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/

Sur le même sujet

22 mai 2019 | Local, Naval

Federal government to buy two more Arctic ships from Irving to prevent layoffs
By Lee Berthiaume, The Canadian Press OTTAWA — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is expected to announce Wednesday that the federal government is buying two more Arctic patrol ships on the top of the six it has already ordered from Halifax-based Irving Shipbuilding. However, unlike the first six ships, which are being built for the navy at a total cost of $3.5 billion, a government source said the seventh and eighth will be built for the Canadian Coast Guard. The source, who was not authorized to comment publicly, said the move is intended to address the Canadian Coast Guard's desperate need for new ships. Documents obtained by The Canadian Press earlier this year warned that more than a third of the coast guard's 26 large vessels have exceeded their expected lifespans — and many won't survive until replacements arrive. And that advanced age is already affecting the coast guard's ability to do its job, including reduced search-and-rescue coverage, ferry-service disruptions and cancelled resupply runs to Arctic and coastal communities. The second problem is the threat of layoffs, which Irving has long warned will happen unless the government fills a gap between when the last Arctic patrol ship is finished and construction on the navy's new $60-billion warship fleet, the source said. The government sought to address that gap in November when it ordered the sixth Arctic patrol vessel for the navy from Irving and agreed to pay the shipyard to slow production for a total cost of $800 million. Government officials at the time defended the high cost of that move, saying a third-party assessment commissioned by the government, which has never been made public, indicated it would cost even more to allow a gap to persist. "Ultimately what happens is the workforce gets laid off, you rehire people, it's not the same people so you're retraining, and then you have this learning curve," Patrick Finn, the Defence Department's head of procurement, said in January. "From some of the data we've run, doing what we've done, if we don't do it, we're probably going to pay that much money anyways in inefficiencies and get nothing for it. So the analysis shows that this is really a prudent way forward." Even then, federal bureaucrats and Irving both warned more would need to be done as even with those measures, there was still the threat of an 18- to 24-month gap between construction of the two fleets. Lee Berthiaume, The Canadian Press https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2019/05/21/federal-government-to-buy-two-more-arctic-ships-from-irving-to-prevent-layoffs-2/#.XOVcKshKiUm
17 décembre 2023 | Local, Sécurité

Canada sending Griffon, Chinook helicopters to Latvia - Skies Mag
Canada will send four CH-146 Griffon helicopters to Latvia and periodically deploy CH-147F Chinooks there starting in fall 2025, as part of a NATO mission.
6 février 2019 | Local, Naval

Ottawa pushes navy's planned supply ships to the front of the construction queue
Murray Brewster · CBC News The Liberal government has decided to pull out all the stops on the construction of the navy's planned permanent supply ships — a move that's raised questions about how quickly the Canadian Coast Guard will get a critical oceanographic science vessel. Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC) issued a statement Tuesday that announced the re-sequencing of the construction schedules for vessels being built at the Vancouver Shipyard, which is owned by Seaspan. The company has already started preliminary construction work on the first of the navy's long-awaited Joint Support Ships and the federal government says the work will continue until the vessel is completed. Under the National Shipbuilding Strategy, Seaspan was suppose to first construct three small fisheries research ships and a larger oceanographic vessel before working on the navy's long-awaited supply ships. Adhering to that plan in the face of repeated organizational delays meant delivery of those supply ships — which are considered critical to allowing the navy to operate beyond Canadian shores — would not happen until 2023 at the earliest. The PSPC statement said that once the first supply ship is finished, Seaspan will turn its attention to the coast guard oceanographic ship and then build the last planned naval supply ship. "Given the complexity of this build, this change in sequencing will ensure focused engineering resources on each of the projects, while allowing for time between construction of the first and second [Joint Support Ship] to incorporate lessons learned," said PSPC spokesman Pierre-Alain Bujold in a statement. "Moreover, this allows for uninterrupted work at the shipyard, mitigating the risk of potential layoffs and production gaps between builds." Bujold said additional details on the construction schedule will be released at a later date. The change to the schedule was, according to sources in the defence industry, agreed upon at the recent Trudeau government cabinet retreat in Sherbrooke, Que. Rob Huebert, a defence expert at the University of Calgary, said the decision "leaves most people scratching their heads" because of the difficulty involved in getting a shipyard to switch up construction between different types of vessels. "Why you would interrupt the building of ships by putting another style and class of vessel in the middle completely boggles my mind," said Huebert, a noted expert on the Arctic. "I don't know why you would do it." If anything, he said, the federal government should simply build both naval ships and then move on the coast guard ship. The re-sequencing means the navy could be waiting until the late 2020s for its second supply vessel, which would make the program a multi-decade odyssey. The Liberal government of former prime minister Paul Martin originally ordered the replacement of the auxiliary ships in 2004, but the program was cancelled in 2008 by the Conservatives when cost estimates exceeded the budget envelope. Huebert said Tuesday's announcement also raises questions about when Canadians will see the heavy icebreaker that Seaspan is also slated to build. The PSPC website says the program is under review and "no activities are planned until work on other projects has advanced." The federal government apparently has not yet formally notified Seaspan of the schedule change, although the shipyard has awarded a series of sub-contracts to companies such as INDAL in Mississauga, Ont., and L3 MAPPS in Montreal, for supply ship components. Seaspan is expected to announce another contract on Wednesday with Lockheed Martin Canada related to the supply ships. Ever since the Conservatives cancelled the first iteration of the supply ship project, the federal government has struggled to get it back on track, setting and missing several deadlines. The supply ships were supposed to arrive in 2017. The date was pushed back to 2019, and then to 2022. The absence of a supply ship prompted the Davie shipyard, in Levis, Que., to pitch a converted civilian cargo ship for navy use. That $668 million lease deal is at the centre of the breach-of-trust case against Vice-Admiral Mark Norman. Davie is pitching the federal government on leasing another cargo ship. A spokesman for Davie, Frederik Boisvert, called Tuesday's decision "an insult to taxpayers" and claimed that Seaspan has failed to deliver on the supply ship project and "should be blacklisted by the government and not rewarded for failure." The effect of switching up the schedule means the navy might not need a second supply ship leasing deal. Sources within the coast guard and the defence industry have said that the design and project coordination for the fisheries science vessel is not as far advanced as the navy supply ship program and that is an important factor in the federal government's timing decision. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ottawa-pushes-navy-s-planned-supply-ships-to-the-front-of-the-construction-queue-1.5006785

Toutes les nouvelles

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

Sur le même sujet

Canada sending Griffon, Chinook helicopters to Latvia - Skies Mag Canada will send four CH-146 Griffon helicopters to Latvia and periodically deploy CH-147F Chinooks there starting in fall 2025, as part of a NATO mission.

Canada sending Griffon, Chinook helicopters to Latvia - Skies Mag
Canada will send four CH-146 Griffon helicopters to Latvia and periodically deploy CH-147F Chinooks there starting in fall 2025, as part of a NATO mission.