Back to news

December 17, 2020 | Local, Naval

Top of the line Canadian-made naval equipment shut out of $70-billion warship program

A spokeswoman says DND is “confident that we have competitively selected the best design to meet Canada's needs.”

David Pugliese • Ottawa Citizen

Dec 16, 2020 • Last Updated 1 day ago • 6 minute read

Canadian equipment that taxpayers spent hundreds of millions of dollars to develop isn't being used on the country's new $70-billion fleet of warships because the consortium that won the bid selected its own affiliated companies and their foreign systems.

A number of Canadian firms repeatedly tried to warn ministers and deputy ministers at the Department of National Defence, Public Services and Procurement Canada as well as Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada that they would be shut out of the Canadian Surface Combatant project, according to federal government documents obtained by this newspaper.

Those concerns were ignored. Instead, Canada left it up to the winning consortium, in this case, the U.S.-controlled Lockheed Martin Canada and BAE of the United Kingdom to determine the equipment that would make up key components of the proposed 15-fleet Canadian Surface Combatant, or CSC fleet. By selecting the consortium's Type 26 warship design for the CSC, the Royal Canadian Navy automatically agreed to what Lockheed Martin had determined was the best equipment for it to use.

In the last week, this newspaper has chronicled multiple issues with the CSC project, the most expensive military procurement in Canada's history. This newspaper reviewed thousands of pages of documents, obtained through sources and through the access to information law, to reveal how the CSC's budget has spiralled upward and upward and how government officials previously tried to block the cost of the project from becoming public.

In an email, DND defended its choice that shut out inclusion on the CSC of Canadian-made propulsion systems, sonar and communication systems, as well as radar. The Canadian-based firms that build those systems employ hundreds of people in the high-tech sector.

“By selecting the design, Canada has selected the associated equipment,” said DND spokeswoman Jessica Lamirande. She noted DND is “confident that we have competitively selected the best design to meet Canada's needs.”

As a result, a radar built by Lockheed Martin in the U.S., which hasn't yet been certified for naval operations, will be installed on the CSC. Passed over was a state-of-the art naval radar developed with the help of Thales Canada in Nepean. Canadian taxpayers contributed $54 million to the development of that radar, which is now being used on German, Danish and Dutch warships.

Also shut out of the CSC competition is SHINCOM, a naval communications system built by DRS Technologies of Ottawa and considered one of the top such systems in the world. SHINCOM is in service on other Royal Canadian Navy vessels as well as 150 warships of allied navies around the world, including Australia, the U.S., Japan, New Zealand and South Korea. It was originally developed for Canada's Halifax-class frigates and taxpayers have poured millions of dollars into its development.

Also left on the sidelines was General Dynamic Mission Systems of Ottawa, Canada's top developer of anti-submarine warfare and sonar equipment. The firm has its systems on aircraft or warships of militaries in Canada, Japan, South Korea, Portugal and various South American nations.

Top government officials and politicians were repeatedly warned key Canadian firms would be shut out of the CSC project.

Steve Zuber, vice president of DRS Technologies, wrote on Aug. 31, 2016 to alert innovation minister Navdeep Bains that the way the CSC procurement was designed would work against Canadian firms. “The CSC procurement approach may actually disadvantage Canadian companies,” Zuber warned. “The current evaluation approach puts our world-class Canadian solutions at serious risk of not being selected for Canada.”

At the heart of the matter was a procurement system that penalized bidders if they deviated too much from their original ship designs to accommodate Canadian equipment. In addition, no competitions were held for key components of the new warships, such as sonar, radar or communications systems.

General Dynamics Missions Systems Canada also tried to warn government officials in November 2019 that the lack of competition shut out high-tech Canadian systems developed over the years with both private and tax dollars.

Company vice president David Ibbetson told navy commander Vice Adm. Art McDonald, DND deputy minister Jody Thomas, PSPC deputy minister Bill Matthews and ISED deputy minister Simon Kennedy about the lack of competition on the CSC anti-submarine warfare systems. That resulted in a “largely foreign solution with only limited Canadian content,” he noted.

The documents also show bureaucrats at ISED countering such concerns by pointing out that the CSC program will include equipment from other firms such as L-3 and CAE in Quebec and MDA in B.C. Lockheed Martin has also committed to invest in priority areas such as cybersecurity, clean technology and the marine sector, innovation minister Bains was told.

But the federal government has declined to release other documents requested through access to information law about specifics of the industrial benefits and job creation plan linked to the CSC. There is concern by some in the country's defence industry that the Liberal government has put at risk existing Canadian high-tech jobs, developed and established in part by federal contracts and development money, in exchange for the promise by foreign companies to create new jobs in the future linked to the CSC.

In addition, in November 2019, the Lockheed Martin Canada executive responsible for delivering on the industrial commitments admitted the system had major problems. Walt Nolan said the policy the Canadian government developed has prompted defence firms to significantly overcommit on the jobs and industry benefits they claim they can deliver on the CSC.

But Lockheed Martin has significant support from the leadership of the Royal Canadian Navy, including Vice Adm. McDonald. In July, McDonald took to Twitter to promote the company and its SPY-7 radar, noting that such a system is critical to a warship's survival and how it performs on missions. “For these reasons, the Royal Canadian Navy is delighted that Canada's Combat Ship Team under Lockheed Martin Canada leadership will fit the SPY-7 in CSC,” wrote McDonald, in retweeting the company's press release about the radar.

But McDonald's enthusiastic corporate plug left out some critical information, namely that the SPY-7 radar had never been installed on an actual warship. Less than a month before McDonald's tweet, Japan's government, which had been hoping to use SPY-7 radar for a land-based missile defence system, suspended the project. Japan cited technical issues and cost for the decision and is now trying to figure out what to do with the systems it has already paid for.

Japan's military has suggested using the SPY-7 on new frigates but some of the country's lawmakers are trying to scuttle that plan. They are worried that Japan will pay significant development costs to get the radar ready for maritime use and since the U.S. Navy will use a completely different system there will be problems operating with a key ally.

While the SPY-7 radar issue has been debated in Japan's legislature, Canadian politicians have been silent.

Lockheed's rival, Raytheon, the firm which will provide the SPY-6 radar for the U.S. Navy, has made several presentations to the Liberal government. It tried to convince politicians and bureaucrats the Lockheed Martin system could become a money pit that would potentially put Canadian sailors at risk.

Switching to SPY-6 would save Canada tens of millions of dollars as the U.S. Navy would finance future research into modernizing the radar to deal with new threats, federal officials were told.

In addition, Raytheon pointed out that unlike the SPY-7, the testing of its radar, which included intercepts of targets, was completed in 2019. The U.S. Navy intends to install the system on 50 of its warships.

But cabinet ministers and federal bureaucrats dismissed Raytheon's overtures as an attempt to reverse the CSC procurement process that had already been completed.

Neither Lockheed Martin nor the DND could provide a date on when the SPY-7 will be ready for naval operations and certified for use on the CSC. But they noted the company is supposed to deliver the first radar system in 2025.

“Once fully integrated into the CSC design, the SPY-7 will provide Canada the capabilities it needs to meet the operational and interoperability requirements of the Royal Canadian Navy well past the middle of this century,” added DND spokeswoman Lamirande.

Responses from DND and Lockheed Martin to questions posed by this newspaper for this story were answered in nearly identical fashion.

Canadian taxpayers will finance the development and testing of any of the radar requirements for the CSC. The cost of that, however, is not known at this point.

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/top-of-the-line-canadian-made-naval-equipment-shut-out-of-70-billion-warship-program

On the same subject

  • Halifax to host new NATO operation to pursue next-level defence technology | CBC News

    November 18, 2022 | Local, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR

    Halifax to host new NATO operation to pursue next-level defence technology | CBC News

    Halifax has been chosen by the federal government to host the new North American NATO defence innovation office, Defence Minister Anita Anand said Friday.

  • CDR: Team Artemis

    November 1, 2018 | Local, Aerospace

    CDR: Team Artemis

    http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/46cfb3a8#/46cfb3a8/18

  • F-35s Are Dead: The Sixth Generation of Fighter Aircraft Is On Its Way

    January 21, 2020 | Local, Aerospace

    F-35s Are Dead: The Sixth Generation of Fighter Aircraft Is On Its Way

    by Kris Osborn Key point: At this rate, the F-35 won't even see combat before its outmoded. It is also possible that the new 6th-generation fighter could use advanced, futuristic stealth technology able to enable newer, more capable air defenses. The air defenses of potential adversaries are increasingly using faster computing processing power and are better networked together, more digital, able to detect a wider range of frequencies and able to detect stealthy aircraft at farther distances. The Air Force has begun experimenting and conceptual planning for a 6th generation fighter aircraft to emerge in coming years as a technological step beyond the F-35, service leaders said. "We have started experimentation, developmental planning and technology investment," Lt. Gen. Arnold Bunch, Military Deputy, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force, Acquisition, told Scout Warrior in an interview. The new aircraft, engineered to succeed the 5th-generation F-35 Joint StrikeFighter and explode onto the scene by the mid 2030s, is now in the earliest stages of conceptual development with the Air Force and Navy. The two services are now working together on early conceptual discussions about the types of technologies and capabilities the aircraft will contain. While the Air Force has not yet identified a platform for the new aircraft. The Air Force characterizes the effort in terms of a future capability called Next-Gen Air Dominance. While Bunch did not elaborate on the specifics of ongoing early efforts, he did make reference to the Air Superiority 2030 Flight Plan which delineates some key elements of the service's strategy for a future platform. Fighter jets in 20-years may likely contain the next-generation of stealth technology, electronic warfare, sophisticated computer processing and algorithms, increased autonomy, hypersonic weapons and so-called "smart-skins" where sensors are built into the side of the aircraft itself. Some of these characteristics may have been on display more than a year ago when Northrop Grumman's SuperBowl AD revealed a flashy first look at its rendering of a new 6th-generation fighter jet. Northrop is one of a number of major defense industry manufacturers who will bid for a contract to build the new plane - when the time is right. While there are not many details available on this work, it is safe to assume Northrop is advancing concepts, technology and early design work toward this end. Boeing is also in the early phases of development of a 6th-gen design, according to a report in Defense News. The Navy's new aircraft will, at least in part, replace the existing inventory of F/A-18 Super Hornets which will start to retire by 2035, Navy officials said. The Navy vision for a future carrier air wing in 2040 and beyond is comprised of the carrier-launched variant of the Joint Strike Fighter, the F-35C, and legacy aircraft such as the EA-18G Growler electronic jamming aircraft. Also, around this time is when Navy planners envision its 6th generation aircraft to be ready, an aircraft which will likely be engineered for both manned and unmanned missions. Technologies are rapidly advancing in coatings, electromagnetic spectrum issues, artificial intelligence, maneuvering, superiority in sensing the battlespace, communications and data links, Navy leaders have said. Navy officials also add that the Navy is likely to develop new carrier-launched unmanned air vehicles in coming years as well. For instance, Northrop's historic X-47B demonstrator aircraft was the first unmanned system to successfully launch and land on the deck of an aircraft carrier. Analysts have speculated that as 6th generation developers seek to engineer a sixth-generation aircraft, they will likely explore a range of next-generation technologies such as maximum sensor connectivity, super cruise ability and an aircraft with electronically configured “smart skins.” Super cruise technology would enable the new fighter jet to cruise at supersonic speeds without needing afterburner, analysts have explained. As a result, super cruise brings a substantial tactical advantage because it allows for high-speed maneuvering without needing afterburner, therefore enable much longer on-location mission time. Such a scenario provides a time advantage as the aircraft would likely outlast a rival aircraft likely to run out of fuel earlier. The Air Force F-22 has a version of supercruise technology. Maximum connectivity would mean massively increased communications and sensor technology such as having an ability to achieve real-time connectivity with satellites, other aircraft and anything that could provide relevant battlefield information.The new aircraft might also seek to develop the ability to fire hypersonic weapons, however such a development would hinge upon successful progress with yet-to-be-proven technologies such as scramjets traveling at hypersonic speeds. Some tests of early renderings of this technology have been tested successfully and yet other attempts have failed. The Air Force Chief Scientist, Dr. Geoffrey Zacharias, has told Scout Warrior that the US anticipates having hypersonic weapons by the 2020s, hypersonic drones by the 2030s and recoverable hypersonic drone aircraft by the 2040s. There is little doubt that hypersonic technology, whether it be weaponry or propulsion, or both, will figure prominently into future aircraft designs. Smart aircraft skins would involve dispersing certain technologies or sensors across the fuselage and further integrating them into the aircraft itself, using next-generation computer algorithms to organize and display information for the pilot. We see some of this already in the F-35; the aircraft sensor fusion uses advanced computer technology to collect, organize and display combat relevant information from a variety of otherwise disparate sensors onto a single screen for pilots. In addition, Northrop's Distributed Aperture System is engineered to provide F-35 pilots with a 360-degree view of the battlespace. Cameras on the DAS are engineered into parts of the F-35 fuselage itself to reduce drag and lower the aircraft's radar signature. Smart skins with distributed electronics means that instead of having systems mounted on the aircraft, you would have apertures integrated on the skin of the aircraft, analysts have said. This could reduce drag, increase speed and maneuverability while increasing the technological ability of the sensors. It is also possible that the new 6th-generation fighter could use advanced, futuristic stealth technology able to enable newer, more capable air defenses. The air defenses of potential adversaries are increasingly using faster computing processing power and are better networked together, more digital, able to detect a wider range of frequencies and able to detect stealthy aircraft at farther distances. The new 6th-generation fighter will also likely fire lasers and have the ability to launch offensive electronic attacks. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/f-35s-are-dead-sixth-generation-fighter-aircraft-its-way-114901

All news