I happen to know Billy Flynn, and while I have the utmost respect for his abilities and experience there is this:
frosti wrote:Oh I forgot, he is being paid by LM
Which means he's selling the airplane. In fact the article even called him a salesman. It would be very surprising indeed and quite detrimental to his income had he said something like "this airplane is an overpriced piece of crap that doesn't live up to expectations...and it only has one engine so you wouldn't catch me dead flying in one 50% farther north than the CF-18 could go".
Exactly what you just said. If the opinion doesn't fit your anti-CPC or 'twin engine everything' view then it's somehow bias. Keep living in that cave....
So, you don't think someone paid by Lockheed Martin to come up to Canada to sell Lockheed Martin's airplane will be just a little biased?
If not, I have this 15 year old car in mint condition with your name written all over it. It goes 50% further than whatever you're driving on the same amount of gas, and it sees everything else on the road while nothing else can see it. I'd be giving it to you for practically free at the ridiculously low price of $35,000.
Call me, but don't wait too long because 20 other people are wanting to buy it too.
kamikaze wrote:"The problem is rooted in a media that is trying to manufacture a story."
KPMG, the Auditor General, and Budget Officer all would disagree that they are either manufacturing anything, or qualify as "media".
The aforementioned bodies pointed out some concerns; the media jumps on the CPC for carrying on with the program. The CPC acknowledges said concerns and reopens the selection process; the media jumps on them for that. Do pay attention to the world around, otherwise your likely to get hit by a bus.
Rockie wrote:So, you don't think someone paid by Lockheed Martin to come up to Canada to sell Lockheed Martin's airplane will be just a little biased?
I will be taking Flynn at his word thanks over someone's journalistic opinion. Seems to me that F35 test pilots aren't allowed to compare it to other aircraft they have flown, nor praise the F-35 in any capacity. However, people who have not flown the F-35 are welcome to comment as much as they like, so long as its negative.
Rockie wrote:So, you don't think someone paid by Lockheed Martin to come up to Canada to sell Lockheed Martin's airplane will be just a little biased?
I will be taking Flynn at his word thanks over someone's journalistic opinion. Seems to me that F35 test pilots aren't allowed to compare it to other aircraft they have flown, nor praise the F-35 in any capacity. However, people who have not flown the F-35 are welcome to comment as much as they like, so long as its negative.
That car's yours if you want it but time's running out.
Rockie wrote:So, you don't think someone paid by Lockheed Martin to come up to Canada to sell Lockheed Martin's airplane will be just a little biased?
I will be taking Flynn at his word thanks over someone's journalistic opinion. Seems to me that F35 test pilots aren't allowed to compare it to other aircraft they have flown, nor praise the F-35 in any capacity. However, people who have not flown the F-35 are welcome to comment as much as they like, so long as its negative.
That car's yours if you want it but time's running out.
Rockie wrote:Surely you'd believe someone who's been test driving that car for the last 15 years over some journalistic opinion?
Given the trustworthiness and critical thinking skills of most journalists I've met, I might be more inclined to trust a used car salesman. We've all seen just how accurate journalists are when reporting about aviation; It would be a stretch to think they were any better at reporting on other subjects.
The advantage of buying weapons from another country is that you do not have any weapon factories that would be targets in any future global conflict.
That would be in keeping with declared Nuclear free zones in many municipalities in Canada.If we do not make weapons and have no factories then nobody will nuke us deliberately.The only minimal fallout risk would come from missiles that are interdicted over Canada and fall as debris in the vast unpopulated tundra.
We can then all sleep safe in our beds knowing that nobody will ever attack us
---------- ADS -----------
Last edited by 2R on Sat Feb 16, 2013 11:09 am, edited 1 time in total.
North Shore wrote:^ Ironic, then, that we are buying weapons from one of the few countries that has attacked us - and they won't sell us the better version (F22)...
Please explain why the F22 is a better multirole fighter aircraft than the F35.
North Shore,
I am not quite sure of the direction of your comment, however, it should be noted that no one can purchase the F22. The manufacturing line has been closed and the tooling has been removed and stored. Most likely only 187 F22's will ever be built.
Japan tried to purchas the F22 a few years before the line was closed and were denied. The F22 has never, and will never be an option.
As for the Euro Typhoon, that aircraft is still being developed as well. The RAF are trying to integrate many of the weapons that the Tornado carries onto it. It is a work in progress, and they are not there yet. The new aesa radar is not even funded yet for the Typhoon. So if purchased by the RCAF, we would still be buying a yet to be fully developed 4+ gen fighter that would rely on the Euro's to develop and fund updates.
The Super Hornet is a bomb hauler and nothing more. It is slower than the classic f18, and has a small increase in range. It has no kinetic advantage over existing types, and would not survive long against a capable foe.....
There are no perfect aircraft, but the slagging the f35 is getting may not be entirely warranted. My two cents. Cheers.
My understanding of the F22 was that it was the fighter to have, and that the -35 is a multi-role machine. (I realise that one of the reasons to have the -35 is the fact that it is multi-role) Also, one of the reasons for the -35 purchase is interoperability with other 'allied' forces. In that vein, seeing as we are the closest ally to the Americans, sharing the world's longest undefended border, you'd think that they might trust us with their top-level machine. Apparently not.
North Shore wrote:n that vein, seeing as we are the closest ally to the Americans, sharing the world's longest undefended border, you'd think that they might trust us with their top-level machine. Apparently not.
The F35 is more advanced in the sense it can actually drop bombs and be effective in all roles. The F-22 in Canada's hands would be completely useless other than intercepting the odd airliner and tooling around up north. Kind of ironic seeing how the lefties on this forum are all up in arms over the F35 price.
frosti wrote:The F35 is more advanced in the sense it can actually drop bombs and be effective in all roles. The F-22 in Canada's hands would be completely useless other than intercepting the odd airliner and tooling around up north. Kind of ironic seeing how the lefties on this forum are all up in arms over the F35 price.
Unless you've been living in a cave (Haha...get it frosti?) you would know that arctic sovereignty is what it's all about with your government of choice. In fact LM's two powerful salesmen were just up here laying it on thick about how the F-35 can go 50% farther north than the CF-18 can making it the most "have to have" fighter out there.
How many bombs do you anticipate dropping on Canada's north frosti?
(Although I agree the F-22 is not the plane for Canada. It can do air\ground although probably not very well since that isn't its primary design criteria and Canada does need a specifically designed multi-role fighter. But the Americans wouldn't sell it anyway, and as mentioned it isn't in production anymore because it is just so gawd awful expensive. A fate I suspect will befall the F-35 for the same reason.)
It is obvious this has little to do with the right aircraft being chosen. It's now become a shouting match to try to prove your d__k is bigger. If you want to change the process then run for office and make a difference that way. If not then shut up. We are all tired of the pontificating and posturing and silly bickering. You may think you're smart but sometimes you need to shut up to prove it. Worse than a bunch of 4 year olds. End of rant.
2R,
If i recall correctly, the tooling has been moved and stored at a huge ARMY arsenal northwest of Reno Nevada. Not sure what the cost of reestablishing the line would be, but i can't imagine it would be cheap.
I do not know where the tooling is secured, nor would i want to know ,and if i did know, i would not post the whereabouts of it on a public forum.Unless i knew i was wrong(again)
Canada needs three dozen twin-engined, jet powered, stealthy, multi-role combat aircraft capable of sustained Mach 1.2 flight, with a 500 nm combat radius. Or does it? Drones would probably work just fine, although air show attendance would fall dramatically..
If the opinion doesn't fit your anti-CPC or 'twin engine everything' view then it's somehow bias. Keep living in that cave....
