Author Topic: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)  (Read 1325494 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 80,480
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,327
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4075 on: December 31, 2016, 18:55:08 »
The USAF is going to use the F-35 at least initilly to penetrate enemy air defense.I would rather use stand off weapons for this role or UCAV's,but this is a mission that the USAF performs pretty well at.

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/lockheed-martins-new-super-stealth-fighter-getting-ready-18911

The Air Force wants the F-35 to be able to elude the best enemy air defenses well into the 2030s and 2040s.

The Air Force F-35 is using “open air” ranges and computer simulation to practice combat missions against the best Chinese and Russian-made air-defense technologies – as a way to prepare to enemy threats anticipated in the mid-2020s and beyond.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 51,080
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,355
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4076 on: January 05, 2017, 19:14:36 »
Start of AvWeek review article:

Quote
Lockheed Martin’s F-35: What Is Left To Fix?
The Joint Strike Fighter: progress and problems


Lockheed Martin’s F-35 achieved its first international deployment and the U.S. Air Force declared its first squadron ready for war in 2016, but the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) also suffered key setbacks last year.

The world’s most expensive fighter program continues to grapple with technological challenges. The latest version of the JSF’s internal logistics system is delayed by several months, and operational test pilots are still seeing stability issues with the warfighting software. The Joint Program Office (JPO) has righted a quality issue with the avionics cooling lines that temporarily grounded 15 operational aircraft, but Lockheed is now racing to fix the 42 in-production aircraft that were affected. Further, the services are dealing with fallout from two aircraft fires this year and recent issues identified in testing.

At the same time, tensions are high between Lockheed and the Pentagon. After failing to come to an agreement on the long-awaited ninth batch of aircraft, the government in a rare move unilaterally issued a contract valued at $6.1 billion for 57 jets. The two parties are still working on a handshake agreement for Lot 10, which they had hoped to reach this fall. Meanwhile, although many of the international partners will move forward with a three-year bulk purchase of the aircraft starting in 2018, the U.S. military will not.

Designing the world’s most advanced fighter does not come cheap. The JPO is racing to finish the F-35’s development phase—already at $14 billion since the 2011 program restructuring—but the Pentagon is preparing for a delay of up to seven months past the planned completion date and projecting additional cost growth of $530 million. And the $14 billion is only a fraction of the full bill: A July 2016 report from the Congressional Research Service pegged the research and development cost at $59.2 billion in fiscal 2012 dollars since the program’s inception.

Here we look at the F-35’s remaining challenges.

Stalled Contract Negotiations...

[Note with engine]


...
http://aviationweek.com/combat-aircraft/lockheed-martin-s-f-35-what-left-fix

By the way: Bloggerdämmerung, or, last post:

Quote
End of 3Ds Blog

CGAI regrets that the 3Ds blog will cease posting new material with immediate effect. Previous posts and comments will be archived and available for research on this site.

CGAI is most grateful to Mark Collins for his careful curating of the 3Ds blog.

For additional content, visitors are encouraged to visit http://www.cgai.ca
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2017/01/05/end-of-3ds-blog/

Jack Granatstein recruited me for the blog in 2010 and gave me strong support, for which I owe him great gratitude.  Will still be tweeting:

@Mark3Ds
https://twitter.com/Mark3Ds/with_replies

Mark
Ottawa
« Last Edit: January 05, 2017, 19:37:11 by MarkOttawa »
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 51,080
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,355
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4077 on: January 10, 2017, 14:20:39 »
Start of latest Pentagon DOT&E F-35 report:

Quote
Executive Summary
Test Strategy, Planning, Activity, and Assessment

•  The Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Program Office (JPO) acknowledged in 2016 that schedule pressure exists for completing System Development and Demonstration (SDD) and starting Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) by August 2017, the planned date in JPO’s Integrated Master Schedule.  In an effort to stay on schedule, JPO plans to reduce or truncate planned developmental testing (DT) in an effort to minimize delays and close out SDD as soon as possible.  However, even with this risky, schedule-driven approach, multiple problems and delays make it clear that the program will not be able to start IOT&E with full combat capability until late CY18 or early CY19, at the soonest. 
These problems include...
http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2016/pdf/dod/2016f35jsf.pdf

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 51,080
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,355
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4078 on: January 11, 2017, 13:11:02 »
Trump still hitting hard:

Quote
Lockheed Martin is sliding after Trump attacks the cost of the F-35

 Shares of Lockheed Martin, the maker of the F-35 fighter jet, are falling after President-elect Donald Trump attacked the cost of the program during his press conference on Wednesday.

During the press conference, Trump said he had been having discussions with generals and admirals about bringing down the costs of the F-35 program.

"I'm very much involved with the generals and admirals on the airplane, the F-35 — you've been reading about it," Trump said during the news conference. "And it's way, way behind schedule and many billions of dollars over budget. I don't like that."

Trump said he was "going to do some big things on the F-35 program and perhaps the F-18 program" and "going to get those costs way down."

The comments are similar to a tweet from Trump in December in which he criticized the cost of the F-35 program and said he would renegotiate the prices.

Experts say that much of the cost of the F-35 program has already been committed and that it is most likely too late to make significant changes to the program.

Despite this, Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson met with Trump in December, saying the company had heard Trump's complaints "loud and clear" and would try to "drive the cost down aggressively."

Shares of Lockheed slid sharply in trading after Trump's comments on Wednesday, down 1.17% as of 11:40 a.m. ET, a drop of $3.01 a share...
http://www.businessinsider.com/lockheed-martin-sliding-trump-comments-press-conference-january-11-2017-1

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 177,185
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,978
  • Freespeecher
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4079 on: January 11, 2017, 14:47:04 »
USMC deploys F-35 squadron to Japan:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/10/marine-corps-deploys-first-f-35-squadron-to-japan-/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiT0dZNE5XTTJPRFptTWpnMiIsInQiOiJudlk4NGJRWnRtSkR6aE4rckp3blZEMzRyc1VxTllGdVFhXC9PYlRidjBFQkZjSGhvbzNGMTBhbmhqMm9cL3VZNFwvd0N2RnNQTXJVeWNVU0JNQTJLVXlLeUtkdXF0ckxaNGZyeFI1bnFwdWRTTW01RFFEUFJlU2RZM3I0bmpZaXNcLzUifQ%3D%3D

Quote
Marine Corps deploys first F-35 squadron to Japan: ‘A true force multiplier’
By Douglas Ernst - The Washington Times - Tuesday, January 10, 2017

A squadron of the Pentagon’s 5th Generation fighter, the F-35B Joint Strike Fighter, is headed for Japan.

Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121 deployed Monday from Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Arizona, for MCAS Iwakuni, Japan. The impending arrival of the aircraft, which are part of a $400 billion project, thrilled officials at 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing.

“The Short Take-off Vertical Landing (STOVL) aircraft is a true force multiplier,” Capt. Kurt Stahl, a spokesman for 3rd MAW, said in a statement released Tuesday, Military Times reported. “The unique combination of stealth, cutting-edge radar and sensor technology, and electronic warfare systems bring all of the access and lethality capabilities of a fifth-generation fighter, a modern bomber, and an adverse-weather, all-threat environment air support platform.”

SEE ALSO: Air Force general itching to send F-35s into ISIS fight: ‘We’ve got to … get moving’

The Pentagon’s longterm plan is to have 2,443 F-35s ready to defend the skies at a moment’s notice, but unexpected technical hurdles and ballooning costs have tested the patience of politicians — including President-elect Donald Trump.

“Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!” Mr. Trump tweeted Dec. 22.

Political wrangling aside, over 200 pilots and 2,000 maintainers for the F-35 have been trained since 2010. Those pilots have logged more than 40,000 flight hours and completed over 75 percent of the project’s Test Program milestones.

Military Times noted that Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121’s presence in Japan paves the way for future deployments and operations in the Middle East.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline CBH99

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 16,685
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 528
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4080 on: January 11, 2017, 17:41:59 »
I think this is a terrible idea.


1.  They aren't operationally required in Japan in any way, shape, or form.  US air assets in Japan are already formidable, not to mention the Japanese Self Defense Force is a pretty potent military organization as it is.

2.  The F-35B still has quite a few significant software issues before coming 100% online.  Declaring it operational was more for PR purposes than anything substantial.


3.  And this is the big one....WHY do we continue to give our potential future enemies as much intelligence as we do, about some of our most significant capabilities!?


China will be probing Japanese airspace every chance they get.  Logging, recording, studying every single radar contact they have with any F-35B they encounter.  Learning from it, developing doctrine, modifying weapons, modifying radars, etc etc.

Would it not be in the West's best interest to keep our cards close to our chest, until the day comes when we need to say "Oh hey, look at all the things this plane can really do!"     

Seems arrogantly counterproductive to give the Chinese a chance to gather as much intel as they can, during a period of uneasy tension in that region of the world.
Fortune Favours the Bold...and the Smart.

Wouldn't it be nice to have some Boondock Saints kicking around?

Offline Loachman

  • Army Pilot in Drag
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 159,662
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,184
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4081 on: January 11, 2017, 18:35:48 »
I give rather more credit to the USMC operators and leadership and their decision-making abilities. They know their aircraft and the Chinese much better than any of us here.

There'll be F35s all over the airshow circuit soon anyway. That's always been a key to generating customers.

Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 352,030
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,312
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4082 on: January 11, 2017, 18:42:08 »
The biggest problems with the program have been driven by trying to make a VTOL variant.  The USMC is engaging in PR to protect their platform.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 177,185
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,978
  • Freespeecher
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4083 on: January 12, 2017, 09:21:10 »
The biggest problems with the program have been driven by trying to make a VTOL variant.  The USMC is engaging in PR to protect their platform.

Yet the Marines seem to have more, and more operational aircraft than either the AirForce or the USN. They are also developing more sophisticated uses of the platform (i.e. using a Marine F-35 to identify a target then launch and guide a missile from a nearby warship to intercept).

If anything, the Marines seem to be forging ahead far more aggressively with their F-35's than anyone else.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 51,080
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,355
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4084 on: January 12, 2017, 15:29:43 »
SecDef nominee Gen. (ret'd) Mattis at Senate confirmation hearing Jan. 12 on F-35 (including nuclear-capable):
Quote
...
If confirmed, Mattis could form a counterweight to Trump in the Pentagon. While Trump has targeted the F-35 programme numerous times on the campaign and on Twitter since his election, Mattis praised the fighter and called it critical to allies’ capability. Not only will the F-35 magnify the capability of other US aircraft, the fighter will create the total strength of several foreign air forces, he says.

When asked about Trump’s tendency to tweet about defense aviation programmes, Mattis demurred.

“It’s not my role to comment on his statements other than to say he is serious about getting the best bang for the dollar and that’s where I find common ground with him,” Mattis says. “I see his statements on certain defense programmes showing his serious side of keeping these programmes under control.”

In written statements, Mattis told senators he would support the nuclear-capable F-35 and bomber programme. Further, the retired general backed dual-capable F-35s for NATO and supported the deployment of the B-61 weapon system...
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/mattis-strikes-sharp-contrast-to-trump-on-f-35-nuc-433139/

More:

Quote
...
Although Trump's tweets on the F-35 and Air Force One rattled the defense industrial base, it was barely a topic of conversation during the confirmation hearing. Only Hirono criticized Trump’s Twitter tactics, and no senator ventured to ask about the president’s comments alluding to a potential competition involving the F-35 and the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet.

“We’re going to do some big things on the F-35 program and perhaps the F-18 program,” Trump told reporters Wednesday. “And we’re going to get those costs way down, and we’re going to get the plane even better, and we’re going to have competition. And it's going to be a beautiful thing.”

During the hearing, Mattis ventured his own support of the F-35 program, calling it "critical" and noting that “many of our allies have bet their air superiority on the F-35 program.” However, the famed former Marine Corps general did not offer any specifics about whether Trump is considering a smaller F-35 buy or the acquisition of an upgraded version of the Super Hornet.

SASC Chairman John McCain of Arizona remained mum on the F-35 program during the hearing, but has been putting his own pressure on the joint strike fighter. This week he sent a letter to Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson blasting the program for a projected seven month delay and $500 million cost overrun.

“If the Lockheed Martin Corporation has new initiatives that are ‘ready to deliver’ to reduce F-35 program costs, I expect you to detail your plans for accomplishing this objective to the committee as soon as possible,” he wrote...
http://www.defensenews.com/articles/mattis-defends-trumps-f-35-criticism

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 51,080
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,355
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4085 on: January 12, 2017, 17:01:16 »
And at AvWeek:

Quote
Trump Probably Won’t Cancel F-35. Just Ask Jim Mattis.

The incoming president’s recent comments about Lockheed Martin’s F-35 have sent the defense community into a frenzy, with observers racing to figure out exactly what Donald Trump has in store for the stealth fighter.

Trump has slammed the F-35 for “out of control” costs, asked Boeing to price out the cost to build a “comparable” F/A-18 Super Hornet and called for “competition” in the defense market. Investors are watching the dialogue closely, and some clearly fear the worst – each time Trump slams the F-35, Lockheed’s stock temporarily slumps. Some observers have interpreted the comments as Trump hinting that he wants to compete the F-35 against the Super Hornet, or cancel the program altogether.

But Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Defense, retired U.S. Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis, provided a simpler, more likely, explanation.

“The president-elect has talked about the cost of [the F-35] but in no way shown a lack of support for the program,” Mattis told the Senate Armed Services Committee during his confirmation hearing. “He just wants the best bang for the buck.”

In other words, Trump is just trying to pressure Lockheed to get costs down.

Mattis, who presumably will have some input on any decision regarding the military’s next-generation fighter, offered a resounding defense of the F-35. 

“The F-35 is critical for our own air superiority, because of its electronics capability inherent to the airplane, which magnifies each individual aircraft's capability,” Mattis said during the hearing. “It is equally important and more so to our allies, because this will be the total strength of their Air Force.”

“Many of our allies have bet their security on the F-35,” he said.
http://aviationweek.com/blog/trump-probably-won-t-cancel-f-35-just-ask-jim-mattis

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Online Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 170,475
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,350
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4086 on: January 12, 2017, 18:59:00 »
And as "uncertainty" is reduced watch the price of the F35 and Lockheed Martin shares stabilize at a higher level.

It is really hard to make a deal if the other guy knows you won't walk away.  Trump revels in uncertainty.  Bureaucrats detest it.
Over, Under, Around or Through.
Anticipating the triumph of Thomas Reid.

"One thing that being a scientist has taught me is that you can never be certain about anything. You never know the truth. You can only approach it and hope to get a bit nearer to it each time. You iterate towards the truth. You don’t know it.”  - James Lovelock

Conservative, n. A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others. [Ambrose Bierce, 1911]

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 51,080
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,355
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4087 on: January 13, 2017, 13:10:58 »
The Donald gets results!?!

Quote
Lockheed CEO: We are 'close to a deal' to bring F-35 cost down 'significantly'

Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson said Friday [Jan. 13] that the company is "close to a deal" that will bring the cost of the F-35 down "significantly" following a meeting with President-elect Trump in New York.

Hewson told reporters after the 45-minute meeting that she shares the incoming president's view that troops need to get the best technology as possible for the lowest price. She said she also gave him some ideas for other ways to bring down the price of the joint strike fighter.

"I'm glad I had the opportunity to tell him that we are close to a deal that will bring the cost down significantly," Hewson said. "It's going to bring a lot of jobs to the United States. In fact, we're going to increase our jobs in Fort Worth by 1,800 jobs."

Navy Secretary Ray Mabus said this week that the promise to drive down costs is "the easiest promise anyone has ever made," since the price per plane is already going down and will continue to go down more as the program moves into production because of lessons learned during building and a more efficient production line.

Friday marked the second meeting between Hewson and Trump. Following the first meeting in December, Hewson gave Trump her "personal commitment" to "aggressively" drive down costs.

Despite that promise, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., released a letter from the Pentagon this week announcing an additional seven-month delay that will cost taxpayers at least $500 million more...
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/lockheed-ceo-we-are-close-to-a-deal-to-bring-f-35-cost-down-significantly/article/2611776

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Good2Golf

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 155,190
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,510
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4088 on: January 13, 2017, 13:52:06 »
Things get cheaper when you can spread design and production costs over more units. 

Is PM JT about to get a "Here's your bill for 65 F-35s, Canada.  Thanks for contributing to global defense and helping to reduce costs for all F-35 operators!" from the Donald?   :nod:


G2G

Online MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 30,150
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,285
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4089 on: January 13, 2017, 14:06:47 »
Things get cheaper when you can spread design and production costs over more units. 

Is PM JT about to get a "Here's your bill for 65 F-35s, Canada.  Thanks for contributing to global defense and helping to reduce costs for all F-35 operators!" from the Donald?   :nod:


G2G

But with the government changing the requirement to meet NATO and NORAD at the same time I don't think 65 is enough any more. I hear there is a price break at 100.
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline Good2Golf

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 155,190
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,510
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4090 on: January 13, 2017, 14:08:24 »
But with the government changing the requirement to meet NATO and NORAD at the same time I don't think 65 is enough any more. I hear there is a price break at 100.

Well played, MilEME09!  Maybe even 120...or 138 (some will get it), if The Donald offers not to re-write NAFTA? 

Online MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 30,150
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,285
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4091 on: January 13, 2017, 14:56:52 »
Well played, MilEME09!  Maybe even 120...or 138 (some will get it), if The Donald offers not to re-write NAFTA?

How about 273? if you add the original CF-18 numbers to the CF-5 numbers which were in service till 1995. But that would require a massive investment in the airforce.
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 352,030
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,312
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4092 on: January 13, 2017, 15:22:11 »
How about 273? if you add the original CF-18 numbers to the CF-5 numbers which were in service till 1995. But that would require a massive investment in the airforce.

And massive investments in intelligence.  And massive investments in IM/IT. And massive investments in security.

To properly exploit the capabilities modern sensors provide, there's a huge bill in analysis and data storage.  And the US is quite particular about protecting the secrets of the aircraft, so airfield security costs will increase as well.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Online MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 30,150
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,285
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4093 on: January 13, 2017, 15:38:38 »
And massive investments in intelligence.  And massive investments in IM/IT. And massive investments in security.

To properly exploit the capabilities modern sensors provide, there's a huge bill in analysis and data storage.  And the US is quite particular about protecting the secrets of the aircraft, so airfield security costs will increase as well.

increase the budget 6% to 19.7 billion, massive capital investment at cold late, bagotvillie, winnipeg and Trenton, and maybe Greenwood or Shearwater based on existing infrastructure.
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 352,030
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,312
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4094 on: January 13, 2017, 15:49:58 »
increase the budget 6% to 19.7 billion, massive capital investment at cold late, bagotvillie, winnipeg and Trenton, and maybe Greenwood or Shearwater based on existing infrastructure.

Why do we need fighters in Trenton or Winnipeg?  How would you get the airfields in Shearwater operational for fighter aircraft?  I'm not certain, but don't think 10/34 is usable, and open source information says that the aircraft need 8000 feet of runway (10,000 for pilots under training); 10/28 is far too short.

"Because there's some infrastructure already there" rarely results in optimal locations for military bases.

Mind you, Gander and Goose Bay both have runways that are more than long enough...  just in case some folks thought Cold Lake and Bagotville weren't remote enough >:D
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Online MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 30,150
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,285
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4095 on: January 13, 2017, 15:57:04 »
Why do we need fighters in Trenton or Winnipeg?  How would you get the airfields in Shearwater operational for fighter aircraft?  I'm not certain, but don't think 10/34 is usable, and open source information says that the aircraft need 8000 feet of runway (10,000 for pilots under training); 10/28 is far too short.

"Because there's some infrastructure already there" rarely results in optimal locations for military bases.

Mind you, Gander and Goose Bay both have runways that are more than long enough...  just in case some folks thought Cold Lake and Bagotville weren't remote enough >:D

looking at the maps i picked spots that geographically were spread out, and that could be expanded, besides putting a big fighter base on the east coast could win some votes next election.
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"

Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 352,030
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 14,312
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4096 on: January 13, 2017, 15:59:06 »
Ah yes, Canadian defence policy: where votes matter more than operational effect.

May I introduce you to the MLVW, LSVW, ILTIS, CF-18 maintenance contract...
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 413,595
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 30,989
  • Crewman
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4097 on: January 13, 2017, 16:07:59 »
Reopen Summerside......Anne of Green Gables and beaches......What more would an Airman want?


 [:D
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.

Any postings made by me which are made on behalf of Army.ca will be followed by the statement "George, Milnet.ca Staff".

Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 51,080
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,355
  • Two birthdays
    • Currently posting at Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute's "3Ds Blog"
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4098 on: January 13, 2017, 16:18:22 »
There won't be money for the fantasy fighter force. Under any party.

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Online MilEME09

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 30,150
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,285
Re: F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
« Reply #4099 on: January 13, 2017, 16:33:24 »
There won't be money for the fantasy fighter force. Under any party.

Mark
Ottawa

Any existing party, I propose we form a political party from the members of Army.ca, with dapaterson, MCG, and FJAG up for party leader. I'm sure we would get lot's of votes :P
"We are called a Battalion, Authorized to be company strength, parade as a platoon, Operating as a section"