Pressure increases on [Canada] to stay or leave F-35 program
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 9825
- Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14
gideonic wrote:Corsair1963 wrote:Trudeau Campaign just took a big hit.........
Reactions to Canadian PM Trudeau's brown face 2001 picture
While I take no liking to Trudeau (to put it lightly) I really wish politic mudslinging would focus on current actions and policies (where there is plenty of crap to sling around) instead of some hugely stuff someone did 19 years ago. If it were something illegal i'd understand, but this? seriously?
I agree to a point.....Yet, in the case of Trudeau. He is a far left Liberal....
That would like a Right (HAWK) Leaning Politician talking bad about the Military!
-
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 5730
- Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29
gideonic wrote:While I take no liking to Trudeau (to put it lightly) I really wish politic mudslinging would focus on current actions and policies (where there is plenty of crap to sling around) instead of some hugely stuff someone did 19 years ago. If it were something illegal i'd understand, but this? seriously?
I fully agree with you!
I would say that political actions like this can end up backfiring against Trudeau's opposition (whose main "benefactor" would be the conservatives) and thus helping up Trudeau and the Liberals.
The speech should focus against Trudeau's incompetence as a PM instead.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call EW and pretend like it’s new.
-
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 7505
- Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
joost wrote:Great! Then we can go back to focus on the F-35, instead of turning this into a political rant.
Joost
we got so distracted with this we missed an important anniversary:
Justin Trudeau vows to scrap F-35 fighter jet program
Troubled effort to buy new fighter jets to be replaced by 'open and transparent competition'
CBC News · Posted: Sep 20, 2015 10:11 AM ET | Last Updated: September 20, 2015
Happy 4 years!
Choose Crews
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 9825
- Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14
Still waiting on that 'open and transparent competition' too!
- Senior member
- Posts: 271
- Joined: 12 Jul 2017, 06:50
If Saab drops out that would be hilarious.
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 9825
- Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14
Will other firms withdraw from fighter jet competition leaving F-35 last plane standing?
David Pugliese, Ottawa Citizen
Updated: September 25, 2019
Shortly before he retired, Pat Finn, the Department of National Defence’s procurement chief, told this newspaper there was always a risk that some companies would drop out of the future fighter jet competition but that extra efforts had been made to ensure the process was fair. “We’re not getting all kinds of signals that (companies are) losing interest” in bidding, Finn said in an interview July 23.
On Aug. 30, the United Kingdom’s Ministry of Defence and Airbus Defence and Space informed the Canadian government of their decision to withdraw from Canada’s future fighter competition. Airbus had been offering Canada the Eurofighter.
At the time the Canadian Press news service reported the Eurofighter withdrawal was a surprise.
It wasn’t.
For the last nine months the various competing firms, Boeing, Airbus and Saab have been sounding the alarm about how the fighter jet process is structured and their worry that it is stacked in favour of the Lockheed Martin F-35. The RCAF, which originally selected the F-35 as the CF-18 replacement before that selection was put on hold by the previous Conservative government because of cost and technical issues, came up with the new requirements. Industry representatives say these requirements highlight the strengths of the F-35 such as stealth and a first strike capability.
The primary role of the new fighter jets is to protect North America, or so government officials have said. Lockheed Martin’s industry rivals question how stealth and a first strike capability fit into that role.
Representatives from Lockheed Martin’s competitors have also made overtures to federal officials about their concerns about the procurement process but say they received little response.
In early July Reuters news service reported that both Airbus and Boeing were considering dropping out. Airbus followed through on its concerns and as noted decided it wasn’t worth competing because of how the process was designed.
Last year the European firm Dassault informed the Canadian government it would not be competing in the competition. It had been planning to offer Canada the Rafale fighter jet.
There were two key changes in the $19 billion procurement that caused Airbus to leave. One was the decision to change the industrial benefits needed for the program. Airbus was willing to outline and guarantee specific industrial benefits for Canada. That was the way previous defence procurements had worked.
But that has been changed because of concerns the U.S. government raised for Lockheed Martin.
U.S. officials had warned that the F-35 development agreement Canada signed years ago prohibits partners from imposing requirements for industrial benefits. Although Canada is a partner in the development of the aircraft that does not stipulate it is required to buy the F-35. But under the F-35 agreement, partner nations such as Canada are prohibited from demanding domestic companies receive specific work on the fighter jet. Instead, Canadian firms compete and if they are good enough they receive contracts. Over the last 12 years, Canadian firms have earned more than $1.3 billion in contracts to build F-35 parts. But there are no guarantees.
The other problem that Airbus and Rafale faced was linked to the requirement that bidders need to show how their aircraft will integrate into the U.S.-Canada system to defend North America. Airbus would have been required to show how it planned to integrate the Eurofighter Typhoon into the U.S.-Canadian system without knowing the system’s full technical details, the Canadian Press news service pointed out.
Saab, which is offering Canada the Gripen fighter, could be facing the same problem.
Boeing, which is considering offering the Super Hornet, would not have such a problem as its aircraft is being flown by the U.S. military.
It is still unclear, however, whether Boeing or Saab will even continue in the competition.
Bids must be submitted by the spring of 2020 but there is a growing sense among the defence industry that the F-35 will ultimately be selected as the new aircraft for the RCAF.
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national ... e-standing
David Pugliese, Ottawa Citizen
Updated: September 25, 2019
Shortly before he retired, Pat Finn, the Department of National Defence’s procurement chief, told this newspaper there was always a risk that some companies would drop out of the future fighter jet competition but that extra efforts had been made to ensure the process was fair. “We’re not getting all kinds of signals that (companies are) losing interest” in bidding, Finn said in an interview July 23.
On Aug. 30, the United Kingdom’s Ministry of Defence and Airbus Defence and Space informed the Canadian government of their decision to withdraw from Canada’s future fighter competition. Airbus had been offering Canada the Eurofighter.
At the time the Canadian Press news service reported the Eurofighter withdrawal was a surprise.
It wasn’t.
For the last nine months the various competing firms, Boeing, Airbus and Saab have been sounding the alarm about how the fighter jet process is structured and their worry that it is stacked in favour of the Lockheed Martin F-35. The RCAF, which originally selected the F-35 as the CF-18 replacement before that selection was put on hold by the previous Conservative government because of cost and technical issues, came up with the new requirements. Industry representatives say these requirements highlight the strengths of the F-35 such as stealth and a first strike capability.
The primary role of the new fighter jets is to protect North America, or so government officials have said. Lockheed Martin’s industry rivals question how stealth and a first strike capability fit into that role.
Representatives from Lockheed Martin’s competitors have also made overtures to federal officials about their concerns about the procurement process but say they received little response.
In early July Reuters news service reported that both Airbus and Boeing were considering dropping out. Airbus followed through on its concerns and as noted decided it wasn’t worth competing because of how the process was designed.
Last year the European firm Dassault informed the Canadian government it would not be competing in the competition. It had been planning to offer Canada the Rafale fighter jet.
There were two key changes in the $19 billion procurement that caused Airbus to leave. One was the decision to change the industrial benefits needed for the program. Airbus was willing to outline and guarantee specific industrial benefits for Canada. That was the way previous defence procurements had worked.
But that has been changed because of concerns the U.S. government raised for Lockheed Martin.
U.S. officials had warned that the F-35 development agreement Canada signed years ago prohibits partners from imposing requirements for industrial benefits. Although Canada is a partner in the development of the aircraft that does not stipulate it is required to buy the F-35. But under the F-35 agreement, partner nations such as Canada are prohibited from demanding domestic companies receive specific work on the fighter jet. Instead, Canadian firms compete and if they are good enough they receive contracts. Over the last 12 years, Canadian firms have earned more than $1.3 billion in contracts to build F-35 parts. But there are no guarantees.
The other problem that Airbus and Rafale faced was linked to the requirement that bidders need to show how their aircraft will integrate into the U.S.-Canada system to defend North America. Airbus would have been required to show how it planned to integrate the Eurofighter Typhoon into the U.S.-Canadian system without knowing the system’s full technical details, the Canadian Press news service pointed out.
Saab, which is offering Canada the Gripen fighter, could be facing the same problem.
Boeing, which is considering offering the Super Hornet, would not have such a problem as its aircraft is being flown by the U.S. military.
It is still unclear, however, whether Boeing or Saab will even continue in the competition.
Bids must be submitted by the spring of 2020 but there is a growing sense among the defence industry that the F-35 will ultimately be selected as the new aircraft for the RCAF.
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national ... e-standing
-
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 5730
- Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29
Corsair1963 wrote:It is still unclear, however, whether Boeing or Saab will even continue in the competition.
I just hope that they (Boeing and Saab) get out of the competition ASAP and get over with all this which is what should have been from the very start/begining: Canada selecting the F-35, period!
Corsair1963 wrote:Bids must be submitted by the spring of 2020 but there is a growing sense among the defence industry that the F-35 will ultimately be selected as the new aircraft for the RCAF.
https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national ... e-standing
Really?? I'm so surprised! Well... actually I'm not
Anyway, and my attempt to give some positive contribution to this thread (I hope):
- Why don't these "guys" from the media focus on the REAL reasons why the F-35 will likely be the only aircraft left on the competition, which is because the F-35 is simply the BEST OPTION?? All the rest is just "smokescreen"...
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call EW and pretend like it’s new.
-
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 5730
- Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29
XanderCrews wrote:we got so distracted with this we missed an important anniversary:
Justin Trudeau vows to scrap F-35 fighter jet program
Troubled effort to buy new fighter jets to be replaced by 'open and transparent competition'
CBC News · Posted: Sep 20, 2015 10:11 AM ET | Last Updated: September 20, 2015
Happy 4 years!
So Trudeau said that on one of my birthdays?? Now I hate the guy even more!
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call EW and pretend like it’s new.
-
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 7505
- Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42
sunstersun wrote:If Saab drops out that would be hilarious.
its coming, get your sides ready
Choose Crews
- Active Member
- Posts: 248
- Joined: 22 May 2010, 10:11
- Location: Netherlands
XanderCrews wrote:sunstersun wrote:If Saab drops out that would be hilarious.
its coming, get your sides ready
Agree! I really wonder what excuse Saab will come up with. Just for the record, with Canada eventually getting the F-35, every single development partner then will operate the jet. Quite an accomplishment of LM.
-
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 5730
- Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29
joost wrote: Just for the record, with Canada eventually getting the F-35, every single development partner then will operate the jet. Quite an accomplishment of LM.
Except Turkey
(although not because of Turkey's wishes)
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call EW and pretend like it’s new.
- Active Member
- Posts: 248
- Joined: 22 May 2010, 10:11
- Location: Netherlands
ricnunes wrote:joost wrote: Just for the record, with Canada eventually getting the F-35, every single development partner then will operate the jet. Quite an accomplishment of LM.
Except Turkey
(although not because of Turkey's wishes)
Well, you are right...one has been kicked out...but they did order aircraft initially.
But indeed...one down.
-
- Elite 5K
- Posts: 5730
- Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29
joost wrote:ricnunes wrote:joost wrote: Just for the record, with Canada eventually getting the F-35, every single development partner then will operate the jet. Quite an accomplishment of LM.
Except Turkey
(although not because of Turkey's wishes)
Well, you are right...one has been kicked out...but they did order aircraft initially.
But indeed...one down.
Yes, you're obviously correct.
Turkey won't be getting F-35s because they were basically expelled from the program (although this isn't still a 100% certainty, is it?) and this besides having already ordered F-35s.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call EW and pretend like it’s new.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests