Nouvelles

By Tim Naumetz. Published on Jan 11, 2018 4:49pm Canadians don't have to wring their hands over whether the country should sign on to the U.S. ballistic missile defence system, says a former top defence adviser to President Barack Obama. Washington is paying more attention to bigger Canadian defence issues such as the long-delayed acquisition of a fleet of new modern fighter jets, Lindsay Rodman, former director of defence policy and strategy for Obama's National Security Council, said in a Canadian interview streamed earlier this week. Rodman, a temporary U.S. expatriate who now is an international affairs fellow at the University of Ottawa, said in a podcast interview with the Canadian Global Affairs Institute that the missile defence question is not a major issue in U.S. military and security circles. “The question of ballistic missile defence has been really surprising to me since I came to Canada a little over a year ago now,” Rodman said in the interview with Global Affairs institute vice-president David Perry. “It is just not on the forefront of anyone's mind in the United States, but it is one of the first things that any Canadian wants to talk to you about the U.S. American alliance,” said Rodman, an attorney who also served in the Pentagon as Obama's senior adviser for international humanitarian policy. “The U.S. is much more concerned with just making sure that NORAD is healthy, that the NATO alliance is healthy, that our homeland defence is being well supported, and we know that we don't depend on Canada for ballistic missile defence. “We do depend on Canada's fighter capability in terms of how we've planned our North American defence, so making good on the promises that Canada has made is going to be more important than new promises that Canada could make in the future, which would be something like ballistic defence.” The Global Affairs Institute offered the podcast up earlier this week, but the interview was recorded on Dec. 18, the same day U.S. President Donald Trump released his administration's first national security strategy. It was only two years after President Obama released his second national security strategy, which Rodman said should have been in place for four years under the normal U.S. four-year cycle for renewing national security and military strategies. While explaining U.S. views on Canadian defence positions — particularly the first Canadian defence strategy released by the Trudeau government last June — Rodman told Perry that while Canada's overarching defence positions have rarely diverged after a change of government, Trudeau's new personal and political approaches to Canada's role in the world may have made a difference. “I would say that Justin Trudeau, just by nature of his international sort of celebrity status, brought a new cachet to Canada, and that's pretty useful,” she said. “Certainly, being in Canada now and learning the ins and outs about the political system a little bit more, I can appreciate the nuances in Canada's position much better.” Canada's new defence policy specifically ruled out Canadian involvement in U.S. ballistic missile defence, even after the topic had been raised multiple times in four months of cross-country consultations that preceded the defence review in 2016. Still, by last December, even Trudeau signalled that the government has not yet ruled the possibility out, and several military experts have advocated Canada's participation in a series of House of Commons and Senate committee hearings. “For a very close ally like Canada, the most important thing is interoperability,” said Rodman. “We not only depend on Canada to potentially help us out in the world, but in terms of our homeland defence there's no one we depend more on than Canada. We really need everything to be interoperable.” The most important question facing the government as it slowly moves toward a 2025 target for acquiring a fleet of 88 new fighter jets could be how the most sophisticated warplane in the world — the Lockheed Martin F-35 strike fighter — fares as it goes through a competition that will decide which aircraft Canada will buy. Interoperability with U.S. warplanes has been a central part of the argument favouring the F-35 acquisition for Canada. https://ipolitics.ca/2018/01/11/u-s-isnt-worrying-canada-missile-defence-says-obama-adviser/

A European report forecasting a surge in billions of dollars worth of missile and missile defence sales worldwide over the next 10 years could renew Canadian debate over signing on to the U.S. missile defence system, a defence analyst says. The forecasting agency based in Amsterdam is offering a market report on missile systems to global defence production companies that forecasts a rise in the value of sales to $93 billion for 2027 — compared to $55 billion in 2018 — for a total of $725 billion in sales over the decade. In the summary of its industry report, ASDMedia BV says the main driver for missile production, including all types of missiles from ballistic to short range and air-to-air missiles, is an increase in “territorial conflicts.” “The market for missile defence systems is anticipated to be the largest category primarily due to the ongoing procurement of missile systems by countries of the Asia Pacific, North American and European regions,” the report says. The report was published recently, during the escalation of tension over North Korean nuclear missile launches, but prior to the missile attack scare from a false alarm in Hawaii on Saturday. The missile spending forecast could also be of interest to participants in an international conference the Canadian government is hosting in Vancouver this week on the North Korean standoff. Senior analyst with the Canadian Global Affairs Institute, David Perry, says the market forecast of missile sales reflects a concern the Department of National Defence included about missile proliferation in the Liberal government's first national defence policy earlier this year, which at the same time included no specific plans for a response to the problem. Although the Liberal strategy included references to ballistic missile defence and modernizing northern defence warnings systems along with the U.S., it did not take a position on the long-sensitive question of whether Canada should sign on to the U.S. ballistic missile defence system. “It was one of those strange bits of the policy where there was an identification of an increased concern and a threat, but then not really any specific itemization of what was going to be done about it,” said Perry. Perry, who took part in closed-door consultations with experts in the lead-up to the review, said the market forecasts, along with the ongoing North Korea crisis, indicate ballistic missile defence should be renewed in Canadian defence discussions, following a short-lived flirtation with the idea by the last Liberal government in 2005. This past August, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau appeared to almost rule out any chance of discussions with the U.S. over ballistic missile defence, but in September said Canada was not considering the idea “for the time being.” “Based on the comments by the Prime Minister, I'm not expecting any urgent movement on ballistic missiles,” said Perry, who argued for Canadian involvement in missile defence during the policy consultations. “I'm curious in a strategic sense, international market observers are saying there's a growing market for this technology because the potential threat of missiles is proliferating, and you've got that (ambiguous) language reflected in the defence policy,” he told iPolitics. The head of Ottawa's Rideau Institute, founded as an advocate for the rule of international law and disarmament, said Perry's desire to renew ballistic missile defence discussions is a reflection of the defence industry's views. “In my view, there isn't actually a debate,” said Rideau Institute president Peggy Mason. “The defence industry lobby keeps raising it, but I think it's absolutely clear that this government, the Liberal government, the Justin Trudeau government, has no interest in reviewing this issue, so long as President Trump is President,” said Mason. “There are so many good reasons not to review it,”Mason told iPolitics, “but just the difficulty of trying to sell this, getting closer to the U.S. on a very controversial and very costly area while President Trump is in office...” https://ipolitics.ca/2018/01/16/report-renew-canadian-debate-u-s-missile-defence-system-defence-analyst/

TEWKSBURY, Mass., Jan. 15, 2018 /PRNewswire/ -- On Friday, January 12, Raytheon (NYSE:RTN) was awarded an indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract with a stated maximum value of $641,758,000. Under this contract, the contractor will perform ballistic missile defense system (BMDS) test related activities for multiple radar platforms that includes planning, executing, and analyzing sensor performance in BMDS flight tests and ground tests for each test event defined in the BMDS integrated master test plan. The radar test contract effort also includes sensors modeling and simulation activities to include Open Systems Architecture Sensor Model (OSM) and Open Systems Architecture Signal Injector (OSI) development and maintenance, integration of OSI with hardware-in-the-loop radar representation, integration of OSI and OSM with the simulation framework, verification and validation support, and stakeholder/event support. This award is the result of a competitively awarded acquisition in which two offers were received. Fiscal 2017 and 2018 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $3,451,000 are being obligated at time of award. The Missile Defense Agency, Huntsville, Alabama, is the contracting activity (HQ0147-18-D-0003). About Raytheon Raytheon Company, with 2016 sales of $24 billion and 63,000 employees, is a technology and innovation leader specializing in defense, civil government and cybersecurity solutions. With a history of innovation spanning 95 years, Raytheon provides state-of-the-art electronics, mission systems integration, C5ITM products and services, sensing, effects, and mission support for customers in more than 80 countries. Raytheon is headquartered in Waltham, Massachusetts. Follow us on Twitter. Media Contact Jackie Gutmann 1.781.879.2789 idspr@raytheon.com SOURCE Raytheon Company http://raytheon.mediaroom.com/2018-01-15-Missile-Defense-Agency-selects-Raytheon-for-Ballistic-Missile-Defense-System-testing-modeling-and-simulation-work

Abbotsford, BC – Cascade Aerospace Inc. (Cascade) is pleased to announce that it has been awarded a contract for the avionics modernization of one Fuerza Aérea Mexicana (FAM) L-100 (C-130) Hercules aircraft. This contract follows on the recent delivery of two modernized C-130K Hercules aircraft delivered to the FAM and fitted with advanced digital avionics from Rockwell Collins. This program will be contracted through the Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC) under the auspices of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Canadian and Mexican governments. ”Completing the C-130 fleet modernization represents a significant milestone for Cascade and affirms our excellent relationship with the Mexican Air Force as a support provider of choice since 2013,” said Cascade's EVP & COO, Kevin Lemke. “The upgrade of this aircraft will establish a common cockpit configuration for the entire FAM C-130 fleet thereby enhancing fleet capability, as well as providing efficiencies in maintenance, training, and operational availability.” This modernization program includes the installation and integration of an advanced Rockwell Collins Flight2 TM digital avionics suite. In addition, Cascade will provide operational and technical training for Mexican Air Force personnel at the company's facility and headquarters in Abbotsford, British Columbia. About Cascade Aerospace Cascade Aerospace, an operating unit of IMP Aerospace & Defence, is a leading Canadian specialty aerospace contractor that provides long-term integrated aircraft fleet support and program management, aircraft maintenance, modification, engineering & integrated logistics support to domestic and international military, government, and commercial customers. About Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC) Established in 1946, the Canadian Commercial Corporation (CCC) is a Federal Crown corporation of the Government of Canada that acts as Canada's international contracting and procurement agency. CCC reports to Parliament through the Minister of International Trade. CCC acts as the prime contractor for foreign governments who wish to contract with Canadian companies and expertise through a government-to-government channel. CCC's strong relationships with international buyers and access to Canada's innovative industrial base, puts CCC in a unique position to facilitate and promote international trade. Media Contacts: Kim Tamminga Cascade Aerospace Direct: +604-557-2646 ktamminga@cascadeaerospace.com www.cascadeaerospace.com https://www.impgroup.com/newsitem.aspx?mid=3D58A7E8-8A48-4F41-B2A8-39AAFF70ABF6

L'industrie et le gouvernement collaborent sur les principes de gestion de la propriété intellectuelle en approvisionnement maritime et de défense En 2017, Services publics et Approvisionnement Canada, le ministère de la Défense nationale, Innovation, Sciences et Développement économique Canada et la Garde côtière canadienne ont travaillé avec des représentants de l'industrie canadienne de la défense comme l'Association des industries canadiennes de défense et de sécurité (AICDS) et l'Association des industries aérospatiales du Canada (AIAC), par l'intermédiaire du Groupe consultatif de l'industrie de la défense, afin d'élaborer les principes de gestion de la PI en approvisionnement maritime et de défense. Les Principes de gestion de la PI en approvisionnement maritime et de défense (Principes) fournissent une base stratégique générale pour la gestion de la PI en approvisionnement maritime et de défense par le gouvernement du Canada. Les Principes : reflètent les intérêts nationaux du gouvernement et les besoins stratégiques en matière de capacités maritimes et de défense reflètent les intérêts de l'industrie de la défense dans la protection de la PI établie à titre privé en tant qu'actifs commerciaux et économiques précieux et en tant que facteur de création et de maintien d'une industrie maritime et de défense canadienne innovatrice reconnaissent que l'élaboration, la protection et la commercialisation de la PI font partie des priorités liées à la mise en œuvre de l'ensemble du programme socioéconomique du Canada, comme la croissance économique et les emplois reconnaissent que la gestion de la PI entre le gouvernement et l'industrie de la défense intervient dans des secteurs stratégiques et dynamiques sujets à des avancées technologiques importantes, et soulevant des enjeux militaires émergents aux plans des capacités et des vulnérabilités servent de cadre à des approches adaptables, souples, fondées sur des principes et axées sur les résultats qui mettent en œuvre des stratégies de gestion de la PI qui aident le gouvernement à se procurer les capacités nécessaires et à optimiser les ressources tout en renforçant l'innovation et la durabilité servent d'encadrement à l'identification des exigences en matière de PI, à la rédaction des marchés ainsi qu'à la conception et l'évaluation des soumissions depuis les premiers stades d'approvisionnement, tout comme servent d'encadrement de gestion de la PI tout au long du cycle de vie des actifs maritimes et de défense Les Principes cadrent avec la Politique sur les marchés du gouvernement du Canada et la Politique sur le titre de propriété intellectuelle découlant des marchés d'acquisition de l'État, qui prescrivent des approches pangouvernementales de la gestion de la PI notamment pour qualifier la titularité de la PI issue des marchés publics. Principes de gestion de la propriété intellectuelle en approvisionnement maritime et de défense Les Principes reflètent les principaux points d'accord entre le gouvernement et l'industrie de la défense du Canada s'agissant de l'approche que devrait suivre en matière de gestion de la PI pendant la durée de cycle de vie des actifs maritimes et de défense. Les Principes définissent l'encadrement du gouvernement et de l'industrie dans l'élaboration des exigences, la conception des processus d'évaluation des offres et d'adjudication et dans la rédaction de contrats. Ils guident aussi la gestion de la PI pendant la durée de cycle de vie des actifs en réconciliant les intérêts nationaux du gouvernement et les intérêts de l'industrie à optimiser les bénéfices pour le Canada. Les Principes reconnaissent que l'élaboration, la protection et la commercialisation de la PI sont critiques parmi un ensemble de priorités qui encadrent de manière plus générale l'essor socio-économique du Canada, notamment la prospérité et les emplois. Les principes reconnaissent que la gestion de la PI entre le gouvernement et l'industrie intervient dans des secteurs stratégiques qui sont l'objet d'évolutions technologiques rapides mais également de capacités et de vulnérabilités émergentes. En conséquence, les gouvernements sont exposés à des cycles d'approvisionnement plus courts qui peuvent leur imposer de se retourner plus rapidement vers les marchés pour bénéficier des évolutions technologiques et pour optimiser les ressources. D'autre part, l'industrie propose des avancées technologiques et de nouveaux produits et services tout au long du cycle de vie des actifs qui peuvent modifier le rendement ou le coût des approvisionnements. Les principes reconnaissent que tirer parti d'un marché aussi dynamique requiert de discuter de la PI très tôt dans le processus d'approvisionnement mais également de considérer la PI en fonction du cycle de vie des actifs ou des services. Dans ce contexte, des stratégies de gestion de la PI adaptée, souple et fondée sur des principes et des objectifs peut contribuer au renforcement des capacités gouvernementales, à l'optimisation des ressources mais également à l'essor technologique et économique. http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/amd-dp/propriete-intellec-property-fra.html

WASHINGTON — The United States is actively pursuing a change to a major arms control treaty that would open the door for wider exports of military drones. The proposed change to the Missile Technology Control Regime would make it easier for nations to sell the systems, also known as unmanned aerial vehicles or UAVs, that fly under 650 km per hour, according to multiple sources who are aware of the efforts. The MTCR is an agreement among 35 nations that governs the export of missiles and UAVs. Under the terms of the MTCR, any “category-1” system capable of carrying 500-kilogram payloads for more than 300 kilometers is subject to a “strong presumption of denial.” Proponents of UAV exports argue that language, while appropriate for curtailing the sale of cruise missiles, should not group together expandable weapons and unmanned systems. Instead, they argue, UAVs should be looked at the same way fighter jets or other high-tech military vehicles are. As part of an effort to find a compromise, American officials floated a white paper during the latest plenary session on the MTCR in October, proposing new language to the treaty: that any air vehicle that flies under 650 kilometers per hour would drop to “category-2” and thus be subject to approval on a case-by-case basis. A State Department official confirmed to Defense News that the U.S. presented the white paper, and that American negotiators have zeroed in on the speed of the vehicles as a potential change to the treaty. However, the official declined to comment on the exact speed under consideration. “I can't confirm any specific numbers because it's treated — inside the MTCR — as proprietary ... particularly because there's a deliberative process,” the official said. “But I can tell you that speed is the thing that we, based on industry input and all, have looked at. And that's what we have discussed with partners. And I know other governments are also looking at speed as well, so we're all sort of coming to a similar conclusion.” Under the MTCR, a “presumption of denial” about exports for category-1 systems exists. In essence, that means countries tied into the MTCR need to have a very compelling case to sell them. However, the speed change, if adopted, would result in most drones used by the U.S. military dropping down from category-1 to category-2, allowing the U.S. to sell them through the traditional foreign military sale or direct commercial sale methods. “Treating drones as missiles is fundamentally incoherent. It reflects a 1980s view of the technology,” said Michael Horowitz, a former Pentagon official now with the University of Pennsylvania who has studied drone issues. “To the extent creating a speed delineation helps you get around that problem, it's a good practical solution.” The impact of speed Most medium-altitude, long-endurance systems like General Atomics' MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper fly at slow speeds, with the Reaper clocking in with a cruise speed of 230 mph or 370 kph, according to an Air Force facts sheet. Northrop Grumman's RQ-4 Global Hawk, a high-altitude ISR drone, flies only at a cruise speed of about 357 mph or 575 kph. The 650 kph ceiling would also keep the door open for companies developing cutting-edge rotorcraft that could be modified in the future to be unmanned — a key request made by the companies involved in the Future Vertical Lift consortium, said one industry source. Those companies include Bell Helicopter and a Sikorsky-Boeing team, both of which are developing high-speed rotorcraft that can fly at excess of 463 kph, or 250 knots, for the Army's Joint Multi Role technology demonstrator program. However, the limitation would ensure that some of the United States' most technologically advanced UAVs stay out of the grasp of other nations. For example, it would prevent the proliferation of jet-powered, fast moving flying wing drones like Boeing's Phantom Ray and Northrop Grumman's X-47B demonstrators, both of which can cruise at near-supersonic speeds. While the UAV industry wants the U.S. government to pick up the pace on drone export reform, the State Department and other agencies argue that a prudent approach is needed. For example, any change to the MTCR that loosens restrictions on low-speed drones also needs to be closely examined to ensure that missile technology is still strictly controlled. “We don't want any unintended consequences, so it has to be crafted carefully. We don't want to inadvertently drop something else out like a cruise missile,” the State Department official said. The focus on speed is particularly smart at a time when countries are focused on increasing the speed of their munitions, Horowitz said. He pointed to growing investments in hypersonic weapons as an example where creating a speed delineation in the MTCR would allow the U.S. to push for greater UAV exports while “holding the line on exports of next-generation missiles.” Industry desires Industry has long argued that the United States has taken an overly proscriptive route, hamstringing potential drone sales to allies and pushing them into the arms of more nefarious actors such as China, the other major UAV producer on the worldwide market. Modifying the MTCR is just one facet of the Trump administration's review of drone export policy, which also includes taking a second look at domestic regulations that can be amended by the president at will. Because changes to the MTCR require consensus among the regime's 35 member countries, industry sees it as a direly-needed, but long-term solution. “Now we have lighter-than-air vehicles; we have intelligence, surveillance reconnaissance [UAVs]. We still have cruise missiles, we have aircraft that could autonomous for cargo and other purposes. But [the MTCR] doesn't distinguish between any of that, so a revisit of those MTCR rules is in order for things that fly and can fly autonomously,” said Aerospace Industries Association President David Melcher during a December 14 roundtable with reporters. American firms are particularly concerned about losing out on sales in the Middle East. China has already exported its Wing Loong — a medium altitude, long endurance UAV that resembles General Atomics' MQ-1 Predator — to multiple countries worldwide, including some close U.S. partners such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Meanwhile, sales of U.S.-made drones have been rarer, with many Middle Eastern countries such as the UAE only able to buy unarmed versions of American UAVs, even though those nations regularly purchase more technologically advanced weaponry like fighter jets from the United States. The State official noted that any change in the MTCR would not need to wait until the next plenary session, but could be introduced in some form as early as an April technical meeting. And at least one industry source was optimistic about the administration's MTCR reform plan. “They're taking a pretty smart process in not trying to tackle everything at once, but trying to get some of the language corrected in small bites,” the source said. “I don't see this as being an overnight process. I don't think we're going to end up in the next six months with a brand new MTCR policy.” However, Horowitz warned that the nature of the MTCR, where any single country could veto such a change, means getting any changes will not be easy. Russia, for example, could block the move not on technical reasons but geopolitical ones, given relations between Moscow and Washington. If that happens, Horowitz noted, the U.S. could potentially look to apply the 650 kph speed definition on its own, something possible because of the voluntary nature of the MTCR. https://www.defensenews.com/air/2017/12/19/heres-how-the-trump-administration-could-make-it-easier-to-sell-military-drones/

Solutions innovatrices Canada, un programme de 100 millions de dollars, stimulera l'innovation et créera des emplois pour la classe moyenne Le 14 décembre 2017 — Ottawa En tant que principal acheteur de biens et de services canadiens, le gouvernement du Canada fera appel à l'approvisionnement pour aider les petites entreprises du pays à innover et à commercialiser leurs innovations. Le ministre de l'Innovation, des Sciences et du Développement économique, l'honorable Navdeep Bains, et la leader du gouvernement à la Chambre des communes et ministre de la Petite Entreprise et du Tourisme, l'honorable Bardish Chagger, ont annoncé aujourd'hui la mise sur pied de Solutions innovatrices Canada, un programme de 100 millions de dollars qui incite les petites entreprises canadiennes à mettre au point des solutions novatrices pour répondre aux défis proposés par les ministères et les organismes fédéraux. Que le défi soit de trouver un moyen d'augmenter la résistance du blindage aux produits chimiques ou encore d'améliorer la connexion sans fil des véhicules connectés, les ministères et les organismes fédéraux demanderont aux petites entreprises d'innover et de proposer une solution. Le gouvernement s'associera ensuite à l'entreprise retenue et agira comme son premier client, en l'aidant à commercialiser son idée et à promouvoir la génération suivante de solutions qui pourront devenir des produits commerciaux viables. Vingt ministères et organismes fédéraux participeront au nouveau programme en ciblant des problèmes d'ordre militaire, économique ou environnemental. Solutions innovatrices Canada est un élément clé du Plan pour l'innovation et les compétences du gouvernement du Canada, une stratégie pluriannuelle visant à créer des emplois bien rémunérés pour la classe moyenne. Citations « Le nouveau programme Solutions innovatrices Canada mis de l'avant par notre gouvernement aura des retombées à bien des niveaux. Nous agissons de façon proactive et transformons nos défis en possibilités : des possibilités d'innovation, de croissance économique et de réussite des petites entreprises qui mèneront à l'établissement d'une économie d'innovation dynamique et à la création d'encore plus d'emplois pour la classe moyenne canadienne. » — Le ministre de l'Innovation, des Sciences et du Développement économique, l'honorable Navdeep Bains « Nous croyons que les petites entreprises innovatrices canadiennes sont bien placées pour aider le gouvernement à relever certains défis particulièrement coriaces. Par l'entremise du programme Solutions innovatrices Canada, nous demanderons aux entrepreneurs de créer de nouveaux produits et services qui nous aideront à relever ces défis, et nous les aiderons à prendre de l'expansion dans de nouveaux marchés et à trouver de nouveaux clients à l'échelle internationale. Les avantages de ce programme sont clairs : le gouvernement du Canada pourra obtenir de nouveaux produits et services pour améliorer son travail, et des exploitants de petites entreprises qui redoublent d'efforts pour réussir pourront prendre de l'expansion et créer des emplois bien rémunérés pour la classe moyenne. » — La leader du gouvernement à la Chambre des communes et ministre de la Petite Entreprise et du Tourisme, l'honorable Bardish Chagger « Notre communauté d'investisseurs, d'incubateurs et d'accélérateurs offre de l'encadrement, ouvre des portes et fournit du capital aux entreprises canadiennes en démarrage qui cherchent à croître et à se développer. Dans bien des cas, le fait de décrocher un “premier client” constitue une validation essentielle qui permet à ces entreprises de s'implanter sur le marché local et le marché mondial. Le programme Solutions innovatrices Canada qui a été annoncé aujourd'hui aidera les entreprises canadiennes à b'tir leur clientèle plus tôt et permettra aux Canadiens de bénéficier de l'adoption de solutions innovatrices conçues ici au pays. » — La présidente du conseil d'administration de la National Angel Capital Organization (NACO Canada), Sandi Gilbert Faits en bref Le financement du programme sera fourni par les 20 ministères et organismes participant au programme Solutions innovatrices Canada. Chaque entité réservera 1 % de ses dépenses de recherche-développement à cette initiative. Solutions innovatrices Canada est modelé sur le programme américain Small Business Innovation Research. Il constitue une composante essentielle des efforts du gouvernement du Canada pour aider les petites entreprises. Solutions innovatrices Canada encouragera les entreprises détenues et dirigées par des femmes, des Autochtones, des jeunes et des groupes traditionnellement sous représentés à présenter des soumissions. https://www.canada.ca/fr/innovation-sciences-developpement-economique/nouvelles/2017/12/le_gouvernement_ducanadaarecoursalapprovisionnementpouraiderlesp.html

WASHINGTON — A large number of American companies supplying the U.S. military may have left the defense market, according to a study announced Thursday, raising alarm over the health and future of the defense industrial base. The Center for Strategic and International Studies study said the number of first-tier prime vendors declined by roughly 17,000 companies, or roughly 20 percent, between 2011 and 2015. The full study, due to be released in January, was authored by CSIS Defense-Industrial Initiatives Group Director Andrew Hunter, Deputy Director Gregory Sanders and Research Associate Rhys McCormick. It was sponsored by the Naval Postgraduate School and co-produced by the Aerospace Industries Association, which released an executive summary on Dec. 14, the day of its annual aerospace and defense luncheon in Washington. The authors, who used publicly available contract data, write that it's unclear — due to the limitations in the subcontract database —whether the companies have exited the industrial base entirely or still perform work at the lower tiers. “There is no doubt that a huge portion of the recent turbulence in the defense industrial base has taken place among subcontractors, who are less equipped to tolerate the defense marketplace's funding uncertainly and often onerous regulatory regime — yet it remains extremely difficult to determine the real impact of these conditions on subcontractors,” the authors conclude. Further details may yet be revealed by the Trump administration's ongoing review of the resiliency of the defense-industrial base. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis' assessment is due to President Donald Trump by mid-April 2018. The CSIS summary links 2011 Budget Control Act caps, subsequent short-term budget agreements, and Congress' “unpredictable and inconsistent” appropriations process to the “lost suppliers, changes in competition and market structure, and other turmoil” it found. The years 2011-2015 are considered a period of defense drawdown and decline. The authors, rather than focus strictly on the total decline of defense contract obligations over the entire period, chose to chart the “whipsaw” effect that struck certain sectors of the industrial base amid the imposition of sequestration in 2013 and subsequent budget caps. Though the defense budget had been declining in the years leading up to the Budget Control Act, the implementation of an across-the-board sequestration budget cut in 2013 “marked a severe market shock that had a considerable impact on the defense industry,” the authors say. Compared to the pre-drawdown fiscal 2009-2010 period, the start of the drawdown in fiscal 2011-2012, average annual defense contract obligations dropped 5 percent. When sequestration was triggered in fiscal 2013, defense contract obligations dropped 15 percent from the previous year. Average annual defense contract obligations fell 23 percent during the so-called BCA decline period, fiscal 2013-2015. The Army, which has a checkered modernization history, bore the brunt of the decline. Average annual defense contracts dropped 18 percent at the start of the drawdown, then 35 percent during the BCA decline period. Missile defense contract obligations actually gained 7 percent at the start of the drawdown and then dropped only 3 percent under budget caps. During his presidency, Barack Obama reversed course from early cuts to missile defense to spur the development and deployment of missile defense systems in Europe, Asia and the Middle East. Lockheed Martin CEO Marillyn Hewson reacted to the internally circulated findings earlier this month, saying budget cuts are responsible for the industry being “more fragile and less flexible than I've seen it, and I've been in the industry many, many years.” “What we've seen in the industry, I'll give you an example at Lockheed Martin: At the outset of budget cuts we were about 126,000 employees; today we are at 97,000 employees,” Hewson said at the Reagan National Defense Forum in California. “Our footprint has shrunk dramatically. We see some of our small and medium-sized business, some of the components that we need, there's one, maybe two suppliers in that field where there were many, many more before.” Budget cuts have squeezed the Defense Department to unduly prioritize low-cost contracts over innovation and investment. Cost “shootouts,” she said, are endangering the military's plans to grow in size and lethality. AIA Vice President for National Security Policy John Luddy said companies have coped through a variety of “healthy efficiencies,” such as mergers and acquisitions, consolidating facilities, exploring shared services, and offloading certain contracting activities. “Our companies have done an amazing job of managing the downturn, they've pulled all kinds of levels to make it work, they've shown the ingenuity of the American free market system,” Luddy said. “Nonetheless, the uncertainty of the budgeting process has become a huge challenge for us.” Army Secretary Mark Esper, formerly of Raytheon, warned lawmakers at a Senate hearing Dec. 7 that uneven funding is driving small suppliers — “an engine of innovation” — out of the defense sector. “If you're a small mom and pop shop out there, and I'm referring to my industry experience, it's hard for them to survive in the uncertain budgetary environment,” Esper said. “And we risk losing those folks who may over time decide that they're going to get out of the defense business and go elsewhere. So that's a big threat to our supply chains.” But the CSIS study found that small vendors either increased their share of platform portfolio contract obligations or held steady, while large and medium vendors were most harmed by the market shock from sequestration and the defense drawdown. https://www.defensenews.com/breaking-news/2017/12/14/american-exodus-17000-us-defense-suppliers-may-have-left-the-defense-sector/

Canada will acquire 18 F/A-18 Hornets and associated spare parts from the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) to augment its fleet of CF-188 fighter jets until a replacement is selected and brought into service in 2025. Government ministers and senior officials confirmed the widely anticipated plan to buy 30-year-old F/A-18A/B legacy Hornets at a press conference on Dec. 12, putting to rest a previous proposal to acquire 18 F/A-18E/F Super Hornets. The Liberal government had announced in November 2016 a plan to buy the Boeing-built Super Hornets as an interim measure to address an urgent capability gap in the fighter fleet. Although the possible sale was approved by the U.S. State Department in September, the government ceased all discussions with Boeing after the company issued a trade complaint against Montreal-based Bombardier over the sale of the C Series jetliner to Delta Air Lines. “We have received a formal offer for sale of F-18 aircraft from the government of Australia, which we intend to pursue. And we have received an offer of Super Hornets from the U.S. government, which we intend to let expire,” said Carla Qualtrough, Minister of Public Services and Procurement. At the same time, the government officially launched a $15 to $19 billion competition to procure 88 aircraft to replace the entire fleet of Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) legacy Hornets by inviting interested governments and manufacturers to join a suppliers list. Qualtrough said the list would allow the government to identify and “share sensitive information” with eligible governments, manufacturers and suppliers able to meet Canada's needs. “All suppliers are welcome to participate in the process. No firm is excluded,” she said. Engagement with industry, which has been ongoing since 2012, is expected to lead to a request for proposals by the spring of 2019, followed by a contract award in 2022. Delivery of the first aircraft would begin in 2025. While ministers and senior officials stressed an “open and transparent” competition, the government also introduced a new criterion in the evaluation of company's bid: Its impact on Canadian economic interests, a measure journalists quickly dubbed the “Boeing clause.” “This new assessment is an incentive for all bidders to contribute positively to Canada's economy,” said Qualtrough. “When bids are assessed this will mean that bidders responsible for harming Canada's economic interests will be at a distinct disadvantage compared to bidders who aren't engaged in detrimental behaviour.” A government official, speaking on background, acknowledged that “many of the suppliers we deal with on defence procurements have several business lines and global reach. We are seeking to leverage (these) procurements to incentivize favourable economic conduct towards Canada and discourage detrimental actions by commercial suppliers.” Qualtrough said the assessment, which will be used in future procurements, would be developed through consultations with industry. “All proposals will be subject to the same evaluation criteria. “The assessment of economic impact will be done at the time of the assessment of the bids,” she added, an indication that much could change between the government and Boeing by 2019. The eventual CF-188 replacement program will include aircraft, sustainment, infrastructure, and aircrew and maintenance training, and will generate billions for Canadian industry in industrial and technological benefits, said Navdeep Bains, Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development, noting that the industrial and technological benefits (ITB) policy has already generated over $40 billion in economic investment. “If you think that sounds impressive, the economic benefits of these new fighter jets will add significantly to those ITB numbers. This is an enormous investment in a very important sector for us. That's why our government feels it's important to do business with trusted partners.” MINDING THE GAP The Liberal government has faced pointed criticism on a number of fronts for claiming a capability gap. During Question Period on Tuesday, Conservative Member of Parliament Tony Clement suggested the capability gap does not exist. “It's a fairy tale created by Liberals to justify their political decisions,” he said. Gen Jonathan Vance, Chief of the Defence Staff, countered that criticism during the press conference, claiming the RCAF cannot generate enough mission-ready aircraft to meet North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) commitments simultaneously. “The RCAF cannot concurrently meet those obligations now without some form of supplemental capability until a future fighter fleet is in place,” he said. “The acquisition of Australian F-18s is a logical choice.” Senior officials with the RCAF and Department of National Defence (DND) said the Australian Hornets would “integrate seamlessly” with the CF-188s. Both fleets have similar operating requirements and share comparable training systems, all of which can be supported by existing supply chains and frontline maintainers. Both countries have cooperated on fleet management and system upgrades, and shared test data, “so we know the jets well,” said the DND official. “We know the state of their aircraft and what modifications may be needed to operate them until the [new] fleet is in place.” Montreal-based L3 MAS, responsible for maintaining Canada's CF-188s since they first entered service in the 1980s, has also performed centre barrel replacements on a number of Australian jets as part of a fuselage life extension program. However, Canada recently began additional structural modifications to ensure the Hornets can operate through 2025, and the Australian F-18s will need to be modified to a similar standard. The government must still negotiate the final price tag for the 18 jets, modifications and spare parts, but a senior official estimated it would be about one-tenth the cost of 18 Super Hornets and associated mission and weapon systems and support, which the U.S. State Department estimated at US$5.23 billion. “Specific dollar amounts will be available once we have finalized an agreement with Australia,” he said. If an agreement is reached, the first Australian Hornets would begin arriving in 2019 and the capability gap would be closed by the end of 2021, two years faster than the planned delivery of the Super Hornets, officials said. The RCAF had planned to deploy the Super Hornets as a standalone squadron at 4 Wing Cold Lake, Alta. The senior Air Force official said the force structure had not yet been finalized, but would likely involve aircraft being placed across the operational and training squadrons at 4 Wing and 3 Wing Bagotville, Que. He also acknowledged that more aircraft would mean a need for more pilots and technicians, and that “retention and recruitment efforts were underway to meet this requirement.” https://www.skiesmag.com/news/government-launches-cf-188-replacement-program-interim-hornet-buy/