F-35, boondoggle? Think "Sea King"

In the last couple of weeks, there's been growing discontent about the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II which is intended to be the workhorse of the air forces of Canada, the US and a number of our allies in the years to come.   At first it was just the RAND Corporation and a series of private military analysts who know the realities of the program better than governments.   Then the F-35 flunked a major war game off the coast of Australia.   And these in 2008, was two years before Canada formally opted into the program last year.

But now, and surprisingly, the malcontents are to be found within the Pentagon itself.   My fellow blogger Impolitical noted this back in November ... but it's now gotten even worse.   First, the estimated cost for the program for 2443 aircraft -- $382 billion and counting.    And second, it now appears the Defense Department and the Environment Protection Agency are at loggerheads over concerns the plane may not mean emissions and noise regulations -- since a report that was supposed to be released this past week detailing the environmental assessment on this, has been "delayed" three months.

There is potentially a third, and one that must be panicking the Pentagon.   Turns out one of the variants of the plane, the F-35 B, is a VTOL or vertical takeoff and landing -- in that it takes off and lands like a helicopter but then flies in the air like a standard supersonic jet.   Unfortunately, the present iterations of VTOL have been plagued with major safety issues.  Think of the Lockheed F-22 Raptor which was de-funded.   And the Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey (no relation), a Marine turboprop / helicopter hybrid which after tens of billions spent may also be de-funded in favour of a more reliable craft, the Sikorsky UH-60 (a pretty reliable technology from, oh let's say, the 1970s!).

In the present environment in Washington there is huge pressure for spending cuts and there are no more sacred cows, not even the military -- a military which took great pride in spending more on its budget than the civilian government spent on health care, a complete reverse of all if its allies.

It's worth pointing out that due to cost concerns, the UK has switched its order from the F-35B to the F-35C the latter of which is the intended replacement for the F-18, the workhorse of the Canadian Air Force.  (The A series, incidentally, would replace the F-16).

Canada has been involved in the program since 1997, so it's no surprising that we're going in headlong on this.   So really both the Liberals and the Conservatives have a hand in this mess.   And it's true that out of the 2400+ planes being built, we're "only" buying 65.   But here's my question:   It is really so important to Western security that we have an identical plane to our allies, or would another similar plane with similar performance outputs do the job and for less money while employing Canadians for the medium and long terms?

Want proof?   The Sikorsky Sea King.   It proved to be disastrously expensive to operate as well as to maintain for us Canadians.  Not just because of its age, but because our weather challenges made it very prone to corrosion from the beginning.   On the other hand, Marine One, the US President's helicopter, is of the same vintage (the 1960s) and still in marvelous shape -- and keep in mind DC is in the same mid-Atlantic region which is continually pounded by the "Nor'easter" in winter and hurricanes in summer that plague most of the rest of the East Coast from Virginia to Newfoundland.   I don't think it's just a question of service levels quite frankly -- it's possible we just ended up with a bill of goods.

But we usually do -- look at the submarines we bought second hand from the UK when we probably could have built new at home for the same price.

It's amazing there's virtually no debate on this one ... and when questions are raised one is accused of being unpatriotic.

I support our troops wholeheartedly.   I also support our men and women in uniform have the best equipment; after all, with the end of the death penalty, they and cops are the only groups who can kill legally.   But it's Canadian tax money, and we have a right to demand value for money.   It's more important to determine we need the Cadillac than say we want it -- there's a big difference.  If the Pentagon is willing to have a second look at the F-35 then so should our DND -- and there should be no political interference if it's determined we made a mistake.

Better to pick the right plane before 65 of them are built and we end up with even more bills of goods.   We don't need a military industrial complex in Canada -- any more than the US does.

Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.