Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) News and Discussions

t68

Well-Known Member
The short answer is the Canadian electorate for the most part are totally mis-informed about the F-35 and continue to accept all the obsolete negative info about the jet (including way out of date pricing for the F-35 and false pricing on some alternatives). The anti-defence media (CBC, Toronto Star "Harper haters) continue to spoon BS to citizens who gladly eat this shit up hoping the money goes to their particular desires. The pollies, gutless as they are, are more than happy to defer or cancel important decisions for political advantage. This is not just a F-35 problem, it is a military procurement failure on all fronts.

From an economic POV, Canadian companies have done about 600-700 million on the JSF program and could manage another 10+ billion if 2500-3000 are built. A failure to procure F-35s by Canada puts that business at risk. Any other choice would not come close to this amount.
So in a nutshell they are happy to reap the benifits not order aircraft and pass the problem down the line.
 

t68

Well-Known Member
For the strategic circamstances what would the bare minimum number of aircraft purchased, do you need a one for one considering the advances in simulation.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #44
For the strategic circamstances what would the bare minimum number of aircraft purchased, do you need a one for one considering the advances in simulation.
Canada bought 138 Hornets of which 80 are still more or less operation. The replacement number was 75 F-35s which was reduced to 65 solely for budget reasons. Certainly PGMs and simulators have made a smaller fleet possible but 65 may be low considering our geography. I beleive Australia is committed to 75 and likely will try to get to 100 later on.
 

SpazSinbad

Active Member
The short answer is the Canadian electorate for the most part are totally mis-informed about the F-35 and continue to accept all the obsolete negative info about the jet (including way out of date pricing for the F-35 and false pricing on some alternatives). The anti-defence media (CBC, Toronto Star "Harper haters) continue to spoon BS to citizens who gladly eat this shit up hoping the money goes to their particular desires. The pollies, gutless as they are, are more than happy to defer or cancel important decisions for political advantage. This is not just a F-35 problem, it is a military procurement failure on all fronts.

From an economic POV, Canadian companies have done about 600-700 million on the JSF program and could manage another 10+ billion if 2500-3000 are built. A failure to procure F-35s by Canada puts that business at risk. Any other choice would not come close to this amount.
This artickle seems to suggest the Canuks are getting a pass of sorts:

Kendall: Canadian Suppliers Will Continue To Support F-35

Shoulda Known Here is the Retort:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...-f-35-loss-would-hurt-canada/article26533227/
 
Last edited:

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
So Italy is punished from going from 131 to 90 aircraft with a reduction of 300 wing orders (~25%) and Canada could leave the program and still maintain workshare?
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #47
It seems that way but I am sure Canadian suppliers are expecting significant blowback if Canada fails to choose the F-35. I bet new non-partner countries buying the jet are expecting some work. Might as well take away from a non buyer.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
It seems that way but I am sure Canadian suppliers are expecting significant blowback if Canada fails to choose the F-35. I bet new non-partner countries buying the jet are expecting some work. Might as well take away from a non buyer.
the reality is that every buyer expects offsets of some sort - and that means workshare

certainly the asian tiger approach will be about that - and lockmart can only cut the cake so much

at some stage realpolitik has to kick in and fleet purchase gets tied to workshare - other partners will be mightily irritated if workshare opportunities are compromised by a small buyer. there was already a high degree of frustration from some partners that canada had cornered disproportionate workshare

I've attended industry briefs where the above issues were white hot touch points for some of the partners
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #49
So Italy is punished from going from 131 to 90 aircraft with a reduction of 300 wing orders (~25%) and Canada could leave the program and still maintain workshare?
IMO, there will consequences for Canadian industry if Canada opts out, regardless of what that POS Turdeau JR. says.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #50
the reality is that every buyer expects offsets of some sort - and that means workshare

certainly the asian tiger approach will be about that - and lockmart can only cut the cake so much

at some stage realpolitik has to kick in and fleet purchase gets tied to workshare - other partners will be mightily irritated if workshare opportunities are compromised by a small buyer. there was already a high degree of frustration from some partners that canada had cornered disproportionate workshare

I've attended industry briefs where the above issues were white hot touch points for some of the partners
I can well imagine. I think Canada's workshare got to the point it is because Canadian aerospace industry got off to a fast start before all the inertia here started against the JSF program. Even 65 jets will still result in some decent overall workshare. The other issue is what will the total export number be? Given the instability at the moment, new unplanned orders could be significant and add to the overall workshare pie.
 
Last edited:

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
The other issue is what will the total export number be? Given the instability at the moment, new unplanned orders could be significant and add to the overall workshare pie.
for all the hand wringing by the anti-jsf fans about LM not reaching their planned partner numbers and thus the end of the JSF world as we know it is near - I've never come across any sense of urgency from lockmart people or principle partners about the build changes being fatal to the program

in fact, lockmart seem pretty confident that the eventual buyers outside of the 1st tranche partners will more than keep sustained build rates at an effective manufacturing rhythm - the bottom line being that its here to stay - and as a result you see that the wiser "unbelievers" have reduced their personal noise levels so as to not hilight the fact that all their ranting and raving is rapidly coming to nothing
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #52
- and as a result you see that the wiser "unbelievers" have reduced their personal noise levels so as to not hilight the fact that all their ranting and raving is rapidly coming to nothing
I wish the noise levels from unbelievers here in Canada could be reduced faster so the the RCAF and Canadian industry don't end up with the short stick. In any event, the Canadian election result on Oct 19 will indicate the F-35's future in Canada....maybe.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
John, what's the voting system in Canada? Is it a first past the post system where basically the winner takes all on election night? Or is it some form of proportional representation system where the chances of an outright victory on election where there is a low probability of an outright victory and parties have to horse trade to form a coalition type government?
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #54
John, what's the voting system in Canada? Is it a first past the post system where basically the winner takes all on election night? Or is it some form of proportional representation system where the chances of an outright victory on election where there is a low probability of an outright victory and parties have to horse trade to form a coalition type government?

It is a first past the post system. Currently the Cons, Libs, and the NDP have equal support percentages. In the last election, the Conservatives won many seats due to a combination of rejection of the Liberals overall but a significant number seats were won because Liberal voters opted to vote NDP to punish the Liberals and the left wing vote split allowed the Cons to win these seats.

Support for the NDP seems to be falling off a bit and going to the Liberals. I still think a minority government is likely which means further indecision.
 

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
IMO, there will consequences for Canadian industry if Canada opts out, regardless of what that POS Turdeau JR. says.
That's what I mean, a 40 airframe reduction lead to a 25% drop in wing workshare, so I find it hard to believe that Canada could back out of the deal and expect to be just as involved as it would otherwise be.
 

SpudmanWP

New Member
While they will lose out on all "Workshare" related contracts (controled by JPO), they could still be a SubContractor to another Partner company who still has Workshare (contract controlled by that company).

They may be confused on the distinction.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #57
While they will lose out on all "Workshare" related contracts (controled by JPO), they could still be a SubContractor to another Partner company who still has Workshare (contract controlled by that company).

They may be confused on the distinction.
That is true, especially for US contractors as they can subcontract to Canadian component suppliers and take advantage of the weak Canadian dollar. Being next door and speaking the same language helps as well.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
That is true, especially for US contractors as they can subcontract to Canadian component suppliers and take advantage of the weak Canadian dollar. Being next door and speaking the same language helps as well.
change in sub contractor levels means a direct impact on what meetings they get to attend - and the sub contractors can't send proxys on behalf of the primes.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #59
change in sub contractor levels means a direct impact on what meetings they get to attend - and the sub contractors can't send proxys on behalf of the primes.

Does the JPO dictate who any prime contractor can subcontract to (aside from security issues of course).
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Does the JPO dictate who any prime contractor can subcontract to (aside from security issues of course).
yes, the sub contractor has to be approved - and it would be approval from the US uniformed PO Mgr as well as State Dept

(State are the key here as ITARs involved - and I've seen primes who were cleared for ITARs lose access when they became sub contractors)

Huge IP firewall and security implications irrespective of whether they were a prime prev - it doesn't provide advantage in the re-assessment
 
Top