F-35 looking more like white elephant

[Moose47]

"Harper's government achieved all of that within a matter of months."

I guess they are just over achievers LOL

Cheers...Chris

[frosti]

http://www.dailypress.com/news/breaking ... 1631.story
They ain't your average tourists

I'm pretty sure the USAF is just itching to use their new toy in combat. The poor Iranian F-14's and F4's don't stand a chance.

[Tom H]

http://www.dailypress.com/news/breaking ... 1631.story
They ain't your average tourists

I'm pretty sure the USAF is just itching to use their new toy in combat. The poor Iranian F-14's and F4's don't stand a chance.

Hope we don't find out.

Iran has F-4s, F-14s with Russian weapons systems, Sukhoi aircraft and their own indigenous multi sonic fighter. From public reports no one seems to really know how many of each are still in action but we do not need an armed exercise to find out.

Tom

[JoeCanuck]

http://www.dailypress.com/news/breaking ... 1631.story
They ain't your average tourists

I'm pretty sure the USAF is just itching to use their new toy in combat. The poor Iranian F-14's and F4's don't stand a chance.

While the F-22s are doing their thing, the Iranians will be shooting Sunburns and supercavitating torpedoes, from dhows and subs, at aircraft carriers and tankers...the big, slow, non stealthy targets.

Iran is a make believe boogie man to distract people from the crap global economy and finding a Palestinian solution. Even Israeli intel knows Iran isn't working on a bomb.

[JoeCanuck]

The conservative majority has much more to do with the complete disarray and division among the opposition than it does for them. What was the percentage of voters that voted for them again? Oh yeah, 39.6%. The rest voted for someone else. It is a quirk of our electoral system that got them the majority.

That's not a quirk...that's the system...live with it. So far, more than double the money spent on the F-35 program has been awarded as contracts to Canadian companies.

No contract was ever signed. There is no commitment to buy the F-35. There is a memorandum of understanding which sets the terms for a contract, should one get written.

I think the F-35 is a waste of time and money and better, cheaper, more appropriate solutions can be had for the money...but that doesn't change the fact that there is no legal commitment to buy the F-35.

[Rockie]

That's not a quirk...that's the system...live with it.

It is a quirk of our electoral system, and I do live with it.

[Moose47]

"I think the F-35 is a waste of time and money and better, cheaper, more appropriate solutions can be had for the money"

And what would they be JoeCanuck? Are your solutions based is on your many years as fighter pilot? I mean, how else would you have all the answers!

Cheers...Chris

[Expat]

"I think the F-35 is a waste of time and money and better, cheaper, more appropriate solutions can be had for the money"

And what would they be JoeCanuck? Are your solutions based is on your many years as fighter pilot? I mean, how else would you have all the answers!

Cheers...Chris

Chris,
No one ever asked the jeep, or other vehicle drivers what the government should buy. Why should it be different for pilots? Does AC ask their pilots if they should buy Airbus or Boeing? Not likely. The fact is that the brass make their own mind, and then add the advices that support their choices, be it from pilots, maintainers, strategists, etc.

The primary role of our Armed Forces, is still the protection of our territory. I still can't fathom our 60 or so F-35s will enable us to do that, while consuming our procurement budget.

BTW, here in Af, the best defense is still the cheap cellular phone jammer. Cheap, but effective.

[frosti]

I still can't fathom our 60 or so F-35s will enable us to do that,

Would you like us to have 1000 F-15's instead, placed all over the international airports across the country. You'll also need at least two arctic air bases to protect the north. I don't even want to imagine the costs to protect us from a non-threat. 65 F35's is good enough for NORAD and international commitments. To say that China or Russia will be flying their junk across the poles to invade Canada is laughable.

[Expat]

I still can't fathom our 60 or so F-35s will enable us to do that,

Would you like us to have 1000 F-15's instead, placed all over the international airports across the country. You'll also need at least two arctic air bases to protect the north. I don't even want to imagine the costs to protect us from a non-threat. 65 F35's is good enough for NORAD and international commitments. To say that China or Russia will be flying their junk across the poles to invade Canada is laughable.

Hello,
You said it well: "NORAD and international commitments"
Times have changed, as they were no 2 and 3 in priorities back then. Sovereignty was first.
By that you mean commitments are now decided in DC. Well said. Bravo!

They tell us what we need, and when to use it.
The Russian and Chinese threats are as old fashionned as the cavalry was in 1939.
Actually, the less our forces are equipped with offensive capabilities, the better, as we may have to pass on future aggressive assignments, like Kosovo and Libya.

In my book, the best defense is a clean balance sheet.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-0 ... -says.html

In a bid to cut spending, Australia’s Defense Force announced this week it will delay buying fighter jets, helping the government add about A$1.6 billion in its 2012-2013 budget

May be the Aussies know better...

[frosti]

May be the Aussies know better...

I'd question the need to buy $B worth of "throw-away" Super Hornets until the F35's are ready. I don't think their A/B model Hornets are that much older than ours.

[shitdisturber]

May be the Aussies know better...

I'd question the need to buy $B worth of "throw-away" Super Hornets until the F35's are ready. I don't think their A/B model Hornets are that much older than ours.

Actually, ours are older and have been used a lot harder.

[JoeCanuck]

"I think the F-35 is a waste of time and money and better, cheaper, more appropriate solutions can be had for the money"

And what would they be JoeCanuck? Are your solutions based is on your many years as fighter pilot? I mean, how else would you have all the answers!

Cheers...Chris

Fighter pilots don't buy fighters...civilian taxpayers do. Canada has never needed the limited stealth of the F-35. We will never have enough fighters to defend our sovereignty. Our sovereignty would be better served with more extensive SAR, icebreaking and coast guard equipment than fighters designed to tag along with the next NATO bombing spree.

Our pilots have done a superlative job with the F-18's...name one occasion where they would have done a better job with the F-35's?

The stealth on the F-35 is, at best, frontal aspect only. Better hit all the targets the first time since that big burner makes a pretty IR signature going away. Its electronics can be put on any aircraft.

[tailgunner]

Joecanuck.
Kosovo. Canadian CF18s were not included in the initial stages because they were not equipped with secure radios. When the threat level was reduced, and secure jam resistant radios were not required, we were welcomed back.
The mid life upgrade of the best 80 cf18's included secure radios.
You have not answered the question about what you claim to be a cheaper option...

[frosti]

"I think the F-35 is a waste of time and money and better, cheaper, more appropriate solutions can be had for the money"

And what would they be JoeCanuck? Are your solutions based is on your many years as fighter pilot? I mean, how else would you have all the answers!

Cheers...Chris

Fighter pilots don't buy fighters...civilian taxpayers do. Canada has never needed the limited stealth of the F-35. We will never have enough fighters to defend our sovereignty. Our sovereignty would be better served with more extensive SAR, icebreaking and coast guard equipment than fighters designed to tag along with the next NATO bombing spree.

Our pilots have done a superlative job with the F-18's...name one occasion where they would have done a better job with the F-35's?

The stealth on the F-35 is, at best, frontal aspect only. Better hit all the targets the first time since that big burner makes a pretty IR signature going away. Its electronics can be put on any aircraft.

So in this post you say we don't need fighters, but in your previous one you said there are cheaper alternatives without backing up your claim. Please, go on....

[Flear]

I thought F-35 was supposed to be "the cheap alternative" to current F-16, A-10, F-18 etc.. And from what I understand its many versions are supposed to replace 13 different fighter types in 11 different countries.

Sounds like an all-round good fighter to me.

____________________
Now working on Oululainen tilitoimisto

[Expat]

Sounds like that to you, but not to everyone...

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articl ... ge-372393/

Meanwhile, later this decade, the stealthy Lockheed Martin F-35C will join the Super Hornet on the carrier deck, but the older aircraft will dominate the air wing for the foreseeable future. Even so, the F-35C probably does not have the kind of range the USN really needs.

So what gives?

[johnysmith]

do u know guys that japan has chosen the US-made F-35 stealth jet as its next-generation mainstay fighter.

http://airsoc.com/articles/view/id/4ee7 ... =10&evp=tl

[Tom H]

do u know guys that japan has chosen the US-made F-35 stealth jet as its next-generation mainstay fighter.

http://airsoc.com/articles/view/id/4ee7 ... =10&evp=tl

According to Lockheed Martin's "Code One" magazine Vol 27, No 1, page 37

The Japanese initial order is for (4) aircraft

Can't imagine a better source of information that Lockheed's own magazine.

Tom

[TimothyTM]

Chinese new stealth fighters turned the tide against F35. If China has no problem mass producing their J-20 planes they would gladly sell it cheaper than the rival F-35. Same with T-50 from Russia. F-35's are expensive and not yet proven. Time will tell which one gets the contract but i have heard a news article http://airsoc.com/articles/view/id/4f62 ... =10&evp=tl that Canada might back out because of its high price tag and high maintenance issues.

[Mach1]

So... the J-20 and the T-50 are both proven and we know for sure the per-unit cost?

[Big Pistons Forever]

So the worlds mightiest industrial power has been working on a stealth fighter for almost 15 years and is still having trouble making it work but the Chinese are going to field one in 6 years......Give me a break

The only way the Chinese are going to get a true operationally stealthy gen five fighter in the next 15 to 20 years is if they buy American.

Besides if he Chinese truly want to defeat the US they don't need to use Military power they just have to stop buying US treasury notes and investing in US companies.
China and the US are now in a place of Monetary Mutually Assured Destruction. A war between the two would so devastate each others economies it simply isn't a credible scenario.

[frosti]

So... the J-20 and the T-50 are both proven and we know for sure the per-unit cost?

By the time the T50 gets IOC, the US will be working on the new generation.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htairf ... 20522.aspx

"Ready for production in 2019", add 3 years for mission systems, a couple more (optimistically) before any squadron declares IOC. That would put them 20 years behind the F-22's IOC date of Dec. 2005. If anyone thinks that just copying the shape of the F-22 will give you a stealthy fighter with it's performance, they are just kidding themselves. There is a heck of a lot more that makes up the F-22 and it isn't easy building this plane, for a reason. Just the fact that these countries are trying to duplicate the F-22, a 1990's era jet shows just how far ahead the west actually is in terms of stealth. The F-35 is even more so advanced than the F-22.

[sky's the limit]

The American's expensive new toy horsing around a bit:

http://youtu.be/Ki86x1WKPmE





And a "news" report from Oz, for what is it worth, seems to degenerate into a Sukhoi commercial at the end:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27qdB1D0 ... re=related

Reminds me of the debate my wife and I are having: the Ferrari, or the R8? Decisions, decisions... can't afford either, but that doesn't seem to be a factor these days.

[C-GGGQ]

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... h-say.html


Dutch unit price for the F35-A: 61.5 MEUR = 79.25 MCAD at today's rate of exchange (1.288 CAD/EUR)
Dutch cost of buying 85 units = 85 x 79.25 = 6.7 BCAD

Dutch project estimate for 85 A/C : 7.5 BEUR = 9.7 BCAD
Interestingly that is the same as, or slightly lower than a year ago.

Estimated operating costs (described as hard to quantify) for a 30 year life cycle: 13.6 to 14.6 BEUR or 17.5 to 18.8 BCAD
By interpolation annual operating cost per aircraft = 18.8/85/30 = 7.4 MCAD and therefore, for a fleet of 65, 480 MCAD per year.

The annualized unit cost of purchase = 9.7/85/30 = 3.8 MCAD
The annual unit cost of ownership = 3.8 +7.4 = 11.2 MCAD or 728 MCAD per year for the fleet of 65


The operating costs do not include the cost of pilots or coffee.