The F-35

[deicer]

Well,,,,

Steve was willing to pay CAT $5million to get his picture in a locomotive, I guess the price to get one in a F-35 is a tad higher

[deicer]

http://pushedleft.bl...e-tax-cuts.html

On March 19, 2008, Stephen Harper posed for a photo-op at London's Electro-Motive plant to showcase a $5-million federal tax break given to Caterpillar, the American buyers of the Canadian company.

When Caterpillar, famous for union busting in the United States, amid record profits, wanted the employees to take a 50% pay cut and surrender their benefits, amazingly no new Harper photo-op.

This article has the picture...

http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/02/06/the-commons-when-photo-ops-go-wrong/

Edited April 4, 2012 by deicer

[Kip Powick]

What we need is leadership. A government that says: You know what? (1) We need fighter jets. The men and women who fly those things say – after careful consideration – that this model is what they need. We looked into it very carefully and found no reason to object to their selection. So we’re going to buy those jets. We are very careful not to spend any more money than we need to. But we will get the equipment we need in a reasonable amount of time, because it would be irresponsible not to.(2) If you don’t like it, vote against us next time.

(1)No, we don't...for reasons previously posted

(2) Perhaps I am wrong but was the purchase of these planes part of their election platform..or is the author saying that if they do buy the F35, and we don't agree with the purchase,..vote against Steve and his gang??

Anyhow

[Airband]

.

What the Avro Arrow should have taught Ottawa about the F-35

Thursday, April 5, 2012 - Globe and Mail

by Harry Swain

Harry Swain is a former federal deputy minister of Industry Canada and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada

A Tory prime minister, secure in his majority but highly suspicious of his political enemies, finds himself blind-sided by obscure processes in the departments of Defence and Industry that had gravitated to the most advanced fighter plane in the world -- but one that cost more than the country could afford. It was fifty years ago, the prime minister was John Diefenbaker, and the plane was the Avro Arrow.

Bowing to fiscal reality affected the next election, and started a national myth of loss and betrayal as persistent as the National Energy Policy or the humiliation of Quebec.

The parallels to the F-35 are eerie, but there are important differences. The basic story of vested interests in both the public and private sectors reinforcing each others’ dreams of the biggest, baddest fighter in the whole world and devil take the taxpayer’s dollars is the same, as is prevarication and mendacity when the truth about cost starts to leak out. Both governments, half a century apart, initially defended their establishments while privately getting more and more alarmed about the financial cost of continuing versus the political costs of cancellation.

But there are some important differences, too. The F-35 does not have a big maple leaf on it, nor is it a vehicle for nationalist pride. Despite the fiction that we and the other non-U.S. buyers had an important role in design and development, we were in fact merely decorative afterthoughts in a U.S.-dominated process. And a large Canadian industrial base will not have to be stood down if the F-35 is cancelled or subjected to competition.

'Both aircraft were obsolete the day they first flew.'

.

[Mitch Cronin]

I obviously know very little about air combat tactics, but it seems to me that in a world with thrust vectoring, any fighter aircraft without that capability would be like fish in a barrel for any opposing force with that ability.

Drones can probably out-turn almost any other aircraft because they don't need to worry about gee limits on a human pilot and they're much lighter than conventional birds.... But unless they too can be made with thrust vectoring agility, it's easy to imagine them being shot down by a craft with such ability.

If I was defending an empire, I think I'd be looking for something with thrust vectoring, maybe VTOL capable, as many hard points under each wing as can be had, and some good old fashioned guns. ...in any case, it sure looks to me that in today's world, a fighter without thrust vectoring is as obsolete as a Sopwith Camel.

Am I wrong?

[DEFCON]

"If you don’t like it, vote against us next time".

I've always thought the comment above represented a 'go piss-into-the-wind' stlye response, which is not appreciated at all!.

[DEFCON]

....which is a comment she would apparently appreciate.

[DEFCON]

I agree?

[RGT2.0]

[Kip Powick]

I agree?

Me too ?

What are you agreeing to?????? and why the question marks?

[Specs]

When the contact was originally announced I figured it was just another GWB tactic. Push the debt to ridiculous levels in order to pave the way for setting the the cost cutting, tax reduction, small government agenda you want to impose. So far, nothing I've seen from the Conservatives has convinced me otherwise. And while it was a shrewd manipulative move to attack Stats Canada to that end, I must admit they do seem a bit amateurish in not savaging the Auditor General's budget as well first. Guess they won't miss that one on the next budget.

[W5]

Fisher: Let's put the F-35 debate in perspective

http://www.canada.com/news/Fisher+debate+perspective/6421612/story.html

The auditor general's report on the F-35 aside, no one knows what Canada will pay for the Joint Strike Fighter, and they won't until a final price is negotiated. So, in the inimitable words of Aislin, "Everyone take a Valium!"

Price estimates now range from $75 million to $162 million per aircraft. The nine partners in the JSF project are currently pressing the manufacturer (and the U.S. government, as program co-ordinator) to get costs down. The odds are, they will.

Things such as which tranche you buy in at, how many aircraft you buy, over what time frame, and where your currency is vis-a-vis the U.S. dollar at the time of signing, all will affect the prices each country pays - just as with every other similar program. Indeed, these factors can have a huge impact on final pricing. As things stand now, the Canadian military still reckons the per-aircraft cost, as the U.S. Congress was told last week, is about $85 million and that the federal government still can purchase F-35s under the $9-billion ceiling the Harper government unnecessarily announced two years ago and boxed itself into for good last week.

Still, the overriding question remains: does or doesn't Canada need a replacement for the CF-18s and if so, what performance should that replacement aircraft be capable of?

Unfortunately, sometimes ridiculously exaggerating what the AG had to say, politicians and other critics conflate these two, using the bureaucracy's and the government's handling of the procurement to question the need for the fifth generation F-35 itself.

Let's live in the real world. Unless Canada decides drastically to change its defence strategy and becomes pacifist and isolationist, we will continue, as we have done for a century, to commit ourselves to military alliances and partnerships to further our national interests. To be worthy allies and partners we have to be more than peacekeepers uttering platitudes - the bulwark of the Liberal defence strategy for years.

As with the entire F-35 debate, the auditor general's report is being discussed with no external context. The competence and integrity of the folks at the Defence Department aside, what about the eight other partner countries in the program, and the Japanese, who have ordered 42 F-35s? Why are a bunch of Europeans signed up to an American program when the EU nations already produces several newish fighter jets of their own. Are they all idiots, too?

The multinational JSF program follows on that of the F-16, another U.S. warplane chosen by many European countries about 30 years ago. As with the F-35, the F-16 had some initial teething problems but it was ultimately successful. This may explain why the F-35 European partner nations have shown far more patience with the F-35's hurdles than Canadian critics have.

As for Canada not having a competitive bidding process before deciding on the F-35, neither did its JSF partners except the U.S., which chose Lockheed Martin's X-35 over Boeing's X-32. The Japanese, who are not partners, did hold a competition and concluded the JSF was better than Boeing's Super Hornet and the Eurofighter consortium's Typhoon.

There is no competition to be had if you want stealth and a networked capability because there are no other western aircraft being produced now that have this. It is THAT simple. The justification that the U.S., Japan and most of their western European allies have accepted is that China and Russia are rushing to catch up with fifth-generation warplanes of their own. Looking out 20 or 30 years, it is hardly a stretch to see how the Chinese or Russians might one day pose a military threat to Canada or Canadian interests.

The only reason for Canada to have a competition to replace its CF-18's is if it decides - in advance - that the stealthy fifth-generation aspects of the F-35 are not important. If they aren't, then the F-35 is going to lose any competition, because aside from these potentially revolutionary capabilities, it isn't that much different from the fourth-generation aircraft out there and of course, it costs more.

Much has been made of the United States Navy and the Royal Australian Air Force purchasing a relatively small number of slightly less expensive fourth-generation Super Hornets, with suggestions that Canada should follow their lead. This totally misrepresents those Super Hornet purchases. They are intended to fill an operational gap due to F-35 production delays, not to replace them.

As for the fourth-generation alternatives to the F-35, several have had troubled histories. Sweden's Grippen, for example, had two very public and embarrassing prototype crashes. Nowhere near as advanced as the F-35, reams of its software code needed to be re-written, delaying the program and boosting costs. France's Rafale was long delayed, over budget, and it has little success in export sales despite years of expensive promotion. Eurofighter's Typhoon has experienced enormous problems, delays and cost overruns and has failed to attract buyers outside its builders' group. The only one that has had any real sales success has been the Super Hornet, and most of these sales have been as bridge aircraft to the F-35.

Why have so few Super Hornets been sold? There are many reasons, but one that stands out is that they are not in the same league as the F-35. The prospect of the JSF's arrival has helped keep other aircraft from selling well, as has the prospect of Russian and Chinese fifth-generation fighters now under development.

Something else forgotten is that Canada spent several billion dollars to purchase C-17 heavy-lift transport aircraft and rebuilt CH-47 medium-lift helicopters for the Afghan mission without a tendering process. At the time, some critics demanded that Canada consider Airbus's A-400M heavy-lift transport, then at the design stage. Well, the A-400M still has not entered service. The RCAF would still be waiting for it if it had been the winner of a competitive process.

Alas, almost none of this has shown up in either the government's case for the F-35 or in the broader debate surrounding it.

[DEFCON]

Who can afford to purchase a $150M 'single engine' fighter? Purely the stuff of nutty thinking.

[Guest]

"Seems that the US is very interested in what we intend to do

Quote

Canada's F-35 decision anxiously awaited, says U.S. deputy secretary of defence

Pentagon official says 'Canada punches well above its weight’ in fight against ISIS

CBC News Posted: Mar 10, 2016 5:00 PM ET Last Updated: Mar 10, 2016 8:30 PM ET

The U.S. deputy secretary of defence says he'd like the Canadian government to make up its mind, one way or the other, whether it will replace its aging CF-18 fleet with Lockheed Martin's F-35 fighter jets. 

"Because Canada has been a partner in the F-35 program, if they withdraw — I think it's 65 airplanes —  the price for all the other members in the coalition goes up slightly," said Robert Work, in an interview with Rosemary Barton, host of CBC News Network's Power & Politics.

The Conservative government had planned to acquire 65 F-35 stealth fighter jets for the Royal Canadian Air Force, but the procurement process was put on hold after the auditor general accused the government of fudging the project's costs and not doing sufficient research.

During the last election Justin Trudeau announced his party would scrap the Conservatives' troubled F-35 fighter jet program. (Daniel Hughes/U.S. Air Force/Reuters)

One of the new Liberal government's main campaign pledges was to buy a less-expensive aircraft and plow the savings into the navy.

However, since taking office, Canada's Minister of Public Services and Procurement Judy Foote has said Lockheed Martin's F-35 fighter jets may still be in the mix to replace Canada's CF-18s.

Most costly weapons program in U.S. history

"It's important for Canada to make the decision on the aircraft that they need for their national interest, and then the United States and Canada can work it out," said Work.

Work said he doesn't think the Canadian government is dragging its feet, but the U.S. is watching closely.

"I work in the Pentagon, so I measure time different ways than other people, so I don't believe it's been long. These are very important political decisions and defence decisions for Canada to make, and we're not trying to pressure them in any way," said Work in an interview at the Pentagon.

"We'd like to know, we're anxious to know, where exactly will you go so we can start to plan together. But these types of decisions are made in due course and we're looking forward to the final decision."

The F-35 program was developed by Lockheed Martin to promote a common system between allied partners including the U.S, Britain, the Netherlands, Italy, Turkey, Denmark, Norway and Australia.

In 2010, the U.S. committed to buying 2,443 aircraft, making it the most costly weapons program in U.S. military history. It's been beset with delays and technical bugs, many of which are related to the development of the fighter's software.

In 2013, Orlando Carvalho, executive vice-president of aeronautics at Lockheed Martin, warned that Canada's aerospace industry would likely fall out of favour if Canada withdrew its intentions to buy F-35s.

"Whatever Canada's choice is we're going to be interoperable," said Work. "I mean Canada and the United States armed forces are as about as interoperable as you can imagine."

Canadian trainers could land on front lines in Iraq, Syria

That close relationship also exists in the U.S.-led coalition against ISIS in Iraq and Syria, Work said.

He told Barton that Canada will be "central" in training local ground troops who will lead  the combat against ISIS in two key cities, Al-Raqqah in Syria, and Mosul in Iraq.

• ISIS airstrikes by Canada to end, training forces to triple
• U.S. airstrikes targeting ISIS in Libya kill Serbian hostages, officials say

Last month Canada announced it will triple the number of Canadian Forces members helping to train local ground troops. The Communications Security Establishment, Canada's electronic spy service, is also set to play a more prominent role in the fight.

When pressed about any disappointment with Canada's decision to pull its jets out, Work shook his head "no."

Libyan troops sit on an armoured personnel carrier in August 2015 in Benghazi. Libya's second-largest city has seen some of the worst fighting since the 2011 uprising against Moammar Gadhafi. (Abdullah Doma/AFP/Getty Images)

He said the intelligence Canada provides "is just as important as six fighter jets."

Work, who previously worked as undersecretary of the U.S. navy, said it's hard to say whether Canada's decision to pull its six CF-18 jets out of the bombing mission will put people on the ground at risk.

"All of the pilots who fly over Iraq and Syria are at risk every day. A lot of people focus on the airplanes, for example, and of the 66 countries in the coalition, Canada punches well above its weight," he said.

Work said it's possible Canadian troops could find themselves caught in an unexpected attack alongside Peshmerga forces.

"It's a chaotic environment, it's a very fluid battlefield. It's not like a normal battlefield with front lines. [ISIS] is very canny and very good, tactically proficient at what they do on the battlefield," he said.

Canada welcomed in Libya campaign

The coalition is also trying to figure out the best way forward in Libya, a country disturbed by civil war and mounting Islamic extremism.

Work said he expects Canada to play an important role if the coalition does decide to expand its campaign into Libya. He said things have to happen sooner rather than later.

"We would like to have a government [in Libya] we could work with. That's the most problematic part right now," said Work.

Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan has already signalled that Canada could soon join a military coalition to take on an estimated 3,000 ISIS fighters in the country.

 

 

Play Media

 

 

U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defence discusses the ISIS mission and fighter jet procurement12:09

 

[blues deville]

Apparently buying in bulk "Costco" style gives everyone a better price.

From what I've read this airplane is a technical nightmare and still a year away from resolving serious flight control software issues. The US Navy did a recent trial (along with a full support team from Locheed) and it was less than successful.

Does our RCAF really need this aircraft or can we invest in upgrading the F18?

[Seeker]

OTTAWA — The Liberal government is intent on buying Super Hornet fighter jets, according to multiple sources.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s cabinet reportedly discussed the issue last week, and while no formal decision was taken, one top-level official said: “They have made up their minds and are working on the right narrative to support it.”

Rather than a full replacement of the air force’s aging CF-18 fighter fleet, it’s believed the purchase will be labelled an interim measure to fill what Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan has warned is a pending “gap” in Canada’s military capabilities.

 

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/liberals-planning-to-buy-super-hornet-fighter-jets-before-making-final-decision-on-f-35s-sources-say

[Super 80]

Boeing apparently made a very attractive offer to the last government that included 767 tankers (the variant operated by the Italians and Japanese) more or less for free out of desperation to get more examples into service for the sake of demonstration after a rough introduction.

[Seeker]

23 minutes ago, Super 80 said:

Boeing apparently made a very attractive offer to the last government that included 767 tankers (the variant operated by the Italians and Japanese) more or less for free out of desperation to get more examples into service for the sake of demonstration after a rough introduction.

Free?  That's a good price!

[conehead]

2 hours ago, seeker said:

OTTAWA — The Liberal government is intent on buying Super Hornet fighter jets, according to multiple sources.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s cabinet reportedly discussed the issue last week, and while no formal decision was taken, one top-level official said: “They have made up their minds and are working on the right narrative to support it.”

Rather than a full replacement of the air force’s aging CF-18 fighter fleet, it’s believed the purchase will be labelled an interim measure to fill what Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan has warned is a pending “gap” in Canada’s military capabilities.

 

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/liberals-planning-to-buy-super-hornet-fighter-jets-before-making-final-decision-on-f-35s-sources-say

Excellent choice. It will create even more jobs in Montreal, now that L-3 has the new contract to do all kinds of Maintenance on LOTS of U.S. F-18 variants.

[Super 80]

2 hours ago, seeker said:

Free?  That's a good price!

With the purchase of something like a hundred Super Hornets.

[Guest]

Going/going/gone?

Liberals miss membership payment to stay in F-35 consortium

Official says missed payment means little and that Canada will honour commitments

By Murray Brewster, CBC News Posted: Jun 07, 2016 5:00 AM ET Last Updated: Jun 07, 2016 8:48 AM ET

The Liberal government has missed its most recent payment to remain part of the consortium of countries developing the F-35 joint strike fighter. (Ross D. Franklin/Associated Press)

Related Stories

• U.S. 'anxious' to know Canada's decision on F-35s, says Pentagon official
• Liberals not closing the door on F-35 purchase just yet
• Defence minister refuses to rule F-35 out of fighter jet competition
• Boeing touts fighter jet to rival F-35 — at half the price

The Trudeau government has missed the deadline for a multimillion-dollar payment that keeps Canada in the club of nations involved in the F-35 stealth fighter program, CBC News has learned. 

The $32-million membership fee was due on May 31, but a spokeswoman for Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan confirmed late Monday that the U.S. project office overseeing development of the highly complex jet has not received the instalment.

But Jordan Owens cautioned not to read too much into the oversight and that Canada is still on the hook for the cash.

"We will honour our financial commitments," she said, responding for the minister who was in transit from a defence conference in Singapore.

• F-35 fighter jet purchase by Liberals may still be in the mix
• Sajjan refuses to rule out F-35 from fighter jet replacement competition
• Canada's F-35 decision anxiously awaited, says U.S. deputy secretary of defence

It's unclear when the instalment will be made and whether there are any penalties associated with a late payment.

The policy issue is an uncomfortable conversation for the Liberals.

Earlier this year, the fact that Canada was still paying to be part of the F-35 buyers' club raised questions about their campaign pledge to purchase something else other than the stealth fighter. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said it "no longer makes sense" to buy the Lockheed Martin fighter because Canada would not participate in any first strike missions.

The annual payment also gives the federal government the right to buy F-35s at a discount price and gives Canadian companies access to supply contracts for the construction and maintenance of the high-tech jet.

The missed payment does not signal Canada's withdrawal from the agreement, Owens said.

Sole-sourcing a new jet

But it does shine a further spotlight on the contradictions in the Liberal policy and comes one day after published reports stated that cabinet was mulling over the sole-source purchase of an unknown number of Super Hornets, the Boeing-built rival to the F-35.

"I was shocked," said Alan Williams, a former procurement manager at the Department of National Defence, and one of the most strident critics of the Harper government's plan to acquire the F-35 without a competition. "I don't think anyone would have expected that kind of behaviour."

Williams was one of the defence insiders most impressed with the Liberal promise of open competition and transparency in last fall's election.

He said that if the government does a sole-source deal with Boeing, it makes the Liberals no better than the government they replaced. 

"There is no legal justification to sole-source this," said Williams, who noted that the use of the national security criteria would not apply.

The move would possibly open the door to a legal — or even trade — challenge by competitors, he said. 

"I'm not sure companies want to take the government to court on this kind of thing, but, you know, there is no legal justification for doing this," he said.

[Super 80]

I guess they could just snarkily argue they're exercising their option on additional F-18s from the original order.

[Guest]

Remember the promise to be open and transparent (or did I dream that).

Harjit Sajjan dodges questions on F-35 fighter jets as rumours swirl

By Monique Muise National Online Journalist, Politics  Global News

 

A Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is shown in this undated handout photo.

The Canadian Press/HO-Lockheed Martin

Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan found himself once again being asked to clarify the government’s position on the F-35 fighter jet on Tuesday after reports surfaced that Ottawa is set to opt for another model of plane.

“We are looking at a gap that we have to deal with,” Sajjan told reporters on Parliament Hill, referring to his previous assertion that a gap in Canada’s military capabilities will open before the country’s existing fleet of CF-18 aircraft is retired in 2025.

“These (CF-18) jets should have been replaced a long time ago.”

The Liberals promised during the election campaign that they would not purchase Lockheed Martin’s F-35 jets, arguing that the procurement process started under the Conservatives was beset with problems and setbacks. But that leaves only a small number of other options, and earlier this week, a report in The National Post suggested that the Trudeau government is looking to Boeing’s Super Hornet fighter jets to act as a stop-gap measure in the coming decade. The F-35 might then be added to augment the military’s capabilities down the line.

READ MORE: Can Canada really pass on the F-35s with no impact?

Any attempt to exclude Lockheed Martin from bidding on a defence contract could trigger legal action. Sajjan would not confirm on Tuesday if there would, in fact, be an open competition that would include both the F-35 and Super Hornet.

“I’m looking through all the information now, but one thing’s for sure: I want to make sure that we buy the right type of airplane for our men and women,” he said.

Asked why the previous government had never spoken of a “gap” in military capability before, the minister replied that “just because somebody didn’t talk about it, doesn’t mean that it (didn’t) exist.”

The Conservatives announced in 2014 that they would spend $400 million on upgrades to the CF-18 fleet so the planes would last until 2025. The jets were first purchased in 1982.

As the Liberals apparently work toward a decision on the future of Canada’s fighter jets, the office set up in late 2015 to oversee the eventual purchase of whatever jet is picked, has been gearing up for a busy few years ahead.

According to a call for tender that went out last week, the Future Fighter Capability Project is on the hunt for a senior-level consultant from the private sector who will “support and assist government executives in defining the scope, the deliverables and the implementation conditions” of the purchase.

READ MORE: F-35 rival upbeat with Ottawa’s signals on defence priorities

It’s yet another sign that Ottawa is moving quickly on the file behind the scenes, even if a formal announcement about the contract bidding process or favoured plane hasn’t been made.

A spokesperson for the Department of National Defence said the hiring within the Future Fighter Capability Project office “will need to take place independent of the course of action and procurement decision taken by our Government in the near future.”

[boestar]

We had to PAY to help develop that piece of crap?  Should they not be paying us for developing the components we do for the Jet?

 

[DEFCON]

Maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention to the details, but the report posted by Malcolm above was the first I've heard of the development commitments to the F 35 project previously made by Canada.

It kind of surprised me to learn that Canada had gotten tangled up in the development of a fighter as complex as the F 35 knowing the aircraft was conceptualized as a single engine type from the get-go, a design consideration military experts had already rejected as fiscally impractical 35, or so years ago.