Letter to the Prime Minister F-35
I have to preface my recent correspondence (pasted below with his assistant's response) with the Prime Minister and Minister of Defence by saying that I think the F-35 is a very cool jet and would give my right hand to fly in one (it's ok i'm left handed). But in an age when even the United States airforce is now training the majority of it's new pilots to fly remote control planes (over 300 new R/C pilots in 2010), success in dogfighting scenarios seems to becoming less and less relevant as a measure of who will have air superiority. And stealth technology is very cool, but I've spoken with plenty of air traffic controllers in the past while flying my RV-4 and no one could see me on their radar in my considerably less expensive, non-stealth aircraft. Frankly, when a Russian bomber enters Canadian airspace and we scramble a jet to meet it, I WANT them to know a jet fighter is on it's way to show them the door, not some Stealth plane that they can't see-that's technology for sneaking into someone's backyard not chasing them out. That's the way I see it. My correspondence with the Prime Minister's office follows below......
Dear Prime Minister Harper,
I am writing this letter to express my concern over our government's plan to purchase 65 F-35 fighter jets, a decision which I believe is not best-suited for our country's needs. As a pilot for over 25 years and avid aviation buff (see canadianaerospace.weebly.com), it is my strong conviction that acquiring and enhancing our current fleet of F-18 jets would be a more reasonable purchase both in terms of overall value and in fulfilling the various roles which we require of an air combat jet.
This aircraft is widely considered to be an underachiever within the aviation community: 'US defense specialist Winslow T. Wheeler and airplane designer Pierre Sprey who called the F-35 'heavy and sluggish' as well as having a 'pitifully small load for all that money', and went on to criticize the value for money of the stealth measures as well as lacking fire safety measures. His final conclusion was that any air force would be better off maintaining its fleets of F-16s and F/A-18s compared to buying into the F-35 program.'
We could purchase at least two top of the line F-18's for the price of one of these aircraft with the advantage of already having experienced pilots and groudcrew for the F-18. The F-35 is also a short range fighter and since we have one of the largest land masses in the world to defend, it only makes sense that we maintain a fleet of aircraft capable of covering the large distances.
I appreciate the value this program has created for Canada as an informed partner in the development program of this aircraft, but to commit to purchase them is a poor decision.
Unfortunately, I will not be able to support your party if the decision is made to proceed with this purchase.
Best regards,
Edward Das
ps. As always, my invitation for a barbeque at my Kitchener residence is still open pending your availability. (519)893-6934
August 17, 2010
Edward Das
Ed.das@rogers.com
Dear Mr. Das:
On behalf of the Prime Minister, thank you for your e-mail of July 26 regarding our Government's decision to acquire the fifth generation Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) F-35 aircraft. Our office has noted your concerns. Rest assured your comments have been carefully reviewed.
We have taken the liberty of forwarding your correspondence to the Minister of National Defence, the Honourable Peter MacKay. As this matter falls under the Minister's responsibilities, his office is best equipped to address your concerns. Should you have any additional questions or comments, we would encourage you to dialogue with the Minister.
Once again, thank you for taking the time to write.
Sincerely,
Salpie Stepanian
Assistant to the Prime Minister
cc The Hon. Peter MacKay, P.C., M.P., Minister of National Defence
/jtd
>>> From : Edward Das ed.das@rogers.com Received : 26 Jul 2010 01:03:59 PM >>>
>>> Subject : F-35 fighter jet >>>>
I have to preface my recent correspondence (pasted below with his assistant's response) with the Prime Minister and Minister of Defence by saying that I think the F-35 is a very cool jet and would give my right hand to fly in one (it's ok i'm left handed). But in an age when even the United States airforce is now training the majority of it's new pilots to fly remote control planes (over 300 new R/C pilots in 2010), success in dogfighting scenarios seems to becoming less and less relevant as a measure of who will have air superiority. And stealth technology is very cool, but I've spoken with plenty of air traffic controllers in the past while flying my RV-4 and no one could see me on their radar in my considerably less expensive, non-stealth aircraft. Frankly, when a Russian bomber enters Canadian airspace and we scramble a jet to meet it, I WANT them to know a jet fighter is on it's way to show them the door, not some Stealth plane that they can't see-that's technology for sneaking into someone's backyard not chasing them out. That's the way I see it. My correspondence with the Prime Minister's office follows below......
Dear Prime Minister Harper,
I am writing this letter to express my concern over our government's plan to purchase 65 F-35 fighter jets, a decision which I believe is not best-suited for our country's needs. As a pilot for over 25 years and avid aviation buff (see canadianaerospace.weebly.com), it is my strong conviction that acquiring and enhancing our current fleet of F-18 jets would be a more reasonable purchase both in terms of overall value and in fulfilling the various roles which we require of an air combat jet.
This aircraft is widely considered to be an underachiever within the aviation community: 'US defense specialist Winslow T. Wheeler and airplane designer Pierre Sprey who called the F-35 'heavy and sluggish' as well as having a 'pitifully small load for all that money', and went on to criticize the value for money of the stealth measures as well as lacking fire safety measures. His final conclusion was that any air force would be better off maintaining its fleets of F-16s and F/A-18s compared to buying into the F-35 program.'
We could purchase at least two top of the line F-18's for the price of one of these aircraft with the advantage of already having experienced pilots and groudcrew for the F-18. The F-35 is also a short range fighter and since we have one of the largest land masses in the world to defend, it only makes sense that we maintain a fleet of aircraft capable of covering the large distances.
I appreciate the value this program has created for Canada as an informed partner in the development program of this aircraft, but to commit to purchase them is a poor decision.
Unfortunately, I will not be able to support your party if the decision is made to proceed with this purchase.
Best regards,
Edward Das
ps. As always, my invitation for a barbeque at my Kitchener residence is still open pending your availability. (519)893-6934
August 17, 2010
Edward Das
Ed.das@rogers.com
Dear Mr. Das:
On behalf of the Prime Minister, thank you for your e-mail of July 26 regarding our Government's decision to acquire the fifth generation Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) F-35 aircraft. Our office has noted your concerns. Rest assured your comments have been carefully reviewed.
We have taken the liberty of forwarding your correspondence to the Minister of National Defence, the Honourable Peter MacKay. As this matter falls under the Minister's responsibilities, his office is best equipped to address your concerns. Should you have any additional questions or comments, we would encourage you to dialogue with the Minister.
Once again, thank you for taking the time to write.
Sincerely,
Salpie Stepanian
Assistant to the Prime Minister
cc The Hon. Peter MacKay, P.C., M.P., Minister of National Defence
/jtd
>>> From : Edward Das ed.das@rogers.com Received : 26 Jul 2010 01:03:59 PM >>>
>>> Subject : F-35 fighter jet >>>>
Sept 19, 2010 follow-up letter to Defence Minister Peter McKay after not receiving a response from my earlier correspondence which was forwarded to him.
Dear Honourable Mr McKay,
I'm writing this letter to express my frustration with our government's plan to purchase the F-35 fighter jet. The last time my government bought new fighters I was still in public school but I clearly remember that a fair competition was held to decide which aircraft best suited our needs. The criteria were clearly laid out as to what was required and a number of aircraft manufacturers showed off their best aircraft with the Hornet ultimately being decided the winner. Fast forward to today and suddenly we're buying a new replacement with no open competition in a market where there are some very good alternatives including the updated Super Hornet and Eurofighter and my government decides to simply spend my tax dollars on the most expensive and least proven aircraft available. As a pilot, I acknowledge that the F-35 is a really neat plane with it's ability to vector thrust and hide it's bombs inside so that it has a better stealth profile but as I mentioned to the Prime Minister (and which his office apparently neglected to pass onto yours since I've been waiting for a reply for some time), I do not want my country involved in any war requiring stealth intrusions into foreign airspace-I want a fighter to protect Canadian airspace and I WANT intruding aircraft to see my kick-ass fighter coming to escort them out the door when our airspace is violated. P:lease reconsider purchasing this aircraft- I think there are better and more suitable aircraft available to fulfil our nation's air defence requirements Than the F-35. At the very least, we should hold an open competition with defined requirements of what it is that we need rather than picking the jet with the coolest options. sincerely Ed Das ps. I have a long outstanding invitation to the Prime Minister to join me for a backyard BBQ at my house in Kitchener which you are also welcome to attend should you care to drop by. Most days are fine except Mondays.
Dear Honourable Mr McKay,
I'm writing this letter to express my frustration with our government's plan to purchase the F-35 fighter jet. The last time my government bought new fighters I was still in public school but I clearly remember that a fair competition was held to decide which aircraft best suited our needs. The criteria were clearly laid out as to what was required and a number of aircraft manufacturers showed off their best aircraft with the Hornet ultimately being decided the winner. Fast forward to today and suddenly we're buying a new replacement with no open competition in a market where there are some very good alternatives including the updated Super Hornet and Eurofighter and my government decides to simply spend my tax dollars on the most expensive and least proven aircraft available. As a pilot, I acknowledge that the F-35 is a really neat plane with it's ability to vector thrust and hide it's bombs inside so that it has a better stealth profile but as I mentioned to the Prime Minister (and which his office apparently neglected to pass onto yours since I've been waiting for a reply for some time), I do not want my country involved in any war requiring stealth intrusions into foreign airspace-I want a fighter to protect Canadian airspace and I WANT intruding aircraft to see my kick-ass fighter coming to escort them out the door when our airspace is violated. P:lease reconsider purchasing this aircraft- I think there are better and more suitable aircraft available to fulfil our nation's air defence requirements Than the F-35. At the very least, we should hold an open competition with defined requirements of what it is that we need rather than picking the jet with the coolest options. sincerely Ed Das ps. I have a long outstanding invitation to the Prime Minister to join me for a backyard BBQ at my house in Kitchener which you are also welcome to attend should you care to drop by. Most days are fine except Mondays.
Oct 25, 2010 response from Peter McKay about my F-35 complaint which clearly is a"one response fits all' reply to any F-35 complaints. And he didn't even RSVP my BBQ invitation.
And I still don't know what criteria were used to determine that the F-35 is the best aircraft to provide Canadians with safety and security. I can only assume no one has told him that McDonnell still plans on making the F-18 for the foreseeable future, and they seem to have a pretty good grasp of what makes an effective fighter plane.
Dear Mr. Das:
Your e-mail concerning the Joint Strike Fighter was forwarded to me by
the Office of the Prime Minister. I appreciate the opportunity to
address your concerns, and please accept my apology for this delay in
responding.
On July 16, 2010, the Government of Canada announced its decision to
acquire 65 Joint Strike Fighter F-35s, an unparalleled fighter aircraft
that will help the Canadian Forces defend the sovereignty of Canadian
airspace, remain a strong and reliable partner in the defence of North
America through NORAD, and provide Canada with an effective and modern
capability to meet the challenges of the 21st century.
As set out in the Canada First Defence Strategy, Canada requires a
fighter aircraft to replace the CF-18 Hornet and contribute to the
safety and security of Canadians while effectively supporting foreign
policy and national security objectives. The F-35 is the best aircraft
to achieve these goals.
As a partner in the Joint Strike Fighter program since 1997, Canada
participated in the extensive and rigorous competitive process, which
led to the selection of Lockheed Martin and its partners as the Joint
Strike Fighter manufacturer in 2001.
Canada's participation in the Joint Strike Fighter program brings
significant benefits to Canadian industry. With a long-term investment
in this aircraft, Canada's defence industry has a unique opportunity to
be a part of the Joint Strike Fighter global supply chain, benefiting
from the sale of thousands of aircraft, as well as contracts with a
potential value of $13 billion. This will bring high-tech jobs and
sustained economic benefits to regions across Canada.
The Government of Canada has committed $9 billion to the acquisition of
the 65 F-35 aircraft, associated weapons, infrastructure, initial
spares, training simulators, contingency funds, and project operating
costs. The Canadian Forces will receive 65 F-35 Lightning II aircraft,
and delivery is expected to start in 2016.
I trust this information is of assistance, and thank you for writing.
Sincerely,
Peter MacKay
Minister of National Defence
c.c. Office of the Prime Minister
MCU2010-07875
March 22 2011 The purchase price of a single F-35 has now ballooned to 163 million per jet with an expected lifetime cost of 450 million per jet. They better not crash any. Deployment has been delayed to 2018 due to development problems hmmm....sounds like a real winner.
April 1 2011 Radio interview about the F-35 with me on 570 news: http://www.570news.com/listen/listenplayer/206336--11am-red-friday-discussion-on-f35-jets
April 1 2011 Radio interview about the F-35 with me on 570 news: http://www.570news.com/listen/listenplayer/206336--11am-red-friday-discussion-on-f35-jets
April 21 2011 SINGAPORE — Japan has issued its much-anticipated request for proposals (RFP) for a replacement of their F-4 fighters and three aircraft are in contention: the Boeing F/A-18E/F, Eurofighter Typhoon and Lockheed Martin F-35. So, bring it on F-35; apparently the F/A-18E/F is good enough to go toe to toe with Canada's preferred choice. It'll be interesting to see which jet comes out on top.
March 9 2011
The Harper government reports $9 billion it intends to spend on 65 of the jets is the final cost.The government won't have a firm price until the 1st delivery currently set around 2016 sometime. Then 20 years service contract is going to be an extra 7 billion according to the airforce.
The cost for 20 years' of in-service support remains a matter of debate, with the air force insisting it will only run in the neighbourhood of an additional $7 billion — a figure the Parliamentary Budget Officer disputes.
The Pentagon estimates suggest the maintenance bill could run between US$14 billion and US$19 billion.
I wonder what I'll be reporting here in 2016 but I'll bet the numbers go higher when someone in the airforce finally has to acknowledge the ever increasing costs.
The cost for 20 years' of in-service support remains a matter of debate, with the air force insisting it will only run in the neighbourhood of an additional $7 billion — a figure the Parliamentary Budget Officer disputes.
The Pentagon estimates suggest the maintenance bill could run between US$14 billion and US$19 billion.
I wonder what I'll be reporting here in 2016 but I'll bet the numbers go higher when someone in the airforce finally has to acknowledge the ever increasing costs.
