Search results

Probability of needing that contingency money is baked in to their figure. Basically, the auditors think they'll need that contingency or they'd put in a higher figure.

Manager as far as I know.

There used to be a remuster to NET(S) at PO1 and later that was changed to NET(M) at CPO2. Dunno when the change was made, but probably before 2010 of I still remember it.

Max, Are you sure you can do NORAD/protecting a HVU without a GBAD backstop/training, as well as simultaneously deploying an expeditionary force with what will probably be 55 declining to 45 airframes? I hear what you're saying about the simulators, but that seems to be penny-packeting a lot of...

The B-70 was killed by its price more than anything else. The USAF wasn't all that worried about the B-70's vulnerability to aircraft flying slower than Mach 4. There isn't much out there now that could touch it. This does sound a lot like the F-35 actually.....

They're not supposed to be "either/or", they're supposed to be complementary. Yet we now only have one. Acquisition budget for the aircraft is $5.992 billion or just over $92 million/aircraft. There's a contingency figure of $600 million but that's supposed to cover the entire acquisition...

Thanks, that's very informative. Now what happens if we don't get F-35? Or if the sim training turns out to not work as well as advertised? I should be able to dig up pictures of it deployed near HVU's. The point is however, that it was a point defence system designed to defend a specific...

Great. You'll still have to do it with fewer airframes. The delta between our original number of upgraded aircraft and what we're going to get is larger than what we deployed to Libya, and that's not counting the three upgraded aircraft that have been lost. With that loss rate, you're going to...

We just got rid of ADATS...they were the last AD platform out there. Now it's down to just the fighter force. Next G-20 meeting? It's all you. Next national emergency involving air threats? All you. Next time the US president wants to visit? Again, all you. That may be true, but there aren't...

There were only 6 Voodoo bases, with 2 QRA aircraft at each. That's not that different from what we have to supply now, and that was when the rest of the military had ways of dealing with aircraft they didn't like much. The F-35's or whatever we actually get are going to be the ONLY air defences...

I've heard promises like that a few times. Sometimes they work out, but not always. Usually it seems to break down on just how many LRU's are stocked and how long actual MTBF is vs projected.

My mistake, it was Deschamps, not Lawson. Fantino pretty much overrode him though, and said everything will be done in Canada. http://www.1310news.com/2011/12/13/moving-f-35-training-to-canada-depends-on-money-and-buildings-air-chief/

The CDS has already stated that we're not joining the big US training package...410 will be continued. I think you've missed deep maintenance as well. We found out with the Sea Kings what a "max effort" will cost later on as all that deferred maintenance catches up.

And we have enough frigates that we have the option of doing what you've stated. If the frigate numbers were cut to only permit EEZ patrols, their multi-purpose capabilities would be largely wasted. We've also had the airframe numbers to permit that. The new project will reduce airframe...

More like the current multi-purpose aircraft we mostly use for AI that we have now can be replaced by either life-extended versions of the same aircraft or whichever new aircraft that can do the same AI job and is the lowest cost. I counter your suggestion with the observation that we tend to...

Generally if aircraft don't want to be seen by a ship, they approach below the radar horizon. LO doesn't enter into it. In the case you mentioned, the fighters would generally be coached on to the target by either another ship or an Aurora. Still not getting your point.

I don't understand your point. Could you clarify? OPV's couldn't meet frigate specs. They wouldn't even be allowed to bid. Submarines are holes in the water....that you shovel cash into. The only way the current ones were bought was through extremely creative accounting, and that was with...

The cost of maintenance may or may not be higher than the other options. That would be spelled out in the support bid. The acquisition cost for that option would probably be a whole lot lower, and that will also be spelled out in the bid. None of those reasons are going to mean anything...

It's one of the options, and they're getting a price on it. I think your dismissal of that option is premature. Why do we need a whole lot of multi-role capability? We're buying fewer aircraft than the Voodoo fleet to do the same job, and that's stated as higher priority than expeditionary...

Whatever the Voodoo had appears to have been good enough to do the job.