But Mike Sullivan, director of acquisition management at the US General Accountability Office, said he doesn't know where that estimate comes from.110 Million for a stealthy, high performance cutting edge airplane? High. Above projected costs. But still a bargain. And that's if Carter isn't able to drive the price point lower.
"That's not a number that I am familiar with at all," he said in an interview Tuesday with CBC's Power & Politics with Evan Solomon, cautioning he hasn't seen the methodology behind the numbers.
Sullivan said the estimated cost of the F-35A model that Canada is buying is "in the low 100 millions."
"Probably somewhere between $110-115 million," he said.
The critics keep losing.
The critics keep winning.
ReplyDeleteAt least here in the Netherlands, were the main critisism is the (ever rising) price.
The source of the Canadian numbers have been explained quite clearly by the ministry. They refer to the SAR09 flyaway cost in Then Year dollars. Sullivan however is refering to the more recent estimated procurement cost which naturally is much higher.
ReplyDeleteB. Bolsøy
Oslo
Just look at the comments to that story, though.
ReplyDeleteMy fellow Canadians have a twisted notion of our military as mere peacekeepers; it is a national myth, in fact.
The CF-18 replacement will be cancelled and most Canadians won't give a damn.
No one likes to get to the cashier and find the price is higher than the sticker. This is no different. What ever you're buying may well be worth that higher price but you always feel a little disappointed and cheated, even if rationally you aren't. We are talking about a plane that was originally suppose to cost $50M, but now costing double. For that price you could get 2-3 F/A-18s, and its probably worth as much... just not too much more. The price is moving into the realm where a truely downsized F22 would meet the cost. Just always struck me the F35's a bit to general purpose to be given the roles that are being assigned to it. Its a bit like the humvee, great utility, flexible in its use, but it should never be expected to stand up to or be compared to certain threats, since if it ever gets into that position your planners are doing something very wrong.
ReplyDeleteI keep posing this, but is there any reason the F35, isn't designated F/A-35, given the roles that its intended for?
Harper is still sticking by his numbers.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/124185/canadian-premier-disputes-pentagon%E2%80%99s-price-tag-for-f_35%2C-says-he-knows-better.html