waldo Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 And we can be assured that next years election won’t have the F-35s as a focal point……….perhaps 2019? that's quite the self-serving spin you've put on that decision... of course! After all your blustering, it appears the Harper Conservatives have such confidence in the JSFail that they choose to negate any suggestion of it being an election issue and, more pointedly, push the life of the existing Hornets out to 2025! Such an absolute vote of confidence in the F-35! point of clarification: are you saying none of the existing active flying Hornets haven't had their "center barrel jigged"? If some have, how many? And if some have, since it can only be performed once on an aircraft, just how many will be undergoing the "jig"?... or are you counting on some of those mothballed to be brought out? Quote
Smallc Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 What such a decision does, is take every other jet out of the running. It's pretty brilliant actually. Quote
waldo Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 What such a decision does, is take every other jet out of the running. It's pretty brilliant actually. another spin heard from! Again, such a display of confidence in the F-35!!! Such confidence that they won't even go the onesy-twosy purchase route... not even for appearance sake! What the hell kind of a partner nation is that? Quote
Smallc Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 The F-35 will win any competition. So far it's won every competition. This eliminates the ability for people such as yourself to muddy the water. Brilliant. Quote
waldo Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 The F-35 will win any competition. So far it's won every competition. This eliminates the ability for people such as yourself to muddy the water. Brilliant. beyond your incessant fawning over your paper tiger, just what actual demonstrated flying/weapons competitions are you referring to? Quote
waldo Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 The F-35 will win any competition. So far it's won every competition. apparently... it didn't win the confidence competition held internally by Harper Conservatives! Go figure, hey? After hundreds of pages of bluster and fluster (from your ilk™), about the ever creeping forward dates for Canadian delivery, with the ever confident assurance being pedaled... the Harper Conservatives apparently don't have the courage of their convictions! Go figure. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted October 3, 2014 Report Posted October 3, 2014 point of clarification: are you saying none of the existing active flying Hornets haven't had their "center barrel jigged"? If some have, how many? And if some have, since it can only be performed once on an aircraft, just how many will be undergoing the "jig"?... or are you counting on some of those mothballed to be brought out? A portion of the fleet (~1/3rd IIRC) that showed early fatigue life (mostly our twin seats conversion trainers) were given partial structural upgrades, the extent based upon the actual estimated airframe life of the individual aircraft…….this proposal would seek a uniformed upgrade across the entire fleet……. As to mothballed fleet (there isn’t any in Canada), the few airworthy examples were used as parts sources, with a portion of the fleet sold to Finland in the late 90s/ early 2000s. Quote
waldo Posted October 4, 2014 Report Posted October 4, 2014 A portion of the fleet (~1/3rd IIRC) that showed early fatigue life (mostly our twin seats conversion trainers) were given partial structural upgrades, the extent based upon the actual estimated airframe life of the individual aircraft…….this proposal would seek a uniformed upgrade across the entire fleet……. given the perpetual F-35 problems/delays, Canada spent $2 Billion in the last upgrade to the CF-18s... supposedly to bring their best before date up to 2020. Of course, as I just highlighted, you were forever on about initial deliveries in the 2016-2017 time period. And then one day, you quite literally floored me with your somewhat non-chalant statement that suddenly had that delivery shifted to 2019. Now... with this latest upgrade path (at what cost???) the CF-18s will be "good to go" up to 2025! But again, how many? Of the current 77 CF-18s, are you aware of how many will undergo this latest upgrade to realize what you've just termed a 'uniformed upgrade across the entire fleet'... and do you have costing for that? should I bother pointing out your selective reply... where you simply choose to stick with your spin-cycle calling this another win for the F-35? Somehow, out of all this, you (and, of course, lil'c) don't accept this as any show of lacking confidence in the F-35 by Harper Conseratives! Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted October 4, 2014 Report Posted October 4, 2014 given the perpetual F-35 problems/delays, Canada spent $2 Billion in the last upgrade to the CF-18s... supposedly to bring their best before date up to 2020. Of course, as I just highlighted, you were forever on about initial deliveries in the 2016-2017 time period. And then one day, you quite literally floored me with your somewhat non-chalant statement that suddenly had that delivery shifted to 2019. A presumed initial Canadian delivery date would clearly be predetermined by the signing of an actual contract……..if a contract had of been signed this summer, it’s not farfetched to suggest a small initial order, based in either/or Florida/Arizona to train the initial Canadian personal, followed by the initial squadron (likely) stood-up in Alberta to start the transition process. Now... with this latest upgrade path (at what cost???) The USN/USMC are currently paying ~3-4 million per aircraft.....For us, that would equate to ~325-350 million. the CF-18s will be "good to go" up to 2025! But again, how many? It would be dependent upon each aircrafts remaining fatigue life expectancy (FLE). Our air force uses a fleet management dictum that doesn’t see aircraft usage spread equally amongst the fleet, but instead, a practice that sees some individual aircraft used greatly versus others with (relatively) little use…..this would lead to a likely outcome of not all of the fleet remaining until 2025, will gradual retirements between now and then, coupled with a portion of the fleet remaining airworthy post 2025. The exact total, again would be dependent upon each aircrafts FLE…..this information quite obviously will not be in the public sphere, but with that, I would be surprised if the entire fleet was determined to be worthy of a SLEP at all. Of the current 77 CF-18s, are you aware of how many will undergo this latest upgrade to realize what you've just termed a 'uniformed upgrade across the entire fleet'... and do you have costing for that? I am not personally aware of the exact figures, but if I were, that level of information would be considered OPSEC...... With that said, it will become obvious through subtraction when the details of the upgrade contract, via either/or a DoD FMS request or a straight contract to Northrop become public. should I bother pointing out your selective reply... where you simply choose to stick with your spin-cycle calling this another win for the F-35? Somehow, out of all this, you (and, of course, lil'c) don't accept this as any show of lacking confidence in the F-35 by Harper Conseratives! I don’t see it as a reflection of the F-35 itself, but the political climate a year out from a Federal election. Quote
waldo Posted October 4, 2014 Report Posted October 4, 2014 The USN/USMC are currently paying ~3-4 million per aircraft.....For us, that would equate to ~325-350 million. I don’t see it as a reflection of the F-35 itself, but the political climate a year out from a Federal election. again, with that decision, Harper Conservatives haven't the courage of their previous convictions... don't have confidence in the current or foreseeable future of the F-35. You're suggesting they didn't have the courage to include the F-35 as a part of their election platform; more pointedly, you're suggesting that Harper Conservatives are willing to spend (by your numbers) $350 million to avoid actually purchasing any F-35s. Clearly, they could have signed a 'kicking the tires' contract to purchase a onesy-twosy complement... but they won't even go that far! Such a display of confidence in the F-35... but, of course, you "don't see it as a reflection of the F-35 itself"! Really? . Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted October 4, 2014 Report Posted October 4, 2014 again, with that decision, Harper Conservatives haven't the courage of their previous convictions... don't have confidence in the current or foreseeable future of the F-35. You're suggesting they didn't have the courage to include the F-35 as a part of their election platform; more pointedly, you're suggesting that Harper Conservatives are willing to spend (by your numbers) $350 million to avoid actually purchasing any F-35s. Clearly, they could have signed a 'kicking the tires' contract to purchase a onesy-twosy complement... but they won't even go that far! Such a display of confidence in the F-35... but, of course, you "don't see it as a reflection of the F-35 itself"! Really? . Yes, because it would be used by both the Liberals and NDP as a political whacking stick........It’s unfortunate that the Government felt compelled to do this, then again, it’s equally unfortunate that the two Opposition parties are so partisan to use defense procurement as a partisan issue……With the F-35 itself, such games are not played to this extent in the domestic politics of the majority of the partner nations…….nations that have had various changes in Government, from all parts of the political compass, throughout the JSF program life. Quote
waldo Posted October 9, 2014 Report Posted October 9, 2014 If Korea has truly signed on the dotted line and truly exchanged money, what did they use to substantiate and give credence to their purchase? LockMart promises/incentives? U.S. DOD/government promises/incentives? Cause it most certainly can't be any kind of actual reference to the observed capabilities of the F-35 today... can it? of course, to me, this F-35 move by Korea was always one counter-balanced by its long-standing want to develop (another fighter) 'in-house', given its relative success in that regard in the past. To furthering that end, a short while back, Korea/Indonesia announced a joint relationship to develop, in this case, another phase forward for the Korean 'KFX program to develop/export a 4.5 gen fighter jet'. What's most revealing is how Janes covered it, particularly in regards my questioning around incentive offerings - here: Another key element of the KFX programme will be the involvement of Lockheed Martin, which has agreed to provide technical support under the terms of the RoCAF's purchase of 40 F-35s under the FX-III acquisition. A Lockheed Martin spokesman told IHS Jane's on 25 September that the F-35 deal's offset commitment would include "technical documentation, design expertise, and development investments. Specifically, Lockheed Martin will provide several hundred man-years of engineering expertise to assist Korea in the KFX design and development." "Lockheed Martin will also provide several hundred-thousand pages of fighter aircraft technical documentation derived from existing Lockheed Martin programmes," the spokesman added. . Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted October 11, 2014 Report Posted October 11, 2014 of course, to me, this F-35 move by Korea was always one counter-balanced by its long-standing want to develop (another fighter) 'in-house', given its relative success in that regard in the past. Which success is that? Local production of Western designs? To furthering that end, a short while back, Korea/Indonesia announced a joint relationship to develop, in this case, another phase forward for the Korean 'KFX program to develop/export a 4.5 gen fighter jet'. What's most revealing is how Janes covered it, particularly in regards my questioning around incentive offerings - here: Japan has similar terms with their F-35 purchase..........In my view, the far more interesting "incentive offerings", saw Lockheed purchase a European produced satellite for the South Koreans, after US Government export laws precluded Lockheed (one of the main suppliers for the US Government) from selling one of theirs to the South Koreans. Quote
waldo Posted October 11, 2014 Report Posted October 11, 2014 as I originally queried over the Korean decision... just what incentives did it take to prod Korea into buying the flying butterball F-35? Now we know. And wow... did not realize the satellite purchase was a part of the incentive offering; clearly, the South Koreans had a shopping list and LockMart, being desperate for F-35 sales, was most obliging! What it took to get South Korea to "roll the dice" on the F-35!!! Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted October 11, 2014 Report Posted October 11, 2014 as I originally queried over the Korean decision... just what incentives did it take to prod Korea into buying the flying butterball F-35? Now we know. Funny that they would not only purchase the "flying butter ball", but get Lockheed to aide in developing their own And wow... did not realize the satellite purchase was a part of the incentive offering; clearly, the South Koreans had a shopping list and LockMart, being desperate for F-35 sales, was most obliging! What it took to get South Korea to "roll the dice" on the F-35!!! It's not uncommon for countries to work out such "side deals"...........Canada is notorious for such offsets. For example, during the 90s & early 2000s, the then Liberal Government, well looking at options for replacing the Sea King and ageing C-130E transports, was looking toward European (namely French) offerings (NH-90 & Airbus A400M) but sought "industrial cooperation" with the allowance of our domestic aircraft engine maker (P&W Canada) to enter these programs.....the Europeans, mindful of their own industries, told us to pound sand. Another current example is the, very basic, replacement of both our current issued Arctic Ranger rifle (WWI & WWII era Lee-Enfields ) and the current Canadian Forces sidearm (1930s circa Browning Hi-Power 9mm). Such replacements shouldn't be difficult with many current options, but the Canadian Government requires a current firearms maker to hand-over their intellectual property rights to Colt Canada/Diemaco for local, Canadian production.....suffice to say no current firearms maker has jumped at the offer......... Quote
waldo Posted October 11, 2014 Report Posted October 11, 2014 Funny that they would not only purchase the "flying butter ball", but get Lockheed to aide in developing their own I expect the 20+ years of F-16 production by Korean Aerospace Industries (KAI) played a part (as licensed by LockMart)... but there's always trade-offs. Clearly, Korea had a shopping list before it would 'take a flier on the F-35'... and LockMart was more than willing to incentivize the sale opportunity... any sale opportunity. But hey now, if only Harper Conservatives had shown the same degree of "confidence" in the F-35 butterball/LockMart, hey? . It's not uncommon for countries to work out such "side deals"........... of course; I just expressed surprise... and linked to the Reuters article describing the satellite purchase (by LockMart for Korea) as one of the most "unusual "offset" agreements ever to accompany a major arms sale". . Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted October 11, 2014 Report Posted October 11, 2014 I expect the 20+ years of F-16 production by Korean Aerospace Industries (KAI) played a part (as licensed by LockMart)... but there's always trade-offs. Clearly, Korea had a shopping list before it would 'take a flier on the F-35'... and LockMart was more than willing to incentivize the sale opportunity... any sale opportunity. But hey now, if only Harper Conservatives had shown the same degree of "confidence" in the F-35 butterball/LockMart, hey? . of course; I just expressed surprise... and linked to the Reuters article describing the satellite purchase (by LockMart for Korea) as one of the most "unusual "offset" agreements ever to accompany a major arms sale". . But, both Boeing and the Eurofighter consortium offered such offsets........of course the Koreans went with the more advanced F-35, coupled with Lockheed's experience with all things "stealth", which the Koreans deem a requirement for their own domestic build..........Nearly the same such process can be found also in the Japanese selection......which is why I was able to "predict" both the Japanese and South Korean fighter outcomes several years ago...... With the South Koreans though, it's further compounded due to not only the Lockheed/KAI partnership on the F-16 and Korea's future domestic fighter, but more so, their partnership on the T-50 trainer, which both companies will enter in the USAF's T-38 trainer replacement program, which will be worth upwards of 500+ aircraft........one can surmise that said offered version of the T-50 lead-in trainer, will encompass a cockpit similar to that of the F-35A.... Quote
waldo Posted October 11, 2014 Report Posted October 11, 2014 But, both Boeing and the Eurofighter consortium offered such offsets........of course the Koreans went with the more advanced F-35, coupled with Lockheed's experience with all things "stealth", which the Koreans deem a requirement for their own domestic build.......... again, trade-offs. LockMart promised a fully complete, absolute, all in-all done, combat ready F-35 by the end of 2017. And the Koreans actually bought that promise (apparently they never heard about the decade+ over-budget, over-schedule, over-hype of the F-35/LockMart). Of course, they only bought 40 (of the original 60 jets they wanted), leaving the option to buy 20 other jets that actually deliver today. LockMart spun that as 'an option' to buy 20 more... but then Boeing and Eurofighter provided their own spin around that remaining 20. As for technology transfer, will the U.S. government actually allow stealth technology transfer (to Korea)?... oh wait, since China "liberated" F-35 stealth technology anyways, perhaps that's now a moot point, hey! . Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted October 11, 2014 Report Posted October 11, 2014 again, trade-offs. LockMart promised a fully complete, absolute, all in-all done, combat ready F-35 by the end of 2017. And the Koreans actually bought that promise (apparently they never heard about the decade+ over-budget, over-schedule, over-hype of the F-35/LockMart). Of course, they only bought 40 (of the original 60 jets they wanted), leaving the option to buy 20 other jets that actually deliver today. Why wouldn't they believe Lockheed? They will start receiving their aircraft after the USAF IOC of the F-35A, and even with continual software updates, the F-35A will be a stark improvement over the 60s era F-4 Phantoms that they will replace........ As to the additional "20", both the F-15 Silent Eagle and Eurofighter tranche 3B are not currently in service, with the F-15SE still in development. Of course, said "20" additional aircraft could be used by the Koreans to sweeten the pot in a program to retrofit the South Koreans already existing F-15 Eagles to a near Silent Eagle status to remain viable in the decades ahead....or they could just purchase more F-35s.... As for technology transfer, will the U.S. government actually allow stealth technology transfer (to Korea)?... oh wait, since China "liberated" F-35 stealth technology anyways, perhaps that's now a moot point, hey! I don't know why you'd feel the US Government would refuse the technology transfer........as to China, do we actually know the extent of China's "liberation" of technology? None the less, why would the Chinese (and Russians) seek F-35 secrets if it's such a turkey? Don't they have access to the same blogs as we do? Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted October 11, 2014 Report Posted October 11, 2014 The Chineese can build a plane (look at the J-20) and now they have enough hacked info to turn the "spotlight" on the F 35 stealth system. So, I guess if we go with the "bomb truck" we just better not get into a fight with China...or Russia for that matter. Perhaps it might be able to bother ISIS a bit but they'll probably get bored and go home by then. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted October 11, 2014 Report Posted October 11, 2014 The Chineese can build a plane (look at the J-20) and now they have enough hacked info to turn the "spotlight" on the F 35 stealth system. So, I guess if we go with the "bomb truck" we just better not get into a fight with China...or Russia for that matter. Perhaps it might be able to bother ISIS a bit but they'll probably get bored and go home by then. The Chinese have yet to build their own domestic military turbofan, even with the benefit of reverse engineering 70s era Soviet examples........none the less, you've suggested Canada purchasing the Super Hornet, how do you feel the Super Hornet would contend against next generation Chinese and Russian offerings........and of course, if the Chinese/Russians have developed technology that can defeat stealth, why are they building their own stealth aircraft? Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted October 11, 2014 Report Posted October 11, 2014 The Chinese have yet to build their own domestic military turbofan, even with the benefit of reverse engineering 70s era Soviet examples........none the less, you've suggested Canada purchasing the Super Hornet, how do you feel the Super Hornet would contend against next generation Chinese and Russian offerings........and of course, if the Chinese/Russians have developed technology that can defeat stealth, why are they building their own stealth aircraft? We pretty much know what a Super Hornet will and won't do, and we know what it will cost. LM keeps moving the goalposts around on the F 35, usually reducing the capabilities while increasing the costs and stretching the timeline. Also I personally don't see why we have to bow down to this treadmill of military industrial complex. Maybe we should just not go to war with China or Russia, and if we do it will probably won't be fought with airplanes anyway. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted October 11, 2014 Report Posted October 11, 2014 We pretty much know what a Super Hornet will and won't do, and we know what it will cost. LM keeps moving the goalposts around on the F 35, usually reducing the capabilities while increasing the costs and stretching the timeline. What capabilities have been reduced? None, when actually further capabilities and technology growth has led to both increased costs and IOCs pushed back. Also I personally don't see why we have to bow down to this treadmill of military industrial complex. Maybe we should just not go to war with China or Russia, and if we do it will probably won't be fought with airplanes anyway. Evolution.........The Chinese and Russians (like the "West") have continually developed new technology......halting ones own progress is not a cure-all, with this being a truism since the dawn of man.......you throw a rock at me, I develop the sling to throw the rock back with greater force etc........ Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted October 11, 2014 Report Posted October 11, 2014 What capabilities have been reduced? None, when actually further capabilities and technology growth has led to both increased costs and IOCs pushed back. Evolution.........The Chinese and Russians (like the "West") have continually developed new technology......halting ones own progress is not a cure-all, with this being a truism since the dawn of man.......you throw a rock at me, I develop the sling to throw the rock back with greater force etc........ Capabilities such as maneuverability-(reduced G force), acceleration to SS flight, continued problems from thermal creep and turbine rub with it's SINGLE engine, and I could go on. You can't "see" out of it, the ejection seat needs a fix etc. And now it's not even stealthy. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted October 11, 2014 Report Posted October 11, 2014 Capabilities such as maneuverability-(reduced G force), acceleration to SS flight, continued problems from thermal creep and turbine rub with it's SINGLE engine, and I could go on. You can't "see" out of it, the ejection seat needs a fix etc. And now it's not even stealthy. Please go on and expand on these issues and how they won't be addressed once development is complete.....Likewise, by all means expand on the F-35 being "not even stealthy".......I'd love to hear you knowledge, knowledge that the JSF partners are not fearful of, so as to dissuade them from selecting the F-35...... 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.