May 25, 2018 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) joined forces with the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries (CADSI) to publicly release a new report on Canada's defence industry for decision makers. Features of the report include building analytic capacity through collaborative research, economic impact, innovation, exports, and supply chains analysis.
May 2, 2022 | Local, Land
Après les USA qui vont fournir 90 pièces de 155 mm et le Canada qui en enverra six, c'est au tour des Australiens de contribuer au renforcement de...
November 28, 2017 | Local, Naval
ANDREA GUNN OTTAWA BUREAU Days before the bid submission deadline for the Canadian Surface Combatant request for proposals, Lockheed Martin Canada has announced it has teamed up with the UK-based BAE Systems to submit a proposal for Canada's new fleet of warships. The combined request for proposals is for an off-the-shelf ship design and combat systems integrator, and experts say the Lockheed Canada and BAE duo will be a powerhouse contender. For the ship design, BAE Systems is offering its Type 26 Global Combat Ship — long rumoured to be a favourite of Royal Canadian Navy officials and arguably the newest and most advanced vessel of its kind in the world — and the only possible contender that has yet to actually be built. The Royal Navy is building eight of their own Type 26 vessels. For the combat systems, which is best described as the brain and nervous systems of the ship's intelligence and combat operations, Lockheed Canada is offering its Canadian-designed CMS 330. This is a newer version of the combat management system Lockheed designed for the Royal Canadian Navy's original Halifax-class ships and is present on Canada's modernized frigates. Both firms were identified among bidders prequalified to participate in the process, alongside other international industry giants like ThyssenKrupp, Navantia and DCNS. Also part of the consortium participating in the Lockheed/BAE bid are CAE, L3 Technologies, MDA and Dartmouth-based marine tech firm Ultra Electronics. Speaking with The Chronicle Herald on Monday, Gary Fudge, VP of Canadian naval systems programs with Lockheed, said an independent study completed by Lockheed Canada revealed the Type 26 as the best design in the running, and prompted their interest in teaming with BAE for preliminary work several years before Canada announced that it would be combining the ship design and combat systems integrator into a single bid. He said BAE's modern design and modern toolsets — for example their use of advanced digital blueprints that will make it easier to modify and modernize the design in the future — made the Type 26 the key contender for them. “Given that Irving has just built the most modern shipyard, we wanted the designer to have toolsets and data that can migrate easily into Irving's toolsets,” said Fudge. Irving is the prime contractor for the combat portion of the government's National Shipbuilding Strategy and will build a fleet of 15 Canadian Surface Combatants (CSCs) at its Halifax shipyard, with a budget of $56billion to $60 billion, starting in the 2020s. It will also have a say, alongside the federal government, in selecting the winning bidder. Rosemary Chapdelaine, vice president and general manager with Lockheed Martin Canada Rotary and Mission Systems, on Monday touted job creation in Canada, including Nova Scotia, as a key component to their bid. For example, Lockheed Canada's combat systems and integration technology is built at a facility in Ottawa and tested at the the company's Maritime Advanced Testing and Training Site in Dartmouth. Chapdelaine said Lockheed Canada's approach to the bid is to be seen as the Canadian team, even if it takes points from other parts of their bid. “We want to provide the Canadian content, do the direct work in Canada using Canadian industry,” she said. David Perry, a senior analyst with Canadian Global Affairs Institute, said Lockheed Canada's long history with the Royal Canadian Navy via the Halifax-class frigates and the advantages of the Type 26 over other potential designs puts the consortium in a good spot in the competition. “An advantage of the Type 26 would be that where the requirements for it overlap with CSC, the technology would be very new, without modifying the design at all. The other ships in the competition would be older technology, so they'd need to modify it to introduce more current technology,” he said. But that doesn't make it a shoo-in — in an RFP with thousands of different parts, Perry said the winning design will have to tick a lot of boxes. Speed and accommodations for example, while adequate in the Type 26, Perry said are not necessarily the cream of the crop compared to other options out there. Retired navy commander and defence analyst Ken Hansen agreed that Lockheed Canada's extensive experience working with the Canadian Navy, as well as their edge on Canadian content, gives them an advantage over some parts of the competition. But, he said, while extremely advanced technology, the Type 26 might not be the ship Canada needs due to its high price and extreme complexity. “The (Type 26) is inordinately complex and it had a lot of teething pains — the ship has been described in the U.K. press as overpriced and a technical nightmare,” he said. “I have not gotten that warm feeling where the reassurances from the British design authorities say ‘Oh it's solved and we're back on track.'” It is not known how many groups will submit bids for the CSC competition. At least one other has gone public — Alion Canada announced its bid with Dutch De Zeven Provinciën Air Defence and Command frigate as its design last week. The federal government says it expects to be able to select a winning bidder at the earliest in the spring of 2018, dependent on the number and quality of bids it receives. http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia/1524306-lockheed-martin-bae-submit-warship-bid http://canadascombatshipteam.com/
May 19, 2020 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security
The lesson from this history is simple. Cutting defence spending in times of austerity is a bipartisan affair in Canada. This is owing less to politics than arithmetic. DND's budget –which typically ranges from 1/5 to 1/4 of total federal departmental discretionary spending –is too big to be excluded from any serious spending restraint initiative. This is well understood by Liberals, Conservatives and the Finance Department. The COVID-19 Recession and its Impact No one knows how deep or how long the COVID-19-induced recession will be. But every serious analyst agrees it will produce the sharpest drop in output since the Great Depression. The International Monetary Fund, for example, projects a 6.2 per cent annualized decline in GDP for Canada,1nearly double that of the 2009 recession. And already the government's fiscal response is without precedent and will lead to the largest deficit in postwar Canadian history (at least 10 per cent of GDP, or over $200 billion). This does not mean that Ottawa will snap into austerity mode next year. The economy will likely be too weak for that kind of action and cutting government spending is not in the Trudeau government's DNA to begin with... One big difference between now and the past is that there will be enormous pressure on Ottawa after the recession to boost spending in a wide range of areas which have been exposed in the pandemic. These include public health funding, medical research, pandemic prevention and mitigation, the social safety net, and industries particularly hard hit during the recession. There are also Liberal election campaign commitments from 2019 to honour –almost none of which had been implemented pre-pandemic –of which national defence is conspicuously absent. ...this could produce a perfect storm for Strong, Secure, Engaged (SSE). This was always a big risk associated with a defence policy that had its funding ramped up gradually over many years. As the Harper government amply demonstrated, it is relatively easy to reduce or eliminate the rate of planned increases to defence funding –the government took almost no flak for doing so in 2010. Making matters worse, DND has failed to come anywhere near meeting the spending trajectory profiled in SSE, as David Perry has analyzed thoroughly. Which means flattening DND's budget ramp is even more tempting for any government in austerity or even re-prioritization mode. Would a change in government matter here? Unlikely. While the Conservatives are more committed to national defence and the Canadian Armed Forces than the Liberals, they would likely see deficit reduction as their top priority, and it is virtually impossible to have meaningful expenditure restraint that doesn't involve national defence [what the Harper government did from 2010 on]. Conclusion Over the past generation, recessions and the fiscal consolidation that has followed them have had a seriously negative impact on DND's budget. The COVID-19 recession could be the most severe Canada has faced in at least 40 years. It has already resulted in the largest peacetime deficit in Canadian history. And, because of the pandemic, government priorities have changed radically overnight. The future for SSE and its associated funding does not look bright. National Defence probably has a year or two before the crunch hits. Now is therefore the time for strategic thinking and serious priority setting among the political, public service and miitary leadership to ensure that the 2020s don't become another decade of darkness. Eugene Lang is Adjunct Professor, School of Policy Studies, Queen's University, and Fellow, Canadian Global Affairs Institute. He was chief of staff to two ministers of National Defence in the Chrétien and Martin governments and served as an official in the Department of Finance. The 2020s most certainly will be “another decade of darkness”. It is not improbable that the Canadian military, if the Liberals win the next election, will effectively end up as a constabulary/militia force with domestic response to natural disasters of various sorts as its primary function along with very token commitments to UN peacekeeping missions. Bye bye to serious numbers of new RCAF fighters, to serious numbers of new RCN frigates, and to the needed large funding to renew NORAD's North Warning System [see this post: “So Will the Canadian Government Put Some Big Bucks into Modernizing NORAD's North Warning System?“]. And bye bye to any meaningful military participation in NATO. Canada will then finally be defenceless against help from the US ( the following quote is from the last sentence of this earlier CGAI paper's Executive Summary: “Throughout its 60-year existence, NORAD has been Canada's “defence against help.”). Any American administration will have no hesitation in demanding the use of Canadian territory and waters for its own defence purposes if our efforts fall well below what the US thinks necessary. US Air Force bases at Cold Lake, Yellowknife, Goose Bay and a US Navy one at St. John's anyone? Take a look at this as an example of an increasingly prevalent Canadian progressive view; and Justin Trudeau's “base” is progressive to the max: Spending $19 billion on fighter jets won't fight COVID-19 or climate change Instead of buying a new weapons system, the federal government should disarm and invest in a Green New Deal There it is. Plus earlier from Mr Lang: Is the “business Liberal” extinct? By the way the photo at the top of the post is of the Avro CF-100 Canuck interceptor, the first jet fighter developed in Canada–to defend against Soviet bombers...and US help. Mark Collins