Jump to content

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, AlienFrogModeller said:

Isn't Level 1 and 2 higher?

 

Correct, my mistake. I knew Chrétien elevated us to level 2 partners by increasing our yearly commitment to the program and paying an additional 30 million lump sum payment to become a level 2 member. Recently I read we were elevated to level 3. Which made me think that was a higher level. I have now found out that article was wrong.

 

We are currently level 2 partners.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, TaiidanTomcat said:

 

Nice piece TT.  Puts to rest those nationalistic chest-thumpers who saw BA's lawsuit as somehow being a direct attack on Canada.  Makes the US procurement system look like a well oiled machine by comparsion. 

 

The only winners in this whole thing are the Australians, who get to offload a bunch of clapped-out jets that pretty much no other nation would be interested in.   If it wasn't for Canada, those Hornets would probably end up being stripped and buried like their F-111 fleet. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/17/2017 at 1:18 AM, 11bee said:

 

 

 

The only winners in this whole thing are the Australians, who get to offload a bunch of clapped-out jets that pretty much no other nation would be interested in.   If it wasn't for Canada, those Hornets would probably end up being stripped and buried like their F-111 fleet. 

 

Shhhhh! The Kiwis have a new Defence minister with a stated interest in reinstating a fast jet element to the RNZAF.  Keep quiet and one never knows, we may be able to sell our little brothers a few cheap second hand bugs as well - I have read it discussed in several places on the net already ;-)

 

Shane

Link to post
Share on other sites

The big mistake was the previous governments secret sole source deal.... instead of starting an open competition years ago. Political ego...... had there been an open competition the present government wouldn't have a leg to stand on. 

 

Now I see things differently, Boeing just gave the out to this government to buy the F-35A. I also see the airbus A330-200 MRTT being chosen as the next tanker transport. 

 

All things said the straight line through the bush in Canadian politics..... isn't straight.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Emvar said:

The big mistake was the previous governments secret sole source deal.... instead of starting an open competition years ago. Political ego...... had there been an open competition the present government wouldn't have a leg to stand on. 

 

 

I strongly disagree with that. There's a lot to it, but when your air force puts out requirements that only one aircraft can actually meet, and all the evaluations and studies and hell your allies and their studies keep coming to the same conclusion, spending years and millions on a competition is wasteful. It was also a "bipartisan program" as well until it was used against the last guy of course.

 

 Some Canadian evaluations put the F-35 So far ahead as to be so self evident that further study or further formal declaration was seen as without purpose. (THAT actually would have helped the F-35)

 

What even caused the initial gripe --and I'm being grossly over simple -- was the long term cost evaluation was carried out to 20 years. This was seen as sufficient by those evaluators who figured that beyond that was more guess than science.

 

Then oversight bodies said they took issue with that since the F-35 would be in service beyond 20 years. So they double that to 40 years then (amazingly!) The cost doubles and its a YUGE scandal!!

 

An external eval by kpmg Canada basically confirmed the numbers out or ooot to 42 years. (At a cost of $2 million btw)

 

So there was some stupidity involved. There were some self inflicted wounds by the previous government. But honestly the entire thing has been blown out of proportion, and its only getting more comical.

 

The statement I posted a few days ago with all the side eyes at Boeing about is about high school drama as you can get lol. It doesnt even seem like it was written by an actual serious government. Right down to the "ill forgive you and we can still go to the dance if you get back together with me" errr "clauses" and "trustworthy partner" warnings

 

Boeing embarrassed these guys.

It's not that Boeing just beat them, it's that it publicly spanked them. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by TaiidanTomcat
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Emvar said:

The big mistake was the previous governments secret sole source deal.... instead of starting an open competition years ago. Political ego...... had there been an open competition the present government wouldn't have a leg to stand on. 

 

 

This is where you are completely wrong in your thinking. The Liberals put us into the JSF competition. What exactly did you think that was? It was a program to find a replacement next generation fighter. A program that the F-35 won. There is your competition.

 

We didn’t join the F-35 program so we could invest money into it so other countries could buy the jet while we sat back and purchased obsolete  junk-yard jets.

 

The present government doesn’t have a leg to stand on. First the refusal to buy the F-35 was a blind misguided personal decision. Second, announcing a new competition where a company (Boeing) is excluded is wrong, that isn’t an open competition.

 

I’m not unhappy Boeing is excluded. But the government has to maintain transparency and lack of bias.

 

I maintain we had our competition though, when we joined the JSF program and continued on with the F-35 program. Which two Liberal governments supported.

Link to post
Share on other sites

TT most have discounted the total cost of the program...... if the thinking was the same in 1979 when senior was PM then the CF-18 wouldn't have been bought. 

 

What junior needs is a reason not to go with the competition especially when he said he would not buy LM. Politically he saves face and buys the F-35A. Because there is no other choice..... in the meantime he closes a capability gap ( which he created, by purchasing used Aussie bugs he has closed the gap ) . Had there been a competition in the last mandate...... we'd be flying our initial F-35 aircraft. The competition is just a facade...... to appease the electorate to open and honest transparency. Don't get me wrong...... I support F-35. I bought the initial aircraft which TT can confirm. 😂

 

 

Ok it has since been traded for a F-4S and a bunch of decals...... and I'm looking for a Meng release.

 

Edited by Emvar
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Emvar said:

. Had there been a competition in the last mandate...... we'd be flying our initial F-35 aircraft. The competition is just a facade...... to appease the electorate to open and honest transparency.

 

 

That's my point though. A competition was seen as a waste of time and resources, and nothing about that has changed BTW. It's still a waste of time and resources. It was then, it was now.

 

We have seen a few, including the latest from the Danes where the F-35 beats the super hornet. Everytime this happens, mouth breathers pour out of the word work. It's like the old "that's not real communism" joke. It's always "that wasn't a real competition" or "that wasn't actually fair" it doesn't change a single public mind. 

 

Canada basically did everything short of a full blown competition-- studies, evaluation, externak audits, review's, they check every box they could short of an actual years long multi million dollar competition that would throw their contracts and timelines into chaos.

 

You can only analyze 1+1=2 So much. 

 

Canada fell into paralysis by analysis. And there are tons of pitfalls in the current competition plan as well. Jr. Tried to exclude LM now he's trying to exclude Boeing. That doesn't sound open and fair. That sounds like internal influence already tainting the whole endeavor, which is what people would have said with the last government too anyway.

 

They've already made such a circus that whoever loses this competition can probably pitch a big enough fit to make this look like a farce.

 

And you know what? They'll be right

 

Boeing did a masterful job. Give them credit. They basically waged a "guerilla marketing" campaign against the status quo. I actually saw Canadians on social media who were convinced of impossible numbers. Numbers that Boeing put out. False numbers. No reporter fact checked them so they became "real" (did we notice the interim super hornets costs nearly 4 times what boeing was quoting?)

We got the two kids and their toy airplanes. Let canadians Sprinkle in some talk about bribery, run a biased cbc special  that makes it all look corrupt. Turn it into political football... I even saw one Canadian say that Boeing would give them a price break because Boeing and Canada had a special relationship. Which is darkly funny in retrospect. 

 

It is as Scooby said. JSF was the competition. F-35 won. At no point in any official Canadian capacity was it seen as wise to waste time and money on a contest the F-35 would surely win and not by a little either. 1+1=2. Canadians aren't stupid. They had some brilliant technical and tactical minds on this program. SMEs in their fields. Canadians have even flown super hornets and basically came to the same conclusion everyone does. "While an improvement on the legacy hornet, that platform falls short of F-35"  which is why the F-35 beats super hornets.

 

 

Edited by TaiidanTomcat
Link to post
Share on other sites

No doubt the whole affair in Canada is highly entertaining and more then a little comical (Keystone Cops have nothing on what's going on in Ottawa lately). But  I do truly and honestly feel bad for RCAF personnel who are the big losers in all this stumbling and bungling. As has already been said/written, other NATO members and allies around the world are surging ahead with the F-35. They will be years ahead when... if... Canada finally decides to go with the F-35 many years from now. There is no need for this drama (pun intended if you know "selfie's" illustrious background) to continue to be played out and no need for the RCAF to have to play catch up because of a spoiled little brats temper tantrum and ill conceived election promise.

 

In other news...

Lockheed made its 2017 F-35 delivery target:

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/18/lockheed-hits-2017-f-35-delivery-target-despite-production-hiccups.html

 

RAF/RN takes delivery of it's 14th F-35:

http://www.forces.net/news/uk-takes-delivery-14th-f-35

 

An older article but illustrates how training by F-35 user nations is expanding and growing quickly:

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2017/11/28/f35-training-simulators-poised-for-rapid-global-expansion

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 Hope not to offend anyone. Many of you have information that I don't have . I've been reading this for  ( I think ) two years now.

 The officials would be a lot better off to let the  people in the know ( the military ) make the  call as to what will be needed to defend you ( the government ) when you have ticked off another government.

 

 To sum it up , it makes me think of the longest  three stooges episode .  Let's face it, the ice cream will be melted before they stop arguing about it .

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Chris L said:

 

 Hope not to offend anyone. Many of you have information that I don't have . I've been reading this for  ( I think ) two years now.

 The officials would be a lot better off to let the  people in the know ( the military ) make the  call as to what will be needed to defend you ( the government ) when you have ticked off another government.

 

 To sum it up , it makes me think of the longest  three stooges episode .  Let's face it, the ice cream will be melted before they stop arguing about it .

 

 

The RCAF has been behind the F-35 the whole time. But why don't you know that? It's not your fault. Here is why:

 

Canadian politicians years before jr, made a rule that the military can't comment on it publicly.

 

So you can find guys in flightsuits from all over the globe that fly F-35s and tell folks from back home why they like them. Exception Canada.

 

It's made things messy because one guy in a flight suit with 2 minutes of explanation can tell you more than a dumb commercial with defense expert children playing with toys. But guess who doesn't get to comment on that silliness?

 

The best rep for Canada has been Billy Flynn, retired CF-18 pilot and bada$$ problem though is he is an LM employee. So anytime he says anythimg people say he is biased lying or both

Edited by TaiidanTomcat
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=2&hl=en&nv=1&rurl=translate.google.com&sl=auto&sp=nmt4&tl=en&u=https://www.lequotidien.com/actualites/le-f-35-pour-remplacer-les-cf-18-db74841382806e929c743bfe541e50f2&usg=ALkJrhgCjoyNQDdXAtXPex29zisrX0Zeag

 

I understand that I am a yank and a slow and mercurial one at that, but can someone explain to me how it's not a scandal to knowingly (attempt to) buy an inferior aircraft and invent "gaps" that cost potetebtial billions? 

 

The last government was raked over the coals for not showing a full lifetime cost estimate...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That article ^^^ should be properly translated into English and published in every English language newspaper across Canada (and in its original French in every French language newspaper in Canada). Scandalous and borderline criminal what's going on in Ottawa in my opinion. And like I posted earlier, its the RCAF and Canadian tax payers that are going to be paying for this three-ring circus for years to come.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't feel inclined to start a new thread but since there was a great deal of previous discussion on BA vrs Bombardier dumping claim, Airbus' purchase of the C Series, etc, I figured this news might be of interest.   Obviously has a ways to go before it happens.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-21/boeing-is-said-in-talks-to-acquire-embraer-wsj-reports

 

Fascinating to watch Airbus and Boeing slugging it out...

Link to post
Share on other sites

G'day people,

 

Heaps of info in this thread and I am working my way through it slowly, but there is a lot to digest.

 

I have an ejection seat question that i hope someone in here can answer, apologies if it has been done to death already. I know that there was some sort of issue with the F-35 ejection seat vis weight restrictions  and the original parachute configuration.

 

Looking at the current online pics, it seems that the parachute headbox has changed shape at some point.  I have the 1/48 Meng F-35A kit and the kit's seat headbox has a rectangular shape in side profile, however most of the current pics I have seen seem to indicate a more triangular side profile sitting above what I assume is the emergency oxy bottle?

 

Is the triangular shaped headbox a modification to overcome the earlier issue or is this a sub variant of the seat that is only particular to some F-35 versions? The MB website indicates that the seat is common to the F-35A/B/C

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, CreepyGuy said:

 

Most excellent. The Block 30H Vipers will be gone and we should find some decal options for the F-35's as well. Really looking forward to seeing them over home.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 11bee said:

Don't feel inclined to start a new thread but since there was a great deal of previous discussion on BA vrs Bombardier dumping claim, Airbus' purchase of the C Series, etc, I figured this news might be of interest.   Obviously has a ways to go before it happens.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-12-21/boeing-is-said-in-talks-to-acquire-embraer-wsj-reports

 

Fascinating to watch Airbus and Boeing slugging it out...

 

Interesting. I doubt that will mean more jobs here in the US if it goes through. Boeing will use the cheap labor market in Brazil instead...even with the whopping reduction in business taxes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr Matt Foley said:

 

Most excellent. The Block 30H Vipers will be gone and we should find some decal options for the F-35's as well. Really looking forward to seeing them over home.


Well..unfortunately it seems like most of the schemes for the F-35 have been ultra subdued...

My guess is little more than a WI and tail flash..

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jonathan_Lotton said:


Well..unfortunately it seems like most of the schemes for the F-35 have been ultra subdued...

My guess is little more than a WI and tail flash..

 

I would venture you are correct. I wouldn't expect snake fangs, wild hogs or in your case......Eagles. To say we are excited and proud to make the cut would be an understatement.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/21/2017 at 4:09 PM, Pappy121 said:

G'day people,

 

Heaps of info in this thread and I am working my way through it slowly, but there is a lot to digest.

 

I have an ejection seat question that i hope someone in here can answer, apologies if it has been done to death already. I know that there was some sort of issue with the F-35 ejection seat vis weight restrictions  and the original parachute configuration.

 

Looking at the current online pics, it seems that the parachute headbox has changed shape at some point.  I have the 1/48 Meng F-35A kit and the kit's seat headbox has a rectangular shape in side profile, however most of the current pics I have seen seem to indicate a more triangular side profile sitting above what I assume is the emergency oxy bottle?

 

Is the triangular shaped headbox a modification to overcome the earlier issue or is this a sub variant of the seat that is only particular to some F-35 versions? The MB website indicates that the seat is common to the F-35A/B/C

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

Pappy,

 

Where are you seeing the new profile?  It's always had a trapezoidal/parallelogram shape.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

G'day mark, I disagree, I think the shape has changed.

 

I just did a general F-35 search, but the pic in the link below is a good illustration of what I mean.  Once you notice it you cannot unsee it.

 

The headbox is definitely a different shape. There is a raised structure on each side of the headbox. On the early headbox version (pre-mod), looking from the side this feature starts at the lower forward corner and angles upwards towards the upper rear corner. On the post-mod version,  a similar feature is present however it now starts at the upper forward corner and angles downwards at a steeper angle  in parallel to the angled forward edge of the headbox. This has slipped past the kit producers and the aftermarket suppliers so an opportunity exists for a corrected seat if people are bothered about accuracy

 

http://taskandpurpose.com/skyline/military-grounds-lightweight-f-35-pilots-over-ejection-seat-concerns/

 

Compare this to the pre-mod headbox shape in post 1525

 

http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=62&t=27677

 

cheers,

 

Pappy

Edited by Pappy121
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...