F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)

[dapaterson]

Yes, we've come a long way from the C-64 to the Samsung Galaxy.  But those are poor comparisons - both are multi-million selling comsumer platforms where software can malfunction with minimal impact.

Military system software, on the other hand, needs exhaustive testing and debugging, and is sold to a very limited audience - the worldwide F35 fleet is estimated to be on the order of 3000 a/c, and having a glitch that causes a system crash or reboot isn't an inconvenience - it's potentially fatal to the operator and others around.

 

[HB_Pencil]

While I think that the Canadian government(s) have seriously mis-handled the "selling" of the F-35 portfolio and I do worry about some of the project's development issues, I think that the F-35 is the right choice for Canada among the available aircraft choices.  I do wonder though about the significant reduction of aircraft types that seems to be happening in the industry.  The aircraft seem to be becoming more and more complex (and expensive) in order to replace several different role-specific airframes.  I worry that (the collective) "we" in the West may end up putting too many eggs in a single basket if the F-35 becomes THE western combat aircraft of choice.  Is there not an advantage to having multiple aircraft types each with their own strengths and weaknesses?  Perhaps there would be an advantage to Canada selecting a different, more specialized aircraft to compliment, rather than supliment, an American F-35 fleet.  The problem is that what other real choices are out there that would make sense for us to purchase?

Interstingly, that is the line that SAAB took during the 2010 parliamentary committee meetings. They wanted us to purchase the Gripen as a compliment to the F-35 for domestic duties. The problem is that the Gripen NG might cost as much as the F-35, and then you're forced to maintain two aircraft types at once.

You're completely right that there is a huge consolidation ongoing in the market and the F-35 is partly to blame. Through its capability, cost and industrial partnership, the JSF was designed to drive some of its competitors out of the market. On one level its simple economics: the US Navy alone is the second largest customer, and will build more F-35s than Eurofighters that will be in existence. The production scale makes it very very difficult for other countries to compete in the market. 

I think the Eurofighter is in a particularly bad position since losing MMRCA; Germany is really its only stalwart customer remaining, as many have opted to go for the F-35 in the long run. Its tough to say that other aircraft will have strengths over the F-35.... some might have more range and can reach a higher speed (which really isn't that big of an advantage in operational terms.)

Is there a lack of diversity? yes and that will affect allied operations in the future. Of key concern is the F-35's range. While its in excess of the F-16 and F/A-18E, it will be an issue against a countries like Iran or China, and their Anti-access capabilities. That's part of the reason why the USAF decided to start the Next Generation Bomber program and extend the life of their F-15E fleet, while the navy is supporting the X-47B and considering a major upgrade to the F-35C.

 

[GAP]

F-35 order tab set at $10 billion
Kyodo
Friday, May 4, 2012
Article Link

WASHINGTON — Japan will pay an estimated $10 billion (¥802 billion) for its order of 42 F-35 stealth jets at a cost of roughly $240 million (¥19.2 billion) per plane, the U.S. Defense Department reported to Congress, revealing price projections for the first time.

Tokyo has selected the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter produced by a U.S.-led consortium as its next-generation mainstay fighter over various other candidates, including the Eurofighter Typhoon that was aggressively promoted by a European group.

Japan is hoping to procure four F-35s by March 2017, and the Pentagon is expected to start mass producing them at domestic plants in 2019 at the earliest.

While the final, official sales price has yet to be disclosed, the Defense Ministry estimates the fuselage alone will cost around ¥8.9 billion. The sales price per unit includes training and other costs.

Defense Minister Naoki Tanaka has already said Tokyo may cancel the order if the jets' delivery is delayed or the price tag hiked.
end

 

[Haletown]

Of key concern is the F-35's range. While its in excess of the F-16 and F/A-18E, it will be an issue against a countries like Iran or China, and their Anti-access capabilities. That's part of the reason why the USAF decided to start the Next Generation Bomber program and extend the life of their F-15E fleet, while the navy is supporting the X-47B and considering a major upgrade to the F-35C.

Could you elaborate on the range concerns . . .  seems the JSF has decent range on internal fuel and with two wet hard points and 480 and 600 gallon drop tank options, it seems that range should be ok for the majority of missions and roles we want the JSF for.

 

[The Bread Guy]

For The Record: House Speaker Andrew Scheer dismisses F-35 privilege claim ...
by Kady O'Malley Posted: May 7, 2012 3:38 PM Last Updated: May 7, 2012 3:53 PM
... but leaves door open to revisiting the matter if evidence of deliberate attempt to mislead comes to light: <blockquote>"(U)ltimately the Chair has before it two clear statements: the first contained in the report of the Auditor General that some costs were not fully provided to Ministers and Members; and the second, by the Government House Leader accepting the conclusions of the Auditor General.

    In my view, no clear evidence has been presented beyond this and thus, the Chair has no choice but to conclude that, it cannot find that Ministers knew or believed that what they were telling the House was not true or that it was intended to be misleading. In other words, the criteria of demonstrating that Ministers knew their statements to the House were incorrect, and that they intended to mislead the House, has not been met.

    Accordingly, bound as I am by the very narrow parameters that apply in these situations, and without any evidence that the House was deliberately misled, I cannot arrive at a finding of prima facie privilege in this case.

    The House will be aware, however, that the StandingCommittee on Public Accounts has, as part of its ongoing mandate, the responsibility to review and report on all reports of the Auditor General. The House knows that the Committee is seized of the report that has given rise to this question of privilege and is at present proceeding with its examination of the report.

    I remind the House that a determination that a breach of privilege is not prima facie at this time in no way interferes with the right of any Honourable member to raise a new question of privilege should the committee arrive at findings that shed new light on this matter, or should other pertinent information become available. "</blockquote>Read the full ruling here:  House of Commons Speaker Andrew Scheer ruling on the F-35 privilege claim

Edited to add alternate download site for Speaker's ruling here

 

[Rifleman62]

http://digital.nationalpost.com/epaper/viewer.aspx8 May 2012

National Post - MATTHEW FISHER - 8 May 12
   
Stealth campaign against fighter jet

One of the untold stories of the F-35 saga has been how opponents of the aircraft have come to urge Canada to switch from Lockheed Martin’s fifth-generation Lightning II to Boeing’s fourth generation F-18E/F Super Hornet.

In the opinion of one bureaucrat at Public Works, the stealth campaign against the Joint Strike Fighter "has been brilliantly conceived and orchestrated” by Boeing, whose Super Hornet is based on technologies developed in the 1970s.

There have been many suggestions that Canada should buy Boeing’s Super Hornets because the Royal Australian Air Force has bought a few. The U.S. Navy has also recently placed a small order for some additional Super Hornets, but those are being bought to specifically fill a gap caused by delays in the development of the F-35. They are not meant to replace it.

To open the door for the Super Hornet, Canadian critics of the F-35 have clamoured for a competition. But the F-35, then known as the X-35, beat Boeing’s X-32 in a fly-off competition to become the main future U.S. multi-purpose warplane. The Super Hornet was never considered by the U.S. or the eight countries in the Joint Strike Fighter consortium because it was based on old technologies. It also lost out to the F-35 in a Japanese competition.

I saw Super Hornets take off and land many times eight years ago on the USS Abraham Lincoln in the Persian Gulf. It is a magnificent aircraft that meets the challenges of today. But what about tomorrow? Crucially, what the Super lacks and what the F-35 has are stealth characteristics that will be central to future air warfare. Without that you will basically be irrelevant.

If you buy the wrong fighter, you may lose a war. You also end up being a third-tier player unable to undertake tough assignments and, by definition, largely ignored when big international decisions have to be made. This is an outcome some members of the opposition probably want, although they have been publicly hesitant to say so.

You’d never know by listening to Liberal leader Bob Rae that it was the Chrétien government that started down the rocky F-35 road. Nor is there anything to indicate that those Liberals intended to have an open competition for Canada’s next warplane.

A mischievous op-ed piece by a former Liberal aide recently tried to suggest that the F-35 was still a "paper airplane,” falsely or mistakenly comparing it to a European transport aircraft that Canada rejected a few years ago because it really was a "paper airplane.”

The F-35 prototype began flight tests 12 years ago. Several dozen are flying now. Training squadrons have been stood up. Certification courses for ground crew have begun. A Dutch F-35 has rolled off the assembly line.

Although the government has been characteristically silent about it, a Royal Canadian Air Force pilot has already flown an F-35 simulator

 

[Rifleman62]

http://defensetech.org/2012/05/08/17189/

Your F-35 Flight Test Update

Here’s your latest update on the unsinkable F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program’s flight testing from Lockheed Martin — who just yesterday received a $237 million contract from the Pentagon to fix design problems with the jet that were discovered during testing.

Among the highlights of this announcement is the fact that the plane just passed the 15,000 test point mark, meaning that it has completed 25 percent of its total — System Development and Design — test program.

Here’s the word from Lockheed:

    FORT WORTH, Texas, May 8, 2012 – Lockheed Martin’s [NYSE: LMT] F-35 Lightning II flight test program continues to make progress during the first four months of 2012​.In March, the program completed 123 test flights totaling 223 flight hours, setting a record for the most System Development and Demonstration (SDD) flights and flight hours for a single month.During the time period, the SDD fleet surpassed the 15,000 total test point threshold, completing approximately 25 percent of the SDD program’s entire requirement of more than 59,000 test points. Overall the F-35 test program remains ahead of the 2012 flight test plan, which calls for the accumulation of 1,001 test flights and 7,873 baseline test points as well as additional points beyond the original plan.

    April 30, the program completed 373 flights against a plan of 281and achieved 2,810 test points – 2,307 of which were baseline points earned against a plan of 2,151. At Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., 30 local area orientation flights were completed totaling 39.5 flight hours as progress toward F-35 pilot training checkout continues.

    Another aspect of flight testing is the progressive check out of the latest version of mission system software known as Block 2A.  To date, more than 90 percent of Block 2A airborne software code is complete with more than 85 percent of that code currently being flight or lab tested.  Block 2A flight test is being conducted at Edwards AFB and will continue through this year.  Block 2A is scheduled for “ready for training” in the summer of 2013.

    “The 2012 F-35 flight test program execution continues to build momentum,” said Orlando Carvalho, F-35 executive vice president and general manager. “From flight envelope expansion to night refueling to external weapons testing, our flight test program is off to a good start this year. We are working to build on this success and deliver unprecedented 5th generation fighter performance capabilities – including radar-evading stealth, supersonic speed, extreme agility and the most comprehensive integrated sensor package of any fighter aircraft in history – to our Armed Forces and allies.”

    The F-35 program has accomplished many flight test, production and training milestones since Jan. 1:

        On Jan. 17, demonstrating the ongoing maturation of the F-35 integrated sensor suite, AF-3, an F-35A conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) test jet, completed the first low Distributed Aperture System (DAS) approach.

        On Jan. 18, the first night flight in the history of the F-35 program was completed at Edwards AFB, Calif.

        On Feb. 16, at Edwards AFB, Calif., AF-1, an F-35A CTOL test jet, flew the first external weapons test mission in F-35 program history.

        On March 6, the 33d Fighter Wing at Eglin AFB, Fla., flew its first local F-35 Lightning II sortie, marking a major milestone.

        On March 22, AF-4, an F-35A CTOL jet, completed the first night refueling missionwhen it successfully connected to an Air Force KC-135 tanker and received fuel through the F-35’s boom receptacle.

        On March 28, BF-4, an F-35B short takeoff/vertical landing (STOVL) test jet based at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md., completed the first F-35 flight with two unarmed air intercept missiles known as AIM-120 Instrumentation Measurement Vehicles (IMVs).  The IMVs are used to measure environmental influences such as temperature, vibration and acoustics of the aircraft on the weapon to ensure they do not impact the weapon’s ability to be carried and employed by the aircraft.

        On April 1, the first F-35 Lightning II for the Netherlands rolled out of the F-35 production facility. The Netherlands will use this CTOL jet, known as AN-1, for training and operational tests for pilots and maintainers.

        On April 5, the program completed in-flight refueling of an F-35B STOVL while configured with external weapons at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md. The mission tested the flying qualities of the aircraft while maneuvering with external weapons.

        On April 10, two F-35A CTOLs from the 33d Fighter Wing assigned to Eglin AFB, Fla., completed the unit’s first formation flight. The mission was part of a continuing process to validate pilot syllabus objectives in preparation for future training.

        On April 11, an F-35A CTOL from the 33d Fighter Wing assigned to Eglin, AFB, Fla., completed the unit’s first air-to-air refueling mission with a KC-135R Stratotanker.

        On April 13, BK-1, the United Kingdom’s first F-35 Lightning II production aircraft, flew its inaugural flight. The U.K. Ministry of Defence will use this short takeoff/vertical landing jet for training and operational tests at Eglin AFB, Fla., beginning later this year.

        On April 18, for the first time, two F-35C Lightning II carrier variant test aircraft launched together and conducted formation flying at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Md. The mission tested flying qualities of the aircraft while taking off, landing and flying in formation for more than one hour.

        On April 21, the program completed the first in-flight refueling of F-35A CTOL aircraft while configured with external weapons at Edwards AFB, Calif.The two-hour mission tested the flying qualities of the aircraft while maneuvering with external weapons.

    Cumulative flight test activity totals for 2012 through April 30 are provided below:

    ·        F-35A CTOL jets have flown 164 times.
    ·        F-35B STOVL aircraft have completed 122 flights, 114 of which began with a short takeoff. Additionally, F-35B STOVL aircraft have conducted 49 vertical landings.
    ·        F-35C carrier variant (CV) jets have flown 87 times.

    Cumulative flight test activity totals for the duration of the program through April 30 are provided below:

    ·        F-35A CTOL jets have flown 811 times.
    ·        F-35B STOVL aircraft have completed 711 flights, 533 of which began with a short takeoff. F-35B STOVL aircraft have also conducted 328 vertical landings.
    ·        F-35C CV jets have flown 279 times.

    Since December 2006, F-35s have flown 2,066 times and accrued more than 3,000 cumulative flight hours. This total includes 91 flights from the original test aircraft, AA-1; 1,801 SDD test flights; and 174 production-model flights.

http://www.defense.gov/contracts/contract.aspx?contractid=4785

          Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, is being awarded a $237,740,000 modification to the previously awarded fixed-price-incentive-fee (firm target) F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Low Rate Initial Production IV contract (N00019-09-C-0010) for changes to the configuration baseline hardware or software resulting from the JSF development effort.  This modification increases the concurrency cap for the U.S. Marine Corps and United Kingdom short take-off vertical landing aircraft; Air Force and Netherlands conventional take-off and landing aircraft; and Navy carrier variant aircraft.  The concurrency cap establishes the threshold at or under which the contractor is obligated to incorporate government-authorized changes.  Work will be performed in Fort Worth, Texas, and is expected to span multiple years.  Contract funds in the amount of $222,600,000 will expire at the end of the current fiscal year.  This contract modification combines purchases for the Navy ($153,200,000; 64.5 percent); Air Force ($69,400,000; 29 percent); the United Kingdom ($8,200,000; 3.5 percent); and the Netherlands ($6,940,000; 3 percent).  The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity.

Plus:

            Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Ft. Worth, Texas, is being awarded a $14,165,940 modification to a previously awarded cost-plus-award-fee contract (N00019-02-C-3002) to implement required design changes that allow coalition training operations for the Joint Strike Fighter Program.  Work will be performed at Orlando, Fla. (55 percent), Fort Worth, Texas (34 percent), and El Segundo, Calif. (11 percent).  Work is expected to be completed in December 2016.  No funds are being obligated at time of award.  Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year.  The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Md., is the contracting activity.

 

[aesop081]

it has completed 25 percent of its total — System Development and Design — test program.

Long way to go still. Then there is the OT&E...........

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Does that 25% cover all models? I suspect the progression on testing varies by type?

 

[HB_Pencil]

Could you elaborate on the range concerns . . .  seems the JSF has decent range on internal fuel and with two wet hard points and 480 and 600 gallon drop tank options, it seems that range should be ok for the majority of missions and roles we want the JSF for.

Basically one of the major concerns with the F-35 is the anti-access systems being deployed by the Chinese. These systems have the potential to knock out some of the American key power projection facilities and Capabilities in the region. If they able to knock out Okinawa and push Carriers out beyond 700nm of the straits, then the F-35's range is a problem. That was particularly the case when the anticipated range dropped below the KPP last year. Moreover there have been indications that the F-35's range might not be boosted significantly by external tanks, because of the aircraft's aerodynamic profile.

None of this has anything to do with Canada, rather its is mainly a US concern about their tacair viability in a major conflict zone. Its range is superior to most fighters that it is replacing in service, including the F/A-18E.

 

[HB_Pencil]

Long way to go still. Then there is the OT&E...........

OT&E is ongoing as well... which was one of the reasons originally behind concurrency.

 

[aesop081]

OT&E is ongoing as well... which was one of the reasons originally behind concurrency.

To a certain extent but it is limited until the end of the SDD testing phase. Change to that will cause slipage in the OT&E program, concurrent or not.

 

[h3tacco]

OT&E is ongoing as well... which was one of the reasons originally behind concurrency.

Not according to the Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation aka the guy in charge of all US OT&E.

http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2011/    (under DOD programs F-35 Joint Strike Fighter)

The annual JSF report is another excellent document if anyone is interested in an actual open source assessment of the project vice the marketing information pushed out by LM.

Plus how could OT&E have started? As entry criteria you need an Operational aircraft, with Operationally trained pilots and maintainers not a flight science aircraft flown bv DT pilots and maintained by the contractor.

 

[HB_Pencil]

Not according to the Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation aka the guy in charge of all US OT&E.

http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2011/    (under DOD programs F-35 Joint Strike Fighter)

The annual JSF report is another excellent document if anyone is interested in an actual open source assessment of the project vice the marketing information pushed out by LM.

Plus how could OT&E have started? As entry criteria you need an Operational aircraft, with Operationally trained pilots and maintainers not a flight science aircraft flown bv DT pilots and maintained by the contractor.

The JSF Program office has an integral Operational Test team that is used to evaluate the system's operational suitability. It has been testing the aircraft and support systems for the past few years. Its clearly discussed in the Selected Acquisitions Report, which is at the site you linked.

http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2011/pdf/dod/2011f35jsf.pdf

In August 2010, the JSF Program Executive Officer (PEO)
asked the JSF Operational Test Team to assess the initial
training mission capability intended for the integrated
training center.  The JSF Operational Test Team developed an
Operational Utility Evaluation (OUE) plan and submitted it
for approval to DOT&E.  In October 2011, DOT&E identified
the need to resolve specific safety-related deficiencies in
the F-35A and sustainment systems, as well as the need to
build-up maturity in the air system, before the OUE test plan
would be approved.

Much of the most damaging information about the F-35 actually came from the Test Team's evaluation. So is it an official OT&E? Not exactly. But it is occurring with the aim to expedite the system's entry into service rather than waiting for the official OTE&E process.

 

[aesop081]

than waiting for the official OTE&E process.

Which will have to be done anyways.

 

[h3tacco]

The JSF Program office has an integral Operational Test team that is used to evaluate the system's operational suitability. It has been testing the aircraft and support systems for the past few years. Its clearly discussed in the Selected Acquisitions Report, which is at the site you linked.

http://www.dote.osd.mil/pub/reports/FY2011/pdf/dod/2011f35jsf.pdf

In August 2010, the JSF Program Executive Officer (PEO)
asked the JSF Operational Test Team to assess the initial
training mission capability intended for the integrated
training center.  The JSF Operational Test Team developed an
Operational Utility Evaluation (OUE) plan and submitted it
for approval to DOT&E.  In October 2011, DOT&E identified
the need to resolve specific safety-related deficiencies in
the F-35A and sustainment systems, as well as the need to
build-up maturity in the air system, before the OUE test plan
would be approved.

Much of the most damaging information about the F-35 actually came from the Test Team's evaluation. So is it an official OT&E? Not exactly. But it is occurring with the aim to expedite the system's entry into service rather than waiting for the official OTE&E process.

In the US DoD procurement system, Operational Test Teams, for the last 30 years or so, are always involved with weapons design and development from a very early stage. The JSF is not following a new model. For the most part, until the start of  Initial OT&E, they conduct operational assessments of the weapon systems based on Developmental Test results. The majority of the DOT&E FY11 report is exactly that, the OTT assessment of the JSF based on DT findings. The OUE Test Plan was a very limited in scope evaluation of the aircraft in order to commence pilot and maintainer trainer within the limitations of that specific aircraft configuration. It was by no ways OT&E.  No one claims it to be OT&E.

The goal of OT&E is to prove a weapon systems Operational Effectiveness and Operational Suitability. At the end of the day, it is the only evaluation either US Government or Armed Services actually care about. By US law, successful completion of OT&E is required, including addressing all the deficiencies raised, before a weapon system can enter production or be released to service. For the last 30 years, failure in OT&E has either delayed or led to the cancellation of a number of major projects.

 

[Haletown]

More from "Guess the Price"

$78.7 million each . . .  that  should aggravate some of the usual suspects. 

"Using 2012 dollar values, the Pentagon projects the Air Force version of the F-35, the aircraft being purchased by most international customers, to cost $78.7 million. The carrier version’s is projected to cost $87 million, and the Marine Corps’ short-takeoff, vertical-landing version, $106 million."


http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120509/DEFREG02/305090009

 

[Haletown]

and in other news, the F-35 test program marches on.  Steady pace wins the race.


"F-35 Lightning II Flight Test Update

Lockheed Martin’s [NYSE: LMT] F-35 Lightning II flight test program continues to make progress during the first four months of 2012. In March, the program completed 123 test flights totaling 223 flight hours, setting a record for the most System Development and Demonstration (SDD) flights and flight hours for a single month.

During the time period, the SDD fleet surpassed the 15,000 total test point threshold, completing approximately 25 percent of the SDD program’s entire requirement of more than 59,000 test points. Overall the F-35 test program remains ahead of the 2012 flight test plan, which calls for the accumulation of 1,001 test flights and 7,873 baseline test points as well as additional points beyond the original plan.

Through April 30, the program completed 373 flights against a plan of 281and achieved 2,810 test points – 2,307 of which were baseline points earned against a plan of 2,151. At Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., 30 local area orientation flights were completed totaling 39.5 flight hours as progress toward F-35 pilot training checkout continues.

Another aspect of flight testing is the progressive check out of the latest version of mission system software known as Block 2A.  To date, more than 90 percent of Block 2A airborne software code is complete with more than 85 percent of that code currently being flight or lab tested.  Block 2A flight test is being conducted at Edwards AFB and will continue through this year.  Block 2A is scheduled for “ready for training” in the summer of 2013. "

rtr @  http://f-35.ca/2012/f-35-lightning-ii-flight-test-update/

 

[The Bread Guy]

Some of the latest "reading of the Treasury Board tea leaves" from The Hill Times:

Official statements and a DND report that Cabinet tabled in the House of Commons last week indicate Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government has no intention of changing course in its plan to acquire a fleet of 65 F-35 stealth fighter jets—which U.S. forecasts suggest will now cost Canada at least $41-billion to buy and maintain over an expected 30-year minimum lifetime. Treasury Board President Tony Clement (Parry Sound-Muskoka, Ont.) tabled a new yearly planning report for the F-35 project in the Commons last Tuesday which shows the government expects its first aircraft delivery in 2017, one year later than an initial timetable set last year. The report was produced despite the government’s earlier claims, following a scathing report on the project from Auditor General Michael Ferguson on April 3, that the F-35 plan wasn’t a done deal and, at one point, suggesting it was even considering other aircraft for replacement of Canada’s aging CF-18 jet fighters ....

• Earlier this month, we had this (DND RPP 2011-2012) (with this correction), listing the Prime Contractor for the “Next Generation Fighter Capability” project as “Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Fort Worth, Texas, USA”, with the project in the “Option Analysis” phase.
• Now, we have the latest posting at the Treasury Board web page (DND RPP 2012-2013) showing the Prime Contractor as the “Joint Strike Fighter Program Office (JPO), Washington, DC, USA” and the “Major Subcontractor(s)” being “Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, Fort Worth, Texas, USA”, with the project at the following phase:  “Options Analysis: An interim Project Management Office was stood up in October 2010 and work has been initiated to advance a Treasury Board submission seeking the required expenditure authorities for definition stage activities.” 
• Last week, during extensive discussion in the House of Comons, Associate Minister Fantino said this: 

  No decision has been made with respect to the acquisition of our replacement aircraft for the CF-18s. We are not in a position to guess. We are acting very diligently and responsibly on the recommendations of the Auditor General. Decisions will be forthcoming once the facts and figures are known, upon which decisions can be made.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Minister Fantino remains on message in the House during Question Period yesterday

We have, as was indicated, accepted the findings. We are acting on the recommendation of the Auditor General. There is a seven step plan in place. We intend to honour that stepped plan. There is a secretariat in place that will put finite numbers to the issues that the Auditor General was concerned about …. The Government of Canada is taking action to ensure that due diligence, oversight and transparency are firmly embedded in the process to replace Canada’s aging fighter aircraft. We are following a seven step action plan to fulfill and exceed the Auditor General’s recommendation. We are going to stick to that and do the best we can for our men and women in the Canadian Forces, as well as Canadians.