Lets get real here, Trump & Carney are not negotiating , Trump has a team of 750 Top Business people working for him, We have Who oh yea LeBlanc, and a Associate whom is a staunch Demo Crat supporter, That represents us, we were in trouble from the get go, that's why Trump and Carney can still be friends and laugh it off , Going to DC to talk about about FIFA ,great way to get away from the HOC's daily scrutiny,, Changing the channel, Subsidies to our economy is unsustainable economics' How many more Businesses will leave our Country, due to his Net Zero policies and so many activists to appease for votes, while the Country is flaying,
Canada is a mess. Decades of this, but why? Who controls Ottawa, Canada? $ KEBEC $ - WEF, WHO, KEBEK = $ = CONTROL. 'Cons' PP, Ford, where do you stand on equalization, multiculturalism, mass immigration, deporting, massive govt growth, debt, censorship, gun control, property rights...the killing of ostriches? Thats what i thought, nothing, not a word. 100s of billions stolen out of Alberta and Sask., BC, Ont. since the 1960s, 70s. Equalization (kebek takes over 50% every single year) became entrenched in his commie charter = kebek communist Pierre Trudeaus constitution of 1982. Since then, 25 years of Liberal govts have made things worse. 18 years of 'Conservative' govts, the exact same thing. Kebeks Charter = 10s of billions stolen out of Ottawa yearly and funneled into quebec and other metis (they are not french) – towns and companies, all across the country every year, all disguised as grants, subsides, equalization, transfers, bilingualism (code for french) – only outside quebec while kebec bans our language, history = bills 22, 178, 101, 96. Multiculturalism (only outside kebec), massive government growth, control, censorship, surveillance, taxes and debt. Canada now just liberals masquerading as conservatives, the rest, communists masquerading as liberals. ’French power’ in all provinces. They are revising, eliminating our BNA history all over the country as they rename, remove all things English, Scottish. Election fraud? YES, guaranteed. Why? Simple, they lie about everything. Why? Bigoted = Socialist = marixst = commie = kebec runs the nation. This IS the problem, and No party, NO ‘leader’ will touch it. ‘Cons’ Poliver, Ford ?...nothing, not a word. “First quebec, and Ottawa and then the entire country…” ‘french power..." PET. The commie - fascist takeover of Canada and when it began....proof – context- https://beforeitsnews.com/power-elite/2012/01/canada-how-the-communists-took-control-1637973.html Anybody, somebody? Rise up people, plan, train...revolt....lets take back our country. HELP
The whole carney “let’s build anAlberta pipeline” is pure fiction. Dressed up as “ nation building”. The regulatory caveats are designed to kill it. Getting rid of carney is the only way to progress Canada into the country it once was.
Listening to Carney‘s press conference on the 1 o’clock November 27 p.m. news the prevarication is there the pauses with the first (pause a)national interest (pause) various commitments. This is just the start (pause)…all these little peccadilloes just leave me to think this is a gigantic charade! fortunately premium Smith will keep fighting, but until Carney is gone, this won’t happen.
And in case you think, my comment is absurd at 1:17 PM on a.m. 1010 radio Vassy Kapelos show, (she’s not around.)The Global propaganda panel is flat out saying this pipeline will never get built because “dinosaur bones “we don’t need oil. It’s such a flagrant Disregard for reality it just baffles me. Fortunately, I’ll be dead and I won’t care about it, by the time the realization hits.
these people ; they are so totally out of touch with their ideology. It’s spell binding.
I believe Bruan Lilley is a true patriot. I'm sure he would like to see a Conservative federal government, as I would, but his main interest is the prosperity of this country.
Brian, your buffoonery is reaching epic proportions. A number of us have researched the Gripens and you are using discredited information.
A pipeline deal is a mistake based on a the the “drink the Brian Lilley Koolaid” you have been giving out. Why build a pipeline that reinforces the Alberta Maga idiots that follow you like lemmings
The argument is over. Maple Maga was rejected, PP Maga Mini Me lost his seat. Now I think we watch Maga implode in the States while Maple Maga listens to Brian Lilley as he starts up the Ouija board.
Surely you can do better than that. That's hardly worth even a chuckle... Maybe you should try for some originality. Hearing the same old stuff from you people does get boring.
Speaking of an epic Buffoon Paul, you win the competition.
2021:”American-built F-35 fighter jet dominated its Swedish rival Gripen in terms of technical and military capabilities during a competition held by the Defence Department in 2021.
The competition focused on each fighter jet's capabilities in defending the North American continent and the likelihood of success in various missions against modern military forces.
The F-35 got a score of 95 per cent on military capabilities, with a total of 57.1 points out of 60.
By contrast, the Gripen-E finished with a score of 33 per cent, netting 19.8 points out of 60, according to the Department of National Defence (DND) ranking obtained by Radio-Canada.
The gap is particularly significant in scoring for “mission performance” and ability to upgrade the aircraft over its life cycle.”
Yes, it is repetitive. And a lot of people are saying the same thing over and over. Unfortunately Maple Maga listens through a lens that is completely contradictory. They don’t like taxes, even though they take more than they give. They are Christians but don’t understand any of the fundamentals of Christ’s teaching, they complain about loss of freedoms but wholeheartedly love the not withstanding clause, they distrust people that are educated but think theirs common sense from FU university is superior, they dislike insults but but are insulting the human race with their stupidity.
What has always struck me about Canada is how the government has to constantly intervene in the economy; and how this rarely changes anything, or even works at all, especially if the Liberals do it.
I wonder if Carney’s plan will survive the inevitable assault by progressives, Quebec, and indigenous tribes whose main industry is holding government programs hostage.
Brian, is the Federal Gov't getting to involved in Canadian Companies...Steel, Lumber etc., this is sounding like Federalism...gov't getting to involved instead of Fed. Gov't Getting Out of the Way? It sounds like Communism, do as I say & the Federal Gov't will give you Tax Payers money. Being manipulated to use ESG, DEI, accountable to WEF, WHO. Federalism to PM is like everything else a tool with which to impose Communism on Canadians. A thought!
I think you miss the point of a diverified mixed fighter fleet. `Every country in the G7 has a mixed fighter fleet, as do most G20 as well. The reason is the F35 while a great first attack fighter, is limited in the number of hard points, endurance and speed. All this means there is a requirement for an additional complementing fighter bomber. The options are the F16, F18 Super Hornet (my favourite) or the F15 the best fighter at the highest cost - all NATO and NORAD compatible but reliant on their supply chains, computer updates (some proprietary to the USA only-a big issue). The Gripen is a really good low operating cost, Sweden is a NATO country so compatible with it's own supply chains and wiling to share all proprietary programs and tech with Canada + construction/assembly in Canada. Plus SAAB is building a new 6th Gen that will become the Canadian/Swedish standard in 10-15 years. As the compatible fighter to the F35 (x32 planes) the Gripen (x72planes) will return Canada to a fleet over 100 which is needed into the future. The Gripen as the second fighter bomber brings the bomb load after the F35 has taken out the threats. Cost effective and military effective pair for Canada's small population and the numbers of fighters for our 4 new northern Army and bases of the future.
Brian, I take your point that the F35 is a more capable plane than the Gripen. And thanks for sharing the evaluation table. Having spent much of my career dealing with multi-factor decision making, though, I would be interested in the evaluation criteria and whether they focused on just the aircraft capabilities, or if they factored in the Canadian operating environment and if so what weighting was given each factor. The weaknesses of the F35 that I see are its cost, its ability to operate in northern environments (including the need for heated hangers), the training required to operate the plane, the complexity and manpower requirements for maintenance, turnaround time, and in my mind sovereignty and control over parts, software and operating control. It seems to me the Gripen would out score the F35 on each of those factors. So for me, the Gripen would be the plane best fit for purpose for Canada. It maybe that we might need the capabilities of the F35 occasionally, but the Gripen better meets our Canadian needs in general. If it were my choice, I would go for the 16 F35’s already contracted, then fill the rest of the fleet with Gripen’s. I have heard the argument that we are short of pilots and having two fighters would be operationally difficult. It seems to me we need to hire and train more pilots in any event. And given we already have over 20 different aircraft types in our airforce, it would seem to me adding one more should be doable. I can relate to the desire to have the best equipment possible, I just question whether we should put all our eggs into the F35 basket.
Except Brian that IT IS CLOSE. In fact when both passed Mandatory Requirements, it means they both do all the critical things to achieve the mission sets!
They BOTH are good and acceptable jets. There is no perfect jet despite what LM or the ex-Generals, many with ties to LM or subsidiaries, would market. Every fighter is a series of compromises.
'Rated Items', the secondary scoring that is getting the attention in the headlines, were in the past often termed 'Desirable', but now commonly called Rated, because points are assigned and a rating given based on some additional criteria. In essence they are 'nice to have, but not Mandatory (or essential) to meet the mission (use). Otherwise they would be a Mandatory Requirement.
A (maybe poor) analogy is you are buying a pistol and the experts assess that a minimum of 8 rounds are required for the magazine based on the use case (the mission)- Its Mandatory. But they also feel that having 10 or even 18 rounds would be nice to have, so they assign points for every extra round in the magazine. 9 rounds gets you 1 point and you get an extra point for every additional round. But getting 10 extra points (18 rounds) doesn't mean the gun with 8 rounds is inferior. It just means you might have to carry an extra magazine. In fact the 8 round gun might actually be more accurate and more reliable. See - Trade-offs! But rated scoring isn't the 'be all'.
That David Perry states its a 'win by a mile' is simply his opinion - he is a policy guy, and I give him credit in his lane, but he isn't a technical expert nor a procurement specialist. (He is also a Director at CGAI, which lists Lockheed Martin, L3 Harris & Raytheon as strategic partners for flagship events). Same for Mr. Massie - policy guy. Nor should they have any insight into what those Rated items were or what the scoring matrix was.
In the spring Gen (Ret'd) Blondin said: "building Canada’s future fighter force solely on the F-35 would be “irresponsible.” Yes this was based on changing politics, but he had a point and a review is justified. (https://ottawacitizen.com/public-service/defence-watch/canadian-general-f-35-fighter-jet-deal). He later on went to advocate for a mixed fleet with the a jet he now says was not even close. Check his linkedin for his open letter ot the government of Canada. He seems to have some ambiguous stances to say the least.
Gen (ret'd) Sullivan as ex President of Boeing Canada likely knows a thing or two, and one would assume saw the RfP. As an ex-CF18 pilot he would be able to cross reference the requirements with actual essential mission requirements. His statement that "air force has long wanted the F-35" rings true - it was an unsaid but well understood theme in the halls of defence, and still is. "... and that the criteria used in the 2021 competition favoured the aircraft". Well he was likely in a position to make an informed evaluation as a former Wing Commander and 1 CAD Director of Operations where the Top Priority for Defence of Canada was well understood.
And then the glaring inconsistency with the rated scores.
Just how would the F35 score 85% on sustainment when a mountain of evidence points to it having poor sustainability? US GAO reports have shown since 2010 that the program is behind development, over cost, critical capabilities aren't realized and mission availability has been on a downward trend for years, and noted as critical problems - these are the key elements of sustainability. and easily referenced by any evaluation team. The latest GAO report confirms this and US CBO data shows full mission capability availability less than 40%, and partial capability less than 50% while costs are ~US$60,000 per flight hour.
Same goes for F35 Upgradability. The program has potential to be upgraded but it consistently fails to deliver on time and on budget. It is really that upgradable? Basic logic suggests a 100% score is 'belief in magic and unicorns' - some sort of detachment from reality. As bidder responses normally have to be backed by provable, evidenced based submissions.
And what were the mission performance items that were not mandatory?
I don't know, but the vast disparity indicates that the rated items, were boutique and aligned to known LM claims for the jet based or potentially things like being able to operate from allied bases (where F35 support already exists), but that is not actually that simple with the byzantine LM integrated logistics system sustainment model.
I have never seen the RfP, but having some technical procurement experience I can envision a scenario or two where you could write something that favoured one solution over another. This is especially true if your teams had visited all the other options during 'Options Analysis' and had a number of people who were well briefed and inculcated in the F35 program, including having exchange positions at the JPO in their previous experience. Some might infer that an organizational bias existed.
So just maybe the PM/government was justified in ordering a review.
Something might not be right in Denmark beyond the issue of "The spare parts issue made headlines in Denmark after the U.S. transferred F-35 components from a Danish base to Israel, which also uses the aircraft. Facing criticism over Israel’s reported use of F-35s in the Gaza War, Denmark’s government has said it has no way to stop such shipments.” - as the US has apparently directed that all parts be titled to the US when not installed on an aircraft.
I often enjoy your posts, you usually do better research.
Lets get real here, Trump & Carney are not negotiating , Trump has a team of 750 Top Business people working for him, We have Who oh yea LeBlanc, and a Associate whom is a staunch Demo Crat supporter, That represents us, we were in trouble from the get go, that's why Trump and Carney can still be friends and laugh it off , Going to DC to talk about about FIFA ,great way to get away from the HOC's daily scrutiny,, Changing the channel, Subsidies to our economy is unsustainable economics' How many more Businesses will leave our Country, due to his Net Zero policies and so many activists to appease for votes, while the Country is flaying,
agree....what a mess....
Canada is a mess. Decades of this, but why? Who controls Ottawa, Canada? $ KEBEC $ - WEF, WHO, KEBEK = $ = CONTROL. 'Cons' PP, Ford, where do you stand on equalization, multiculturalism, mass immigration, deporting, massive govt growth, debt, censorship, gun control, property rights...the killing of ostriches? Thats what i thought, nothing, not a word. 100s of billions stolen out of Alberta and Sask., BC, Ont. since the 1960s, 70s. Equalization (kebek takes over 50% every single year) became entrenched in his commie charter = kebek communist Pierre Trudeaus constitution of 1982. Since then, 25 years of Liberal govts have made things worse. 18 years of 'Conservative' govts, the exact same thing. Kebeks Charter = 10s of billions stolen out of Ottawa yearly and funneled into quebec and other metis (they are not french) – towns and companies, all across the country every year, all disguised as grants, subsides, equalization, transfers, bilingualism (code for french) – only outside quebec while kebec bans our language, history = bills 22, 178, 101, 96. Multiculturalism (only outside kebec), massive government growth, control, censorship, surveillance, taxes and debt. Canada now just liberals masquerading as conservatives, the rest, communists masquerading as liberals. ’French power’ in all provinces. They are revising, eliminating our BNA history all over the country as they rename, remove all things English, Scottish. Election fraud? YES, guaranteed. Why? Simple, they lie about everything. Why? Bigoted = Socialist = marixst = commie = kebec runs the nation. This IS the problem, and No party, NO ‘leader’ will touch it. ‘Cons’ Poliver, Ford ?...nothing, not a word. “First quebec, and Ottawa and then the entire country…” ‘french power..." PET. The commie - fascist takeover of Canada and when it began....proof – context- https://beforeitsnews.com/power-elite/2012/01/canada-how-the-communists-took-control-1637973.html Anybody, somebody? Rise up people, plan, train...revolt....lets take back our country. HELP
You need some help buddy....jeez...
lolllllllll, the truth sucks hey...lolllllllll
The whole carney “let’s build anAlberta pipeline” is pure fiction. Dressed up as “ nation building”. The regulatory caveats are designed to kill it. Getting rid of carney is the only way to progress Canada into the country it once was.
Listening to Carney‘s press conference on the 1 o’clock November 27 p.m. news the prevarication is there the pauses with the first (pause a)national interest (pause) various commitments. This is just the start (pause)…all these little peccadilloes just leave me to think this is a gigantic charade! fortunately premium Smith will keep fighting, but until Carney is gone, this won’t happen.
And in case you think, my comment is absurd at 1:17 PM on a.m. 1010 radio Vassy Kapelos show, (she’s not around.)The Global propaganda panel is flat out saying this pipeline will never get built because “dinosaur bones “we don’t need oil. It’s such a flagrant Disregard for reality it just baffles me. Fortunately, I’ll be dead and I won’t care about it, by the time the realization hits.
these people ; they are so totally out of touch with their ideology. It’s spell binding.
I believe Bruan Lilley is a true patriot. I'm sure he would like to see a Conservative federal government, as I would, but his main interest is the prosperity of this country.
Brian, your buffoonery is reaching epic proportions. A number of us have researched the Gripens and you are using discredited information.
A pipeline deal is a mistake based on a the the “drink the Brian Lilley Koolaid” you have been giving out. Why build a pipeline that reinforces the Alberta Maga idiots that follow you like lemmings
Follow Paul for tips on how to win an argument - hahahahahaha...
The argument is over. Maple Maga was rejected, PP Maga Mini Me lost his seat. Now I think we watch Maga implode in the States while Maple Maga listens to Brian Lilley as he starts up the Ouija board.
Surely you can do better than that. That's hardly worth even a chuckle... Maybe you should try for some originality. Hearing the same old stuff from you people does get boring.
Paul again. Liberal shill. Oh well. It’s a free country he he
So a military poll is discredited information 🤔
But yet you probably believe nanos and ekos. 🤣🤣
Speaking of an epic Buffoon Paul, you win the competition.
2021:”American-built F-35 fighter jet dominated its Swedish rival Gripen in terms of technical and military capabilities during a competition held by the Defence Department in 2021.
The competition focused on each fighter jet's capabilities in defending the North American continent and the likelihood of success in various missions against modern military forces.
The F-35 got a score of 95 per cent on military capabilities, with a total of 57.1 points out of 60.
By contrast, the Gripen-E finished with a score of 33 per cent, netting 19.8 points out of 60, according to the Department of National Defence (DND) ranking obtained by Radio-Canada.
The gap is particularly significant in scoring for “mission performance” and ability to upgrade the aircraft over its life cycle.”
Yes, it is repetitive. And a lot of people are saying the same thing over and over. Unfortunately Maple Maga listens through a lens that is completely contradictory. They don’t like taxes, even though they take more than they give. They are Christians but don’t understand any of the fundamentals of Christ’s teaching, they complain about loss of freedoms but wholeheartedly love the not withstanding clause, they distrust people that are educated but think theirs common sense from FU university is superior, they dislike insults but but are insulting the human race with their stupidity.
You sound like a really pleasant person. /s
I don’t put much weight on polls, especially when they are dated and out of context
What has always struck me about Canada is how the government has to constantly intervene in the economy; and how this rarely changes anything, or even works at all, especially if the Liberals do it.
I wonder if Carney’s plan will survive the inevitable assault by progressives, Quebec, and indigenous tribes whose main industry is holding government programs hostage.
Brian, is the Federal Gov't getting to involved in Canadian Companies...Steel, Lumber etc., this is sounding like Federalism...gov't getting to involved instead of Fed. Gov't Getting Out of the Way? It sounds like Communism, do as I say & the Federal Gov't will give you Tax Payers money. Being manipulated to use ESG, DEI, accountable to WEF, WHO. Federalism to PM is like everything else a tool with which to impose Communism on Canadians. A thought!
I think you miss the point of a diverified mixed fighter fleet. `Every country in the G7 has a mixed fighter fleet, as do most G20 as well. The reason is the F35 while a great first attack fighter, is limited in the number of hard points, endurance and speed. All this means there is a requirement for an additional complementing fighter bomber. The options are the F16, F18 Super Hornet (my favourite) or the F15 the best fighter at the highest cost - all NATO and NORAD compatible but reliant on their supply chains, computer updates (some proprietary to the USA only-a big issue). The Gripen is a really good low operating cost, Sweden is a NATO country so compatible with it's own supply chains and wiling to share all proprietary programs and tech with Canada + construction/assembly in Canada. Plus SAAB is building a new 6th Gen that will become the Canadian/Swedish standard in 10-15 years. As the compatible fighter to the F35 (x32 planes) the Gripen (x72planes) will return Canada to a fleet over 100 which is needed into the future. The Gripen as the second fighter bomber brings the bomb load after the F35 has taken out the threats. Cost effective and military effective pair for Canada's small population and the numbers of fighters for our 4 new northern Army and bases of the future.
Brian, I take your point that the F35 is a more capable plane than the Gripen. And thanks for sharing the evaluation table. Having spent much of my career dealing with multi-factor decision making, though, I would be interested in the evaluation criteria and whether they focused on just the aircraft capabilities, or if they factored in the Canadian operating environment and if so what weighting was given each factor. The weaknesses of the F35 that I see are its cost, its ability to operate in northern environments (including the need for heated hangers), the training required to operate the plane, the complexity and manpower requirements for maintenance, turnaround time, and in my mind sovereignty and control over parts, software and operating control. It seems to me the Gripen would out score the F35 on each of those factors. So for me, the Gripen would be the plane best fit for purpose for Canada. It maybe that we might need the capabilities of the F35 occasionally, but the Gripen better meets our Canadian needs in general. If it were my choice, I would go for the 16 F35’s already contracted, then fill the rest of the fleet with Gripen’s. I have heard the argument that we are short of pilots and having two fighters would be operationally difficult. It seems to me we need to hire and train more pilots in any event. And given we already have over 20 different aircraft types in our airforce, it would seem to me adding one more should be doable. I can relate to the desire to have the best equipment possible, I just question whether we should put all our eggs into the F35 basket.
Except Brian that IT IS CLOSE. In fact when both passed Mandatory Requirements, it means they both do all the critical things to achieve the mission sets!
They BOTH are good and acceptable jets. There is no perfect jet despite what LM or the ex-Generals, many with ties to LM or subsidiaries, would market. Every fighter is a series of compromises.
'Rated Items', the secondary scoring that is getting the attention in the headlines, were in the past often termed 'Desirable', but now commonly called Rated, because points are assigned and a rating given based on some additional criteria. In essence they are 'nice to have, but not Mandatory (or essential) to meet the mission (use). Otherwise they would be a Mandatory Requirement.
A (maybe poor) analogy is you are buying a pistol and the experts assess that a minimum of 8 rounds are required for the magazine based on the use case (the mission)- Its Mandatory. But they also feel that having 10 or even 18 rounds would be nice to have, so they assign points for every extra round in the magazine. 9 rounds gets you 1 point and you get an extra point for every additional round. But getting 10 extra points (18 rounds) doesn't mean the gun with 8 rounds is inferior. It just means you might have to carry an extra magazine. In fact the 8 round gun might actually be more accurate and more reliable. See - Trade-offs! But rated scoring isn't the 'be all'.
That David Perry states its a 'win by a mile' is simply his opinion - he is a policy guy, and I give him credit in his lane, but he isn't a technical expert nor a procurement specialist. (He is also a Director at CGAI, which lists Lockheed Martin, L3 Harris & Raytheon as strategic partners for flagship events). Same for Mr. Massie - policy guy. Nor should they have any insight into what those Rated items were or what the scoring matrix was.
In the spring Gen (Ret'd) Blondin said: "building Canada’s future fighter force solely on the F-35 would be “irresponsible.” Yes this was based on changing politics, but he had a point and a review is justified. (https://ottawacitizen.com/public-service/defence-watch/canadian-general-f-35-fighter-jet-deal). He later on went to advocate for a mixed fleet with the a jet he now says was not even close. Check his linkedin for his open letter ot the government of Canada. He seems to have some ambiguous stances to say the least.
Gen (ret'd) Sullivan as ex President of Boeing Canada likely knows a thing or two, and one would assume saw the RfP. As an ex-CF18 pilot he would be able to cross reference the requirements with actual essential mission requirements. His statement that "air force has long wanted the F-35" rings true - it was an unsaid but well understood theme in the halls of defence, and still is. "... and that the criteria used in the 2021 competition favoured the aircraft". Well he was likely in a position to make an informed evaluation as a former Wing Commander and 1 CAD Director of Operations where the Top Priority for Defence of Canada was well understood.
And then the glaring inconsistency with the rated scores.
Just how would the F35 score 85% on sustainment when a mountain of evidence points to it having poor sustainability? US GAO reports have shown since 2010 that the program is behind development, over cost, critical capabilities aren't realized and mission availability has been on a downward trend for years, and noted as critical problems - these are the key elements of sustainability. and easily referenced by any evaluation team. The latest GAO report confirms this and US CBO data shows full mission capability availability less than 40%, and partial capability less than 50% while costs are ~US$60,000 per flight hour.
Here they are:
- https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61482 (2023)
- https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-25-107632 (2 Sep 2025)
Same goes for F35 Upgradability. The program has potential to be upgraded but it consistently fails to deliver on time and on budget. It is really that upgradable? Basic logic suggests a 100% score is 'belief in magic and unicorns' - some sort of detachment from reality. As bidder responses normally have to be backed by provable, evidenced based submissions.
And what were the mission performance items that were not mandatory?
I don't know, but the vast disparity indicates that the rated items, were boutique and aligned to known LM claims for the jet based or potentially things like being able to operate from allied bases (where F35 support already exists), but that is not actually that simple with the byzantine LM integrated logistics system sustainment model.
I have never seen the RfP, but having some technical procurement experience I can envision a scenario or two where you could write something that favoured one solution over another. This is especially true if your teams had visited all the other options during 'Options Analysis' and had a number of people who were well briefed and inculcated in the F35 program, including having exchange positions at the JPO in their previous experience. Some might infer that an organizational bias existed.
So just maybe the PM/government was justified in ordering a review.
Something might not be right in Denmark beyond the issue of "The spare parts issue made headlines in Denmark after the U.S. transferred F-35 components from a Danish base to Israel, which also uses the aircraft. Facing criticism over Israel’s reported use of F-35s in the Gaza War, Denmark’s government has said it has no way to stop such shipments.” - as the US has apparently directed that all parts be titled to the US when not installed on an aircraft.
I often enjoy your posts, you usually do better research.
Good post. Hard to argue with facts.