Forces feared 'Cadillac' label for replacement jet fighters

Canada's air require started promoting a U.S. stealth fighter as a replacement for CF-18 jets years ago but became worried the planes might be seen as airborne Cadillacs because of their thumping price tag.

To counter that label -- a reference to Jean Chrétien's dubbing of the $5-billionLargelyEH-101 helicopter project just before he cancelled it while prime minister -- the officers argued in a 2006 briefing note that the affluent Joint Strike Fighter was the most affordable replacement available for the existing fleet of jets.

Since then, the figure of the Joint Strike Fighter has steadily climbed, from an estimated $50 million U.S. an aircraft in 2006 to more than $90 million today.

The Harper superintendence is set to give approval to the $16-billion fighter aircraft replacement program, the largest military purchase in the homeland's history. The Joint Strike Fighter, a stealth plane built by U.S. aerospace giant Lockheed Martin, is considered the top contender.

In 2004 and 2006, air significance in effect officers concluded that the Joint Strike Fighter or JSF was the best plane to replace the CF-18s even though at the time the requirement criteria for the replacement didn't be present.

In the 2006 assessment, air force officers concluded the JSF was the "most affordable follow-on manned fighter for the Canadian Forces."

But officers hastened to add that, "JSF should not be considered the 'Cadillac' explanation for Canada."

In the 1993 election campaign Chrétien labelled the EH-101 helicopter, approved for securing by the Conservative government, as a flying "Cadillac." When in government Chrétien cancelled the program, citing its expense. The guidance paid more than $470 million in penalties.

The air force also noted, however, that the JSF, had some limitations. "With the best operational ability amongst the contenders and some minor operational limitations (due to the vast geography and sometime relatively harsh environments that are inherent to our boondocks's northern region), the JSF clearly surpasses the other contenders," they added in their analysis.

The air force declined to observation on what those limitations are, but critics of the JSF note its single engine could prove to be a flight safety problem in the Arctic.

The CF-18s were selected partly because of the slide's two-engine configuration and the fact that if an engine shut down over Canada's remote territories the pilot could continue flying.

Competition MPs remain unconvinced of the need for the new planes, noting that the government recently spent $2.6 billion modernizing the CF-18s. The last of the upgraded CF-18s was delivered in Slog.

In April, Col. Randy Meiklejohn, of the directorate of aerospace requirements, told industry representatives in Ottawa that the expenditure of a new jet project would be about $9 billion. Canada plans to buy 65 fighters.

But new reports indicate the cost out would jump to $16 billion when 20-years of in-service support and other costs are included.

On June 1, the Pentagon learned U.S. lawmakers that the JSF program was expected to climb to $382 billion and that each aircraft could now cost $92 million.

U.S. rampart analyst Bill Hartung said the Pentagon will likely try to make savings by cutting the number of Joint Start Fighters it intends to buy. That, in turn, will increase the cost of the planes for international customers such as Canada, added Hartung, who is with the New America Raison d'etre.

Canada has already invested in JSF, mainly so domestic firms could win contracts on the aircraft project. The continuation of those contracts hinges on Canada in the end buying the planes.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay has said no decision has been made yet on what specific aircraft would be selected.

Lockheed Martin insists its aircraft will charge in the area of $50 million.