You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
Did you also do 99 pushups on your express test? Did the Warrior today, waiting on confirmation that I broke the school record for the cart relay / ladder climb. I did the cart pull last unfortunately. Been sick the entire time I've been here with bronchitis and got gastro just in time for the 13k/trench dig and the obstacle course. I refused to be sent back to St-Jean and passed them all vomiting constantly as I walked, ran, and dug. Got a couple outstanding commendations and noteworthy actions from my staff. I can't wait to leave this shithole, the Garrison is just rancid.
Jesus, 99 is a pretty crazy number. I don't do military style pushups too often, I got a really really shitty amount for pushups. It was 42 degrees out at 9am when we did our BFT, needless to say we unfortunately didn't get to do the trench did.
When are you expecting to go for PFT? I got confirmation I should be going in June if I graduate on time.
No word on PFT yet but I'll know shortly, looking like Feb/Mar. See you in two weeks Belka Posted via RS Mobile
Probably not until after the new year. We're in Salina, KS right now doing some CAS training for the Army. Once I'm back, I'll be on xmas leave and heading back to the loops for a few weeks. Sir.
Got a chance to go for another back-seat ride yesterday. Wasn't as good as the BFM mission last January in Florida. This time it was a CAS mission, so basically circling over a small area at 13k. The FAC student sucked at giving accurate targets so we only had enough fuel left for a LGB drop, no gun strafing. Had the go-pro going but the only good parts were the take off and landing, lol, just lots of circling. I got the controls this time, it was very easy to fly, just point it where you want and it stays there. The stick is very sensitive to inputs...giggity. You'll love flying it JD.
This is in a CF18, we are in Salina, Kansas right now doing CAS for the Army FAC students. Getting back-seat rides back in Cold Lake is nearly impossible, but on deployments we usually take one dual so some techs all get a chance to go up.
Also to the RCAF guys...Is there any RS guys here based in CFB Trenton?
I was in Trenton doing my OPME's last year around this time, it's not that bad. I wouldn't mind getting posted there I was able to drive back to Toronto every weekend, beats the North Bay -> Toronto trip that I have to do now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by belka
This is in a CF18, we are in Salina, Kansas right now doing CAS for the Army FAC students. Getting back-seat rides back in Cold Lake is nearly impossible, but on deployments we usually take one dual so some techs all get a chance to go up.
If you ever do fly up on the Hornet and I'm the controller that day, I'll give you a shout out lol.
Enjoy Farnham in the snow, my buddy just graded his BMQ.
I've been out for a couple weeks, aced Vimy. Piece of cake. I'm posted to 4 Wing but was forced to take all my annual leave over the holidays. I had to burn it up since I'm on course again first week of Jan. 31 days off
I've been out for a couple weeks, aced Vimy. Piece of cake. I'm posted to 4 Wing but was forced to take all my annual leave over the holidays. I had to burn it up since I'm on course again first week of Jan. 31 days off
Nice, i'm assuming you're doing PFT? My friend is skipping his PFT and going straight to the Harvard Jan 14th.
Fighter jet plan 'reset' as F-35 costs soar
F-35 isn't dead yet, but on life-support with costs set at $45.8B over 42 years
The federal government says it won't make a final decision on which fighter jet to buy until it completes every step of the complex process it laid out last spring following a blistering report from the auditor general about the escalating costs attached to the F-35.
Those costs have now been set at $45.8 billion over the jets' full 42-year life cycle, in an independent audit released Wednesday.
rest of the article here:
Spoiler!
But officials didn't say Wednesday how long its evaluation process will take to find new planes, or whether the aging CF-18 Hornet jets in service now will hold up if there is a significant delay in finding replacements.
Officials said Wednesday that National Defence is conducting a thorough examination of the current fleet, including any costs of upgrades that might be needed to extend its life.
At a press conference Wednesday, Minister of Public Works Rona Ambrose said, "The next step is a full review of options. We have hit the reset button and are taking the time to do a complete assessment of all available options."
A panel of independent reviewers to oversee the evaluation process to replace the older planes was announced Wednesday. Members will include Keith Coulter, Philippe LaGassé of the University of Ottawa, public policy expert James Mitchell and Rod Monette, a former comptroller general of Canada.
Officials also said that all fighter jets currently in production or scheduled to be in production will be considered to replace the CF-18s. That includes the Eurofighter Typhoon, the Boeing Super Hornet and others.
Costs have steadily risen
The government announced its decision to buy the F-35 fighter jets in July 2010, without following a competitive process, and it stuck to its line that acquisition costs for the F-35s would be $9 billion for a 20-year lifespan.
It dismissed a report from parliamentary budget officer Kevin Page who estimated the costs would be $30 billion over a life cycle of 30 years.
However, the government back down when,in his report last spring, Auditor General Michael Ferguson concluded the F-35 program would cost as much as $25 billion over 20 years. But Ferguson also said that was too short a period of time to consider.
In response to the auditor general, the government created the National Fighter Jet Procurement Secretariat under Public Works, and touted a seven-point plan to put the process back on the rails.
The government extended the jets' life cycle to the more realistic 42 years.
Wednesday, a Department of National Defence report assessed the new longer costs at about $44 billion.
The independent auditor KPMG essentially certified those costs — and the methodology used to determine them — in its own report also released on Wednesday. It also tacked on another billion dollars in costs to account for aircraft losses over the years, setting the final cost for 65 aircraft, maintenance, operating costs and sustainment at $45.8 billon.
This is a huge increase from the government's original estimate of about $16 billion over 20 years, but there is no doubt that the lengthening of the life cycle is a big contributor to the inflated cost.
NDP defence critic Jack Harris said Wednesday, "Why we're doing this, this charade, is because they've been caught out, they've been misleading Canadians about the cost, they've never revealed the true cost."
Process 'reset' with longer life cycle
Speaking to reporters Wednesday, Defence Minister Peter MacKay said that in 2010 he announced that the acquisition costs of the F-35 would be $9 billion. He stated that today's estimates were close to that figure, although he acknowledged that the $9 billion was spread over a life cycle of only 20 years.
MacKay also admitted that operating costs were not taken into account when coming up with the $9-billion calculation.
In the past few days the government has seized on that phrase, "life cycle," as a way to explain the inflated costs revealed by the KPMG report. Ambrose said that using the "full life cycle" of 42 years explains the difference in the costs.
A flushed and at times angry looking MacKay replied to a question a question about why all this "reset" is happening at all, saying, "Obviously the result of the AG recommendation that due diligence occur in the examination of the numbers, that's exactly why we're here."
MacKay was asked if he'd perhaps been hiding the true numbers, given that the previous auditor general Sheila Fraser, in a report on costing helicopters, had recommended that full life cycles should be used in calculating costs. He replied, "You'll recall that I just said this was a working model that was used by the Department of Defence, as long as I've known, as well, it's the Treasury Board guidelines that we followed."
MacKay did not directly answer questions about whether he had any regrets about how he attacked opposition members when they questioned the costs of the F-35s.
Interim Liberal Leader Bob Rae, speaking to reporters later, said, " I didn't hear a moment, not a nanosecond of contrition from this government, either from Mr. MacKay. We can provide you with quotes from now until the cows come home where they said this was the only plane, this was the only plane, and anyone who attacked this plane was against the military."
F-35 benefits to Canada set at $9.8B
Another report released today found that, as has been reported, the industrial benefits that would flow from the F-35 program are estimated to be $9.8 billion. However, those opportunities will disappear if Canada drops out of the F-35 program. Even if the F-35 is the chosen plane, there are no guarantees that Canadian industry will win all of the potential contracts.
Documents released Wednesday also revealed that the sticker price for each F-35 jet, based on information from the Joint Strike Fighter Program office, is now $92 million. This is a jump from the government's original promise of $75 million per plane.
Officials said that the plan is still for 65 planes if the winning jet turns out to be the F-35, but that figure could change if another plane is chosen.
i had thought we were already committed to the f-35? so now we're back to square one in deciding which jet our air force is going to fly? how much money have we already sunken into the f-35 development? *confused*
We were providing fuel to some CF-18's heading back to Cold Lake. A total of 95,000lbs of fuel for 7 receivers!
Looks like the 410 guys coming back from Miramar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by seakrait
i had thought we were already committed to the f-35? so now we're back to square one in deciding which jet our air force is going to fly?
We are still getting the F35, this is nothing more than political mongering. The only thing this whole 'reset' will do is prove that the F35 is the best choice. Once they price out the costs of the Super Hornet and Eurofighter the F35 will become a bargain.
Stephen Harper’s Conservatives are officially recanting their 2 1/2-year-old decision to buy the cutting-edge F-35 fighter plane – but the federal government is still resisting calls to hold an open competition to pick Canada’s next jet purchase.
The Harper government on Wednesday officially announced it was backing off a sole-source plan to buy 65 F-35 Lightning jets as a replacement for Canada’s aging CF-18 Hornets. It was a rare U-turn for an administration that only infrequently acknowledges it was wrong – but one the Tories felt was necessary to repair their fiscal stewardship credentials.
“No decision has been taken on a replacement for the CF-18,” a senior government official told reporters in a not-for-attribution media briefing set up by the Tories so that top civil servants on the file could speak plainly about Ottawa’s new jet purchase policy.
The Conservatives have been dogged for months by a damning auditor general’s report last spring that said they selected the F-35 without due regard for price and availability. Back in July, 2010, the Tories announced to great fanfare they would forgo an open competition and would buy the Lockheed warplane because it was the only plane that would serve Canada’s needs. They defended the decision in the 2011 election and often excoriated critics who suggested they had made a mistake.
On Wednesday, Ottawa made a great show of backing away from that decision – while unveiling a full lifetime cost estimate for the Lockheed Martin plane that is five times greater than what the Tories originally advertised it would cost.
The “cradle-to-grave” bill to taxpayers for buying and operating the controversial F-35 warplane will exceed $600-million per jet – or $45-billion in total, the government announced Wednesday. The Tories originally sold the aircraft as a $9-billion purchase.
The $45-billion lifetime estimate may ultimately prove to be too low if the cash-strapped U.S. government cuts its own order for the F-35 – a move that would increase the average price.
Defence Minister Peter MacKay and Public Works Minister Rona Ambrose went to great effort Wednesday to distance themselves from the July, 2010, purchase announcement, an event where Mr. MacKay posed for photos in a dummy version of the fighter. “We are pressing reset on this acquisition in order to ensure a balance between military needs and taxpayer interests,” Mr. MacKay told reporters. “Let me be clear: The government of Canada will not proceed with a decision to replace the CF-18 fighter aircraft until all steps … are completed.”
Ottawa formally announced Wednesday it’s now shopping around to see if alternatives to the F-35 better meet its needs as a replacement for the aging CF-18 Hornets. The government has acknowledged, however, that it could again decide the F-35 is best for the job. “We’re undertaking a full-options analysis and the F-35 is obviously one of those options,” Ms. Ambrose told reporters.
Still, the government is holding off calling for open bids to build the plane – as opposition parties are demanding – saying they’ll wait for an options analysis led by the Royal Canadian Air Force first.
The new $45-billion F-35 price tag is based on the most expansive definition of costs over a 30-year lifetime for each jet, including fuel as well as upgrades and maintenance. The bill includes 65 planes and as many as 11 spares – a cost that works out to more than $600-million per plane.
The new forecast, which was scrutinized by consulting firm KPMG, looks at costs incurred over a 42-year-period. Less than 20 per cent of the costs are for buying the initial 65 planes. The other 80 per cent are for keeping this fleet operating.
The Canadian government is still assuming the United States will buy a large order of the jets. In one of the documents Ottawa released Wednesday, it said it’s expecting the U.S. and partners will purchase 3,100 jets – a number that’s expected to fall as Washington, heavily in debt, trims its order.
The government said the overall price tag for Canada will rise by $500-million for every reduction of 400 aircraft that are cut from international orders. That’s because there would be fewer economies of scale to be derived from mass production.
Separately, the Harper government trimmed its estimates for the maximum industrial benefits Canadian companies might win for supplying the F-35 production. This country’s firms are only able to compete for work related to the warplane because Canada joined a consortium of countries planning on buying the jets.
The government said now it believes the maximum potential industrial benefits from F-35 supply work would be $9.8-billion – instead of the $12-billion Ottawa previously touted. So far Canadian companies have secured $438-million in work.
Also, the Harper government has redrawn the list of independent monitors who will oversee the hunt for alternatives to the F-35 Lightning fighter after retired general Charles Bouchard bowed out. He is replaced by former senior civil servant James Mitchell of consulting group Sussex Circle. The others remain the same, including ex-Communications Security Establishment chief Keith Coulter, a former fighter pilot; former federal comptroller-general Rod Monette, who also served as a senior bureaucrat in National Defence; and University of Ottawa professor Philippe Lagassé, an outspoken critic of the jet procurement.
The Harper government is going shopping for alternatives to the controversial F-35 in the most significant demonstration yet that it is prepared to walk away from its first choice for a new warplane.
To demonstrate that they are restarting the procurement process from scratch, Canadian officials will collect information from other plane manufacturers, including U.S.-based Boeing, maker of the Super-Hornet, and the consortium behind the Eurofighter Typhoon. They may also contact Sweden’s Saab, manufacturer of the Gripen, and France’s Dassault, maker of the Rafale.
The ballooning lifetime cost of the F-35 fighter and Ottawa’s decision to shop around for alternatives are creating panic among Canadian companies betting on supply contracts for the Lockheed Martin plane, sources have said.
The government aims to complete this reappraisal of what the fighter aircraft market can offer Canada as expeditiously as possible in 2013.
Government officials said Wednesday that Ottawa has not decided whether to call for competitive bids to supply a plane and will await the results of the options analysis.
Canada has signed no contract to buy F-35s, and while it has signalled to Lockheed Martin, the manufacturer, that it wants 65, it has no obligation to buy them.
It did sign a memorandum of understanding in 2006 that set the terms by which a country would buy the aircraft and also enabled domestic companies to compete for supply contracts for the plane.
__________________ Proud member of GRAPEGreat Revscene Action Photographers Enthusiasts
I only answer to my username, my real name is Irrelevant!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CELICAland
Posts: 25,651
Thanked 10,382 Times in 3,908 Posts
Quote:
The $45-billion lifetime estimate may ultimately prove to be too low if the cash-strapped U.S. government cuts its own order for the F-35 – a move that would increase the average price.
Was never a fan of the decision to buy these so now im just soaking this all up
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
Sir. 
Had the go-pro going but the only good parts were the take off and landing, lol, just lots of circling. I got the controls this time, it was very easy to fly, just point it where you want and it stays there. The stick is very sensitive to inputs...giggity. You'll love flying it JD.
