First two used Australian fighter jets arrive in Canada on Sunday

Sur le même sujet

• 

  9 octobre 2018 | Local, C4ISR

  String of radar stations in Canadian Arctic nearly obsolete — and modernizing them will cost billions

  David Pugliese, Ottawa Citizen The radar sites detect potential threats entering North America's airspace and transmit a stream of data to military command centres in the south CAMBRIDGE BAY, Nunavut — The white domes that rise from the tundra look innocuous enough, and yet they play a critical role in protecting millions of Canadians and Americans thousands of kilometres away. Inside, where photographs are forbidden, they are like a time capsule from the late 1980s, the décor still reflecting the late Cold War era when the Canadian and U.S. governments established the North Warning System, the chain of mostly unmanned radar sites of which the Cambridge Bay facility is a part. Spanning Canada's northern coastline across the Yukon, Northwest Territories, Nunavut and Labrador, the radar sites exist to detect potential threats entering North America's airspace, transmitting a stream of data to military command centres in the south. At the Cambridge Bay site, dozens of civilian contractors — employees of Raytheon Canada — work around the clock to keep the installation operating in temperatures that can dip to -60 C in January or February. At times during the winter, Arctic storms almost completely cover some of the sites in snow, requiring contractors to climb through hatches in the roofs of the buildings to conduct maintenance work. But the North Warning System now faces a threat greater than the harsh Arctic environment. In seven years the radar system is expected to be obsolete. The Canadian and U.S. governments are trying to figure out how to upgrade the radars for modern times — opening the door that the sensors could be plugged in to the Pentagon's missile defence system as well as be modernized so they can track a new generation of Russian cruise missiles. Canada and the U.S. are trying to figure out technological improvements for the early warning system and are in the midst of discussions on the topic. A joint study on continental defence is expected to be finished by next year, Department of National Defence spokesman Dan Le Bouthillier told Postmedia. “Following the completion of the study, Canada and the United States will determine the next steps for the replacement of the NWS and update the project timelines accordingly,” he added. But that could emerge as yet another point of contention between Canada and the Trump administration in the U.S., which has already admonished Canada for not spending enough on defence. The last time the U.S. and Canada modernized the radar system was during the tenure of U.S. President Ronald Reagan, when relations between the two nations were on a solid footing. “Negotiating with the Trump administration is going to be a lot different than with the Reagan government,” explained defence analyst Martin Shadwick. “Trump will be the wild card.” Shadwick said details about funding and what the radars need to do in the future could become sticking points. The Liberal government has recognized it has to do something about what it calls the capability gaps in the North Warning System. “While the current NWS is approaching the end of its life expectancy from a technological and functional perspective, unfortunately the range of potential threats to the continent, such as that posed by adversarial cruise missiles and ballistic missiles, has become more complex and increasingly difficult to detect,” the government's defence strategy, released last year, pointed out. But the Liberals did not include funding for the modernization of the NWS in that policy, saying it would come later. Canada is currently responsible for 40 per cent of the cost of the North Warning System, with the remaining 60 per cent falling to the Americans. Canada owns the sites and provides the site operations and maintenance while the U.S. owns the radar and radio equipment. Ernie Regehr, a senior fellow in Arctic security and defence at The Simons Foundation, has found that while the cost for upgrading the North Warning System is unknown at this time it can be expected to run into the billions of dollars. Canada and the U.S. share the responsibility for a credible contribution to the defence of North America, Regehr pointed out. “And the American definition of credible is the one that counts,” he wrote in a March briefing for the Simons Foundation. Full article: https://nationalpost.com/news/modernizing-warning-radars-in-the-arctic-will-cost-canada-and-the-us-billions-of-dollars

• 

  12 janvier 2023 | Local, Aérospatial

  Achats de F-35 : Des travaux de 500 M$ à prévoir à Bagotville

  Des travaux d'au moins 500 millions de dollars auront lieu à la base militaire de Bagotville, à Saguenay, en vue de l’acquisition par Ottawa de 88 appareils F-35.

• 

  13 mai 2019 | Local, Aérospatial

  Like it or not, the U.S. needs to be a key part of Canada’s next-gen jet procurement process

  ELINOR SLOAN, CONTRIBUTED TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL RICK BOWMER/THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Elinor Sloan, professor of international relations in the department of political science at Carleton University, is a fellow at the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. For a bid to buy a plane designed to cut quickly through the skies, Ottawa's pursuit of a future-generation fighter jet has been a long and torturous slog. In 1997, Jean Chrétien's Liberal government joined the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, a U.S.-led initiative conceived as a new way for allies to work together to design, develop and produce a fifth-generation fighter aircraft. In 2006, Ottawa signed a formal memorandum of understanding that gave Canada and the other eight partner nations the exclusive right to compete for contracts to produce such aircraft and, since 2007, Canadian companies have won more than US$1.3-billion in defence contracts related to the Joint Strike Fighter. With a production line that will be operating at full capacity starting this year, and is expected to produce about 10 times as many aircraft as exist today over the next few decades, this number promises to grow substantially. Meanwhile, Canada's nearly 40-year-old fleet of fighter jets – the CF-18s – continues to age. In 2010, the Harper government shelved its plan to sole-source buy the Joint Strike Fighter to replace them after a public outcry and a damning auditor-general's report that found significant weaknesses in the process used by the Department of National Defence. Then, when the Liberals took office in 2015 and promised an open and fair competition to replace the CF-18s, it also banned the F-35 from bidding – two contradictory positions. The Trudeau government quietly dropped that ban last year, and pre-qualified four companies to bid on a contract worth at least $15-billion: Sweden's Saab Gripen, Britain's Airbus Eurofighter, the U.S.'s Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet and, yes, Lockheed Martin's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. According to letters released last week, though, the U.S. government threatened to pull the Lockheed Martin F-35 from consideration last year over Ottawa's insistence that Canada receive industrial benefits from the winning bid. In response, Ottawa relaxed its requirement on Thursday: Where bidders once had to commit to spend 100 per cent of the value of the aircraft's acquisition and sustainment in Canada, bids will now only lose points in a three-category scoring system in the review process, instead. With such exhausting twists and incompatible statements, it's little surprise that it took three and a half years of the government's four-year mandate just to get to the formal request-for-proposal stage. But there is a way out of this morass: pursuing a back-to-basics focus on why we need this aircraft and what we need it to do. To do so, we must focus on the proposed jets' promised technical capabilities, which are paramount, and rightly weighted the highest of that three-category scoring system. The second category is cost, which of course is important to any government. The third is creating and sustaining a highly skilled work force within our own borders, a goal enshrined in Canada's industrial trade benefits (ITB) policy, which requires a winning bid to guarantee it will make investments in Canada equal to the value of the contract. Each bid is scored by these three categories, weighed 60-20-20, respectively. However, the Joint Strike Fighter program, which Canada has spent millions to join, does not fit neatly into the ITB policy. In those letters last year, the Pentagon and Lockheed Martin pointed out that Canada's ITB terms are inconsistent with – and indeed prohibited by – the memorandum of understanding Canada signed in 2006, which says partners cannot impose industrial compensation measures. The solution reached on Thursday allows that memorandum to be obeyed, but since Canada will still give higher grades to bids that follow its ITB policy, questions remain as to whether the playing field has really been levelled. All of this is important because of the growing competition between the major powers. Russian bombers and fighters, for example, are increasingly testing the boundaries of Canadian and U.S. airspace. More than ever, the focus needs to be interoperability with the United States, working together on NORAD and helping NATO allies in Europe. As a flying command-and-control platform, rather than a mere fighter, Canada's next-generation jet must work with the United States' most sophisticated systems, and include a seamless and secure communications capability – that is a critical and non-negotiable criterion. Indeed, as DND has said,the United States will need to certify the winning jet meets Washington's security standards. Some may question the federal government's decision to relax the ITB rules, and to grant this certification sign-off. But whatever Canada buys must be able to address threats to us and to our allies until well into the 2060s. Our relationship with the United States, both in terms of geopolitics and military technology, is crucial. Despite our trade tiff, the United States remains our most important strategic partner. Canada can either take an active part in our own security, or leave it to the United States. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-the-us-needs-to-be-a-key-part-of-canadas-next-gen-jet-procurement/