1  2  3  4  Next

Title: Top commander says 65 is the 'minimum' number of F-35s needed by the air force
Category: Military
Posted By: saturn_656
Date: 2011-11-03 09:22:33
Canadian

   

I was wondering when somebody would pony up and publicly state the problems involved with such a inadequate sized order.

If 65 is a bare minimum needed, what is going to happen when we lose air frames to accidents or combat?

   

65 is nowhere near enough - we probably need 100 or more, but simply can't afford that many fighters.

When we get around to buying the next generation of fighters in 2040, I wonder how how many we'll be able to afford then. With the rapid escalation of pricing in military hardware, it'll probably be a half dozen or so...

   

Since we haven't actually ordered yet, 65 is not a number set in stone. Hopefully they also ditch this idea of having the Americans train our pilots, it would be a pretty sad god damn day if we lost the ability to train our own pilots

   

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Fi ... z1cfBYnIWi

   

Yet another couple hundred million pissed away for nothing by the Liberals.
I love how the media continues to call this Harper's project, or the CPC's project

It was the Chrétien government that took part in the original international competition in 2001 that selected Lockheed Martin as lead contractor.
It was Jean Chrétien that originally signed the deal for the F-35 to replace the CF-18s. The Liberal government also signed a memorandum of understanding with Lockheed Martin to develop the Joint Strike Fighter. And in February 2002, former defence minister Art Eggleton signed a deal in Washington with former U.S. defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld that ensured Canada would be a partner in the joint strike force.

While it may be worth having a debate over the dangers of sole-source military contracts, it’s rather pathetic to hear Liberal critics attack the Conservative government for completing a procurement process they started themsleves over a decade ago

Let's tally up the bananas shall we?
Money spent on the F-35 by the CPC- $0
Money spent on the F-35 by the Liberals- $170M

How come this was such a great idea when the Liberals invested in it(one can only assume it was a great idea by the lack of hue and cry from the left about it) but the instant the CPC gets in power, the F-35 is just another example of Conservatives wasting money?
I mean for cryin out loud, every news article about the F-35 points fingers at the CPC and Harper. I'm guessing there are a LOT of "journalists" (and Liberals and Liberal supporters) out there that had "does not pay attention" comments on their school report cards.

   

Because the CPC is in charge now, and just blaming the libs won't cut it. McKay is pushing this deal as hard as he can, so to say this is all the Libs doing is a crock - but doesn't matter because it's up to the Cons to deal with it. It actually sounds like the whole deal will go down the toilet, because neither the Europeans nor Americans can afford it. Nor can we, come to that. I mean with what's going on in the world right now, and the financial shit storm that seems to be building, it's time for everybody to pull in their horns. If we're going to spend money in Canada, it should be on things that give Canadians jobs - like the ships that were just ordered.

   

Unfortunately we don't build advanced fighter jets anymore. Necessity dictates that we obtain the required hardware from abroad.

Unless you want to disband the fighter force.

   

Read what I said again. This whole project may flush down the toilet, because none of our allies will be able to afford it. And maybe that's a good thing, because it will allow us to spend that money on creating Canadian jobs.

   

You're completely ignoring the fact that even if the F-35 goes belly up, the Hornets still need to be replaced, if not with the F-35 than with something else.

And it will not be built in Canada. You can't just "put it off" and blow the cash on make work programs instead.

   

Yep right over your head. YOu don't get it do you. It's the Liberals blaming the CPC for something the Liberals started in the first place.
As far as the taxpayer goes, your statement about the CPC being in charge is correct. What is totally fucked up is the Liberals pissing and moaning and blaming the CPC for the VERY process the Liberals started. They decry the point that this is a sole source contract while reamining mum about the fact that Chretien more or less committed us to that sole source in the first place.

If I owned a car dealership and engaged in slimy business practices, then sold it to you and publicly bitched because you engaged in the same slimy business practices, would that not be the height of lame hypocracy?

I'm not defending the the idea to purchase the -35 but the partisan hackery surrounding it gets me so mad I could strangle a manatee in the nude.

   

OK, so what's your suggestion when the US pulls back or cancels? Still buy F-35's? Wonder what the cost/unit would be then.

   

Wow, you must spend a lot of time pissed off, if political hackery gets you upset. The Cons of course would never stoop to such a thing.

I don't care about any of this except it's our money they're spending, and as usual they wind up spending a lot more of it than originally stated. It's up to Harper to deal with this, plain and simple.

   

Andyt,

At that point we could look at, I don't know, maybe SuperHornets or something like that.

The point is that our CF118's need to be replaced before they start falling out of the sky on their own. Canada does not have the capacity to build any of the potential replacements (I disagree with this personally, but I digress).

So, unless Canada wants no Air Force, the money is leaving Canada.

   

If the US cancels, there will be no F-35. We will have no choice but to go to an alternative plane (Super Hornet, Silent Eagle, etc).

   

1  2  3  4  Next