 Boeing touts fighter jet to rival F-35 — at half the price In a dogfight of defence contractors, the hunter can quickly become the hunted. It's happening now to the F-35, as Boeing targets the stealth fighter with its own jet, the Super Hornet. Terry Milewski reports.Commentsview comments in forum Page 1 2 You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
Share
Who voted on this?
|
Mobile
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2025 by Canadaka.net
I'd like to think we'd get more (say 80-90), but in this age of shaky economic times and deficits, I wouldn't hold my breath.
With all of that in mind then maybe now is the best time to cut a deal with Boeing?
It looks like a great aircraft, suited to our needs, proven design, a whole lot cheaper to buy and operate, and probably operational a lot sooner than F-35's.
If we could buy more of them that would be a plus too. Sixty to sixty-five front line fighters is not much. 90 to 100 would be better.
As this issue drags on, I'm leaning more and more toward Super Hornets.
It looks like a great aircraft, suited to our needs, proven design, a whole lot cheaper to buy and operate, and probably operational a lot sooner than F-35's.
If we could buy more of them that would be a plus too. Sixty to sixty-five front line fighters is not much. 90 to 100 would be better.
That might be possible if the government waas running a surplus, but odds are, the deal will stay as it is and the government will 'pocket' the savings to spend elsewhere.
That might be possible if the government waas running a surplus, but odds are, the deal will stay as it is and the government will 'pocket' the savings to spend elsewhere.
"Government" and "savings"... two words that make me smile every time I see them used in the same sentence.
That might be possible if the government waas running a surplus, but odds are, the deal will stay as it is and the government will 'pocket' the savings to spend elsewhere.
Very likely. A fully-capable Arctic icebreaker perhaps? One could always hope.
"Government" and ""... two words that make me smile every time I see them used in the same sentence.
"Re-allocated unused political capital" then.
The problem for Canada is that the knobs at DOD will take the base $55 million Super Bug and turn it into a $75 million Super Bug with all the additions and deletions required for Canadian "kit". Who knew slapping all those bilingual stickers all over an airplane would end up adding so much to the cost?
Don't forget the cost of changing "DOD" to "DND"
That might be possible if the government waas running a surplus, but odds are, the deal will stay as it is and the government will 'pocket' the savings to spend elsewhere.
"Government" and "savings"... two words that make me smile every time I see them used in the same sentence.
Well, as I said, they would just spend it elsewhere, hence no real savings...
That might be possible if the government waas running a surplus, but odds are, the deal will stay as it is and the government will 'pocket' the savings to spend elsewhere.
Very likely. A fully-capable Arctic icebreaker perhaps? One could always hope.
We already have two heavy icebreakers (CGS Terry Fox and CGS Louis St.Laurent), with one more coming on stream in 2017 - CGS Diefenbaker.
Unfortunately, CGS Diefenbaker is to replace the CGS Louis St.Laurent, so we'll still only have two.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equipment_ ... oast_Guard
As this issue drags on, I'm leaning more and more toward Super Hornets.
It looks like a great aircraft, suited to our needs, proven design, a whole lot cheaper to buy and operate, and probably operational a lot sooner than F-35's.
If we could buy more of them that would be a plus too. Sixty to sixty-five front line fighters is not much. 90 to 100 would be better.
That might be possible if the government waas running a surplus, but odds are, the deal will stay as it is and the government will 'pocket' the savings to spend elsewhere.
Likely on the woefully under budgeted ship building program
Unfortunately, CGS Diefenbaker is to replace the CGS Louis St.Laurent, so we'll still only have two.
For the vast amount of Arctic we have, that seems woefully inadequate.