MHD-ROCKLAND and ESG Aerosystems Keep the P-3 Legacy Alive

On the same subject

• 

  November 12, 2018 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land

  Ottawa on track to invest less on new military kit than promised for second year

  OTTAWA — For the second year in a row, the federal government is expected to spend billions of dollars less on new military equipment than promised because of a combination of good and bad news: cost savings on some projects and delays in others. The Trudeau government in 2016 released a new defence policy that included dramatic increases in spending on new aircraft, ships, armoured vehicles and other military equipment over the next 20 years. The investments are vital to replacing the Canadian Forces' fighter jets, ships and various other types of aging equipment with state-of-the-art kit. Yet while new budget documents filed in the House of Commons show the Department of National Defence has so far been given authority to spend $4 billion this fiscal year, the policy had predicted total spending of $6.5 billion. The department does have until March 31 — when the federal government's fiscal year ends — to make up the $2.5-billion difference, but its top civilian official, deputy minister Jody Thomas, admitted Thursday that a large shortfall is likely. Part of the reason is that the department expects to save about $700 million on various projects that ended up costing less than planned, Thomas told The Canadian Press following a committee appearance on Parliament Hill. “We've delivered things more efficiently than was anticipated and so we don't need the money,” she said. “And we can apply it to projects, either new projects or projects that have a cost overrun.” But delays moving some projects through the military procurement system have also caused their fair share of problems, Thomas said, and the department is expecting to have to put off $1 billion to $1.3 billion in purchases it had planned to make this year. “We'd like to (spend) $6 billion every year. Can I guarantee to you that we're going to do that? No, there's slowdowns in projects, there's slowdowns with suppliers, there's changes in scope. Things change,” she said. “I'm hoping to get it below $1 billion. I'm not committing to getting it to below $1 billion. ... We're driving projects to get it as low as possible and spend funds efficiently and effectively. We're not wasting money.” The government spent $2.3 billion less than planned last year. That was also largely because of delays in projects such as the government's multibillion-dollar plan to buy new warships, though also because some things ended up costing less than expected. The government does deserve credit for having increased investments in equipment to levels not seen since the height of the war in Afghanistan in 2010 and 2011, said defence analyst David Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. “And if they can actually move as much as the deputy (minister) was saying, and they only leave $1 billion on the table, that will be the best year in the last several decades,” said Perry, who has previously warned that delays in the procurement system could derail the defence policy. “But there are a bunch of impacts from not being able to spend money on schedule. One is you don't have the actual gear to do what you want. And project budgets lose purchasing power when money is not spent on schedule. So it's not good to have delays.” https://windsorstar.com/pmn/news-pmn/canada-news-pmn/ottawa-on-track-to-invest-less-on-new-military-kit-than-promised-for-second-year

• 

  January 8, 2021 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security, Other Defence

  Poor IT support hurting Canadian military operations, internal review finds

  Lee Berthiaume The Canadian Press OTTAWA -- An internal Defence Department report has warned that Canadian Armed Forces operations and security may be at risk due to major problems with how the military's computer networks are built and supported. The report follows a review of the Defence Department's information management and technology systems, which are described as "critical" to the success of Canadian military operations and training. That review uncovered a patchwork of IT systems across the Defence Department and Armed Forces that was not only inefficient and expensive to maintain, but also often out-of-date and poorly supported. The brunt of the report's criticism is directed at the technical support provided to the military by another federal entity, Shared Services Canada, the agency that took over management of most federal networks in August 2011. Nearly all defence and military officials who participated in the review were upset by the amount of time it took Shared Services to respond to requests for help, according to the report. In some instances, those delays harmed operations. The report cited one instance in which an email server that went down during an unspecified domestic mission couldn't be fixed right away because it was a weekend and Shared Services did not have staff on call. The reviewers also found that a quarter of requests for assistance made to Shared Services remained unresolved after six months, and the agency did not have anybody in Europe to help the hundreds of Canadian troops posted there. While the problems were partly attributed to a lack of appropriate IT resources and staff, the report also flagged the lack of an agreement between the Defence Department and Shared Services establishing clear expectations for network support. Without such an agreement, the report, defence and military officials believed Shared Services not only didn't understand their needs but also wasn't required to respond quickly, "which led to putting clients at great risk on a number of fronts, including security." Delays in tech support weren't the only point of contention between the Defence Department and Shared Services, with the latter upsetting the navy by requiring the removal of equipment that had increased bandwidth on warships. Shared Services also stopped supporting some older intelligence systems while they were still being used by the air force, army and navy, according to the report recently published on the Defence Department website. Defence Department spokesman Daniel Le Bouthillier on Monday described the review as a "valuable tool" for improving IT support even as he defended the department's relationship with Shared Services Canada. "We have a good working relationship with Shared Services Canada and the two departments continue to work collaboratively to ensure the appropriate and timely delivery of IT services to DND/CAF," he said. "We are also reviewing our relationship with Shared Services Canada with a focus on improving the service delivery model to help better support the department and the Canadian Armed Forces." The internal report also took aim at the military's troubled procurement system, which was found to deliver IT equipment with inadequate or out-of-date technology. Poor planning was partly to blame but the report also blamed onerous levels of oversight. While that oversight was described as the result of cost overruns and delays on past IT projects, the report said that it nonetheless created new problems in delivering modern equipment. "The complex processes associated with the capital projects and procurement are very slow and cumbersome," according to the report. "The process cannot keep up with the rate of change of technology." Those delays -- and their potential impact on operations -- were also cited as a major reason for why a patchwork of IT systems and programs now cover different parts of the Defence Department and military. While that patchwork might serve the day-to-day needs of the military, it was also found to be inefficient and expensive. To that end, the reviewers could not pinpoint exactly how much was being spent by the Defence Department and military on IT services and support every year, but estimated it at more than $700 million. In response to the report, senior officials told reviewers that they were looking at ways to better calculate annual spending on IT and address the problems that have contributed to the creation of so many systems in the first place. This report by The Canadian Press was first published Jan. 4, 2021. https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/poor-it-support-hurting-canadian-military-operations-internal-review-finds-1.5253148

• 

  June 3, 2019 | Local, Aerospace

  Comment le F-35 est réapparu sur le radar d’Ottawa

  Marc Godbout Justin Trudeau s'était engagé à ne pas acheter le F-35, l'avion de chasse de Lockheed Martin. Pourtant, de récentes manoeuvres rendent de plus en plus probable l'acquisition de l'appareil américain. Une réelle compétition aura-t-elle vraiment lieu pour remplacer les vieux chasseurs des Forces armées canadiennes? Les jeux de coulisse se sont intensifiés toute la semaine à Ottawa. L'enjeu est énorme : un contrat de 19 milliards de dollars pour 88 avions de combat canadiens. En toile de fond, le salon canadien des équipements militaires. Non seulement les lobbyistes sont plus actifs que jamais, mais leurs clients ont mis le paquet pour séduire et chercher à influencer le futur acheteur. Airbus et SAAB ont même fait venir d'Europe, par navire, des répliques de leurs avions de chasse respectifs. Mais au-delà des apparences, l'inquiétude s'est installée. Après le F-35, le F-35 Après des années d'attente, de dérapages et d'interminables débats, un appel d'offres du gouvernement fédéral doit finalement être lancé d'ici la mi-juillet. Il le sera juste avant la campagne électorale, près de quatre ans après l'élection des libéraux qui avaient promis d'amorcer le processus immédiatement en arrivant au pouvoir. Résultat? Le choix du gagnant ne sera annoncé qu'en 2022, et les premiers avions, livrés en 2025, au plus tôt. Les concurrents potentiels pour la construction des avions de chasse canadiens : Boeing (Super Hornet) Airbus (Typhoon) Saab (Gripen) Lockheed Martin (F-35) Quatre joueurs souhaiteraient être de la course. Mais le seront-ils tous? Le portrait pourrait très bien changer. Les pressions exercées par Washington sur Ottawa y sont pour beaucoup. L'administration Trump a obtenu des assouplissements au processus d'évaluation des retombées économiques au Canada pour s'assurer que le F-35 soit de la course. La politique canadienne d'approvisionnement militaire exige depuis très longtemps que les entreprises dépensent au pays l'équivalent de la valeur d'un contrat afin de renforcer l'industrie canadienne. Or, le programme du F-35, dont le Canada est l'un des neuf pays partenaires, est structuré autrement. Les entreprises canadiennes ont le droit de soumissionner pour des contrats mondiaux liés à la chaîne d'approvisionnement. Les pays partenaires ne peuvent, par contre, exiger des avantages économiques comme condition préalable à l'achat de l'appareil. Voilà que la récente révision obtenue par Washington permet à Lockheed Martin et son avion de ne pas être écartés de la compétition quoiqu'ils seraient pénalisés s'ils choisissent un système différent. On est donc bien loin de la promesse électorale de 2015 de Justin Trudeau, qui s'engageait à ne pas acheter l'avion de Lockheed Martin. Les libéraux ont tout fait pour se distancer du F-35 dans la foulée du fiasco qui collait à la peau des conservateurs. Mais la réalité a fini par rattraper le gouvernement Trudeau. « Sélectionner un appareil autre que le F-35 pourrait créer des tensions avec les Américains », soutient Justin Massie, professeur de science politique à l'UQAM. « Le F-35 est important pour l'administration Trump, qui veut développer davantage l'industrie militaire américaine. » Ce revirement a eu l'effet d'une douche froide chez les concurrents. « Il ne serait pas étonnant de voir des joueurs se retirer dès le départ ou en cours de route. Ils sont furieux », a confié à Radio-Canada une source très proche du dossier. Tant l'américaine Boeing que l'européenne Airbus et la suédoise Saab disent maintenant attendre « l'ensemble des exigences » de l'appel d'offres avant d'annoncer leurs intentions finales. « Nous sommes sur nos gardes [....] et de plus en plus incertains de vouloir nous lancer », a même indiqué un dirigeant de l'une de ces compagnies, sous le couvert de l'anonymat. Retour vers le futur Le temps est-il en train de jouer en faveur du F-35? Possiblement. « Le volume de production du F-35 entraîne la diminution du coût à l'unité qui est inférieur à celui de ses concurrents qui sont moins avancés sur le plan technologique », expliquait récemment Richard Shimooka dans un rapport de l'Institut Macdonald-Laurier. Alors que le coût par avion dépassait les 200 millions de dollars américains au début de la production en 2007, il devrait passer sous la barre des 80 millions d'ici 2020, selon le Pentagone. Plus de 390 appareils ont été livrés dans le monde. Et pas plus tard que cette semaine, le président américain annonçait la vente de 105 avions supplémentaires à l'issue d'un sommet avec le premier ministre japonais. Les pays qui ont choisi le F-35 : États-Unis Royaume-Uni Italie Pays-Bas Norvège Danemark Belgique Turquie Japon Australie Israël Corée du Sud Il s'est déjà écoulé neuf ans depuis l'annonce par le gouvernement Harper de l'achat de 65 avions F-35. « La modernisation de nos vieux F-18 a coûté beaucoup d'argent. Et l'acquisition de chasseurs intérimaires australiens a coûté au bas mot un milliard de dollars de plus aux contribuables canadiens », déplore Justin Massie. Neuf ans plus tard, le Canada a commencé à recevoir ses premiers F-18 australiens usagés, toujours dans l'attente d'une solution permanente. Il est quand même plutôt ironique de constater que l'Australie voulait s'en débarrasser pour recevoir ses premiers F-35 tout neufs. https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1173077/canada-avions-chasse-f-35-achat-armee