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

[Smallc]

It's a really stupid way, but it's what too many people wanted for them to ignore it, unfortunately.

[Derek 2.0]

You're impressed they're paying $1.7 billion for a $200 million airplane?

The 1.7 billion dollar figure will include through life support and additional operating costs added to the current fleet.......really surprised you didn't pick up on that, since you alluded to full costing on this very page.........If the Government stated just the purchase price, after a ATI request, the Liberals, NDP and media would be outraged over the Tories lying about the cost........

[Argus]

The 1.7 billion dollar figure will include through life support and additional operating costs added to the current fleet.......really surprised you didn't pick up on that, since you alluded to full costing on this very page.........If the Government stated just the purchase price, after a ATI request, the Liberals, NDP and media would be outraged over the Tories lying about the cost........

Why would I care if the Liberals, NDP and media are morons?

[Smallc]

Undortunately, the government has to care.

[Derek 2.0]

Why would I care if the Liberals, NDP and media are morons?

Faux outrage then bombards the populace......who vote. I still doubt, by and large, the LPC are total morons, and do understand the actual costings involved in procurement and choose to play politics with it.......the NDP and (most of the) media, I'm not too sure...

[Argus]

Matthew Fisher is one of my favourite columnists and is, as ever, both blunt and insightful in describing Canada's defence policy. Basically, we are loafer because we know the Americans will take care of us.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/12/13/matthew-fisher-canada-lives-off-u-s-military-protection-while-australia-forced-to-fend-for-itself/

[Wilber]

Faux outrage then bombards the populace......who vote. I still doubt, by and large, the LPC are total morons, and do understand the actual costings involved in procurement and choose to play politics with it.......the NDP and (most of the) media, I'm not too sure...

Not so sure of that, their "understanding" of the EH 101 procurement cost us dearly.

[Derek 2.0]

Matthew Fisher is one of my favourite columnists and is, as ever, both blunt and insightful in describing Canada's defence policy. Basically, we are loafer because we know the Americans will take care of us.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/12/13/matthew-fisher-canada-lives-off-u-s-military-protection-while-australia-forced-to-fend-for-itself/

I largely agree with Fisher's piece, but their military was, in many areas, in much the same position as ours a decade ago. Like us, they faced bungled procurement (Sea Sprite helicopters and NH-90s), cost over runs and delays (Collins class), retirement of equipment prior to a replacements in service (Charles F Adams destroyers), buggering on with old gear (M113s and the F-111) and critical manning shortages (in the their Submarine force).....though the ADF is getting to a better place now, their travels have not been trouble free.

He is bang-on with the fortress Australia meme in my opinion though......

[Derek 2.0]

Not so sure of that, their "understanding" of the EH 101 procurement cost us dearly.

With the EH-101, the Liberals clearly politicked themselves into a corner.......much like they are doing with the F-35.

[Argus]

With the EH-101, the Liberals clearly politicked themselves into a corner.......much like they are doing with the F-35.

Yes, but they never suffered for it. The military did. And that could EASILY happen again, and will if Trudeau is elected.

[On Guard for Thee]

Latest problem with the "bomb truck": it has a problem burning hot fuel. They are starting to paint the fuel trucks with white paint to see if that will fix the problem. So it doesn't like it hot, nor cold, so I guess they'll have to limit bombing to countries with temperate climates. ISIL will be happy with that news.

[Derek 2.0]

Yes, but they never suffered for it. The military did. And that could EASILY happen again, and will if Trudeau is elected.

Without a doubt, I lived through it firsthand and knew one of the last Canadian aircrew to die in a Labrador.....

[Smallc]

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140802/DEFREG02/308020014

I've been too hard on the government it seems. I wasn't even aware of this.

[Derek 2.0]

Latest problem with the "bomb truck": it has a problem burning hot fuel. They are starting to paint the fuel trucks with white paint to see if that will fix the problem. So it doesn't like it hot, nor cold, so I guess they'll have to limit bombing to countries with temperate climates. ISIL will be happy with that news.

Again, you don't understand (or perhaps the information from the media/blogger that you pass along), the F-35 can burn "hot fuel" like any other modern fighter, but the F-35 uses its fuel as a heat sink to reduce its IR signature (part of the troika that makes it "Stealth")..........of course said "issue" was solved by at first painting the USAF's fuel bowsers with white thermal paint, followed by thermal paint in both olive drab and desert pink...........or keep the truck in the shade..

Also, you still repeat the failed suggestion that the F-35 can't operate in the cold........you understand the USAF recently announced the F-35 will be based in Northern Alaska right?

[Derek 2.0]

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140802/DEFREG02/308020014

I've been too hard on the government it seems. I wasn't even aware of this.

Much of whats reported in your link has been on the Navy's radar (pun intended) since the late 90s, and published in Leadmark 2020.........Some of the initial requirements were included with FELEX program, other like "new weapons" (actually the next block of ESSM) and UAVs required technology to progress and trails conducted prior to committing to.........for instance, ESSM upgrades are continual and Boeing's Scan-Eagle has been deployed aboard the MCDVs..

All such "upgrades" are required to allow the Halifax class to operate in a medium threat environment safely.......

[Argus]

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140802/DEFREG02/308020014

I've been too hard on the government it seems. I wasn't even aware of this.

Or is this an indication they don't think we'll be getting any new ships any time in the near future? In any event, it doesn't change the fact the government is spending less than 1% of GDP when NATO is calling for 2%

Edited December 14, 2014 by Argus

[Derek 2.0]

Or is this an indication they don't think we'll be getting any new ships any time in the near future? In any event, it doesn't change the fact the government is spending less than 1% of GDP when NATO is calling for 2%

Not quite......its a realization that the Halifax class requires upgrades to address emerging threats into the 2020s until they are replaced.....also, many of said upgrades will be recycled onto their replacements, as is standard among most navies.........

As to your GDP barb, as said to you in another thread, Estonia currently pays upwards of 2%, do you feel they have a more capable military? Likewise, throughout the 70s and 80s, Canadian Governments spent a far larger percentage on defense, but the vast majority of our military was obsolete, and relegated as a "reserve force" by NATO.........its almost as if what percent of GDP spent on defense doesn't translate into the levels of capability of said force......of which, the Canadian Forces as a whole, have not been as capable and experienced since the Post-Korean 1950s.....

[Smallc]

Derek, have you heard anything about FWSAR?

[Derek 2.0]

Derek, have you heard anything about FWSAR?

Industry, IIRC, has about a month to finalize their proposals, then selection should be late Spring 2015.....I forget the thread I spoke to in greater depth,and my current internet connection is a snails pace (Up in the Arctic right now) so I won't do an extensive search for it, but I still feel it will be either the C-130J or the C-27...if I were to bet on which on of the two, I would go with the Herc, as Alenia has soured some with their threat to pull contractor support if we bought the new-surplus USAF fleet.

[Smallc]

I think more of the same would be better anyway, as it would mean that we wouldn't have to service two fleets. Having the planes all the same colour and the same configuration is also a possibility, with S&R pallets that could be loaded to duty planes when they're not in use for transport (though the new ones would probably be the shorter model). A potential fleet of 5 CC-177s and 32 C-130J would make Canada very capable in terms of transport. Of course that does open up a new problem, as the 5 CC-130H(T)s would be gone, leaving only two AAR aircraft in the RCAF.

As a side note, I'm surprised this didn't get more coverage at the time:

http://www.seaspan.com/2014/seaspans-vancouver-shipyards-starts-construction-initial-production-blocks-first-nsps-vessel/

The start of construction almost a month and a half ago is a huge accomplishment for the government.

[Derek 2.0]

I think more of the same would be better anyway, as it would mean that we wouldn't have to service two fleets. Having the planes all the same colour and the same configuration is also a possibility, with S&R pallets that could be loaded to duty planes when they're not in use for transport (though the new ones would probably be the shorter model). A potential fleet of 5 CC-177s and 32 C-130J would make Canada very capable in terms of transport. Of course that does open up a new problem, as the 5 CC-130H(T)s would be gone, leaving only two AAR aircraft in the RCAF.

As a side note, I'm surprised this didn't get more coverage at the time:

http://www.seaspan.com/2014/seaspans-vancouver-shipyards-starts-construction-initial-production-blocks-first-nsps-vessel/

The start of construction almost a month and a half ago is a huge accomplishment for the government.

That is the total end fleet size the RCAF wants........the color (Yellow/Red) aides in visibility on the ground/sea/air, likewise, outfitted for SAR, the aircraft will have more (bubble) windows and IR/NVG gear for the (larger) crew...The "H" fleet is rarely used for tanking, I don't know how much they even practice anymore, and I'd expect new tankers sometime in the next decade.

Not surprised their was hardly any mention of steel being bent, likewise (outside of local coverage) the debut of Hiyi Skwayel......Why would the MSM report good news for the Government????

[Smallc]

That is the total end fleet size the RCAF wants........the color (Yellow/Red) aides in visibility on the ground/sea/air, likewise, outfitted for SAR, the aircraft will have more (bubble) windows and IR/NVG gear for the (larger) crew...The "H" fleet is rarely used for tanking, I don't know how much they even practice anymore, and I'd expect new tankers sometime in the next decade.

Still, they could be used if needed for transport. Overall it should cut down on maintenance costs.

[Derek 2.0]

Still, they could be used if needed for transport. Overall it should cut down on maintenance costs.

They already are.......look no further than the Squadrons names

[Moonbox]

One more page and this is officially the longest thread on MLW. Don't stop now!

[Argus]

One more page and this is officially the longest thread on MLW. Don't stop now!

What's sad is we've been talking about it for two years and still have no decision.