- Reaction score
- 22,101
- Points
- 1,360
Altair said:
The US DoD-led competition between the Lockheed YF-35 and Boeing YF-32 in the 1997-2001 timeframe seemed good competitive enough for the Chretien Liberals of the day...what am I missing? ???
The US DoD-led competition between the Lockheed YF-35 and Boeing YF-32 in the 1997-2001 timeframe seemed good competitive enough for the Chretien Liberals of the day...what am I missing? ???
- Reaction score
- 4,722
- Points
- 1,160
Nobody did at that point besides the Americans, who were footing the Lions share of the bill for R&D.
Altair
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 717
- Points
- 1,110
Yup.PuckChaser said:
And just because canada was invested in the program nothing was stopping the government from holding a open competition.
Which, if all of you to be believed, the F35 wins hands down. Sources within DND still decided to make it so there was no such competition. Which tells me that there are probably other planes that can do the job and DND didn't want those planes to potentially win.
And when this all comes to light, DND looks bad and surprise surprise, the public don't trust the experts at DND anymore.
If DND had done it's job properly, and had the F35 won a open competition and had DND not meddled and pushes it's biased viewpoint on PW the conservatives wouldn't have gotten nearly as much heat as they did on the file, causing them to wipe their hands of it until after the election or caused the liberals to fed on the publics distrust of the whole situation and promise a jet other than the F35 which will probably end up being the stupid hornet.
This all stems from a F35 or bust attitude in the forces, which clearly still exists today.
- Reaction score
- 8,305
- Points
- 1,160
Altair said:
Always.
Altair said:
No. I don't. In order to avoid the cost of a competitive tendering process and expedite delivery of F35s (thereby preventing the opening of any future capability gaps) the regulations in place at the time permitted the operating department to sole source the material, if it identified and justified an appropriate exception. It did. PWGSC agreed.
"Identify and justify" can be stated flatly as an administrative requirement. Or an accusatory tone could be read in, if one were so inclined.
Altair said:
So there does not have to be an open competition then.
Altair said:
More or less? Did they or did they not?
PWGSC supported the exception that deemed a competition was not necessary.
As G2G and others have pointed out - a competition would have been a competition on top of the Boeing-Lockmart competition that Boeing had already lost.
Of what, precisely, is this "open competition" supposed to consist? Can we buy ringside/trackside tickets to watch it, and cheer our favourite entrant on?
The data has been analysed, and a decision was made. What more is required? Please tell me.
"Open competition" gets tossed around a lot, but nobody has defined it. I am convinced that it was dreamed up by an opponent of the programme purely to get an ignorant media, populace, and political regime all stirred up. People similarly and ignorantly claim that, because it is stealthy, that it is a first-strike aircraft, and that that, somehow, is bad. It can carry nuclear weapons (what can't?), so I expect that that will soon be added to the list of nonsense. It only has one engine, so is no good in our north. It won't work in the cold. It's a flop. It's a "sole-source" contract - as would any other choice be; whatever aircraft is selected, there is only one source for it.
All nonsense, every shred of it.
The data has been analysed, and a decision was made. What more is required? Please tell me.
"Open competition" gets tossed around a lot, but nobody has defined it. I am convinced that it was dreamed up by an opponent of the programme purely to get an ignorant media, populace, and political regime all stirred up. People similarly and ignorantly claim that, because it is stealthy, that it is a first-strike aircraft, and that that, somehow, is bad. It can carry nuclear weapons (what can't?), so I expect that that will soon be added to the list of nonsense. It only has one engine, so is no good in our north. It won't work in the cold. It's a flop. It's a "sole-source" contract - as would any other choice be; whatever aircraft is selected, there is only one source for it.
All nonsense, every shred of it.
- Reaction score
- 4,722
- Points
- 1,160
Altair said:
I was told at work once that whenever recommending change, it should be revolutionary not simply evolutionary. A Super Hornet/Gripen/Rafale/Eurofighter is an evolutionary change, big money for small increases in capability. The F-35 is the only aircraft that provides revolutionary change, with relatively similar costs to any evolutionary aircraft.
Of course people want the revolutionary change. We're stuck with whatever we buy until 2060.
Jarnhamar
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 7,066
- Points
- 1,160
Altair said:
Honest question here Altair.
Why do you make a bit of a scene telling everyone you won't post in this thread anymore then continue to do so? I'm not sure if it's intentional or not but you're coming across as very emotionally vested in this.
Has anyone heard any reports on F-35 performance out of Red Flag?
Red Flag 16-3 was the first full mission exercise (US only - no foreign nations involved) with the F-35B incorporated in packages along with F-22s, F-15s, F-16s, F-18s, and others (even A-4s!) :nod:. The exercise concluded a week ago, so I would have expected to see some reports of how it went by now.
LM is usually very fast at getting out all the good news, and I am sure their PR department is fully capable of managing two big news stories at the same time (USAF IOC & Red Flag performance).
Harrigan
Red Flag 16-3 was the first full mission exercise (US only - no foreign nations involved) with the F-35B incorporated in packages along with F-22s, F-15s, F-16s, F-18s, and others (even A-4s!) :nod:. The exercise concluded a week ago, so I would have expected to see some reports of how it went by now.
LM is usually very fast at getting out all the good news, and I am sure their PR department is fully capable of managing two big news stories at the same time (USAF IOC & Red Flag performance).
Harrigan
Similar threads
