16 décembre 2019 | Local, Aérospatial
Two senior officers from the New York Air National Guard of the United States Air Force visited Winnipeg, Man., on Nov. 19 and 20, 2019, as part of the first official 1 Canadian Air Division/Canadian NORAD Region (1 CAD/CANR) Arctic Airpower Seminar.
Col Michele Kilgore and Col Clifford Souza, commanders of the 109th Airlift Wing and 109th Operations Group respectively, engaged in discussions with a diverse group of operators, specialists and advisors to talk about training and operational opportunities that would benefit the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) and its United States Air Force (USAF) allied partners.
BGen Ed “Hertz” Vaughan, deputy commander of CANR and deputy Combined/Joint Forces Air Component commander for 1 CAD/CANR, hosted the two-day seminar.
A partnership last September between the RCAF and the 109th Airlift Wing executing Operation Boxtop, the mission to bring supplies to Canadian Forces Station Alert in Nunavut, prompted him to invite members of the 109th Airlift Wing to the seminar to exchange information on processes and objectives.
“The Arctic is critically important to the security and defence of North America, and our ability to survive and operate in the Arctic domain are essential parts of our daily mission at 1 CAD/CANR,” said Vaughan. “We established this series of seminars to help build relationships and deep dive into the specific of polar logistics and sustainment. Forging partnerships across Arctic communities, mission stakeholders, and allied forces are requirements for success.”
The RCAF is no stranger to bi-national operations. Every day, military personnel and defence team members from Canada and the United States work together to protect and defend North American airspace through the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) mission.
Comprising more than 40 per cent of Canada's land mass (and 75 per cent of Canada's coastline) with about 120,000 inhabitants, the Arctic is undergoing significant change. Retreating ice cover is opening the way for increased shipping, tourism, and resource exploration, increasing interest in the region.
Following the presentations and discussion sessions, seminar attendees visited with members of 435 Transport and Rescue Squadron, a unit that routinely deploys north in support of Canada's NORAD and search and rescue commitments, to learn more about the role they play in the daily delivery of air power in the North.
“The Arctic can be a complex, harsh and unforgiving location to operate in if one isn't prepared to face its challenges,” said Vaughan. “These seminars permit us to learn from our partners and allies as we continue developing the skills, technology, and relationships to work effectively in a polar environment. I look forward to our next seminar in Yellowknife, focused on energy security at remote locations, and many more seminars to come. “
https://www.skiesmag.com/press-releases/canadian-norad-region-hosts-first-arctic-airpower-seminar
11 août 2022 | Local, Aérospatial
Airbus was designated as the only supplier qualified to provide the tankers to the Royal Canadian Air Force. As a result, a formal request for its proposal for the planes was issued to the firm on May 13, 2022.
6 janvier 2023 | Local, Aérospatial
Bombardier’s CEO is concerned that Canada is considering awarding a sole-source contract to Boeing for the Canadian Multi-Mission Aircraft project.
8 mai 2019 | Local, Aérospatial
Matt Gurney One can only imagine the astonishment in Ottawa when a letter arrived from Washington, reminding the Canadian government that military procurement projects are about procuring military equipment, not creating Canadian jobs. I like to imagine flabbergasted bureaucrats reading the letter over and over, before finally putting it down, rubbing their temples and musing aloud, “Don't the Americans realize how things are done here?” They do, it seems. And they don't like it. On Monday, the Macdonald-Laurier Institute published a new report, “Catastrophe: Assessing the Damage from Canada's Fighter Replacement Fiasco.” The title tells you most of what you need to know about the tone of the report. Author Richard Shimooka recaps the long and embarrassing history of Canada's inability to properly replace our rapidly aging and slowly attritting fleet of almost-40-year-old CF-18 jets. The report mostly covers a story that's been oft-told, including here in the National Post. But it did break some news: apparently, Washington's frustration with Canada is boiling over, and it's not keeping quiet about it anymore. Shimooka recaps the long and embarrassing history of Canada's inability to properly replace our rapidly aging ... CF-18 jets Shimooka's report reveals the existence of two letters previously unknown to the public, sent last year by American officials to Canadian counterparts. The specifics of the complaints involve fairly legalistic and technical aspects of Canada's membership in the international consortium that helped finance the development of the F-35 stealth fighter. Suffice it to say that Canada, as a participating nation, gets access to a rock-bottom price for the fighter (meaning the same cost paid by the U.S. military) and Canadian firms have been part of the production of the planes from the very beginning. That's the deal. It's a pretty good one. But Canada wants a different deal. Specifically, it wants the same kind of deal it always insists on when buying military equipment from abroad. We want any foreign company we're purchasing equipment from to invest heavily in Canada, so that even a contract signed with a foreign supplier can be shown to have helped Canadian jobs, and the middle class, and those working hard to join it. Even this is only a second-best option, a procurement Plan B. Canadian politicians would much rather have stuff built in Canada by Canadians, no matter how much that ends up costing us in terms of cost overruns and delays. But when that's simply not possible, we'll settle for industrial offsets from foreign companies. You'll note that in the above paragraph on military procurement, there was very little emphasis on actually successfully procuring equipment for the Armed Forces. Ottawa is much too sophisticated for that kind of concern. The real action is in the jobs, the industrial benefits, the gigantic novelty cheques, the ribbon cuttings, the question period talking points and the partisan mailers crowing about all the money flowing to Canadian firms. That's what military procurement is really for, at least in the eyes of Canadian officials. That's why our national shipbuilding strategy was to first build out a shipbuilding industry and then build some ships, almost as an afterthought, when we could have bought them faster and almost certainly cheaper from an ally. The Americans, it seems, have had enough, and are threatening to pull the F-35 from consideration in Canada's upcoming program to select our next fighter. To their mind, Canada has already been offered an objectively good deal: access to one of the world's most advanced fighter jets at the same cost the U.S. military pays, and billions in industrial benefits. It's true that the F-35 program has been troubled, but most of those problems are now behind it. These jets are entering service in large numbers in the U.S. military and in allied forces, as well. The F-35 isn't perfect but it's available, now, and Canada has already paid the cost of entry to the club. Angling for a better deal than everyone else is getting, is a slap in the face to the Americans and all the other allied nations who are part of the process. Angling for a better deal than everyone else is getting, is a slap in the face to the Americans Now a cynic will say that it's just good business. There's nothing wrong with Canada trying to get the best deal for itself. In general, I have an open mind to this kind of argument. But Canada isn't a business. It's a country that has signed alliances and agreements with our democratic peers, theoretically in good faith. We have our own interests, to be sure, but we also have obligations. Canada's membership in the F-35 consortium does not obligate us to buy F-35s. We'd retain the industrial benefits even if we select another fighter. But certainly it obligates us to at least honour the agreement we've already made? The Liberals have never been keen on the F-35. Before the past election, they actually pledged to never purchase them, before realizing that that was an impossible pledge to keep if we actually intended to hold a fair and open competition to select the next plane. The prime minister himself once dismissively described the F-35 as a plane that didn't work, even as the United States was putting its first squadron into active service. Part of me wonders if the Liberals are deliberately structuring our selection process to make it impossible for the U.S. to sell us F-35s. That would certainly solve that particular problem for the Liberals. Alas, the more realistic answer is probably, as ever, the simplest one. The Canadian government is probably baffled that the Americans would object to us behaving as we always do. Military procurement in Canada isn't about procurement, or the military, or honouring our commitments to our friends. It's about political booty that can be flung around the country come election time. That's just the way we do things here. Why would that ever change? https://nationalpost.com/opinion/matt-gurney-is-it-any-wonder-the-u-s-is-steamed-at-us-over-our-fighter-jet-fiasco