F-35 news roundup

[Justin86]

While restarting the Avro program is probably not the best idea, I don't think the f-35 is the best idea either for Canada. Now the F-18E/F would probably be a much better fit, but that is just my opinion.

[-Neu-]

http://www.globalnews.ca/f-35+alternative/6442711404/story.html

Canadians

Probably one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard... and that's saying something. What's particularly ridiculous is the performance claims: Mach 3.5, 3000 km range and some unbelievable altitude.

This is the crap that gets churned in our national discussion. Basically claims that we could, from zero experience, we would recreate an entire program and then add on systems. I expect this out of 14 year olds... not national figures like Lew Mackenzie.

Its basically infected all aspects of the debate. Like the claims that somehow the F-35 is deficient for defending our sovereignty vs all the other options.

[GRAIL007]

While restarting the Avro program is probably not the best idea, I don't think the f-35 is the best idea either for Canada. Now the F-18E/F would probably be a much better fit, but that is just my opinion.

In the opinion of most of the fighter guys, at Cold Lake at least, the Super Hornet is the last jet that we should get. If not the F-35 most would say a F-15 Silent Eagle (if it gets made), or Typhoon, but not the Super Slow Hornet. In the words of one of our fighter pilot exchange pilots after flying the Super Hornet for the first time down at Lemoore, "It's a pig". Most would rather have new build legacy Hornets that the Super's, but that is just their opinion.

cheers

[MarkW]

http://www.globalnews.ca/f-35+alternative/6442711404/story.html

Canadians

Another "WOW!" story. I am truly embarrassed for my friends to the North.

But before we jump to too many conclusions, let's wait for the detailed analysis from Dr. Krapp at APA.

[Emvar]

Another "WOW!" story. I am truly embarrassed for my friends to the North.

But before we jump to too many conclusions, let's wait for the detailed analysis from Dr. Krapp at APA.

Oh I wouldn't be embarrassed.... I'm sure whatever the new AC will be someone will call it the Arrow. The Official name for the CF-18 Hornet was Frelon until everyone kept calling it Hornet.... And I don't know too many people who call the F-16 'Fighting Falcon' I know it as a Viper.

I'm beyond figuring out the Canadian Political Arena as they really don't know what they are doing in procurement..... Look at the Sea King replacement we are still waiting for delivery on that one... One Political Party spends money we don't have while the other just plain cancels the other parties acquisitions Costing us money.... In the end it is the will of the people right?

And yes I'm not going to argue that the latest procurements for the military have been necessary and good ones..... C-177 and C-130J (both were ordered by different parties I might add) But there is a stall in SAR replacement and we have a made in Canada solution. Don't get me going on the Snowbird replacement..... Which no party wants to even address.

So in the end I think the F-35 will be the aircraft, the question will be how many. And if you all want to start a pool.... $50 dollar buy in winner is the person who correctly predicts the total # of aircraft the correct cost including 20 year servicing and the exact date of first aircraft delivery and acceptance. Oh I think it will be called Arrow and not Foudre Deux.

Emil

[-Neu-]

I'm beyond figuring out the Canadian Political Arena as they really don't know what they are doing in procurement..... Look at the Sea King replacement we are still waiting for delivery on that one... One Political Party spends money we don't have while the other just plain cancels the other parties acquisitions Costing us money.... In the end it is the will of the people right?

Actually in the CH-148 fiasco, I'd actually place more of the blame on DND. The F-35 decision was mostly military led until earlier this year.

So in the end I think the F-35 will be the aircraft, the question will be how many. And if you all want to start a pool.... $50 dollar buy in winner is the person who correctly predicts the total # of aircraft the correct cost including 20 year servicing and the exact date of first aircraft delivery and acceptance. Oh I think it will be called Arrow and not Foudre Deux.

Emil

Is there something wrong with the Government's current cost estimates and delivery date?

[Emvar]

Is there something wrong with the Government's current cost estimates and delivery date?

This is a loaded question for any Government because yes I'm sure they are running around looking for someone who is willing to stick their Pee pee on the chopping block and take the cushy fall. This procurement will be a thorn in this governments side regardless if it is the right or wrong platform. Fiscal restraint is the sermon from Ottawa and if they can't do it on this it will come around and bite them in the behind in the next election.

As to answer your question with my opinion... Yes..... we are not being told the whole truth. This is also my opinion.... When a politicians mouth is moving and it is not at a free dinner, they are lying.

[-Neu-]

This is a loaded question for any Government because yes I'm sure they are running around looking for someone who is willing to stick their Pee pee on the chopping block and take the cushy fall. This procurement will be a thorn in this governments side regardless if it is the right or wrong platform. Fiscal restraint is the sermon from Ottawa and if they can't do it on this it will come around and bite them in the behind in the next election.

However we won't be spending anything on the program between now and the next election. The financial outlays occur after 2016 and the bulk of it after 2018.

As to answer your question with my opinion... Yes..... we are not being told the whole truth. This is also my opinion.... When a politicians mouth is moving and it is not at a free dinner, they are lying.

Actually I think you're right we're not being told the whole truth... however its not in the way that you think. The government has not publicized the true industrial benefits for the program, which are substantial. Furthermore they have done a abysmal job of representing the program at various outlets.

The cost estimates however are actually looking pretty sound. Since the 2010 announcement the program has progressed much more smoothly, mostly due to the efforts of David Venlet's restructuring. Per unit costs have basically stabilized around 10% over predicted costs, which may come in line over the next decade as more aircraft are purchased and the airframe matures.

[Emvar]

However we won't be spending anything on the program between now and the next election. The financial outlays occur after 2016 and the bulk of it after 2018.

Either they are not expecting a re-election or are hoping that it does die down and no one will notice.

Actually I think you're right we're not being told the whole truth... however its not in the way that you think. The government has not publicized the true industrial benefits for the program, which are substantial. Furthermore they have done a abysmal job of representing the program at various outlets.

The cost estimates however are actually looking pretty sound. Since the 2010 announcement the program has progressed much more smoothly, mostly due to the efforts of David Venlet's restructuring. Per unit costs have basically stabilized around 10% over predicted costs, which may come in line over the next decade as more aircraft are purchased and the airframe matures.

I do hope you are right because Banko Varosi is getting pretty tapped out.... I might just re-start the Rhino Party...

Emil

[Justin86]

In the opinion of most of the fighter guys, at Cold Lake at least, the Super Hornet is the last jet that we should get. If not the F-35 most would say a F-15 Silent Eagle (if it gets made), or Typhoon, but not the Super Slow Hornet. In the words of one of our fighter pilot exchange pilots after flying the Super Hornet for the first time down at Lemoore, "It's a pig". Most would rather have new build legacy Hornets that the Super's, but that is just their opinion.

cheers

I did not know that the pilots thought that about the super hornet. My thinking was more in line that the RCAF is currently using the F-18, so the step up on a training level for ground and pilots is not nearly as big. Not sure about this but would some of our current spares carry over?

Also for the dollar amount, would we not be able to get more jets compared to the cost of the F-35? Another thought about adding the F-18E/F to Canada's fighter roster is that we could A-Receive them sooner(Depending on current orders from other countries) B- Once operational we could put the F-18E/F on a primary role, and move the current legacy Hornets into a training C- secondary fighters should the need arise that they are needed. The secondary roles would be accomplished since they would be close to operational readiness since they would be used for training.

Food for thought, but I highly doubt that any of this will happen. Our current Government / RCAF has decided that stealth is a must for any aircraft purchased. I have yet to figure out for the life of me why Canada needs a stealth fighter . Time will tell whether Canada does get the planes, if they are getting them, the Government better hurry up though and make it happen. There is an election coming in 1-2 years, and if they keep dragging there heels they might not be in power to sign on the line.

And if we don't get something signed soon, we may be left with this -

Justin

[-Neu-]

I did not know that the pilots thought that about the super hornet. My thinking was more in line that the RCAF is currently using the F-18, so the step up on a training level for ground and pilots is not nearly as big. Not sure about this but would some of our current spares carry over?

Some would, but less than one would imagine now. Early in the Shornet program, there was something like 60~70% commonality. That has decreased over the years significantly as the aircraft has been slowly upgraded.

Also for the dollar amount, would we not be able to get more jets compared to the cost of the F-35?

Not likely. The F/A-18E woudld be purchased through the Foreign military sales program. Baseline F/A-18E would be around $55 million, but that doesn't include ATFLIR, pylons, pods ect, which are integral to the F-35. Next you would add 15% premium which the US government would take for development costs. In the end it might be about 10 million less than the F-35 (because of Canadian modifications) but over the long term we would also pay more. The US intends to replace the F/A-18E/F with the F-35 and F/A-XX in 2030... which means we will be on the hook for maintaining the aircraft after that point.

Another thought about adding the F-18E/F to Canada's fighter roster is that we could A-Receive them sooner(Depending on current orders from other countries)

The reality is that unless we decide to buy the F/A-18E within the next year, we will not be able to purchase the aircraft ever again. The line is expected to close in two years time with the last US Navy and Australian orders completed.

B- Once operational we could put the F-18E/F on a primary role, and move the current legacy Hornets into a training C- secondary fighters should the need arise that they are needed. The secondary roles would be accomplished since they would be close to operational readiness since they would be used for training.

Food for thought, but I highly doubt that any of this will happen. Our current Government / RCAF has decided that stealth is a must for any aircraft purchased. I have yet to figure out for the life of me why Canada needs a stealth fighter .

I think this is one of the key misconceptions with the program. Stealth is one part of the capabilities, certainly. However the key driver is the avionics capabilities, which is becoming an essential part of modern warfare. This with stealth will allow the aircraft to participate in coalition warfare for the foreseeable future. After 2020 other aircraft will be less able to operate in international missions, like in Libya.

Even with arctic defence these capabilities are very valuable. With the polar ice receding and Russians claiming more of the arctic, we need a credible defense capability in the north. I wouldn't be worried about Bears, but Russian naval vessels which possess advanced Surface to air missile systems.

Edited September 11, 2012 by -Neu-

[GRAIL007]

I did not know that the pilots thought that about the super hornet. My thinking was more in line that the RCAF is currently using the F-18, so the step up on a training level for ground and pilots is not nearly as big. Not sure about this but would some of our current spares carry over?

The thing that most people don't see is the big picture, that being these jets will have to last 40 years, if you buy an already dated aircraft the RCAF will be out of the fighter business in 20 years. The Air Force wants the big step-up in capability, the newest airframe, if not then they resign the fighter fleet to obsolescence in a short time. Buying Super Hornets would be like buying updated Voodoos instead of CF-18s in the early 1980s, who is flying Voodoos today?

Also for the dollar amount, would we not be able to get more jets compared to the cost of the F-35? Another thought about adding the F-18E/F to Canada's fighter roster is that we could A-Receive them sooner(Depending on current orders from other countries) B- Once operational we could put the F-18E/F on a primary role, and move the current legacy Hornets into a training C- secondary fighters should the need arise that they are needed. The secondary roles would be accomplished since they would be close to operational readiness since they would be used for training.

As Neu mentioned the F-35 package has all the extras included in the airframe already to preserve the Low-observability, the Super Hornet not so much. If you see the total cost of the Australia Super Hornet buy for just 24 airframes you will see they are not that cheap in the long run.

Food for thought, but I highly doubt that any of this will happen. Our current Government / RCAF has decided that stealth is a must for any aircraft purchased. I have yet to figure out for the life of me why Canada needs a stealth fighter . Time will tell whether Canada does get the planes, if they are getting them, the Government better hurry up though and make it happen. There is an election coming in 1-2 years, and if they keep dragging there heels they might not be in power to sign on the line.

It is not just the current Canadian government/RCAF that requires stealth, every fighter just entering production or on the drawing board has significant levels of low-observability built into the airframe. It is a necessity as radar once was, if Canada does not get an aircraft with these features then we resign ourselves to be a high-speed cheerleader in any upcoming conflict. cheers

[MarkW]

It is not just the current Canadian government/RCAF that requires stealth, every fighter just entering production or on the drawing board has significant levels of low-observability built into the airframe. It is a necessity as radar once was, if Canada does not get an aircraft with these features then we resign ourselves to be a high-speed missile sponge in any upcoming conflict. cheers

Fixed

[GreyGhost]

>>> Article <<<

__________________________________________

>>> Hi Res <<<

PATUXENT RIVER, Md. (Sept. 5, 2012) F-35 test pilots Navy Lt. Cmdr. Michael Burks and Peter Kosogorin fly CF-1 and CF-2 during a formation flying qualities test in the Atlantic Test Ranges. Testing formation flying qualities provides data on handling characteristics. The F-35C carrier variant of the Joint Strike Fighter is distinct from the F-35A and F-35B variants with its larger wing surfaces and reinforced landing gear to withstand catapult launches and deck landing impacts associated with the demanding aircraft carrier environment. The F-35C is undergoing test and evaluations prior to delivery to the fleet. (U.S. Navy photo courtesy of Lockheed Martin/Layne Laughter/Released)

-Gregg

Edited September 12, 2012 by GreyGhost

[TaiidanTomcat]

Cool pic!!

oh Canada, what money won't you spend to look fiscally responsible?

KPMG accounting hired to look into Canadian F-35.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/09/07/f-35-bill-just-went-up-again-tories-spend-600k-on-kpmg-audit-of-jet-program/

I know it mentions politics, but in me defense, I am an American, and don't even know what a "Tories" is

[Les / Creative Edge Photo]

Cool pic!!

oh Canada, what money won't you spend to look fiscally responsible?

KPMG accounting hired to look into Canadian F-35.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/09/07/f-35-bill-just-went-up-again-tories-spend-600k-on-kpmg-audit-of-jet-program/

I know it mentions politics, but in me defense, I am an American, and don't even know what a "Tories" is

"Tory" is political jargon for the Conservative Party. "Wigs" was the term as such for the Liberal Party, though nobody uses that term for them anymore. The Liberals are more often called the "Grits" in more modern terms. These terms come out from English politics of which Canada's Parliamentary system is based on.

The Tories are proving to be very loose with tax money too. I guess when one gets a majority govt. they get a good dose of amnesia as to how they loved to rail the previous Liberal govts. for being loose with tax dollars.

Edited September 13, 2012 by Les / Creative Edge Photo

[ChernayaAkula]

<...> I think it might be a long shot to ask Vlad to kick in some rubles to fund the Afghans. Probably some bad memories from their last go round over their <...>

You might want to read up a little on that, then. Russia has supported the United Front/Northern Alliance against the Taliban since the mid-1990s. Back then, the US thought the Taliban were just a little extreme in their ways, but might actually be "workable" (with the help of Pakistan) and able to form some kind of statehood in Afghanistan.

[TaiidanTomcat]

Better nip this in the bud:

A certain candidate from political party INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK proposes new F-22s:

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/09/romney-more-f-22s/

FTFA

In 2010 the think-tank RAND estimated it would cost an extra $90 million per plane, on top of the existing $137 million price tag per plane, to restart production and build 75 more Raptors following a two-year shut-down. But Romney’s F-22 v2.0 would begin assembly in 2013 at the earliest, meaning the restart would be at least a year later than RAND’s model and costs would surely be higher. The Air Force bought most of its Raptors in annual lots of around 20 jets. If a Romney administration bought a batch in each of its four years, the total cost for up to 80 new F-22s could top $20 billion.

Chances of this happening even if he is elected?... is there a number lower than .5 percent chance?

Cheney promised to restart B-2 production if they won the election. They won twice, and the B-2 still never went back into production

Edited September 13, 2012 by TaiidanTomcat

[rustywelder]

is there a number lower than .5 percent chance?

Yessir, my favourite number that I hear on the news all the time, :blink: one tenth of 1 percent. And thats about as likely as think restarting Raptor production will be. I say this as someone who has been in manufacturing for 7+ years, once a line is down and gone it is GONE the logistics of puting it back in place are unbeliveable.

[11bee]

You might want to read up a little on that, then. Russia has supported the United Front/Northern Alliance against the Taliban since the mid-1990s. Back then, the US thought the Taliban were just a little extreme in their ways, but might actually be "workable" (with the help of Pakistan) and able to form some kind of statehood in Afghanistan.

I'm familiar with that. I was referring to Vlad kicking in money to assist the current Afghan government. Whatever and whoever they funded back in the 90's is irrelevant.

The US mismanagement of the Afghan situation pre-9/11/01 is quite another subject indeed. Huge mistakes were made but that is probably not relevant discussion in this forum.

[MarkW]

Yessir, my favourite number that I hear on the news all the time, :blink: one tenth of 1 percent. And thats about as likely as think restarting Raptor production will be. I say this as someone who has been in manufacturing for 7+ years, once a line is down and gone it is GONE the logistics of puting it back in place are unbeliveable.

Especially since all the factory floor space has been converted in some plants to solely F-35s...

[TaiidanTomcat]

Especially since all the factory floor space has been converted in some plants to solely F-35s...

One thing is for sure, now that a not even a president yet has mentioned restarting F-22 production, most likely with no idea what it actually would cost, it will circulate around the internet to the point of near legend, that the F-22 has/had a chance to come back and of course this time be exported but it didn't go through because (insert conspiracy theory here)

[MarkW]

Bill Sweetman strikes again!

http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx?plckBlogId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a40a881f7-7eea-4429-83e3-7bf315c5a9db&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

[TaiidanTomcat]

Bill Sweetman strikes again!

http://www.aviationweek.com/Blogs.aspx?plckBlogId=Blog:27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckController=Blog&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&newspaperUserId=27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7&plckPostId=Blog%3a27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3a40a881f7-7eea-4429-83e3-7bf315c5a9db&plckScript=blogScript&plckElementId=blogDest

Conspiracy theories abound! deception is everywhere!

[GreyGhost]

Well, it's not like this has been the smoovest of programs ...

So there is precedent there ...

-Gregg