AVCANADA

There has also been no discussion about F 35 specific infrastructure costs, which could again become another hidden but nonetheless real cost

Well it would seem that the extra cost of extending the existing CF18's would be solely due to the fact that Lockheed can't deliver the F 35 before the current end of service date. It is a fact that any existing gen 4.5 fighter could be delivered well before the CF18 retirement therefore I think it is entirely appropriate that when discussing the total program costs of the F35 buy, the costs of a further CF 18 extension should be applied.

Well using that logic why don't we factor into the cost of the F35 things like the salaries of pilots and techs?

As Yogi bear says "It is Deja vu all over again"
Anyone in procurement should look at the General Dynamics/McDonnel Douglas A-12 project.
The F-35 project was really just a trap to catch foreign spies.

The real weapon systems that will win any future air conflict are still as secret as the Aurora

Not to be a nit picker but that would be Yogi Berra. One was a baseball CATCHER, the other was a cartoon bear.

Here I fixed it for you but not to nit pick

He was more known as the greatest catcher of all time, but yes he did throw a few years of mediocre managing in there too...however, his quotes come from throughout his entire basebll career and it is often said that the cartoon bear was named after him which he was repeatedly upset about being called "yogi bear"....off topic but interesting none the less.

So do you think we will avtually take delivery of F-35's or go for something else?

We lost several during the early 80's due to our unfamiliarity with their manoueverability and g loading.

If you take said bird up the intake of a single engine aircraft you get an ejection, just like the guys in the Hawk in Moose Jaw. If you're in the Arctic far from civilization, you're probably going to die before anybody gets to you; that's just the way it is! McKay can guarantee all he wants that there won't be engine failures; but I did my time wearing blue, they're going to happen, for any number of potential reasons!

Manoeuvrability and g loading are very similar to the Hornet's. The F-15/16/18 series was a novelty, in terms of manoeuvrability because they were the result of John Boyd's studies about just that. No plane before then were built the way these were/are built using the principles preached by Boyd. Yes, there will be other challenges (the Helmet being one), but with today's simulators, I don't think we're going to lose as many JSF as Hornets.




Are you really comparing that shitty Adour engine to the P&W F135? You can't even compare it to the Hornet's engines. They were designed and built 30 years apart.

I agree, they will fail. It's designed by a human, built by a human, maintained by a human and operated by a human. It will eventually fail. However, I believe their fail rate will be much lower than what we are used to. In the end, it's risk management. How many catastrophic engine failures did we get in the last 30+ years? Pretty much everybody I know had to shut down and engine at one point or another, however had it been the only engine, you can bet we would have milked that engine all the way to a place to land or punch out safely.

As far as not having contingency planning for attrition, well, the line will be opened for many years after we buy them. I am sure that when the needs come to get new airframe, we will be able to buy more.

In the end, the JSF is great for us. It brings expertise and technology in Canada, by having companies building parts and we get a cut on every JSF that is sold, being a participant nation. If we were to pull out of the program now, we get off that wagon and get nothing, when we decide to buy it again in 5 years (because it is the plane we need)

Nobody is disputing the amazing technology and capability the F 35 represents, the issue in my mind is can we afford it. There is only so much money to go around and I think we are spending a disproportionate amount on one capability, especially when there is so little cost certainty in the program. F35 program cost escalation will come out of other re-equipment programs and that will effect the overall capability of the CF. It is past time we started talking about a plan B and that has to start with how much total procurement money can we realistically spend on the F35 program and what is the money PNR.

The JSF, overall, is the cheapest solution.

On what information are you basing that statement one ?

On what information are you basing that statement one ?

As far as not having contingency planning for attrition, well, the line will be opened for many years after we buy them. I am sure that when the needs come to get new airframe, we will be able to buy more.

canada needs the fighters yes but i would also feel more comfortable sitting as we are on the biggest pile of natural resources ,in the 2nd largest land mass with more numbers alot more in fact. could we not impose a 5 $a barrel export tax on oil to the us so that we can cover the cost of the new fighter program and have several hundred fighter jets ? at 2 million barrels a day we would have it paid for in spades pronto . check 6 have a safe new year and 2012

As far as not having contingency planning for attrition, well, the line will be opened for many years after we buy them. I am sure that when the needs come to get new airframe, we will be able to buy more.

How many of the Hornets that we lost for one reason or another were replaced, even though the line was open? If you're unsure, I can tell you; that'd be NONE! If you're making an argument in favour of something you should at least use reasonable statements as part of your arguments.

Don't count on that. We lost 1 of 15 Cormorant SAR helicopters and no replacement was ever considered. Same goes for all the E/H model Hercs that we have lost over the years. Heck - they're still making/refurbing Sea Kings and no replacements have been sought for them over the years either.

(ie don't screw around on your first operational solo mission

don't turn your landing lights on at night in a snow storm).