Page 103 of 111 FirstFirst ... 949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111 LastLast
Results 1,531 to 1,545 of 1659

Thread: What is up with the F-35? Part II

  1. #1531
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 08
    Posts
    1,744
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    After some of the problems the F35 has had, its hardly surprising Canada questioned the purchase of it.
    Add to that the fact that there was never any real discussion or competition for the choice of new fighter...

  2. #1532
    Idiot Mode [ON] OFF Senior Contributor YellowFever's Avatar
    Join Date
    17 Jul 06
    Posts
    6,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    In most other if not all industries.The customer doesn't pay for the mistakes or even incompetence of the contractor/supplier. Cost overruns on an unimaginable scale seems to be the norm for some reason in the defence industry. I get that the F35 program is ground breaking technology. But its not healthy to hide behind that and constantly expect the Government or governments to keep picking up the tab. Politicians and the procurement programs they are charged with have proven to be inept at best for some time! So yeh maybe it does need a business man to upset the cozy little deals Defence companies have taken for granted. After some of the problems the F35 has had, its hardly surprising Canada questioned the purchase of it.
    Correct me if I'm wrong but to my knowledge a procurement of a platform has never been done this way before where a nation can get involved early before an actual platform is built much less operational.

    This allows favorable queue and partaking in the actual building of the platform so it contributes to a nation's economy (even a little).

    I also know a platform faces many difficult technological hurdles before the end product reaches the user. The F-16 wasn't nicknamed the "Lawn Dart" without reasons. It just goes to reason that a platform of this scale will have many teething problems. And anybody even remotely involved with procurement of platforms should know this.

    Trudeau's government decided to pull out for political reasons and the "technical" issues were just an excuse for them to achieve their goal.

    Now the end product is basically here so I see no reason for them to receive any sort of favorable queues or considerable contracts (are some parts still going to be built in Canada? I don't know).

    At least not to the length they were before.

    Ergo, my statement.
    Last edited by YellowFever; 18 Dec 16, at 19:06.

  3. #1533

    Join Date
    11 Apr 08
    Posts
    9
    My understanding is Canada has to stay in the program in order for Canadian suppliers to remain eligible to bid on contracts. If your country is not in the program you cannot bid on any of the contracts.

  4. #1534
    Contributor Toby's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 16
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by YellowFever View Post
    Correct me if I'm wrong but to my knowledge a procurement of a platform has never been done this way before where a nation can get involved early before an actual platform is built much less operational.
    To my knowledge, you are correct!

    This allows favorable queue and partaking in the actual building of the platform so it contributes to a nation's economy (even a little).
    It also leaves countries badly exposed to manipulation of budget funds
    I also know a platform faces many difficult technological hurdles before the end product reaches the user. The F-16 wasn't nicknamed the "Lawn Dart" without reasons. It just goes to reason that a platform of this scale will have many teething problems. And anybody even remotely involved with procurement of platforms should know this.
    True, but as we say in Lancashire. Ya can spin a yarn too far lad!
    Trudeau's government decided to pull out for political reasons and the "technical" issues were just an excuse for them to achieve their goal.
    Yes Trudeau is proving to be a Tony Blair, but don't hold that against the Canadian People. As I'm sure you are aware, other countries have elected worse leaders.
    Now the end product is basically here so I see no reason for them to receive any sort of favorable queues or considerable contracts (are some parts still going to be built in Canada? I don't know).

    At least not to the length they were before.

    Ergo, my statement
    Well its in your interests to. They guard your (if you are from the US) Northern flank and that is something you don't gamble with.
    Last edited by Toby; 18 Dec 16, at 22:33. Reason: more detail

  5. #1535
    Contributor Toby's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 16
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by jlvfr View Post
    Add to that the fact that there was never any real discussion or competition for the choice of new fighter...
    The cost of this program was massive before it went up. Most countries couldn't contemplate a program this advanced as things stood at the start, so they thought it wise to pool resources. Which is why the UK are involved to the extent they are. Bae have had employees working at F.Worth for some considerable time and Rolls Royce too have allocated massive input for the F35B? It is truely a first in terms of joint finance and technical know how with the US taking the lead.

  6. #1536
    Contributor Toby's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 16
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by anotar View Post
    My understanding is Canada has to stay in the program in order for Canadian suppliers to remain eligible to bid on contracts. If your country is not in the program you cannot bid on any of the contracts.
    As it should be

  7. #1537
    Idiot Mode [ON] OFF Senior Contributor YellowFever's Avatar
    Join Date
    17 Jul 06
    Posts
    6,034
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    Well its in your interests to. They guard your (if you are from the US) Northern flank and that is something you don't gamble with.
    This reason, and the fact that Canada is part ABCA, is probably the only reason why it will be allowed back into the program should Tredeau want back in.....despite how I feel about it.

  8. #1538
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,436
    Well as an old Chinese saying goes the relationship between Canada and the US us like the relationship between lips and teeth.

  9. #1539
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,436
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    In most other if not all industries.The customer doesn't pay for the mistakes or even incompetence of the contractor/supplier. Cost overruns on an unimaginable scale seems to be the norm for some reason in the defence industry. I get that the F35 program is ground breaking technology. But its not healthy to hide behind that and constantly expect the Government or governments to keep picking up the tab. Politicians and the procurement programs they are charged with have proven to be inept at best for some time! So yeh maybe it does need a business man to upset the cozy little deals Defence companies have taken for granted. After some of the problems the F35 has had, its hardly surprising Canada questioned the purchase of it.
    For defense it goes both ways. Sometimes the customer is the problem, some times the contractor, some times both.

    In this case it was a healthy dollop of both.

    The Canadian government's folly isn't questioning the costs. It's charging headlong into the program when problems were rife then charging headlong out of it just as problems are pretty much fixed.

  10. #1540
    Idiot Mode [ON] OFF Senior Contributor YellowFever's Avatar
    Join Date
    17 Jul 06
    Posts
    6,034
    A sizable chunk of the delay/cost over run problems can also be placed at the feet of the government that kept changing the requirements.

    I don't know if the problems that plagued this airplane goes anymore beyond what other programs had to go through but surely the advent of Internet and everybody and their sister constantly critizing every little setback and blasting it all over the net had also contributed a great deal to the general negative feelings towards the program.
    Last edited by YellowFever; 19 Dec 16, at 06:19.

  11. #1541
    Contributor Toby's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 16
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by citanon View Post
    Well as an old Chinese saying goes the relationship between Canada and the US us like the relationship between lips and teeth.
    Exactly!!..there are differences, but they are the same?
    Last edited by Toby; 19 Dec 16, at 17:08.

  12. #1542
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    15,747
    Quote Originally Posted by anotar View Post
    I mean, this is the President Elect of the USA, I'm pretty certain he has someone hired on staff to keep an eye on these PR activities and yet everyone (press included) acts like he's an 11 year old who has just been given his first smartphone for Christmas.
    I take absolutely nothing for granted with this man. He is most likely a narcissistic sociopath that has been president and chairman of a privately held company for 45 years, able to do as he pleased and beholden to no one.

    Quote Originally Posted by anotar View Post
    Anyway, back to the F35... Maxwell has C130's there and no fighter squadrons, Boise has F15's, Selfridge has A10's and Truax has F16's fr what that information is worth. Unfortunately the F35 reminds me of that hot girl in High School who could kick your ass in racquetball and discuss philosophy any day of the week then goes off to a college with a 24 hour buffet and free cable and when you next see her 4 years later you feel guilty about not wanting to associate with her any more as her bloated butt just wants to talk about soap operas yet you were quite fond of her at one time.

    Oh yeah, you also find out she's maxed out all of her credit cards.
    Heh...I know exactly what you mean. I don't think the F-35 will be that girl though.
    Far better it is to dare mighty things, than to take rank with those poor, timid spirits who know neither victory nor defeat ~ Theodore Roosevelt

  13. #1543

    Join Date
    11 Apr 08
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by TopHatter View Post

    Heh...I know exactly what you mean. I don't think the F-35 will be that girl though.
    Man I so hope you are right! I much preferred the old way where there'd first have to be a decent airplane and only then would they start loading it with improvements until it became unwieldy.

  14. #1544
    Global Moderator
    Military Professional
    Defense Professional
    Albany Rifles's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Apr 07
    Location
    Prince George, VA
    Posts
    8,138
    Quote Originally Posted by anotar View Post
    Man I so hope you are right! I much preferred the old way where there'd first have to be a decent airplane and only then would they start loading it with improvements until it became unwieldy.
    The F-35 series is not an incremental change...it is a revolutionary change. It is massive. As YF and others have said the amount of issues the aircraft had to overcome were huge...but that is because of how complex the aircraft is. But it is that complex because of how capable the aircraft is. It far outstrips the aircraft it is replacing in just about all categories. And the biggest issue that has been overcome is the integration of the software. This is not just a platform...it is a system of systems.

    I will also say this about the aircraft...it is very easy to maintain.It has been designed from the start to be easy to maintain. That is key because it keeps them in the fight. Sustainability has been pounded into the heads of those of us in the acquisition community. If it is not sustainable it doesn't go to the force. And what also helps is they, smartly, got acquisition logisticians on the project early to point out possible sustainability issues in the design so it could be modified early enough to help keep costs in line.

    The old adage you get what you pay for has never been truer than in this case.
    "The genius of you Americans is that you make no clear-cut stupid moves, only complicated stupid moves which make us wonder at the possibility that there may be something to them we are missing." - Gamal Abdel Nasser

  15. #1545
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,169
    Quote Originally Posted by anotar View Post
    Man I so hope you are right! I much preferred the old way where there'd first have to be a decent airplane and only then would they start loading it with improvements until it became unwieldy.
    I thoroughly disagree. One of the biggest things they've done with the F-35 program is take the long view of the entire life of the platform rather than just trying to build it for what we need today.

    The F-35 is designed for 8000 hours rather than the typical 6000 to avoid the need for extensive (and expensive) Service Life Extension Programs. It's designed with excess power generation in anticipation of DEWs, better radars, and newer computers that will exist 30 years from now. It is built to be easy to upgrade as it matures.

    Of course none of those features are particularly useful today, and they all add to the procurement costs up front. Yet they will save a TON of money later down the line, and allow for better upgrades than other fighters because it has ample headroom to grow.
    Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 19 Dec 16, at 16:52.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Sig P250, Part 2
    By GraniteForge in forum Small Arms and Personal Weapons
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 26 Nov 08,, 00:04
  2. What part do you disagree with?
    By Roosveltrepub in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 22 Apr 08,, 16:52
  3. Who wants to be a part?
    By joey2 in forum International Politics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 22 Nov 06,, 00:31
  4. I did my part
    By bren in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08 Nov 06,, 10:49

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •