Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 program

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

arrow-nautics

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 625
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2012, 23:42
  • Location: Halifax

Unread post24 Nov 2017, 13:53

maus92 wrote:It looks like the Senate Appropriation committee will cut the "extra" F-35As authorized in the 2018 NDAA, while retaining the additional four F-35Cs (two for the Navy, and two for the Marines,) and four F-35Bs. The committee also will retain all 10 extra Super Hornets. This probably is in reaction to the woeful state of tactical naval aviation assets.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... uy-443536/


And?

What does this have to do with "Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 program"? The only relevance I see is the SH line still has a pulse. But given the dispute with Boeing and when the scheduled wrap up in (February) these decisions by the Senate Appropriation committee are moot to the subject matter. Whether it be 10 more or 30 more SHs it's hooey. That is unless you're attempting to pull a "Nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah" on the SH versus the F-35A for Canada.

I have a dry bowl of Canadian Cornflakes here maus92. Care to moisten them for us?

Not trying to be a meanie but seriously....it's a tough room so avoid slipping on bananas please :devil:
There's an old rule among many in the fighter procurement business: "Too Early to Tell, Too Late to Stop".
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1113
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post25 Nov 2017, 04:35

From the friendy Finns and their thread...

neptune wrote:https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/mod_at_least_64_fighter_jets_needed_to_defend_finland/9946949

MoD: At least 64 fighter jets needed to defend Finland

The current fleet will be retired by 2030.


Looks like Canaduh only need wait 13 more years 'til she finally gets her CF-18 replacements... :doh: :devil:

Surely if Canaduh buys up the worlds left-over F-18s from Ozzieland, Swizzerland, Finland, maybe even scraping up hulks from their friends in the USMC... shirley they should be able to piece together some frankenplanes with duck tape, bailing wire, and bubble gum...
Take an F-16, stir in a little A-7, bake, then sprinkle on a generous helping of F-117. What do you get? An F-35.
Offline

luke_sandoz

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 459
  • Joined: 08 Feb 2011, 20:25

Unread post25 Nov 2017, 17:46

steve2267 wrote:From the friendy Finns and their thread...

neptune wrote:https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/mod_at_least_64_fighter_jets_needed_to_defend_finland/9946949

MoD: At least 64 fighter jets needed to defend Finland

The current fleet will be retired by 2030.


Looks like Canaduh only need wait 13 more years 'til she finally gets her CF-18 replacements... :doh: :devil:

Surely if Canaduh buys up the worlds left-over F-18s from Ozzieland, Swizzerland, Finland, maybe even scraping up hulks from their friends in the USMC... shirley they should be able to piece together some frankenplanes with duck tape, bailing wire, and bubble gum...




Frankenplane?

Also known as the Craigslist CF-18 :D
Offline

hb_pencil

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 841
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2011, 21:50

Unread post26 Nov 2017, 00:54

Maus92

I hate to say it (actually I don't) but if you expect that any Super Hornets have a chance to be sold to Canada after the costing in the Letter of Offer, you're going to be sorely disappointed.
Last edited by hb_pencil on 26 Nov 2017, 00:57, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 772
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post26 Nov 2017, 00:57

hb_pencil wrote:Maus92

I hate to say it (actually I don't) but if you expect that any Super Hornet,has a chance to be sold to Canada after the costing in the Letter of Offer, you're going to be sorely disappointed.


I agree with you except for one detail: I would replace the "Letter of Offer" with "Boeing-Bombardier trade dispute". :wink:
Online

optimist

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 481
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34

Unread post26 Nov 2017, 02:25

You mean the SH wasn't $55M after all? Who would have seen that one coming out of left field. :shock:
Looking at what the aussies paid would have been too hard. :roll:
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5161
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post26 Nov 2017, 04:37

What does this have to do with "Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 program"?


Sometimes you get so excited to troll you don't read which thread you're in

Maus likes to highlight how the navy is Inept at basic management:

maus92 wrote: This probably is in reaction to the woeful state of tactical naval aviation assets.
Last edited by XanderCrews on 26 Nov 2017, 04:56, edited 1 time in total.
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5161
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post26 Nov 2017, 04:38

hb_pencil wrote:Maus92

I hate to say it (actually I don't) but if you expect that any Super Hornets have a chance to be sold to Canada after the costing in the Letter of Offer, you're going to be sorely disappointed.


Maus assures us the Super Hornet is cheaper and more versatile. So take your actual Boeing price tags and cost comparisons and several super hornet competition loses to the F-35 and just listen to him instead of your own lying eyes.
Choose Crews
Offline

hb_pencil

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 841
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2011, 21:50

Unread post26 Nov 2017, 06:58

ricnunes wrote:
hb_pencil wrote:Maus92

I hate to say it (actually I don't) but if you expect that any Super Hornet,has a chance to be sold to Canada after the costing in the Letter of Offer, you're going to be sorely disappointed.


I agree with you except for one detail: I would replace the "Letter of Offer" with "Boeing-Bombardier trade dispute". :wink:


and you'd be wrong then.
Offline

madrat

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1679
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post26 Nov 2017, 16:32

Some posters are ignoring the wording in between the lines. Boeing was going to give Canada a sweet deal on the front end and recoup losses on sustainment until the trade dispute issue. Boeing has absolutely no incentive to hide costs now, because the Canadian boy prince doesn't want to be a team player.

Take a minute to step back and look at a bigger picture here. Trudeau came to power on the same foreign influence that pushed a minority liberal socialist opinion as populist in the states. Canada is about seven years behind the learning curve here. Eventually their people will see the sabotage act going on and unseat this troublemaker. Soon enough the lights will turn on and the cockroaches will scurry. The Americans aren't going to help at the moment. Ivanka is a little smitten with the boy prince at the moment, but daddy Trump will get weary of the backstabbing from the Canadians and turn the dogs loose on their political machine.

People want to associate the election influence with the Russians. Once again, consider the larger picture. Determine who gains the most if Canada and the U.S. are bickering about trade and other politics. (It's no the Russians.) Canada is the key to cheaper resources and they force the Russians to keep prices down. The funny thing is, it required a cooperation between several ideological opponents. The Russians are a common enemy of these state actors. (If anything the Russians probably feel left out as they were late to the party.) The Russians are also a convenient scapegoat for the liberal socialists in the West. The Russians are literally being sucked dry by their own infighting and sabotage, so you're seeing the early hints of a purge forming there. One of the big meddlers has been put down rather publicly and most people won't even see or realize who it was. I wouldn't put too much money into China in the near future. And if I was a Sino businessman in Russia, I'd be a little more worried about Putin than the Americans. Major shakeups are coming.

In the end I would be surprised to see the Canadians allow the Trudeau government to thwart an F-35 buy. If they opt for Typhoon or Rafale, you will see all hell break loose.
Online

optimist

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 481
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34

Unread post27 Nov 2017, 00:27

The front end is a FMS, end of story as to any price fudging. It's gov. to gov., not a boeing-canada sale.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 772
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post27 Nov 2017, 00:46

hb_pencil wrote:
ricnunes wrote:
hb_pencil wrote:Maus92

I hate to say it (actually I don't) but if you expect that any Super Hornet,has a chance to be sold to Canada after the costing in the Letter of Offer, you're going to be sorely disappointed.


I agree with you except for one detail: I would replace the "Letter of Offer" with "Boeing-Bombardier trade dispute". :wink:


and you'd be wrong then.


And why is that so?

It seems obvious that the only reason why this Canadian government will NOT buy the Super Hornet is because of the Boeing-Bombardier dispute and certainly not because the Super Hornet deal price tag which this government was apparently so willing to pay.
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 6963
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post27 Nov 2017, 05:51

optimist wrote:The front end is a FMS, end of story as to any price fudging. It's gov. to gov., not a boeing-canada sale.


I don't think so as no mandatory FMS announcement was made. I think this was Business to Government, just like Boeing tried to do with the South Korean F-15E deal. Only $2.4 Billion of the items had to go through the FMS process as the rest was "Direct Commercial Sales (DCS)".

WASHINGTON, April 3, 2013 – The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress March 29 of a possible Foreign Military Sale to the Government of Korea in support of (60) F-15 Silent Eagle aircraft being procured via Direct Commercial Sales (DCS), and associated equipment, parts, training and logistical support for an estimated cost of $2.408 billion.

http://www.dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/ko ... ft-support
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

hb_pencil

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 841
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2011, 21:50

Unread post27 Nov 2017, 08:31

ricnunes wrote:
And why is that so?

It seems obvious that the only reason why this Canadian government will NOT buy the Super Hornet is because of the Boeing-Bombardier dispute and certainly not because the Super Hornet deal price tag which this government was apparently so willing to pay.


Because it is.
Offline

hb_pencil

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 841
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2011, 21:50

Unread post27 Nov 2017, 08:32

SpudmanWP wrote:
optimist wrote:The front end is a FMS, end of story as to any price fudging. It's gov. to gov., not a boeing-canada sale.


I don't think so as no mandatory FMS announcement was made. I think this was Business to Government, just like Boeing tried to do with the South Korean F-15E deal. Only $2.4 Billion of the items had to go through the FMS process as the rest was "Direct Commercial Sales (DCS)".

WASHINGTON, April 3, 2013 – The Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress March 29 of a possible Foreign Military Sale to the Government of Korea in support of (60) F-15 Silent Eagle aircraft being procured via Direct Commercial Sales (DCS), and associated equipment, parts, training and logistical support for an estimated cost of $2.408 billion.

http://www.dsca.mil/major-arms-sales/ko ... ft-support


Its Gov to Gov. There is no DCS portion to this, as Canada requires training and wants a vanilla F/A-18E/F.
PreviousNext

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], mas and 15 guests