waldo Posted August 17, 2014 Report Posted August 17, 2014 All leaked evidence points to the panel recommending the F-35. what leaked evidence - and who leaked it? And... aligning with your implication/suggestion, more pointedly, most pointedly, what are Harper Conservatives waiting for, anyway? Why the delay in any official announcement... why are they sitting on the report/recommendations? Wouldn't you think Harper Conservatives would be trumpeting the "presumed decision", loud and proud? Is there a problem? Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted August 17, 2014 Report Posted August 17, 2014 why don't you cost those new refuellers out for us. Based on the recent USAF pricing for their KC-46 Pegasus, ~1 ½ billion for acquisition. While you're doing that why not take your ever so cavalier reference to "equipping the A variant on production"... and also cost that out for 'A' variant production. I have no idea of the cost.......I would assume the same price as the B & C. the author made no mention of a 'drag chute'... that's on you. However, your link presumes on a concept being fully developed and integrated into production --- that has not occured to-date. Perhaps you can also price out that add-on option for a drag chute as well, hey? I have no idea.......A drouge chute will be standard on all F-35As, like all other fighters. as for the tailhook, I expect the author should have been more qualified in speaking to effectiveness and maintenance requirements relative to a CF-18 comparison. Accordingly - (note: the following is identified as appearing in a DND/CF FAQ): As to maintenance, that is correct to a degree, but non-carrier types have no requirement to have automatic retrieval of their hooks, nor a requirement for repeated use…….If a conventional fighter is deploying it’s arresting gear on a runway, there will be far more post flight maintenance issues to contend with………repeated use of course leads to structural issues with the aircraft. Hence why the employment of drogue chutes is the primary means of rapidly slowing an aircraft if required. Quote
Army Guy Posted August 18, 2014 Report Posted August 18, 2014 the 'bias fix' was already in - the AG's report historical accounting of the program shows exactly how requirements were jiggered to match a pre-conceived intent from within DND. To suggest "DND did this right" is outright blatant denial (or ignorance) of the early process... the results of which simply carried over into this latest go-around. If, as you say, "DND did this right", why are you calling for it to be removed from the procurement process? more pointedly, most pointedly, what's Harper waiting for? What are Harper Conservatives sitting on the report... if "everything's been done right, if the politicized so-called independent review has signed off", what's the hold-up? Harper Conservatives should be trumpeting this loud & proud! And yet... crickets! Is there a problem? this latest charade is par for the course. Clearly, the only way to get real costs for the F-35 is to have an open competition... one where LockMart is forced to respond to an RFP and provide real costs and substantiated estimates... not this ongoing puffery cycle being paraded! Nothing says it more than the response from Saab... that it would come back into the process if, and only if, an actual and legitimate open competition were to be forthcoming. I thought that the AG report is what inspired this independent review ? Now that the review is over, everything is found to be on board as per the treasury boards guidelines it would seem the AG report was indeed wrong. I'm not calling it to be removed from the process, just that the treasure board and PWSG were quick to piont out that the F-35 program was flawed, that and a few more projects but it was still quoted as one of the reasons to have all major equipment purchases removed from DND. That ship has already left the docks... Why are they sitting on it , not sure, i guess they don't want it as another election issue. because that is what this would turn into , and if another party wins the next election they will scrap F35 program just on princple....like the Maritime helo project.... And if the F-35 gets chosen again will that be enough to quell all the protests to the F-35, allowing the program to move on ? or will it just cloudy up the waters once again, with the final decision being made by the cheapest bidder such as the Super hornet, or the SAAB which did not make the muster before.... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Derek 2.0 Posted August 18, 2014 Report Posted August 18, 2014 (edited) Why are they sitting on it , not sure, i guess they don't want it as another election issue. because that is what this would turn into , and if another party wins the next election they will scrap F35 program just on princple....like the Maritime helo project.... And if the F-35 gets chosen again will that be enough to quell all the protests to the F-35, allowing the program to move on ? or will it just cloudy up the waters once again, with the final decision being made by the cheapest bidder such as the Super hornet, or the SAAB which did not make the muster before.... I tend to agree, creating a narrative similar to the EH-101 and Chrétien…….Politics. Cowardly and morally wrong to put politics before the needs of the men and women within our Armed Forces, but a common narrative going all the way back to past Liberal motivated purchases such as the Ross Rifle and Avro Arrow…… Edited August 18, 2014 by Derek 2.0 Quote
PIK Posted August 18, 2014 Report Posted August 18, 2014 I tend to agree, creating a narrative similar to the EH-101 and Chrétien…….Politics. Cowardly and morally wrong to put politics before the needs of the men and women within our Armed Forces, but a common narrative going all the way back to past Liberal motivated purchases such as the Ross Rifle and Avro Arrow…… http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/life-video/video-collector-preserves-ill-fated-canadian-ww1-rifles/article20088536/#video1id19993007 Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
waldo Posted August 18, 2014 Report Posted August 18, 2014 I thought that the AG report is what inspired this independent review ? Now that the review is over, everything is found to be on board as per the treasury boards guidelines it would seem the AG report was indeed wrong. I'm not calling it to be removed from the process, just that the treasure board and PWSG were quick to piont out that the F-35 program was flawed, that and a few more projects but it was still quoted as one of the reasons to have all major equipment purchases removed from DND. That ship has already left the docks... how interesting member 2.0 didn't bother to correct your false interpretations! No - the AG Report (the PBO report, the KPMG audit) all pre-date the focus of this latest go-round... they all reflect on the initial "no open competition; single sourced charade that DND/Harper Conservatives proferred... the one where NO requirements existed... the one where challenge after challenge finally brought forward the DND-tailored requirements that were specifically written to match "claimed" F-35 capabilities. As I said, that's what carried through to this latest go-round where "manufacturers were invited to submit sumthin"... your direct reference to SAAB is noteworthy in that SAAB, as previously stated, advised they were withdrawing from the sham... but would come back in if an actual legitimate open competition were to be held. . Quote
waldo Posted August 18, 2014 Report Posted August 18, 2014 Cowardly and morally wrong to put politics before the needs of the men and women within our Armed Forces good on ya for finally acknowledging just what DND and Harper Conservatives are in this failed F-35 regard! Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted August 18, 2014 Report Posted August 18, 2014 good on ya for finally acknowledging just what DND and Harper Conservatives are in this failed F-35 regard! I never stated DND....... Quote
waldo Posted August 18, 2014 Report Posted August 18, 2014 I never stated DND....... I did! Wear it Quote
waldo Posted August 28, 2014 Report Posted August 28, 2014 the after explosion refrain was an emphatic "not systemic" ... this lil' ole engine design change is simply, uhhh.... maintenance! Good thing there's only ~100 prototypes out there. About those engine engineering and design development phases that didn't manage to find this problem in the first place..... Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted August 31, 2014 Report Posted August 31, 2014 So "we're close" to a "potential" fix which "we hope" will stop the engine from destroying itself and burning the rest of the plane down. Well now if I was a test pilot on that machine this news would give me whole heapin' helpin' of restored confidence. Now how many times now has that stove been re-designed? Oh, and just to confirm, the ejection seat is working now,... right? Quote
PIK Posted September 2, 2014 Report Posted September 2, 2014 By the time you guys are done the F-35 will be 30 yrs old and will be buying a 8th generation. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
On Guard for Thee Posted September 2, 2014 Report Posted September 2, 2014 By the time you guys are done the F-35 will be 30 yrs old and will be buying a 8th generation. Probably won't be buying anything, we'll be broke. Quote
PIK Posted September 2, 2014 Report Posted September 2, 2014 Probably won't be buying anything, we'll be broke. If JT wins, you just might be right. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
On Guard for Thee Posted September 2, 2014 Report Posted September 2, 2014 By the time you guys are done the F-35 will be 30 yrs old and will be buying a 8th generation. The US already operates their 8th generation fighter...it's called the F22 Raptor Quote
Moonbox Posted September 4, 2014 Author Report Posted September 4, 2014 If JT wins, you just might be right. Hey now, we don't know he'll be as much of a spend-thrift as his father. At the very least, he so far appears to listen to his advisers. He has his father's legacy to shake off, and I really doubt that he'll start his first term off by making it rain. Quote "A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he does for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous
waldo Posted September 5, 2014 Report Posted September 5, 2014 So "we're close" to a "potential" fix which "we hope" will stop the engine from destroying itself and burning the rest of the plane down. Well now if I was a test pilot on that machine this news would give me whole heapin' helpin' of restored confidence. Now how many times now has that stove been re-designed? Oh, and just to confirm, the ejection seat is working now,... right? what's just coming forward is engine production/delivery stopped prior to the actual explosion/fire event... apparently unrelated to the "cause" of the explosion. Some time back a major acknowledgement from the U.S. Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, Frank Kendall, was that the program had a parts reliability problem; one where Kendall threw fault directly at the main contractors lax oversight/control of its sub-contractors and supply chains. It seems another like example of that was being covered up in regard engine parts as relates to a supply chain source of suspect titanium. of course, this is the same Frank Kendall that has labeled the F-35 program's production methodology (concurrent test and production) as "acquisition malpractice"... also the same Frank Kendall that provided the F-35 program waivers to existing U.S. laws banning Chinese-built components on U.S. weapons - what Chinese espionage! Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted September 5, 2014 Report Posted September 5, 2014 what's just coming forward is engine production/delivery stopped prior to the actual explosion/fire event... apparently unrelated to the "cause" of the explosion. Some time back a major acknowledgement from the U.S. Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, Frank Kendall, was that the program had a parts reliability problem; one where Kendall threw fault directly at the main contractors lax oversight/control of its sub-contractors and supply chains. It seems another like example of that was being covered up in regard engine parts as relates to a supply chain source of suspect titanium. of course, this is the same Frank Kendall that has labeled the F-35 program's production methodology (concurrent test and production) as "acquisition malpractice"... also the same Frank Kendall that provided the F-35 program waivers to existing U.S. laws banning Chinese-built components on U.S. weapons - what Chinese espionage! Yeah like ducks in a shooting gallery at the CNE. Oops, probably using an analogy that involves anything that has to do with flying things is in poor taste. Apologies. In any case, that phrase "acquisition malpractice" is fairly scary whether you be a taxpayer or a test pilot. Hey maybe there is a marketing opportunity for a shooting gallery using F 35's instead of mallards. We'd have to make them harder to shoot down though or we'd lose our shirts at the Ex. Quote
waldo Posted September 6, 2014 Report Posted September 6, 2014 probably the single most in-depth article written on the recent F-35 engine blow-up and subsequent drive for engine redesign... with a definitive cause for the engine explosion still not determined. The article also touches on some of the history, political play and actions by Pratt & Whitney in doing away with its competitor (GE) and what was a 2-source model for F-35 engines. Neither the program office nor Pratt & Whitney have responded to a query concerning the reasons the F135’s diagnostic and prognostic systems failed to detect the incipient failure of AF-27’s engine or the excessive rubbing found on borescope inspections of other engines. During its campaign to advocate termination of General Electric’s alternate engine, P&W stated that prognostic systems could detect problems early and “mitigate their potential impact on flight operations.” Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted September 8, 2014 Report Posted September 8, 2014 probably the single most in-depth article written on the recent F-35 engine blow-up and subsequent drive for engine redesign... with a definitive cause for the engine explosion still not determined. The article also touches on some of the history, political play and actions by Pratt & Whitney in doing away with its competitor (GE) and what was a 2-source model for F-35 engines. So ~5% of engines were found to be problematic, P&W and the F-35 program office are testing a solution, and it will be paid for by P&W………… I thought you were going to lean on this: The source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said Lockheed Martin Corp’s F-35 stealth fighter and Boeing Co’s F-18 E/F Super Hornet were deemed more suitable for the variety of tasks the military has laid out. That would mean the exclusion of Dassault Aviation SA’s Rafale and the Eurofighter Typhoon, jointly made by BAE Systems PLC, Finmeccanica SpA and Airbus Group NV. and The source said that while the F-35 had scored well on the various tests laid out by the secretariat, the Super Hornet was almost as capable and had the advantage of being cheaper. Quote
waldo Posted September 8, 2014 Report Posted September 8, 2014 So ~5% of engines were found to be problematic, P&W and the F-35 program office are testing a solution, and it will be paid for by P&W………… oh, did I manage to prod you back into the thread? But nice try! Read it again... all existing engines are to be replaced. I recall you emphasizing something about "not being systemic"! As it stands, they still have no clue to the definitive cause. I'm shocked you managed to so casually bypass a few of these recent posts... like the big cover-up concerning titanitum... that engines were not being delivered well before anything to do with the unrelated engine explosion. Nothing from you about the impacts on testing schedules and IOC dates. Clearly you don't want to revisit "acquisition malpractice"... or Chinese parts in the F-35! Clearly. By the by, did Bodnar's recent VolumeSalesTour prove out... any bites yet? Quote
Remiel Posted September 19, 2014 Report Posted September 19, 2014 Should I mention that Russian bombers are again testing our airspace? Quote
Smallc Posted September 20, 2014 Report Posted September 20, 2014 No no, we'll never need fighter jets. It's not like 6 hours before that, they send 2 Migs, 2 bombers, and 2 refuelling aircraft to the edge of US airspace. Whatever we're going to buy to replace the CF-18, we'd better figure it out soon. Quote
Peter F Posted September 20, 2014 Report Posted September 20, 2014 Why? You think the Ruski's will send their bomber fleet vs the USofA instead of their ICBM's? Very tricky...who da thunk they'd pull a sneak attack with bombers? Quote A bayonet is a tool with a worker at both ends
waldo Posted September 20, 2014 Report Posted September 20, 2014 Why? You think the Ruski's will send their bomber fleet vs the USofA instead of their ICBM's? Very tricky...who da thunk they'd pull a sneak attack with bombers? ya, it's just the minimum 'bear' bones diplomacy at work... in international air-space, no less! Quote
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.