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

[bush_cheney2004]

...Personally, I would be highly surprised if any aircraft is selected prior to the next election.......at such a time, the only aircraft that will be in production will be the F-35.....

Agreed...Canada will kick this can so far down the road it will actually eliminate the possible choices because they will no longer be in production or be even more expensive than F-35A unit production costs by then.

[Derek 2.0]

One would expect nothing less from a Liberal government. Their legacy of "savings" is great.

Inversely, precluding a North American maker from bidding on a Government contract will be grounds for numerous NAFTA challenges.......likewise, European aircraft with American content (i.e. Gripen) could be refused an end user technology transfer from the United States Government, coupled to a requirement of other European aircraft being able to integrate into NORAD....

[Keepitsimple]

How does one have an "open-source contract bid" by precluding aircraft by name prior?

Personally, I would be highly surprised if any aircraft is selected prior to the next election.......at such a time, the only aircraft that will be in production will be the F-35.....

They're just kicking the can down the field....an easy election promise for them.....makes it look like they are "saving" money when in fact, the F35 will likely be the chosen craft 6 or 7 years down the road.....after we've spent billions pro-longing the life of our CF-18s.....and we'll have lost our spot in line to become a major player in the F35 Global supply chain. Another Sea King helicopter debacle in the making.

[Derek 2.0]

Agreed...Canada will kick this can so far down the road it will actually eliminate the possible choices because they will no longer be in production or be even more expensive than F-35A unit production costs by then.

Exactly, Boeing and Lockheed will cease production of their legacy types within the next several years. As made evident several pages back, there is no funding in next years DoD budget for additional Super Hornets/Growlers, as such, precluding a firm contract order soon, the line will close once their current DoD orders are complete in ~mid 2017.

[On Guard for Thee]

That S/E operating cost tends to go up when that over stressed engine blows it's guts out the tailpipe and you lose the whole airframe. The stealth is questionable and it can't fight alone. Lets have a competition and see if we can't do better.

[Derek 2.0]

They're just kicking the can down the field....an easy election promise for them.....makes it look like they are "saving" money when in fact, the F35 will likely be the chosen craft 6 or 7 years down the road.....after we've spent billions pro-longing the life of our CF-18s.....and we'll have lost our spot in line to become a major player in the F35 Global supply chain. Another Sea King helicopter debacle in the making.

I would be even further surprised if the Trudeau Government formally abandoned the F-35 consortium anytime soon, as such a move would devastate the Canadian Aerospace industry sans a firm alternative, which no current maker of an alternative able to replace the F-35's footprint.....The Trudeau Government will be selecting more losers than winners.

[segnosaur]

I'm glad this albatross has been released from taxpayer's necks....

An open-source contract bid is the way to go. What kind of fiscal conservative wants a sole-source contract for billions of dollars without looking at alternatives? It isn't the jets themselves I would object to, it's the process for purchasing them that was a disaster.

Will Trudeau fix that issue? Who knows... but criticizing before he even becomes PM is rather ludicrous... "partisan hackery", one might say...

Normally open source bidding is preferable. But, its not a process without issues. The process does cost money, and it does take time (of which we have very little). And often you end up with a situation where there are various invalid comparisons. And if your final selection is the same plane that you were going to buy anyways (which would probably be the case if it were a truly unbiased process) then you've just wasted millions of dollars and years of time to make what should have been the obvious decision.

Will Trudeau fix that issue? Who knows... but criticizing before he even becomes PM is rather ludicrous...

Why can't we criticize him?

Liberal policy on the F35 has been known for months. Actual costs of the alternative have also been known for quite some time. Realizing that the supposed cost savings just won't be there is something that should be obvious.

Edited October 28, 2015 by segnosaur

[bush_cheney2004]

Even if Canada procures an alternative to the F-35A, it would need spares and other support for the next 40 years.

Canada has paid dearly for support and upgrade contracts to the aging and shrinking CF-188, often to foreign contractors.

[waldo]

That S/E operating cost tends to go up when that over stressed engine blows it's guts out the tailpipe and you lose the whole airframe. The stealth is questionable and it can't fight alone. Lets have a competition and see if we can't do better.

"can't fight alone"... yes, it's a most inconvenient fact that high-level U.S. military officials have spoken of the requirement for the F-22 to support the F-35. Since no other country has the F-22 it's quite obvious the "tactic" is to have member's of a "willing U.S. led coalition" position their F-35s to the discretionary use of the U.S. military "force projection" machine. Perhaps some of these F-35 proponents can speak to Canada's use of F-35s at a domestic defense level, sans U.S. F22s.

[On Guard for Thee]

I would be even further surprised if the Trudeau Government formally abandoned the F-35 consortium anytime soon, as such a move would devastate the Canadian Aerospace industry sans a firm alternative, which no current maker of an alternative able to replace the F-35's footprint.....The Trudeau Government will be selecting more losers than winners.

The contracts Canadian firms have to provide parts for the F 35 program remain in place whether we buy the bomb truck or not.

[Derek 2.0]

Even if Canada procures an alternative to the F-35A, it would need spares and other support for the next 40 years.

Canada has paid dearly for support and upgrade contracts to the aging and shrinking CF-188, often to foreign contractors.

Exactly, and would be required to integrate with the NORAD command structure, which going forward, will be dominated by USAF F-35s. Currently and going forward, the alternatives will be limited other American aircraft, namely the F-16 and F-15.

[Derek 2.0]

The contracts Canadian firms have to provide parts for the F 35 program remain in place whether we buy the bomb truck or not.

Until the current contracts end..........as noted in the previous article.

[On Guard for Thee]

Until the current contracts end..........as noted in the previous article.

Those contracts may or may not be renewed although it would seem to make sense to renew them since the support will still be required throughout production. And if we chose a better option there would likely be additional contracts to flow from those companies so the aerospace industry would still be busy.

[waldo]

As such, said average is determined by dividing operating costs spread across various fleet sizes, hence the F-35 does currently have a sustainably higher hourly cost.

source/cite

.

Until the current contracts end..........as noted in the previous article.

you tried this once already - again, per Frank Kendall, the Pentagon’s undersecretary of defence for acquisition:

Frank Kendall, the Pentagon’s undersecretary of defence for acquisition, told reporters in Fort Worth, Tex., on Tuesday that he can’t see why the existing $637 million in contracts wouldn’t remain with Canadian firms.

“I believe those suppliers are part of the team, I don’t see any reason why they would not continue to be part of the team whether Canada buys jets or not,” Kendall was quoted as saying by the web site DefenceNews.

“We make our decisions on participation based on best value and if Canadian firms are still best value, then they will be part of the program.”

.

Edited October 28, 2015 by waldo

[Derek 2.0]

"can't fight alone"... yes, it's a most inconvenient fact that high-level U.S. military officials have spoken of the requirement for the F-22 to support the F-35. Since no other country has the F-22 it's quite obvious the "tactic" is to have member's of a "willing U.S. led coalition" position their F-35s to the discretionary use of the U.S. military "force projection" machine. Perhaps some of these F-35 proponents can speak to Canada's use of F-35s at a domestic defense level, sans U.S. F22s.

The F-35 will be the mainstay of the American contribution to NORAD for the next half century.........I think the speaks to your "concerns", likewise the Trudeau Governments focus on Canadian air defense........

With the Russians now returning to fighter operations in the Arctic, and building new bases within the Arctic circle, "domestic defense" will be should be a focal point in the selection process........could be quite embarrassing to a Canadian Government that is unable to properly intercept supersonic Blackjack bombers escorted by stealth MIGs and Sukhoi fighters in our own airspace.....

[Derek 2.0]

source/cite

.

.

Grade school math......... x/1000, x/500, x/100.......which will produce a larger and lesser result?

you tried this once already -

Sure, and the point still stands, as the current contracts, producing parts for the F-35 in Canada won't go anywhere, yet the far larger future contracts will go elsewhere, as mentioned in the linked G&M article.

[waldo]

As to the Liberal brandished “first strike” moniker, that too is a inane determination……as our current vintage Hornets, likewise current in service Super Hornets, Eurofighters and Rafales have all been used historically for “first strike” (and second and third strike etc) missions. Clearly the decision to “first strike” an enemy is a political determination. As such, one is left to assume the Trudeau Liberals real intent as being an aircraft less capable, and in turn, with the preclusion of stealth etc afforded by the F-35, less survivable going forward.

again, just what is... what should be... Canada's role, needs and related defined requirements. The new reality you haven't quite grasped here is that Harper's "Canada First Defence Strategy" won't stand without significant scrutiny/change... "Real Change™"

.

Edited October 28, 2015 by waldo

[waldo]

Grade school math......... x/1000, x/500, x/100.......which will produce a larger and lesser result?

you're busted again! And you were so forceful/emphatic with that claim!

.

[Derek 2.0]

you're busted again! And you were so forceful/emphatic with that claim!

.

If by busted, you mean having the ability to do grade school math I'm guilty as charged.

[Derek 2.0]

again, just what is... what should be... Canada's role, needs and related defined requirements. The new reality you haven't quite grasped here is that Harper's "Canada First Defence Strategy" won't stand without significant scrutiny/change... "Real Change™"

.

That is now a question better asked of the (new) Government.......it appears to be yet to be determined, but with a focus on continuing with NORAD, sans the F-35, which will be used by the USAF for its NORAD role.......

I'll await the determination of the Government's placing of the puzzle pieces.

[waldo]

If by busted, you mean having the ability to do grade school math I'm guilty as charged.

you should be able to project upon your 'grade school math'... and show/prove that's exactly how operational costs have been determined ala supplied military/government figures and/or disclosed international fighter competition cost figures and/or manufacturer stated figures... again, source/cite:

[waldo]

That is now a question better asked of the (new) Government.......it appears to be yet to be determined, but with a focus on continuing with NORAD, sans the F-35, which will be used by the USAF for its NORAD role.......

I'll await the determination of the Government's placing of the puzzle pieces.

that was a quite obvious rhetorical question... given it plays off my previous posts in that regard. Quite obviously a proper review is required to determine Canada's role/needs/requirements... and it most certainly, as I said, will see Harper's "Canada First Defence Strategy" in that mix!

[On Guard for Thee]

Apparently we will have added costs of feeding our pilots more and keeping them fattened up if they are to be safe flying the F35.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/breaking-news/2015/10/14/f-35s-heavier-helmet-complicates-ejection-risks/73922710/

[Big Guy]

.....and we'll have lost our spot in line to become a major player in the F35 Global supply chain. ..

I see nothing wrong with losing our spot in line to waste $billions on these weapons.

[Derek 2.0]

that was a quite obvious rhetorical question... given it plays off my previous posts in that regard. Quite obviously a proper review is required to determine Canada's role/needs/requirements... and it most certainly, as I said, will see Harper's "Canada First Defence Strategy" in that mix!

As I said (several weeks ago?), I've no qualms with a review to plot a projection of where we want to go (the last proper one was conducted by the Mulroney Government, only to be thrown on its ear by the Wall coming down) and feel it prudent. With that said, I doubt said review will alter our place in NORAD.