I think it's fair to say that the upgrades we've done to the CF-18 are tremendous, and the airplane, right now, is very relevant and capable of doing our business. The sad truth, though, is that the airplanes are aging. They're great airplanes, but they're going to reach the end of their service life. Airplanes are built around a maximum amount of time they can fly given the airframe and the structure fatigue, which will become an issue. We've replaced a lot of components on the airplane, but there are some very key components that will not be replaced without a huge reinvestment program, which would see us spend a lot of money to try to renew 40-year-old airplanes. So this is where there's a cost curve that we fall behind now if we decide to delay the program. We will lose capabilities as we approach the end of the decade and we have to start parking airplanes because they're no longer safe to fly. Then we're going to start having less capability for our mission internationally and, certainly at some point, at home.
That's the risk factor we have to keep in mind as we look at timeliness. There is a very firm definite ending to airplanes. That's the way airworthiness works. We have to be cognizant that it can't be stretched without massive reinvestment. I'm not even sure it's technically possible, in many respects, to extend the life of the older CF-18s once we've done what we've already done.
That's the risk we run if we delay the program too much. We will run into a capability gap towards the end of this decade.