13 février 2019 | Local, Aérospatial

Du plomb dans l’aile ou plutôt de la rouille sur les ailes et le moral dans les talons…

par

La décision du gouvernement de Justin Trudeau de procéder à l'achat de 25 avions de combat F-18 à l'Australie est fortement discutable sur de multiples facettes.

Dans quelques semaines, le Canada commencera à prendre possession de ces « nouveaux » appareils. Personnellement, je suis d'avis que notre nation est une fois de plus la risée mondiale. Quel autre pays du G7 irait dépenser 500 millions de dollars pour faire l'achat de 25 avions de combat qui ont plus de 30 ans de service ?

Pourront-ils (au moins) voler de Mirabel à Cold Lake ?

Le comble du comble, Radio-Canada nous apprenait que le gouvernement Trudeau considère sérieusement de rapporter au Canada ces vieux appareils à l'aide... d'un avion-cargo de type Antonov. C'est quoi le problème ? Les F-18 australiens ne sont pas en mesure de parcourir la distance entre Canberra en Australie et Mirabel au Canada ? Si cela est le cas, c'est rassurant, car ce sont ces mêmes appareils qui assureront la défense aérienne de notre pays. Pourront-ils voler de Mirabel à Cold Lake ?

Si le Canada décide de rapporter les 23 avions par avion-cargo (2 avions sont déjà aux États-Unis), une fortune sera dépensée en transport, car les frais de fonctionnement d'un Antonov sont très élevés. Ils n'ont pas pensé à les transporter par bateau ? Pourquoi ne pas acheter un porte-avion usagé ? Avec nos sous-marins et nos « nouveaux » F-18, un porte-avion usagé ferait aussi l'affaire !

Vous savez quoi, ça me donne l'impression que tout est improvisé !

Technologie désuète

Fondamentalement, avons-nous besoin de F-18 dont la technologie est désuète et qui selon toute vraisemblance ne feraient aucunement le poids contre des avions de chasse de 5e génération ? Dans le contexte des guerres modernes et urbaines, quelle est la valeur ajoutée, l'utilité, de procéder à l'achat de ces appareils ? Les gouvernements libéraux ont une f'cheuse habitude d'acheter du matériel militaire usagé. Personne (et surtout pas les contribuables) n'a oublié la désastreuse transaction du gouvernement de Jean Chrétien avec la Grande Bretagne dans les années 1990 pour l'achat de 4 sous-marins, au diesel, technologie qui était déjà dépassée depuis longtemps au moment de l'achat. Ces sous-marins ont coûté jusqu'à présent plus de 3 milliards de dollars et ont passé 91% du temps en cale sèche ou à quai.

Mais au-delà de tous ces éléments de discussion, ma réflexion porte sur les répercussions sur le moral des troupes lorsque notre gouvernement fait l'achat d'équipement qui est bon pour la ferraille, pour le musée ou pour être installé en avant d'une filiale de la Légion royale canadienne.

Et le moral des troupes ?

Si je prends le temps de me mettre dans la tenue de vol d'un pilote de l'Aviation royale canadienne, j'aurais sans doute le moral dans les talons. Je me questionnerais sérieusement. J'aurais sans doute des craintes pour ma propre vie si jamais je devais être impliqué dans un combat aérien. Je me demanderais si notre gouvernement est véritablement sérieux dans sa stratégie de défense. En fait, je serais assez confus et déprimé. De mon point de vue, l'achat d'équipement militaire usagé ne peut qu'avoir un impact négatif sur le moral des troupes et un impact sur l'attrition du personnel. Par de fait même, cela doit aussi affecter le recrutement des personnes qui auraient un intérêt pour la carrière de pilote de chasse. J'ai tenté de rejoindre deux pilotes de chasse que je connais, mais je n'ai pas eu de retour. De toute manière, je doute fortement qu'ils aient commenté cet achat, ils sont trop professionnels.

Nous avons l'une des meilleures forces militaires au monde sur le plan des ressources humaines. Une force qui est professionnelle, très bien entraînée et qui a démontré à maintes reprises son excellence lors de conflits ou d'opérations locales ou de maintien de la paix. Toutefois, pour demeurer parmi les meilleurs, nos soldats, marins et aviateurs doivent pouvoir bénéficier d'un équipement militaire à la fine pointe de la technologie. C'est aussi simple que ça ! Il est impossible de séparer le soldat de l'équipement militaire pour obtenir de bons résultats.

Une fausse bonne affaire

Bien évidemment, l'équipement militaire moderne est extrêmement cher et comme pays, nous avons des moyens financiers limités en matière de défense (budget de +/- 25 milliards en 2017). Comme nation, nous devons faire des choix en matière d'investissements dans les différentes sphères de la société. Conséquemment, avant d'acheter n'importe quoi dont des sous-marins au diesel qui devraient être stationnés à Pointe-au-Père en Gaspésie ou des F-18, il faudrait possiblement avoir une réflexion de fond sur nos intentions en matière de défense, sur nos alliances et sur notre capacité financière.

Entretemps, le gouvernement de Justin Trudeau pourra continuer de penser qu'il a fait une bonne affaire et se réjouir d'avoir obtenu 7 avions F-18 sur les 25 qui seront utilisés par leurs pièces.

À une échelle moins considérable il va sans dire, c'est comme le gars, très fier de son coup, qui s'achète deux Bombardiers ski doo Tundra 250cc 1988 dont l'un sera utilisé pour les pièces ! Il doit aller les chercher à Chibougamau et il habite en banlieue de Montréal. Il pense faire une bonne affaire ! Le Tundra à quand même 30 ans, il doit parcourir des centaines de kilomètres pour aller le chercher et son moral risque d'en prendre un coup lorsqu'il sera « stallé » dans les bois à des kilomètres de chez lui !

Une bonne affaire vous dites ! ?

http://www.45enord.ca/2019/02/du-plomb-dans-laile-ou-plutot-de-la-rouille-sur-les-ailes-et-le-moral-dans-les-talons-f-18-australiens-canada/

Sur le même sujet

  • Canada's new frigates could take part in ballistic missile defence — if Ottawa says yes

    26 décembre 2019 | Local, Naval

    Canada's new frigates could take part in ballistic missile defence — if Ottawa says yes

    Murray Brewster Canada's new frigates are being designed with ballistic missile defence in mind, even though successive federal governments have avoided taking part in the U.S. program. When they slip into the water sometime in the mid- to late-2020s, the new warships probably won't have the direct capability to shoot down incoming intercontinental rockets. But the decisions made in their design allow them to be converted to that role, should the federal government ever change course. The warships are based upon the British Type 26 layout and are about to hit the drawing board. Their radar has been chosen and selected missile launchers have been configured to make them easy and cost-effective to upgrade. Vice-Admiral Art McDonald said the Lockheed Martin-built AN/SPY-7 radar system to be installed on the new frigates is cutting-edge. It's also being used on land now by the U.S. and Japan for detecting ballistic missiles. "It's a great piece, and that is what we were looking for in terms of specification," McDonald told CBC News in a year-end interview. Selecting the radar system for the new frigates was seen as one of the more important decisions facing naval planners because it has to stay operational and relevant for decades to come — even as new military threats and technologies emerge. McDonald said positive feedback from elsewhere in the defence industry convinced federal officials that they had made the right choice. "Even from those that weren't producing an advanced kind of radar, they said this is the capability you need," he said. The whole concept of ballistic missile defence (BMD) remains a politically touchy topic. BMD — "Star Wars," to its critics — lies at the centre of a policy debate the Liberal government has tried to avoid at all costs. In 2017, Canada chose not to join the BMD program. That reluctance to embrace BMD dates back to the political bruising Paul Martin's Liberal government suffered in 2004-05, when the administration of then-U.S. president George W. Bush leaned heavily on Ottawa to join the program. In the years since, both the House of Commons and Senate defence committees have recommended the federal government relent and sign on to BMD — mostly because of the emerging missile threat posed by rogue nations such as North Korea. Liberals reluctant to talk BMD The question of whether to join BMD is expected to form part of the deliberations surrounding the renewal of NORAD — an undertaking the Liberal government has acknowledged but not costed out as part of its 2017 defence policy. Missile defence continues to be a highly fraught concept within the federal government. Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan made a point of downplaying a CBC News story last summer that revealed how the Canadian and U.S. militaries had laid down markers for what the new NORAD could look like, pending sign-off by both Washington and Ottawa. Asked about Sajjan's response, a former senior official in the minister's office said it raised the spectre of "Star Wars" — not a topic the Liberal government was anxious to discuss ahead of last fall's election. The current government may not want to talk about it, but the Canadian navy and other NATO countries are grappling with the technology. Practice makes perfect Last spring, a Canadian patrol frigate, operating with 12 other alliance warships, tracked and shot down a supersonic target meant to simulate a ballistic missile. A French frigate also scored a separate hit. For the last two years, NATO warships have practiced linking up electronically in defensive exercises to shoot down both mock ballistic and cruise missiles. A Canadian frigate in the 2017 iteration of the exercise destroyed a simulated cruise missile. At the recent Halifax Security Forum, there was a lot of talk about the proliferation of missile technology. One defence expert told the forum Canadian military planners have been paying attention to the issue for a long time. The frigate design is an important example. "I think what they've tried to do is keep the door open by some of the decisions they've made, recognizing that missile proliferation is a significant concern," said Dave Perry, of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. "They haven't shut the door on doing that and I think that is smart." Opponents of BMD, meanwhile, have long argued the fixation by the U.S. and NATO on ballistic missile defence is fuelling instability and giving Russia and China reasons to co-operate in air and missile defence. Speaking before a Commons committee in 2017, Peggy Mason, president of the foreign and defence policy think-tank Rideau Institute, said the United States's adversaries have concluded that building more offensive systems is cheaper than investing in defensive ones. "The American BMD system also acts as a catalyst to nuclear weapons modernization, as Russia and China seek not only increased numbers of nuclear weapons but also increased manoeuvrability," said Mason, Canada's ambassador for disarmament from 1989 to 1994, testifying on Sept. 14, 2017. She also warned that "there would be significant financial costs to Canadian participation" in the U.S. BMD program "given American demands" — even prior to Donald Trump's presidency — "that allies pay their 'fair share' of the collective defence burden." https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/frigate-ballistic-missile-defence-canada-1.5407226

  • Updated: Eurofighter drops out of Canadian fighter jet program

    5 septembre 2019 | Local, Aérospatial

    Updated: Eurofighter drops out of Canadian fighter jet program

    By DAVID PUGLIESE, OTTAWA CITIZEN Another company has pulled out of Canada's competition to buy new fighter jets. The United Kingdom's Ministry of Defence and Airbus Defence and Space informed the Canadian government Friday of their decision to withdraw from Canada's future fighter competition. Airbus had been offering Canada the Eurofighter. Last year the European firm Dassault informed the Canadian government it would not be competing in the competition. It had been planning to offer Canada the Rafale fighter jet. The $19 billion competition has been dogged by allegations it is designed to favour Lockheed Martin's F-35 stealth fighter. Postmedia reported earlier this year that the requirements for the new jets put emphasis on strategic attack and striking at ground targets during foreign missions. That criteria is seen to benefit the F-35. In addition, the federal government changed criteria on how it would assess industrial benefits after the U.S. government threatened to pull the F-35 from the competition. Industry representatives have said they will carefully review the Canadian requirements before making their decision to bid. The work needed to prepare a bid will cost the firms around $15 million each. The decision to pull the Eurofighter from the competition leaves the F-35, the Boeing Super Hornet, and Saab's Gripen. It is unclear whether Boeing or Saab will continue in the competition. Airbus and the UK Defence Ministry noted that its decision to withdraw was the result of a detailed review of Canada's request for proposals which was released to industry on July 23. It pointed to the changes Canada made to the industrial benefits package to appease Lockheed Martin as well as the excessive security costs that U.S.-Canadian security requirements placed on a company based outside North America. “A detailed review has led the parties to conclude that NORAD security requirements continue to place too significant of a cost on platforms whose manufacture and repair chains sit outside the United States-Canada 2-EYES community,” the statement from Airbus and the UK Defence Ministry noted. “Second, both parties concluded that the significant recent revision of industrial technological benefits obligations does not sufficiently value the binding commitments the Typhoon Canada package was willing to make, and which were one of its major points of focus.” Bids must be submitted by the spring of 2020. Public Services and Procurement Canada, which is running the competition, did not provide comment. A winning bid is expected to be determined by early 2022. The first aircraft would be delivered by 2025. Technical merit will make up the bulk of the assessment at 60 per cent. Cost and economic benefits companies can provide to Canada will each be worth 20 per cent. The Conservative government had previously selected the F-35 as the air force's new jet but backed away from that plan after concerns about the technology and growing cost. During the 2015 election campaign, Justin Trudeau vowed that his government would not purchase the F-35. But at the same time, Trudeau stated his government would hold an open competition for the fighter purchase. The Liberal government backed away from its promise to freeze out the F-35 and the aircraft is now seen as a front-runner in the competition as it has many supporters in the Royal Canadian Air Force. Many of Canada's allies plan to operate the plane. Canada is a partner in the F-35 program and has contributed funding for the aircraft's development. Canada already changed some of the industrial benefits criteria of its fighter jet competition in May to satisfy concerns from the U.S. government that the F-35 would be penalized or couldn't be considered because of how that program was set up. U.S. officials had warned that the F-35 development agreement Canada signed years ago prohibits partners from imposing requirements for industrial benefits. Under the F-35 agreement, partner nations such as Canada are prohibited from demanding domestic companies receive specific work on the fighter jet. Instead, Canadian firms compete and if they are good enough they receive contracts. Over the last 12 years, Canadian firms have earned more than $1.3 billion in contracts to build F-35 parts. The changes made in May would now allow some of those F-35 contracts to be considered when looking at industrial benefits for the new planes. https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/eurofighter-drops-out-of-canadian-fighter-jet-program

  • Marinvent Announces Successful Delivery to Government of Canada of its APM Product

    9 avril 2019 | Local, Aérospatial

    Marinvent Announces Successful Delivery to Government of Canada of its APM Product

    Montreal, Canada, April 2, 2019 – Marinvent is pleased to announce the successful delivery of its Airfoil Performance Monitor product (APM) to the Government of Canada following extensive independent flight testing by the National Research Council under the Build in Canada Innovation Program (BCIP). APM monitors and displays the margin to stall of an airfoil and detects the real-time effects of icing, contamination, and degradation on the lifting surface of any airfoil and in all phases of flight. The recently-concluded flight evaluations conducted independently by NRC-FRL conclusively demonstrated the following unique capabilities of APM: Provides stall warning and backup airspeed indications and is completely independent of all aircraft-side inputs except power. (it needs no airspeed, air data, angle-of-attack, or flap position inputs). Gives the correct stall warning margin, even with contaminated (iced or otherwise degraded) airfoils. Correctly detects compressibility stalls at high altitude. Provides tail stall warning which is particularly relevant to a number of UAV platforms. Provides correct diagnosis of contamination early during the takeoff roll (Air Florida Flight 90, Arrow Air, and Dryden, among others). Provides real-time data enabling significantly reduced fuel consumption and brake wear and enabling better predictive maintenance scheduling, helping to pay for itself by reducing aircraft operating costs. “APM is a mature product having been successfully tested on several Part 25 jet and turboprop aircraft, as well as numerous Part 23 light aircraft and business jets”, said Dr. John Maris, President of Marinvent. “It is available for installation today. The Canadian government is our first customer under the BCIP program, and we have also made our first forays into the UAV market, which desperately needs this technology particularly for Canadian winter operations”. Dr. Maris, whose doctoral thesis “AN ARCHIVAL ANALYSIS OF STALL WARNING SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS DURING AIRBORNE ICING ENCOUNTERS” led to the final development of APM, has made his academic life's work the study of the relationship between aircrew and angle of attack/stall warning systems. He is one of the world's leading authorities on this subject, which is particularly pertinent currently, and is also a Transport Canada Test Pilot DAR. Dr. Maris is an Adjunct Professor at Concordia University in Montreal, Canada as well as being President of Marinvent Corporation and inventor of APM. In recognition of the potential impact of APM, SAE named APM as the 2017 Aerospace & Defense category winner in their Create the Future competition: https://contest.techbriefs.com/2017/entries/aerospace-and-defense/8422 About Marinvent – Marinvent is a privately held Canadian company, founded in 1983. Marinvent is headquartered on the outskirts of Montreal, the leading aerospace center in Canada and one of the largest aerospace centers in the world. Marinvent provides consulting, services, training, tools and IP to reduce customers' program/product risk, cost and schedule and to help them innovate quickly. Its engineers, experience, TCCA DARs, flying avionics test bed, research simulator and IP make it a reliable and trusted partner for the planning and management of projects, regardless of size and complexity. Marinvent's customers include aircraft OEMs, integrators, tier 1s, tier 2s and Government customers around the world. Marinvent prides itself of helping its customers bring their products to market and has a stellar track record of doing exactly that. As a result, Marinvent has won numerous awards in recognition of that fact. http://www.marinvent.com/wp-content/uploads/APM-First-Customer-April-2019.pdf

Toutes les nouvelles