I don’t know much about airplanes, the Air Force, aerodynamics or pilots. Why would I want to? For that matter, why would anyone want to?

Well, perhaps there are a couple of reasons. For example, I would imagine that if one is to engage in any sort of modern day conflict it would likely be handy to know about things like effective fighter jets, and to have them on call. You know, some sort of kick-ass airplane that could convince the bad guys not to shoot things at you, your troops, your country or your pals. Now, or ever.

So I reckon it’s no surprise that the Royal Canadian Air Force looked towards the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter when it realized that sooner or later the CF-18 was going to have to be replaced. And why not? It’s being produced by one of the world’s leading aircraft manufacturers, it has the backing of the US government, and the timing of its production seemed about right for replacing the CF-18. Further, the RCAF would be joining a crowd of investors that included the UK’s Royal Air Force, Australia’s air guys, the Danes, the Turks and the Italians and Dutch. What could go wrong?

Well, according to Canadian opposition politicos and the Auditor General (the Odd Gen?), lots can go wrong; specifically the cost estimates for the programme that they claim are being criminally hidden by the bean (and dollar) counters in DND. And, of course, once the planned procurement had attracted some negative attention the usual suspects, the bad news vultures, swept down to feed.

Unneeded, they cried. Un-Canadian, they postulated. Illegal, they claimed. And, thoroughly demonstrating their mastery of history, military strategy, and fortune telling, not something that Canada, the Canadian Forces or the RCAF would ever need. Why would an state-of-the-art fighter jet be needed they asked. Obviously, it is clear that the world is definitely becoming a friendly and conflict free sphere. Just ask the Sudanese (north or south) or the sane management currently running North Korea. Under no circumstances can it be imagined that Canadian pilots would need to be seated in the best fighter in the world. Nah, let ‘em keep the CF-18, that’ll do.

Now, as I mentioned earlier, I know little about the air force and have little interest in changing that comfortable fact. But, if I were jumping on a bandwagon throwing allegations around and criticising folks who probably are experts I might take a couple of minutes to find out a couple of things.

And what would I find? Well, the reality is that for the third straight year F-35 flight tests are ahead of schedule, the cost to build each plane is falling fast, and international partners are so enthused that new customers are getting in line for the F-35 on a regular basis. Any paper thin query would have determined that the Pentagon’s recent disclosure concerning rising costs in building and operating the F-35 included estimates for inflation and reflected changes in how costs are calculated. A quick call to the RCAF maintenance folks would have discovered that costs associated with keeping the CF-18 airworthy would be at least as expensive as the projected F-35 bill. You think keeping a 6-year old Ford on the road is expensive, try a 30-year old fighter jet.

But blasting budgets and the military is easy. No thought required. And say it loud enough and just watch who will join up.

It is really too bad, as this could be a good news story. Canadians should be told that when this programme is completed their pilots will be flying the most capable, cost-effective tactical aircraft produced in the last 60 years. Flight tests are steadily verifying all the performance features of the aircraft and are years ahead of schedule. The US Air Force and the US Marine Corps, two of the plane’s largest customers, are delighted with tests to date.
And everyone should be delighted with production costs. Estimates for unit costs for the common variant of the plane fell well below the $150 million mark by the third production run and will be less than $100 million by the fifth run. The RCAF reckons it will pick up its planes somewhere after the fourth production run.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m not pushing for these planes. I don’t know enough about the subject to discuss it with any comfort. And I’m sure that $150 million is basically the “drive it off the lot” cost and that someone will still have to ante up for weapons, communications, an electronics package, training and the like. But I am sure that it wouldn’t take the naysayers long to check that out. That’s really all I’m asking. Do the due diligence and check the facts. After all, its Canadian troops we’re talking about here, not politics.

As an aside, and appropos of nothing, I would cut a few F-35s off the total package and invest in an Armour Brigade and double the budget for the JTF-2. Now that’s something that could really kick some ass!

I have spent considerable time living in Cairo and New
Delhi. While there I felt a distanced sympathy for the locals as they ran their
heads into the brick walls of what passed for local bureaucracy. I pitied the
Indians as they faced up to the babus who had learned about
officialdom from the Brits and refined it to unimagined levels. Babus who
wallowed with delight in their volumes of undecipherable regulations.  I commiserated with the Egyptians as they
stacked their wallets with cash prior to any foray into the hallows of
government, ready to shell out the baksheesh needed to go from one faceless
desk to another in the hope of solving an innocuous issue.

But I am beginning to learn about envy. Whatever else the
Indians and Egyptians faced when they fronted their local bureaucracies they
knew what to expect.

I have recently been defeated in my attempt to secure a
building permit. Derailed by Kingston’s own version of third world red tape.   Our city officials apparently have an
aversion to common sense, hide willingly, dare I say eagerly, behind the armour
of regulation and by-law, pay scant attention to argument or explanation, and
have only a cursory understanding of the pressures caused by time, space and
budget.

In my case ( an attempt to obtain a building permit to
construct a 200 square foot addition to my existing house, situated in splendid
isolation on almost 10 acres, with my nearest neighbour invisible more than 100
meters away)  they denied my application
while telling me, sotto voce,  they
disagreed with the decision. A decision, I must add, that surprised their own building inspectors my very experienced contractor. Regulations,
city planners insisted, must be met and by-laws adhered to religiously.

An appeal to my local Councillor presented me with a moment
of hope and a possible course of action. Heady stuff, that amounted to naught.
His “very best on my behalf” wasn’t nearly good enough and I am left facing an
expensive minor variance process and owing money for services that were part of
the initial application.

So my extension plans have been buried, my faith in
municipal government shattered and my envy for my Egyptian and Indian
bureaucracy-suffering brethren on the rise.
People in glass houses indeed.