There's a lot of discussion and criticism and just plain objections to this whole program, mostly because these aircraft are ridiculously expensive - so much so that nobody seems absolutely sure what the final costs actually will be. It's very difficult to decide if we can afford it, when we don't know the real costs.
Here in Canada, as elsewhere, there's a lot of debate about this, and various factions are lining up for and against it. Our Defense Minister, Peter MacKay,
says we simply don't understand a difference in accounting procedures which results in a ten billion dollar difference in total costs. Peter seems to think we're all idiots or something similar. Personally, I think he's sounding more like a two-faced lyin' bastard every day. If everyone had been completely honest and up front about costs from the beginning, we wouldn't be having these problems, and we probably wouldn't be arguing about buying these glorified flying video-game machines, which, in almost 30% of their test flights, have required according to one authority "more than routine maintenance to restore them to flying condition afterward". If these things are getting bent or broken almost one third of the time while being tested, and are so expensive many nations can't afford them, why aren't we opting for something more reasonable, more proven,
and less controversial? Here's the Wikipedia article.
No comments:
Post a Comment