Still Going to Buy the F-35, Really?

[rotary]

These are fighters after all. A second engine will not keep you from being shot down in a combat situation. The USAF has been operating F-16's in Alaska for decades and there have been a lot of single engine carrier based aircraft.

You don't need to be shot down to suffer from the single engine problem Especially one that burns as hot as the F 35's. Let's not re learn the F-104 lessons from the past.

[Wilber]

You don't need to be shot down to suffer from the single engine problem Especially one that burns as hot as the F 35's. Let's not re learn the F-104 lessons from the past.

Conjecture, there have been plenty of reliable single engine fighters. As I just said, The US has been operating a wing of F-16's from Eielson AFB in Fairbanks for decades.

[rotary]

Conjecture, there have been plenty of reliable single engine fighters. As I just said, The US has been operating a wing of F-16's from Eielson AFB in Fairbanks for decades.

Right, but there seem to be a lot more reasons to kiss the 35 good bye beyond it's lack of engines.

[Wilber]

Right, but there seem to be a lot more reasons to kiss the 35 good bye beyond it's lack of engines.

This is a decision that will determine the future of the RCAF's fighter capability for at least 30 years. Seems to be isn't good enough, so let's have a real competition that respects the military's requirements, not political requirements, and involves operational F-35's before we jump off the cliff.

[Cl Le]

Right, but there seem to be a lot more reasons to kiss the 35 good bye beyond it's lack of engines.

F-16 , F-18 , F-35 , Eurofighter et etc , truthfully it doesn't matter at this point because our CF-18's have been brought home and Trudeau Jr announced today that Canada is not at war with ISIS. His timing is interesting since our allies haven't even begun to bury their dead , embarrassing beyond words for this great country . I hope our allies realize our PM speaks fro himself not Canadians in general .

[rotary]

This is a decision that will determine the future of the RCAF's fighter capability for at least 30 years. Seems to be isn't good enough, so let's have a real competition that respects the military's requirements, not political requirements, and involves operational F-35's before we jump off the cliff.

Yep, a proper competition. Been saying that for a quite a while now. Serious competitors will offer production contracts similar to Lock Marts in all likelihood.

[rotary]

F-16 , F-18 , F-35 , Eurofighter et etc , truthfully it doesn't matter at this point because our CF-18's have been brought home and Trudeau Jr announced today that Canada is not at war with ISIS. His timing is interesting since our allies haven't even begun to bury their dead , embarrassing beyond words for this great country . I hope our allies realize our PM speaks fro himself not Canadians in general .

Our allies, you mean like the US who have commented at various levels their support for our current approach to taking ISIS out without wasting more time flying around in F 18's and returning to base with all the ordnance still attached, those allies?

[Wilber]

Yep, a proper competition. Been saying that for a quite a while now. Serious competitors will offer production contracts similar to Lock Marts in all likelihood.

Your idea of a proper competition seems to rule out the F-35 from the outset.

[rotary]

Your idea of a proper competition seems to rule out the F-35 from the outset.

I personally don't like the machine, but that's beside the point. When you are spending that much money, it only makes sense to outline the requirements and let potential produces come to the party. Single sourcing as Harper tried to do was probably doomed to come off the rails from the outset. The AG's report confirmed that.

[Wilber]

I personally don't like the machine, but that's beside the point. When you are spending that much money, it only makes sense to outline the requirements and let potential produces come to the party. Single sourcing as Harper tried to do was probably doomed to come off the rails from the outset. The AG's report confirmed that.

It hasn't come off the rails if this is the aircraft that best meets the military's needs. We had the same go around over single sourcing the C-17 and C-130J but they were simply the best aircraft available regardless of all the hand ringing over single sourcing and therefore, they were the right choice.

[bush_cheney2004]

You mean like throwing good money after bad toward the F 35? I'd much rather go in the red to buy things that actually work.

No...at least the Americans, British, Australians, Norwegians, and other partners are actually getting "replacement" aircraft now, instead of getting nothing like Canada. Ships, "jets", subs, helos...doesn't matter which one, 'cause Canada just can't figure these things out without so much political ping-pong. That's how Canada eventually ended up defaulting to a cheaper, shorter range U.S. Navy carrier based strike fighter.

[rotary]

It hasn't come off the rails if this is the aircraft that best meets the military's needs. We had the same go around over single sourcing the C-17 and C-130J but they were simply the best aircraft available regardless of all the hand ringing over single sourcing and therefore, they were the right choice.

Then let the military outline it's specific needs, and then pass those along to see which producer can best meet them. A C 130 fulfills a fairly obvious need, and it has done so very well. However I think things get a fair bit more complex when you get beyond a simple transport machine.

[bush_cheney2004]

Then let the military outline it's specific needs, and then pass those along to see which producer can best meet them. A C 130 fulfills a fairly obvious need, and it has done so very well. However I think things get a fair bit more complex when you get beyond a simple transport machine.

So what is taking so long to define mission and platform requirements. Even that seems to take forever. It's not rocket science.

That's just more of Canada's famous stalling game.

Edited March 24, 2016 by bush_cheney2004

[rotary]

No...at least the Americans, British, Australians, Norwegians, and other partners are actually getting "replacement" aircraft now, instead of getting nothing like Canada. Ships, "jets", subs, helos...doesn't matter which one, 'cause Canada just can't figure these things out without so much political ping-pong. That's how Canada eventually ended up defaulting to a cheaper, shorter range U.S. Navy carrier based strike fighter.

Well you can't blame us for trying to get actual value for money spent. How much have those countries you mentioned scaled back their F 35 orders so far?

[waldo]

No...at least the Americans, British, Australians, Norwegians, and other partners are actually getting "replacement" aircraft now, instead of getting nothing like Canada.

no - none of the LRIP pre-production aircraft are legitimate replacement aircraft... oh wait, you wyly-guy, you put air-quotes around the word "replacement". We've already dealt with the charade being played out by the USMC and it's trumped-up IOC designation for its F-35 variant... just as the USAF schedules a similar brazen propaganda display for a 2016 end-of-year IOC.

.

[rotary]

So what is taking so long to define mission and platform requirements. Even that seems to take forever. It's not rocket science.

That's just more of Canada's famous stalling game.

Perhaps you may have heard that we recently elected a new government. They seem to have this strange concept of asking potential suppliers to submit proposals of their products before asking us to buy them.

[bush_cheney2004]

Well you can't blame us for trying to get actual value for money spent. How much have those countries you mentioned scaled back their F 35 orders so far?

However much they want or need to, but it ain't zero. Other nations have actually partnered up and placed orders.

Canada will kick this cheap can down the road as long as it can, because that's what Canada does,

[waldo]

So what is taking so long to define mission and platform requirements. Even that seems to take forever. It's not rocket science.

That's just more of Canada's famous stalling game.

perhaps one day you might choose to actually take me up on that challenge and have you openly acknowledge the long, long, long history of failed U.S. military procurement initiatives, hey! Oh wait, that's why you won't take up that challenge, right? Of course, as always, it's quite telling to read you so fixated on Canada's military procurement, while you refuse to touch the big-time U.S. failures - go figure, hey!

.

[Wilber]

Then let the military outline it's specific needs, and then pass those along to see which producer can best meet them. A C 130 fulfills a fairly obvious need, and it has done so very well. However I think things get a fair bit more complex when you get beyond a simple transport machine.

I thought they had and determined the F-35 best met those needs. As usual in Canada, they get buried in politics.

[bush_cheney2004]

Perhaps you may have heard that we recently elected a new government. They seem to have this strange concept of asking potential suppliers to submit proposals of their products before asking us to buy them.

Platform requirements do not change with a new government. Ship contracts (what little they are) were not competitive proposals from many potential suppliers.

[waldo]

Other nations have actually partnered up and placed orders.

pony up the order numbers... with signed contracts! Sure you can.

.

[waldo]

I thought they had and determined the F-35 best met those needs. As usual in Canada, they get buried in politics.

no - initial requirements/needs were written 'after-the-fact'... and somehow, somehow... managed to align towards the F-35 - go figure! This go-around, the new sheriff in town is asking for those requirements/needs... fitting Canada's role (which similarly is being properly defined)... to be declared before an open competition is set. What a concept!

.

[rotary]

I thought they had and determined the F-35 best met those needs. As usual in Canada, they get buried in politics.

They sort of did, but the original folly of this exercise was that the Harper gov't decided to simply hand the contract to the first supplier who came along, and it turns out that product has a serious amount of doubts about it, along with ever escalating costs and failures to meet production time projections. The poor old taxpayer should get some consideration here don't you think?

[bush_cheney2004]

They sort of did, but the original folly of this exercise was that the Harper gov't decided to simply hand the contract to the first supplier who came along, and it turns out that product has a serious amount of doubts about it, along with ever escalating costs and failures to meet production time projections. The poor old taxpayer should get some consideration here don't you think?

Like when PM Harper's Canada waltzed into the Boeing Store and handed the sole source contract for C-17 heavy lift aircraft without so much taxpayer consideration, jumping in line, and taking production orders from the United States Air Force ?

[rotary]

Platform requirements do not change with a new government. Ship contracts (what little they are) were not competitive proposals from many potential suppliers.

Well yes they may change, and I don't think they were likely properly defined to begin with. But fill your boots, piss away all the bucks you want on F 35's if it's what you think you need. The US does tend to invade countries a lot more often than does Canada, so maybe you think you need this stealth thingy. A word of warning though, don't mess with China or Russia or they may just eat the F 35 for breakfast.