Italy scales back its F-35 order

Italy scales back its F-35 order

Italy’s defense ministry has decided to buy 40 fewer F-35s, according to reports Wednesday, part of overall defense spending reductions that were probably inevitable given Europe’s economic nightmare. Italy will also cut some 30,000 troops and 10,000 defense civilians, according to Bloomberg.

The mind begins to race ahead: The Italians are scaling back their buy. The Brits are delaying another firm commitment. The Aussies are grumbling, grumbling grumbling. The F-35’s own hometown Pentagon is pushing 179 airplanes outside the future years defense plan. Can this Fellowship hold? Quantity is the key to maintaining any semblance of “affordability” for these jets — which already cost $23,557 per hour to fly, according to GAO — and each partner that scales back threatens the unit cost that much more.

If nothing else changes, the answer is probably yes, the Fellowship can hold. If Congress saves the Pentagon from “sequestration” and DoD can carry on unmolested for the next few years, it’s hard to imagine it imposing another big delay in the program — so long as it improves. If Europe avoids an economic apocalypse in which, say, Greece leaves the Euro zone or more pauper nations require costly bailouts, the Continent’s members of Club F-35 probably also can keep their overall commitments to the jet.


But our “interesting times” so far in the 21st Century never seem to repay optimism. There’s as much reason to expect Congress would come up with some kind of super-double-sequestration as a way to prod itself to do away with regular sequestration, and then fail to avoid both of them and zero out the entire budget. And another round of Euro-dithering amidst the next country’s debt crisis could break up the euro zone, taking Europe out of the defense game for 20 years. The fate of the F-35 program could be the least of our worries.

One thing Italy’s decision might definitely do in the near-term is put additional pressure on the F-35B. Italy is the only other customer for the B besides the U.S. Marine Corps, and although Secretary Panetta just gave the airplane his blessing, it’s viewed as the weakest pup of this litter. The Italian navy, like the U.S. Marine Corps, is absolutely depending on the B to keep its ability to fly fast jets at sea.  When one, or both, decides to give up that aspiration, that’s how we’ll know things have gotten really, really serious.

Join the Conversation

Ouch.

Fiscal reality has a way of trimminng back “costs are no object” type programs which is what F-35 has become. See B-2, F-22, Sea Wolf etc.

The F-35 is going to have to now sell under the umbrella of more realistic sales numbers, reduced short term buys by the US, much lower confidence in the current product based on DoD reviews and the need to limit concurrency liability (which had always been ignored previously).

The Death Spiral has started, any more bad news and it could go into free fall.

BTW The upcoming meeting between Canada and Australia could be that bad news. Both countries are re-thinking (mabey just thinking?) they’re ealy commitments.

Sanity…Slipping…Must…Take…Meds.…

or no good testing news this year, and the F-15SE may look palatable even to some F-35 converts.
F-15SE IOC 2015, F-35 IOC ?2020

An F-35 motivational poster I saw recently: http://​i40​.tinypic​.com/​b​i​1​d​h​y​.​jpg

Looks like a pregnant turkey ha ha

You are correct, however the neocon war lobby that frequents armchair general sites such as this one will give you many a thumbs down. After all “we must make the world safe for democracy!” whatever the hell that means any longer.……

Iran and Syria are in the crosshairs, and it seems the only ones wanting another war are the ones that won’t be fighting in it. And people think the defense budget is in danger now? Just wait another year and all the new pretty weapons we have been promised will soon become the vaporware of history’s next dead empire.

Too bad that’s an X-32, which nobody is paying for…

He is a troll. Engage at your own peril! :-)

Thank you Allen. Someone has to try to pop their paradigm! It’s about our only hope, but probably a forgone conclusion that someone promised them a “special slot in the bunker” so no waves stirring here. Damn shame — no fighting men/women left — when the real enemy is so damn obvious.

instead of building killer planes, we have the option of channeling our creative resources toward space exploration–developing new frontiers and scouting uncharted territories!

Well Canada seems quite blindly entered into the f-35 up to the last dollar. According to boeing, they did not even dared to request to specs about the super hornet radar capability (we currently have cf-18 hornet).

Good news on this side, they are apparently considering to buy drones, which make sense as we got very wide land to cover. Those sub-10M$ are a rational bought. Now lets see what they are going to decide. I seriously hope that they are going to consider an alternative.

There is an interesting comment at ‘http://​www​.dodbuzz​.com/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​0​9​/​a​u​s​s​i​e​s​-​m​o​d​e​s​t​-​p​r​o​p​o​s​a​l​-​s​e​l​l​-​u​s​-​f​-​2​2​s​-​m​a​t​e​/​&​a​m​p​;​#​039;
” Guest · 7 hours ago

Hello Mars Patrol

The F-15AU and F-22AU concepts will certainly provide a potent combination of flexibility and capability to suit Australia’s “long range” requirements as a perfect replacement of the 71 F/A-18A/B Hornet fleet.

I was thinking of another alternative such as developing a new single seat F-15, based on the latest advancements in F-15E as an export variant for new and existing customers to purchase the fighter for predictable costs.

You can email to Brad Jones Director, F-15 US Air Force Development Programs.

Roger Besancenez Boeing Vice President, F-15 Program or

Richard ‘Rick’ Banholzer, Boeing’s Director of Business Development for Air Force Fighters and Weapons about the idea of developing a new proposed single-seat F-15. Boeing can suggest the export designation of the Eagle for e.g. the F-15F or any idea’s they can come up with.”

Competition is good for the economy. ;-)

I think Italy would come to it’s sense if they realize that they should have a back up plan in case the F-35 becomes a huge money pit. They could buy updated harriers for their navy and even look at getting more eurofighters.

With Australia that makes two allies that have shown they are losing faith in the F-35. I am betting that the UK or Canada will be next. My wager is $10, meaning if I’m wrong I’ll pay $10 to myself. Anyone else want to participate in this?

Your right of course. I don’t know what came over me.

You think it was built on contractor money LOL

I think theF-18 E/F Super hornet and the F-15SE, F-15K or F-15SG maybe the back up plan that some countries may have in mind. I even heard that Lockmart is coming up with an open architecture F-16 for it’s customers. That is something countries maybe looking at, if the F-35 becomes a major money pit for them.

The inevitable is coming… bring back a modernized version of the F-20…

If it had been, all of those responsible would have been fired long ago. As it is, they were all promoted and congratulated for doing a good job. After all, they earned millions for Boeing, just missing the chance LM had to make billions in profit. What the hell, though, when this one gets cancelled without building a single operational fighter, there will always be another program like it to bid on. And they’ll all get paid $1.10 for every dollar they spend building that pack of lies (commonly known as a proposal) for the next one. But as the industry schills all tell us, they are motivated only by the need to do good, never by profit because everyone knows capitalism doesn’t work.

Savings on the DoD front doesn’t mean NASA gets more. Besides… the government has already began to take a hatchet to space exploration as well;
http://​www​.examiner​.com/​a​v​i​a​t​i​o​n​-​a​n​d​-​a​e​r​o​s​p​a​c​e​-in…

The sign to watch for is a formal request for information from the UK to Boeing or Dassault. If/when that happens, all bets are off.

I don’t see anyone buying Tiger Sharks; that ship has sailed. I see them buying deeply discounted Eurofighters or F-16s first. Don’t know what would take the B’s place as an STOVL variant.

Better still, bring back the F-19.

http://​www​.infomercantile​.com/​-​/​N​o​r​t​h​r​o​p​-​L​o​r​a​l​_F-…

And it’ll be sitting right next to the X-32 and X-35 right outside gate 1…

A reduce of 40 units is in compare with the UK reductions very moderate and not a real drama. Italy is really near to a state bankrupt and under this condition I had expected a far more dramatic cut those 40 Units.

Well if he’s going to pitch a fit about the F-35, he could at least make sure it’s a picture of an actual F-35 and not a static display of a plane that doesn’t even fly.

Great idea! Someone call Monogram and have them restart their production line. IIRC, they were only about $8 apiece when I bought mine in the mid-80s. We could have a fleet of these assembled for less than the price of muffins at a JCS meeting.

/s

LOL! Well played Sir.

I know this is but the beginning Canada or Australia is next. The delays due to the B model is killing the whole program. And many NATO nations are losing patience with the wait. Time to put the F-15SE and F-22 onto export market.

Worth pointing out too, that Italy’s ‘current’ revision in orders to the downside is in itself predicated on F-35 Procurement unit prices still being as cheap as are still being ‘estimated’ for late LRIP and early FRP years.

Once the reality hits that FY14 and FY15 and FY16 unit weapon system costs will not be as cheap as originally and currently still assumed, watch for further Italian reductions in orders. At most, I’d estimate Italy to be looking at a maximum of 35, maybe 40 F-35A units in the end. Thus, the hard cold fact is that F-35 unit prices are going to come in higher than expected, especially under any eventual FRP production metrics, as revised as those will be.

And wth the IMF and EU supervising Italy’s budgets going forward under the terms of debt financing support, a blown-out fighter jet won’t be looking too good on the sheets.

Why not just order a couple more squadrons of upgradeable EF Typhoon tranche III+ as part of a leaner force structure and consolidate logistics and training? That’s Europe’s main joint fighter anyways, non?

Italy got some economical interest from the f-35 so it may be more delicate for them to go away from it compared to Australia or Canada. I think that they will have the infrastructures for major repair, infrastructure that Israel complained to not have (not sure where it is right now).

Canada will probably never go for the eurofighter, even if they could negociate the assembling and manufacturing of parts within Canada, we will never have the guts for doing it.

What I see right now is that Italy seems to do like Canada. They have a budget of X M$ and are going to buy <X/price_per_unit> planes. Only difference, Italy doesn’t claim that each plane will cost ~69$M each…

All the allied air-forces are facing decimation if they buy the F-35, they will all bail in the end rather then see their air-forces destroyed by Lockheed’s greed and incompetence.

Canada is just a blind follower. The economics benefits are overblown to the point where some american officials correct us, and their number are much lower. We seems to have no problem to buy a black box that need to go to usa for any upgrade, yet we had to upgrade our cf-18 in catastrophe when they realized that our system were too old to communicate with the rest of the otan, and that was a 2.6Billion upgrade.

Britain on the other side, would probably be the next. Rumors are that they will refuse to buy any plane if the don’t have access to the source code. So I would say either Australia or UK, more likely to be the australia as they would be the most affected. UK already got the eurofighter, they might only buy the C model, or order some rafale. That would make a very bad weather in the sky. :)

Japan could loose patience as well, who know.

And I wonder if the eurfighter will have thrust vectoring before the f-35 finally comes out.

This would be their answer to the eurofighter I guess.

Do you ever wonder if that’s where the F-23 got the IR suppression tunnels?

I’m betting that the Eurofighter maybe their fallback but for the Italian Navy, they may have to see if they can get rebuilt Harriers as their fallback.

Meds fine — you? YOU/WE have an enemy domestic/national security issue — just “youtube” Greenspan on the relationship betweeen the Fed Reserve and the Law of the Land — you’ll be eating more than your meds.

Blimey, I’d prefer a temporary military dictatorship versus the sell-out chaps in the DC bubble at this point. Has anyone seen McCrystal lately?

I have no idea about Italy specific need, but for their carrier they could look at the rafale or any other american navalized plane available. UK could do the same too, although I would suspect them to go american.

How many used American Carriers that we have we can sell to the brits, Italians and even the Brazilians

You omitted that the Israleis have ordered 19 and Japanese some 40 all starting 2016 — so there are two side to this coin!
And BTW Australia is NOT grumbling — only yhe APA folks who do not have access to the classified spec.!

Ausies were dowsed (‘cept for the pink diamonds) by Rhodes a long way back, ask Klinkton and his buds from bohemian grove.

to pay the banksters off? I would personally like to buy a greek isle — can they austerity that? Bet IMF/EUC is in the wings. Calling Elvis, is Hillary home>? ha ha

Ha Ha but good :-)

Still — take a proven, capable 4 Gen fighter and update it and keep it AFFORDABLE & on schedule…

Japan would do so much better to upgraded all F-15s not just a few dozen and just copy the F-22 like they unofficially copied the F-16 for the J-2. Japan could make there own F-22 w/o US politics getting in the way. I bet South Korea will do just as I said and do both for there fighter competitions.

I used to prop up the French Rafale on these pages, just to ruffle some feathers of self important “experts” on this site. I just thought it was a beautiful aircraft. Now that the India domino has fallen, and Dassault is calling back 1700 emplyees, the UAE, Kuwait and Brazil may also fall soon. Suddenly the Rafale has 270 units on order and possiblely more to come. As F-35 unit price starts to soar, the Rafales’ is falling weekly. Sarkozy has reached out to many component suppliers in the UK recently. RAF and RN pilots are queing up for their Rafale M training on CDG. 6 Rafale will spend the whole Spring and Summer in Cold Lake, Canada. Cats and arresting wires on the new QE2 CVA, while Argentina sabre rattles over the Falklands. Maybe the beautiful Ugly Duckly, Rafale, may turn into a swan after all.
As for Italy, The Cavour cannot use conventional CATOBAR aircraft, so I dont know. But they do have a very successful record of cooperation with Yak. Maybe time to dust of those old Yak-141 plans and fill them up with this eras best off the self components.

Reading Heratz Daily you’ll find that even with their limited access, the Israelis are intent on gutting all they can out of their F-35s and install Israeli electronics. Remember signing a memorandum of understanding or even a formal contract means nothing in these economic times.

Interesting story on Defense News that Lockheed has the F-16V on display at the show. Me thinks governments aren’t the only ones looking to hedge their bets in regards to the F35.

Singapore air show that is.

Seems to be “just another” Block 60 F-16 sub-variant. Not much different from the E/F model F-16s that have been offered to India and other countries. I wouldn’t mind a modern development of the F-16XL or F-16X “Falcon 2000″ proposal, but most of Lockheed’s effort is going into the F-35 program.

I thought pretty much the same. A little early to say yet, nothing for certain… but sticking data links compatible with “5 gen” aircraft. Hmmm. Who would that be for? Why, Air Forces that can’t afford the F-35, of course. Wait a minute…

Maybe a bit early!? But is seems the F35 program should be looked over again as for the production numbers.
The US pushed aircraft out of the fiscal scope (is buying less)
Italy will be buying less
The UK will be buying less (and dropped one variant)
The Dutch said nothing yet, but with their frozen budget they can afford 45–50 aircraft instead of the intended 85.
Not looking to good.

And what other 5th generation aircraft are on the market, in development, and can fill the roles planned by the three F-35 variants? It’s a bitch but it’s better to work through it than expect Congress to allow two or three new replacement fighter programs.

This is what happens when one company, builds two front line fighters at the same time. I am not saying the Boeing version was a winner, but there are not enough good engineers in one company to build two (really 4) different jets at the same time (F-22, F-35 A, B, & C). There are other companies other than Lockheed.……DoD.

I’ll put an even finer point on your observation. This is what happens when you go sole source which is essentially what the gov’t did with the latest fighters. X-23 and X-32 may not have been the winners, but i think a split buy would’ve better protected the taxpayers’ funds.

IMO…We are not selling the F22 to anyone. It’s not wise to sell your top of the line, unmatched fighter. The F35 is a poor mans F22 which is why it is being exported. It’s starting to look like an overpriced dog to me. The Japs cannot make an F22 nor can the Russians or French. If they could they would. The radar absorbing tech of the F22 is beyond them right now. BTW it does not reflect radar at odd angles like the mothballed F117. It absorbs it like a sponge.

F-35 the shi t you need to work through — William C.

F-35 the plane that will destroy your airfroce but you must buy.

F-35 — Why do you need an anti shipping missile when you cant land on a carrier anyways ?

F-35 — the latest in subsonic cruise

No matter how you measure it — cost per pound, cost per mile, cost per failure, cost per Congressman the F-35 is Lockheed’s best earner.

And my favorite — F-35 the only aircraft that ever existed.

This program has become so outrageously expensive that it probably needs to die. The B version is looking to cost over $300M a COPY and that simply isn’t realistic for the USMC or the Italian Navy. Not to mention it hasn’t come anywhere near the level of capability promised. This may be one airplane too far.

How is 1995 treating you, things have moved on from there over here.

The only thing the unmatched (For purchase and operating costs)F-22 absorbs like a sponge is money.

I have no doubt that some other countries will trim their orders, but I don’t think that proves they have lost faith in the program. I don’t think the fact that Italy, a country facing significant economic challenges, cutting their buy proves they have lost faith.

Long time no see Oblat. How is the F-35 going to destroy our air force? It seems western governments can destroy their own militaries quite well without buying any new aircraft.

The F-35 will be able to carry anti-shipping missiles and weapons and the tailhook on the F-35C will be corrected. These are hardly impossible barriers.

The F-35 can go supersonic, but are you under the impression that fighters spend most of their flight time at supersonic speeds?

I don’t know… given the horrible state Italy is in, it’s amazing they are only scaling back the purchase by 40 units. They must really want this plane.

I don’t think it’s the best design (it only has one engine). I also think it’s a great example of foolishly trying to make something that handles everything, instead of specialized planes… it saves money on paper, but it never really works and it’s tactically foolish compared to diverse tools.

No, there is no alternative to defense spending.

There is certainly plenty of room to discuss spending the money more wisely, but we have to have killer planes. It’s just a fact of life. Russia is still pretty belligerent. China is thirsty for expansion. Iran is building weapons they totally intend to use.

These planes actually prevent expensive war. Not having some kind of defense provokes conflict rather than saving money.

Nicky, those harriers are not cheap to maintain. I’m not sure about Eurofighters.

That’s one reason a lot of legacy aircraft are being replaced. They are money pits that will have to be replaced anyway. Think of it as the old Chevy you keep replacing major components on. Does it save you money to keep doing that until you buy the new Honda? Or would it save money to bite the bullet and just get the Honda now?

The big exception is the F-16, which should be the airpower backbone of any fiscally sane country that doesn’t have aircraft carriers.

No surprise, considering they are fiscally screwed also. I won’t be surprised if more order reductions aren’t going to occur. There are a lot of countries in the same financial boat.

I guess the President could authorize the sale of some to the Chinese. They have an aircraft carrier, but no planes for it.

You know what you call China’s aircraft carrier with no planes? A barge.

Nonsense testosterone treatment has been around decades. There is no excuse for taking a scared little girl attitude to foreign policy.

These were just arguments for the economics side of the program.
There is no alternative yet on the market if you want a 5th generation aircraft. And I am beginning to wonder if the Europeans really want a 5th gen. A good 4.5 gen. will do nicely (for the time being).

I’m afraid the JSF will put itself out of business because of the costs, that’s the main threat for this thing.

It would be cheaper to simply start again and design another aircraft then continue to try to rework an increasing number of broken F-35s.

Lockheed need not bother to submit a bid since the F-22 and F-35 show they cant build aircraft anymore.

And itfunk/oblat shows his true colors of wanting to gut our military again.

In foreign policy matters talking tough doesn’t matter if you don’t have the strength to back up your words.

>Long time no see Oblat. How is the F-35 going to destroy our air force?
>It seems western governments can destroy their own militaries quite well without buying any new aircraft.

This is purely fallacious. With all respect how irrelevant it is to say that buying planes that are likely to cost too much, for almost everything including acquisition, maintenance and subsequent upgrade won’t matter at the end of the day, simply because there are (many) other ways to make a bad decision?

>.….. and the tailhook on the F-35C will be corrected. These are hardly impossible barriers.

We would need to agree first to a definition of the word “impossible”. Designing something on paper that CAN’T be physically manufactured is very possible, and the fact that you don’t see it doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist. Then one might argue that “can’t” only mean too expensive, because for engineering there is nothing “impossible”. I am sorry to tell you but ‘sky is the limit’ may give the illusion to be true with those astounding defense budget but at the end of the day, the money available is the limit, the manpower available is the limit, the hardware is the limit; the resources are the limits. And with all those university making ‘ready-to-go’ program for the masses, the number may be smaller than you think. With all the other big project going around (i.e. space sovereignity, UAV) the best talents may be in the good company, but not available for the project.

There is no excuse for bad decision, wherever it came from.

ROFL
(I could add many more but the discussion is going to derail)
We need to find a good surname for this plane. I think we already have ‘Turkey’ but this is too X-32 IMHO.

I got two more suggestion.
1. F-35A .. C: decepticon
after all the budget is unreal and there is the word deception in it ;-)

2.
F-35A: (not sure y et, perhaps the same as F-35C)
F-35B: Dragonfly
(only the backward feature seems to be missing http://​t3​.gstatic​.com/​i​m​a​g​e​s​?​q​=​t​b​n​:​A​N​d​9​G​c​T​o​9​d​7​NsF…
F-35C: Collibris
(http://​strikefighterconsultinginc​.com/​w​p​-​c​o​n​t​e​n​t​/​u​p​l​o​a​d​s​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​l​o​c​k​h​e​e​d​-​m​a​r​t​i​n​-​f​-​3​5​-​l​i​g​h​t​n​i​n​g​-​w​a​l​l​p​a​p​e​r​s​_​1​7​3​6​1​_​1​0​2​4​x​7​6​8​.​jpg)
Note that the two last name have been chosen to represent the flightweight feature and the robustness that came with it. Expect some f-35 swatter.

The eurofighter is not that cheap, I think the price is at around 90M$ a piece; the fact that the eurofighter is a plus-value on so many vector versus a f-35 show at which point the program have derailled. If the american can’t provide any plane cheaper than that, there will have a huge problem.

If a country can’t afford a f-16 or f-18 I think the only rational option remaining is the Grippens and perhaps the Rafale, to some extends.

When USA starting JSF ptoject, their secret objective was the control of all NATO members and the end of european aircraft builders.
Today, you see these european country in big difficult, all others country who go up, is going to take the rafale.
You can be largely sure than india, brasil, UAE, kuwait, qatar, switzerland go buy the rafale.And when these country have signed the deal, many others can follow.
JSF don’t give the air power to the USA, that’s exactly inversed, in profit of the french firm

Australia isn’t doing too terribly and they scaled their order back anyways. There is a huge debate in Canada about buying F/A-18E/Fs instead of F-35s as well.

Also, the people that gave me +1, this means you have to pay me $10 if I’m wrong. See how this works. ;)

Please stop pretending to be English. Dick Van Dyke’s English accent in Mary Poppins was more believable than yours, “guv’ner”…

F-35 — because you wanted to destroy your air force anyways right ?

F-35 — now un-powered bombs are missiles too !

F-35 — failure it’s what we do.

F-35 — the first fighter optimised for the flight regime of civilian airliners

Willian like many defense contractors thinks that America exists to service him. It’s the opposite of patriotism.

And your cynical attitude is patriotic? Pot, meet kettle.…

Ok, since the rigorous reply that was intended to William have been deleted –did the person who decided to delete it dared to read it in full?- and not the foolish one lets add a few more.

The F-35: More than 320 tons of Ritalin.

The F-35: We make it lightweight to take more payload but we forgot that we have to hook it on the frame.

The F-35: We bought the design tools from Embraer.

The F-35C: We stole the arrestor hook from starcraft.

I am not aware of any huge debate about buying f-18 right now. We are in the dark. No joke, there is the same exact news that is passing again and again for two-three day, word for word. (just the same article published among many journals)
http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​16/…
’.…a high-level defence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

“We have no back-up plan. We have a reserve and flexibility in the life extensions we’ve done structurally to our F-18s and in weapons systems,” said the source, referring to the $1.8-billion modernization that’s took place over the last decade.

The upgrades mean the current fighter-bombers can “easily” stay in the air to 2020 and beyond.

The Royal Canadian Air Force isn’t expected to take delivery of its first F-35 from U.S. defence giant Lockheed Martin until 2016, with the bulk of the planned 65 planes arriving around 2020.

“The (CF-18) will still be effective, but you’ll have slightly lower numbers as we get to maximum fatigue life on air frames,” said the source in a recent background interview.’

For these rumors about buying some drone, they say ‘no, we are not going to replace plane by UAV’ which means absolutely nothing. Then when deputy are asking question like how much, how many, there are no answer. The only clue that we got recently was a ‘stay tuned’.

There were an interview with the retired lieutenant-general Angus Watt. (Apr 2011) http://​www​.theglobeandmail​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​o​tta…

Now the speech from Julian Fantino. http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​14/…

Since the 65 planes have been designed as the absolute minimum and their budget is said to be 9Billions (or 16Billions with maintenance cost I think), it’s just impossible that they are going to buy the f-35. What I think is that they will play their blind follower until the end, because they don’t want to have the blame to have killed the f-35.

What should be a confidence bluff from Canada seems more like a butched decision process on their part, altogether with a 5th generation fighter pipe-dream.

The first link to the article is not the article repeating the same story again and agian, that’s this one. http://​www​.canada​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​T​a​n​d​t​+​F​a​n​t​i​n​o​+​c​a​u​g​h​t+c…

“Now that the wheels are truly coming off, with rising costs pushing the Royal Canadian Air Force’s minimum 65-plane requirement beyond reach, Fantino has been reduced to wanly repeating talking points that no one, perhaps not even him, believes.

Wednesday in the House, for the first time, the minister appeared to concede that his mantra will soon undergo a revision. “Stay tuned,” he said after interim leader Bob Rae asked a series of pointed, probing questions about how many F-35s the government now thinks it can buy, within its stated $9-billion budget. Thursday, the opposition pressed the attack: “How many, how much, and when?“
.….….
Here’s why the numbers matter. Sixty-five planes based in Cold Lake, Alta., and Bagotville, Que., according to Defence sources, is the minimum required to fulfil the primary mission of the Royal Canadian Air Force, which is to provide 24-hour air cover over four Canadian cities in the event of a “9/11″ event.”

Note that I am not this Michael Den Tandt.

I am not aware of any huge debate about buying f-18 right now. We are in the dark. No joke, there is the same exact news that is passing again and again for two-three day, word for word. (just the same article published among many journals) Link is on the next post.
http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​16/…
’.…a high-level defence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

“We have no back-up plan. We have a reserve and flexibility in the life extensions we’ve done structurally to our F-18s and in weapons systems,” said the source, referring to the $1.8-billion modernization that’s took place over the last decade.

The upgrades mean the current fighter-bombers can “easily” stay in the air to 2020 and beyond.

The Royal Canadian Air Force isn’t expected to take delivery of its first F-35 from U.S. defence giant Lockheed Martin until 2016, with the bulk of the planned 65 planes arriving around 2020.

“The (CF-18) will still be effective, but you’ll have slightly lower numbers as we get to maximum fatigue life on air frames,” said the source in a recent background interview.’

For these rumors about buying some drone, they say ‘no, we are not going to replace plane by UAV’ which means absolutely nothing. Then when deputy are asking question like how much, how many, there are no answer. The only clue that we got recently was a ‘stay tuned’.

There were an interview with the retired lieutenant-general Angus Watt. (Apr 2011) http://​www​.theglobeandmail​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​o​tta…

Now the speech from Julian Fantino. http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​14/…

Since the 65 planes have been designed as the absolute minimum and their budget is said to be 9Billions (or 16Billions with maintenance cost I think), it’s just impossible that they are going to buy the f-35. What I think is that they will play their blind follower until the end, because they don’t want to have the blame to have killed the f-35.

What should be a confidence bluff from Canada seems more like a butched decision process on their part, altogether with a 5th generation fighter pipe-dream.

The same story again and again, from http://​www​.canada​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​T​a​n​d​t​+​F​a​n​t​i​n​o​+​c​a​u​g​h​t+c…

“Now that the wheels are truly coming off, with rising costs pushing the Royal Canadian Air Force’s minimum 65-plane requirement beyond reach, Fantino has been reduced to wanly repeating talking points that no one, perhaps not even him, believes.

Wednesday in the House, for the first time, the minister appeared to concede that his mantra will soon undergo a revision. “Stay tuned,” he said after interim leader Bob Rae asked a series of pointed, probing questions about how many F-35s the government now thinks it can buy, within its stated $9-billion budget. Thursday, the opposition pressed the attack: “How many, how much, and when?“
.…..
Here’s why the numbers matter. Sixty-five planes based in Cold Lake, Alta., and Bagotville, Que., according to Defence sources, is the minimum required to fulfil the primary mission of the Royal Canadian Air Force, which is to provide 24-hour air cover over four Canadian cities in the event of a “9/11″ event.”

Please note that I am not this Michael Den Tandt.

Ok, seems to have some problem posting this, trying to split it up at less than 2000 caracters.
I am not aware of any huge debate about buying f-18 right now. We are in the dark. No joke, there is the same exact news that is passing again and again for two-three day, word for word. (just the same article published among many journals) Link is on the next post.
http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​16/…
’.…a high-level defence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

“We have no back-up plan. We have a reserve and flexibility in the life extensions we’ve done structurally to our F-18s and in weapons systems,” said the source, referring to the $1.8-billion modernization that’s took place over the last decade.

The upgrades mean the current fighter-bombers can “easily” stay in the air to 2020 and beyond.

The Royal Canadian Air Force isn’t expected to take delivery of its first F-35 from U.S. defence giant Lockheed Martin until 2016, with the bulk of the planned 65 planes arriving around 2020.

“The (CF-18) will still be effective, but you’ll have slightly lower numbers as we get to maximum fatigue life on air frames,” said the source in a recent background interview.’

For these rumors about buying some drone, they say ‘no, we are not going to replace plane by UAV’ which means absolutely nothing. Then when deputy are asking question like how much, how many, there are no answer. The only clue that we got recently was a ‘stay tuned’.

There were an interview with the retired lieutenant-general Angus Watt. (Apr 2011) http://​www​.theglobeandmail​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​o​tta…

Now the speech from Julian Fantino. http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​14/…

Since the 65 planes have been designed as the absolute minimum and their budget is said to be 9Billions (or 16Billions with maintenance cost I think), it’s just impossible that they are going to buy the f-35. What I think is that they will play their blind follower until the end, because they don’t want to have the blame to have killed the f-35.

What should be a confidence bluff from Canada seems more like a butched decision process on their part, altogether with a 5th generation fighter pipe-dream.

There were an interview with the retired lieutenant-general Angus Watt. (Apr 2011) http://​www​.theglobeandmail​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​o​tta…

Now the speech from Julian Fantino. http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​14/…

Since the 65 planes have been designed as the absolute minimum and their budget is said to be 9Billions (or 16Billions with maintenance cost I think), it’s just impossible that they are going to buy the f-35. What I think is that they will play their blind follower until the end, because they don’t want to have the blame to have killed the f-35.

What should be a confidence bluff from Canada seems more like a butched decision process on their part, altogether with a 5th generation fighter pipe-dream.

I am not aware of any huge debate about buying f-18 right now. We are in the dark. No joke, there is the same exact news that is passing again and again for two-three day, word for word. (just the same article published among many journals) Link is on the next post.
http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​16/…
’.…a high-level defence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

“We have no back-up plan. We have a reserve and flexibility in the life extensions we’ve done structurally to our F-18s and in weapons systems,” said the source, referring to the $1.8-billion modernization that’s took place over the last decade.

The upgrades mean the current fighter-bombers can “easily” stay in the air to 2020 and beyond.

The Royal Canadian Air Force isn’t expected to take delivery of its first F-35 from U.S. defence giant Lockheed Martin until 2016, with the bulk of the planned 65 planes arriving around 2020.

“The (CF-18) will still be effective, but you’ll have slightly lower numbers as we get to maximum fatigue life on air frames,” said the source in a recent background interview.’

For these rumors about buying some drone, they say ‘no, we are not going to replace plane by UAV’ which means absolutely nothing. Then when deputy are asking question like how much, how many, there are no answer. The only clue that we got recently was a ‘stay tuned’.

There were an interview with the retired lieutenant-general Angus Watt. (Apr 2011) http://​www​.theglobeandmail​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​o​tta…

Now the speech from Julian Fantino. http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​14/…

Since the 65 planes have been designed as the absolute minimum and their budget is said to be 9Billions (or 16Billions with maintenance cost I think), it’s just impossible that they are going to buy the f-35. What I think is that they will play their blind follower until the end, because they don’t want to have the blame to have killed the f-35.

What should be a confidence bluff from Canada seems more like a butched decision process on their part, altogether with a 5th generation fighter pipe-dream.

The same story again and again, from http://​www​.canada​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​T​a​n​d​t​+​F​a​n​t​i​n​o​+​c​a​u​g​h​t+c…

“Now that the wheels are truly coming off, with rising costs pushing the Royal Canadian Air Force’s minimum 65-plane requirement beyond reach, Fantino has been reduced to wanly repeating talking points that no one, perhaps not even him, believes.

Wednesday in the House, for the first time, the minister appeared to concede that his mantra will soon undergo a revision. “Stay tuned,” he said after interim leader Bob Rae asked a series of pointed, probing questions about how many F-35s the government now thinks it can buy, within its stated $9-billion budget. Thursday, the opposition pressed the attack: “How many, how much, and when?“
.…..
Here’s why the numbers matter. Sixty-five planes based in Cold Lake, Alta., and Bagotville, Que., according to Defence sources, is the minimum required to fulfil the primary mission of the Royal Canadian Air Force, which is to provide 24-hour air cover over four Canadian cities in the event of a “9/11″ event.”

Please note that I am not this Michael Den Tandt.

The posting comment is erroneous! Some of my post appear on my black but not on my desktop. Tried to delete everything before re-posting this. Otherwise I will try tomorrow. Sorry if multi-posting eventually appear.

I am not aware of any huge debate about buying f-18 right now. We are in the dark. No joke, there is the same exact news that is passing again and again for two-three day, word for word. (just the same article published among many journals) Link is on the next post.
http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​16/…
’.…a high-level defence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

“We have no back-up plan. We have a reserve and flexibility in the life extensions we’ve done structurally to our F-18s and in weapons systems,” said the source, referring to the $1.8-billion modernization that’s took place over the last decade.

The upgrades mean the current fighter-bombers can “easily” stay in the air to 2020 and beyond.

The Royal Canadian Air Force isn’t expected to take delivery of its first F-35 from U.S. defence giant Lockheed Martin until 2016, with the bulk of the planned 65 planes arriving around 2020.

“The (CF-18) will still be effective, but you’ll have slightly lower numbers as we get to maximum fatigue life on air frames,” said the source in a recent background interview.’

For these rumors about buying some drone, they say ‘no, we are not going to replace plane by UAV’ which means absolutely nothing. Then when deputy are asking question like how much, how many, there are no answer. The only clue that we got recently was a ‘stay tuned’.

There were an interview with the retired lieutenant-general Angus Watt. (Apr 2011) http://​www​.theglobeandmail​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​o​tta…

Now the speech from Julian Fantino. http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​14/…

Since the 65 planes have been designed as the absolute minimum and their budget is said to be 9Billions (or 16Billions with maintenance cost I think), it’s just impossible that they are going to buy the f-35. What I think is that they will play their blind follower until the end, because they don’t want to have the blame to have killed the f-35.

What should be a confidence bluff from Canada seems more like a butched decision process on their part, altogether with a 5th generation fighter pipe-dream.

The same story again and again, from http://​www​.canada​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​T​a​n​d​t​+​F​a​n​t​i​n​o​+​c​a​u​g​h​t+c…

“Now that the wheels are truly coming off, with rising costs pushing the Royal Canadian Air Force’s minimum 65-plane requirement beyond reach, Fantino has been reduced to wanly repeating talking points that no one, perhaps not even him, believes.

Wednesday in the House, for the first time, the minister appeared to concede that his mantra will soon undergo a revision. “Stay tuned,” he said after interim leader Bob Rae asked a series of pointed, probing questions about how many F-35s the government now thinks it can buy, within its stated $9-billion budget. Thursday, the opposition pressed the attack: “How many, how much, and when?“
.…..
Here’s why the numbers matter. Sixty-five planes based in Cold Lake, Alta., and Bagotville, Que., according to Defence sources, is the minimum required to fulfil the primary mission of the Royal Canadian Air Force, which is to provide 24-hour air cover over four Canadian cities in the event of a “9/11″ event.”

Please note that I am not this Michael Den Tandt.

PART1 (only part2 is visible now)
I am not aware of any huge debate about buying f-18 right now. We are in the dark. No joke, there is the same exact news that is passing again and again for two-three day, word for word. (just the same article published among many journals) Link is on the next post.
http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​16/…
’.…a high-level defence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

“We have no back-up plan. We have a reserve and flexibility in the life extensions we’ve done structurally to our F-18s and in weapons systems,” said the source, referring to the $1.8-billion modernization that’s took place over the last decade.

The upgrades mean the current fighter-bombers can “easily” stay in the air to 2020 and beyond.

The Royal Canadian Air Force isn’t expected to take delivery of its first F-35 from U.S. defence giant Lockheed Martin until 2016, with the bulk of the planned 65 planes arriving around 2020.

“The (CF-18) will still be effective, but you’ll have slightly lower numbers as we get to maximum fatigue life on air frames,” said the source in a recent background interview.’

For these rumors about buying some drone, they say ‘no, we are not going to replace plane by UAV’ which means absolutely nothing. Then when deputy are asking question like how much, how many, there are no answer. The only clue that we got recently was a ‘stay tuned’.

There were an interview with the retired lieutenant-general Angus Watt. (Apr 2011) http://​www​.theglobeandmail​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​o​tta…

Now the speech from Julian Fantino. http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​14/…

Since the 65 planes have been designed as the absolute minimum and their budget is said to be 9Billions (or 16Billions with maintenance cost I think), it’s just impossible that they are going to buy the f-35. What I think is that they will play their blind follower until the end, because they don’t want to have the blame to have killed the f-35.

What should be a confidence bluff from Canada seems more like a butched decision process on their part, altogether with a 5th generation fighter pipe-dream.

(there is some glitches with the server, this was supposed to be the part one)
I am not aware of any huge debate about buying f-18 right now. We are in the dark. No joke, there is the same exact news that is passing again and again for two-three day, word for word. (just the same article published among many journals) Link is on the next post.
http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​16/…
’.…a high-level defence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

“We have no back-up plan. We have a reserve and flexibility in the life extensions we’ve done structurally to our F-18s and in weapons systems,” said the source, referring to the $1.8-billion modernization that’s took place over the last decade.

The upgrades mean the current fighter-bombers can “easily” stay in the air to 2020 and beyond.

The Royal Canadian Air Force isn’t expected to take delivery of its first F-35 from U.S. defence giant Lockheed Martin until 2016, with the bulk of the planned 65 planes arriving around 2020.

“The (CF-18) will still be effective, but you’ll have slightly lower numbers as we get to maximum fatigue life on air frames,” said the source in a recent background interview.’

For these rumors about buying some drone, they say ‘no, we are not going to replace plane by UAV’ which means absolutely nothing. Then when deputy are asking question like how much, how many, there are no answer. The only clue that we got recently was a ‘stay tuned’.

There were an interview with the retired lieutenant-general Angus Watt. (Apr 2011) http://​www​.theglobeandmail​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​o​tta…

Now the speech from Julian Fantino. http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​14/…

Since the 65 planes have been designed as the absolute minimum and their budget is said to be 9Billions (or 16Billions with maintenance cost I think), it’s just impossible that they are going to buy the f-35. What I think is that they will play their blind follower until the end, because they don’t want to have the blame to have killed the f-35.

What should be a confidence bluff from Canada seems more like a butched decision process on their part, altogether with a 5th generation fighter pipe-dream.

Please Admin if you read this, there comment system is erroneous. There are posts that I can see on my blackberry that doesn’t show on the desktop. I have already tried to delete the cookies, change of OS and still the same; I am still trying to post part 1 of the message posted 19hours ago, the one about canada position.

Thank you.

I am not aware of any huge debate about buying f-18 right now. We are in the dark. No joke, there is the same exact news that is passing again and again for two-three day, word for word. (just the same article published among many journals) Link is on the next post.
http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​16/…
’.…a high-level defence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

“We have no back-up plan. We have a reserve and flexibility in the life extensions we’ve done structurally to our F-18s and in weapons systems,” said the source, referring to the $1.8-billion modernization that’s took place over the last decade.

The upgrades mean the current fighter-bombers can “easily” stay in the air to 2020 and beyond.

The Royal Canadian Air Force isn’t expected to take delivery of its first F-35 from U.S. defence giant Lockheed Martin until 2016, with the bulk of the planned 65 planes arriving around 2020.

“The (CF-18) will still be effective, but you’ll have slightly lower numbers as we get to maximum fatigue life on air frames,” said the source in a recent background interview.’

For these rumors about buying some drone, they say ‘no, we are not going to replace plane by UAV’ which means absolutely nothing. Then when deputy are asking question like how much, how many, there are no answer. The only clue that we got recently was a ‘stay tuned’.

There were an interview with the retired lieutenant-general Angus Watt. (Apr 2011) http://​www​.theglobeandmail​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​o​tta…

Now the speech from Julian Fantino. http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​14/…

Since the 65 planes have been designed as the absolute minimum and their budget is said to be 9Billions (or 16Billions with maintenance cost I think), it’s just impossible that they are going to buy the f-35. What I think is that they will play their blind follower until the end, because they don’t want to have the blame to have killed the f-35.

What should be a confidence bluff from Canada seems more like a butched decision process on their part, altogether with a 5th generation fighter pipe-dream.

I am not aware of any huge debate about buying f-18 right now. We are in the dark. No joke, there is the same exact news that is passing again and again for two-three day, word for word. (just the same article published among many journals) Link is on the next post.
http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​16/…
’.…a high-level defence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

“We have no back-up plan. We have a reserve and flexibility in the life extensions we’ve done structurally to our F-18s and in weapons systems,” said the source, referring to the $1.8-billion modernization that’s took place over the last decade.

The upgrades mean the current fighter-bombers can “easily” stay in the air to 2020 and beyond.

The Royal Canadian Air Force isn’t expected to take delivery of its first F-35 from U.S. defence giant Lockheed Martin until 2016, with the bulk of the planned 65 planes arriving around 2020.

“The (CF-18) will still be effective, but you’ll have slightly lower numbers as we get to maximum fatigue life on air frames,” said the source in a recent background interview.’

For these rumors about buying some drone, they say ‘no, we are not going to replace plane by UAV’ which means absolutely nothing. Then when deputy are asking question like how much, how many, there are no answer. The only clue that we got recently was a ‘stay tuned’.

There were an interview with the retired lieutenant-general Angus Watt. (Apr 2011) http://​www​.theglobeandmail​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​o​tta…

Now the speech from Julian Fantino. http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​14/…

Since the 65 planes have been designed as the absolute minimum and their budget is said to be 9Billions (or 16Billions with maintenance cost I think), it’s just impossible that they are going to buy the f-35. What I think is that they will play their blind follower until the end, because they don’t want to have the blame to have killed the f-35.

What should be a confidence bluff from Canada seems more like a butched decision process on their part, altogether with a 5th generation fighter obsessive dream.

It seems to have two problems.
1-Some post doesn’t post. Some appear after 10 tires (i.e.The post starting with “The same story again and again…”) or some other appear right away (i.e. fortunately, the post to admin). Dodbuzz is directly hosting these message so this may have nothing to see with intensedebate​.com

2-Some post are only visible when javascript is disabled. For instance, if you click check the source (Ctrl+U in firefox, usually view->source for others or maybe still Ctrl+Shift+U) and you make a search for ‘82249’ (the post id of an invisible post), you’ll find a post that is only visible when javascript is disabled.

While I have not decorticated the java script, this script is located from intensedebate​.com (for instance this script provide the nice view with Reply, and the “Sort by: Date, Rating, Last Activity’.

Please admin if you can email for for eventual problem so I don’t have to post those annoying details.

Thank you

It seems to have two problems.
1-Some post doesn’t post. Some appear after 10 tires (i.e.The post starting with “The same story again and again…”) or some other appear right away (i.e. fortunately, the post to admin). Dodbuzz is directly hosting these message so this may have nothing to see with intensedebate​.com

2-Some post are only visible when javascript is disabled. For instance, if you click check the source (Ctrl+U in firefox, usually view->source for others or maybe still Ctrl+Shift+U) and you make a search for ‘82249’ (the post id of an invisible post), you’ll find a post that is only visible when javascript is disabled.

While I have not decorticated the java script, this script is located from intensedebate​.com (for instance this script provide the nice view with Reply, and the “Sort by: Date, Rating, Last Activity’.

Please admin if you can email for for eventual problem so I don’t have to post those annoying details.

Thank you

(trying to post this with java script disabled)

I am not aware of any huge debate about buying f-18 right now. We are in the dark. No joke, there is the same exact news that is passing again and again for two-three day, word for word. (just the same article published among many journals) Link is on the next post.

http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​16/…
’.…a high-level defence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

“We have no back-up plan. We have a reserve and flexibility in the life extensions we’ve done structurally to our F-18s and in weapons systems,” said the source, referring to the $1.8-billion modernization that’s took place over the last decade.

The upgrades mean the current fighter-bombers can “easily” stay in the air to 2020 and beyond.

The Royal Canadian Air Force isn’t expected to take delivery of its first F-35 from U.S. defence giant Lockheed Martin until 2016, with the bulk of the planned 65 planes arriving around 2020.

“The (CF-18) will still be effective, but you’ll have slightly lower numbers as we get to maximum fatigue life on air frames,” said the source in a recent background interview.’

For these rumors about buying some drone, they say ‘no, we are not going to replace plane by UAV’ which means absolutely nothing. Then when deputy are asking question like how much, how many, there are no answer. The only clue that we got recently was a ‘stay tuned’.

There were an interview with the retired lieutenant-general Angus Watt. (Apr 2011)
http://​www​.theglobeandmail​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​o​tta…

Now the speech from Julian Fantino.
http://​www​.cbc​.ca/​n​e​w​s​/​p​o​l​i​t​i​c​s​/​s​t​o​r​y​/​2​0​1​2​/​0​2​/​14/…

Since the 65 planes have been designed as the absolute minimum and their budget is said to be 9Billions (or 16Billions with maintenance cost I think), it’s just impossible that they are going to buy the f-35. What I think is that they will play their blind follower until the end, because they don’t want to have the blame to have killed the f-35.

What should be a confidence bluff from Canada seems more like a butched decision process on their part, altogether with a 5th generation fighter pipe-dream.

Canada Italy and Australia all have the same problem — they needed 130 aircraft, Lockheed had convinced them they could get by with 100 because the F-35 was so special and now it looks they will only get 30 of which only half will be operational because of the horrendous maintenance problems of the F-35. Of course if you actually buy the F-35 you are also facing a decade of waiting for rework to get them operational.

You might as well just scrap your air-force altogether.

Just Reading on these pages recently shows that In its debut supersonic run most of the super secret stealth radar absorbing coatings bubbled up, with most of it falling off in flight. This aircraft gets over half of its so-called “stealth” from these coatings.
Can it go supersonic? Yes. Can this be fixed? Probaly. Is it really embarrassing this many years into this program? Priceless

I’m not a engineer, but most of the so called “untouchable” traits of STEALTH were predicated on 70/80/90s radar performance. Its 2012 and radars have progressed drasticly in the last decade. FYI the
F-2 is not a Mitsubishi re-worked F-16. It is a substantially larger, much more capable aircraft. Dont think that Japan would be snapping up a large share of the World fighter market if they exported Combat aircraft. The Israelis tried to get them exported in kits(not a aircraft yet), but failed.

Canada doesn’t even have 100 CF-18s. Also export customers will be getting the production models that don’t need any sort of rework and won’t suffer from these maintenance problems related to the IPP that LRIP F-35s suffer from.

But I’m sure it’s the F-35 sending the world’s economies down the drain and not the trillions of debt built up on unsustainable social spending. But evidently you think the US should be just like Greece.

Fully agree. Except that our army seems to be governed by a team of soldier traumatized by not having the latest equipment, and felt ridicularized about that. Or then start to see some stuff as useless, like a thank. No joke, for canada having tank was considered as post-apocalyptic, they though that their new high-tech toys designed to resist to mine was the future, until they went to Afghanistan and that everything except a thank got stuck in the sand; even worse, they have realized that those mine resistant vehicules had no protection to offer against simply using more explosive to destroy them.

Did Australia had such problem when they bought their vessel from UK? http://​www​.ctv​.ca/​g​e​n​e​r​i​c​/​W​e​b​S​p​e​c​i​a​l​s​/​H​M​C​S​_​C​h​i​cou… (look at the chronology section)

The F-35: Built on NT technology

The F-35: You know that your tank is empty when you can accelerate vertically

The F-35: Each batch you order came with a crew to tighten pilot’s seatbelts and keep you happy

The F-35: You don’t want to meet a canada goose

The F-35: We thought that multirole was meaning to be able to pull a stump

The F-35: We forgot to take gravitational attraction in account

The F-35: Someone pressed the wrong button

The arrestor hook: You can still use it for a banner

Canada doesn’t even have 100 CF-18s. I love how your somehow blaming the European debt crisis on the F-35. Export customers aren’t getting the LRIP models either. By the time they get the FRP models those maintenance issues with the IPP will be long corrected.

It seems sitting around doing nothing and spending ourselves trillions into debt is destroying our air force. Getting new aircraft would actually show otherwise.

So JSOW-ER and JSM are un-powered now? That’s news to me. Plus JASSM can be carried externally. In all likelihood Harpoon could be integrated and carried externally if somebody wanted to pay for that capability.

You do realize the F-35 is optimized for the same flight regimes as the F/A-18 and F-16 right?

There have been 138 CF-18. None of them have been lost in combat.

IMHO it’s not the debt crisis that have to be blamed but rather the system that created it, and the people behind it; and the F-35 is not build by a non-profit company, all the money it spend/waste have to be recovered by sales…

>It seems sitting around doing nothing and spending ourselves trillions into debt is destroying our air force. Getting new aircraft would actually show otherwise.

Perhaps this is an illusion then? That’s exactly this mentality that put the entire world into a crisis, including bank (except few country like Canada).

IMHO it would be much better for country to buy a plane like the eurofighter or the f-16v and instead of sending check to lockheed for every future “unplanned” upgrade to hire local workforce to make them working at improving the plane at their own pace! Of course they will still need to send a check to the manufacturer, there is not much solution to this.

The difference is that OUR economy will run much better.

Ah fanboy patriotism, I think you are ready for the scouts.

And the engineer that blew the whistle on it 5 years ago was ignored because every redesign and repair makes Lockheed more money.

The F-35 isn’t an aircraft program it is fraud.

There was 138 F18s purchased in 1981 by Canada. Over a dozen have crashed, and less than 80 are operational, with around 70 being completely upgraded. William C. is correct, not you Michael.

Cpl I. Rensby, Cold Lake, AB

That’s exactly in line with what I was saying. Except that 80 were upgraded and since then, threee have crashed, like this one (link below). I won’t argue that there is by now only about 70 operational, public information is not the most accurate sometimes, some report a 1.8Billions upgrad and others a 2.6 Billions upgrade, and the exact number is not that relevant for me, since it depend on how it is counted.
http://​instapinch​.com/​?​p​=​1​043

Caporal, I can easily understand that you don’t like my opinion of the cf but please can you elaborate when you say that I am not correct?

Last batch as I am facing exhaustion, finally.

The F-35: Data plan not included

The F-35: No ejection seat required

The F-35: 1200W sound system in option

The F-35: Even the drug dealer want it

The F-35: Version C will be recycled as “C“harter

The F-35: It’s not a hasard that there is the word Lock in Lockheed; you are lock-in

The F-35: The key features are not in the plane, it’s from our satellite

The F-35: The plane IS the ejection seat

The F-35: You will cry for your mammy

The F-35: A hyundai engine is powerful enough to destroy it

The F-35: Some of us forgot for who they are working for

*required

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement