Construction de brise-glaces à la Davie « Le début de quelque chose de grandiose »

Sur le même sujet

• 

  9 octobre 2018 | Local, Naval

  Plan to split warship maintenance between Quebec and Nova Scotia shipyards prompts warnings of job losses

  David Pugliese, Ottawa Citizen Officials are concerned the Irving yard in Halifax won't be able to handle all the work as it will also be building the new Canadian Surface Combatant warships The federal government is looking at splitting up maintenance work on the Canadian navy's frigates between an east coast shipyard and one in Quebec, but is facing objections from Halifax workers and Irving Shipbuilding who warn the change will mean lost jobs in Nova Scotia. There are seven frigates that will need maintenance on the east coast over a five-year period. But military and Department of National Defence officials are concerned the Irving yard in Halifax won't be able to handle all the work as it will also be in the midst of building the new fleet of Canadian Surface Combatant warships. Each of the aging Halifax-class frigates will require about a year of maintenance work, and in 2020 the navy expects maintenance will be needed on two frigates at the same time. Irving won the original maintenance contract in 2011 but that deal is nearly expired.In order to keep the navy at sea, federal procurement officials are proposing splitting up the work between Irving and its rival, Davie Shipbuilding in Levis, Que. Pat Finn, assistant deputy minister of materiel at DND, said that while no final decision has been made, discussions are taking place about splitting up the work. “We have to do this maintenance,” he told Postmedia. “We've got a fair bit to do. We have to keep the navy operational.” Finn said the government's shipbuilding strategy is producing new vessels for both the navy and coast guard, all of which will have to be maintained in the future — a large task. “If we don't have two maintenance and repair facilities for the navy and the coast guard we're going to have a strategic problem,” he said. Union officials at the Halifax shipyard and, defence-industry sources say, Irving itself have been lobbying the Liberal government to stop the plan to send some work to Davie. Irving did not offer comment for this story, but Lana Payne, the Atlantic Regional Director for Unifor, the union representing around 900 employees at the Irving yard, said her organization is worried that as many as 300 staff could face layoffs if some of the work is transferred to Davie. “The Halifax-class has been historically (maintained) at the Halifax yard and the loss of that work will create a major problem for our membership,” she said. “Our understanding is that this is work they can easily do.” Unifor has brought its concerns to Nova Scotia Liberal MPs and other members of the Liberal government. The government will spend several hundred million dollars per frigate for each maintenance period. To date, Irving Shipbuilding Inc. has received more than $3.4-billion in contracts under the government's shipbuilding strategy. That includes contracts for the Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ships and initial work on the surface combatant program. That also includes more than $511 million for repair, refit and maintenance contracts, according to federal government figures. The surface combatant program will result in an estimated $30 billion in build contracts for Irving, with work continuing into the 2040s. Sources within the federal government told Postmedia they do not see widespread layoffs arising from any decision to split the work between the yards. The government is also examining a plan to fast-track some aspects of the surface combatant program so the Irving yard is working at high capacity. Irving raised similar concerns in August after Davie received a contract to refit and upgrade three medium-size icebreakers purchased by the federal government. At the time, Irving noted that it and Seaspan Shipyards in Vancouver had been selected to build Canada's future fleets. “We call upon the Federal Government to confirm to Irving Shipbuilding, our shipbuilders and their families, the Province of Nova Scotia, and all Atlantic Canadians that the National Shipbuilding Strategy remains intact and, therefore, construction of the ships for Canada's Navy and Coast Guard will be done exclusively by Irving Shipbuilding and Vancouver Shipyards,” it pointed out in its statement. Treasury Board President Scott Brison, a Nova Scotia MP, said at the time that Irving's role in the shipbuilding strategy is secure but it has always been the case that other shipyards can compete for maintenance and refit work. • Email: dpugliese@postmedia.com https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/plan-to-split-warship-maintenance-between-quebec-and-nova-scotia-shipyards-prompts-warnings-of-job-losses

• 

  31 mai 2019 | Local, Aérospatial, Sécurité

  What does a DAR do?

  Michael Petsche Helicopters are pretty awesome devices. Even when you understand the physics of how they work, it's still a wonder that the combination of whirling bits and pieces can result in flight. These magnificent machines put out fires, string powerlines, erect towers, pluck people in distress from mountains, and save countless lives. But here's the thing: a brand new, factory-spec helicopter right off the production line can't do any of those things. Flip through the pages of any issue of Vertical, and in almost every photo, the aircraft has been fitted with some type of special equipment. A firefighting machine will have a cargo hook for the bucket, a bubble window, an external torque gauge, pulse lights and a mirror. A search-and-rescue aircraft will have a hoist. Air ambulances are filled with lifesaving equipment. And very little of that stuff comes directly from the airframe original equipment manufacturers (OEMs). Instead, this equipment is in place thanks to supplemental type certificates (STCs). As the name implies, an STC is required for an installation that supplements the original aircraft type certificate. It needs to meet all of the same requirements as the aircraft that it's installed upon. Therefore, it must undergo the same kind of testing, analysis, and scrutiny that the aircraft does. How do regulatory authorities ensure that supplementary equipment meets the same standards as the aircraft they're designed to augment? Through people like me. I am a Transport Canada Design Approval Representative (DAR), also known as a delegate. A DAR does not actually work for Transport Canada, but is delegated to act on its behalf to make findings of compliance in a particular field of specialty — such as structures, avionics, or as a flight test pilot. To secure an STC, not only must a modification meet the same standards as the original aircraft, but it has to be shown not to degrade the safety of the aircraft. Let's take the firefighting helicopter as an example. The bubble window needs to be strong enough to withstand the aerodynamic loads in flight. In order to verify this, a structural test can be done on a test rig. However, the bubble window protrudes from the aircraft, resulting in extra drag. It could adversely affect how the aircraft behaves, or reduce climb performance, or have an effect on the pitot-static system. These are the sorts of issues that flight testing is meant to uncover. Similarly, if someone wants to upgrade an old GPS system to the latest and greatest model, testing must be done to ensure that there is no electrical interference between the new unit and any other existing systems on the aircraft. A big part of the STC process is determining just how you can prove that a modification meets the regulations. Does it need to be tested or is a stress analysis enough? Or is it a combination of the two — or another method entirely? And on top of that, which regulations are applicable? And furthermore, which version of the regulations needs to be applied? The rules for the Airbus H125, for example, are not the same as for the Bell 429. It's the role of the DAR (with concurrence from the regulator, in my case Transport Canada) to make these kinds of determinations. While the STC process is technically uniform, the scope can vary widely from one project to another. Changing a seat cushion or changing an engine type can both be STCs. The execution of a project can take many forms, and is dependent on a huge number of factors, including the DAR, the project scope, the resources available, and the end user. In my current role, I work largely on my own. The process typically begins with me submitting an application to open the project with Transport Canada. I prepare the documents and drawings, and witness and document any required testing. Then I compile it all and submit it to Transport Canada. Through all this, I will rely heavily on the end user to provide their insight and expertise — and their facilities. After all, it's their aircraft, and they are the ones who will ultimately be installing, using, and maintaining the STC kit — so it has to make sense to them. Whenever possible, I will have documents and drawings reviewed by the maintenance team to make sure that theory and reality align. Becoming a delegate How does someone become a delegate? In Canada, it begins with an educational requirement. You must have an engineering degree, or have, in the opinion of Transport Canada, equivalent experience. In other words, if someone has many years of applicable experience, they can be eligible to be a delegate, even if they do not have an engineering degree. A prospective delegate must also successfully complete the Aircraft Certification Specialty Course. This is a two-week intensive course that covers the ins and outs of aircraft certification: type certification, STCs, Change Product Rule and so on. And yes, there are exams! Next is a one-year working relationship with Transport Canada. The process for becoming a delegate is not uniform, with the one-year timeline more of a guideline than a rule. In my case, it took less than 12 months. Prior to beginning my process, I had the good fortune of working for a talented delegate for many years. He taught me how it “should be done.” I was given the opportunity to fly at 170 knots indicated airspeed in AStars pointed at the ground during flight tests; I snapped bolts while piling steel plates onto structures during structural tests; and I wrote numerous supporting reports for many kinds of STCs for many different aircraft types. My mentor is a (sometimes maddeningly) meticulous guy. Everything we did was thorough and correct. So, by the time I was presenting my own work to Transport Canada, it was evident that I already had a pretty firm grasp on the process. As a result, my delegation was granted before a full year. During the period while I was building my relationship with Transport Canada, my friends would ask if I had to accomplish certain specified milestones or achieve specific “levels.” The short answer is: not really. In fact, it's about building trust. It's almost counter-intuitive that in an industry with such strict regulations, granting delegation to someone is, to a large degree, based on a “warm, fuzzy feeling.” Ultimately, Transport Canada must have confidence in the delegate. Let's face it, we are in a business with tight schedules and high price tags. There can be a lot of pressure, financial or otherwise, to meet deadlines — and things can go wrong. Parts can fail under ultimate loading during a structural test. That cursed Velcro can fail the flammability test. And when these things happen, it can be the delegate that incurs the wrath of the angry operator who really needs to get his aircraft flying. Transport Canada must have the confidence that not only does the delegate have the technical knowledge and ability, but that they have the intestinal fortitude to stand firm under what can sometimes be difficult circumstances. There's the somewhat cynical axiom that the only way for an aircraft to be 100 percent safe is to never let it fly. I have heard many tales of woe and misery about people's dealings with Transport Canada and how the regulator was being “unreasonable” about X, Y, or Z. I'm of the opinion that these instances often stem from poor communication — on both sides. This is another area where the DAR can help. The DAR often acts as a liaison (or translator) between the operator and Transport Canada. Operators don't necessarily spend that much time studying design regulations. And similarly, Transport Canada engineers may not be fully familiar with the day-to-day challenges and obligations of aircraft operations. As a DAR, I speak the same language as Transport Canada. But I also spend a great deal of time in hangars, so I am also fluent in “aircraft operator.” This level of bilingualism can alleviate misunderstandings. And with a little strategic communication, everyone involved can be satisfied a lot sooner. Not surprisingly, communication and open dialogue between the DAR and the regulator is just as crucial. It has been my experience that Transport Canada wants to help get projects completed. They are aviation geeks, just like the rest of us, and they want to “Git ‘er done.” Because I have developed a solid relationship with Transport Canada, if ever I find myself struggling with something, I can call them and ask for guidance. Obviously it's not their job to fix the issue for me, but they are there to help. Whether they point me at an Advisory Circular that I wasn't aware of, or they draw from their own experience, 99 times out of 100, talking it through with them yields a solution very quickly. We all want to keep aircraft flying — safely. And we all have our different roles to play. As a DAR, I enjoy being the go-between for the regulatory world and the operational world. The challenge of getting them to work and play nicely together can be pretty fun — and a big part of accomplishing that goal requires earned trust and open communication. https://www.verticalmag.com/features/what-does-a-dar-do/

• 

  20 janvier 2021 | Local, Aérospatial, C4ISR

  Saab : Proposes New Saab Sensor Centre in Canada

  01/18/2021 | 12:16pm EST NEWS FROM SAAB 18 January 2021 CUE 21-001 Saab Proposes New Saab Sensor Centre in Canada Today at the AIx Space 2021 Conference Saab announced that it has offered to establish a new facility in Canada as part of its offer for Canada's Future Fighter Capability Project (FFCP). This would be known as the Saab Sensor Centre and would be located in Vancouver, British Columbia, with a focus on sensor technologies such as radar. The Saab Sensor Centre would provide career opportunities for Canadian engineering talent in the Vancouver area, as well offering research and development avenues for academia. One of the proposed projects is to develop a Space Surveillance Radar (SSR) in Canada, in co-operation with other companies within the Canadian space industry. It is envisaged that this surface radar will target the global market for greater awareness of objects in the Earth's orbit. "So much of modern life and military capability depends on space- based assets. Today space is anything but empty when it comes to the Earth's immediate vicinity with an increasing number of satellites and many more to come. We feel that Saab teamed with Canadian space partners are the perfect combination to co-develop a SSR for Canada and the global market," said Simon Carroll, President of Saab Canada Inc. A Saab radar demonstrator has been built and is the basis for a co- development opportunity of a SSR with Canadian companies and their world-leading expertise and knowledge. This demonstrator leverages radar technology as found in Saab's military radars that operate across the world including on Canadian and US naval ships. NEWS FROM SAAB Saab, in co-operation with the Swedish government, has offered 88 Gripen E fighter aircraft, for Canada's FFCP. The establishment of the Saab Sensor Centre is part of the associated Canada-wide Industrial and Technological Benefits program from Saab. For further information, please contact: Saab Press Centre, +46 (0)734 180 018 presscentre@saabgroup.com www.saab.ca Twitter: @Saab Facebook: @saabtechnologies LinkedIn: Saab Instagram: Saab Saab serves the global market with world-leading products, services and solutions within military defence and civil security. Saab has operations and employees on all continents around the world. Through innovative, collaborative and pragmatic thinking, Saab develops, adopts and improves new technology to meet customers' changing needs. This is an excerpt of the original content. To continue reading it, access the original document here. Attachments Original document Permalink Disclaimer Saab AB published this content on 18 January 2021 and is solely responsible for the information contained therein. Distributed by Public, unedited and unaltered, on 18 January 2021 17:15:01 UTC https://www.marketscreener.com/quote/stock/SAAB-AB-6491624/news/Saab-Proposes-New-Saab-Sensor-Centre-in-Canada-32221101/