762 replies to this topic

[Smallc]

BUT WHAT ABOUT THE CONTRACT. Oh yah that never existed it was just a Conservative lie, one of many.

No one ever said there was a contract.

[Spiderfish]

Sayings its the "best" is besides the point. Being an early adopter is dangerous in a lot of different ways. Since we know that 95% of what our airforce does is fly routine patrols and stand ready to shoot down rogue civilian planes, we should buy the plane that can adequately do that for the least ammount of money.

If we need a small contingent of JSF fighters as well for conflicts overseas then we can buy those later on once the plane has had all the kinks worked out of it, and we can assess its real performance and operational costs based on real data instead of projections.

I understand what you are saying, and agree on the concept in theory. Unfortunately, the program needed initial support from our country and others to determine if there was adequate need to proceed with such a huge investment. The 'if you build it, they will come' mentality may work for turning cornfields into baseball fields, but not when it comes to building technologically advanced jet fighters.

Airbus did the same thing when they decided to build the A380, without pre-development support and commitment from the industry, the plane never would have made it off the drafting table.

[Spiderfish]

That's not the way people are going to see it.

True, but multi-billion dollar commitments by government should be based on more than optics.

[punked]

No one ever said there was a contract.

Oh I am sorry I meant the Billion dollar contracts that the Conservatives said that Canadian business would lose if we didn't buy these plans. Guess that was a dumb argument to make at the time then?

[fellowtraveller]

Its called a FlipFlop and its one I am happy about..

As noted, if they don't buy the F-35s, they'll buy something else equally costly. Glad you approve.

[dre]

As noted, if they don't buy the F-35s, they'll buy something else equally costly. Glad you approve.

Why would they do that? Is it utterly impossible for the government to live within its means and consider costs?

I do a lot of procurement at work, and I can tell you that you wouldnt get away with doing this in the private sector. You establish a budget, you document the capabilities required, and you consider all the various options that fullfill those capabilities.

Since 95% of what our airforce does is routine patrols, we need some decent range and speed, and some decent air to air capability. Theres probably a dozen platforms that would satisfy these business requirements.

The fanciest, newest, and greatest (and most expensive to buy and maintain) may or may not be the best option. And you may or may not have enough money for the "best option".

[Smallc]

True, but multi-billion dollar commitments by government should be based on more than optics.

Sure, and I didn't say otherwise.

[Smallc]

Oh I am sorry I meant the Billion dollar contracts that the Conservatives said that Canadian business would lose if we didn't buy these plans. Guess that was a dumb argument to make at the time then?

Not at all. By signalling our commitment to move our investment in this program to the next phase, it opens up opportunities for Canadian companies in regards to the entire JSF project.

[Smallc]

Why would they do that?

Because, a ) as far as we know, there's nothing considerably less expensive, b ) other aircraft will need more airframes to do the same job, and c ) the government has committed to a $9B procurement and related budget.

[dre]

Not at all. By signalling our commitment to move our investment in this program to the next phase, it opens up opportunities for Canadian companies in regards to the entire JSF project.

I thought we had already paid a bunch of money, and gotten a bunch of contracts.


Anyhow, once the government is able to provide the kind of cost/benefit/risk analysis that would be expected from a first year accounting student then we can talk about which option makes the most sense, and what we can afford.

[Smallc]

I thought we had already paid a bunch of money, and gotten a bunch of contracts.

With each phase comes more opportunity, from what I understand.

Anyhow, once the government is able to provide the kind of cost/benefit/risk analysis that would be expected from a first year accounting student then we can talk about which option makes the most sense, and what we can afford.

That can't really be done, as Canadian companies have to compete for the contracts. There are potential contracts far in excess of the $9B purchase price, and those numbers were given, but I don't know where to look for them right now.

[dre]

That can't really be done

That HAS to be done. Thats how procurement works... And maybe they did all these things behind the scenes, and arrived at the conclusion that the f35 is the best. In which case they should share all the studies and analysis that went into this decision. Was real due dilligence put into this decision, and if so where are the artifacts that were produced by that process?

Based on what theyve shown us so far, they havent even done the ammount of work that a 9 year old girl would do when sourcing lemonade for her lemonade stand out on the road.

[Smallc]

That HAS to be done.

What I'm saying is that they couldn't know what all the spinoffs from this particular project would be.

[waldo]

In which case they should share all the studies and analysis that went into this decision. Was real due dilligence put into this decision, and if so where are the artifacts that were produced by that process?

as I recall, that decision rationale was 'outsourced' to the U.S.; i.e., there were no formal requirements defined by the Canadian Forces... requirements that should have been, obviously, tailored specifically to Canadian needs. I would like/relish to be corrected on this.

[dre]

What I'm saying is that they couldn't know what all the spinoffs from this particular project would be.

Why not? I read that as part of our initial investment we got about 200 contracts making various components. I also read that they were not contingent apon actually purchasing the plane.

Either way... it seems like we have no real information at all.

If the government wants to take 30 billion dollars from people for the biggest purchase in Canadian history then they should do extensive analysis on each possible option, and show us why this option won out.

Im am being absolutely serious when I tell you that Im supposed to provide more documentation and comparative analysis to my boss in order to procure a small bank of servers than the government has shared with the public around this gigantic purchase.

Why would our government ignore basic common sense procurement methodology and processes that are pretty much universally used in the private sector?