Hoser360 Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 (edited) Wow, just goes to show how messed up our Federal government is. This plane is a black hole of money and does not serve our military needs one bit. If we are going to spend this much money on an air plane maybe we should just build our own. What was wrong with just continuing with the new generation of the F-18 Super Hornet, a superb aircraft capable of preforming all the tasks our modern air force needs. We keep electing DONKEY'S, not leaders. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-to-stay-in-program-of-f-35-jet-buyers-despite-pledge-to-withdraw/article28897002/ Edited February 25, 2016 by Hoser360 Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 Wow, just goes to show how messed up our Federal government is. This plane is a black hole of money and does not serve our military needs one bit. If we are going to spend this much money on an air plane maybe we should just build our own. What was wrong with just continuing with the new generation of the F-18 Super Hornet, a superb aircraft capable of preforming all the tasks our modern air force needs. We keep electing DONKEY'S, not leaders. What makes you think we are planning to buy the F35? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 Wow, just goes to show how messed up our Federal government is. I agree...doesn't matter whether it's strike fighter aircraft, ships, or helicopters....Canada's government will always manage to screw up any procurement process in royal fashion. Bring on the usual and totally incompetent circus...again. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
waldo Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 I agree...doesn't matter whether it's strike fighter aircraft, ships, or helicopters....Canada's government will always manage to screw up any procurement process in royal fashion. Bring on the usual and totally incompetent circus...again. it's always a free-shot for ya... but somehow, you never want to acknowledge the many, many, provisioning failures of the various branches of the U.S. military. My gawd man, Canada is just a piker compared to the U.S. in failed military procurement! There is quite the competence in that failed history of U.S. military procurement! . Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 I agree...doesn't matter whether it's strike fighter aircraft, ships, or helicopters....Canada's government will always manage to screw up any procurement process in royal fashion. Bring on the usual and totally incompetent circus...again. Well let's see, $1.5 trillion later and the Pentagon is backing away from the bomb truck as the latest round of failures of the F 35 surface. Now speaking of incompetent circuses... Quote
eyeball Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 Bring on the usual and totally incompetent circus...again.That said...The only way you guys could ever win a war now is if you took everyone out with you. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Topaz Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 The F-35 is the biggest lemon since the scud missile. Russia has one the best jets fighters made. Quote
Hoser360 Posted February 25, 2016 Author Report Posted February 25, 2016 What makes you think we are planning to buy the F35? http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-to-stay-in-program-of-f-35-jet-buyers-despite-pledge-to-withdraw/article28897002/ Quote
TimG Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 Wow, just goes to show how messed up our Federal government is. This plane is a black hole of money and does not serve our military needs one bit.So you claim that the case against the F35 is so obvious to you but a new government which explicitly questioned the merits of the deal is unable to see your POV. Why? ideological blinders? bribes from Lockheed? Alien mind control? Perhaps the case against the F35 is not as strong as you wish to believe. Quote
Argus Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 No one has yet posted anything which shows that some other aircraft would be significantly cheaper without being almost immediately obsolete. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Smallc Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 The USN is keeping the Super Hornet to about 2040. I doubt we'd have a problem keeping it to 2050. Quote
Big Guy Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 I find it interesting that the posters who are complaining about Canada's deficit are the same ones who are now complaining about these $100 million a pop military toys. Where is the money for these macho machines supposed to come from? Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Argus Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 The USN is keeping the Super Hornet to about 2040. I doubt we'd have a problem keeping it to 2050. I haven't seen it demonstrated that the super hornets are going to be much cheaper than the f35 either. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
TimG Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 I find it interesting that the posters who are complaining about Canada's deficit are the same ones who are now complaining about these $100 million a pop military toys. Where is the money for these macho machines supposed to come from?The jets need to be replaced so some money needs to be spent whether you like it or not. I have heard some suggestions that Canada start using drones for surveillance and sovereignty patrols but we still need aircraft to support our military alliances. I am not convinced that the critics of the F35 are being honest about the costs/limitations of the alternatives. The fact that the F35 is still on the list suggests that the Liberals feel the same. Quote
Argus Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 I find it interesting that the posters who are complaining about Canada's deficit are the same ones who are now complaining about these $100 million a pop military toys. Where is the money for these macho machines supposed to come from? Generally, people complain about money being wasted on unnecessary social welfare and environmental programs, not on necessary projects and programs. The problem is that so many lefties fail to differentiate between what government NEEDS to buy and what would simply be nice to have. There are those who think we need no military, of course, a supremely short-sighted belief fostered by their lack of familiarity with history and geopolitics. Those who realize you can't foresee when or if you'll need a military regard it the same way we do insurance, as a necessary expenditure. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Smallc Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 I haven't seen it demonstrated that the super hornets are going to be much cheaper than the f35 either. At the moment they are about $50M less in CAD based on the latest buys by the USN. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 I haven't seen it demonstrated that the super hornets are going to be much cheaper than the f35 either. Here's a comparison for you. I imagine the F35 has a lot of room to grow it's price as well with the recent findings of further software screw ups. http://planes.axlegeeks.com/compare/136-170/Boeing-F-A-18E-F-Super-Hornet-vs-BAE-F-35-Lightning-II Quote
Argus Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 (edited) At the moment they are about $50M less in CAD based on the latest buys by the USN. We don't pay what the USN pays. We don't fly the same version they fly either. And under our newly discovered 'whole life' accounting methodology you need to take into account the entire cost of the aircraft, including the toilet paper to be used by the next fifty years worth of pilots who fly them. This seems a fairly knowledgeable column discussing the two aircraft and their costs. https://www.cdainstitute.ca/en/blog/entry/f-35-vs-super-hornet This is a column explaining how difficult it is to cost out military aircraft purchases like the F35 and F16 or F18, and the assumptions which need to be made when you compare them. http://aviationweek.com/defense/opinion-f-35-not-too-pricey-performance-better Edited February 25, 2016 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Smallc Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 We don't pay what the USN pays. We don't fly the same version they fly either. And under our newly discovered 'whole life' accounting methodology you need to take into account the entire cost of the aircraft, including the toilet paper to be used by the next fifty years worth of pilots who fly them. This seems a fairly knowledgeable column discussing the two aircraft and their costs. https://www.cdainstitute.ca/en/blog/entry/f-35-vs-super-hornet This is a column explaining how difficult it is to cost out military aircraft purchases, and the assumptions which need to be made. http://aviationweek.com/defense/opinion-f-35-not-too-pricey-performance-better I was comparing the price that the USAF pays for the F-35 to the price the USN pays for the Super Hornet. I'm not an idiot. Quote
overthere Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 No one has yet posted anything which shows that some other aircraft would be significantly cheaper without being almost immediately obsolete. Although a few posters immediately attacked an American for US defence failures. Like that matters or is relevant. I guess they forgot to blame Harper, just this one time. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
overthere Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 Generally, people complain about money being wasted on unnecessary social welfare and environmental programs, not on necessary projects and programs. The problem is that so many lefties fail to differentiate between what government NEEDS to buy and what would simply be nice to have. There are those who think we need no military, of course, a supremely short-sighted belief fostered by their lack of familiarity with history and geopolitics. Those who realize you can't foresee when or if you'll need a military regard it the same way we do insurance, as a necessary expenditure. I'd go further and state that National security/rule of law must be the very first priority for any Canadian govt. The US is slowly but surely retreating from a role as the worlds policeman. We have to recognize that and act accordingly. I am not optimistic. Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
Big Guy Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 (edited) The armchair Generals continue to opine on what Canada needs. Their opinions do vary. There are also those who understand how a military works and would like to see our government decide on where we are going with our military. You can choose to let other countries (especially the USA who seems to enjoy wars) expend their blood and treasure for their wars (and Canadian protection)) - or - we can decide that Canada needs to have and facilitate our own foreign policy. If we allow the USA to protect themselves (and by necessity Canada) from the wars it initiates then we have no need to spend our money on expensive military technology. They start it, they own it, they pay for it. If we decide that we need Canadian autonomy and a unique Canadian foreign policy then we triple our yearly military budget to $60 billion a year and begin to create a nuclear capability. We can always increase taxes, deficits and other means to pay for our new nuclear military. We can always find a way. At the moment, we keep spending money on the kind of military hardware that allows the USA to pressure and/or blackmail us into using it to support them in their wars and expeditions based on American foreign policy. That is what we did in Somalia, Afghanistan, Libya and now in Iraq and Syria. I prefer to allow the Americans the glory, patriotism and celebration of sending their men and women to die in all corners of the world into doing what the USA thinks they should be doing. I much prefer to attend university graduation ceremonies then military burials. Edited February 25, 2016 by Big Guy Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
On Guard for Thee Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 Although a few posters immediately attacked an American for US defence failures. Like that matters or is relevant. I guess they forgot to blame Harper, just this one time. Oh there's plenty of blame for Harper: look at the hundreds of millions he wasted trying to sole source this turkey. Quote
TimG Posted February 25, 2016 Report Posted February 25, 2016 The armchair Generals continue to opine on what Canada needs.So the opinion of the real Generals that want the F35 do not matter? The only opinions that matter are people who say things you agree with? Quote
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
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.