Where oh where is our Hornet replacement?

[TaiidanTomcat]

15 hours ago, 11bee said:

 

Don't expect to get any guidance from your friends to the south.  The US system is pretty much a train wreck as well.  If you don't believe me, Google "F-35", "Littoral Combat Ship", "USS Gerald Ford" or hell, pretty much any other major weapons system.  The norm is a system that, if it isn't cancelled halfway through it's development, is something that is grossly over budget, over schedule.  We can't even figure out how to come up with a functional uniform for the vast majority of our armed services.    

 

Yes and no. The US system is far larger, we make more projects, we make more ambitious projects (IE cutting edge, trend setting) far more often. Since Canada has selected the CF-18 the US has run and fielded something like 12 new aircraft types (IIRC) This also doesn't consider the many attrition replacements for example. The US buys new aircraft of many types every year, so boringly in fact that it doesn't even make the news. As opposed to Canada which buys new fixed wing every 3 decades and has a procurement system that   According to one study, it takes on average, 107 months from the creation of a Statement of Requirements, to Draft RFP, to Final RFP, to Evaluation, Selection, and Contract Award. 

 

 

The US has poor planning, under bidding, behind closed doors politics, occasional overt politics but typically if a system is taking a long time to field its not due to indecisiveness but trying to get the new system to properly function since a lot of US stuff is again ambitious and new there are going to be setbacks and delays. Congress is mostly in charge of US programs every once a while it trickles to the big boss but for the most part they don't bother with individual weapon systems unless its to make a point. Canada seems to have politicos "adopt" individual programs as if they were political issues, which then firmly removed them from military decisions based on evaluations and sound practices. For every horrible no good JSF program there are 3 successful programs that never make headlines. From Rover, to the Predator UAV, to Shredder engineering vehicle. There is plenty of good news, but good news doesn't make headlines. Some weapon systems do turn out to be revolutionary, the issue is with public perception and the inability for the media to do anything other than give narratives and gross oversimplifications. Maybe the JSF really is double plus ungood. Maybe its a lemon. But the media says that everytime and far more often than not the "Lemon" goes on to be critical to winning wars. Its the boy who cried wolf. And its not just the CBC report from 1980. people were saying this same stuff about the Super Hornet in the year 2000 with nearly the exact same complaints verbatim.   Every aircraft is terrible, horrible, a no good turkey that costs too much. Heard it about ALL of the teen fighters, The Harrier, V-22, F-22, Apache, EF typhoon, Rafale, even Gripen at one point. How are we supposed to know when its an actual wolf and not a boy crying it? 

 

 

Whats worse is beuracrats are always trying to "fix" the procurement system and that invariably add more oversight and makes it worse. More beaurcracy, more redtape, more money, more time. The DOT&E "contest" between the F-35 vs the A-10 is going to be an utter waste. Not least of the reason being we have former A-10 guys who now fly F-35s. They could simply pick up the phone and answer any question the DOT&E have, but we are opting to spend millions of dollars for answers we already know. Maybe this contest will really surprise us when the A-10 hits mach 1, and the F-35 grows a 30MM cannon mid flight?

 

The Army cocking up their camouflage is squarely on the army. The Marines came up with a new camo that is universally loved and hasn't changed much since it was fielded while the army continues to try and find its buttocks with both hands. The Navy's blue berry camo was about "branding" IE recruiting, and the USAF camo isn't bad just generally unneeded. all of these decisions fall on the services, it was very direct and much controlled by them as opposed to be major weapons program that has to go through the procurement ringer. So thats not procurement stupidity its service stupidity. Service that made smart decisions are happy, and services that made dumb decisions are unhappy. 

Edited December 10, 2016 by TaiidanTomcat

[Johnopfor]

15 hours ago, Raceaddict said:

Just as a side note, could anyone not Canadian break down more or less how the military procurement works in your country? I've gathered from people's reactions in this thread and the FWSAR one as well, that the way we do it here isn't exactly the normal way of doing things.

The US procurement system in a nutshell.......

 

 

The USAF way......

OK, we want a super doper can opener for use on our tankers, any bids?

Company A: OK we bid our M-249 Super Slicer

Company B: And we'll bid our K-733 Metal Ripper

Five years later....., Company A wins the bid!

Company A: Great, let's start production!

Company B: Hey that ain't fair, their product doesn't have 35 gripping teeth like the specification states!

Company A: So!

The Government Accounting Office: They're right, the USAF needs to address this.

USAF: Screw it, we'll rebid the contract.

Two years later.....OK, Company B wins the contract!

Company B: Woo hoo! Let's get started!

Company A: Hey the handle is too short according to specifications!

The GAO: They're right, the USAF needs to correct this.

USAF: OK, let's bid this again.

After another 10 years of back & forth.....

USAF: Finally, Company B gets the contract....whew....

Company B: Cool, we will get the first ones to you in about 10 years, but it may need some upgrades after being added to the tankers.

American Taxpayer shakes his head.

 

The US Army way.....

OK, we want a new can opener to be issued to the troops in the field, anybody game?

Company A: Sure, we're in!

Company B: Us too.

Five years later.......Company A wins the bid!

Company A: Great! Let's get the production lines running!
US Army: Wait a minuite. We want some things added to the design.

Company A: OK, we'll see what we can do.

Three years later:.....Company A: Here you go, we're ready for production!
US Army: Wait, we need you to add some more things to the design.

Company A: OK.....we'll see what we can do.

Three years later.....Company A: OK, it's ready!

US Army: Hold up, can you add this?

Company A: OK, but there may be some issues.

Two years later......Company A: OK, we're good to go!

US Army: Sorry, it's too heavy, too big, and too expensive, we need to cancel the contract. We'll do this again later.

American Taxpayer shakes his head.

 

US Navy way.....

OK, we need a new can opener for our ships, what's you got?

Company A: We have our M-249!

Company B: And we have our K-733.

USN: Great, since there are just two of you we'll split the contract.

Companies A & B: Great!

Seven years later.....Companies A & B: Here you go!

USN: Company A, it's broke, will you fix it?

Company A: Yeah, but you need to pay for the modification.

USN: How much?

Company A: Double the price.

USN: Geez......well, get it done. Company B, yours isn't working correctly.

Company B: Did you train your sailors how to use it?

USN: Yeah, but we still have problems. Is there anything that we can do?

Company B: We'll recommend retraining your sailors. We will also have to issue civilian contractors to fix them when they break.

USN: Damn....how much?
Company B: Double the price.

USN: Yeah, do it

American taxpayer shakes his head

 

USMC way.....

This system is screwed up, we'll let the Navy deal with it, or get upgraded older equipment....

Edited December 10, 2016 by Johnopfor

[TaiidanTomcat]

14 hours ago, mingwin said:

canada's situation is rather unique in the world.  (not that we could not learn useful things about military procurement... but a lot of our closest allies tends to build their own fighter jets. the JSF program was an attempt at this... but it fails in canadian public opinion because the politicians couldn't "sell" a number of jobs it will create or maintain for canadians. it also fails the part where the people believe it is based, or meet, the canadian requirement. because none of our military comes to tell publicly " we've ask LM for this and that, and will operate in the harshest/coldest environment on earth! (or something like that)...sounds funny, but it's PR for canadians...but stealthy first strike capability is not much in the top priority for canadians, more reluctant to pay much for that feature.)

 

"stealthy first day strike" is a misnomer, and like the above Canadian examples is yet another misconception. Buying the F-18s was the ticket to the day one club back in the 1980s. Thats called relevancy. Stealth is going to become a common feature in the same way turbine engines and radars are today. Stealth is useful for air to air and ISR missions, close air support, you name it its always nice to not be seen and get shot at. Its very useful over No fly zones where SAMs are still active below, or any other conflict that goes on beyond one day in which you can't nuetralize every potential threat.  In some cases like the CF-18 deployment to eastern europe you are taking off in the range of enemy systems. and of course the Russians and chinese are fielding stealthy fighters. We have seen in Syria when someone parks a SAM system in the middle of places you need to be that it can throw a wrench in a lot of stuff. 

 

That day one first strike thing is a strawman. if we were talking about Canada buying F-117s, then its relevant. F-35 is not F-117.  Just like Canada doesn't need multi-role hornets designed to land on ships right? 

 

Every generation of aircraft adds features and capabilites, especially electronically. If Canada wants to be able to sense and distribute the amount of information the F-35 does, its going to need F-35s. Small anecdote but an interesting one:

 

Guts:  My first “aha” moment was a seemingly simple thing. 

I was executing a familiarization flight near MCAS Yuma.  I was coming back to the airfield and I basically just turned the jet and pointed its nose at Yuma. 

Immediately the jet is providing me the information of all the traffic that is out there in the airspace.  

When I talk to approach for the first time they are telling me about the traffic that is out there that I already know about and I see it. 

I can tell who everybody is that he is talking about and the jet also saw traffic that ATC hadn’t seen yet and I asked about it.  And I thought, “holy cow,” here I am coming back to the field from a simple familiarity mission and my jet is telling me everything about the operational environment I am about to go into.  

In this case, something very simple, the traffic pattern coming back there, but I didn’t have to do anything to have that level of SA. 

I can start making decisions about what altitude I wanted to go to, if I wanted to turn left or right, speed up or slow down. 

There’s somebody coming up next to me, I want to get in front of them – or whatever. 

It is a very simple example, but I thought WOW this is amazing that I see everything and can do that...

 

 

...BC:  I was conducting a strike mission and Red Air was coming at me.  In a 4^th Gen fighter you must do a whole lot of interpretation.  You see things in azimuth, and you see things in elevation.  In the F-35 you just see the Gods eye view of the whole world.  It’s very much like you are watching the briefing in real time. 

I am coming in to perform the simulated weapons release, and Red Air is coming the other direction. 

I have enough situational awareness to assess whether Red Air is going to be a factor to me by the time I release the weapon.  I can make the decision, I’m going to go to the target, I’m going to release this weapon.  

At the same time I pre-target the threat, and as soon as I release the A2G weapon, I can flip a switch with my thumb and shoot the Red Air.  

This is difficult to do in a 4^th Gen fighter, because there is so much manipulation of systems in the cockpit. 

All while paying attention to the basic mechanics of flying the airplane and interpreting threat warnings that are often very vague, or only directional. 

In the F-35 I know where the threats are, what they are and I can thread the needle.  I can tell that the adversary is out in front of me and I can make a very, very smart decision about whether to continue or get out of there.  All that, and I can very easily switch between mission sets.

Mo: I was leading a four ship of F-35s on a strike against 4^th Gen adversaries, F-16s and F/A-18s.  

We fought our way in, we mapped the target, found the target, dropped JDAMs on the target and turned around and fought our way out.  

All the targets got hit, nobody got detected, and all the adversaries died.  I thought, yes, this works, very, very, very well. 

 

 

Are we really trying to convinces ourselves Canadian pilots don't need good threat detection or superior survivability? Canadian pilots should be half blind and easier to spot?

 

I just don't accept the argument. Stealth is still being passed off like a "nice to have" when everyone is saying its a "need to have" and if you don't have it you "need to have" additional assets, like jammers, mixed fleets, specialized crews, more expensive and longer ranged munitions etc. 

 

This is big picture but 2 countries operate the Super Hornet, both those countries also bought Growlers. And both those countries also plan on buying F-35s than both the hornet types combined. Kuwait is buying Super Hornets AND EF Typhoons. And more Typhoons than Super Hornets. Super Hornets have never won a competition. They are always sole sourced. Everytime Super Hornets are purchased, other aircraft are purchased as well. just observations

 

[mingwin]

you might have miss it , but many times, over many thread, i've stated that, if it was just about my money, Canada would have buy the F-35. there is no need to convince me... you might just think that because i found pointless to tear off my shirt for the SH decision... there is too many waste of public money (here there and everywhere, past present and future) for being pissed off by a political decision.

if the reformist would have been sure that cancelling the F-35 would have gave them the victory in the last election, hell they would have cancelled it... 

those who where in charge, when it was the time to do a good PR job for the plane, just totally failed... because, too many times, on too many occasion (over too many years), they have shown a tendency to ignore facts. they also had lots of issues with their own scientific employees...(not just 200 employees forced to silence, but thousands...)  ...so after a while, when they'll bring "facts" they where not taken seriously...

 

advocating for the F-35 to liberal Canadian taxpayer, is like experimenting what most Climate Scientist experiment when trying to explain global warming to conservative people... everything point that this is it... but anyone have just to thrown anything like "it don't work"(or it's not happening) . SAAB can tell that their plane cost 5000$/hour to operate... like BP can fund scientific to tell how good is Oil, and all the drawbacks of using electricity instead... haters are gonna hate... 

 

the only hope for Canadian that don't wanted a mixed fleet, and just F-35...is that the Boeing negotiation don't  end in a purchase.

i fear that shouting insults to Sunny&Friends won't make him buy any F-35. neither..nor help him change his mind. but if the only supports F-35 have in canada are clearly associated with the other political party, my bet is that we'll only have SH for years...

in the end, Canada have survive the loss of the CF-105(but mostly the Avro staff)... and have to use voodoos instead for decades... Canada did survive... like to choice of the Hornet over the Tomcat... hey! isn't the F-14 the greatest jet fighter ever build? why haven't we choose it then? wouldn't Canada been a greater ally to the US with Tomcats? (i think history prove the that the Hornet was a good choice, but could it have been better??)

... the final irony would be that the first F-35 loss in anger would be caused by an old IRIAF Tomcat...

[Scooby]

Mingwin, we truly didn't survive the CF-105 cancellation. That cancellation put us behind 4 or 5 decades, at least. We lost a lot of good people to other countries after that cancellation. We are still playing catch-up in our aviation community.

 

The F-35 cancellation could hurt our aviation community in much the same way. Companies could close shop and move elsewhere rather than lose business.

 

Instead of Sea King #2 this political meddling will turn into Arrow #2.

[mingwin]

we certainly survived.  Canadian military aeronautical industry might have just die then.  but Canadians didn't suffer much from those losses...  outside of the AvGeek community, no one knows what was the CF-105...

there is so many things that have changed in Canada since then, our whole economy have changed, and globally, in a much positive way, most Canadians have improve their living situation when compared to the previous generations...

 

 

Edited December 11, 2016 by mingwin

[TaiidanTomcat]

 

32 minutes ago, mingwin said:

we certainly survived.  Canadian military aeronautical industry might have just die then.  but Canadians didn't suffer much from those losses...  outside of the AvGeek community, no one knows what was the CF-105...

there is so many things that have changed in Canada since then, our whole economy have changed, and globally, in a much positive way, most Canadians have improve their living situation when compared to the previous generations...

 

Lol wut? pretty sure those were real tangible jobs connected with arrow just like with Eh 101. ridiculous that you think it's just an AvGeek thing. Doesn't the Canadian government subsidize aerospace jobs to the tune of billions of dollars up there? Why isn't Bombardier going to have to "just die then"? 
 

 

 

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/f-35-triggers-conceptual-overhaul-in-israel-air-force

 

 Israelis don't listen to Canadian PM, press.

 

 

Quote

i fear that shouting insults to Sunny&Friends won't make him buy any F-35. neither..nor help him change his mind. but if the only supports F-35 have in canada are clearly associated with the other political party, my bet is that we'll only have SH for years...

 

 

If the myriad of DND studies and RCAF recommendations have no effect on him then what do insults matter at all? 

 

 

Edited December 11, 2016 by TaiidanTomcat

[Don]

The cancellation of the Avro Arrow was absolutely devastating to the Canadian aerospace industry and like "Scooby" wrote, it's still playing catch up and likely never will! Its undeniable and has been clearly written about in virtually every book dealing with the Arrow. The almost immediate brain drain of most of the brightest and sharpest Canadian aerospace engineers/designers to the United States, Great Britain, France and elsewhere pretty much killed what was once a cutting edge Canadian military aircraft design industry. It's never recovered because Canada has never designed and built its own indigenous fighter aircraft since the Arrow.  To say the immediate loss of 14,000+ engineers and skilled craftsmen at A.V. Roe alone (don't forget all those at Orenda and all the other companies associated with the Arrow) wasn't suffering is ridiculous. Many of those went on to help NASA with its space program (imagine had they never left?). I also believe that the Arrow is an enduring legacy in Canada and many are aware of it still to this day, not just aviation enthusiasts and historians. Heck there was talk (silly as it was...) of resurrecting the Arrow or something like it to replace the Cf-18's!!

Entertaining viewing:

 

Good stuff huh! Considering the keystone cops routine being acted out by JT and his cronies I am kind of surprised he hasn't pitched this idea.

[TaiidanTomcat]

I'm not bLind to the arrows faults, or its expense. in it's cancellation it became a legend. but I do think it's funny that the Canadian civil aerospace is subsidized to the tune of billions of taxpayer dollars 

[Don]

2 hours ago, TaiidanTomcat said:

...I do think it's funny that the Canadian civil aerospace is subsidized to the tune of billions of taxpayer dollars 

It appears nobody knows for certain just how much Quebec based Bombardier alone owes Canadians...but you aren't far off in your assertion:

 

http://globalnews.ca/news/2624709/how-much-money-does-bombardier-owe-canadians-its-a-secret/

[mingwin]

how governments deal with bombardier is a shame. (not just federal, but also Québec's province government also, who'd just added 1,3 bn last year, in a joint venture for the CSeries) 

[MacStingy]

Sore spot for sure. Is there a problem with what Bomb offers that we allways have to prop them up? If I am in business and my product line can't survive without subsidy, isn't it time for a reset? Look at our CBC. I can't believe the junk they put out that we pay for. How many world class outlets are clamouring for their programming? Watched the CBC morning news show lately? You are watching a radio studio, live. No news clips or graphics. This is what they call entertainment. If they put their hands out, we will encourage them with more handouts.

[Gordon Shumway]

2 hours ago, MacStingy said:

Sore spot for sure. Is there a problem with what Bomb offers that we allways have to prop them up? If I am in business and my product line can't survive without subsidy, isn't it time for a reset? Look at our CBC. I can't believe the junk they put out that we pay for. How many world class outlets are clamouring for their programming? Watched the CBC morning news show lately? You are watching a radio studio, live. No news clips or graphics. This is what they call entertainment. If they put their hands out, we will encourage them with more handouts.

 If a corporation like Bombardier and there are many like it world wide gets use to government handouts, these are dressed in many ways, it gets fat to such and  resists the need to change, to get better as a business. If you are a say 20 something kid and  you plug away making ok money for a 20 something   but you know  mommy and daddy will  prop you up if cash runs short, will you  be more responsible or will you throw more of it away?

 

Financial help   be it mommy and daddy or  via the government  may have a place   to a person or a  corporation  at times.  But it  should not be seen as a    forever handout or a place to run  to    cap in hand, begging.

 

[Raceaddict]

Don't get too excited about Super Hornets just yet: http://www.macleans.ca/news/super-hornet-fighter-jet-costs-under-scrutiny-pbo/

[-Neu-]

On December 11, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Don said:

The cancellation of the Avro Arrow was absolutely devastating to the Canadian aerospace industry and like "Scooby" wrote, it's still playing catch up and likely never will! Its undeniable and has been clearly written about in virtually every book dealing with the Arrow. The almost immediate brain drain of most of the brightest and sharpest Canadian aerospace engineers/designers to the United States, Great Britain, France and elsewhere pretty much killed what was once a cutting edge Canadian military aircraft design industry. It's never recovered because Canada has never designed and built its own indigenous fighter aircraft since the Arrow.  To say the immediate loss of 14,000+ engineers and skilled craftsmen at A.V. Roe alone (don't forget all those at Orenda and all the other companies associated with the Arrow) wasn't suffering is ridiculous. Many of those went on to help NASA with its space program (imagine had they never left?). I also believe that the Arrow is an enduring legacy in Canada and many are aware of it still to this day, not just aviation enthusiasts and historians. Heck there was talk (silly as it was...) of resurrecting the Arrow or something like it to replace the Cf-18's!!

Entertaining viewing:

 

Good stuff huh! Considering the keystone cops routine being acted out by JT and his cronies I am kind of surprised he hasn't pitched this idea.

 

No, that sort of view has been allowed to propagate, and its to the detriment of us actually understanding what's going on today. First off, our aviation industry is the Fifth largest in the world. We are a world leader in landing gear assemblies (heroux devtek), carbon fibre structures (Magellan), turboprop engines (P&W Canada) and top line aircraft simulators (CAE).So the claim that "we'll never catch up" is complete BS. 

 

Most of the "books" written on the Avro arrow are done by enthusasts. Instead, read Dr. Randall Wakelam's Cold War Fighters. He gives a very clear view of the nature of Canada's defence industry from 1945 to 1955. People seem to forget that Canada had two major defence contractors. the first was Avro, which was a poorly run defence contractor, bloated on federal money, delivered things over budget and highly delayed. People today think the CF-100 was some sort of marvel. Back in 1955, the RCAF felt they were getting substandard equipment. Then there was the real success of Canadian Industry: Canadair. That company delivered almost everything on time, on budget. It produced 1800 Sabres, nearly half of which they exported. However they were just producing a licensed production of an american fighter.

 

The CF-105 was an abject disaster, no matter what the CBC's heritage moment claims. The reality is that precious Canadian dollars was supporting an aircraft that was for a mission that was significantly lower in the priorities list than when it was designed, had serious technical issues, was actually outclassed by existing aircraft (F-4 phantom), and was insanely costly.  It had to be cancelled, despite the unfortunate reality that many people would lose their jobs. Furthermore it became fairly apparent that trying to indigenously develop aircraft was a fools errand: incredibly costly and unlikely to produce something that was better than what the Americans had. 

 

But what people don't realize was that Diefenbaker's government didn't just leave the aviation industry to rot. Rather it negotiated a major agreement with the United States that allowed Canadian firms to bid for US military sub contracts. The Defence Production Sharing Agreement, to this day has done vastly more to improve the prospects of the Canadian aviation industry than what the Arrow's cancellation could have wrought.  Overnight our industry basically went from supporting an unsustainable military development structure in Canada, to supporting the world's largest aviation industry. All over the country we started building major sub assemblies for american companies. Many of those companies I listed above worked for AV Roe: and they prospered under the agreement with the United States. 

 

So no, far from the abject disaster, the Avro cancellation laid the foundation for the immense success that our industry enjoys today. While there was certainly some sharp short term pain, it resulted in untold long term gain. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Gordon Shumway]

Canadair also built over 200 CF-104 Starfighters under contract with Lockheed. Most served ably in  the RCAF / Canadian Air Force but some were exported to European Nato Allies, (Denmark I believe).

 

The CF-105 Arrow was a very good interceptor design, but single purpose interceptors were readily available from US firms and at a lower cost. The Arrow was a marvel of design for its day and would have served ably in the RCAF all be it at its bloated price. It likely would not have had any  foreign sales for such a high price. This would have made the costs for the RCAF even higher. I doubt the RCAF would have been able to buy any in larger numbers.

 

Now lets look at what was a  very good  deal for the RCAF at the time post CF-105 cancellation. The McDonnell CF-101B Voodoo. The Voodoo was an excellent long range interceptor it had longer legs than  CF-105 did.  It served about 25 years as a NORAD (USSR Bomber) interceptor. We got 66  CF-101B's for the cost of Canada setting up the Pine Tree Radar line which sat below the DEW line. A couple of years later we were able to ship the 56 remaining CF-101B's back to Lockheed and picked up 66 CF-101B' which were actually older but more advanced as they had the IR tracker and a better fire control system.

 

The CF-101B Voodoo in many ways was the best Century Series jet. It was capable, durable and advanced enough as an interceptor. Where as the F-104 was IMO the sexiest Century Series jet, the  F-101 Voodoo may have been the most elegant Century Series jet.

 

 

Edited December 13, 2016 by Gordon Shumway

[Don]

Sorry Neu, I have to disagree in regards the affect the Arrow cancellation had on Canadian indigenous fighter designs (which was my point). It's cancellation was devastating to Canada because it has never since designed, built, and actually implemented its own fighter AC (building other peoples designed fighter AC is just that... building other peoples designed AC like the F-104). Sure Canada has had some successful civilian AC designs, but not since the Arrow program has Canada been in the frontline fighter business. Did the brain drain (my uncle being one of them) have anything to do with this or did the Arrow program leave a bad taste in higher up's mouths making them gun-shy to attempt a Canadian designed and built fighter AC? Who knows. I agree the Arrow program was flawed, over budget, and bungled from the start. But there is no denying that Canada hasn't done anything since to create its own fighter AC industry. That was my point that I may not have articulated clearly.

[11bee]

Why would Canada want to sign up for the F-35?  Trump has stated costs are out of control.  Gotta believe he knows what he is talking about, wonder if he'll fire the JSF upon taking office?  

 

Given the apparent state of the JSF program, the Canadian decision appears to be extremely prudent.  

 

 

[MacStingy]

A VERY BIG NUMBER

If I give you $1 billion and you stand on a street corner handing out $1 per   
Second, twenty four hours a day, seven days a week, you would still not have 
Handed out $1 billion after 31 years!! 

Now read on. 


A VERY BIG NUMBER 

This is too true to be funny. 
The next time you hear a politician use the word 'billion' in a casual   
Manner, think about whether you want the 'politicians' spending YOUR tax   
Money. 

A billion is a difficult number to comprehend, but one advertising agency   
Did a good job of putting that figure into some perspective in one of its   
Releases. 

A.     A billion seconds ago it was 1959. 
B.     A billion minutes ago Jesus was alive. 
C.     A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the Stone Age. 
D.     A billion days ago no-one walked on the earth on two feet. 
E.     A billion Dollars ago was only 13 hours and 12 minutes, at the rate   
        Our government is spending it. 

I came across this and it puts a little reality into things.

Edited December 13, 2016 by MacStingy

[mingwin]

yep... but ain't got nothin for nothin! as big as are the numbers, they barely reflect the reality of 35 million life! those billions are not just burned away! 

 

1,5Bn KM away is saturn...merely halfway the end of solar system... which is infinitely small in comparison to the scale of our galaxy... which itself is not much than a dot like millions of others... 

don't get too stressed by numbers

Edited December 13, 2016 by mingwin

[Raceaddict]

3 hours ago, 11bee said:

Trump has stated costs are out of control.  Gotta believe he knows what he is talking about.

 

That's gotta' be the funniest thing I've read online this month.

 

I mean, you were being sarcastic, right?

[Gordon Shumway]

4 hours ago, 11bee said:

Why would Canada want to sign up for the F-35?  Trump has stated costs are out of control.  Gotta believe he knows what he is talking about, wonder if he'll fire the JSF upon taking office?  

 

Given the apparent state of the JSF program, the Canadian decision appears to be extremely prudent.  

 

 

One must understand what Trump is trying to do. He's  only making it clear his administration will be looking at costs of government projects closely. He is already    likely going to save the US taxpayer money on the new AF1 by having Boeing sharpen its pencil so to speak. If his rhetoric can save some tax dollars on F-35 why would that be bad? He has been making it loud and clear for over a year and half, his  Presidency will be different, it is not going to be business  as usual and that has the establishment  scared $hitless.

 

Again those who want to crucify him maybe let him be sworn into office first. You all will have ample time to build the crucifix to  put him on ok? BUT! maybe you all will be wrong and maybe   he will as billionaire  Cuban-American  John Penna said, "President Trump  will rock the world."   Only time will tell, lets not stop the clock   before he gets an opportunity to actually be POTUS?

[Don]

A new book has come out that may be of interest. It's called "Charlie Foxtrot: Fixing Defence Procurement in Canada" by Kim Richard Nossal.  here is a link to the newspaper article:

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/matthew-fisher-new-book-pleads-for-fix-to-canadas-dysfunctional-military-procurement-system

 

From the linked article:

"Charlie Foxtrot — military shorthand for “clusterf—” — is particularly relevant today because the Liberal government is seemingly intent on equaling if not surpassing their Conservative predecessors’ brutal mishandling of the multi-billion dollar programme to finally buy new fighter jets."

 

Timely...

[TaiidanTomcat]

6 hours ago, 11bee said:

Why would Canada want to sign up for the F-35?  Trump has stated costs are out of control.  Gotta believe he knows what he is talking about, wonder if he'll fire the JSF upon taking office?  

 

Given the apparent state of the JSF program, the Canadian decision appears to be extremely prudent.  

 

 

 

cheeky

[-Neu-]

6 hours ago, Don said:

Sorry Neu, I have to disagree in regards the affect the Arrow cancellation had on Canadian indigenous fighter designs (which was my point). It's cancellation was devastating to Canada because it has never since designed, built, and actually implemented its own fighter AC (building other peoples designed fighter AC is just that... building other peoples designed AC like the F-104). Sure Canada has had some successful civilian AC designs, but not since the Arrow program has Canada been in the frontline fighter business. Did the brain drain (my uncle being one of them) have anything to do with this or did the Arrow program leave a bad taste in higher up's mouths making them gun-shy to attempt a Canadian designed and built fighter AC? Who knows. I agree the Arrow program was flawed, over budget, and bungled from the start. But there is no denying that Canada hasn't done anything since to create its own fighter AC industry. That was my point that I may not have articulated clearly.

 

 

No you articulated that point... its still not really defensible. We got out of the fighter market because it was immensely costly and we didn't produce an aircraft that was really unique. It was the RCAF that was footing the development bill, which sucked up money it could use to purchase and operate a fighter. It wasn't just the Arrow that left a bad taste in their mouth, the CF-100 was a near disaster as well. Within a year of its entry into service, it was already overshadowed by an American interceptor (the F-102). And if we look to the 1960s and the 70s, you see governments that have no appetite for defense spending whatsoever. Instead of purchasing the F-4, like what the RCAF wanted, we got the F-5,... then waited fifteen years until we got a proper replacement, the CF-18.  

 

The reality is that unless you are willing to invest tens of billions of dollars into fighter development or willing to accept that your aircraft are qualitatively poorer than everybody else, you're not going to be in the fighter market, nor does it make sense to be in it. Its much better to be in the second and third tier, where we can (and have) developed niche interests and make a real industry out of that. That's what we did.