the framework of the program........not 2 for 1 as you suggested. oh please! What does "under the framework of the program" mean? Actual sales are effectively non-existent. Hence the need to attempt to realize actual sales, actual contracts, actual monies changed hands. Hence the volume pricing incentive attempt to secure sales. Perhaps you can provide an update on whether or not he's been successful in securing any actual sales, hey? Canada, like Australia, is a tier III partner........The Americans are a tier I partner.........You can pick whatever benchmark you want. this is why discussing anything with you is a waste of time. You either resort to "it's been discussed in the past - go fetch" (whether it's actually been discussed or not, apparently, one is take/accept your claim in that regard)... or you come back with these kind of nonsense statements. Again, if you're going to reference LockMart pricing, cite it. Again, if you're going to fall-back to respective tier member pricing, provide your substantiation in that regard. Otherwise it's just your same ole cheerleading BS game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 5, 2014 Report Share Posted August 5, 2014 What's wrong if it's legal? Does the Green industry not partake in influence peddling lobbying? perhaps we could have some fun here... I'm not sure if it's simply your false bravado or you actually think any (other) industry comes close to the MIC lobbying efforts. Nice to read you attach "influence peddling" to your acceptance of F-35 lobbying! Well done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 5, 2014 Report Share Posted August 5, 2014 oh please! What does "under the framework of the program" mean? Actual sales are effectively non-existent. Hence the need to attempt to realize actual sales, actual contracts, actual monies changed hands. Hence the volume pricing incentive attempt to secure sales. Perhaps you can provide an update on whether or not he's been successful in securing any actual sales, hey? So called “actual sales” won’t take place until just prior to FRP begins……….So as to leverage economy of scales etc etc this is why discussing anything with you is a waste of time. You either resort to "it's been discussed in the past - go fetch" (whether it's actually been discussed or not, apparently, one is take/accept your claim in that regard)... or you come back with these kind of nonsense statements. Again, if you're going to reference LockMart pricing, cite it. Again, if you're going to fall-back to respective tier member pricing, provide your substantiation in that regard. Otherwise it's just your same ole cheerleading BS game. Both tier membership commitments and recent contracts have already been referenced and discussed………As I’ve said before, I feel no obligation to revisit several hundred pages of posts to retrieve citations from conversations that we’ve already had. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 5, 2014 Report Share Posted August 5, 2014 perhaps we could have some fun here... I'm not sure if it's simply your false bravado or you actually think any (other) industry comes close to the MIC lobbying efforts. Oil/energy must be a close number two.........Efforts simply follow the money and importance....... Perhaps the Greenies should take note... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 5, 2014 Report Share Posted August 5, 2014 So called actual sales wont take place until just prior to FRP begins.So as to leverage economy of scales etc etc nice buzzword bingo! That's the now standard response to no actual sales... which begs the question on why Bogdan is out trying to secure sales now for what you claim will only begin once full-rate production commences... years down the road. Sort of takes away from the hyped messaging coming from LockMart every time some supposed "commitment" has been made, hey? . Both tier membership commitments and recent contracts have already been referenced and discussedAs Ive said before, I feel no obligation to revisit several hundred pages of posts to retrieve citations from conversations that weve already had. this should be simple for you to provide - what's the problem? You should have this at the ready... I mean, c'mon... you're forever making claims about F-35 pricing. What's the problem in having you provide the latest and greatest LockMart stated pricing? let's be absolutely clear here: are you stating, unequivocally, that U.S. pricing has no bearing on the actual F-35 quoted pricing partner nations or non-partner nations might receive? if one is to accept your claim that the exorbinantly high current U.S. pricing is due to "development costs", at what point does U.S. taxpayer "sunk costs" become a non-issue?... at what point is there an end to so-called "development costs" continuing to be added only to U.S. prices? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted August 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2014 (edited) What's wrong if it's legal? Are you trying to ask dumb questions? Did you know that insider trading (while highly illegal for corporate insiders) was perfectly legal for political insiders until 2012, and legislation curbing the practice only went into effect after Capitol Hill was publicly embarrassed by 60 Minutes? What makes the whole story even better is that the new legislation was full of simple loopholes, where your spouse or children can still make trades for you instead! That's okay though, right!? It's legal! The fact that the only people capable of preventing the practice are the ones benefiting from it doesn't matter! Nope! Those sure are impressive ethical standards Derek! I'd better be careful though. You might accuse me of libel again! Edited August 5, 2014 by Moonbox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 5, 2014 Report Share Posted August 5, 2014 nice buzzword bingo! That's the now standard response to no actual sales... which begs the question on why Bogdan is out trying to secure sales now for what you claim will only begin once full-rate production commences... years down the road. Sort of takes away from the hyped messaging coming from LockMart every time some supposed "commitment" has been made, hey? . Not at all…...Your simplistic approach here does not recognise the purchasing roadmap of the various partners, which will see the bulk of said purchases take place once the aircraft begins full rate production in several years……….. this should be simple for you to provide - what's the problem? You should have this at the ready... I mean, c'mon... you're forever making claims about F-35 pricing. What's the problem in having you provide the latest and greatest LockMart stated pricing? It should be simple for you to revisit prior pages if you deem this important. let's be absolutely clear here: are you stating, unequivocally, that U.S. pricing has no bearing on the actual F-35 quoted pricing partner nations or non-partner nations might receive? With the inclusion of developmental funding, that is correct…….nobody will pay the same share as the Americans. if one is to accept your claim that the exorbinantly high current U.S. pricing is due to "development costs", at what point does U.S. taxpayer "sunk costs" become a non-issue?... at what point is there an end to so-called "development costs" continuing to be added only to U.S. prices? There will be no “end to development”, for the program from the onset was intent on continual developments and incorporations of new technologies. The funding share is divided amongst the end users; with the percentage assigned by fleet size…..clearly the Americans will pay the bulk of development costing through the life of the program. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 7, 2014 Report Share Posted August 7, 2014 "The Right Choice for Canada"....actually, the only choice: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 7, 2014 Report Share Posted August 7, 2014 "The Right Choice for Canada"....actually, the only choice: And the retired Lieutenant Colonel is a credible source on our technical requirements….aside from commanding a Hornet squadron and our Hornet contribution during operations over the FRY, he’s type certified in not only the Hornet in Canadian service, but also the Eurofighter, F-16, Tornado and F-4………..and of course all three variants of the F-35………I’ll take his opinions over any bloggers view Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 7, 2014 Report Share Posted August 7, 2014 ………I’ll take his opinions over any bloggers view designated by LockMart as an "official Lockheed Martin video"... hosted on the LockMart youtube channel... offering the "perspective" of a LockMart test pilot! Ya baby... just your kind of LockMart propaganda! . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 7, 2014 Report Share Posted August 7, 2014 (edited) designated by LockMart as an "official Lockheed Martin video"... hosted on the LockMart youtube channel... offering the "perspective" of a LockMart test pilot! Ya baby... just your kind of LockMart propaganda! . ......you forgot held at gun point too!! Clearly, a former officer in the RCAF, that flew Hornets and commanded them during a military operation, then became a test pilot for both EADS/Airbus (Flying the Eurofighter) and now Lockheed, that has the shared views on the F-35 with the RCAF leadership, is not fit to comment on the subject.. Edited August 7, 2014 by Derek 2.0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 7, 2014 Report Share Posted August 7, 2014 ......you forgot held at gun point too!! Clearly, a former officer in the RCAF, that flew Hornets and commanded them during a military operation, then became a test pilot for both EADS/Airbus (Flying the Eurofighter) and now Lockheed, that has the shared views on the F-35 with the RCAF leadership, is not fit to comment on the subject.. right! Cause as an employee of LockMart he knows where his next paycheque comes from, hey! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 7, 2014 Report Share Posted August 7, 2014 right! Cause as an employee of LockMart he knows where his next paycheque comes from, hey! What of his shared views with the RCAF? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 7, 2014 Report Share Posted August 7, 2014 keep moving your propaganda goalposts! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 7, 2014 Report Share Posted August 7, 2014 keep moving your propaganda goalposts! What of your own goalposts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 7, 2014 Report Share Posted August 7, 2014 I guess the USAF didn't get the memo on operating the single engine F-35 in cold weather...... Eielson Air Force Base has been selected as the “preferred alternative” to house the fifth-generation fighter in the Pacific, the service said. The base was picked based on its location, existing infrastructure and proximity to a training range. Eielson also is home to Pacific Air Force’s premiere training exercise, Red-Flag Alaska, and is easily accessible by training partners from Korea and Japan. Somewhat surprised they didn't join the F-22s in Elmendorf, which would allow the closure of Eielson, and in turn save money...........but as mentioned, Eielson is closer to ranges.........So F-35s to the interior of Alaska........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 7, 2014 Report Share Posted August 7, 2014 tis in keeping with the top Air Force guy's claim... Gen. Michael Hostage, head of air combat command in the U.S.: "The F-35 is not built as an air superiority platform,” Hostage said. “It needs the F-22." Hey now, just how does a non-U.S. country get one of those there F-22s? Oh wait... how does the U.S. get... any more of the now "put out to pasture... never having seen combat F22s? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek 2.0 Posted August 7, 2014 Report Share Posted August 7, 2014 (edited) tis in keeping with the top Air Force guy's claim... Gen. Michael Hostage, head of air combat command in the U.S.: "The F-35 is not built as an air superiority platform,” Hostage said. “It needs the F-22." Hey now, just how does a non-U.S. country get one of those there F-22s? Oh wait... how does the U.S. get... any more of the now "put out to pasture... never having seen combat F22s? When was the last time Canada operated an "air superiority platform"..........The F-35 is to the F-22, what our current Hornets are to the F-15. Edited August 7, 2014 by Derek 2.0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted August 7, 2014 Report Share Posted August 7, 2014 hey now! If ya ain't buyin sumthin superior... then buy sumthin inferior... like the vapourware F-35! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.