F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

[Journeyman]

#F35 Joint program office has not received notice (yet?) of any change to Canada's commitment to acquire #F35.

:not-again:  Ah, the cuckolded is always the last to know.  Sad, really.

 

[The Bread Guy]

This from CTV, from more sources without faces/names....

The cost of buying and servicing the F-35 stealth fighter jets that Ottawa has been planning to purchase could reach $40 billion, CTV News has learned ahead of the government’s report on the financial implications of the program.

The report, which will be released next week, will kick off a review of the entire jet fighter procurement process and the need to replace Canada’s aging fleet of CF-18 jets ....

And more from Sun Media's Hill reporter, also from those who will not be named yet.....

The federal government's updated cost estimates for the F-35 fighter jet will be tabled in Parliament next week, just before MPs go home for their Christmas break, QMI Agency sources confirm.

The new figure will come from the National Fighter Procurement Secretariat, which was set up after auditor general Michael Ferguson's report last spring slammed a $25-billion National Defence estimate to buy and fly 65 of the jets over 20 years and asked for a full life-cycle cost projection.

A senior official familiar with the secretariat's work says the new figure will predict costs over a 42-year life cycle, resulting in a figure that's much higher than $25 billion because it will include development, purchase, operation and disposal costs.

"It's a very substantive process," said the official, noting that accounting firm KPMG has verified the work.

Still, National Defence officials say they doubt the reliability of projections so far into the future.

(....)

QMI Agency has also learned the secretariat's report will spur a "full and substantive" options analysis of other possible replacements for the CF-18, including those that don't offer the same stealth capability, but may be cheaper.

Asked whether he still believes in the F-35, Defence Minister MacKay says his goal is to get fighter jets "as good, preferably better" than the CF-18.

"The aircraft that I certainly "¦ (think) meets that need, there's only one," said MacKay. "People have talked about other aircraft, but what we need to do is get the best equipment for the best pilots in our country."

 

[HB_Pencil]

Now, I believe, we can start chanting "We told you so!  We told you so!"  ;D

We'll see. I'd like to see KPMG's methodology and the actual numbers before making snap decisions. Frankly, I'm not sure where these figures come from, partly because it should be based on US numbers which are publicly available. All I can point to is a similar Audit conducted by the Australian National Audit Office which said:

The most comprehensive systems engineering review of the JSF Program to date was the 2010 Technical Baseline Review (TBR), which in January 2011 led to a budget increase of US$4.6 billion. That increase was needed to fund the program’s March 2012 cost and schedule rebaseline, which included the SDD phase being extended by three years to 2019. At the same time, budget considerations and concurrency risks drove a decision to further reduce the numbers of aircraft being produced in LRIP lots. Data from Lockheed Martin’s Earned Value Management System indicates that, since the TBR, the program has been achieving its cost and schedule goals in a more sustained manner than previously, indicating the potential for the program to continue progress within its cost and schedule parameters.

73. The US Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009, prompted by the cost overruns in the JSF Program and other programs, has driven a strong focus towards delivering better value to the taxpayer. For the JSF Program in particular, the US Department of Defense has adopted a proactive approach to pricing through a Should-Cost initiative, which requires program managers to justify each element of program cost and show how it is improving. In the first half of 2012, negotiations for the next F-35 production contract were being conducted within a Fixed Price Incentive Firm Target contract arrangement. This is expected to lead to Lockheed Martin and the US Government sharing equally the burden of any cost overruns over a contract Target Price and up to a Ceiling Price, which is set at 6.5 per cent above the Target Price; any costs above the Ceiling Price are to be Lockheed Martin’s responsibility.

The GAO report state the same things. So since 2010 the cost figures have stabilized, and yet there is some sort of discrepancy between this and the government's figures. So throwing figures like 40 billion around doesn't tell me much.


Furthermore, the cost of other fighters under this methodology should be higher as well. I'd like to see more before stating making a judgement.

 

[Edward Campbell]

It's the front page story in the print editions:

"Tories seek alternatives to F-35 jet as cost soars to more than $40-billion" - The Globe and Mail

"F-35s scrapped by Tories as audit puts true cost past $30B" - The National Post

"Federal government cancels F-35 fighter purchase" - The Ottawa Citizen

 

[Edward Campbell]

Andrew MacDougall, the Prime Minister's Director of Communications, says that the "cabinet has not taken a decision on the F-35. The Government will fulfill its seven point plan."

The seven point plan is:

"In response to the Auditor General's 2012 Spring report on Replacing Canada's Fighter Jets, the Government announced on April 3, 2012 the following action plan to address the Auditor General's findings and recommendation:

1. The funding envelope allocated for the acquisition of the F-35 will be frozen;

2. The Government of Canada will immediately establish a new F-35 Secretariat within the Department of Public Works and Government Services Canada. The Secretariat will play the lead coordinating role as the Government moves to replace Canada's CF-18 fleet. A committee of Deputy Ministers will be established to provide oversight of the F-35 Secretariat;

3. The Department of National Defence, through the F-35 Secretariat, will provide annual updates to Parliament.  These updates will be tabled within a maximum of 60 days from receipt of annual costing forecasts from the Joint Strike Fighter program office, beginning in 2012. The Department of National Defence will also provide technical briefings as needed through the F-35 Secretariat on the performance schedule and costs;

4. The Department of National Defence will continue to evaluate options to sustain a Canadian Forces fighter capability well into the 21st century;

5. Prior to project approval, Treasury Board Secretariat will first commission an independent review of DND's acquisition and sustainment project assumptions and potential costs for the F-35, which will be made public;

6. Treasury Board Secretariat will also review the acquisition and sustainment costs of the F-35 and ensure full compliance with procurement policies prior to approving the project;

7. Industry Canada, through the F-35 Secretariat, will continue identifying opportunities for Canadian Industry to participate in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter global supply chain, as well as other potential benefits for Canada in sustainment, testing, and training, and will provide updates to Parliament explaining the benefits.”

Source: http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/stamgp-lamsmp/mandat-tor-eng.html

This is still a very complex business with two cabinet committees (P7P and Government Operations), four departments (DND, PWGSC, TB and IC) plus a new F-35 Secretariat and an all important Committee of Deputy Ministers all involved.

 

[The Bread Guy]

An interesting "MOAR studies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" development reported in the Globe - highlights mine:

The Harper government is going shopping for alternatives to the controversial F-35 Lightning fighter jet in the most significant demonstration yet that it is prepared to walk away from its first choice for a new warplane.

In an attempt to head off public skepticism that Ottawa’s “options analysis” is something less than a rigorous rethink of which jet is best, the government is enlisting four independent monitors to vet the process.

They will include retired Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard, who led the NATO mission in Libya, and University of Ottawa professor Philippe Lagassé, an outspoken critic of the jet procurement ....

 

[The Bread Guy]

Andrew MacDougall, the Prime Minister's Director of Communications, says that the "cabinet has not taken a decision on the F-35. The Government will fulfill its seven point plan." ....

From MacDougall's Twitter feed here and here.....

The (National Post) story is inaccurate on a number of fronts. The reports from 7 pt plan will be tabled before the House rises .... To elaborate on my previous tweet, Cabinet has not taken a decision on the F-35. The Government will fulfill its seven point plan.

An interesting "MOAR studies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" development reported in the Globe - highlights mine:

.... In an attempt to head off public skepticism that Ottawa’s “options analysis” is something less than a rigorous rethink of which jet is best, the government is enlisting four independent monitors to vet the process.

They will include retired Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard, who led the NATO mission in Libya, and University of Ottawa professor Philippe Lagassé, an outspoken critic of the jet procurement ....

Here's Professor Lagassé's most recent take on the F-35, as part of a column on defence procurement in general ....

.... Declaring that the F-35 was the only aircraft that can replace the CF-18s has produced the exact opposite of the effect sought by the Joint Strike Fighter’s advocates; it led to a wave criticism which led the government to re-examine Canada’s fighter aircraft options. If the F-35 was clearly the best aircraft, it would have prevailed in a rigorous cost-benefit analysis of various alternatives. Despite Thursday’s confusing news about the F-35, the government’s insistence that all options are being examined suggests that such a comparative assessment may eventually take place ....

 

[Edward Campbell]

There's a rumour floating about (online) that Prof Philippe Lagassé, who is, generally, regarded as a pretty fierce critic of the F-35 programme (or maybe process) will be asked to join the government's F-35 rethink project.

 

[Haletown]

Remarkably poor level of journalism covering this story.

Very little has changed despite the headlines and ink spilled.  You are watching a government respond to a hostile political attack on a good policy poorly carried out.  They are backing up a few feet and will climb the hill a different way with suitable cover and less wheel spinning.

Not much to see actually. Carry on, smoke 'em if ya got 'em.

 

[Edward Campbell]

This is being leaked by either:

1. The civil service; or

2. The Conservative information machine.

Care to guess 1 or 2?

 

[The Bread Guy]

There's a rumour floating about (online) that Prof Philippe Lagassé, who is, generally, regarded as a pretty fierce critic of the F-35 programme (or maybe process) will be asked to join the government's F-35 rethink project.

Taken as reportable fact by the Globe & Mail.

This is being leaked by either:

1. The civil service; or

2. The Conservative information machine.

Care to guess 1 or 2?

My answer:  yes.

 

[Maxadia]

In this link on CBC:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/12/06/poli-f35-pmo-government-fighter-jets.html

the author states that:

CBC News has learned the KPMG report is based on a longer and more realistic life cycle for the next-generation stealth fighter, which would therefore also arrive with a higher price tag than previously reported. The actual cost could be as high as $40 billion.

(emphasis is mine)

Why is this a bad thing that the fighter will have a longer life cycle?  Does the author think that it is going to be cheaper to get them out of operation sooner, and start a whole new contract on the next fighter that much sooner? Isn't it like an older car....you keep it around until the  maintenance costs make it too expensive, rather than new car payments?

 

[The Bread Guy]

Twitter update (1)  - lotsa questions in Question Period, quite a few F-35 answers in French, and none being answered so far by the Defence Minister.

Twitter update (2) - Interesting interpretation of what the Liberals signed on to in 2002 with the JSF program, from Denis Coderre:

our government funded a technology not F-35

Riiiiiiiiiight....

 

[Haletown]

Twitter update (1)  - lotsa questions in Question Period, quite a few F-35 answers in French, and none being answered so far by the Defence Minister.

kinda makes me wonder if PM Harper is allowing a potential rival to rotate on the spit a bit here to get some visible political scars he can point to if his leadership is challenged.

Mackay looks bad.

Ambrose looks solid and competent  . . .  future Party leader when Harper is ready to go for his walk in the snow?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Not a fanboy of the F-35, but I am done listening to the complainers as few bring up any real alternatives. It's purely a stick to beat the Conservatives with and almost none of them have given the alternatives more than a passing glance. Meanwhile the plane is slowly but surely meeting it's test protocols and my suspicion is that the VTOL version will be looked upon as a stellar aircraft in the generations to come and one that was perfect for that niche.

 

[The Bread Guy]

kinda makes me wonder if PM Harper is allowing a potential rival to rotate on the spit a bit here to get some visible political scars he can point to if his leadership is challenged.

"Wheels within wheels" isn't impossible, but I wonder if they might be getting their messaging ducks in a row before coming out with one firm "here's what's next"?

 

[Journeyman]

I think "what's next" will be to focus the media on Bouchard, Lagassé, et al until after the next election; we'll see no further movement on a CF-18 replacement until after the next election.

 

[OldSolduer]

I just heard that the Opposition wants the MND to resign.

 

[Haletown]

I just heard that the Opposition wants the MND to resign.

The Opposition wants the Government to resign too, but it is doubtful in the extreme that either the Minister or the Government will pay any heed to what the Opposition wants.

Even if they hold their breath until they turn Conservative Blue. :nod:

 

[The Bread Guy]

I think "what's next" will be to focus the media on Bouchard, Lagassé, et al until after the next election; we'll see no further movement on a CF-18 replacement until after the next election.

:nod:

Meanwhile, all aboard the Liberal outrage train!

Liberal Leader Bob Rae made the following statement today on the Conservative government’s reported cancellation of the F-35 contract:

“The termination of this multi-billion dollar contract has fully exposed the Harper Conservatives’ fiscal incompetence and complete mishandling of the F-35 procurement process. They have spent millions of taxpayer dollars promoting a decision to purchase these fighter jets despite being well-aware of the true and colossal costs.

The Liberal Party of Canada is the only party that has asserted consistently from the outset that this acquisition was fundamentally flawed.

It is time that the Conservatives are held accountable for their complete mismanagement of the largest military procurement in Canada’s history. This failure falls squarely on the shoulders of the Minister of Defence whose incompetence is inexcusable. He acted as spokesman-in-chief for Lockheed-Martin for two years, while the Conservatives knowingly misled taxpayers. Canadians have lost all confidence in this Minister and he must resign.”

Liberal National Defence critic John McKay continued:

“The Harper Conservatives have lost all credibility on the replacement of our CF-18s. Confidence in any future military procurement process will not be achieved until this government apologizes to Canadians for their gross misconduct.”