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

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

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 25655
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post31 Dec 2020, 04:24

charlielima223 wrote:The Canadian military has been in decline in more ways than one...

The USN has been having problems with keeping their ships maintained but at least they're still able to get their ships and boats out into the water.

Sadly some USN warships (not CVNs) have had collisions recently from being under trained and over worked is that not so?
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3090
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post31 Dec 2020, 15:05

charlielima223 wrote:The Canadian military has been in decline in more ways than one...

The USN has been having problems with keeping their ships maintained but at least they're still able to get their ships and boats out into the water.


Don't confuse the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) Submarine fleet with the rest of the RCN (surface) fleet, basically the Halifax-class frigates and the Kingston-class coastal defence vessels.

The (Canadian) Submarines ended up being one of the worse military purchases in the recent Canadian military history and this was actually a rare case. This purchase happened mainly due to 3 reasons:
1- The submarines were bought during the late 1990's, an era when there was some major cuts in defense spending in Canada (and in many other western countries for that matter) but at the same there was this urgent need to replace the aging and obsolete fleet of Oberon-class submarines which is another classical example of what happens with the Canadian military procurement and which you can add to the examples that I gave in my last post. Due to the urgent need of replacing the old Oberon-class submarines together with the major defense cuts it was decided to buy a fleet of second hand submarines which leads to point 2- below:
2- On paper the purchase of the British Upholder class submarines seemed to be a great deal/opportunity. These Upholder class submarines were seen (again "on paper") as being almost "brand new" since they were completed during the late 1980's and commissioned during the early 1990's and they were in service with the (British) Royal Navy for a period of only about 4 years for the first/older sub and only 1 year for the last/most recent sub of the class since the British decided to keep a full-nuclear sub fleet instead of a mixed nuclear and conventional sub fleets and as such it was decided to laid up these Upholder class subs (again almost in a "brand new" condition). It's also worth noting that the Upholders were among the most advanced conventional submarines at that time.
3- As such and because of points 1- and 2-, the Canadian government at the time decided to purchase these Upholder class submarines, renaming them to Victoria class. It's also worth noting that Canadian wasn't the only country interested in these subs. For instance Pakistan and Portugal were also interested in these same subs.
However, these submarines were allowed to deteriorate while in storage and this is the main reason behind the very poor readiness of the Canadian submarine feet with the first submarine of the class (Upholder while in the Royal Navy service and Chicoutimi in the Royal Canadian Navy service) only being commissioned in 2015, 17 years later after being purchased (which happened in 1998)!

However and again the rest of the Canadian Navy fleet is not in this shape and neither seems to have a poor readiness.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6963
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post31 Dec 2020, 18:40

spazsinbad wrote: being under trained and over worked is that not so?


Image

wonder how that happened...
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6963
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post01 Jan 2021, 16:02

Image
Choose Crews
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4342
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post01 Jan 2021, 18:04

XanderCrews wrote:
spazsinbad wrote: being under trained and over worked is that not so?


Image

wonder how that happened...


Makes me sick knowing our tax dollars are wasted on this PC nonsense. Instead of paying, equipping and training our people to fight wars and win them, we have to put up with this PC bullsh!t.
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2932
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post01 Jan 2021, 23:45

If you have to potentially fight someone or can win through diplomatic means, do both. Canada is being whipped inside and out by Chinese influence peddling. Stalwart types, stooges propped up in places of power with access to deep secrets, weren't just born in the states.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3090
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post02 Jan 2021, 01:32

madrat wrote: Canada is being whipped inside and out by Chinese influence peddling. Stalwart types, stooges propped up in places of power with access to deep secrets, weren't just born in the states.


Canada is obviously a target for Chinese influence as it's basically any other relevant western country (and not only) of the world. The USA most likely suffers from much bigger Chinese influence attempts than Canada itself.

However none of this means that China rules Canada or affects any decision making in Canada. I believe that a great example of this was the arrest of Huawei's CEO in Canada due to an arrest warrant issued by US authorities and which was later extradited to the USA. By the way, what was the USA's decision and outcome regarding the arrest and extradition of Huawei's CEO? Last time I heard, the USA released the CEO (despite ordering her arrest) and then China exerted some retaliatory actions against Canada (namely against some Canadian citizens in Chinese soil) while the USA did nothing (or commented anything) about these Chinese retaliatory measures. So from this case, I would say that the USA is probably more influenced by China than Canada (of course I could be wrong, but...)
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6963
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post02 Jan 2021, 16:29

ricnunes wrote:
madrat wrote: Canada is being whipped inside and out by Chinese influence peddling. Stalwart types, stooges propped up in places of power with access to deep secrets, weren't just born in the states.


Canada is obviously a target for Chinese influence as it's basically any other relevant western country (and not only) of the world. The USA most likely suffers from much bigger Chinese influence attempts than Canada itself.

However none of this means that China rules Canada or affects any decision making in Canada. I believe that a great example of this was the arrest of Huawei's CEO in Canada due to an arrest warrant issued by US authorities and which was later extradited to the USA. By the way, what was the USA's decision and outcome regarding the arrest and extradition of Huawei's CEO? Last time I heard, the USA released the CEO (despite ordering her arrest) and then China exerted some retaliatory actions against Canada (namely against some Canadian citizens in Chinese soil) while the USA did nothing (or commented anything) about these Chinese retaliatory measures. So from this case, I would say that the USA is probably more influenced by China than Canada (of course I could be wrong, but...)



Thats probably exactly what happened, when you do high level international espionage you show your cards the whole time, and telegraph every single thing you do. Secrets are bad...
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6963
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post04 Jan 2021, 21:29

The first Saab F-39E Gripen fighter arrived on a ship in the port of Navegantes, state of Santa Catarina, Brazil, on 20 September. The Brazilian variant of the Gripen E/F will be used for a flight-testing campaign, Saab said on 23 September, according to a report from Flight Global.

“It will be used for the verification of Brazilian specific functionality, such as communication system and weapon integration,” says the company. “The aircraft will also be used as a common test asset for the whole Gripen E/F test program.”

The Gripen E/F test program started in 2017 in Linkoping, Sweden, and is ongoing. The “F” variant of the Gripen is a two-seat aircraft.

“Activities in Brazil will include testing of flight control system, environmental control system as well as tests in the aircraft in tropical climate conditions,” says Saab. “In addition to the testing that is common for the Gripen E program, unique features of the Brazilian aircraft, such as weapons integration as well as the Link BR2 communication system – which provides encrypted data and voice communication between the aircraft – will be tested in Brazil.”

In 2014, Brasilia ordered 36 Gripen E/F fighters, called the F-39E/F by the Brazilian air force. The deal includes in-country production of 15 examples of the aircraft, as well as a technology transfer agreement that will see more than 350 Brazilian engineers and technicians trained on the fighter.

“So far more than 230 engineers have been trained in Sweden and are already back in Brazil, most of them working at the Gripen Design and Development Network at Embraer’s plant in Gaviao Peixoto,” says Saab.

“The Brazilian and Swedish engineers there are involved in development work for the Gripen E/F, in areas such as vehicle systems, aeronautical engineering, airframe design and systems installation, system integration, avionics, human-machine interaction and communications.”

The first F-39E, which just arrived in Brazil, was built in Sweden and has been undergoing flight tests there. Saab says the F-39E program is moving forward as scheduled. The first aircraft is set to enter service with Brazilian air force in 2021.


not even 400 jobs and less than half actually built in Brazil-- wow! buckle up Canada!!
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3090
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post04 Jan 2021, 21:45

XanderCrews wrote:not even 400 jobs and less than half actually built in Brazil-- wow! buckle up Canada!!


LOL! :doh:

Another 'great gem' in the article that you shared is the following:
The first F-39E, which just arrived in Brazil, was built in Sweden and has been undergoing flight tests there. Saab says the F-39E program is moving forward as scheduled. The first aircraft is set to enter service with Brazilian air force in 2021.


So the first (Gripen) aircraft just arrived in Brazil (in 2021) in order to perform several (and apparently very complex) tests during this same year of 2021 and then it will enter in service with the Brazilian Air Force during this same year?! Yeah, good luck with that!
On the other hand and knowing Brazil like I do, they (Brazilians) are even capable of declaring a wingless and/or engine-less aircraft as 'operational' so having a single prototype as an 'operation aircraft' wouldn't surprise me at all. :roll:

I guess that they (Sweden and Brazil) should rename the 'Gripen E/F' to 'Unicorn' or something like that. :wink:
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

go4long

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: 04 Sep 2013, 07:20
  • Location: Calgary

Unread post04 Jan 2021, 22:01

Funny poll on BF4C has people going off the rails. Asks who has seen a Gripen and likes it, versus who hasn't and likes it, and the same questions of who doesn't like it.

The reactions from the Gripen fanboys were incredibly predictable, saying that the poll is unfair to the gripen because it assumes that those who have seen it would automatically not like it. But interestingly (and also predictably), the people that say they've seen it and like it almost all have swedish last names.

Then one of my personal favourites over there, directly after a post saying that F-16.net is not a valid source of information, posts a link to his own article as a source on cost overruns.
Offline

optimist

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1286
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34
  • Location: australia

Unread post04 Jan 2021, 22:05

"In 2014, Brasilia ordered 36 Gripen E/F fighters"
So 7 years later a test plane arrives, When will they get a squadron to go IOC?
Aussie fanboy
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6963
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post05 Jan 2021, 02:53

go4long wrote:
Then one of my personal favourites over there, directly after a post saying that F-16.net is not a valid source of information, posts a link to his own article as a source on cost overruns.


who??
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6963
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post05 Jan 2021, 02:55

Yes, I basically agree with everything you said and yes, you're right about the PR issue above. However, I still feel that if LM started to pay attention to PR much sooner (IMO, I still think that they started late) what happened above and people Bill Sweetman & his minions or other similar wannabes would have been exposed much sooner.
And this could (I believe) even prevented the pathetic current situation around the Canadian procurement.


You don't really start "late" when the PR battle starts before the airplane is even picked, Sweetman was busted back in 2010.

a quick note on Canadian PR:

What hurt the F-35 in Canada was BASICALLY (because theres a lot to it and I'm leaving some out):

1. Political football between the various Canadian parties and classic political opportunism, political failures. (this entire thing really is basically 90 percent politics.)

2. F-35 cost escalation

3. Bureaucratic miscommunication between Canadian agencies (namely the cost estimators vs the auditor general who made a stink of them of not calculating the costs out as far enough as he thought they should)

4. SOLE SOURCING (the inability to compare multiple fighters left the F-35 overanalyzed and its competition not analyzed at all- it wasn't until the silly interim fiasco that we finally got a comparative look at the Super Hornet costs after 7 years of sh!t talking) I could go on about sole sourcing, and might in another post.

5. The horribly timed engine fire

6. Amazingly successful Boeing propaganda (see 4)

7. "PR"


Have you noticed that only Canada seems to be having those uniquely Canadian style procurement issues that only the home of "Cadillac helicopter" has?? Thats probably someone else's fault. why is Norway not having the same "PR" problems that Canada has? or Australia? UK? Japan? South Korea? Poland? Belgium? You can complain about PR all you want, but there is not an actual centralized PR firm responsible for how each government explains their decision to the people. Norway handled it well, Canada did not.

In all my time I can safely say Canada is like an alternate universe of F-35 misinformation that NO other country really has, and its far more severe because even your Prime Minister (Trudeau) has been caught falling for it

a great example would be those "65 million dollar" Super Hornets that never existed but that the Liberals said were real. for YEARS. ever see that in any other country? is any other nation actually do the silly BS we have seen from Canada for a decade? no other country is having these problems.

One of the big mistakes the old Harper government made was that they forbid people in uniform from speaking publicly about the F-35. You would not believe what an effective PR tool it is, to have someone in a military uniform calmly talk and explain something. those uniforms give a sense of authority, officialdom, credibility, experience, and even trust! Almost like they were designed for that. Since Canada put the stops on that (and it got even WORSE with the Trudeau Gag order) it left people like Billy Flynn to carry the weight the RCAF should have been carrying all along. I know a few heads of the RCAF publicly stated for F-35 here and there but they were rarely covered by the media over all the years.

one of the most vocal and rabidly Gripen Fans on BF4C admittedly tried and failed to get into the Swedish armed forces. He couldn't make it to training day 1 basic training, but is somehow smarter than all the experts who actually do this for a living. but there's no one in a Canadian uniform to tell him to shut up the way Air Marshal in Australia did their detractors. one guy in uniform will wipe out 1000 wannabes. Thats how we do it in the states, thats how most people do it that aren't stupid:

Image

Again its interesting that through uniquely Canadian actions Canada finds itself in uniquely Canadian problems.

theres no amount of "PR" that could save Canada from the internal games and self destruction.


PUBLISHED SEPTEMBER 27, 2012

When the Harper government comes calling for advice on replacing the country's venerable CF-18 fighters, the new commander of Canadian Air Force says he'll repeat what his predecessor has said — the F-35 is the best choice.

But Lt.-Gen. Yvan Blondin was also quick to paint himself as a pragmatist.

"In the end, I'm a military guy. I'm going to salute and carry on with orders and the equipment the government judges adequate," said Lt.-Gen. Blondin shortly after taking over from retiring lieutenant-general Andre Deschamps, whose stalwart defence of the troubled stealth-fighter program occasionally landed him in hot water.

Since the auditor general's scathing assessment of the program last spring, almost everyone in the government, from the prime minister on down, has insisted that a new secretariat overseeing the replacement of the older fighter bombers will look at all options as it analyzes the F-35 program.

Lt.-Gen. Deschamps' insistence that the Lockheed-Martin-built, multi-role fighter is the only choice has irked opposition MPs, who've pointed to his testimony before a House of Commons committee as proof that the fix is in for the F-35.

Lt.-Gen. Blondin, a former fighter pilot and 33-year veteran, said his best advice would be to stick with the program.

"I truly believe, given the mandate that we have now, the F-35 is, from all airplanes that are available, is the best airplane that's out there," he said, but then quickly added: "Now, I'm not a man of absolutes."

Lt.-Gen. Blondin's show of deference is a bit of a departure from Lt.-Gen. Deschamps, who was heavily invested in the 2010 stealth-fighter decision. The auditor general accused both National Defence and Public Works of hiding the full cost and not following proper procedures with the multibillion-dollar program.

Defence expert Phil Lagasse at the University of Ottawa said it's disturbing to note that even though it said the secretariat will look at other options, the government doesn't seem to have ordered the air force to do the same.

"It signals the lack of clear guidance from the government about exactly what they want to do," he said. "It signals a recognition that the file is uncertain and (has) become extremely political, and that military advice and cost alone may not be what determines the outcome anymore."
Choose Crews
Offline

go4long

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: 04 Sep 2013, 07:20
  • Location: Calgary

Unread post05 Jan 2021, 03:08

XanderCrews wrote:
go4long wrote:
Then one of my personal favourites over there, directly after a post saying that F-16.net is not a valid source of information, posts a link to his own article as a source on cost overruns.


who??


McColl
PreviousNext

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests