That's not how military vehicle contracts work. It's not like buying a car.
F35
- Thread starter D23
- Start date
That's not how military vehicle contracts work. It's not like buying a car.
For the anti's....
Once you pay your taxes they are gone. You don't get any say in how they are spent. It's also pretty foolish trying to argue X billion is a lot of money or too much money on a global scale and unfortunately this is what we are talking about, major (necessary) purchase that does leave a dent but it's not a bankrupt move.
I do find it funny that on one had they are trying to trim billions out of the defense budget (by cutting civilian jobs, stopping the severance package and bumping up the pension contribution amongst other things) and on the other hand getting into a cost unknown venture with the US. It's explainable though. If you want to go on a vacation you save money on some things to contribute to the fund. Same same.
For the pros....
It's time to upgrade an air fleet but just like the Eurofighter it's getting into the most expensive possible program available that will suffer delays, price hikes and possible failures from unproven tec.
I feel we are doing it to blindly suck American nut more so that to get what we NEED.
Money be damned. I love my shiny stuff and am probably considered a brand snob but i see high price as (usually) a better product.
Still kinda hung up on the SU 30MKI costing under $2B for 50 planes (minor point) and India having 40 of those 50 in their hands. (major point)
Effective fighter platform with on the shelf armament at the start of it's service life bought and payed for and in the air.
Once you pay your taxes they are gone. You don't get any say in how they are spent. It's also pretty foolish trying to argue X billion is a lot of money or too much money on a global scale and unfortunately this is what we are talking about, major (necessary) purchase that does leave a dent but it's not a bankrupt move.
I do find it funny that on one had they are trying to trim billions out of the defense budget (by cutting civilian jobs, stopping the severance package and bumping up the pension contribution amongst other things) and on the other hand getting into a cost unknown venture with the US. It's explainable though. If you want to go on a vacation you save money on some things to contribute to the fund. Same same.
For the pros....
It's time to upgrade an air fleet but just like the Eurofighter it's getting into the most expensive possible program available that will suffer delays, price hikes and possible failures from unproven tec.
I feel we are doing it to blindly suck American nut more so that to get what we NEED.
Money be damned. I love my shiny stuff and am probably considered a brand snob but i see high price as (usually) a better product.
Still kinda hung up on the SU 30MKI costing under $2B for 50 planes (minor point) and India having 40 of those 50 in their hands. (major point)
Effective fighter platform with on the shelf armament at the start of it's service life bought and payed for and in the air.
Not exactly.
If when you bought a car the price included all replacement parts, maintenance parts, fluids and logisticis support for the projected lifespan of the car... then ya it'd be just like buying a car. The majority of the cost associated with a military vehicle purchase (LAVs or airframes, it matters not) is actually tied up in the support that comes after the initial acquisition of the vehicle.
Its not like we were gonna buy Jets from Russians :lol:
We signed up for development of the JSF a long time ago, and only an idiot would bring up specific production problems and setbacks as a definite reason to bail on our commitment. You folks don't think Chretien knew full well the rollercoaster he was signing up for in 1997?? OF COURSE the costs are gonna go up and OF COURSE there are gonna be setbacks. Have you guys never been involved in any kind of sizable development project? You don't stop and bail half way through just because its "hard".
Part of the strength and effectiveness of this program is the fact that all our allies are also participating and will be utilizing the same platform. You wanna f*** around in an aging Saab while our friends are flying F35s? We want the same avionics and radar systems, we want the same situational awareness and comm systems. NORAD, imo, is the most serious and vital part of our national defense...and you clowns wanna save a few bucks on it.
You declined your ballot. What a clown you are. Therein is your problem. You think you are a somebody and declining your ballot is going to somehow echo in the walls of the house of commons. This shows you like to waste your time on things that don't matter just to make a ridiculous point that doesn't matter either.
really, is that why canada is one of the few nations when sourcing their fifth gen jet contracts to fail to account for this? it's only "how military contracts work", apparently, in canada--please be clear about this, we do things bass-ackwards here. time for the fiscally prudent cons to come clean and change this misleading practice, since they are the transparency government
two BIG problems with what you wrote:
1. there are nowhere close to any tested confirmations that the f35 ACTUALLY is the best jet out there. in fact it has repeatedly failed lots and lots of tests based on claims that it supposedly would meet. NONE of the multitude of safety, design, and performance issues have been addressed yet--all will delay the delivery further and increase costs. that's the ONLY thing that is a sure thing with the f35
2. the tax dollars are gone, but does that mean the government can't be held accountable for how they spend it? ludicrous idea.
get this clear: it's a BLANK CHEQUE.
there is no cost certainty. they are lying if they claim it.
who the heck writes a blank cheque (with our money, btw) and expects no consequences???
do you just hand over your cheque book come tax season?
total hypocracy by a lot of clearly right-wing posters here who suggest that in a time of austerity budgets with a government that claims to have both transparency and fiscal prudence that they agree on buying a multi-billion dollar item, cost be-damned.
hypocrites in gov't, and hypocrites on this board (by supposed 'business owners' who would never do the same reckless financial action in real life. get real, no one believes that people hand over blank cheques for that amount of money)
Your arrogance and know it all attitude are over the top. As a " supposed" business owner I will repeat again you don't get caught up in going around and around when buying things. You make the best choice you can and move forward so business can continue. Getting bogged down in committee over purchases costs more money and you usually end up in the sameplace anyway. My two businesses are substantial ,I employee many people we are across the country and we have almost tripled since 2008. Would you like to post your resume so we can see how valid your advice is?
Oh for sure I know we can't but Sukhoi jets... we can't even share our communications platforms with them let alone radar and target acquisition systems. We couldn't even buy the weapons platform tec.
It's not about money to me, it's about failing to pick a winner.
As an aside, can anyone confirm exactly what our commitment is to this project? Where we are in it phase wise?
This entire thread is just a curiosity. I know the prolls can't effect change. All they can do is cry to deaf ears.
Last edited:
Can you cite your sources?
And to you I'm in with the Pro's?
Nowhere have I said I am on board with F-35
But, new tech is is always unproven in it's development stage. It's not proven until it downs it's first real target. So, while there are issues that's completely normal. prototype motorcycles are unproven and go through development issues until the first one hits the showroom and even then, CBR1000RR, nice bike, too bad it couldn't keep oil south of the rings. Ducati 1098, nice bike, too bad it couldn't keep from stalling and locking the back wheel randomly after it was hot.....
Honestly, you pay your taxes because you have no choice. It's money spent. I pay half (almost) of what I make in taxes. I don't have any say in where it goes.
You don't get to say what happens to it when it's gone. You want to, but you don't.
Life.
When you guys are ready to march on parliament let me know. Till then...... keep yelling at the internet.
My comments were directed at the hippie-knowitall, not at you d23. I recognize that you're remaining neutral.
He makes it sound like he's privy to all kinds of secret information, when in reality he hasn't a frickin clue. All his arguments are political talking points direct from Rae and The Star. His arguments are purely partisan and stink of bias.
He makes it sound like he's privy to all kinds of secret information, when in reality he hasn't a frickin clue. All his arguments are political talking points direct from Rae and The Star. His arguments are purely partisan and stink of bias.
so you make massive purchase decisions without cost certainty?
furthermore, you stick to that choice, even though other options were not thoroughly investigated, and the promised items are delayed for years, the product fails performance criteria that you set, and developmental costs are continually escalating?
lol. yeah, right.
I know that you don't get a say in exactly how your tax dollars are spent but you do expect that they are spent wisely. These economic times are some of the worst we've faced since the great depression and add to that a number of high profile financial irregularity courtcases, increasing unemployment, declining healthcare system and you have an environment where any very large purchase needs to be looked at extremely carefuly. This isn't the 80's, we're not flush with cash and not everyone's having a booming year.
As for saying we're committed....we have to go ahead. That's not true, things change, economies change, needs change, budgets get altered.
As for saying we're committed....we have to go ahead. That's not true, things change, economies change, needs change, budgets get altered.
Especially when the government HAS made very poor rushed decisions influenced by outside sources in the past.
Make mistakes sure, but learn from them.
afong56: I am most interested in determining for my self if this is the right purchase. Your concerns are valid but to tell the truth, nothing is coming up as an option to the F-35 at this time.
If you can think of anything that can compete, that we share Security with I would love to hear what that is.
Understand.
US CAN GBR is the level that we share everything with.
US CAN GB AUS NZ is the next level of security/interoperability.
Outside that we can't buy/share/use.
We require a long range, high speed airframe capable of engaging air and ground targets. It doesn't have to be the best possible dogfighter since that is 1% of it's roll but it has to be able to be able to get to it's target and show enough force that the target thinks it's time to leave. Be it a fighter, unknown aircraft or 1500 ton trawler.
We aren't buying dogfighters. If we were we would buy F-15 SU-37 type air superiority fighters and put the F-35s in the ground like lawn darts.
There is never cost certainty in many purchases especially big ones. Ever built a house, custom car, custom motorcycle, business or done a large renovation? Im building a pool and the costs have gone all over the place and I'm sure there will be more as we go along. Changes,upgrades, downgrades, unforeseen problems. On and on.
In afongs world estimates are always 100% right and costs can be forecast accurately 40 years in the future.
