Tow away costs on F35 are escalating.

Who are these F-35 fighters supposed to be used against? The underequipped military forces of underdeveloped states who can't even defend against our f18s? If so, why don't we just but more f18s? Or is it perhaps going to go up against the best of advanced military powers such as Russia, China, or even Europe, whom we have extensive economic relationships with and whom we dare not challenge militarily?

Just who are the so called threats that these aircraft are designed to protect us from?

Apparently the main factor in making these aircraft so expensive is the stealth capability. Unfortunately stealth is not impervious to "obsolete" long band radar, as Serbia demonstrated over a decade ago when it successfully tracked and destroyed an f117 stealth fighter using Czech radar built in the 1960s.

So what exactly is the value of these aircraft?

If they really are necessary, why don't we look at the altenatives being offered for export by other states? Apparently Russia produces a superior stealth fighter, and probably at a fraction of the cost. 

Why can't Canada produce it's own aircraft? 

@incorrect:

This issue has nothing to do with military role or capability.

It is about votes, and Harper sucking up to the Americans. That is all.

I am an ex military man, and feel pretty confident about my assertions here. Its G-d dam sad!

If small states like Israel and Sweden can respectively produce their own main battle tanks and advanced fighter aircraft, why can't Canada? We would benefit from the support of an industrial base, and maintain control over our own supply chain, which is an important strategic factor. 

It's discouraging to watch Canada import it's advance military hardware, like some underdevelopped state.

Yeah I 100% agree Boom Boom.  These jets are for NATO missios strafing third world countries.

There are many alternatives. We are rushing into this, and frankly the decision has already been made.

It's so frustrating watching this. I am inclined towards the Super Hornet, mainly because of the second engine. That by the way is why we bought the F18 in the first place. I can't' understand where the Chief of the Air Staff and his group are on this. It mystifies me. They know the score. Can't understand it.

@incorrect:

I really do respect what you right and I appreciate your insight. But I think you are giving Harper way too much credit. I don't think that reptile brain can think with that much sophistication, lol.

If Harper is returned as PM in yet another minority government, can the Opposition force the government to consider an alternative to the F35? Laurie Hawn seems pretty determined that this is the only aircraft the Cons are interested in. Maybe Laurie Hawn is the problem?

The job of enforcer for the interests of global capital and "democracy" can no longer be borne by the United States alone. Other countries such as Canada, France, and Germany will have to shoulder more of a burden for when it is necessary to take military action against recalcitrant peoples and their "regimes". Canada is now a net investor abroad (i.e. more Canadian money is invested abroad than foreign money is invested here), so Canada now in its own way is an Imperal country.

Therefore it may very well be that Canada will be able to "afford" things the US cannot.

Consider Canada's position on water rights, the tarsands, the way Harper fails to address slights and putdowns from the US beyond what is needed to placate outraged Canadians, how much all that has cost our reputation with the UN and the rest of the world, and his alignment with the Republican's. These jets are in keeping with the direction we're going in. I get the idea that Harper's sold our soul to the devil and in typical Harper fashion, has neglected to reveal his agenda to Canadians.

Agreed. The American Empire is dying slowly but don't be too quick to write off the American "Nation". Because those who are tied in extremely closely with the American "Nation" will go down too if the ship of state fails. That means if America goes down, so does Canada.

Too many economic and military ties. Too much crossborder movement and waayyy too much dependence on America in a lot of sectors.

It's nice and quiant to think about Canada as some island of power unto its own, but it ain't so. Washington issues the orders, Ottawa follows them.

I'm not sure that was one of the orders, but how hard could it have been to make a sale with Peter MacKay, Laurie Hahn and Stephen Harper listening to the crocidile tears from these poor generals in the Canadian military crying the blues about being underfunded and overused?

I don't even know why Canada bought F-18's. What the heck have they been used for other than the "ooohhs and ahhhs" at airshows?

Heck the American military will come up here and do that for you anytime.

It would be nice to see all that power and all those resources used in a positive way Frmrsldr. Yes it is later than what many think. A debt load like $14 trillion is nothing to sniff at. Unemployment, poverty. It's a sad reflection of the American state. So much waste for such petty greedy reasons.

Looks like it may never fly anyway.

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/djclimenhaga/2011/05/israeli-newspaper-r...

Boom Boom, I really like that quote. Who should I cite?

Maybe after scrapping the F35 "white elephant" the Canadian military can look at cheaper Russian models. They're perfect for the predatory war in Afghanistan - which takes the lion's share of Canadian "defence" spending in any case - and the Americans like them so much that they're buying the Russian copters themselves. lol.

You peaceniks need to stop the linear thinking and start looking at the F35 as more than a simple boondoggle. The reality is that it is a very complicated boondoggle.

Since no contract has been signed, Stone Cold Steve may be playing the old BFF card with the US administration  to garner work for Canadian aerospace concerns while simultaniously waiting for the F35 program to collapse of its own weight. Steve may be many things but he is not stupid.

Even diehard US chickenhawks are concerned with the speed the F35 clowncar is picking up as it hurtles over the budgetary cliff. The biggest problem in Canada is that even if the F35 program dies a well deserved death, the Canadian Forces numpties that manoevre for exotic US toys at the expense of yeoman work kit like the Mil17 Helo will still be with us.

Roscoe wrote:

You peaceniks need to stop the linear thinking and start looking at the F35 as more than a simple boondoggle. The reality is that it is a very complicated boondoggle.

Since no contract has been signed, Stone Cold Steve may be playing the old BFF card with the US administration  to garner work for Canadian aerospace concerns while simultaniously waiting for the F35 program to collapse of its own weight. Steve may be many things but he is not stupid.

Even diehard US chickenhawks are concerned with the speed the F35 clowncar is picking up as it hurtles over the budgetary cliff. The biggest problem in Canada is that even if the F35 program dies a well deserved death, the Canadian Forces numpties that manoevre for exotic US toys at the expense of yeoman work kit like the Mil17 Helo will still be with us.

First stay polite! Giving us name won't help you.

And second it look like that tje F35 are going to be an other money pit in canadian pocket. Question this decision is legit. Especially when we got the technology to do better in montreal quebec and giving job to our people.

And finally, we don't need such big military expense, especially when it will be use to keep usa supremacy at our expence
we need to defend the north sovreignty which required plane that can stand the cold unlike the F35!

Boom Boom wrote:

The Cons faced embarrassing questions today on two issues:

1. The F35s as presently designed can not communicate in Canada's north.

2. The F35s can not land on northern airstrips as what airstrips exist in the north are too short for the F35 - so it has to be equipped with a parachute at the back end that will depolyed every time the F35 lands up north. Plus - the parachute eliminates the 'stealth' feature of this aircraft.

Peter McKay said the planes are five years away and these concerns will be addressed.

And one other concern was raised on P&P tonight: with only one engine, if the F35 encounters problems with that one engine, it can not fly back from whever it has landed. It sounds like a total boondoggle. And the cost keeps going up - one critic said it will be twice the cost the Cons estimated.

I'm just wondering how many two engined fighters can actually take off with power from one engine? I'd be surprised if the existing CF-18s have that ability.

But I do agree with the other points. I think the primary requirement of fighter jets is defending Canada's territory - intercepting unfriendly aircraft. And I think our primary vulnerability is still the Arctic. So I really am doubtfull that the F-35 is suited to Canada's main aerial defense needs. I would think "compatibility with NATO" would be a secondary requirement.

With the delivery date so far off in the future, and no deal actually signed, I think we would be well advised to go through some sort of neutral non-partisan analysis of requirements for equipping the Air Force, including fighters, refuelling tankers, drones, airbases, etc.

By the way, the Liberals and Conservatives are saying the F18 is coming to the end of its life cycle and that's why it has to be replaced. That's nonsense. These sophisicated aircraft can fly indefinitely - they will be outclassed by newer aircraft, but only from a stealth attack mode. The F18s could be used just to patrol Canadian airspace for at least the next 20 years and probably beyond that. Harper and others want to the F35 because it's a stealth first strike weapon - and it gives bragging rights to any country that orders them - which is probably why the Cons (and some Libs) are salivating at the thought of having this expensive toy.

I'm sure the F18 can take off with one engine. That's the purpose of 'redundancy'. With the F35, there's no redundancy.

BTW, the DOD just released a statement that the mid-air refueling probe and drag chutes are included in the $9billion cost. However, the communications pod that will allow the F35 to communicate in the High Arctic is an extra cost, no one knows today what those will cost.

 I think the F35 sends out a message from Harper: "don't f*ck with Canada". But, also, this aircraft gives Harper first-strike capability anywhere in the world - that is, until someone figures out how to beat the stealth capability - which will be put into question anyway, with the addition of the drag chutes and communications pod (now inside the aircraft versus outside the aircraft as in the F18).

Mackay today concerned about delivery date on the F35s.

ETA: Commentators on P&P think the gov't will have to refurbish the F18s because it now looks like the full order of F35s won't be delivered until beyond 2020 - at the end of the shelf life for the F18s. Australia is buying a stopgap plane until they get the F35.

Peter Julian, the NDP finance critic, led off Question Period Monday referring to the F-35 "boondoggle" and "fiasco" that will be paid for on the backs of Canadian seniors. "It's a question of choices and priorities," he said.

excerpt:

This could be a potent line of attack for the Opposition, if Canadians can be persuaded that a multi-billion-dollar fighter plane that doesn't work is being paid for by cutbacks to pensions that we don't need to make, if the Parliamentary Budget Officer is to be believed.

Mr. Julian continued to link the fighter jets and pension cuts when interviewed outside the House. Public opinion is turning against the government, he said, "because Canadians are reading every day about another country that's stepping back from the F-35s."

The F35 program actually started back in 1990, and it was in 1998 I think that the Liberals decided this was the plane to replace the F18s. Big mistake.

ETA: these are the same Liberals that dumped those four useless subs on this country.