Its political. Its the price of admission. Don't you get it?
F35
- Thread starter D23
- Start date
Its political. Its the price of admission. Don't you get it?
I'm gonna add this and cap my arguments for the night. I've got dishes to wash.
The US DOD will spend $707 BILLION in 2012. That's 400 billion dollars more than our ENTIRE federal program spending.
They're our biggest ally and our first line of defence in a highly uncertain future. We all agree (Chinese and Russians included) that the Arctic will be a highly contested territory in the decades to come. Couple this with global economic hardship, rising prices of tightly controlled natural resources, and a general state of instability on this planet, and it becomes abundantly clear that our little country could potentially be on the receiving end of military actions in the foreseeable future. It's an uncertainty we have to bet on. We could NEVER afford a capable military to fend off these threats on its own. We depend on the immense might of the US military for our own safety.
We get to tap into all the benefits and resources that 700 billion US dollars of USDOD spending buys, by contributing only a tiny minuscule fraction to it. It's the only bet we can make.
Good night.
The US DOD will spend $707 BILLION in 2012. That's 400 billion dollars more than our ENTIRE federal program spending.
They're our biggest ally and our first line of defence in a highly uncertain future. We all agree (Chinese and Russians included) that the Arctic will be a highly contested territory in the decades to come. Couple this with global economic hardship, rising prices of tightly controlled natural resources, and a general state of instability on this planet, and it becomes abundantly clear that our little country could potentially be on the receiving end of military actions in the foreseeable future. It's an uncertainty we have to bet on. We could NEVER afford a capable military to fend off these threats on its own. We depend on the immense might of the US military for our own safety.
We get to tap into all the benefits and resources that 700 billion US dollars of USDOD spending buys, by contributing only a tiny minuscule fraction to it. It's the only bet we can make.
Good night.
ok, i'm going ask again.
what are the primary roles you think the f35 will have to perform? please put them in real world terms (e.g. patrol airspace, etc.).
what you don't seem to get is that clearly, most people are getting the impression that the f35 just doesn't fit what role CANADA needs it to perform.
you see, that's just not an answer that you should admit openly.
that harpo cut a blank cheque worth billions of our taxpayers' dollars to satisfy his american masters and that the real reason for the choice is political, not actual military need.
we voted to have a gov't represent canada, not be the puppet of the u.s.
all answers need to be put in terms of why CANADA, first and foremost, will benefit from the f35 instead of the f22.
political expediency is flat out the WRONG answer. . .too many people are still bristling from NAFTA and the ghetto-isation of our economy to want to hear that.
the u.s. spends more on military expenditures than most of the rest of the world, combined.
that just emphasizes why our f35 order is meaningless. it is a tiny fraction of what the u.s. has on order for the jsf production, and our 65 would be inconsequential in its 'integrated' strategy. having 65 f22s though, would allow us to play a much more meaningful role in that so-called strategy. i would think that is an even better argument for switching the purchase order.
in related news:
f35 boondoggle:
no cost certainty
gov't lied to canadian people
no due diligence or transparency
they signed a blank cheque with our tax dollars
It's a tri-bike. It doesn't have hoops or drops
sorry, skimmed the tri part. . .
did you already try replacing the pads?
Its a three dimensional issue, and you're only arguing about one; the absolute dynamic performance of the aircraft and its cost.
Whats even funnier is that you're now advocating the purchase of F-22s instead; a fighter already out of production (due to cost issues, no less!) and one that was never allowed for export. :lol: awesome
Whats even funnier is that you're now advocating the purchase of F-22s instead; a fighter already out of production (due to cost issues, no less!) and one that was never allowed for export. :lol: awesome
we can certainly discuss the other issues if need be, but i don't think we're done with the most important one, the cost.
to the taxpayers of canada, the f35 looks, sounds, and walks like a duck (boondoggle). canadians expect that in this time of austerity, tight budgets, and cutbacks everywhere, that when they open their wallets, they better get best value for the dollar.
when they hear that the government signed off on the purchase before they were even informed by the dnd as to the criteria they expected the f35 to meet, well, that sure as hell sounds like due diligence was not performed.
we are far from seeing an f35 meet its stated/claimed capabilities, and it looks like the delays and cost-overruns are far from reaching their peak.
as for the f22, production was halted, yes, due to costs, but the f35 is quickly making the f22 look like the more affordable option. furthermore, there are inklings that production will possibly re-start since even americans are beginning to wonder if the f35 is a dud, and if canada and others (such as australia, etc.) expressed an interest in making sizable, multi-billion dollar purchases, it could only add to the fire.
the big advantage that the f22 has is that it is in service, it has solid capabilities for its role, it could deliver on time to meet the scheduled de-commission of the cf18s, and most importantly, it has a measure of cost certainty.
none of which is offered by the jsf.
This purchase transcends the current economic climate. It's a purchase which must be made, we all agree on that.
With that being said, do we skimp out on the 'right' choice just because its a few tenths of a percent more expensive annually than the cheaper option; just because the economy is still reeling now? Remember, these have to serve us 30+ years. How many economic downturns have we had in the previous 30 years?
To the taxpayers of Canada this looks like a boondoggle because we're being told by political opposition that its a "boondoggle"... its a political hot topic, its something they've decided to latch onto to make their opponents look bad. Is it really that big of an issue? No, I don't think so at all. I firmly believe that both the NDP and the Liberals would still be on track with this purchase were they in power; and the conservatives would be slamming them for it. Usual bs politics.
Do I think the government signed off on the purchase before due diligence was performed? Hell no. We've had since the mid 1990s to do the thinking.
With that being said, do we skimp out on the 'right' choice just because its a few tenths of a percent more expensive annually than the cheaper option; just because the economy is still reeling now? Remember, these have to serve us 30+ years. How many economic downturns have we had in the previous 30 years?
To the taxpayers of Canada this looks like a boondoggle because we're being told by political opposition that its a "boondoggle"... its a political hot topic, its something they've decided to latch onto to make their opponents look bad. Is it really that big of an issue? No, I don't think so at all. I firmly believe that both the NDP and the Liberals would still be on track with this purchase were they in power; and the conservatives would be slamming them for it. Usual bs politics.
Do I think the government signed off on the purchase before due diligence was performed? Hell no. We've had since the mid 1990s to do the thinking.
As far as the politic issues go, I couldn't care less.
People always want an excuse to cry about the government and these kind of purchases always provide that opportunity.
It's sad that people jump on bandwagons every time big money numbers get brought up desperate to find someone who wrote something online that backs their "complaint".
Personally I am never aligned with a party, as I vote for a majority government regardless of their platform. I don't care who, I just care that whoever it is has the strongest voice to accomplish what needs to be done.
When the Harpos quoted a cost it was a generalization and the rest is typical of incurred costs that go with such deals.
What I have learned is, aircraft selection is limited to who we are in bed with. Makes sense since we have to look at security and interoperability. Well, I always knew that but I'm noticing how there is no competition any more.
Aircraft production is now based on getting everyone on board before starting a project instead of having manufacturers bring their "YF" to battle for a bid.
This also makes sense because the technology isn't about aircraft that can shoot down other aircraft only....
Basically, Sukoi is mass producing capable 5th gen fighters from it's Air Superiority SU-37 designs and selling them by the hundreds to everyone that can get them. At the same time they are developing a rival to the Western worlds best fighter (some say possibly superior) but given their history with advanced fighter development their best, may end up being 10 that get off the ground and run missions.
If the F-22 was considered too much and we missed that boat then there really isn't any option to what we are getting.
A short range low payload aircraft with the wrong engine.
Shame we as a first world supertec country can't build our own.
People always want an excuse to cry about the government and these kind of purchases always provide that opportunity.
It's sad that people jump on bandwagons every time big money numbers get brought up desperate to find someone who wrote something online that backs their "complaint".
Personally I am never aligned with a party, as I vote for a majority government regardless of their platform. I don't care who, I just care that whoever it is has the strongest voice to accomplish what needs to be done.
When the Harpos quoted a cost it was a generalization and the rest is typical of incurred costs that go with such deals.
What I have learned is, aircraft selection is limited to who we are in bed with. Makes sense since we have to look at security and interoperability. Well, I always knew that but I'm noticing how there is no competition any more.
Aircraft production is now based on getting everyone on board before starting a project instead of having manufacturers bring their "YF" to battle for a bid.
This also makes sense because the technology isn't about aircraft that can shoot down other aircraft only....
Basically, Sukoi is mass producing capable 5th gen fighters from it's Air Superiority SU-37 designs and selling them by the hundreds to everyone that can get them. At the same time they are developing a rival to the Western worlds best fighter (some say possibly superior) but given their history with advanced fighter development their best, may end up being 10 that get off the ground and run missions.
If the F-22 was considered too much and we missed that boat then there really isn't any option to what we are getting.
A short range low payload aircraft with the wrong engine.
Shame we as a first world supertec country can't build our own.
Last edited:
the problem is that it's pretty clear due diligence was NOT done.
we can't trust the dnd because they were the ones the failed due diligence from the get go, and then the harpo government compounded it by not doing their job.
a frank assessment of clearly defined roles for the cf18 replacement has not been transparently arrived at--i've asked you many, many times to delineate just what roles you seem to think the jsf must meet, since it is not an air superiority fighter.
the cost of the jet is ALREADY the highest out of all of the options, so that is clearly an issue. without some measure of cost certainty, it is a boondoggle. to portray it as merely fractions more on the dollar is very short sighted, considering costs are continually going up, and it has missed every developmental deadline so far. we are probably 8+ years away from seeing any jsf's dressed in rcaf colours--that has an additional cost to consider as well.
unless you can identify the roles that the f35 will play in your projected defence system, there is no way to make a comparison of the f35 to any of the options, and you CANNOT claim that the f35 is the best option out there.
well, if your colleague is to be believed, the f35 choice was a geo-political one, so yeah, it is germane.
this is a government purchase, made using our tax dollars, so no, it's not free from oversight and transparency.
they have to work within prescribed protocols that maintain oversight and transparency. they failed to do that.
military procurement is not done in a vaccuum.
futhermore, there evidence that the criteria were rigged to make the f35 the only viable candidate, so we cannot definitively exclude the possibility that options exist.
Regardless of who is to believed...
It seems transparent to me. The oversight is just what it is. DND domain.
There is no evidence of rigged anything. The Criteria was we came to the end of F18 and we missed the boat on F22 meaning the F35 is the next thing if we want something by 2016.
Show me the prescribed protocols when making military purchases with DND funds?
It's always been buy what we need from one specific line and buy 100 000 or 200 with weapon system and ammo costs etc., service contracts and training... with future hidden cost possible. Small class items are put our to bid.
Items with 0 competitor. How would one tender?
Time doesn't stand still.
There were many spending's over the last ten years that draw no speculation and cost as much or more than some planes...
Anyways.
I got what I wanted out of it.
Cheers.
I haven't read through this entire thread, but figured I'd chime in here anyway. The fact of the matter is Canada is a Tier 3 partner in the F35 program, we are very much tied to the program. We can't simply back out of the order, there's way too much politics involved. We have military obligations to uphold as well, and for that we need jets.
I'm not saying the F35 is what we should have bought - in my opinion it's absolutely the wrong plane for the job. But what other plane would we have purchased? So far, the only real purchasable fifth generation fighters out there are the F35 and the Sukhoi PAK 50. And I doubt we can back out of the F35 program to purchase planes from Moscow. I wish we could, the PAK 50 is a nice plane and it comes in at 1/3 the price of the base model F35.
I wouldn't mind Canada getting some 4.5 generation fighters (like the Saab Gripen or the Dassault Rafale), but again... we can't. We can't "politically" pass up whatever America has to offer
the protocols were laid out in the report by ferguson, and in the report by the previous ag, fraser, when the chopper purchase was audited in 2010.
the ministry is responsible to report to parliament and the canadian people for the decisions it makes, and is responsible for oversight on the dnd's actions, so while the procurement is the domain of the dnd, there is civilian oversight. when mackay signed off on the project and reported to the public, he was claiming that he did due diligence in the affair. when the dnd screwed up, it was his responsibility to fix it back in 2010, something he said he would.
zero competitors depends on if you believe that the dnd and the government intended to put forward a fairly-assessed set of criteria, or were never intending to have an open competition when they dropped the ball on due diligence.
when the ministry signs off on these criteria WITHOUT LOOKING AT THEM and BEFORE DND SENT THEM, you have to wonder whether this was a fait accompli.
isn't it interesting that the harpo government hasn't been selling the f35 purchase front and centre based upon being politically trapped by the u.s.
if we believe in the absolute imperative that you suggest, then why not come clean with the canadian people and tell them we bought the wrong plane because the u.s. told us to?
lol, because they would have lost the last election.
this is the absolute worst argument to use in justifying the f35 purchase. canadian taxpayers expect more than that.
OpenGambit
Banned
i seriously doubt they would have lost the last election on this considering the incompetence of everyone else.
When has a government ever come clean? When has a government every told the truth? You expect Harper to get up there and say "We need new planes, and America says we can only buy this one."?
I'm absolutely not arguing for Harper, or the F35s. I told you I think they are the wrong plane. With regards to their procurement, I'm simply telling it like it is. We need new planes, and the only plane we can buy is the F35. Nothing can change the fact that we are committed to this program. Even if we weren't, the choice would have been between the revamped Boeing F15 and the F35. We cannot, politically speaking, buy a plane from a country other than America.
Look at what they did when we tried to make our own.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Canada_CF-105_Arrow
The Avro was ages ago, Canadians really need to get over it.
We would not have the money to develop and build a 5gen fighter on our own now. Thats a laughable thought.
Furthermore, you naysayers have yet to counter my argument for the F35 as it fits in with NCW/NCO doctrine. Tell me which plane we can buy today that would have the network/comm ability to integrate with the USAF.. I'll be waiting.
New military doctrine quite clearly dictates that true power comes from network-centric warfare, and not the ability of any one individual weapons platform. The strongest fighter is the most well connected fighter.
I've yet to hear a valid suggestion for anything other than the F35...because no other such option exists.
We would not have the money to develop and build a 5gen fighter on our own now. Thats a laughable thought.
Furthermore, you naysayers have yet to counter my argument for the F35 as it fits in with NCW/NCO doctrine. Tell me which plane we can buy today that would have the network/comm ability to integrate with the USAF.. I'll be waiting.
New military doctrine quite clearly dictates that true power comes from network-centric warfare, and not the ability of any one individual weapons platform. The strongest fighter is the most well connected fighter.
I've yet to hear a valid suggestion for anything other than the F35...because no other such option exists.
OpenGambit
Banned
Just rush Battlecrusiers.
