Canada blows the budget on 63 F-35 jets

CBC NEWS

Ferguson wrote in his April 3 report that the department didn't exercise due diligence in choosing the F-35 to replace the CF-18, wasn't forthcoming with Parliament about its true estimated cost and made key decisions without required approvals or proper documentation.

His report also showed the department had internal estimates that 65 F-35 jets would cost $25 billion over 20 years, but would only admit to a cost of $14.7 billion. Defence Minister Peter MacKay and Associate Defence Minister Julian Fantino avoided answering questions about the full cost, insisting the jets would be $9 billion, despite months of formal and informal requests.

"What we identified was there were some significant things missing from the life-cycle costs," Ferguson said, pointing to attrition, upgrades and "the fact that these aircraft were going to last for 36 years, not 20 years."

So the F-35...

The F-35 does not need to be physically pointing at its target for weapons to be successful.[170][221] This is possible because of sensors that can track and target a nearby aircraft from any orientation, provide the information to the pilot through his helmet (and therefore visible no matter which way they are looking), and provide the seeker-head of a missile with sufficient information.

The F-35 from what I have read, is a kick ass multi-purpose jet fighter aircraft that comes in various models, such as short take off, and landing for aircraft carriers, and long range for recon, and mid sized high powered fighters for air defense.


Well you can't pull up a drawbridge without them, so I don't see why we are arguing over what appears to be a steal of a deal.
63 aircraft and 20 years to pay? We could almost patrol our own borders with 63 good aircraft.

So what then will happen to our current airforce the Snow Birds???

The U.S. cuts while Canada expands. Well, I thank you guys up North for giving us some much needed arms revenue while the Pentagon is cutting back their orders. I'm sure there won't be any 'Your Welcome's' coming from the normal folk up there, but we aren't thanking Uncle Sam down here either, so don't feel lonely. No one cares what we think here, either.

63 is one BIG order, given what these are though. Look at inventory numbers of U.S. fighters and that number becomes very meaningful. Why the worry and need for so many?? Is Canada somehow expecting a world where they face a fight alone and without American help? Interesting...

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
The U.S. cuts while Canada expands. Well, I thank you guys up North for giving us some much needed arms revenue while the Pentagon is cutting back their orders. I'm sure there won't be any 'Your Welcome's' coming from the normal folk up there, but we aren't thanking Uncle Sam down here either, so don't feel lonely. No one cares what we think here, either.

63 is one BIG order, given what these are though. Look at inventory numbers of U.S. fighters and that number becomes very meaningful. Why the worry and need for so many?? Is Canada somehow expecting a world where they face a fight alone and without American help? Interesting...

Expensive YES
But I do think we need them even if it only to keep a eye on the US

If WWIII start it may just slow down any income force long anoft to give the US a chanse to go kick some @SS

So I guess we will be needing 63 helicopters now for logistical support, unless we are expecting to just strafe anything that tries to cross the border.

And you know about the F-35 short take-off, even though we don't have an aircraft carrier (yet) we should maybe get some of that model for use with some of our more modest sized airfields. (and highway emergency landing sites)

And two aircraft carriers and a couple ice breakers for them and two battleships, one for each coast to support them.

Nows the time to make some deals while prices are low. China might even be able to sell us some stuff half price.

reply to post by Rocketman7

I hear the Enterprise is coming to the end of it's service life in our Navy, maybe Canada is on the slate to get a couple hand-me downs. In a world where we give NO ONE that technology, Canada might be the lone exception for the obvious reasons. Heck.. We're kind tied to each other for our fates whether we like it or not, eh?

@ Trillium

I love that explanation for why this would be seen as necessary and you're right on that. I guess my head is too far in conspiracy thinking sometimes to see the forest right in front of me. It's fair enough to say Canadian forces were as much on the pointy end of the Cold War defense of North America as American forces were for what came out of Russia. Perhaps that is the only motive on this, and that makes sense.

Canada is an idiot. No aircraft would be attacking Canada and if it happened NORAD is a joint effort by US-Kanada and it would halt and stem any enemy aircraft and once again Canada would get a free ride..Useless money spent.

reply to post by Rocketman7

The F-35 from what I have read, is a kick ass multi-purpose jet fighter aircraft that comes in various models, such as short take off, and landing for aircraft carriers, and long range for recon, and mid sized high powered fighters for air defense.

And in a limited edition single engine model. The only model...



Ah well... even though it just has one engine it does look pretty nice in flight, and in take off and touch down.

Now where did I put that extra 10 billion, I know I left it around here somewhere?

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
Canada is an idiot. No aircraft would be attacking Canada and if it happened NORAD is a joint effort by US-Kanada and it would halt and stem any enemy aircraft and once again Canada would get a free ride..Useless money spent.

If you take a gander at Canada's energy exports to the US, you will see that there isn't exactly what you would call a "free ride."

You can also take a look at the American companies tearing up pristine Alberta environment to get at all the bitumen too...

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I think with the reality of a population of 4 billion people in China, Indonesia and India, we can't even conceive of what it might look like if something happened there that caused some of them to come here in boats.

Pandemic? Who knows right?

But we at present are ill prepared to even do our share of the policing of our own borders. And so we rely on the US and have joint forces. NORAD is watching the skies. And of course spy satellites are watching the ground.

But in the event of a pandemic, you have to restrict air traffic. You have to be able to seal off your borders.

So we don't expect to be in a local war at any time but the reality is we still need to control our own airspace.

reply to post by boncho


You're right on your points.

I'd add one to that as I watched this happen as a kid in the 80's. The path from Russia to the United States isn't shortest over the Atlantic...it's shortest right over the Arctic Circle and Canada. IF the unthinkable ever happens..and this 'on' one day, 'off' the next tensions with Russia escalate, I imagine Canada will again find itself in the position of 'Human Shield' by sheer virtue of geography between Putin and the American President....whoever that is, if that all happens.

Err... I'd also note in a VERY important way.... Putin started running Strategic Bombers up to our Air borders and screwing with American Air defense shortly after 9/11. If it's stopped, I hadn't heard. It's not daily or even weekly like it was in the bad old days...but google will show no shortage of incidents since 2001 of Russian Bombers playing with our tripwires. Not nice...and I suppose it puts Canada's actions into more context.

reply to post by boncho


We are already one big country but we are just like independent states within it. There is another thread here that talks about the water rights and the Free Trade agreement. And I remember that time when we got sold down the river by Mulrooney, but water I think is like air, and so we shouldn't charge you (much) for it. However, having said that, when Coke started bottling it and selling it and we weren't even getting a kickback? Yeah, we felt like Barnum and Bailey had just been through town.

As advisor to the government I spent 15 years telling them to just shut up. Don't say anything. If you say anything at all, they will take you to the cleaners. You are not in their league. This is hardball.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Yes but our role as diplomat has been established and peace keeper so we are on good terms with Russia and China and Iran and all countries including Israel. I don't think we are expecting any sort of major global conflict due to the balance of power.

But if there is a pandemic you need to be able to close your airspace to air traffic in a matter of hours not days. So if we are dependent on other countries when it comes to managing our borders, we could not expect them to abandon their own people to come and help us.

If we had the capacity to close down our borders in the event of pandemic and could do it quickly and securely then we could consider ourselves protected. The best way to avoid border conflicts is to be able to police your border.
If you can you won't need to. Its only when you can't effectively police your own border that people will try to get in.
And right now who would want to its damn cold here, but in the event of, people could be driven here by who knows what sort of natural catastrophe and in the event of pandemic well we would be devastated if we did not have the ability to block it from getting here. All the studies in the world regarding the spread of disease do not help you if you cannot contain and control the outbreak.
It spreads like wild fire in todays world of easy global travel.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Rocketman7

 

I hear the Enterprise is coming to the end of it's service life in our Navy, maybe Canada is on the slate to get a couple hand-me downs. In a world where we give NO ONE that technology, Canada might be the lone exception for the obvious reasons. Heck.. We're kind tied to each other for our fates whether we like it or not, eh?

@ Trillium

I love that explanation for why this would be seen as necessary and you're right on that. I guess my head is too far in conspiracy thinking sometimes to see the forest right in front of me. It's fair enough to say Canadian forces were as much on the pointy end of the Cold War defense of North America as American forces were for what came out of Russia. Perhaps that is the only motive on this, and that makes sense.

If we get then I sure hope they are in better shape then the Brit. sub we got a few year back
www.defenseindustrydaily.com...
Your starting to sound like a use car salesman

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by boncho

 

You're right on your points.

I'd add one to that as I watched this happen as a kid in the 80's. The path from Russia to the United States isn't shortest over the Atlantic...it's shortest right over the Arctic Circle and Canada. IF the unthinkable ever happens..and this 'on' one day, 'off' the next tensions with Russia escalate, I imagine Canada will again find itself in the position of 'Human Shield' by sheer virtue of geography between Putin and the American President....whoever that is, if that all happens.

Err... I'd also note in a VERY important way.... Putin started running Strategic Bombers up to our Air borders and screwing with American Air defense shortly after 9/11. If it's stopped, I hadn't heard. It's not daily or even weekly like it was in the bad old days...but google will show no shortage of incidents since 2001 of Russian Bombers playing with our tripwires. Not nice...and I suppose it puts Canada's actions into more context.

Yes they have been kocking on our door for a few year now not much on the news though
www.torontosun.com...

Here a few more reason we need those plane

www.army.forces.gc.ca...

1969/70: The Manhattan Event20
In 1969, after an announcement of the discovery of oil in 1968 in the Alaskan North Slope
region, the U.S. sent its oil tanker SS Manhattan to sail through the Northwest Passage on
behalf of the Atlantic Richfi eld Company The purpose of the voyage was to determine the
feasibility of transporting oil from Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, to the American Eastern Seaboard.21
Although accompanied by two U.S. Coast Guard icebreakers throughout the voyage,
the Manhattan became stuck in the ice a number of times, requiring assistance from the
Canadian icebreaker CCGS John A. MacDonald, which accompanied the tanker through
the Passage.22
A great deal of controversy surrounds the Manhattan voyage because of its perceived
violation of Canadian Arctic sovereignty.23 The issue in question is whether Canada had
granted permission to the U.S. to allow the vessel to enter the NWP. Canada did not offi cially
claim sovereignty over the NWP until 1973, when the government asserted sovereignty
as part of Canada’s historic internal waters. However, the government did not enact any
legislation or treaty to formalize this statement24 and the other Arctic nations maintain to
this date that the Passage constitutes an international strait. Interestingly, Canada and the
U.S. strongly disagree on the internal/international status of the NWP, despite their bilateral
Arctic security initiatives.
Sources indicate that in the months leading up to the Manhattan voyage, the U.S. Coast
Guard and oil company executives had consulted Canadian offi cials and requested the
assistance of a Canadian icebreaker throughout the voyage.25 According to Navy Captain
Thomas C. Pullen,26 not only had Canada agreed with and supported the voyage, but in
return for its participation, had negotiated an agreement with the Americans to share data
on ice conditions and ship performance. In addition, Pullen affi rmed that Roger Steward,
master of the Manhattan, had followed protocol and fl own the Canadian fl ag, making efforts
not to offend Canadians.27 The Trudeau government welcomed the Manhattan voyage
and Canada’s participation in the exercise, and expressed its position that there was no
sovereignty challenge to Canadian territory.28 Media reports at the time of the sailing
misrepresented American intentions when the U.S. refused to offi cially request Canadian
permission to enter the Passage. Media criticism effectively swayed political opinion
towards accusing the Americans for violating Canadian sovereignty. In reality, a request for
permission would have been interpreted as the U.S. recognition that the Passage represents
Canadian internal waters.29 In addition, other reports confi rm Canadian participation in the
voyage of the SS Manhattan. Although the U.S. had not offi cially request permission to
enter the NWP, Canada offi cially granted permission anyway.

reply to post by Rocketman7


Wow... Diplomat? Peacekeeper? Hey, I hate to insult you by thanking you but Canada's combat forces were the best in the theater outside of American troops for a number of specialties in Afghanistan, including what I believe is still the world record for a long distance rifle shot and kill. I'm incredibly sorry for the bomb one of our planes dropped on a bunch of your troops a few years back, but Canada has held it's own and then some while MOST of those NATO Contributor nations put their people under such restrictions, they barely mattered for traffic cops. Trainers primarily.. Oh well.... Just don't sell your nation short. They aren't war like to the degree the U.S., but your current leaders are no Doves. Not by a long shot.

Err... Let's not get too confused with the nations we'd like to see compared to what we DO see. Peace Keepers aren't buying dozens and dozens of front line, first generation combat FIGHTER aircraft. Peace Keepers might invest that money in Air Defense to insure fighters wouldn't be a relevent issue, regardless of who owned them.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
Canada is an idiot. No aircraft would be attacking Canada and if it happened NORAD is a joint effort by US-Kanada and it would halt and stem any enemy aircraft and once again Canada would get a free ride..Useless money spent.

So you want only to produce and buy what is actually really needed. You communist.

The eastern Germans presented back in the day a lightbulb that would last up to 30 years. When they presented it, the west Germans were enquiering if their colleagues in the communist block were looking to put themselves out of work.