Federal government to link ‘economic interests’ to bids for fighter jets

Sur le même sujet

• 

  20 août 2019 | Local, Aérospatial

  Smol: Why Sweden is leagues ahead of Canada on fighter-jet technology

  With the election looming, the Liberal government has set in motion, at least on paper, its commitment to consider bids for the purchase of new fighter jets. Of course, how committed the government is to move ahead on its renewed commitment remains to be seen. Meanwhile, any Canadian truly committed to seeing a modern, well-equipped RCAF, supported by a capable military procurement program, should take special note of one of the top contenders to replace Canada's aging fleet of fighters: Sweden. This non-aligned country, approximately the size of Newfoundland and Labrador, with a population only slightly larger than that of Quebec, has not only succeeded in developing generations of fighter jets, but has seen impressive success in exporting them. Apart from Sweden, Saab's JAS 39 Gripen, the latest version released in 2016, is being used by the Czech Republic and Hungary within NATO. The governments of Brazil, South Africa and Thailand are also purchasing the aircraft. Other countries such as India, Botswana, Indonesia and the Philippines are seriously considering the Gripen. But instead of fretting about how much Canada's aging fighters stand to potentially be outdone by the air forces of the developing world, we should instead look squarely at how Sweden came to be a serious contender to arm and equip this country's emaciated airforce. We should instead look squarely at how Sweden came to be a serious contender to arm and equip this country's emaciated airforce. The answer lies in the national mindset of the two countries. Unlike Canada, and especially when it comes to defence, Sweden refuses to allow itself to fall into dependency status vis-à-vis Europe, NATO or any other military power. In other words, while they actively cooperate with NATO in the defence of Europe, they make it clear that the defence of Sweden is first and foremost a Swedish responsibility. It is why the Swedish army, navy and airforce use high-tech equipment, much of which is built by the Swedes themselves. It is why the Swedes supplement their advanced military technology with elaborate defence-in-depth war plans and civil defence policies. The manual, “If crisis or war comes,” has been recently mailed to every household in Sweden. By contrast, we Canadians have chosen a quasi-colonial mindset with respect to our defence, clearly reflected in our epically embarrassing procurement shortcomings and failures. For the last 60 years, beginning with the cancellation of the Avro Arrow, Canada has been falling into a pattern of dependency on the United States on all matters related to defence. Sweden, on the other hand, has remained committed to designing and developing much its own military aircraft, ships, submarines and army equipment. In the mid-1950s, both Canada and Sweden were working independently on their own advanced fighter aircraft. While Canada was working on the Arrow, the Swedish military and engineers were hard at work on the Draken, which came out the same year. The Draken had a similar delta wing design to the Arrow and was the first European-built fighter jet to break the sound barrier. But that is where the comparison ends; the two countries went on very different paths with respect to their airforces. Canada cancelled and destroyed its Arrow aircraft and took on second-rate Voodoo fighters from the United States. It is what we Canadians wanted, as no successive Conservative or Liberal government has since tried to “bring back the Arrow.” Sweden aggressively continued development of new fighter technology, replacing the Draken with the Viggen in the 1970s, while Canada continued to try to squeeze more life out of our then-aging fighter jets. In the 1980s, as Canada was finally taking on the U.S built F-18, Sweden was working on the first version of the modern Gripen. Of course, as had been well documented, the early Gripen had problems. But as with the Draken and Viggen, the Swedes, unlike Canada, stayed with their national fighter jet. Today, Canada can only dream what our military aircraft industry might have been like in 2019 if then-prime minister John Diefenbaker, with the tacit support of the opposition Liberals, had not cancelled the Arrow, accelerating our descent into military dependency on the United States and national impotence on military procurement. https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/smol-why-sweden-is-leagues-ahead-of-canada-on-fighter-jet-technology

• 

  7 juin 2023 | Local, Aérospatial

  J-model Hercules now flying the SAR mission in Trenton - Skies Mag

  As initial operating capability of the CC-295 Kingfisher has been delayed, the RCAF is finding creative ways to address potential gaps in its SAR response. As of late May, the CC-130J Hercules became the primary fixed-wing asset for SAR missions in central Canada.

• 

  10 février 2020 | Local, Naval

  Irving to receive $58 million for 'minimal' changes to new Coast Guard ships

  DAVID PUGLIESE, OTTAWA CITIZEN Irving is receiving $58 million from taxpayers to make what the federal government calls minimal changes to an existing ship design so it can be used by the Canadian Coast Guard. Irving is in the midst of building a fleet of six Arctic and Offshore Patrol Ships (AOPS) for the Royal Canadian Navy and will add two more in the production line for the coast guard. The addition of two ships for the coast guard, announced by the federal government in May, was supposed to be cost-effective as the design of the vessel was completed and the ships were in the process of being built. But documents recently tabled in Parliament show the government entered into a $58-million contract with Irving for engineering design work on the AOPS that would ensure the coast guard's vessels “can meet regulatory and operational requirements.” The coast guard has determined that only minimal modifications are required to the ships to meet its needs as well as any regulatory requirements, according to documents provided to Parliament as the result of a question from Conservative MP Lianne Rood. “The modifications have been assessed as minimal as none of the identified modifications will impact major elements of the AOPS design and construction,” Bernadette Jordan, the minister of Fisheries, Oceans, and the Canadian Coast Guard, stated in her written response. But critics are questioning why taxpayers are spending $58 million if the changes are so limited. “That's a very expensive tweak,” said Aaron Wudrick, the federal director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. “We'd like see some clarity from the government on what could possibly justify such an increase in the price tag.” Each AOPS is estimated to cost around $400 million. The coast guard originally looked at the AOPS in 2017-2018 but decided against acquiring the ship, industry representatives noted. But the Liberal government announced in May 2019 that two AOPS would be bought for the coast guard. One of the benefits of the purchase is to prevent layoffs at Irving as there is expected to be a gap between when the shipyard finishes the navy's AOPS and when it starts working on replacements for the navy's frigates. Tom Ormsby, director of communications for Irving, said the first step for the firm is to fully review the AOPS design and then confirm any modifications that are needed to be made for the coast guard. “Once modifications have been agreed to, these changes must then be worked through and implemented into the design,” he noted. “While not making major changes that a first-in-class design would require, the Canadian Coast Guard has a different and critical mission, including the need for scientific laboratories for sampling and research, so each vessel is being tailored to suit the Canadian Coast Guard's unique and important role.” The government only pays for actual costs incurred, he added. Irving will also receive an additional $18.8 million to purchase some initial equipment for the vessels as well as reimbursement for project management. The contract to Irving on the design changes was signed Nov. 1, 2019 and is to end March 31, 2021. Areas of change include modifications to the bridge layout and accommodations to meet Transport Canada requirements for a non-military crew, as well as changes to some areas to accommodate coast guard equipment and modifications to the deck, Jordan noted in her response to Parliament. The main portions of the ship, including the hull and propulsion systems, will remain unchanged, she added. The AOPS program was launched by the Conservative government with a minimum of five ships for the navy. The Liberal government approved the construction of a sixth AOPS for the navy and two for the coast guard But retired Liberal senator Colin Kenny, who served on the Senate defence committee, questions the value of the AOPS for either the navy or coast guard. Kenny noted he is also concerned about the engineering contract. “These changes shouldn't cost $58 million,” Kenny said. “I think it's questionable as to why we are even buying these ships.” In 2017 the Senate Defence Committee raised concerns about the capabilities of the AOPS. Among the issues identified by the committee was the slow speed of the AOPS and its limited ability to operate in ice-covered waters. “These limitations are troubling and raise the question of whether the taxpayers are receiving value for the monies spent,” the Senate report said. The Department of National Defence expects the delivery of the first AOPS by the end of March although it acknowledges there is a possibility that may not happen. The delivery of the vessel has already been delayed a number of times. The navy expects its last AOPS to be delivered by 2024. After the navy vessels are built, construction will begin on the AOPS for the coast guard, the federal government has said. https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/irving-to-receive-58-million-for-minimal-changes-to-new-coast-guard-ships