F-35 issues - Page 17 - Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums
 

Go Back   Canadian TV, Computing and Home Theatre Forums > Not the Digital Home > News, Weather, and Sports

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 2012-02-08, 11:52 AM   #241
cr9527
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 63
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gworg View Post
New Plan: NGJ To Go Unmanned

If Canada is relying on the jamming capabilities if the F-35 and the US is moving in a different direction this could be a problem, no.
Canada never operated a dedicated jammer. This is what your source is talking about. F-35 can still bring along jammer pods which are not platform specific should the need arise. Further, the F-35's radar also has the ability to jam enemy equipment, granted at a lesser capability.

In conclusion, the F-35 will be superior to any non-dedicated jamming platform. (Which is what Canada needs)

To those who are still worrying about costs, Italy, an operator of the Eurofighter, has just announced their estimated cost of the F-35 in full production at 80 Million. Which is lower than what the Eurofighter would cost.
cr9527 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 2012-02-12, 11:08 PM   #242
cr9527
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 63
Default

A document from the Swiss fighter evaluation back in 2007/08 detailed the comparisons between F-18C/D from the 1990s block, Gripen, Rafale, and Eurofighter.

Results showed that the Gripen actually performs worse in defensive counter-air than the F-18, while the Rafale surpasses the F-18 by a wide margin, as did the Eurofighter, although at a lesser extent.

This put the Gripen out of the possible competitors one may use against the F-35.
cr9527 is offline  
Old 2012-02-13, 09:43 AM   #243
travisc
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Uxbridge, ON
Posts: 3,600
Default

I guess the Swiss are always right about everything?
travisc is offline  
Old 2012-02-13, 01:23 PM   #244
cr9527
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 63
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by travisc View Post
I guess the Swiss are always right about everything?
I'm sorry, do you have a more reliable source that you would like to share? Or would you just prefer to simply denounce every source that just so happen to disagree with you?

Anyways, the Swiss were holding a competition to replace their aging F-5s, and one of the competitor was the Gripen. The Swiss Air Force will continue to operate the F-18C/D together with Gripen (chosen over the Rafale, and Eurofighter due to lower costs against the Air Force's wishes).

To put this into perspective of this discussion, The Gripen, as well as the other Eurocanards seen by the Swiss Air Force, are within the same generation(sometimes surpassing) and league as the F-18C/D, something older than our upgraded Hornets.

Results of the comparison were, in air defense role, Gripen fared ~25% worse than the 15 year old Hornet block, Rafale 30% better, Eurofighter 10% better.
cr9527 is offline  
Old 2012-02-13, 02:04 PM   #245
travisc
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Uxbridge, ON
Posts: 3,600
Default

Until you post links, your source is no more reliable than any other. It seems to me that you like to cherrypick the facts that agree with your side of the argument and present them as absolute truths.
travisc is offline  
Old 2012-02-13, 05:47 PM   #246
cr9527
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 63
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by travisc View Post
Until you post links, your source is no more reliable than any other. It seems to me that you like to cherrypick the facts that agree with your side of the argument and present them as absolute truths.
Ask and Ye shall receive.

Italian purchase:
http://theaviationist.com/2012/02/08/f35-typhoon/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8DAC5T20120210

Swiss paper:
http://files.newsnetz.ch/upload//1/2/12332.pdf

Also what cherry picking have I done sir?
cr9527 is offline  
Old 2012-02-13, 08:41 PM   #247
travisc
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Uxbridge, ON
Posts: 3,600
Default

It seems like there are strong arguments on both sides of the issue. You completely disregard every argument that disagrees with yours out of hand. Anyway, I'll take a look at those links. Thanks for providing.

Edit: So, looking at the articles, Italy just bought 3 F-35s, but is likely to cut their purchase from 131 to 100 overall. Other partners are looking to delay/decrease orders. Doesn't this mean it increases the potential for the F-35 to cost more than planned?

The Swiss like the Rafale. Fair enough.

Last edited by travisc; 2012-02-13 at 08:51 PM. Reason: stuff
travisc is offline  
Old 2012-02-13, 10:28 PM   #248
cr9527
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 63
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by travisc View Post
It seems like there are strong arguments on both sides of the issue. You completely disregard every argument that disagrees with yours out of hand. Anyway, I'll take a look at those links. Thanks for providing.

Edit: So, looking at the articles, Italy just bought 3 F-35s, but is likely to cut their purchase from 131 to 100 overall. Other partners are looking to delay/decrease orders. Doesn't this mean it increases the potential for the F-35 to cost more than planned?

The Swiss like the Rafale. Fair enough.
Out of hand? I always provide reasoning as to why I consider arguments invalid.

As for your post.

Delays won't increase cost necessarily if we delay our purchase until Full rate production

As for cuts, nothing is concrete as of yet for any of our allies, and at worst, the F-35 fleet globally would decrease around 5%, assuming 150 planes total will be cut. (Right now, at most, partners are thinking about cutting on the order of 20-30. And only a few consider this).

F-35 customers:
US: 2443, no official change planned=====79% est. ~80 Million for A model by full rate production (Source: USAF Budget Data)
UK: Undecided, 138 from old estimate====4.5% no est.
Italy: Reduction of 20-30 from 131======4.2% est. ~80 Million (Source: Given above)
Netherlands: No change, 85 planned=====2.7% est. ~118 Million including initial support and infrastructure, 23 Billion total for 30 year cost
--------Note, if we use Harpers estimate of 9 Billion for intial support and infrastructure and planes, we get 138 Million. If we factor in the 20 year estimate, extend it to 30 years, over 85 planes to match the Netherlands purchase, we get a number EXACTLY (22.91) $23 Billion.
This is a STRONG indicator that Harper gov's estimate was accurate.

Australia: Undecided, 75-100===========2.8% est. 16 Billion+ total (No details available)
Canada: 65========================2.1% est. 9 Billion for initial, 15 Billion for 20 years total
Norway: 56========================1.8% est 8-9 Billion for initial, inc modification, no life time est. (Source from previous posts)
--------Note, if we compare this with Harper gov's estimate, we get 10 Billion for 65 planes, 1 billion more than Harper's estimate, that is with modification to the onboard electronics.
Denmark: undecided
Turkey: 100+=======================3.2% est 16 Billion+ life time total.
Israel: on hold no est, order on hold by both parties.

So... still going to trust PBO's rediculous accusation(how this whole shinanigans started) that 65 F-35 will cost $30 Billion over the life time?
Also notice how small the percentage the partners of F-35 take up the total of the orders. 20-30 F-35 reductions won't put a dent on the overall production.


Again, I don't disregard arguments out of hand like many do here, I respond to them with reason.
cr9527 is offline  
Old 2012-02-21, 02:06 AM   #249
stampeder
OTA Forum Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North Delta, BC (96Av x 116St)
Posts: 23,972
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cr9527
I don't disregard arguments out of hand like many do here, I respond to them with reason.
Correction: you respond to them with lectures based only on what you consider to be "reason" and "factual", while failing to discuss opposing views in any form of friendly, mutually respectful discourse. Savvy, experienced web users see right through your routine. And now you're trying to play the victim... sheesh . Your one-topic single-mindedness is merely boring now. Move on.
stampeder is offline  
Old 2012-02-21, 09:04 AM   #250
travisc
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Uxbridge, ON
Posts: 3,600
Default

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/edito...tealth-fighter

But The Star obviously is a left-leaning communist rag who doesn't understand the issues and is biased against the purchase anyway.
travisc is offline  
Old 2012-02-21, 11:18 AM   #251
stampeder
OTA Forum Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North Delta, BC (96Av x 116St)
Posts: 23,972
Default Recent world press reports on F-35 budgets

Not just the Toronto Star... how about major newspaper editorials and articles across all party lines and countries (featuring Lockheed Martin's official announcements too):

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&gl...Ioz9iQKg4OSlAQ

Things are going way out of control very fast with the entire F-35 budget process. The DND wants a minimum of 65 new jets, but the government is evading the issue. They don't have a "Plan B" either. We could save them a lot of trouble and effort if they'd just follow our advice to scrap the deal.
stampeder is offline  
Old 2012-02-22, 01:19 AM   #252
nfitz
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Toronto - Rogers 8300HD PVR
Posts: 3,376
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by travisc View Post
But The Star obviously is a left-leaning communist rag who doesn't understand the issues and is biased against the purchase anyway.
The Star left-leaning? That's why they have spent so much time trashing the NDP ... and were particularly vicious about David Miller.

Or is Joe Clark your idea of a leftist ...
nfitz is offline  
Old 2012-02-22, 02:26 AM   #253
cr9527
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 63
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stampeder View Post
Correction: you respond to them with lectures based only on what you consider to be "reason" and "factual"
How have they not been rational or factual? None of you, including yourself have even bothered to raise any counter arguments and instead go straight to attacking me.

(e.g. I provided recent cost estimates of the F-35 from other countries with sources in the above post, and you like you did so many times before ignored it outright and focused entirely on the statement about me ignoring others. How Ironic)


Quote:
while failing to discuss opposing views in any form of friendly, mutually respectful discourse.
How have I been unfriendly? Disrespectful? Have I made any personal attacks? Have I been using verbally abusing language?

Quote:
Your one-topic single-mindedness is merely boring now. Move on.
I'm sorry for caring about a subject more than just to keep myself from getting bored.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
But The Star obviously is a left-leaning communist rag who doesn't understand the issues and is biased against the purchase anyway.
Toronto Star IS a Left-leaning news agency. No one in the right mind would challenge this.

As for responding to the claim by Toronto Star that the F-35 costs 120 million now, and 90 million in the future by pentagon's estimates.

I refer you to the USAF Budget Data from 2013.

While yes it is true, recurring cost for each F-35 is estimated to be 95 Million in 2016.

As mentioned before though, one needs to account for both the recurring and non-recurring cost to get the accurate picture when it comes to procurement.

Harper's 9 Billion comes from here

Procurement 101:


Source

Harper's estimate for 9 Billion = Weapon Systems Cost + Spares + other costs related to basing and salaries.

USAF budget data states Total Weapon Systems cost = 6.043044 Billion for 48 planes, or extrapolated to 8.183 Billion for 65.

Data for initial Spares = 274.415 Million for 48 planes, or 371.6 Million for 65.

Combine this with Harper's estimates for other basing/salary estimates, we have:
8.555 Billion + 0.9 Billion = 9.455 Billion

Conclusion:

Based ENTIRELY on FY2016 estimate, the procurement cost of 65 F-35 will be 455 Million over the 9 Billion estimate.

However, since we aren't buying all 65 fighters in 2016, one would expect, should the estimate be accurate, to be lower than 9.455 Billion, since based on USAF budget data, FY2017 ~3% cheaper than 2016.

Rough estimate maybe around 9.2 - 9.0 Billion.

Yes, it is more than Harper's estimate, but only slightly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stampeder View Post
Not just the Toronto Star... how about major newspaper editorials and articles across all party lines and countries (featuring Lockheed Martin's official announcements too):

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&gl...Ioz9iQKg4OSlAQ
[/QUOTE]

And they state nothing concrete, no factual numbers, with very vague wording.


Quote:
Things are going way out of control very fast with the entire F-35 budget process. The DND wants a minimum of 65 new jets, but the government is evading the issue. They don't have a "Plan B" either. We could save them a lot of trouble and effort if they'd just follow our advice to scrap the deal.
How are things going out of control with the budget process? A delay of purchase?

There is no plan B because there are no contenders that meet the DND's requirements.
Before you say it, here are the requirements.
http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/pri/2/p.../or-bo-eng.asp
cr9527 is offline  
Old 2012-02-22, 02:39 AM   #254
nfitz
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Toronto - Rogers 8300HD PVR
Posts: 3,376
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cr9527 View Post
How have I been unfriendly? Disrespectful?
If you read your own posts, it's pretty easy to find. Here's an example from further down:

Quote:
Originally Posted by cr9527 View Post
Toronto Star is a Left-leaning news agency. No one in the right mind would challenge this.
There - you've just insulted those who don't believe that the Star is left-leaning. Given they tend to support the Liberals more often than not, that would make them centrist. Their brutal attacks on so many NDP politicians seems to show they aren't particularly left, attacking left and right. However you've implied anyone who disagrees with your (wrong) assessment is not of right mind.

You've been very dismissive and disrespectful of those who challenge your fantasies of flight.

Best thing we could do is simply eliminate fighter planes from our Air Force. Dreadful waste of money. Expensive toys - that's all - no one in the right mind would challenge this.
nfitz is offline  
Old 2012-02-22, 02:43 AM   #255
cr9527
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 63
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nfitz View Post
The Star left-leaning? That's why they have spent so much time trashing the NDP ... and were particularly vicious about David Miller.

Or is Joe Clark your idea of a leftist ...
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/edito...dorses-the-ndp

Quote:
Fortunately, this time there is a real choice. Voters who believe Canada should aspire to something greater than the crabbed, narrow vision offered by the Harper Conservatives should look to Jack Layton and the New Democrats on Monday.
huh?
cr9527 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:56 PM.

Search Digital Home

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.