The F-35

[Kip Powick]

An opinion from Dotville...

Which would be more appropriate.................'new' fighters or really new Transport/SAR aircraft

Money expended, as per the article above, could be used to purchase over 30 Brand New CC-130s (Hercules)  or perhaps 6 or 7 Brand  New  CC-17s (Globemasters)

Just ask yourself which  type of aircraft would create more civilian and Military personnel employment  and  result in an operations where one could actually see accountable results and be more financially acceptable for all Canadians, and more helpful for the  World at large........used jets.... or ......brand new Transport/SAR aircraft.??

 

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Kip Powick said:

An opinion from Dotville...

Which would be more appropriate.................'new' fighters or really new Transport/SAR aircraft

Money expended, as per the article above, could be used to purchase over 30 Brand New CC-130s (Hercules)  or perhaps 6 or 7 Brand  New  CC-17s (Globemasters)

Just ask yourself which  type of aircraft would create more civilian and Military personnel employment  and  result in an operations where one could actually see accountable results and be more financially acceptable for all Canadians, and more helpful for the  World at large........used jets.... or ......brand new Transport/SAR aircraft.??

 

I quite agree with you Kip but I don't think "common sense" or reality have anything to do with our current government's decisions. 

[J.O.]

6 hours ago, Malcolm said:

I quite agree with you Kip but I don't think "common sense" or reality have anything to do with our current government's decisions. 

From my experience, that disability is not isolated to the current one. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, J.O. said:

From my experience, that disability is not isolated to the current one. 

I guess it just goes to prove, you can change the party but not the inability of those in power to learn from the mistakes  of their predecessor .

[Super 80]

Other than the F-35 I doubt any of the manufacturers would drag it out that long.

[boestar]

Look every government in the last 20+ years has dragged their feet on fighter aircraft replacement.  This government will be no different.  Tie it up in red tape until the election.  If you win tie it up in more red tape, if you lose not your problem anymore.  this has been going on for years.  nothing will be purchased by the time hes voted out

 

[Super 80]

That isn't what I mean.

Other than Lockheed who is going to be building the F-35 until Congress says otherwise, the other manufacturers just can't agree to building 8 planes a year or less over a decade or more.

[Guest]

Canada releases list of eligible future fighter suppliers Français

---

NEWS PROVIDED BY

Public Services and Procurement Canada

Feb 22, 2018, 15:00 ET

SHARE THIS ARTICLE

•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  

---

OTTAWA, Feb. 22, 2018 /CNW/ - Canada has taken another step towards building a highly capable, flexible military with the ability to operate closely with allies and partners and to protect the safety and security of Canadians.

Today, the Government of Canada published a list of eligible suppliers that will be invited to submit proposals under the competition to replace Canada's fighter fleet.

 

The suppliers consist of foreign governments and fighter aircraft manufacturers that will be invited to participate in formal engagement activities over the coming months. This competition was launched ‎in December 2017 and the activities will continue until spring 2019, when the Government of Canada will invite eligible suppliers to submit proposals. Only those suppliers on the list published today will be eligible to submit proposals.

Proposals will be rigorously assessed on cost, technical requirements and economic benefits. The Industrial and Technological Benefits Policy will also be applied, requiring the winning supplier to make investments in Canada equal to the value of the contract.

The evaluation of bids will also include an assessment of bidders' impact on Canada's economic interests. Engagement with stakeholders and industry on this new criteria, as well as guidelines for its application as an ongoing procurement tool for major projects, are being conducted through separate consultations. Officials have already met with aerospace and defence industry associations and will continue to engage with various stakeholders on further refining this criteria over the coming months.

This procurement project represents the most significant investment in the Royal Canadian Air Force in more than 30 years.

Quotes

"We are pleased with the responses received from foreign governments and commercial entities that have the ability to meet Canada's needs. Our government is confident this will result in a robust competition, providing good value to Canadians and the Canadian economy."

The Honourable Carla Qualtrough
Minister of Public Services and Procurement

"Our women and men in uniform must be provided with the necessary equipment to fulfill their demanding, and sometimes dangerous, missions. The work we have done and the work we continue to do on the future fighter procurement helps ensure we get the right equipment at the right price to support these important missions."

The Honourable Harjit S. Sajjan
Minister of National Defence

"The Government of Canada is leveraging procurement to create jobs, drive innovation and grow small businesses. Thanks to the Industrial and Technological Benefits Policy, winning suppliers will make investments in Canada equal to the value of the contract. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to drive investment in innovation and research across all sectors of our economy, including with post-secondary institutions."

The Honourable Navdeep Bains
Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development

Quick facts

• On December 12, 2017, the Government of Canada launched an open and transparent competition to permanently replace Canada's fighter fleet. Canada will purchase 88 advanced fighter aircraft, as outlined in Strong, Secure, Engaged: Canada's Defence Policy.
• A contract award is anticipated in the 2021 or 2022, with the first replacement aircraft expected to be delivered in 2025. These timelines are consistent with international experience for a procurement of this size and complexity.
• Other entities may be added to supplier teams on the list at any time during the process, subject to approval by the Government of Canada.
• Canada will continue to engage industry stakeholders to gather and share general information related to this procurement. This will ensure the Canadian aerospace and defence industries are well-positioned to participate.
• Aerospace is one of the most innovative and export-driven industries in Canada and adds $28 billion annually in gross domestic product to Canada's economy. Together, Canada's aerospace and defence industries contribute more than 240,000 quality jobs.

Associated links

Replacing and supplementing Canada's fighters

CF-18 replacement

List of eligible suppliers  Publication of the names of entities forming the Suppliers on the Suppliers List This notice is provided in accordance with article 4.2 of the Suppliers List Invitation to publish the names of the entities forming the Suppliers on the Suppliers List. x Gouvernement de la République Française - Dassault Aviation (with Thales DMS France SAS and Safran Aircraft Engines) x United States Government - Lockheed Martin Corporation (Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company) x United States Government - The Boeing Company x Swedish Government - SAAB AB (publ) - Aeronautics x Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland - Airbus Defense and Space GmbH

[Tango Niner]

On 2018-02-23 at 9:54 AM, boestar said:

Look every government in the last 20+ years has dragged their feet on fighter aircraft replacement.  This government will be no different.  Tie it up in red tape until the election.  If you win tie it up in more red tape, if you lose not your problem anymore.  this has been going on for years.  nothing will be purchased by the time hes voted out

 

This is true, it's futile and nonsensical and this is why the job of procuring military equipment needs to be delegated to the military.

Sure, let the government decide what is needed - be it fighters, destroyers, tanks etc - and provide a budget. But then let a NON-PARTISAN expert military board "pull the trigger" (pardon the pun) on exactly what equipment is purchased.

IMHO.

[Guest]

Great idea Tango Niner but where are you going to find a "Non-Partisan expert military board" qualified to rule?

Quote

adjective

1.

not partisan; objective.

2.

not supporting or controlled by a political party, special interestgroup, or the like.

noun

3.

a person who is nonpartisan.

SynonymsExpand

See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com

2. uninvolved, disinterested, unimplicated.

 

[Kip Powick]

Not that simple......

The "government decides what it wants based on input from the Minister of Defense  who has his own source of "we want" information from the Chief of Defense Staff, (CDS), of the Canadian Military who gets the "want list" from the three  branches of the Canadian Forces he represents...

Now the CDS can be an  Army officer  an Air Force officer or a Naval officer so right away a bias is dropped into the mix based on the CDS's lineage. 

Until someone IN GOVERNMENT changes the CF Mission Statement  the CF is doomed to continue living in the 20th century and want to keep acquiring the toys that the old brass hats used when they were actual "worker bees."

Let me give you a couple of  simple examples  of the CF living in the past......

When Training Command wanted to get rid of the basic training aircraft, the beloved Chipmunk, they opted for the Musketeer . Their choices of factory ready aircraft  colors were standard, red, while , blue ........some Full Colonel up at NDHQ remember he trained on the Chipmunk and it was yellow in color so he had his staff insist on pumping up the chain that the color should be yellow.....Musketeers were painted yellow at an approximate  cost of $10,000.00 per aircraft instead of "free" with any standard factory color...Part of the rational for being painted yellow was that most training bases  were in low density population areas .......and if one went down it would be easy to see........but that was when the Chipmunk came on the scene...not decades later when the population had grown so that flying into an area where the "Chippy" could not be seen was impossible.

When the Tutor aircraft were built the CF was given the option of including internal plumbing for extra fuel tanks...it would cost about $8000.00 more per aircraft.......once again some brass hat said plumbing was not required because they would be training aircraft and would not be required to be flown outside the range of their home training base. When it was "discovered" that the aircraft would be required to fly long distant cross country flights for pilot training , the order went out to retrofit the aircraft with the required plumbing and the cost was in excess of $18,000 per aircraft plus their "down" time of about 3 weeks per bird.

Now the above examples are not indicative of the problem at hand,  the procurement of a new fighter, but are posted to show you that many of the Military  BOD8D drivers live in the past and fail to see that the world is changing and that the Canadian Government as well as the Canadian Military  should address and acknowledge that fact.

 Canada should be changing its Military Mission and  drop those items (new fighters), and move the CF into the 21st century with a more economical and justifiable Mandate.

A Mandate and Mission Statement  that would move the CF into the 21st Century and probably garner the respect and admiration of  numerous countries in the world....

 

Old man now leaves and starts yelling at the falling rain here in "Dotville".

[conehead]

And a proper needs assessment would be required, based on that Mandate and Mission Statement.  

[DEFCON]

"Until someone IN GOVERNMENT changes the CF Mission Statement  the CF is doomed to continue living in the 20th century and want to keep acquiring the toys that the old brass hats used when they were actual "worker bees.""

I think that line really sums the situation up very nicely.

[Tango Niner]

1 hour ago, Malcolm said:

Great idea Tango Niner but where are you going to find a "Non-Partisan expert military board" qualified to rule?

 

Only in the happy place inside my head I guess . You're right, the reality is that such a thing probably isn't capable of existing.

[Guest]

More problems and more costs

U.S. Navy vexed by lack of access to F-35 logistics coding

 

‎Today, ‎March ‎7, ‎2018, ‏‎25 minutes ago

The U.S. Navy remains frustrated by its inability to connect the F-35 s logistics software with the other logistics software programs it uses.

 

F-35 development and support to cost $1 billion annually

 

‎Today, ‎March ‎7, ‎2018, ‏‎45 minutes ago

The Joint Program Office (JPO) estimates that continued development of the F-35 to deal with evolving threats and changing warfighting environments will cost the U.S. government more than $1 billion a year between 2018 and 2024.

[DEFCON]

Luke Skywalker will be a licensed pilot before this thing is ready to go. 

[Guest]

Trouble in fighter city.

State-of-the-art? America’s two best fighter jets can’t even communicate with each other

 

‎Today, ‎April ‎2, ‎2018, ‏‎36 minutes ago | Washington Post

With the F-22 Raptor and the F-35 Lightning II, the U.S. has fielded two of the world’s most sophisticated, maneuverable and stealthy fighter jets. They both function as airborne shepherds of America’s flock of older combat aircraft, using their state-of-the-art systems to communicate threats and targets on the ground and in the air.

Unfortunately, they have a difficult time communicating with each other.

The F-22, originally designed as an air superiority fighter, dates to the mid-1980s and was created to dispense near-invisible lethality against Soviet targets before the enemy knew it was there. The plane’s requirements for maximum stealth extended to its communications systems, since they can betray an aircraft’s location. But budget considerations and initial optimism about a post-Cold War world cut short its production. In 2009, then-Defence Secretary Robert Gates ended the program.

And that’s where the problem begins. Had the Air Force gotten all the F-22s it wanted-more than double the 183 or so it has-integration of its systems with another fleet of “fifth generation” fighters wouldn’t have been as critical. The F-22’s Intra-Flight Data Link (IFDL) is a much older system than the Tactical Link 16 system used on the newer F-35. While the F-22’s IFDL protocol can receive data from the F-35 and other allied aircraft, such as the F-16 and Eurofighter Typhoon, it can’t transmit the vast array of situational data it collects.

In a recent story on the situation, Air Force Magazine likened U.S. combat communications among the various aircraft to “a kind of Tower of Babel.” And the necessary modifications haven’t been fast in coming. “There’s a lot of improvements that could have been done and should have been done 15 years ago,” said David Rockwell, a senior defence electronics analyst with Teal Group. “The Air Force postponed a lot of things for [the] F-22.”

Both the Raptor and Lightning II are known as “fifth-generation” aircraft because of their stealth, sensors and other capabilities. Jets such as the Air Forces’s F-15 and F-16 and the Navy’s F/A-18 are “fourth-generation.” Russia and China also are fielding and refining their fifth-generation fighters, the Su-57 and J-31, respectively.

The U.S. fifth-generation jets are adept at disseminating a more detailed view of the battle space to older aircraft, increasing the former’s “survivability” in combat. The F-35 fleet also has what’s called a multifunction advanced data link (MADL) to gather and share information with other F-35s. This fusion of sensor data-and the ability to distribute it with allied aircraft-allows the F-35 to serve as a “quarterback” during a conflict. “You hear it from the [F-15) Eagles and the Marine Corps,” said Billie Flynn, an F-35 test pilot at Lockheed Martin Corp., which also made the F-22. “We’re keeping our own forces much more engaged and boosting survivability.”

“The thing that’s great about having Link 16 and MADL onboard and the sensor fusion is the amount of situational awareness the pilot has,” Lt. Col. George Watkins, a squadron commander, said in an Air Force statement last year. “I can see the whole war, and where all the other players are, from a god’s-eye view. That makes me a lot more effective.”

“We don’t have data anymore,” said Flynn, a former squadron commander for the Royal Canadian Air Force. “We have knowledge.”

When it comes to talking to each other, however, the F-22 and F-35 pilots currently must use secure voice links. This temporary fix has worked in training and simulated combat, Flynn said.

Keeping the F-22 relevant has been a 15-year effort. The Air Force established a modernization program in 2003, with 10 unique upgrades and enhancements. To date, the program has awarded contracts totaling as much as $12.9 billion, according to a Defence Department Inspector General audit on F-22 modernization released last month. The IG criticized the Air Force’s software development and contracting strategies.

“We’re always working on ways to improve connectivity wherever the mission requires additional information sharing,” an Air Force spokesman, Major Ken Scholz, said in an email. “As well, the F-35A and F-22 are very complementary assets, particularly in highly contested areas.”

Still, the Air Force doesn’t plan to fix the communications problem until 2023, when the F-22 fleet is scheduled to get the same Tac Link 16 system F-35s currently have.

• Don't talk to journalists, Canadian government warns companies interested in fighter jet contract
• Canada's CF-18s to fly until 2032 as new fighter jets expected to be slowly phased in
• Missing Polish fighter jet found; pilot ejected before crash and survived

While these two fighters have a ways to go until they share the same communications and sensor systems, there’s at least one thing they already have in common: they’re budget busters. The Raptor is the most expensive aircraft in the U.S. arsenal, in terms of cost per flight hour; the program ended up costing taxpayers more than $330 million per unit.

Operating and maintenance costs have grown daunting for the F-35 as well. The Air Force may need to cut almost 600 from its planned order of 1,763 if upkeep costs can’t be lowered by more than a third. It also faces annual maintenance costs of almost $4 billion for a fighter fleet that’s likely to top $1 trillion in sustainment through 2070 across the three service branches.

Meanwhile, Lockheed and others are working on near-term fixes for the F-22’s communications problems. Longer term, the Air Force would like to find a way to extend the existing stealth profile to its upgraded communications and radar systems, Rockwell said. “There could already be a partial classified solution in the short-term,” he said. “This is exactly the sort of thing that goes classified because you don’t want to put out that the F-22 can interact with other things.”

[Super 80]

I talked to a US Navy pilot who has flown the F-35 a few weeks ago, he could only say there was a still a lot of work to be done and the supporting infrastructure is as big a problem as anything internal to the aircraft itself.

He felt it was destined to by the Navy's F-16 but probably won't displace a single Super Hornet ever.

[Guest]

• Manufacturers & Airframes
• Pentagon refuses delivery of F-35s over repair dispute

Pentagon refuses delivery of F-35s over repair dispute

• 11 April, 2018
• SOURCE: FlightGlobal.com
• BY: Garrett Reim
• Los Angeles

The US Department of Defense is refusing delivery of F-35 Lightning IIs over a dispute with manufacturer Lockheed Martin about who should pay for repair costs to fix a production error found on the aircraft last year.

Last year the Pentagon stopped accepting F-35s for a month after finding corrosion where the carbon fiber exterior panels of the plane were fastened to the airframe. The DOD and Lockheed Martin have found a fix to the corrosion problem, but are reportedly at an impasse over who should pay to fix the F-35s already stationed around the world.

Lockheed Martin confirmed the issue in an email to FlightGlobal.

“Production on the F-35 programme continues and we’re confident we’ll meet our delivery target of 91 aircraft for 2018,” the company said. “While all work in our factories remains active, the F-35 Joint Program Office has temporarily suspended accepting aircraft until we reach an agreement on a contractual issue and we expect this to be resolved soon.”

The JPO, which is responsible for managing the F-35 programme, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The JPO also halted deliveries for three weeks last year after the problem was discovered, but then allowed deliveries to resume. Lockheed delivered 66 aircraft in 2017, meeting its yearly target.

[Guest]

 

Canada to purchase 25 used Australian fighter jets if States says yes

 

‎Today, ‎June ‎15, ‎2018, ‏‎57 minutes ago | David Pugliese, Ottawa Citizen

Canada has boosted the number of used Australian fighter jets it is purchasing to 25, but the deal still hinges on approval from the U.S. government.

The Liberal government originally announced it would buy 18 used Australian F-18 jets to augment the Royal Canadian Air Force’s CF-18s until new aircraft can be purchased in the coming years. It has added seven more aircraft to the deal, Dan Blouin, a spokesman for the Department of National Defence, confirmed Friday.

Those extra aircraft will likely be stripped down for parts.

It is not known yet if the seven aircraft will be flown to Canada or shipped, Blouin added.

The exact cost of the aircraft, along with weapons and other equipment, is not yet known as negotiations are still underway, Procurement Minister Carla Qualtrough recently told journalists. The Liberal government has set aside up to $500 million for the project and that would cover the seven added jets.

An Australian Senate hearing was recently told that Canada was presented with a cost proposal last year. “They accepted our offer in December, but they have also put in a further request for some seven aircraft for system testing, training and spares,” Australian Air Vice Marshal Cath Roberts told the hearing.

The U.S. government is examining the deal and will have to give its approval before Australia can sell the F-18s to Canada, because the F-18s were built in the U.S. with American technology. Canada is hoping for the U.S. approval sometime in the summer.Although U.S.-Canada relations have hit a slump, with President Donald Trump vowing to punish Canadians over economic disputes, the DND does not expect that to affect approval of the fighter jet deal.

Pat Finn, DND’s assistant deputy minister of materiel, has said he expects a deal by the end of the year with deliveries of the Australian planes to begin in the summer of 2019. The government originally planned for the arrival of the first used aircraft next January.

The government had originally planned to buy 18 new Super Hornet fighter jets from U.S. aerospace giant Boeing. But, last year, Boeing complained to the U.S. Commerce Department that Canadian subsidies for Quebec-based Bombardier allowed it to sell its C-series civilian passenger aircraft in the U.S. at cut-rate prices. As a result, the Trump administration brought in a tariff of almost 300 per cent against the Bombardier aircraft sold in the U.S.

In retaliation, Canada cancelled the deal to buy the 18 Super Hornets. That project would have cost more than US$5 billion.

In the meantime, the federal government expects to issue next year a request for proposals from aerospace firms who want to take part in the competition to provide Canada with 88 new fighter jets. That project, with a $19 billion price-tag, would see the purchase of a new fleet of planes that would replace both the CF-18s and the used Australian jets.A winning bidder is expected to be selected in spring 2021 and the first of the new aircraft would be delivered four years later.

The last CF-18 will be retired in 2032.

dpugliese@postmedia.com

Twitter.com/davidpugliese

[J.O.]

He can go pound sand. 

[dagger]

I suspect if the US were to say no, it would have to come from Trump, not Mattis who would almost certainly green-light it, and it would remove the F35 and F18 from the competition for the permanent replacement

[Guest]

July 6, 2018 / 8:58 AM / Updated an hour ago

Italy says won't buy more F-35 fighter jets, may cut existing order

 

Reuters Staff

2 Min Read

 

ROME (Reuters) - Italy will not buy more Lockheed Martin Corp F-35 fighter jets and is considering whether to stick to the order to which it is already committed, Defence Minister Elisabetta Trenta said on Friday.

 

FILE PHOTO: Italian Defence Minister Elisabetta Trenta arrives at a NATO meeting in Brussels, Belgium, June 8, 2018. REUTERS/Francois Lenoir/File Photo

Trenta comes from the anti-establishment 5-Star Movement which has always been critical of NATO member Italy’s order for 90 of the planes, saying the money could be better spent to boost welfare and help the sluggish economy.

 

“We won’t buy any more F-35s,” Trenta said in a television interview with private broadcaster La 7. “We are assessing what to do regarding the contracts already in place.”

She spelled out several reasons to be cautious, saying that “strong financial penalties” could mean that “scrapping the order could cost us more than maintaining it.”

She also cited benefits in terms of technology and research in Italy linked to the planes, as well as jobs that would be lost.

The F-35 is made by Lockheed Martin Corp, with companies including Northrop Grumman Corp, United Technologies Corp’s Pratt & Whitney and BAE Systems Plc also involved.

However, Trenta said she saw merit in stretching out the purchases in order to free up resources for investments in European defense projects.

 

Some 5-Star officials said last year that Italy should cancel the order for the fighters altogether, but Trenta made clear she had reservations about this.

“No one is hiding the fact we have always been critical ... In view of the existing contracts signed by the previous government, we are carrying out a careful assessment that exclusively considers the national interest,” she said.

The 5-Star Movement formed a populist coalition government last month with the far right League party.

[Guest]

Def. Aviation but almost more about politics.

John Ivison: Auditor's F35 lightning to strike twice — and this time the Liberals may get burned

Harjit Sajjan and Jonathan Vance are going to enjoy a dish of cold revenge, a full two years after their claims that the country faced an urgent shortage of fighter jets

What rejoicing there must be in the twin towers at National Defence HQ at the news Canada’s auditor general is going to investigate the fighter jet “capability gap” claim used as justification for sole sourcing the purchase of 18 shiny, new Boeing Super Hornets.

At last, the prospect of vindication against allegations made by out of touch former air force commanders and cynical pundits that the entire “capability gap” excuse was a load of trumped up codswallop designed to push off the purchase of the next generation of fighters until after the next election, thereby living up to the campaign commitment not to buy Lockheed Martin’s F35 Lightning stealth jet.

How Harjit Sajjan, the defence minister, and Jonathan Vance, the chief of the defence staff, are going to enjoy a dish of cold revenge, a full two years after their claims that the country faced an urgent shortage of fighter jets and was unable to fulfill its commitments to both NATO and NORAD.

The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II. Lockheed Martin photo

Unless, of course, the auditor Michael Ferguson finds that the entire tangled web was woven in the minister’s office, with the connivance of the military, in order to deceive the public and avoid political embarrassment.

To recap, in spring 2016, Postmedia reported the Liberals planned on buying Boeing Super Hornet fighters to bridge a so-called “capability gap”. The benefits to the governing party were obvious – it postponed the need for a competition to replace the aging CF-18s that risked being won by the F35. In its election platform, the Liberals had promised to hold an “open and transparent” competition to replace the CF-18s but had also pledged not to buy the F35 – commitments that would seem, to anyone whose head did not zip up at the back, incompatible.

 

 

RELATED STORIES:

 

Federal auditor general to dive into contentious fighter-jet 'capability gap'

 

 

Prior to the leak, Sajjan mentioned the capability gap at every opportunity, despite the commander of the air force, Lt.-Gen. Michael Hood, telling the House of Commons defence committee the CF-18s useful life could last until 2025 and that any decision taken before 2021 would give the air force sufficient time to adjust. Alan Williams, a former assistant deputy minister of materiel at National Defence, said a competition could produce results within a year.

Subsequently, the minister was silent on the file until November when he appeared at a press conference alongside Vance, then public works minister Judy Foote, and Innovation Minister Navdeep Bains to deliver the news that the government would indeed sole-source an “interim” purchase of 18 Boeing Super Hornets – at a cost of an estimated $6.4 billion. The editorial comment in this space at the time described the event as “the uncomfortable attempting to justify the indefensible”.

Minister of National Defence Harjit Sajjan arrives for a change of command ceremony on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Monday, July 16, 2018. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang

Sajjan blamed the lack of a replacement for the CF-18s squarely on the Conservatives, for reining over a “highly politicized process” that left just 77 jets in the fleet and no replacements on order. He was correct up to a point, but the obvious solution was to hold an open competition pronto, not spend an extra $6.4 billion on jets that were not needed.

He presented the interim purchase as a political solution to a national security problem, when, in fact, it was a political solution to a political problem. Hood had also told the Commons committee that he needed just 65 aircraft to fulfill Canada’s commitments.

When pushed at the press conference in November 2016, Vance said the air force could not meet the missions to which it was assigned and respond to unforeseen circumstances.

But the requirement to meet NATO and North American defence commitments simultaneously was brand new – a Liberal policy introduced in September 2016 to justify the interim purchase.

As a former chief of the defence staff Paul Manson and 12 other retired senior air force commanders pointed out in a letter to the prime minister, it had been decades since Canada had enough aircraft to meet all its commitments at the same time. “Over the years, the air force, by judiciously balancing strategic risks and available resources, has managed its operational contributions reasonably well,” the letter stated.

Manson and his co-signators asked Justin Trudeau to abandon the interim purchase on the basis it was “ill-advised, costly and unnecessary”.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, left, is accompanied by Minister of National Defence Minister Harjit Singh Sajjan as he holds a press conference at the NATO Summit in Brussels, Belgium, on Thursday, July 12, 2018. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick

“I’m 82 years old and I may not see the outcome of all this but I want the facts put before the public,” he said in an interview. “The main point right now is that the government seems determined to go ahead with a plan that those of us with countless decades of experience running the air force think would take decades to correct.”

The former air force commanders recommended that, if the government was intent on an interim purchase, it should buy so-called legacy Hornets from a partner nation like Australia.

In the event, that is exactly what has happened – though not because the Trudeau Liberals were struck by a sudden anxiety about wasting billions and billions of taxpayers’ dollars.

Rather, Boeing’s complaint to the U.S. Commerce Department about Canadian subsidies for Montreal-based Bombardier Inc. that allowed it to sell its C-series civilian passenger aircraft at below cost – and the subsequent 300 per cent tariffs levelled against Bombardier by the Trump administration – persuaded Trudeau to cancel the deal to buy the new Super Hornets.

Canada is now intent on purchasing 25 used Australian jets – if it wins approval from the U.S. government. The government has set aside $500 million for the acquisition.

But the subsequent course correction does not invalidate the orgy of spin, obfuscation and outright fabrication that preceded it. The news, via The Canadian Press, that Ferguson is now scrutinizing the “capability gap”, as part of a wider fighter jet review is welcome news.

A report will be tabled this fall and it remains possible that the auditor finds the original plan to add brand new Super Hornets was a productive use of resources, and crucial to the readiness of the Canadian air force.

But, there also exists the prospect of a searing indictment of Liberal mendacity, such as the one Ferguson unleashed four years ago on the Conservatives’ handling of the F35 purchase, that derailed the acquisition and gave the Harper government an embarrassing black eye.

In his first report as auditor-general, Ferguson said the government gambled on the F35 without running a fair competition, had no cost certainty and that key data was hidden from decision-makers and parliamentarians.

Surely this could not be a case of the F35 Lightning striking twice?

[Guest]

Quote

Ottawa releases draft tender on purchase of new fighter jets

The effort to replace the air force’s aging fleet of CF-18 fighters took a small step forward Monday when Public Services and Procurement Canada released a draft tender and asked for feedback from the makers of new jets.

It's the first sign of movement on the file since the competition was launched almost a year ago

 

Murray Brewster · CBC News · Posted: Oct 29, 2018 1:39 PM ET | Last Updated: an hour ago

The effort to replace the air force's aging fleet of CF-18 fighters took a small step forward Monday when Public Services and Procurement Canada released a draft tender and asked for feedback from the makers of new jets.

There are five companies in the running: France's Dassault Aviation; Saab of Sweden; Airbus Defence and Space out of Britain; and Boeing and Lockheed Martin in the U.S.

 

The manufacturers will have about eight weeks to comment on various aspects of the proposed tender before the government finalizes the document.

A full-fledged request for proposals is not expected to be released until the new year.

The department said input from the manufacturers "is critical to the overall success of this procurement and for selecting the right fighter aircraft to meet Canada's needs."

A slow process

It has been almost a year since Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan formally "launched" competition to replace the CF-18s, which were originally purchased in the 1980s but have received significant upgrades in the decades since.

At the same time, Sajjan also announced the federal government would buy used Australian F-18s of the same vintage as Canada's current fighter fleet.

That purchase is meant to serve as a stopgap to ensure the air force can meet its NATO and NORAD commitments at the same time.

• Canadian air force short 275 pilots as attrition outpaces recruitment, training

• Liberals faced closed-door criticism over now-cancelled Super Hornet fighter plan: documents

• Could Trump's trade war cripple the U.S. defence industry's dominance of the Canadian market?

The Liberal government is looking to buy 88 new jets, but the first ones aren't likely to arrive until the mid-2020s.

The competition among manufacturers for Canada's business is expected to be fierce.

Lockheed Martin will pitch its F-35 stealth fighter, which the former Conservative government was prepared to buy until the auditor general criticized both Public Works and National Defence in 2012. The AG said, among other things, that the departments had not done enough homework to justify the multi-billion-dollar purchase.

Boeing is in line to offer the Super Hornet — a larger, more advanced version of the F-18 — but the Chicago, IL.-based company and the Liberal government traded blows last year in a dispute over passenger jets and Bombardier.

The Liberals initially had planned to buy Super Hornets as a stopgap instead of the Australian fighters, but cancelled the purchase because of the dispute.

Advantage: Europe?

Airbus plans to offer its Eurofighter Typhoon. Saab will pitch the latest version of its Gripen, while Dassault has the Rafale.

The European aircraft-makers all privately expressed optimism about the competition last spring at an Ottawa defence industry trade show.

For years, Canada has been seen as favouring U.S. manufacturers because of what the military called "interoperability issues."

But recent trade disputes and political tensions between Ottawa and Washington have given contractors outside of North America a morale boost.