101 replies to this topic

[Mr.Canada]

Watch and learn about the politics of procurement. Specifically dealing with the new F35. A big issue with Canadians. Hopefully CPAC will set the record straight.

[Tilter]

The Plane is expensive. If there were any other choice all this palaver would be unnecessary because it would be put to tender. The only other A/C that are seriously competitive (and not even that) are the SU series Russian fighters and the new Chinese fighter. Do we really want to go there??
We could look at the NATO fighter (SAAB??) but it isn't 1/2 of the airplane the F35 is proving to be in it's test flights.
The British Tornado fighter is getting a lot of bad publicity for it's serviceability record and even if it were to prove to be a top fighter it is a fighter designed for a country the size of the Maritime provinces. The films of the F35 are spectacular.
We need a new fighter fleet and it must be ordered well in advance of the delivery date. As another ex-air force pilot said--- the Falcons we are flying now will be 60, yes , 60 years old at the time of the F35 delivery. The Canadian Air Force I flew with was made up largely of 2nd hand rebuilt WW2 planes we bought as USAF surplus. These planes killed many of my friends and the CF 100 planes that were newly built had enough flaws that they killed many Pilots & Air Interception Officers before they were retired.
The Armament they carried was a joke and the likelihood of the CF100 killing Russian bombers was laughable. Most of the Pilots laughingly said that the only positive way was ramming the Bears (bombers) That Russia overflew Northern areas of Canada. Let' see what Cpac shows

Edited by Tilter, 24 April 2011 - 08:03 PM.

[wyly]

The Plane is expensive. If there were any other choice all this palaver would be unnecessary because it would be put to tender. The only other A/C that are seriously competitive (and not even that) are the SU series Russian fighters and the new Chinese fighter. Do we really want to go there??
We could look at the NATO fighter (SAAB??) but it isn't 1/2 of the airplane the F35 is proving to be in it's test flights.
The British Tornado fighter is getting a lot of bad publicity for it's serviceability record and even if it were to prove to be a top fighter it is a fighter designed for a country the size of the Maritime provinces. The films of the F35 are spectacular.
We need a new fighter fleet and it must be ordered well in advance of the delivery date. As another ex-air force pilot said--- the Falcons we are flying now will be 60, yes , 60 years old at the time of the F35 delivery. The Canadian Air Force I flew with was made up largely of 2nd hand rebuilt WW2 planes we bought as USAF surplus. These planes killed many of my friends and the CF 100 planes that were newly built had enough flaws that they killed many Pilots & Air Interception Officers before they were retired.
The Armament they carried was a joke and the likelihood of the CF100 killing Russian bombers was laughable. Most of the Pilots laughingly said that the only positive way was ramming the Bears (bombers) That Russia overflew Northern areas of Canada. Let' see what Cpac shows

wow are you uninformed don't they have newspapers or tv access in retirement homes?

British Tornado a fighter??? the Tornado is primarily a ground attack bomber...the primary british fighter is the Typhoon a vastly superior plane to our CF-18 Hornet and as far as the brits are concerned superior to the F35...and a ex-airforce pilot told you we're flying now is the Falcon? really canada doesn't have any F-16 Falcons and the Falcon has been in use for 32 years a wee bit short of 60 years don't you think....and the Hornets canada does fly first came into service in 1982 or 29 years ago....

actually know something of what you post before you try bull shit everyone...

[wyly]

Watch and learn about the politics of procurement. Specifically dealing with the new F35. A big issue with Canadians. Hopefully CPAC will set the record straight.

ya it's a big issue 63% of canadians don't think we need them...

[RNG]

ya it's a big issue 63% of canadians don't think we need them...

Which makes me quiver in fear every time I realize the can vote.

[wyly]

Which makes me quiver in fear every time I realize the can vote.

unlike conservative voters who don't what a Tornado is for or that we don't have Falcons in our air force and come up with a BS story about a air force pilot claims our Falcons(that we don't have ) are 50+ years old...

[Derek L]

wow are you uninformed don't they have newspapers or tv access in retirement homes?

British Tornado a fighter??? the Tornado is primarily a ground attack bomber...the primary british fighter is the Typhoon a vastly superior plane to our CF-18 Hornet and as far as the brits are concerned superior to the F35...and a ex-airforce pilot told you we're flying now is the Falcon? really canada doesn't have any F-16 Falcons and the Falcon has been in use for 32 years a wee bit short of 60 years don't you think....and the Hornets canada does fly first came into service in 1982 or 29 years ago....

actually know something of what you post before you try bull shit everyone...

The United Kingdom is also purchasing the F-35 as a replacement for the Tornado, Jaguar and Harrier. The Typhoon, which was designed as a mutlirole fighter, still is not fully operational in the air to ground role. At a price of ~90 million Euro per copy, it's in the same price range as the JSF, but still the product of the 1980s.

Also, of the four nations that developed it (UK/Germany/Italy/Spain), only Germany doesn't plan to purchase the F-35.

[wyly]

The United Kingdom is also purchasing the F-35 as a replacement for the Tornado, Jaguar and Harrier. The Typhoon, which was designed as a mutlirole fighter, still is not fully operational in the air to ground role. At a price of ~90 million Euro per copy, it's in the same price range as the JSF, but still the product of the 1980s.

Also, of the four nations that developed it (UK/Germany/Italy/Spain), only Germany doesn't plan to purchase the F-35.

the F-22 raptor superior to the f-35 is still a product of the 80's as well and didn't come into service until 2005 the typhoon came into service in 2004...the f-35 is beset with a whole list of problems and no one will admit how much it will cost, if they even know, estimates now as high as 130 million per unit...

Edited by wyly, 24 April 2011 - 11:06 PM.

[Derek L]

the F-22 raptor superior to the f-35 is still a product of the 80's as well and didn't come into service until 2005 the typhoon came into service in 2004...the f-35 is beset with a whole list of problems and no one will admit how much it will cost, if they even know, estimates now as high as 130 million per unit...

Actually, the F-22 is only superior in the air-air role, it's air to ground role is lacking. As for being a product of the 80s, you're right, and production of it is ending later this year. The vast majority of the USAF's legacy fleet (F-15 & F-16) will be replaced with the F-35A (What we're buying).

WRT being "beset with problems", you're wrong. The version we're buying is already starting low-intial production. The F-35B, which will replace the USMC Harrier and Hornet fleets is the version suffering weight issues. The F-35C, which the USN & RN are buying is currently meeting all test goals.


As for cost, when you factor in economies of scale, 3000-5000 JSF orders will trump the 500-600 airframes orderd under the Eurofighter program. Also, unless further orders are placed (Maybe India & Brazil), the Eurofighter production lines will be likely be closing by the middle of this decade. The JSF will be produced into the 2030s.

And though it shouldn't mater with defence procurment, the Eurofighter has no Canadian content. The F-35A & C will use engine parts made by Pratt & Whitney Canada.

[Topaz]

Here's an idea, if the conservatives are soooooo sure that he F35 is the one and that the price will NOT go up, then they should sign a contract stating that if any increase in price, the whole party will resign there jobs on the spot!! OR they can have an open tender, which should be the way.

[Moonbox]

WRT being "beset with problems", you're wrong. The version we're buying is already starting low-intial production. The F-35B, which will replace the USMC Harrier and Hornet fleets is the version suffering weight issues. The F-35C, which the USN & RN are buying is currently meeting all test goals.

Oh boy. Where to start? The F-35 program isn't beset with problems? You might want to let US Defense Secretary Robert Gates know that. US officials (pentagon included) are estimating costs of between $115-150M per plane, which is getting close to double what Harper and his government are projecting. The program is struggling so badly that the USMC variant, the F-35B may be getting cancelled altogether.

http://ipolitics.ca/2011/03/30/pm-disputes-pentagon-price-tag-for-f-35s/

http://beauforttribune.com/archives/50736

[Derek L]

Oh boy. Where to start? The F-35 program isn't beset with problems? You might want to let US Defense Secretary Robert Gates know that. US officials (pentagon included) are estimating costs of between $115-150M per plane, which is getting close to double what Harper and his government are projecting. The program is struggling so badly that the USMC variant, the F-35B may be getting cancelled altogether.

http://ipolitics.ca/2011/03/30/pm-disputes-pentagon-price-tag-for-f-35s/

http://beauforttribune.com/archives/50736

As I said in my above post, and your link confirms, the F-35B is having problems with weight issues. The F-35B version, is the VTOL version (Vertical take-off and landing), and uses a completly different engine (Rolls-Royce) then the other two versions. Though SecDef Gates has put it on probation for two years it won't be cancelled in the end, for the simple reason that if it was, The United States Marine Corps, Italian navy and Spanish navy would not have an aircraft to fly form their LHD/CVLs. There is no other option once the Harrier is retired. The B is too important to fail.

Reguardless, problems and cost overuns to the B version won't effect us, as I've said, we're buying the A version, and as I said, it's already in low-rate production.

http://www.dailytech.com/First+Production+Lockheed+F35A+Takes+Flight+in+Texas/article21015.htm

[Moonbox]

Reguardless, problems and cost overuns to the B version won't effect us, as I've said, we're buying the A version, and as I said, it's already in low-rate production.

Nope. Cost estimates are for the A variant. They're all going to be way over budget. To say that the F-35B is somehow going to be 50-100% more expensive simply because it's STVOL is ridiculous. If that was the case it'd be smarter just to design a completely new fighter from scratch.

[Derek L]

Nope. Cost estimates are for the A variant. They're all going to be way over budget. To say that the F-35B is somehow going to be 50-100% more expensive simply because it's STVOL is ridiculous. If that was the case it'd be smarter just to design a completely new fighter from scratch.

Did I mention cost estimates in any of my previous posts?

The F-35B will be the most expensive version, because it's STVOL. There has never been a supersonic, STVOL (achieved through lift-fan), production aircraft. It's completly new technology, also due to it being the least produced version, economies of scale will dictate it being the most expensive.

As for designing a new plane from scratch, won't happen. There's no reason to beleive another, stand alone aircraft design, would be cheaper. Will the B version cost more than expected? Yes. Will the B version be cancelled? No, for the very reasons I've outlined above. The first production B versions will likely be delayed 1-2, which is not uncommon for modern aircraft. (Look at our Sea King replacement. Or the Eurofighter. Or the new Airbus wide-body)


Since you've brought up JSF costing, again, from using your link:

The F-35 program has seen massive cost overruns, which have alarmed lawmakers in the U.S. The Pentagon’s program is estimated to cost $386 billion, almost double what was initially proposed.

The Harper government has fought a pitched battle with the opposition parties and the parliamentary budget officer over its figures. When the purchase of 65 stealth fighters was first announced, the Conservatives said the price tag was $9 billion for the aircraft and up to $7 billion more for 20 years’ of maintenance.

Though that $386 billion number is the cost of the entire program and includes R&D costs for all three versions, and I question the source of the estimate, for the sake of argument, let's use that high estimate for the entire program from the link you provided.

Lockheed, the US DoD and other partner nations are expecting the number of aircraft produced over the life of the program to be somewhere between 3000-5000.

Using the low end of that estimate:

386 billion/3000 = ~$129 million per aircraft

Using the high end

386 billion/5000 = ~$77 million per aircraft

Closer to Harper's figure, and since thats an average that includes the more expensive B & C verisons, R & D costing, the cost of the development of the B version's Rolls Royce lift-fan and the now canceled second engine GE produced for the coventional versions, I still feel that a rather high estimate.

[wyly]

Here's an idea, if the conservatives are soooooo sure that he F35 is the one and that the price will NOT go up, then they should sign a contract stating that if any increase in price, the whole party will resign there jobs on the spot!! OR they can have an open tender, which should be the way.

i like it!