Still Going to Buy the F-35, Really?

[Derek 2.0]

Quote

My comment was referring to a specific claim... that the ability to dogfight was important because the U.S. experiences in Vietnam showed that missiles were sometimes ineffective. I was pointing out that the reason they had to dogfight wasn't necessarily that long range missiles were ineffective, but that  the rules of engagement in that conflict required visual confirmation (which would have resulted in more dogfights.) 

 

Right, but even then, from what's been made public by actual F-35 pilots, the F-35 won't have any concerns "dog fighting" with legacy types.

 

------------

 

In the case of Vietnam, the medium range Sparrow was very ineffective, averaging 3-4 missiles expended for a kill (if any).......thus, for an F-4 with a typical loadout of 4x Sparrows and 4x Sidewinders (and later guns) they often had no choice but to dogfight with the Vietnamese.......with the addition of the internal gun and new tactics, the F-4 earned its nickname of the "World's largest distributor of MiG parts" for a reason. 

[segnosaur]

Quote

 

Actually we can. While there are accusations that the costs of the F35 are "out of control", the fact is that the unit price has dropped significantly as the production rate has increased, and will drop further in the near future.

Sounds like a huge rewrite of history.

Not really. The first F35 produced costed over $200 million. Once they started producing them, costs dropped to ~150 million. Now the cost is below $100 million.

The program cost continues to escalate, and the orders are way down from the original estimates.

As another poster pointed out, you are making the mistake of comparing unit cost with program cost.

Now, it is true that development costs were higher and the number of planes ordered is lower than expected when the program started. This might increase the price per plane relative to initial plans. But that's irrelevant... we are not comparing the current price of the F35 now with the theoretical price from a decade ago when the program was started. We are comparing the current price of the F35 with the current price of the F18, or of the Gripen, or of the Eurofighter. So, instead of being a good plane at a GREAT price, it becomes a good place at a GOOD price.

[segnosaur]

8 hours ago, Omni said:

 

Before I deal with this posting, I just want to point out: Omni made many claims about the F35... too expensive, lacks maneuverability, Pretty much all of those claims were debunked. So what does he do? Ignores the fact that most of what he's already said has been debunked and flings yet more stuff around. Guess we can call that the spaghetti method.

Quote

If you think the test pilot's actual report of how poorly he thought of the F 35 is the only negative critique of the F 35, I can assure you there are plenty more.

I'm sure there are plenty more. I can even point out ones you haven't even mentioned yet. However, I never claimed the F35 was flawless. I admitted in an earlier post that there were still problems, and there will probably be new problems in the future.

All jet fighters have had problems, both during development and during deployment. Its the nature of the beast. That the F35 seems to have more problems than other planes is partly due to the fact that its such a step up when compared to other planes. Pointing to the F35 and shouting "Problems!" while ignoring similar faults with the F18, or the Gripen, is rather weak tea.

Quote

Here's just one.

http://fortune.com/2016/03/10/the-f-35-is-still-a-mess

 

 

Ok, so lets take a look at some of the problems listed in that particular article:

- Wing drop; Problem:  fixed, by simply rewriting part of the control software. See: http://breakingdefense.com/2013/08/dont-ask-alis-yet-f-35-wing-drop-issue-fixed/

- Radar requiring reboot: Last I heard, a fix in the software was currently undergoing testing and seems to have solved the problem. See: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/f-35-software-glitches-fixed/

- Problem with ALIS (software used for maintenance)... a new version is expected early next year. Yes its out of date and still buggy. But its a feature that our current CF18 fleet doesn't have, so even if its never used, its not like we're loosing functionality. And furthermore, ALIS is being used by the Marines on their squadron of F35Bs, and even with the bugs it still seems to be making maintenance easier. http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/support/2016/04/27/f35-marine-maintainers-alis-uk-us-f35b/83614074/

 

Much like the problems they had with the F18s and Gripen during development and deployment... they'll eventually solve the problems, or find workarounds.

Edited November 24, 2016 by segnosaur

[PIK]

This is all about what is good for the liberal party, it has nothing to do with Canada. 

[GostHacked]

1 minute ago, PIK said:

This is all about what is good for the liberal party, it has nothing to do with Canada. 

And this stuff all started under Harper and the Conservatives, all of them are to blame.

[DogOnPorch]

22 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

And this stuff all started under Harper and the Conservatives, all of them are to blame.

Gutting the military was initially Trudeau Sr's deed.

As pointed out, Canada used to operate a large Navy including carriers.

[Argus]

21 hours ago, Omni said:

Think of the money we will save not buying things that don't really work and that we don't need in the first place. Like stealth both the Russians and Chineese can see through.

I can pretty much guarantee there will be no savings. As for whether the F-35 is better than other aircraft, I have this odd habit of listening tot he people who fly them, and the Air Force wants the F-35. 

[DogOnPorch]

It's much more than an aircraft. It's part of a much larger battlefield network....I imagine one feels plugged-in to the overall situation much more than in an older machine.

[Argus]

1 hour ago, GostHacked said:

And this stuff all started under Harper and the Conservatives, all of them are to blame.

What did Harper do other than continue the policy of the Liberals to contribute to the F-35 project with an eye to eventually buying them?

[Derek 2.0]

3 hours ago, GostHacked said:

And this stuff all started under Harper and the Conservatives, all of them are to blame.

 

No, the reduction in the fighter force size (which put further pressure on the remaining fleet) and our joining of the Joint Strike Fighter program began under the previous Liberal government.

[Derek 2.0]

2 hours ago, Argus said:

I can pretty much guarantee there will be no savings. As for whether the F-35 is better than other aircraft, I have this odd habit of listening tot he people who fly them, and the Air Force wants the F-35. 

Not at all......the Danes, in their one year competition, found the F-35 to be far more capable and cheaper then the Super Hornet.

 

 

[Derek 2.0]

2 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

It's much more than an aircraft. It's part of a much larger battlefield network....I imagine one feels plugged-in to the overall situation much more than in an older machine.

 

Exactly, the F-35 is a system of systems, far more important then its other physical attributes........something 4th generation aircraft like the Super Hornet can never hope to be. 

[Derek 2.0]

3 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

Gutting the military was initially Trudeau Sr's deed.

Yes indeed......PET actually procured too many (far more then we could operate absent converting Voodoo or Starfighter squadrons), ineffective, CF-5 Freedom Fighters, despite Air Command selecting one of the F-4E, A-6 or A-7 to fulfill our theater strike commitment to NATO.......that they were produced in the Montreal area was but a happy accident. 

 

3 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

As pointed out, Canada used to operate a large Navy including carriers.

 

Not only did he scrap our last carrier, that just finished a refit and had close to two decades left in it, but slashed our new destroyers (280 program) to four and canceled the planned guided missile frigates, intended to replace our obsolete destroyer escorts in the early 70s........only after political pressure, including the threat of scuppering trade deals, did the Trudeau government dither into agreeing to procure 6 of what would become the Halifax frigates.......still leaving the majority of the fleet at technological level that would have been hard pressed to survive in the later stages of WW II. 

[Omni]

3 hours ago, Argus said:

What did Harper do other than continue the policy of the Liberals to contribute to the F-35 project with an eye to eventually buying them?

What he did was he attempted to single source a defective product who's price has shot up much faster than ever an F 35 could do in flight.

[Wilber]

4 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

Gutting the military was initially Trudeau Sr's deed.

As pointed out, Canada used to operate a large Navy including carriers.

Trudeau accelerated the rot alright but I don't know that he started it.

The Bonaventure wasn't big enough to operate as a fleet carrier. It's flight deck was too short for modern high performance aircraft, it was short even for the Korean War vintage Banshees it did have. They should have never done its refit in the first place. When you consider our NATO allies already have a good 80% of the worlds in service carriers, there was never a need for us to have one in the first place. Our defense money would be better spent elsewhere, for both our own and our allies benefit.

 

Britain's new QE class carriers are costing 5B US each, plus their aircraft on top of that.

[segnosaur]

15 minutes ago, Omni said:

What he did was he attempted to single source

A product that Canada has been involved in the development of, for many years.

As opposed to the Liberals sole-sourcing the F18, for which Canada has not been involved in the development.

a defective product

Already pointed out that all planes have defects. Even the F18 has serious problems (e.g. the system that provides air to the pilots. Most people would prefer if pilots didn't black out.)

who's price has shot up much faster than ever an F 35 could do in flight.

Already pointed out that the F35 is already cheaper than some of its competitors, and will likely cost less than the F18 in the long run.

You know you keep making bogus claims. The fact that you repeat them does not make them any more true.

[Omni]

1 minute ago, segnosaur said:

A product that Canada has been involved in the development of, for many years.

As opposed to the Liberals sole-sourcing the F18, for which Canada has not been involved in the development.

 

 

Already pointed out that all planes have defects. Even the F18 has serious problems (e.g. the system that provides air to the pilots. Most people would prefer if pilots didn't black out.)

 

 

Already pointed out that the F35 is already cheaper than some of its competitors, and will likely cost less than the F18 in the long run.

You know you keep making bogus claims. The fact that you repeat them does not make them any more true.

I don't make the claims, I just quote 'em.

[Derek 2.0]

1 hour ago, Wilber said:

The Bonaventure wasn't big enough to operate as a fleet carrier. It's flight deck was too short for modern high performance aircraft, it was short even for the Korean War vintage Banshees it did have. They should have never done its refit in the first place. When you consider our NATO allies already have a good 80% of the worlds in service carriers, there was never a need for us to have one in the first place. Our defense money would be better spent elsewhere, for both our own and our allies benefit.

 

It was never intended to operate as a fleet carrier, both sister classes were termed "light fleets".......none the less, the Bonaventure was operated as an anti-submarine carrier. As to fixed wing aircraft, if as intended in the early 60s (and again in the later 60s), the RCN wouldn't have had an issue operating A-4s like her sisters did in Australian, Brazilian and Argentinian service......better yet, the AV-8A and then the Sea Harrier (if you buy into conspiracy theories, the Bonaventure did operate Sea Harriers in Indian service for decades).

 

As to need, yes there was........fulfilling our NATO anti-submarine obligations in the North Atlantic, where a light carrier with an anti-submarine air group was very much needed, not only in combating Soviet subs, but also picking off Bear patrol aircraft which very much so operated in conjunction with Soviet subs and bombers.......in such a light (of self imposed slashed defense budgets in the middle of Cold War), the Bonnie's operating cost was a far better use of money in terms of capability then any combination of 2-3 of the obsolete steamers.....further more, once the Trudeau government signed us up for NATO Northern Flank, the Bonaventure would have been worth its weight in gold with the reinforcement of Norway....be it as an anti submarine escort or a Commando carrier.

 

There was no justification for Trudeau snr to retire it then, just as there is no justification for Trudeau jnr to sole source Super Hornets to fill a gap that isn't there......when he should just piss or get off the pot on deciding a Hornet replacement.....instead, he's in a political corner of his own making.   

[Wilber]

37 minutes ago, Derek 2.0 said:

IAs to need, yes there was........fulfilling our NATO anti-submarine obligations in the North Atlantic, where a light carrier with an anti-submarine air group was very much needed, not only in combating Soviet subs, but also picking off Bear patrol aircraft which very much so operated in conjunction with Soviet subs and bombers.......in such a light (of self imposed slashed defense budgets in the middle of Cold War), the Bonnie's operating cost was a far better use of money in terms of capability then any combination of 2-3 of the obsolete steamers.....further more, once the Trudeau government signed us up for NATO Northern Flank, the Bonaventure would have been worth its weight in gold with the reinforcement of Norway....be it as an anti submarine escort or a Commando carrier.

 

 

That's the thing, without new aircraft, the Bonney was losing its usefulness and there were few new aircraft it could handle. There is no way a Banshee could catch a Bear or anything else and the A4 wasn't a whole lot better. The ship was also marginal for the old Trackers it was operating.  It could have used Harriers but would need a ski jump to use them effectively and the Sea Harrier didn't come into service until 1978. Even if we could have got some by 1980, the Bonaventure would have been 35 years old by then. The only realistic option would be converting it solely to helicopters.

 

A few more frigates with good ASW helicopters would have been far more useful.

Edited November 25, 2016 by Wilber

[Argus]

2 hours ago, Omni said:

What he did was he attempted to single source a defective product who's price has shot up much faster than ever an F 35 could do in flight.

To repeat. What did he do but continue the Liberals' involvement in this program with an eye to buying it?

I think you know very well that if the Liberals had been in power we'd have already bought this aircraft by now. They only started opposing it once they were in opposition.

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Omni said:

I don't make the claims, I just quote 'em.

I prefer to rely on our own air force people to make the right decision. They're not reading articles in on-line magazines. They actually know what they're talking about.

Edited November 25, 2016 by Argus

[Omni]

1 minute ago, Argus said:

To repeat. What did he do but continue the Liberals' involvement in this program with an eye to buying it?

I think you know very well that if the Liberals had been in power we'd have already bought this aircraft by now. They only started opposing it once they were in opposition.

You may recall that Harper became the first and only PM to be found in contempt because he refused to open the file on this thing because he realized he had no idea what the eventual costs were going to amount to. Thankfully the Liberals in power now have the good sense to back away.

[Argus]

Just now, Omni said:

You may recall that Harper became the first and only PM to be found in contempt because he refused to open the file on this thing because he realized he had no idea what the eventual costs were going to amount to. Thankfully the Liberals in power now have the good sense to back away.

That was nothing but a political propaganda campaign on both sides. The Liberals and NDP wanted information they could use to jack the costs up as high as possible. Again, this is the first time in Canadian history that the life-cycle costs, and not the purchase costs of a weapons system were bandied about. That was done to scare the ignorant with the costs and to cause bad publicity for the Harper government.

And your reply ignored what I said: the people best able to make the decision about what the air force should be flying are the people in the air force who'll be flying it.

[Omni]

4 minutes ago, Argus said:

I prefer to rely on our own air force people to make the right decision. They're not reading articles in on-line magazines. They actually know what they're talking about.

Overheated SINGLE engines suffering from turbine rub blowing up on the runway when T/O power is applied is scary no matter where you read about it.

[Omni]

2 minutes ago, Argus said:

That was nothing but a political propaganda campaign on both sides. The Liberals and NDP wanted information they could use to jack the costs up as high as possible. Again, this is the first time in Canadian history that the life-cycle costs, and not the purchase costs of a weapons system were bandied about. That was done to scare the ignorant with the costs and to cause bad publicity for the Harper government.

And your reply ignored what I said: the people best able to make the decision about what the air force should be flying are the people in the air force who'll be flying it.

The opposition has a right to request that information so as to be able to advise us what the costs will be. Harper hasw at least one "noteworthy" footprint. And I suspect for every expert you can quote who like the 35, there will be another who will pooh pooh it.