I strongly urge readers to look carefully at both of these:

1) Chief of the Air Staff Lieutenant-General André Deschamps at the Commons’ Standing Committee on National Defence:

CANADIAN FORCES OPERATIONAL REQUIREMENTS
AND THE SELECTION OF THE F-35 LIGHTNING II

2) David S. McDonough, Canadian International Council (I especially like his concluding paragraphs):

Canada and the F-35 Procurement: An Assessment

…it might be prudent for the government to more fully re-assess the role of the air force and the need to contribute its air force for high-intensity combat missions. The F-35, while having the requisite capabilities for such operations, might simply be too expensive a choice for the Canadian military. And if this means that Canada might no longer be capable of participating in a coalition air war, perhaps it is now finally time to seriously look at that option.

A more specialized role for our air force, focused more on domestic and continental tasks with the acquisition of the cheaper Super Hornet, might appear to be a risky proposition. But given the need for fiscal restraint and soaring costs of advanced weapon platforms, the status quo is not without danger. Simply put, the decision to acquire the F-35s can easily result in significant opportunity costs. For example, the navy could find little funds available in the capital budget when its major surface combatants are in need of replacement [see this post for more on the Navy].

Canadian governments generally prefer to avoid making hard choices on defence. However, with the recent F-35 controversy and major naval procurement projects on the horizon, it is perhaps finally time for the government to begin to take a hard look at and make some difficult decisions on the future of Canadian defence policy, force structure and procurement priorities [more on that at this post].

David S. McDonough is a Doctoral Candidate at Dalhousie University, a Doctoral Fellow at Dalhousie’s Centre for Foreign Policy Studies, and is presently a Visiting Research Associate at the Centre for International Policy Studies, University of Ottawa.  He is the editor of the CIC-CDFAI Strategic Studies Working Group’s forthcoming book, Canada’s National Security in the Post-9/11 World: Strategy, Interests and Threats. He would like to thank Philippe Lagassé for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this commentary.

Mr McDonough’s article via Spotlight on Military News and International Affairs. My F-35 posts here.

Update: I wonder how/if the government will react to this news:

Pentagon May See Higher F-35 Costs, Delays Up to Three Years

Lockheed Martin Corp.’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the Pentagon’s costliest program, may see more price increases and new schedule delays of as much as three years, two government officials familiar with the matter said.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates is scheduled to be briefed tomorrow on new cost and schedule assessments for the F-35 and other aircraft, said the officials, who requested anonymity because details aren’t public. Software, engineering and flight difficulties are greater than expected, the officials said…

New delays and higher prices would add to the struggles in development and combat testing of the F-35, which is more than four years behind schedule [emphasis added]. Designed for missions including bombing and aerial combat, the JSF will be used by the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps…

The $50 billion development phase may cost as much as $5 billion more, and Pentagon analysts now estimate the JSF may be as much as 1 1/2 times more expensive to maintain than the warplanes it will replace [emphasis added], according to preliminary estimates in Venlet’s review, the officials said.

Different Models

Slippage in the JSF’s timetable may be as much as one year for the Air Force [the one we're supposed to get] and Navy versions and two to three years for development of the Marine Corps model capable of short takeoffs and landings, the officials said.

The potential increases would be on top of changes unveiled this year by the Pentagon: a 13-month extension to the current development phase to November 2015, shifting of $2.8 billion in production funds for continued research and delaying the purchase of 122 jets to beyond 2015…

Do you really believe the cost figures given by the government mentioned at this earlier post?

…
More on the F-35:

On CBC News Network’s “Power and Politics” National Defence Parliamentary Secretary Laurie Hawn just said [Oct. 26] that $5 to $5.5 billion of the F-35’s $9 billion acquisition cost will be for the aircraft themselves ($70-$75 million per plane), with the other costs being for associated equipment, munitions, facilities, training etc. (I’m expanding somewhat on his explanation of these costs).

Nice price if we can get it when a contract is actually signed.

Remember the F-35–all three versions–is still in flight testing and no-one knows what the actual production price will be.

And you think the maintenance costs and delivery date from the government are realistic either?

…
The government committed $9-billion to buy the 65 planes from Lockheed Martin, and the first aircraft is to be delivered by 2016, said a statement from the Defence Department.

But the overall cost is expected to soar to $16 billion when a 20-year maintenance contract is factored in…

Mark
Ottawa