Author Topic: Auditing C(A)F Capabilities  (Read 682 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 201,635
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,471
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Auditing C(A)F Capabilities
« on: July 30, 2018, 11:37:00 »
The Auditor-General seems to be making noises about finally coming to terms with an actual appreciation of how much it costs to maintain a combat air capability - hopefully a firm benchmark will be established against which the notorious life-cycle costing of the F-35 can be compared.

Some questions:

If the AOPS project includes refuelling facilities in Nanisivik and the price of boats and ammunition what does that mean for the Combat Air Capability analysis?

Shouldn't that mean that the replacement of the CC-150 Polaris and the CC-130 Hercules tankers should also be covered in evaluating the cost of maintaining the Combat Air Capability?  And the cost of maintaining them?  And the cost of maintaining the bases to maintain them?  And the bases to train the crews and the maintainers?

Likewise, for the CSC project shouldn't the life cycle costs include the costs of the AORs and the Maritime Helicopters and all their support, maintenance and training requirements?  After all you only need tankers because you have CSCs.  Likewise you only need Cyclones because you have CSCs.  Take away the CSCs and you no longer need Cyclones or AORs.  Take away the CSCs, Cyclones and AORs you no longer need crews, or trainers, or bases to house them all, or pension plans.

Edit:  Oops.  I forgot.  Need to include all the command and control structure.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline FSTO

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 43,840
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,686
Re: Auditing C(A)F Capabilities
« Reply #1 on: July 30, 2018, 12:29:14 »
The thing that annoyed me all to hell with the costing issue is that the AG and PBO costs were not conducive to the sound bite. All the public hears is that a piece of military gear cost X Billions and there is not enough time to tell the public the breakdown of why the government is costing it that way.

They should announce the delivery cost, the cost of the infrastructure to support, the costs of O&M and finally the cost of the people.

edit -  I think this has all been discussed before. :boring:

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 201,635
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,471
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: Auditing C(A)F Capabilities
« Reply #2 on: July 30, 2018, 13:40:43 »
The thing that annoyed me all to hell with the costing issue is that the AG and PBO costs were not conducive to the sound bite. All the public hears is that a piece of military gear cost X Billions and there is not enough time to tell the public the breakdown of why the government is costing it that way.

They should announce the delivery cost, the cost of the infrastructure to support, the costs of O&M and finally the cost of the people.

edit -  I think this has all been discussed before. :boring:

It might have all been discussed before - but until the press, the politicians and the auditors all see things through the same lens it will probably have to be discussed again.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"