[EyeBrock]

This a pretty flawed 'report' though Hurley. The Libs see the Tories as vulnerable on this procurement and are hammering away at it.

We've discussed the F35 quite a few times and I think it's probably the best bet for long term.

Other solutions are either as or more expensive for less longevity or 10 year stop-gaps that we will end up flying for 30 years.

We shouldn't buy aircraft that are bordering on obsolete already or will be in 5-10 years.

[hurley_108]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

This a pretty flawed 'report' though Hurley. The Libs see the Tories as vulnerable on this procurement and are hammering away at it.

We've discussed the F35 quite a few times and I think it's probably the best bet for long term.

Other solutions are either as or more expensive for less longevity or 10 year stop-gaps that we will end up flying for 30 years.

We shouldn't buy aircraft that are bordering on obsolete already or will be in 5-10 years.

There's flawed and then there's false. The report may be the former, but gonavy's statement was demonstrably the latter. If you're going to make an ad-hominem attack, for God's sake at least make sure the claim is accurate.

[bootlegga]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

Guess Chretien should have thought ahead when he cancelled the EH-101 contract(at significant cost) to help fund this little project then eh?

You should stop trying to pass off this little red herring. The EH-101 cancellation and JSF have absolutely nothing to do with one another whatsoever. Canada didn't join the JSF program until 2002;

http://www.jsf.mil/program/prog_intl.htm

Given the NINE year gap between the two programs, I don't see how anyone can tie these two programs together.

He cancelled the EH-101 because it was representative of the spending the PCs engaged (specifcally he called it a "Cadillac program" - big ticket, big pricetag items) as opposed to other options that were cheaper and more affordable.

Admittedly, other options were smaller/less robust, but the EH-101 as ordered was designed for ASW against Soviet subs in the middle of the North Atlantic, which by 1993 were as extinct as the dodo bird.

If the Liberals had been smart, they would have ordered the NH-90 as a replacement, instead of going with a brand-new and totally unproven Sikorski helo. it has been flying since 1995 and proven a pretty good choice. I guess hindsight is 20-20...

Honestly, I wasn't a fan of the EH-101 cancellation ($500 million cancellation fee BTW), but I have to be honest, it's refreshing to see a politician keep an election promise nowadays!

[EyeBrock]

hurley_108 hurley_108:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

This a pretty flawed 'report' though Hurley. The Libs see the Tories as vulnerable on this procurement and are hammering away at it.

We've discussed the F35 quite a few times and I think it's probably the best bet for long term.

Other solutions are either as or more expensive for less longevity or 10 year stop-gaps that we will end up flying for 30 years.

We shouldn't buy aircraft that are bordering on obsolete already or will be in 5-10 years.

There's flawed and then there's false. The report may be the former, but gonavy's statement was demonstrably the latter. If you're going to make an ad-hominem attack, for God's sake at least make sure the claim is accurate.

Even though I think the report is less than substantial, it does bring into question the final tab. The aircraft manufacturers are in the business to make a profit. Pinning them down on price guarantees only makes sense.

I don't agree with the report's fudged 'maybe' stats and I think it is agenda driven but we should listen to the warning bells and adapt accordingly.