3 ms·

> Every generation of combat aircraft ends up roughly an order of magnitude more expensive than the one before Do you really think that's a law, though? Consid

> Every generation of combat aircraft ends up roughly an order of magnitude more expensive than the one before Do you really think that's a law, though? Consider the incompetencies of Boeing that are being revealed these days with the 737 Max debacle, combined with the tragedy that was Canada's approach to the JSF / F-35 and the amount of money that was pissed away on absolutely nothing in that space. There's no reason to believe that it's not possible for a smaller, scrappier, yet reliably-subsidized corporation in Canada to produce things for cheaper than in the States by bypassing a lot of the corruption / inefficiency / etc that plagues these companies and these development approaches presently.

mandevil 7y ago
Tornado ADV cost 14m Pounds in 1980[1]. Eurofighter Typhoon cost 100m Pounds[2] in 2006. Saab Viggen cost of 2mUSD in 1967. Saab Gripen cost something like 70m in 2006. (All four of those numbers are replacement cost, ignoring R&D overhead.) Yes, inflation is real, but the costs in the Augustine's Law chart I provided earlier weren't otherwise adjusted for inflation either, and the rest of the costs of living haven't gone up by an order of magnitude over that stretch. As for the armwaving about how magically the waste/fraud/abuse in the American defense systems can be avoided, US aircraft win competitive bids on the international market against other countries fighters, suggesting that US price/capability rates are at least as good as other countries can offer. As every Canadian airpower enthusiast would know, the Panvia Tornado and the French Mirage were entered into the New Fighter Aircraft competition that resulted in the CF-18. But the American design won, because it was cheaper/better than the alternatives. (Neither the Tornado nor the Mirage made the cut to 3 finalists- the Tornado was too expensive, the Mirage not good enough.) So... where's the waste/fraud/abuse? [1]: https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/written-answers/1980/nov/28/armaments-replacement-cost#S5CV0994P0_19801128_CWA_41 https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/written-answers/1... [2]: http://www.defense-aerospace.com/dae/articles/communiques/FighterCostFinalJuly06.pdf http://www.defense-aerospace.com/dae/articles/communiques/Fi... Also the source for Saab costs.

mandevil 7y ago

Tornado ADV cost 14m Pounds in 1980[1]. Eurofighter Typhoon cost 100m Pounds[2] in 2006. Saab Viggen cost of 2mUSD in 1967. Saab Gripen cost something like 70m in 2006. (All four of those numbers are replacement cost, ignoring R&D overhead.) Yes, inflation is real, but the costs in the Augustine's Law chart I provided earlier weren't otherwise adjusted for inflation either, and the rest of the costs of living haven't gone up by an order of magnitude over that stretch. As for the armwaving about how magically the waste/fraud/abuse in the American defense systems can be avoided, US aircraft win competitive bids on the international market against other countries fighters, suggesting that US price/capability rates are at least as good as other countries can offer. As every Canadian airpower enthusiast would know, the Panvia Tornado and the French Mirage were entered into the New Fighter Aircraft competition that resulted in the CF-18. But the American design won, because it was cheaper/better than the alternatives. (Neither the Tornado nor the Mirage made the cut to 3 finalists- the Tornado was too expensive, the Mirage not good enough.) So... where's the waste/fraud/abuse? [1]: https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/written-answers/1980/nov/28/armaments-replacement-cost#S5CV0994P0_19801128_CWA_41 https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/written-answers/1... [2]: http://www.defense-aerospace.com/dae/articles/communiques/FighterCostFinalJuly06.pdf http://www.defense-aerospace.com/dae/articles/communiques/Fi... Also the source for Saab costs.