stupid.

lockheed martin is sad?

well it may cause a ripple affect as this will cause the fighters to become more expensive for all the other participants.

gentleman. this brings but one movie to mind.





http://content7.flixster.com/movie/26/00/260017_det.jpg

Didn't a couple of other countries also pull their orders? NYTimes mentioned this somewhere.

Possible.
my ubercool nation, holland, has been thinking of cancelling too. not that'd we buy that many, but still..

yeah but it is reasoning behind why Canada cancelled that is stupid.

wasn't the final price tag pegged at over $40 billion? seems a bit much compared to the original budget allocated for this purchase

yea, it is really expensive.
You can buy a european build fighter that does the job for far less.. might not be as advanced but in these economic times costs matter a great deal.

another problem is that we don't have another lined up, it's back to the drawing board. Which means starting all over with the sourcing and buying.

Right now the canadian armed forces is flying f18a/bs that have a retirement date of 2020.

When the aussies and the us navy scaled back their orders a few years back they announced the purchase of f18c/ds//superhornets right away.

Oh right, that boeing plane. That would do fine too.

Canada is the SOL of RL

That seems pretty silly. THe F35 is pretty awesome.

terrible comparison.

What does Canada need an airforce for? Just build a giant impermeable igloo around the country and we'll just live in our paradise free from the terrible happenings of the rest of the world.

The cost estimate went up because they adjusted the lifecycle of the planes. Originally they were only costing the planes to be in operation for 26 years. Later they revised it to 36 years.

So yes, it is more expensive to fuel and maintain planes for 36 years than it is for 26 years. But the fact that they get 10 more years use out of the planes increases the value of the project because it pushes forward the timeline requirements for replacing that equipment with new planes by 10 years.

Also, probably most importantly, although the total lifecycle costs were revised upwards by $10 billion, since the lifecycle of the planes was increased by 10 years, the average annual cost associated with procuring and operating the planes over their life cycle WENT DOWN with the latest cost estimate revision.

I repeat, the AVERAGE ANNUAL COST OF THE PROGRAM DECREASED.

Yes, so we scuttled our fighter jet purchase because it turned out that we were going to get to keep them/use them longer than we originally thought.

So, as I said.... stupid.

Hmm...I'm not trolling here but wasn't the initial life-cycle cost presented at $25 billion for 20 years? That's $1.25 billion per year. The more updated figures are now for $40 billion (or more) for 30 years. That's $1.33 billion per year.

You'd think the second largest country in the world size wise with such a small and condensed population would embrace a more powerful Air-force and Navy. Oh well :P

I think this is absolutely stupid -- especially since the alternatives are to buy some F/A-18's or the Eurofighter, which will likely be a headache too. It will probably be more expensive overall in the end with less infrastructure/business/research investment in Canada from the program. We're not signed on to be part of the Eurofighter or F/A-18 programs, afaik.

Canada should design and deploy a modern force of drone aircraft to patrol the north, leveraging partnerships with US and Europeans defense companies. That's probably the most cost effective solution for the air force given the roles we play. It also hits one of our self-proclaimed specialties (robotics, although I'm sure many would disagree) and creates lots of really high tech jobs, probably near where I live :p

I can't find a source saying it's been cancelled. I see some people talking about the possibility, but no official announcement. Anyone got a link?

-Fooglmog
Guy with no clue.

My understanding is that the newest estimate is based on a 36 year lifecycle, not 30.

Ahh...my mistake then...I would have liked to see a side-by-side comparison of total costs and capabilities for different aircraft though...the national post had an interesting comparison of capabilities but the cost info was rather flat..

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/...5802000000-in-new-report/

KPMG estimates the lifetime cost will be apprx $45B over 42 years. As opposed to DND's estimate which are $24B over 20 years.

The article points out that both are assuming the same purchase price. As well, I doubt that anyone at DND didn't expect that they would last more then 20 years. The CF18s will have been in use for about 40 years when we start receiving f35s.

A lot of the problem was that the procurement was not put up for competition(we just agreed to buy whatever the americans went with) and the government overpromised when they should've been more cautious.

well they didn't over promise because they didn't sign a contract, only a MOU.

But I would say the selection was made for strategic reasons (all our allies are going for them which makes coordination and logistics easier for joint operations) and economic reasons (as part of the deal we were securing supplier and secondary contracts, with the endgame being a hopeful boost to the domestic aerospace industry).

I understand the concept of procurement and acquisition process. Scopes of work, requests for proposals etc. (I did previously work at the Department of Public Works after all), but I think this is an example of where other priorities took precedent, at least from the tories perspective.

Regardless at this point canceling it would just turn out like the helicopter deal scandal in the early 90's. Last I heard we were just starting to get the first batch of new helicopters about a month ago...

(note, I'm traditionally a liberal supporter, but not on this issue heh)

Why do we need F35s when we can send our Seaking helicopters instead?

under promise and over deliver - it's a common sales technique. When you want a repeat buyer you promise little and then look like a hero when all is said and done. It's the exact opposite of a used car salesman who would 'churn and burn.'

Look at the chretien liberal years. It was all doom and gloom until election time rolls around and suddenly the books are balanced, unemployment numbers are revised down, and everything is sunshine and lollipops.

In this case the feds originally pitched a sale with a price tag of $9B for 65 jets. It ultimately will work out to $45B for 65 jets. It doesn't matter if the $9B number is still technically right, it's all in perception. Even look at your own argument. You too have been oversold on the F35. A boost to the Canadian aerospace industry? Canadian owned companies have secured about a half billion in contracts - roughly 1% of Canada's expected cost, or roughly 0.02% of the entire program's estimated final price tag. Not exactly a huge benefit for the Canadian economy.

That this is perceived as a sole sourced and not really subject to the procurement process of a normal $45B contract is just ammo for their opponents.

What I'm trying to say is the feds set themselves up to look like fools on this one, even if they made what may ultimately have been the correct choice.

Cloaked isnt that the typical political strat? Doom and gloom a few months after being elected and try to make it all look good the last year and a bit

politicians are the best salesmen in the world.

yes and no, certain number fudging is illegal.

cloaked: I don't consider myself fooled in any respect. The idea of even talking about things like fuel and maintenance over the lifecycle is highly atypical for a procurement. Why are we suddenly talking about these things with the F-35's when we never do when it comes to other major procurements? Why?

There is nothing deceptive about only reporting the purchase price, because that is simply how it works. The Purchase price is a stock variable and gets booked into the fiscal plan immediately (even if the actual cost is incurred over time), where as operating costs are flow variables and do not get booked until they are incurred.

1 other issue that seems to be ignored by our politicians about these aircraft however in itself is reason to begin sourcing a different plane is the fact they are not designed for extreme cold and would not be viable for missions in the arctic/cold weather.

This alone should have scuttled this plan years ago, as Canada gets frigging cold! We can't afford to commit $45B to purchasing and maintaining aircraft only suitable to provide air support year round for 40% of our country.

That primary point, while also keeping in mind that the design and primary purpose of the F35 program is a stealth, first strike aircraft, shows truly how unnecessary and inappropriate this craft is to our armed forces. We do not attack countries, we provide supporting roles to our allies when necessary, and unless they can be fitted with fire hoses for dealing with Green Peace, we don't "first strike" anything. :P

Our government went into this with the completely wrong mind set, more like a 6 year child that needs a stuffed bear, but spots the Xbox and cries until he gets it. Its for ages 12 and up, and we have no need, nor would we know the first thing to do with them.

so you're calling canadians six year old children?


forget the planes, get the air craft carriers and then focus on the planes!

no need until the moose get wings. (translation, spam for bonus)

Really the F35 will be obsolete within 20 years. Drones will become the standard by then.

Particularly dumb time to cancel. Syria has chemical warheads pointed at Turkey and Israel, and Israel has nukes pointed right back.

The Canadians do not need to purchase these planes, the US would NEVER standby and watch anyone invade our Northern neighbor. Thus, they can still be protected by such planes without having to spend any money on it.

It's simply smart business like that. I don't blame them even a little bit.

UMMMMM we can not even protect ourselves and you want us to fly air cap over Canada???

Backing up here.... Canada has an Air Force with fighter jets? Damn, I really have been living in the dark ages.

nasjym: forgive me if I am wrong, but doesn't the US get just as cold as canada? if the planes are designed for US conditions, then it should be fine for canadian conditions?
As I said, I'm not 100% on the climates of the US and canada but I was under the impression they were fairly similar.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ki86x1WKPmE


i am not sure if you had ordered any of the B variants, but they are sexy as they are revolutionary.

There are some places in Canada that are a lot colder than the coldest places in the continental US and there are some places in the US a lot warmer than the warmest places in Canada but if you were to put the regions in a Venn diagram sorted by temperature the overlap would be significant.

The U.S. will be "sending" these aircraft to Canada whether you buy them or not. What you are paying for is for them to be sent unarmed and left their for your use.

why does Pang's Patron thingie mess with the forum layout?

Who the hell is Canada planning on going to war with? The last time I checked, nobody had been able to challenge Canada's existing air force. Spending tens of billions of dollars on a weapons platform that will never be used to its potential.

You can do ground attacks on the Taliban with F-18/F-16s for the next 50 years. Unless Canada is thinking about warring Russia over International hockey, you guys are unlikely to need air superiority.

Since WWII, Canada has only fought in wars they were drug into by the US, if you can't see the irony of the US selling you weapons to help us clean up our FA messes, well - disregard this.

I've been selling jets to LCN on the public market...

Of course, I've probably been selling jets to LaF and SoF too, so.....

what are you people all defence contractors or do you own stock in some weapons company?

bonus

I work for Lockheed Martin now, albeit ofter Obama raped their large contracts.

i dont think canada even needs an air force... we got some strong DPs