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

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

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 19381
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post23 May 2013, 03:31

Pressure increases on Conservatives to stay or leave F-35 program 22 May 2013 Murray Brewster, The Canadian Press
"
OTTAWA - The Harper government may have "hit the reset button" on the purchase of F-35s, but planning for the stealth fighter continues — and Canada is facing a series of deadlines that will increase pressure to stick with the program.

Eight Canadian military officers continue to work on the multinational program in the U.S., at both the Pentagon and at Edwards Air Force Base in California, where they fill a variety of technical and planning roles.

An additional 16 military officers and civilians also work on the possible acquisition in Canada, according to a statement from the public works secretariat, which is overseeing the replacement of the air force's current fleet of CF-18s.

They will remain on the project until the government makes a decision whether to continue with the F-35 purchase, or buy some other fighter jet, the secretariat said....

...The country is so involved that Canadians are due to take over chairmanship of a key multinational board at the Pentagon's Joint Strike Fighter project office in the spring of 2014....

...Documents show the lead time between ordering a jet and its delivery is four years.

And in order to keep the program on track, " the first aircraft in 2016, must have procurement expenditure authority to formalize (Joint Strike Fighter) Program Partner Procurement Request by (no later than) Fall 2012,'' warned a Aug. 19, 2011 slide deck written by the project management office."

http://www.thompsoncitizen.net/article/ ... late=cpart

A LONG COMPLICATED ARTICLE best read at source.
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 6936
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post05 Jun 2013, 05:43

The opposition is crying "foul" but the process was never meant to be a competition but rather, an analysis of alternatives.


http://www.hilltimes.com/news/politics/ ... orks/34950

Prime Minister Harper, Cabinet to decide on F-35 fighter jets without advice from Public Works Procurement Secretariat, say Public Works officials
By TIM NAUMETZ | June 4, 2013

The Harper Cabinet has until mid-2014 to make a decision on the F-35 fighter jets, either to sign an initial contract for the first batch of four of the stealth fighters for delivery to Canada in 2017, or to delay it, or drop the plan entirely.

PARLIAMENT HILL—Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Cabinet will make the final decision on whether the government should go ahead with a 2010 plan to acquire a fleet of F-35 stealth fighter aircraft without advice or recommendations from Public Works’ National Fighter Procurement Secretariat now in the midst of an exhaustive “options analysis” that include three other fighter jet options along with the F-35, bureaucrats in charge of the review have disclosed.

A committee of Cabinet will be presented with information that is being gathered in the review, including aircraft capabilities and their ability to meet Canada’s requirements under the missions outlined in a defence strategy the government established five years ago, as well as cost and industrial benefits for Canada, but the senior officials presenting the information will provide Mr. Harper (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) and his Cabinet with no advice or any recommendations about which aircraft to choose, one of the senior officials supervising the review told a media briefing last Friday...

The plan to leave the final decision to Cabinet without advice from the public service on the controversial acquisition—estimated to incur costs of $44-billion over 30 years, including purchase price, sustainment, operations, replacement aircraft due to attrition and new weapons systems —surprised opposition MPs.

The opposition and other critics have accused the government of using the options analysis review as a delaying tactic to divert attention after an uproar over a report from Auditor General Michael Ferguson on the trouble-plagued F-35 project released last year...

More,at he link...
Offline

gtx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 658
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012, 21:52
  • Location: Brisbane, Australia

Unread post05 Jun 2013, 07:40

The opposition is just playing at being the opposition. If they were to quit the F-35 they would be crying over the loss of jobs in this important international program...
Offline

geogen

Banned

  • Posts: 3123
  • Joined: 11 Mar 2008, 15:28
  • Location: 45 km offshore, New England

Unread post06 Jun 2013, 04:27

GTX,

It's probably too early to proclaim with such certainty that; 'if CA decides to delay or change acquisition plan, then CA will necessarily lose jobs'.

There are a significant number of invaluable Canadian suppliers already in the F-35 production loop. These are among top notch industrial leaders. Notwithstanding, Canada is not buying F-15s, but Canada still receives industrial production work for current-build F-15s being final-assembled in the US. Likewise, it's probably a good bet to think that Canadian industry would still be a valued and trusted source of critical F-35 parts and components, even if an alternative was selected.

That said, this mid-2014 date should give sufficient time for a more accurate assessment of alternatives to be considered, in relation to the latest classified progress report of the day on Block IIIF development (block IIIi being irrelevant to Canada). That, as well as progress of the relevant block IV follow-on development. Hopefully by then, more accurate estimates of potential total procurement costs would also be better 'estimated' for potential operational Canadian FY16-FY19 buys too. (e.g., among other potential forward-looking indications, if USAF is buying fewer FY15 jets than currently expected, etc). Yet, if too many uncertain factors remain, CA decision makers might very well opt to 'delay' the decision further and go for further SLEP and MLU'd CF-18s.

We'll definitely have to keep our collective 'Google-Fu' skills sharp during the continued wait and see holding pattern on this one. Stay tuned. Will be interesting to see how it plays out no doubt.
Offline

lookieloo

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1244
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2013, 08:04

Unread post06 Jun 2013, 09:24

gtx wrote:The opposition is just playing at being the opposition. If they were to quit the F-35 they would be crying over the loss of jobs in this important international program...
Possibly... though I suspect this whole reevaluation thing is more of a smoke-grenade thrown by Harper to buy some time for things to cool down while keeping F-35 workshare as long as possible in the event of a switch. Of course, this will only work for so long... Sooner or later, someone's gonna tell Canada to $hit or get off the pot. Canadians don't seem to realize that 60 planes doesn't make them as important to the program as they think; so while a cancellation might sting LM's pride and bottom-line temporarily, I'm personally looking forward to watching their workshare move south if this goes on much longer.
Offline

gtx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 658
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012, 21:52
  • Location: Brisbane, Australia

Unread post06 Jun 2013, 20:04

geogen wrote:GTX,
It's probably too early to proclaim with such certainty that; 'if CA decides to delay or change acquisition plan, then CA will necessarily lose jobs'.


I think you misread what I was trying to say. I was having a go at the opposition which like nearly all oppositions in the Western world plays the role of opposition to its fullest. In other words, no matter what the government of the day says/does, the opposition will nearly always take the opposite stance. If the Govt says "white", the opposition will say "black" and vice-versa. therefore, if the Govt of Canada were to suddenly pull out of the F-35 program, I would put money on it that the opposition would decry the loss of jobs and investment opportunities...regardless of their previous positions or any facts.

geogen wrote:There are a significant number of invaluable Canadian suppliers already in the F-35 production loop. These are among top notch industrial leaders. Notwithstanding, Canada is not buying F-15s, but Canada still receives industrial production work for current-build F-15s being final-assembled in the US. Likewise, it's probably a good bet to think that Canadian industry would still be a valued and trusted source of critical F-35 parts and components, even if an alternative was selected.



I can assure you that should Canada withdraw fully from the F-35 (which I highly doubt they will), then the pressure from industries in other remaining partner nations to get their work-share and opportunities will be immense. I know, since that is what I would be doing. I will be hitting the road/telephone/email within minutes of hearing any such decision.
Offline

gtx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 658
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012, 21:52
  • Location: Brisbane, Australia

Unread post06 Jun 2013, 20:07

lookieloo wrote:I'm personally looking forward to watching their workshare move south if this goes on much longer.


I hear you...deep south! :wink:
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5170
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post06 Jun 2013, 20:57

geogen wrote:
There are a significant number of invaluable Canadian suppliers already in the F-35 production loop. These are among top notch industrial leaders. Notwithstanding, Canada is not buying F-15s, but Canada still receives industrial production work for current-build F-15s being final-assembled in the US. Likewise, it's probably a good bet to think that Canadian industry would still be a valued and trusted source of critical F-35 parts and components, even if an alternative was selected.
.


The pressure to take those jobs and put them elsewhere should Canada leave would be enormous. especially with Korea looking to come aboard. The JSF program is not the F-15. If Canada were to leave or do a "hard reset" there could be some serious consequences. if only to negate the domino effect of canada leaving on other partners. If Canada were to withdraw and select something else, I would be shocked to see the same number of jobs stay there as other countries are champing at the bit to get more perks, and may well be threatening to leave themselves. Other countries would add pressure. and it they picked an alternative it could get downright punitive. "get your perks from boeing or EADs, because the F-35 is long gone here" There is no way Canada selects an alternative and there aren't big consequences, if only to set the example. What stops Australia from pulling the same maneuver as canada?
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1927
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post07 Jun 2013, 14:12

geogen wrote:It's probably too early to proclaim with such certainty that; 'if CA decides to delay or change acquisition plan, then CA will necessarily lose jobs'.


IP is proportional to buy. It goes away if they drop out of the program.
Offline

luke_sandoz

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 461
  • Joined: 08 Feb 2011, 20:25

Unread post07 Jun 2013, 14:59

About time for the chuckleheads who pass themselves off as Canadian Journalists to weigh in with some torqued up Winslow Wheeler quotes and out of context fearmongering about how bad the F-35 is.

Is "Canadian Journalist" an oxymoron?
Offline
User avatar

smsgtmac

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 821
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2013, 04:22
  • Location: Texas

Unread post07 Jun 2013, 17:58

I don't think it can be overstated that the pressure on Canada is self-generated by the political decisions they made. What they have are conflicting interests: politics are making them reevaluate and reevaluation may close off the best way forward. Since buying NO fighters would be the ideal solution for their left-wingers, they have no motivation to help the government in power solve a problem the 'Libruls' created with the willing Canadian press. Program schedule milestones are driving the urgency, and Canada knows they can't hold up the train if they want to get back on board. If they had this political crisis two-three years earlier, they'd have more time to do more navel-gazing. Canada knows that even with the 'reset' price going up, if they bail and then decide to come back later, FMS prices will be higher and their access to the technology involved and value of available long-term production and sustainment work share will be much lower. It will be much lower because that 'multinational board' referenced above will make certain as much work goes to member nations as possible. I think this is the main reason the Canadian 'Opposition' doesn't push a cost argument as much as the disingenuous "Canada is Uniquely Cold and Vast" argument. On that point, I think Norway would have a few words about their history of escorting Russian bombers from the Barents Sea and down the GIUK Gap with F-16s.
--The ultimate weapon is the mind of man.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 5170
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post07 Jun 2013, 21:09

smsgtmac wrote:I don't think it can be overstated that the pressure on Canada is self-generated by the political decisions they made. What they have are conflicting interests: politics are making them reevaluate and reevaluation may close off the best way forward. Since buying NO fighters would be the ideal solution for their left-wingers, they have no motivation to help the government in power solve a problem the 'Libruls' created with the willing Canadian press. Program schedule milestones are driving the urgency, and Canada knows they can't hold up the train if they want to get back on board. If they had this political crisis two-three years earlier, they'd have more time to do more navel-gazing. Canada knows that even with the 'reset' price going up, if they bail and then decide to come back later, FMS prices will be higher and their access to the technology involved and value of available long-term production and sustainment work share will be much lower. It will be much lower because that 'multinational board' referenced above will make certain as much work goes to member nations as possible. I think this is the main reason the Canadian 'Opposition' doesn't push a cost argument as much as the disingenuous "Canada is Uniquely Cold and Vast" argument. On that point, I think Norway would have a few words about their history of escorting Russian bombers from the Barents Sea and down the GIUK Gap with F-16s.


Its the EH-101 trap perfectly set again. Lets hope they don't fall for it twice.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 19381
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post09 Aug 2013, 20:59

National Fighter Procurement Secretariat Releases Updated F-35 Costs Through 2013 Annual Update 09 Aug 2013
* Reuters is not responsible for the content in this press release.
"National Fighter Procurement Secretariat Releases Updated F-35 Costs Through 2013 Annual Update

GATINEAU, QUEBEC--(Marketwired - Aug. 9, 2013) - As part of the Government of Canada's Seven-Point Plan, the National Fighter Procurement Secretariat today released the Next Generation Fighter Capability 2013 Annual Update.

This second Annual Update presents updated life-cycle cost estimates for the F-35 and compares current estimates with those reported in the 2012 Annual Update. In 2012, the estimated cost was $44,820 million. The current cost estimate is $44,676 million, an overall decrease of 0.3 per cent. The new estimated cost reflects a decrease in sustainment and operating costs, while noting an increase in disposal and development costs....

...The Secretariat continues to work diligently on the evaluation of options to replace the CF-18 fleet. Industry has provided the information requested to support a rigorous examination of available fighter aircraft options against the missions outlined in the Canada First Defence Strategy. The Independent Review Panel continues to provide oversight and guidance on the work supporting the evaluation of options to ensure it is both rigorous and impartial, and that the results to be made public are comprehensive and understandable.

Until the Seven-Point Plan is complete, the Government will not make a decision on the replacement for the CF-18 fighter jets and all options remain on the table."

For additional information, visit the National Fighter Procurement Secretariat website at http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/st ... s-eng.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/ ... KW20130809
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

neptune

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2615
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2008, 00:03
  • Location: Houston

Unread post09 Aug 2013, 21:44

spazsinbad wrote:Pressure increases on Conservatives to stay or leave F-35 program 22 May 2013...........


:shrug: :pint:
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 19381
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post09 Aug 2013, 22:54

Make My Day - Make a Decision Canada. :D
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Next

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests