Gov't announces JSF purchase

[Hedley]

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Ottawa ... story.html

The Harper government is gearing up for more multibillion-dollar announcements on military equipment spending: one for a controversial purchase of new fighter aircraft.

Department of National Defence officials are preparing for an announcement next Friday on a new fighter aircraft, a project estimated to cost $16-billion.

Let's hope the (minority gov't) Conservatives stay in office long enough to stop the Liberals from cancelling it. Again.

Previously, air force officers voiced concern that the planes might be seen as airborne Cadillacs because of their hefty price tag, according to documents obtained by Canwest News Service.

To counter that label — a reference to Liberal Leader Jean Chretien’s description of the $5-billion EH-101 helicopter project just before he cancelled it after being elected prime minister — the officers argued in a 2006 briefing note that the Joint Strike Fighter was the most affordable replacement available for the existing fleet of jets.

[iflyforpie]

How much you want to bet that this is the straw that brings down the House...?

[V1 Rotate]

I don't know too much about fast jets, but this is what I've heard from experienced jet drivers and ones still awaiting training:

Single engine - not a great thing
Quite a limited armament load - mostly internal hard-points.
Canadian version not STOVL capable. (USMC only I think)
Many times the cost of a new Super Hornet. A type that is familiar to the CF.

Cool plane, but do we need it?

[crazy_aviator]

I say we rent-a-airforce much lower cost, guarantees, no obsolete a/c. no pilots wearing out planes waiting for a war,,,,,,

[Expat]

What a waste of funds!!!

[Old fella]

Biggest waste of taxpayer $$$$$ ever.......... didn't they just complete a 2+ billion refit of their current fighters and now another 16B, military spending is getting out of control notwithstanding the fact of current tab(billions) for this Afghan. caper of very questionable results......... history will prove that. I am no screaming socialist, never voted that way in my life but the country is running a big current deficit of a huge magnitude. One would think you would pay down your maxed out VISA bill before spending an equal sum on a trip or some other" nice to do" item. Any financial/credit advisor will point that out......... why is a government different.

[Expat]

In 30 years, or F-18s only partook in one real mission, which was the carpet bombing of former Yougoslavia, to free up the country from its ex-soviet past.
I do not see any other need for this type of operations in the future, as the world will wake up some day...

[DanJ]

Biggest waste of taxpayer $$$$$ ever.......... didn't they just complete a 2+ billion refit of their current fighters and now another 16B,

It isn't like the new fighters will come online in the next few years. The money spent on the CF-18's was to make them current and to make them USAF compatible. And it also isn't like the government will write the $16B check next year either. There likely will be a 15-20 year maintenance deal included in that price.

The current fleet will need to replaced this decade, or at least starting this decade. However, unlike the C-17 and C-130J programs, there are other options out there, so hopefully the military and government aren't tunnel-visioned on the F-35. I hope they look at various aircraft that a) are the best for our pilots and expected missions (not what other governments *cough*Americans*cough* tell us is the aircraft they want us to have) and B) the ones that provide the best opportunities for Canadian businesses.

[Moose47]

<<<Expat
Post subject: Re: Gov't announces JSF purchase
New postPosted: Mon Jul 12, 2010 5:41 pm
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 10:58 am
Posts: 1063
Location: Central Asia
In 30 years, or F-18s only partook in one real mission, which was the carpet bombing of former Yougoslavia, to free up the country from its ex-soviet past.
I do not see any other need for this type of operations in the future, as the world will wake up some day... >>>

I have a number of friends who flew with the 'Desert Cats' during the Gulf War. They would argue that your assertion that these missions were not real is BS.

How about our air defence role intercepting Russian Bears on both coasts during the Cold War. Are you implying just because we never shot down one, it was not a real mission either?

[Old Dog Flying]

expat: Carpet bombing of whom during that bit of ethnic nastiness? You really don't know what you are talking about.

[172PIC]

Every nation needs to be able to defend itself. We don't need anything approaching the US's military might, but we need to hold our own. Air power rules all in modern war so we can't just ignore it.

Is the F-35 the right choice? I have no idea but we do need to keep up with technology and the F-35 should future-proof us for a good while. At least the F-18's aren't getting replaced with UAVs lol.

[Old fella]

Biggest waste of taxpayer $$$$$ ever.......... didn't they just complete a 2+ billion refit of their current fighters and now another 16B,

It isn't like the new fighters will come online in the next few years. The money spent on the CF-18's was to make them current and to make them USAF compatible. And it also isn't like the government will write the $16B check next year either. There likely will be a 15-20 year maintenance deal included in that price.

The current fleet will need to replaced this decade, or at least starting this decade. However, unlike the C-17 and C-130J programs, there are other options out there, so hopefully the military and government aren't tunnel-visioned on the F-35. I hope they look at various aircraft that a) are the best for our pilots and expected missions (not what other governments *cough*Americans*cough* tell us is the aircraft they want us to have) and B) the ones that provide the best opportunities for Canadian businesses.

..... and the nation's maxed out VISA still has to be dealth with. Do we want to be like our southern neighbour, living off their credit card while at the same time:

US military spending accounts for 46.5 percent, or almost half, of the world’s total military spending
US military spending is 7 times more than China, 13 times more than Russia, and 73 times more than Iran.
US military spending is some 44 times the spending on the six “rogue” states (Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Sudan and Syria) whose spending amounts to around $16 billion.
US spending is more than the next top 14 countries at least.
The United States and its strongest allies (the NATO countries, Japan, South Korea and Australia) spend something in the region of $1.1 trillion on their militaries combined, representing 72 percent of the world’s total.
The six potential “enemies,” Russia, and China together account for about $169 billion or 24% of the US military budget

[Dash-Ate]

Every nation needs to be able to defend itself. We don't need anything approaching the US's military might, but we need to hold our own. Air power rules all in modern war so we can't just ignore it.
Is the F-35 the right choice? I have no idea but we do need to keep up with technology and the F-35 should future-proof us for a good while. At least the F-18's aren't getting replaced with UAVs lol.

Does it? How many of the tens and tens of thousands of US and Canadian soliders killed and injured in the middle east were hit from enemy air strikes?

[Dash-Ate]

Biggest waste of taxpayer $$$$$ ever.......... didn't they just complete a 2+ billion refit of their current fighters and now another 16B, military spending is getting out of control notwithstanding the fact of current tab(billions) for this Afghan. caper of very questionable results......... history will prove that. I am no screaming socialist, never voted that way in my life but the country is running a big current deficit of a huge magnitude. One would think you would pay down your maxed out VISA bill before spending an equal sum on a trip or some other" nice to do" item. Any financial/credit advisor will point that out......... why is a government different.

Old fella is wondering who will pay for someone to change his diapers in old age. He is thinking ahead.

[Ogee]

Every nation needs to be able to defend itself. We don't need anything approaching the US's military might, but we need to hold our own. Air power rules all in modern war so we can't just ignore it.
Is the F-35 the right choice? I have no idea but we do need to keep up with technology and the F-35 should future-proof us for a good while. At least the F-18's aren't getting replaced with UAVs lol.

Does it? How many of the tens and tens of thousands of US and Canadian soliders killed and injured in the middle east were hit from enemy air strikes?

Touche eh!

[Hawkerflyer]

That explains the Ecotax and HST

[Old fella]

Biggest waste of taxpayer $$$$$ ever.......... didn't they just complete a 2+ billion refit of their current fighters and now another 16B, military spending is getting out of control notwithstanding the fact of current tab(billions) for this Afghan. caper of very questionable results......... history will prove that. I am no screaming socialist, never voted that way in my life but the country is running a big current deficit of a huge magnitude. One would think you would pay down your maxed out VISA bill before spending an equal sum on a trip or some other" nice to do" item. Any financial/credit advisor will point that out......... why is a government different.

Old fella is wondering who will pay for someone to change his diapers in old age. He is thinking ahead.

You are, more that likely, right on that. When my time has expired(and it will), you will be next(and that will happen also). In the intriem, tuck away a few bucks for your own diapers and ass wipe. There will be nothing left as it will be all spent paying off those shiney F-35's and keeping them in jet fuel....... probably "commies" under every rock!!!!

[iflyforpie]

Every nation needs to be able to defend itself. We don't need anything approaching the US's military might, but we need to hold our own. Air power rules all in modern war so we can't just ignore it.
Is the F-35 the right choice? I have no idea but we do need to keep up with technology and the F-35 should future-proof us for a good while. At least the F-18's aren't getting replaced with UAVs lol.

Does it? How many of the tens and tens of thousands of US and Canadian soliders killed and injured in the middle east were hit from enemy air strikes?

And how many were hit by friendly air strikes?

And not every nation needs to defend itself. Look at Costa Rica.

[172PIC]

And not every nation needs to defend itself. Look at Costa Rica.

Holland tried the neutral card in the 40s, didn't work out so well for them. It's naive and ignoring history if we think nothing could happen on a scale like that again, not that I see it in the immediate future by any means.

[fingersmac]

Are you serious?

[zed]

65 is stil stepping down the entire fleet of fighters. We originally ordered 138 CF18s back in the 80s. We are only upgrading 80 of them. And now we are planning on replacing our fleet by buying 65. Don't forget that these include the training versions that will be used to train pilots as well.

As for the timing, understand that the mid-life upgrades for the jet are now more or less completed. That means those staff officers who were working on that project can now switch their focus and look at the replacement. Ideally they should have already been planning this. Lead time for a major purchase like this is anywhere from 15-25 years. So don't expect to see them showing up any time soon. As it is, they are probably already late on getting the replacement program moving.

As for operational use... they represent Canada's commitment to NATO and have been on continuous 30 day readiness (that's deploying anywhere in the world, and being able to intercept/bomb a target within 30 days of receiving the order to go) since at least the 80s. Their has also been a number of major operations that were spooled up, but not executed. I can think of at least 3 within the last 10 years. And as for intercepting Russians, Putin kicked off a whole new era and raised the bar by increasing their strategic fleet activities with out of area flights i.e. coming to visit N.A. It hasn't been as busy since the 1960s.

Personnally, if you aren't willing or capable of policing your airspace, it ceases to be your airspace. I do have concerns over a single engine. The biggest reason the CF18 was purchased over a 'CF-16' was the engine. And looking at the number of engine outs that fleet has experienced it was probably the right decision. There is a world of difference between bailing out during the month of March, over Texas, versus somewhere in the territories. You might even say a liftime.

Just my two bits. out.

[DanJ]

Biggest waste of taxpayer $$$$$ ever.......... didn't they just complete a 2+ billion refit of their current fighters and now another 16B,

It isn't like the new fighters will come online in the next few years. The money spent on the CF-18's was to make them current and to make them USAF compatible. And it also isn't like the government will write the $16B check next year either. There likely will be a 15-20 year maintenance deal included in that price.

The current fleet will need to replaced this decade, or at least starting this decade. However, unlike the C-17 and C-130J programs, there are other options out there, so hopefully the military and government aren't tunnel-visioned on the F-35. I hope they look at various aircraft that a) are the best for our pilots and expected missions (not what other governments *cough*Americans*cough* tell us is the aircraft they want us to have) and B) the ones that provide the best opportunities for Canadian businesses.

..... and the nation's maxed out VISA still has to be dealth with. Do we want to be like our southern neighbour, living off their credit card while at the same time:

US military spending accounts for 46.5 percent, or almost half, of the world’s total military spending
US military spending is 7 times more than China, 13 times more than Russia, and 73 times more than Iran.
US military spending is some 44 times the spending on the six “rogue” states (Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Sudan and Syria) whose spending amounts to around $16 billion.
US spending is more than the next top 14 countries at least.
The United States and its strongest allies (the NATO countries, Japan, South Korea and Australia) spend something in the region of $1.1 trillion on their militaries combined, representing 72 percent of the world’s total.
The six potential “enemies,” Russia, and China together account for about $169 billion or 24% of the US military budget

I have no problem letting the US spend on military like they do as it lets us lead the lives we get to lead here. However I do think we need to pony up some change (comparatively speaking) towards the defense of our little slice of heaven. I would choose to live nowhere else, and since I'm man enough to admit I'm not man enough to suit up and defend this place with my life, I'll gladly fork over some cash to allow those who are brave enough to have the tools they need.

[Hedley]

Personnally, if you aren't willing or capable of policing your airspace, it ceases to be your airspace

Exactly! We need aircraft like this, or we complete the transition to a banana republic.

I find it bizarre that the anti-Americans here are the ones least interested in enforcing our sovereignty, which in turn makes us more dependent upon the Americans. Bizarre indeed, but I often find left-wingers have extraordinarily muddled and inconsistent thinking. Yesterday I read in the news that the lefties are now claiming that the G20/G8 summit riots in Toronto were an "inside job", and the riots were in fact conducted by undercover police agents to make the lefties look bad. I honestly have trouble comprehending that kind of left-wing nonsense, but I digress.

Back on topic ...

Is the JSF technically and financially the best choice? Or, is it politics driven? I surely don't know. I can't help but think that politics might become involved with a $16B expenditure, but perhaps I am getting overly cynical in my old age (cough)

As a taxpayer, I can't help but look at the super hornet, and wonder that perhaps for the same money as the whiz-bang JSF, that we could get more (two engine) shiny new super hornets, and fly more hours on them, than the unproven JSF - for the same (or less) money.

Do we absolutely require the additional features of the single-engine JSF, over the more economical and proven twin-engine super hornet? Only time will tell, with 20/20 hindsight, as to which was the better choice.

Last comment on one vs two engines: I might remind the youngsters here that the predecessor to the hornet was the supremely fast (single-engine) -104, which was born to the interceptor role. Yes, it killed a lot of pilots, but it got the job done, didn't it? A tad ruthless, perhaps, but keep in mind that I fly the most widely-used fighter jet trainers in the world - with one engine and cold ejection seats (shrug).

[172PIC]

I find it bizarre that the anti-Americans here are the ones least interested in enforcing our sovereignty, which in turn makes us more dependent upon the Americans.

Exactly. We're already losing the sovereignty battle for control over our Arctic waters because we don't have the equipment to claim control over them, in the age of hyper-security the Americans only need the smallest excuse to try and exercise some measure of control over our airspace and not having any air defense would give them more than enough reason.

As for the JSF, not sure how secure I'd feel flying single engine up the Arctic to intercept Putin's Bears so that is a valid concern. Superhornet is an idea, as is the Eurofighter Typhoon (not sure what the range is on those mind you).

[55+]

".....I find it bizarre that the anti-Americans here are the ones least interested in enforcing our sovereignty, which in turn makes us more dependent upon the Americans. Bizarre indeed, but I often find left-wingers have extraordinarily muddled and inconsistent thinking. Yesterday I read in the news that the lefties are now claiming that the G20/G8 summit riots in Toronto were an "inside job", and the riots were in fact conducted by undercover police agents to make the lefties look bad. I honestly have trouble comprehending that kind of left-wing nonsense, but I digress."

It's always the lefties and the righties - this old triade never stops and it gets quite booring to listen/read. Yes, the country has to be defended and that costs money. However in doing so, there has to be some responsibility with the public purse(and military shouldn't be exempt) so as not to saddle future generations with a financial load that is not substainable and we are heading in that direction. Our friends to the south of us are not shining examples, they spend way too much borrowed money on their military/industrial complex and there will be another 1929. The emerging financial powers like China/India/European bloc/Brazil etc are not gonna be shoved around by the Americans. Bipolarity doesn't really exist now.

There is simply no need for this country to spend that kind of money on those type of airplanes in face of our bank account or as a previous poster indicated"VISA".