CF-18 Life-Extension To Cost at Least $1.5 Billion

By: David Pugliese, The National Post 

Canadians could be paying more than $1.5 billion extra as the operating life of the military’s aging CF-18 fighter jets is extended for another 14 years.

CF-18 Hornet fighter jets takes off from 4 Wing Cold Lake.Trevor Robb/Postmedia/File

The jets were to be taken out of service after 2025, but as Postmedia recently reported, delays in the Liberal government’s plan to buy replacements means the jets will need to continue operating until 2032. While the Department of National Defence says it still has yet to figure out how much that will cost, a December 2014 report produced by DND and the Canadian Forces raised concerns about further extending the life of the CF-18s.

“Rough order of magnitude incremental costs for an Estimated Life Expectancy of 2030 are just over $1.5 billion and are primarily due to the requirement for a new structural life extension program needed to enable the CF-18 to be flown beyond its current safe life,” said the report, which was prepared for the previous Conservative government.

That roughly $1.5 billion would be on top of the $500 million the Liberal government has set aside to buy 18 used Australian F-18s as a stop-gap until it can acquire new planes.

Some savings could be found from the cost of extending the service of the CF-18s if the military reduces their flying hours, the report said.

The jets, first received in 1982, will be 50 years old when they are retired.

“The government has stated the need to invest further in the life extension and continued operation of the CF-18 fleet,” said DND spokesman Dan Le Bouthillier. “The cost will be known once investigations are complete.

“Life extension would occur under continuing in-service support using already proven engineering and maintenance processes,” he said.

During the 2015 election campaign the Liberals promised to immediately launch a competition to buy replacements for the CF-18s. Once elected, they instead decided to buy 18 Super Hornets from Boeing as a temporary measure, then scuttled that arrangement over a trade dispute between the U.S. aircraft manufacturer and Canadian aerospace firm Bombardier.

They have committed to buying 88 new fighter jets in a program that could cost as much as $19 billion, a price which does not include long-term maintenance. Troy Crosby, director general of defence major projects at Public Services and Procurement Canada, said that a request for proposals from companies for the new jets is expected to be issued in spring 2019, with a contract likely not signed until late 2021 or early 2022.

Canada’s CF-18 jets, first received in 1982, will be 50 years old when they are retired. Trevor Robb/Postmedia/File

The department said it is still evaluating information from various fighter jet companies and will at some point release a list of those firms approved to take part in the upcoming competition.

The first replacement aircraft for the CF-18s are expected to arrive in 2025 but the delivery of all 88 planes would not be completed until 2030, according to federal government documents distributed to industry representatives at a Jan. 22 meeting in Ottawa. The last CF-18s would then be retired in 2032.

Aerospace industry officials have privately said it would have made more sense to launch an immediate competition and fast-track the purchase of new aircraft instead of dumping money into keeping older jets airborne.

Over the last decade the Canadian Forces have investigated various options to replace the CF-18s, which have been upgraded over the years.

In 2001 a modernization project was launched to allow the planes to continue operating until 2017-2020. Structural improvements to maintain the fleet have been ongoing and another upgrade program is in the works to keep the planes flying until 2025, according to the RCAF.

That will provide the planes with various systems to allow them to operate with allied air forces as well as meet new rules to fly in domestic and international airspace, and could potentially involve upgrades to weapons.

It is unclear how extensive another upgrade beyond that would need to be to keep the planes flying from 2025 to 2032.

RCAF to Fly CF-18s until 2032

By: David Puglise, The National Post 

Canada will squeeze even more flying time out of its aging CF-18s, keeping the jets operating for another 15 years.

There had been plans to take the jets out of service shortly after 2025.

But representatives from companies who took part in a Jan. 22 industry day outlining the Liberal government’s program to buy new fighter planes were told the RCAF will now keep the CF-18s operating until 2032.

The jets, first received in 1982, will be retired after 50 years of service.

Some aerospace industry sources, however, question whether the 2032 retirement is set in stone since any delays in the purchase of new jets could alter that schedule.

The first replacement aircraft for the CF-18s will arrive in 2025 but the deliveries of the 88 planes would not be completed until 2030, according to the federal government documents distributed to industry representatives at the Jan. 22 meeting in Ottawa.

A CF-188 Hornet from the Canadian Air Task Force Lithuania perform manoeuvres over Lithuania on September 15, 2014 for the NATO Baltic Air Policing Block 36 during Operation Reassurance. Cpl Gabrielle DesRochers

The CF-18s have been upgraded over the years. In 2001 a modernization project was launched to allow the planes to continue operating until 2017-2020.

Structural improvements to maintain the fleet have also been ongoing and another upgrade program is in the works, with the aim to keep the planes flying until 2025, according to the RCAF.

That will provide the planes with various systems to allow them to operate with allied air forces as well as meet new rules to fly in domestic and international airspace. There could also be upgrades to weapons, the RCAF says.

It is unclear if yet another upgrade would be needed beyond that to keep the planes flying from 2025 to 2032.

Canada is in also in discussions with Australia to purchase 18 used F-18 aircraft to augment the existing fleet of CF-18s. While the exact cost of that deal won’t be made public until the contract is signed, the Liberal government has set aside $500 million for the project.

In November 2016, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan acknowledged that the CF-18s might have to keep flying longer than planned, suggesting they could even continue until 2030 or perhaps beyond. The briefing to industry representatives was the first official government confirmation that the RCAF would stretch out the life of the aircraft until 2032.

Seen from the window of a Canadian Forces CC-150 Polaris tanker, a CF-18 Hornet fighter jet refuels in the air over Vancouver during Operation Podium on Feb. 18, 2010. Master Corporal Andrew Collins, 14 Wing Imaging

The Liberals have committed to buying 88 new fighter jets in a program that could cost as much as $19 billion. That price-tag does not include long-term maintenance.

Troy Crosby, director general of defence major projects at Public Services and Procurement Canada, said in an interview with Postmedia that a request for proposals from companies for the new fighter jets is expected to be issued in spring 2019. A contract would be signed in late 2021 or early 2022.

André Fillion, chief of staff in the materiel branch at the Department of National Defence, said the Jan. 22 meeting provided a way to brief industry on how the purchase will unfold. “This was an opportunity for us to start talking to industry about the context for the fleet in terms of its operation, sustainment and acquisition,” he explained in an interview with Postmedia. Fillion said attendees were given “a bit of an appreciation of where we are headed so they can start thinking about their solution.”

Further details of the purchase will emerge over the next year.

Canada is compiling a suppliers list which will include aircraft manufacturers and the foreign governments or defence agencies associated with those planes. The deadline for submissions to that list is Feb. 9.

The Canadian government will then evaluate the responses and a formal list will be drawn up by March. Only suppliers on the list at that time will be invited to take part in the competition and to submit proposals.

RCAF to ask for $500 million in spending for CF-18 upgrades

By: David Pugliese, The National Post

The Canadian military is hoping to ask the government early next year for approval to spend up to $500 million to modernize its CF-18 fighter jets.

The upgrade would keep the planes flying until 2025, giving the government some breathing room to organize the purchase of replacements and make sure they are delivered before the older jets are taken out of service.

Work has already started to ensure the CF-18s are structurally sound.

Now, the military is analyzing improvement options for communications equipment to deal with changes in civil aviation regulations. There could be other upgrades to weapons and how the CF-18s communicate and operate with Allied fighter jets.

DND/FileThe CF-18 upgrade would keep the planes flying until 2025, giving the government some breathing room to organize the purchase of replacements

“This project is expected to go for potential government submission early in 2017,” said Ashley Lemire, Department of National Defence spokeswoman.

The options focus “on what is required from a regulatory and interoperability perspective.”

The DND estimates the cost of the modernization at between $250 million and $499 million, depending on the options chosen and what the government accepts, say defence sources.

Military officers say the upgrades will have to be done by 2021 to make financial sense — new fighter jets are expected by 2025. That means decisions on the upgrades must be made and contracts placed by 2018.

Since 2002, Canada has spent $2.6 billion modernizing the CF-18s. The planes were bought in 1982.

The Conservative government planned to buy 65 F-35 stealth fighters to replace the CF-18s. The purchase was put on hold as the cost ballooned and technical problems emerged.

Related
Colin Kenny: It’s time for us to get on with replacing the CF-18 fighter fleet
‘It’s here. It’s real:’ Stealth fighters vie for attention from air show attendees — and the Canadian Forces
Eight CF-18s deployed for month to U.S.-led exercise despite Liberals’ warning of jet shortage

During last year’s federal election, the Liberals said they would buy a less expensive fighter jet if they came to power.

In June, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said the F-35 “does not work, and is far from working.”

But the Liberal promise not to buy the F-35 has been thrown into question by Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan, who has said any competition would be open to all jets. He has insisted the government must move “quickly” selecting a new fighter jet, but has not outlined any timetable.

Last month, the House of Commons defence committee called on the government to pick a replacement within a year. It pointed out the costs of the new jets should be well documented so other military equipment programs would not be affected.

THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jason Franson A CF-18 Hornet on the runway at CFB Cold Lake Alberta, Oct. 21, 2014.

Both the NDP and Conservatives argued the report was written to support the Liberal government’s defence strategy.

“The committee report marshals evidence to bolster the Liberal decision to sole-source the purchase of Super Hornets,” the NDP said in its submission.

That refers to the Liberals’ attempt in the summer to buy Super Hornet fighter jets, built by Boeing, instead of holding a competition. The plan was put on hold after it prematurely became public when Postmedia revealed the scheme.

Industry sources say they believe some senior Liberals still hope to revive the Super Hornet sole-source purchase in the near future.

Sajjan has said the Canadian military is facing a “capability gap” since the CF-18 fleet can’t handle the country’s commitments to NATO and the North American Aerospace Defence Command’s needs to protect the continent.

“Between our NORAD and NATO commitments and how many jets are serviceable at one time, we cannot meet both those requirements simultaneously,” he said in July.

“The Canadian Armed Forces have been risk-managing this problem for some time now and the previous government found it acceptable. I do not, and I want to make sure that we give all the tools necessary not to put the Canadian Armed Forces in a scenario to risk-manage.”

Vimy Paper: The F-35 Program, Defence Procurement, and the CF-18 Replacement Debacle

The Conference of Defence Associates has published it's latest Vimy Paper. In it, Richard Shimooka outlines the troubled history of the RCAF's CF-18 replacement. Shimooka starts as early as 1997, but mainly focuses on the Harper Era in his paper, tracking the procurement of the CF-18 Replacement from 2006 to 2015. While Shimooka does not make a direct appeal to purchase the F-35 JSF; I believe there is a fair amount of bias in the article to indicate that he is calling for the government to learn from past procurement, and move forward with the purchase. 

Decide for yourself: 

"The Fourth Dimension: The F-35 Program, Defence Procurement, and the Conservative Government, 2006-2015"

 Executive Summary:

Since 1997, the Government of Canada has engaged in a process to replace its tactical fighter fleet of 122 CF-18 Hornets, which were acquired in the 1980s. Much of that history has been intertwined with a single aircraft: Lockheed Martin's F-35. The public discourse has largely been dominated by criticism of the selection process, as well as the aircraft's capabilities, cost, and attendant industrial benefits.

Inside of government, a very different view emerged. The federal bureaucracy, initially led by the Department of National Defence worked to undertake a proper evaluation of the CF-18 replacement program. Far from being exorbitantly expensive or technologically defective, it discovered the F-35 was the best option for Canada and recommended a sole source selection in 2010. Program troubles in the United States, two deeply flawed oversight reports by the Parliamentary Budget Officer and the Office of the Auditor General, as well as a series of errors by the government resulted in a loss of support for the project. Consequently, a new assessment process was launched in 2013, known as the Seven-Point Plan. However, it too endorsed the sole-source selection of the F-35, resulting in a series of culminating events leading up to the 2015 federal election.

This study is a history of these events. It is a story not of bureaucratic mismanagement or military bias, but one of civil-military relations and political dysfunction. The Liberal victory in the October 2015 election might have initiated a new phase of the CF-18 replacement program history. Yet the preceding several years should provide a number of lessons going forward. Few, if any, of the program's fundamentals have changed. Many of the considerations that underpinned the original analysis are still valid. The current government would do well to take heed of what occurred before.

To read the full Vimy Paper, see link below.

http://www.cdainstitute.ca/images/Vimy_Papers/Vimy_Paper_33.pdf

A Mixed Fighter Fleet for Canada? Super Hornets, F-​35s, and the challenge of comparisons

By: Dr. Peter Layton, CDA Institute 

Every country has an F-​35 story it seems. Both Australian and Canadian force structure planning has been blighted by the aircraft’s problems and long delays. In 2007 Australia opted for a bridging capability – against Air Force advice – and acquired the F-​18F Super Hornet. Canada now appears to be similarly considering a bridging capability, perhaps also against Air Force advice, and possibly acquiring Super Hornets.

USAF F/A-1 Super Hornets.

Sounds much the same, at first glance. But Australian and Canadian requirements have some fundamental differences, and just as importantly time has moved on. 2016 is not 2007.

For Australia, the F-​18F acquisition has been a good experience; the aircraft arrived on time and under budget. Neither are surprising in that the aircraft was an off-​the-​shelf buy rather than an F-​35 developmental program. The in-​service F-​18A Hornet aircrew found converting to the Super Hornet easy and quick, with the US Navy (USN) training system providing a good head start.

The maintenance and support, however, was a much more complex matter. The current variant Super Hornet technology is considerably more advanced than the 1980s vintage Hornet. In many respects the Super Hornet’s technology is closer to the F-​35 than the F-​18A; it is really more of an F-​35 Lite than a ‘super’ Hornet.

In being more advanced, the Super Hornet’s operating costs are much greater than those of the older Hornet. Apples to oranges comparisons are hard given different fleet sizes and other factors, but are probably more than twice as much per aircraft (see p. 120 of a recent Australian Strategic Policy Institute report). In this, a major project lesson learned by the Australian acquisition organisation is that, while off-​the-​shelf jets can be quickly acquired, “the establishment of a sustainment solution is a challenge and requires early management oversight.” Half the Super Hornet fleet had been delivered within three years but reaching the final operational capability state, when everything is bedded down, took 5½ years from government approval.

It must also be remembered that the F-​18 that Australia and Canada bought was developed from the US Air Force’s (USAF) Lightweight Fighter technology evaluation program. The F-​18 began life as an air-​to-​air fighter first and a bomber second. The F-​35 is the reverse with air-​to-​ground the primary requirement and air-​to-​air secondary. By dent of excellent sensors, datalinks, stealth, and millions of lines of code, the F-​35 overcomes the airframe deficiencies that arise from this upbringing, albeit at the cost of great complexity and perhaps a certain operational brittleness.

In contrast, the F-​35 and the Super Hornet are both alike in being originally designed as strike fighters. Unsurprisingly, both offer broadly similar capabilities and neither are highly manoeuvrable dogfighters. In wars-​of-​choice such as fightingISIS in Iraq the differences between the aircraft in terms of operational effect might be marginal.

Given this, maybe a Canadian Super Hornet bridging capability makes some sense. It would take the pressure off having to make an F-​35 decision – at a time when the aircraft design remains unstable, maintenance systems are immature, operating costs uncertain, and the US’s chief tester is still publishing scary flight test reports. On the other hand, the F-​35 program office is progressively addressing technical issues, unit costs are coming down, more aircraft have been ordered by various countries, and the USAF looks set to declare an initial operational capability this year.

Yet this might not be the kind of capability most want or are expecting. As more becomes known about the software, it seems that the F-​35 might not be fully operationally ready until Block 4 is implemented. This Block may also see some key hardware changes, such as bringing the Electro-​Optical Targeting System (EOTS) up to a suitable standard. Block 4 should be ready early next decade. Buying F-​35s before then might mean expensive upgrades before they even enter delivery flight-​test. Unfortunately for the F-​35, buying later is always cheaper and always brings a better standard aircraft.

In Canada, another consideration is whether there will be a capability gap between the new fighters’ introduction to service and the last old Hornet retiring, by 2025 or even earlier. It should be recognised that the transition period will see a dip in capability and some years when deploying a squadron overseas would severely tax the RCAF, especially on the personnel front. Individuals can’t be at home bringing a new fighter on board while fighting offshore. Moreover 2025 is not far away in major project terms. It took Australia almost six years to fully bed down a technically well-​understood, off-​the-​shelf fighter. The F-​35 is in nothing like the same state; even if contracting this year, meeting the 2025 deadline would be a near-​run thing if Canada wanted a seamless transition from one aircraft type to the other.

But hold everything. The F-​35 program, while too big to stop, may not be too big to fail, at least in the air-​to-​air arena. (Its air-​to-​ground capabilities appear robust by comparison.)

Enter stage left the shadow of the future. Air superiority is becoming contested again in both East Asia and Europe. As the RAND Corporation warns, “continuous improvements to Chinese air capabilities make it increasingly difficult for the United States to achieve air superiority within a politically and operationally effective time frame.” The Centre for Strategic and International Studies, considering China’s full range of defence capabilities – including its rapidly advancing fighter fleet – observes: ” at the current rate of U.S. capability development, the balance of military power in the region is shifting against the United States.”

In this vein, the USAF in Europe commander recently noted: “The advantage that we had from the air, I can honestly say, is shrinking.… This is not just a Pacific problem. It’s as significant in Europe as it is anywhere else on the planet … I don’t think it’s controversial to say they’ve closed the gap in capability.”

Most worryingly, USAF’s head office has determined that the “projected force structure in 2030 is not capable of fighting and winning against …potential adversary capabilities.” The growing fleets of F-​35s in service with America and its allies seems inadequate to ensure air superiority beyond 2030. Future control of the air is in doubt.

What to do is uncertain. Whatever Canada buys now appears unlikely to be operationally viable in the air-​to-​air role beyond 2030 or so. The USAF is suggesting an expedited program to get some suitable ‘system of systems’ into service before then – maybe even 2025 – so air superiority can be maintained long term. What these systems might be remains unknown.

One option is for Canada to ignore this reality, press on and buy F-​35s to replace the Hornets by 2025. This is not necessarily a bad approach. The F-35’s air-​to-​air capabilities might be doubtful long-​term against advanced fighters but should be adequate for contributing to NORAD where the threats will hopefully be meagre. The F-35’s air-​to-​ground capabilities should be suitable for participating in NATO and future coalitions of the willing. In this case, the American alliance will be primarily relied upon to ensure control of the air.

Some will say – probably correctly – that this sounds like spending vast sums of money to buy a second rate air combat force and that ‘hope is not a strategy.’ Yet Canada’s (and Australia’s and most European NATO nations) Cold War fighter contribution was arguably in this vein. But you have to ask if you’re buying a doubtful capability anyway, is there any reason not to go for the lower cost Super Hornet option then.

Another alternative is to buy say 30 Super Hornets now, retain 30 CF-​18 Hornets, and wait until mid-​next decade to decide what to do. By then America’s intentions concerning new air superiority systems will be clearer and perhaps – a big ‘perhaps’ – Canada could buy into a long-​term robust solution. This offers at least a chance Canada may remain an ally important for more than just geographical proximity. If however this air superiority path does not eventuate, is unaffordable, or not releasable to close allies, by the mid-​2020s better and cheaper F-​35 versions will be available to round out Canada’s fighter force in terms of numbers. Importantly, also by then, the F-​35s operating costs will finally be known, allowing a more accurate assessment of whether a mixed fleet really is more expensive than a single type one. It may not be.

The later approach stresses hedging and is suitable for uncertain times but takes a dark view of the future where strategic circumstances are deteriorating. The other option is more of a big bet built on the hope the geopolitical situation in next few decades is better than seems to be likely now. The choice between these two options is not easy but indicates the F-​35/​Super Hornet issue is more complex than it seems at first. Which is more sensible? More pragmatic? Some deep thinking is required.
---
Dr. Peter Layton is a Visiting Fellow at the Griffith Asia Institute, Griffith University in Queensland, Australia. (Image courtesy of Staff Sgt. Aaron Allmon, U.S. Air Force.)

Liberals: RCAF Doesn't have enough CF-18s

By: Lee Berthiaume, National Post/ Post Media 

OTTAWA — The Liberal government says it is pressing ahead with upgrades to Canada’s CF-18s so they can fly through 2025. However, it maintains the upgrades will not address a shortage of fighter jets today.

The state of Canada’s CF-18 fighter fleet has become a hotly debated point since Postmedia revealed earlier this month that the government was looking to purchase new jets, likely Super Hornets, without a competition.

A Canadian Forces CF-18 Hornet fighter jet. Twenty-six CF-18s — or about one-third of the fleet — have already undergone structural work to be able to operate to the mid-2020s.

The government says there is a “gap” in the military’s capabilities. Speaking in Vancouver on Thursday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said the government has a “responsibility” to buy new jets for the military, and is working “respectfully and carefully through options” to get planes “in a responsible way for Canadians.”

Critics, however, allege the government has manufactured a gap to justify buying a plane other than the F-35. They note the previous Conservative government committed $500 million in 2014 to extend the lives of the CF-18s until 2025.

A spokeswoman for Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan says the government has no plans to cancel those planned upgrades. In fact, Jordan Owens said 26 CF-18s — or about one-third of the fleet — have already undergone structural work to be able to operate to the mid-2020s, and electronic upgrades are planned next.

However, Owens said Canada has a certain number of CF-18s committed to defending North America through the joint Canada-U.S. aerospace command, NORAD, on a daily basis. It also has a certain number of fighter jets committed to NATO.

“And when you add these two numbers together, that is greater than the number of planes that we can put into the sky on an average day, which we would call mission ready,” she said. “So that is what we are defining as a capability gap.”

Owens wouldn’t say how many CF-18s are actually needed to meet Canada’s NORAD and NATO commitments for operational security reasons.

Asked the same question, Defence officials pointed to Royal Canadian Air Force commander Lt.-Gen. Michael Hood’s comments to a parliamentary committee in April.

“We started with 138 (CF-18s),” Hood told the Commons’ defence committee on April 14. “Currently, we feel that we do not need more than 65. The situation has changed. Our commitments have changed over time. So that was a conscious decision not to increase.”

Conservative defence critic James Bezan said there is a balance because Canada would require 65 fighter jets if it was at war. “That’s not the daily operation requirement, though,” Bezan said, adding Liberals should “easily meet” Canada’s commitments after withdrawing the CF-18s from Iraq and Syria earlier this year.

A 2015-16 internal business plan prepared by 1 Canadian Air Division, which manages the RCAF’s numerous aircraft fleets, also made no mention of a shortage of CF-18s. Rather, it identified government-ordered budget cuts and increasing fuel, utility and training costs as the air force’s biggest challenges.

Owens said the gap hasn’t been pronounced to this point because “most of the time, we don’t have to put all of the NORAD fleet into the air at once. But, at any given time, we have enough planes in maintenance, which is even more so as the fleet is older. We have an old fleet.”

Documents tabled in the House of Commons this week show many of those that are still operational have flown more than 6,000 hours, and four more than 7,000.

In his testimony, however, Hood told the committee he was comfortable with the CF-18 fleet as long as a decision on a replacement was made in five years. The previous Conservative government had planned to purchase 65 F-35s.

• Email: lberthiaume@postmedia.com

CF-18 Airframe hours for entire RCAF Fleet

By: David Pugliese,

New information tabled in the House of Commons gives some insight into the number of hours on the airframes of the RCAF’s CF-18s.

The document lists 77 CF-18s in service at Cold Lake, Alberta and Bagotville, Que.

The “to be determined” columns are for “hours at retirement” and the date of retirement.

The information was current as of April 22.

It has been reported that the maximum flying hours for a F-18 is around 8,000 hours.

Four Canadian jets have more than 7,000 hours on their airframes, according to the chart provided. Forty-six have more than 6,000 hours.

The rest are in 5,000 to 5,900 range. One has just under 4,000 hours.

At this point the RCAF is still looking at a life extension to keep the aircraft flying until 2025. Sources tell Defence Watch the life extension is to proceed but it is unclear at this point how a proposed purchase of Super Hornets might affect that program.

   

CF-18 airframes approaching their age limits: Report

By: Murray Brewster, CBC News 

Canada's current fleet of CF-18s is rapidly wearing out, according to new figures tabled in Parliament, and there are fresh questions emerging about how well the fighter jets, and other so-called legacy aircraft, will be able to communicate with the new F-35s.

The new data emerged on the same day as the corporate air war over the Trudeau government's fighter replacement program heated up, with one of the principal contenders going on a PR offensive to counter the notion that choosing anything other than the Lockheed Martin F-35 stealth fighter would cost Canadian jobs.

Last week Lockheed Martin warned it would pull hundreds of millions of dollars in F-35 related work out of the country unless its jet was selected to replace Canada's CF-18s.

On Wednesday, rival aerospace company Boeing tried to paint that notion as an empty threat and promised to match or even exceed the value of lost contracts should Canada go with it instead.

Related:
Peter MacKay says he regrets Conservatives' failure to buy new fighter planes
Lockheed Martin warns it will pull $825M in F-35 contracts if Canada buys different jet
Canada's F-35 decision anxiously awaited, says U.S. deputy secretary of defence

But it was the release of a defence department chart, which tracks maintenance on the 77 remaining CF-18s, which may be the most startling development. It shows many of the fighters have used up to 85 per cent of their anticipated airframe life.

On average, each aircraft is expected to end its service life with just over 7,000 hours in the air.

As many as 49 of them have already logged in excess of 6,000 hours, according to air force data tabled at the request of Conservative defence critic James Bezan. Three of the aircraft had even exceeded the limit.

The figures are current up to April 22, 2016, and therefore would have included the wear and tear accumulated during the recent bombing campaign in Iraq and Syria against ISIS.

The Harper government set aside nearly $500 million to extend the life of the CF-18s, a program the Defence Department recently said was still in the "options analysis" phase and wouldn't be completed until October of next year.
Defining the 'capability gap'

Despite that, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan told the House of Commons on Wednesday that 26 of Canada's CF-18s have undergone some sort of refurbishment, but he gave no further details.

"A lot more work needs to be done, but we would not be here if we had replaced the fighters 10 years ago," Sajjan told the Commons.

The Liberals have said Canada faces a "capability gap," meaning either the air force doesn't have enough fast jets to meet its obligations — or the current aircraft do not have the right capabilities.

They've forwarded that argument as justification for taking swift action, which might include the sole-source purchase of a handful of Boeing Super Hornets.

But there are new questions within the defence community about what that would mean for the air force, especially when many allies operating in the Far North, including the U.S., Norway and Denmark, have all opted for the F-35.
Communication issues

The U.S. is currently wrestling with important technical aspects, including how the stealth fighters can communicate and exchange data with older model jets, such as the CF-18s, the Super Hornets and European designed fighters.

It has been known for years that F-35s and F-22 Raptors will have trouble signalling and handing off "weapons quality data" to older planes while maintaining their radar-evading capabilities.

The U.S. air force and Lockheed Martin have been working on a solution to the communications problem through something called Project Missouri.

But proponents of the stealth fighter say Denmark's recent selection of the F-35 means Canada will be relegated to the back seat in terms of operations, including in the Arctic.

Traven says concerns over the ability to communicate between various makes of aircraft are misplaced. (Terry Milewski/CBC News)

But Ricardo Traven, the chief test pilot for the Boeing Super Hornet, denied there's a problem and called it a "ridiculous" notion.

Communications among everyone on the battlefield are paramount and the obstacles will be overcome, he said.

"We're all going to be able to communicate and share information, whether you're a tank, a [joint strike fighter] or a Super Hornet," Traven said.

Boeing vice-president Roger Schallom also attempted Wednesday to put to rest the notion that Canadian aerospace jobs would be lost if the F-35 isn't selected.

Many of the 110 Canadian companies doing business with Lockheed Martin are also working for Boeing on separate contracts.

If Boeing's plane is chosen, Schallom said, the company could replace or even exceed the current $825 million in contracts and the up to $10 billion lifetime value of industrial benefits.

"We will put in much more work than those numbers. I can't quantify it until we see what the [air force] requirement is, but we will definitely trump those numbers," he said.

Lockheed Martin still has hopes to sell Canada the F-35

By: Jordan Press, The Canadian Press 

A top executive says the firm wants back into the competition to replace CF-18s, and will “evaluate all of our alternatives” if it is shut out.

OTTAWA—The company building the F-35 fighter jet says all it wants is a chance to compete in an open and fair competition to provide the next generation of airplanes to Canada’s military.

New F-35s in the Netherlands, June 2016 (Getty Images) 

The possibility of being part of that process is murky, with the Liberal government having promised during last year’s election campaign that it would not buy the F-35, but vowing to hold an open competition to replace Canada’s fleet of aging CF-18s.

Further complicating matters is a published report that the Liberals have decided to purchase Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornet — a direct competitor to the F-35 being built by Lockheed Martin — as an interim measure to buy time for a long-term fix.

Jack Crisler, Lockheed Martin’s vice-president of F-35 business development and strategic integration, said the company plans to support the Canadian procurement process, but believes its plane can compete with and beat the Super Hornet for any contract.

Examples of Boeing's F/A-18 on a U.S. aircraft carrier. One report says Ottawa has already decided to buy this aircraft type as an interim replacement for its aging CF-18s.

When asked if the company would sue the federal government if blocked from competing for the fighter jet contract, Crisler said the company would look at all of its options.

“Right now, all we want to do is to be able to compete,” Crisler said in a telephone interview.

“So if we get told that we’re not allowed to compete, then we’ll go and evaluate all of our alternatives at that point. But right now all we’re asking to do is be able to compete in a fair, open, transparent and requirements-based competition for the replacement of the CF-18s.”

The comments came amid a tumultuous two days in the House of Commons where the opposition parties attacked the Liberals over the path the government appears to be taking on a replacement for the CF-18s.

The Ottawa Citizen reported this week that cabinet had discussed buying the Super Hornets while officials seek a long-term replacement.

On Tuesday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau blamed the Conservatives for backing “a plane that does not work” and was a “long way from ever working” when peppered with questions about the F-35.

Crisler said Trudeau’s comments “couldn’t be further from the truth.” He said the U.S. Marines declared earlier this year that their fleet of F-35s is ready for combat, while the American air force is expected to make the same declaration by the end of 2016.

On Wednesday, the Conservatives questioned the Liberals about why they were reportedly sole-sourcing the purchase of the Super Hornets, rather than holding an open competition.

“I find it ironic and rich for the opposition to talk about an open-sourced, full competition considering they were going to be sole-sourcing the F-35,” Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan told the Commons. “No decision has been made, but we will be replacing the CF-18s.”

He said the government wanted to ensure that the procurement process ends with the military receiving the equipment it needs and that Canadian companies benefit as well.

“We will go through an appropriate evaluation and when I’m good and ready, our government will be announcing (the results) to this House,” Sajjan said.

The CF-18s, purchased in the 1980s, were designed to last for 20 years. Having been pressed years beyond that timeline, the previous Conservative government decided to spend $400 million to keep the jets flying until at least 2025.

Federal lobbying records show Boeing has had a dozen meetings with government officials between February and April, including with senior staff in the Prime Minister’s Office.

Those records show Lockheed Martin hasn’t been able to meet any federal officials on the CF-18 file.

However, Annie Trepanier, a spokeswoman for Public Services Minister Judy Foote, whose department oversees major military procurements, said company officials had a meeting with Foote’s office on April 21 and again on May 25, both about the CF-18 replacement.

Liberals cite CF-18 'capability gap' due to upgrades being in limbo

By: Murray Brewster, CBC News 

A nearly $500-million upgrade to the country's CF-18 jet fighters, ordered by the Harper government almost two years ago, is still under study by the military, an evaluation that won't be completed for another 16 months.

Capt. Alexandre Munoz, a spokesman for the air force, says the refurbishment, which is meant to keep the 1980s-vintage jets flying until 2025, is still in the "options analysis" phase.

The Conservatives directed the work be done in September 2014 as it released a series of independent reports on the failed bid to buy F-35 stealth fighters.

They deemed the program important and necessary to keep the jets out of retirement and to avoid a "capability gap" in the fighter fleet, which is considered a strategic military capability.

Despite that, Munoz conceded the process of analyzing how the extension would take place and what was required didn't get underway until September 2015.
International obligations lagging?

A spokesman for Procurement Services says no contract has been arranged for the work.

"As the Department of National Defence (DND) is working on requirements for the life extension of the CF-18s, no request for proposal has been issued and no contract has been awarded," said Jean-François Letourneau.

The new Liberal government recently resurrected the notion of a "capability gap" between fighter fleets and used it to justify their desire to take immediate action.

Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan stuck to that line on Wednesday, telling the House of Commons that the air force was "risk-managing a gap between our Norad and NATO commitments at this time."
'The state of the fleet is far worse than has been described because the upgrades haven't happened.'- George Petrolekas, Conference of Defence Associations Institute

That suggests Canada is struggling to meet its international obligations to both continental defence and overseas operations.

Up until just recently, both Liberal and Conservative governments, in tandem with the head of the air force, have insisted that the situation was under control, and a defence analyst said some tough questions need to be asked.

"It means the state of the fleet is far worse than has been described because the upgrades haven't happened," said retired colonel George Petrolekas, of the Conference of Defence Associations Institute.

The Trudeau government has been under fire all week after a published report suggested that cabinet was prepared to sole-source the purchase of an unknown number of Boeing Super Hornets as an interim measure in order to address the gap.
'It can't be that hard'

"I don't see the value of an interim purchase," said Petrolekas, who noted that acquiring interim jets would likely take between two and three years.

If the condition of the CF-18 fleet is that dire, he said: "Why not just go straight to the competition right now. It can't be that hard."

It has been suggested publicly that Canada would follow Australia's example and acquire Super Hornets until its order of F-35s is ready.

Petrolekas says it's an irrelevant example, because the circumstances of both countries are not the same.

The CF-18s, originally purchased in the mid-1980s, were given a $2.6-billion facelift about a decade ago, receiving new electronics and up-to-date targeting technology.

Depending upon the age of the aircraft, the "capability gap" that Sajjan refers to could mean several things. It might be needed to update the avionics, strengthen the airframe, and reinforce different stress points on the fighter so it can make high-speed turns.

It could also mean the air force is having trouble mustering the required number of jets because so many are in the shop for maintenance.

Petrolekas says he's been told the air force has been "husbanding" and conscious of gently flying the jets over the last several months.

Follow @Murray_Brewster on Twitter

Liberals playing defence with reports of Super Hornet Purchase

By: Lee Berthiaume & David Pugliese, Ottawa Citizen (Post Media) 

The Liberal government has brushed aside opposition concerns following a report it intends to purchase Super Hornet fighter jets, saying it must act “sooner rather than later” to meet the country’s defence needs.

But the opposition says the government has manufactured a crisis so it can fulfil its promise not to buy the F-35 stealth fighter.

The Ottawa Citizen, citing multiple sources, reported over the weekend the Liberal government is intent on buying Super Hornet fighter jets.

Rather than a full replacement of the air force’s aging CF-18 fighter fleet, it’s believed the purchase will be labelled an interim measure to fill what Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan has warned is a pending “gap” in Canada’s military capabilities.

The Liberals promised during the election campaign not to buy the F-35 to replace the CF-18s. But the government has been struggling with how to fulfill that promise for fear any attempt to exclude the stealth fighter from a competition will result in a multi-billion-dollar lawsuit, says a senior Defence Department official.

In the House of Commons Monday, Conservative defence critic James Bezan accused the Liberals of having already decided to buy the Boeing Super Hornet.

John McKay, Sajjan’s parliamentary secretary, didn’t deny the charge, but blamed the Conservatives for failing to deal with the fighter jet replacement during their tenure.

“Unfortunately, the last five years has been a bit of a loss, and as a consequence, there is a developing capability gap which needs to be managed,” McKay said. “We have obligations to NATO. We have obligations to NORAD. We have obligations to our own defence and to expeditionary matters.”

Sajjan has “taken the responsible action and he is moving forward with making a decision sooner rather than later, which should have happened maybe five years ago now.”

Bezan questioned the Liberal government’s claim the CF-18s are close to the end, pointing out they can operate effectively until 2025.

“Liberal suggestions that our fighters are literally on their last legs is patently false,” he said.

In 2014, the Conservative government said it was upgrading the CF-18s so they could continue to operate through 2025. That $400-million initiative was intended to buy the government time to make the right decision on a replacement.

The Royal Canadian Air Force is continuing to work on the project and contracts are expected to be awarded in the next two years.

In April, Lt.-Gen. Michael Hood, the air force chief, told the Commons’ defence committee the military had enough CF-18s to do its job for the foreseeable future.

The end of the CF-18s “useful life” has been established as 2025, and while some aircraft will be retired before that, there is no rush on a replacement, he added.

“I’m confident, heading into what the government has suggested for an open and transparent competition, about the timelines associated with that project,” Hood said. “I’m confident that if a decision were taken, certainly in the next five years, we’ll be in a comfortable position changing that aircraft.”

In the last month, Sajjan has introduced the idea that a fighter capability gap has emerged and the government needs to move quickly on a replacement jet.

McKay said the government finds itself in the situation “where we are going to have to make serious decisions about the replacement for the CF-18. We cannot any longer carry on in the fashion that we’ve been carrying on.”

There is precedent for buying Super Hornets on an interim basis. Australia paid $2.5 billion for 24 of the aircraft to replace antiquated F-111 jets until newer F-35s were ready.

However, the idea of Canada needing to follow suit was largely dismissed by a government-appointed expert panel and the military’s research branch.

The expert panel, whose mandate was to evaluate options for replacing the CF-18s, wrote in its final report in December 2014 “there was no need to pursue a bridging option,” as “it is possible, with certain investments, to fly the CF-18 to 2025 and even beyond.”

In 2014, Defence Research and Development Canada wrote ,“The costs involved with bridging options make them unsuitable for filling capability gaps in the short term … any short-term investment results in disproportionately high costs during the bridging period.”

The reason such a stop-gap would be more expensive is because the air force would be operating two types of aircraft, requiringdifferent training, infrastructure and supporting equipment. Opinion is divided over whether buying the Super Hornet could mitigate some of those costs given its similarities to the CF-18.

Sole-sourcing Super Hornets; Liberals now look identical to Tories on fighter file

By: John Invison, Post Media 

The idea that political power corrupts is hardly new: George Orwell chronicled its corrosive effects in penetrating fashion in Animal Farm.

The surprise is how short a time it has taken for the Liberals to become what they professed to despise.

Assuming Postmedia’s story predicting the Liberals will buy Boeing Super Hornet fighter jets to bridge a “capability gap” comes to pass — and I have every confidence it will — it signals a government that has lost its moorings.

John McKay, parliamentary secretary to the defence minister, told the House of Commons on Monday that a decision is coming “sooner, rather than later” and did not deny the government plans to sole-source the purchase of a small number of Super Hornets to supplement the aging CF-18 fighter fleet. Sources suggest a memorandum to cabinet on the subject will be presented to ministers on Tuesday.

The benefits in the short term for the Liberals are obvious — it postpones the need for a competition to replace the CF18s, a competition Lockheed Martin’s F-35 might win, unless it is specifically excluded, in which case, the company’s learned friends might take an interest in suing the government. (Lest you slept through last October, Trudeau’s Liberals promised not to buy the F-35.)

By sole-sourcing the Super Hornets, it pushes off the need for a competition into the next parliament.

Brilliant. Except it’s too clever by three-quarters.

While that plan might work for the Liberals in the short run, it will likely be an inflection point in their fortunes — the moment that many supporters became aware that they are just as contemptuous of process and the broader national interest as their predecessors.

By sole-sourcing the contract, they will be doing exactly what the Conservatives did when they chose the F-35 in the first place.

The only justification for sole-sourcing would be on national security grounds. But that is usually done when Canadian Forces are in theatre and need life-saving equipment quickly. That is not the case here.

It’s true that the CF-18s are reaching the end of their lifespan. But nobody talked about a “capability gap” until Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan did so in a speech last month.

Back in April, the commander of the Air Force, Lieut.-Gen. Michael Hood, told the House Defence committee that the end of the CF-18s’ useful life will be in 2025. “I’m confident, heading into what the government has suggested for an open and transparent competition, about the timelines associated with that project. I’m confident that if a decision were taken, certainly in the next five years, we’ll be in a comfortable position changing that aircraft.”

What is clear is that the purchase of Super Hornets will come with costs. Boeing has argued that buying from them will save the Department of National Defence half a billion dollars in infrastructure costs — the same hangars can be used to house the Super Hornet as the CF-18, and so on.


What is obvious is that this decision was not the military’s idea.

But the planes are not carbon copies and the new additions will mean the creation of a mixed fleet, something the RCAF has rejected on the grounds that it lowers capability and raises costs.

If part of the motivation is to free up money that can be diverted to the shipbuilding program, it would be interesting to first find out the full life cycle cost of operating two fleets.

What is obvious is that this decision was not the military’s idea.

Sajjan might roll out the example of the Australians as political cover. The Aussies also bought 24 Super Hornets to bridge a capability gap.

But they are absolutely committed to the F-35. In common with other countries that have a long-term vision of their defence needs, they know the Super Hornet will operate well into the 2030s but will be obsolete by the second half of the century.

Canada needs a fighter jet for the next 40 years.

The Liberal time horizon looks shorter — by, say, 37 years.

Related
Liberals planning to buy Super Hornet fighter jets before making final decision on F-35s, sources say
Matthew Fisher: Suitability for Arctic defence, lower cost may put F-35s on Liberals’ radar
Michael Byers: The F/A-18 Super Hornet — a better fighter jet

The interim solution avoids the embarrassing prospect of the F-35 winning an open competition. But the purchase of Canada’s first line of defence should not be predicated upon the Liberal party’s electoral prospects.

“It’s an horrific start for this government — no better than the previous government,” said Alan Williams, a former head of procurement at the Department of National Defence, who helped blow the whistle on the sole-sourcing of the CF-18 fighter jet replacement program. “It’s not good for the men and women in uniform, the taxpayer or the industrial benefits that flow to this country. I don’t care which plane they pick, but they should go through the front door.”

That’s the bottom line. The Canadian people, and their Armed Forces, deserve the straight goods — an open and transparent competition that ends up choosing the plane best suited to defending this country against all threats.

But it was always going to be this way. The balder and dash about doing politics differently was destined to be undone by the realities of governing — a Sisyphean task, made harder still by the party’s 219 campaign commitments.

The Liberals and Conservatives now look indistinguishable on this file, just as the creatures of Animal Farm eventually saw the pigs and the humans as tantamount: “[They] looked from pig to man and from man to pig; but already it was impossible to say which was which.”

RCAF Super Hornets - Difference between CF-18 and F/A-18 Super Hornet

With today's announcement that the Liberal Government will purchase an undisclosed number of Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornets as an interim replacement to Canada's CF-18 Hornet fleet; there have been a number of questions as to the differences between Canada's current Hornet's versus the new proposed "Super Hornets."

The Royal Canadian Air Force's current fleet of CF-18s were adapted from the American McDonnell-Douglas F/A-18 A/B variant.  In 1977, the Canadian government identified the need to replace the NATO-assigned CF-104 Starfighter, the NORAD-assigned CF-101 Voodoo and the CF-116 Freedom Fighter (also known as the CF-5).  The Canadian government originally purchased 138 CF-18s that were almost identical to the American F/A-18s with a few exceptions. The undercarriage of the CF-18s were painted with a false canopy - something the US Marines later adapted. 

The CF-18s were originally produced between 1982 and 1988. Of the original 138 purchased, the RCAF has 77 remaining. As of January 2016 - each CF-18 has flown close to 6,000 hours. The earliest models of the fleet are approaching 40 years of age; and with life-extension plans to keep them flying until 2025; the entire fleet will be older than 40. 

Boeing took over McDonnell-Douglas and developed the F/A-18 into the F/A18 E/F Super Hornet. The aircraft took its maiden flight in 1995, and went into service in 1999. While the two aircraft appear remarkably similar; it is actually a completely new air-frame - despite having 90% of its avionics in common with its older siblings.

The Super Hornet has 25% larger wings; is capable of carrying 33% more fuel; has 41% longer mission range; 35% more thrust; and 50% more endurance. The Super Hornet also has the ability to carry a heavier back-load; which increases the ordinance available. 

While the Super Hornet is obviously a larger aircraft that the CF-18 Hornet; its radar cross section is actually smaller - but it is still not "Stealth."

Simple scale version of the F/A-18 C/D (also based on the A/B which the CF-18s are modeled on) versus the F/A-18 E/F Super Hornet

The purchase of Super Hornets as an interim replacement is not a new idea. The Royal Australian Air Force purchased 24 Super Hornet's as a stop-gap measure until the F-35 Lighting is delivered; and so they can begin retiring some of their aging F-18's. The RAAF also purchased 12 EA-18 Growler aircraft ( a ground attack variant of the Super Hornet). The US Marines also ordered more Super Hornets while they wait for the F-35.

Here is a thought:  If Canada intends on future deployments of CF-18s against ground insurgencies (Kosovo, Iraq (1999), Libya, and Iraq (2014/16) perhaps a purchase of EA-18's should also be considered. This would mean fewer fighters could be purchased in any future purchase; and Canada could easily maintain a medium fleet of ground attack aircraft and a medium fleet of fighter aircraft instead of one large fleet of multi-role aircraft. 

Liberals to Purchase F/A-18 Super Hornet as Interim Replacement to CF-18

By: Lee Berthiaume, Ottawa Citizen 

The Liberal government is intent on buying Super Hornet fighter jets, according to multiple sources

Suggesting an urgent need to replace the CF-18 fleet due to difficulties in meeting NORAD and NATO requirements, and describing the purchase of Super Hornets as an interim measure, could allow the Liberals to make good on their promise not to buy the F-35 without sparking a legal battle.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s cabinet reportedly discussed the issue last week, and while no formal decision was taken, one top-level official said: “They have made up their minds and are working on the right narrative to support it."

Rather than a full replacement of the air force’s aging CF-18 fighter fleet, it’s believed the purchase will be labelled an interim measure to fill what Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan has warned is a pending “gap” in Canada’s military capabilities.

The Liberals promised during the election campaign not to buy the F-35 to replace the CF-18s. But the government has been struggling with how to fulfil that promise for fear any attempt to exclude the stealth fighter from a competition will result in a multi-billion-dollar lawsuit, according to one senior Defence Department official.

The current fleet size makes it difficult to do everything NORAD and NATO require. There is precedent for purchasing Super Hornets on an interim basis; Australia bought 24 of the aircraft about five years ago for $2.5 billion, to replace antiquated F-111 jets until newer F-35s were ready.

Sajjan, who recently visited Australia, warned last month that Canada’s CF-18s “need to be replaced now. And the fact they have not been replaced means we are facing a capability gap in the years ahead.” He indicated the government planned to move quickly.

An official in Sajjan’s office reiterated that sense of urgency on Saturday, saying the Royal Canadian Air Force has been “risk-managing” its fighter jet fleet.

“The government is working very hard on this file as it must because today the Canadian Armed Forces are risk-managing a gap between our NATO and NORAD obligations, and the number of planes we can put in the air on any given day,” the official said. “That capability gap is expected to grow in the years ahead, and that’s an unacceptable situation.”

The official added that the issue is a “very high priority for the government to chart a way forward in the very near future.”

Liberal suggestions that Canada’s CF18s are on their last legs appear to have come out of nowhere, after the previous Conservative government announced in 2014 that it was upgrading the CF-18s so they could continue to operate through 2025. That $400-million initiative was intended to buy the government time to make the right decision on a replacement. Defence analyst David Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute noted Canada originally bought 138 CF-18s, and is now down to fewer than 80 — all of which are aging.

“The current fleet size makes it difficult to do everything NORAD and NATO require,” he said.

But Perry noted that has been the case for years, including under the Conservatives. “This government seems to find the situation a lot more problematic than the last one did,” he said.

Suggesting there is an urgent need to replace the CF-18s, and then describing any purchase of Super Hornets as an interim measure could be one way for the Liberals to make good on their promise not to buy the F-35, without sparking a costly legal battle. The government could maintain that it still plans to hold a full competition to replace the CF-18s at a later, undetermined date.

There have long been suspicions that the Liberals have wanted to buy the Super Hornet. Aside from ruling out the F-35 during the election, officials have indicated that Canada all but has to buy an American-built plane, given the importance of joint continental defence with the U.S. That leaves the Super Hornet as the only alternative, given that the F-35’s other competitors — the Dassault Rafale, the Eurofighter Typhoon and the Saab Gripen — are all European.

The official in Sajjan’s office described reports of the government’s intention to buy the Super Hornet as “speculative,” insisting no decision has been made.

Meanwhile, the Liberals have also refused to publicly rule out buying the F-35 since winning the election. It’s believed that’s because they have realized that the U.S. aerospace giant responsible for building the stealth fighter, Lockheed Martin, could hit the government with a massive lawsuit.

There is reason for such a worry. Last month, a federal trade tribunal sided with an American company that felt it was treated unfairly during a competition to provide new trucks for the army. The tribunal called for the company’s design to be retested, and if it would have won, for the government to pay compensation.

In that competition, the winning company was paid $834 million, and the loser stands to gain tens of millions of dollars, if not hundreds of millions, in compensation following the tribunal’s ruling. In the case of the F-35, that figure could easily reach the billions — all of which would be covered by taxpayers.

Industry representatives warned there could be a fight if the government does move to purchase the Super Hornet, even if it’s labelled an interim measure. But one Defence Department official said the government might be able to sidestep legal questions by citing urgent national security needs.

Sajjan: CF-18's Need Replacement Now

By: Daniel Leblanc - The Globe and Mail 

Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan has pushed the purchase of new fighter jets to the top of his priority list, stating the current fleet of CF-18s can hardly fulfill its domestic and international mandates.

Minister of National Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan speaks at the CANSEC conference in Ottawa, Thursday May 26, 2016.
(Adrian Wyld/THE CANADIAN PRESS)

“Our fleet of CF-18s need to be replaced now. And the fact they have not been replaced means we are facing a capability gap in the years ahead,” Mr. Sajjan said in a speech on Thursday morning.

“Now, we did not create this issue. Unfortunately I inherited it, but it needs to be dealt with quickly,” he said, blaming the previous Conservative government for failing to buy a replacement plane.

Mr. Sajjan made the comments at the CANSEC defence and military trade show in Ottawa, where the world’s biggest aircraft manufacturers are lobbying federal officials on the merits of their respective product.

Lockheed Martin, which makes the F-35 stealth fighter, has a large presence at CANSEC, despite the Liberal Party’s promise in the last election not to buy its airplane.

Speaking to reporters, Mr. Sajjan refused to state whether any aircraft manufacturer will be prevented from bidding on the multi-billion-dollar contract.

“As I said from the get-go, right now my focus is on making sure that our men and women in the Air Force have the right capabilities and my focus is replacing the F-18s,” Mr. Sajjan said, refusing to lay out a specific timeline for the purchase.

Canada remains an official partner in the F-35 program, which has allowed Canadian firms to win contracts for the international production line. Still, Mr. Sajjan said that will not influence the government’s handling of the procurement process.

“This doesn’t mean that the F-35, we are going to be purchasing that,” he said. “I want to make sure that we do our due diligence before we make any decisions.”

In the last election campaign, Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau promised to opt for a more “affordable” aircraft than the stealth Lockheed Martin fighter jet.

“We will not buy the F-35 fighter jet,” said Mr. Trudeau, less than two months before he was sworn in as prime minister.

However, in his mandate letter to his lead ministers on the procurement file, Mr. Trudeau simply called on them to launch an open and transparent process to replace the CF-18s.

Mr. Sajjan said time is running short.

“Today, we are risk-managing a gap between our NORAD and NATO commitments and the number of fighters available for operations. In the 2020s, we can foresee a growing capability gap, and this, I find unacceptable and it’s one thing that we plan to fix,” the Minister of Defence said in his speech.

The CF-18s were designed to last 20 years when they were purchased in the 1980s. The planes will now be used for twice as long, lasting into the 2020s, Mr. Sajjan said.

More than two dozen protestors blocked one of the main entrances to the CANSEC trade show on Thursday, denouncing the Liberal government for approving the sale of Canadian-made light armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia. Letting only a few cars enter the facility every minute, the protestors sang songs such as Solidarity Forever and carried banners stating “Canadians Say No To Sending Weapons To Saudi Arabia.”

“He’s putting a Liberal face on the sale of weapons of destruction,” protestor Joel Harden said of Mr. Sajjan. “The Liberals can’t wash their hands of this.”

Still, inside the trade show, Mr. Sajjan toured the booth of General Dynamics Land Systems, which featured a LAV 6.0 vehicle that can be used for humanitarian work.

“That’s great,” Mr. Sajjan said as he was briefed by a GDLS official on the capabilities of the vehicle.

Window Slowly Closing on Availability of Super-Hornet

By: David Pugliese, Defence Watch

The Liberals promised that if elected they would begin an immediate competition to purchase a replacement aircraft for the CF-18 fighter jet.

Public Services and Procurement Canada has created a new office to oversee that purchase. But there hasn’t been a lot of movement on the file. Instead, work is proceeding on the modernization program to keep the CF-18s flying until 2025.

Boeing’s Super Hornet is seen as a top contender if and when the Canadian government actually begins the process to replace the CF-18.

But with the Canadian procurement system notoriously slow, can Boeing hold out the years (potentially) it will take before Canada is ready to award a contract? The issue, according to defence analysts, is the lack of new orders for Super Hornets and whether Boeing can keep its production line going until Canada is ready to purchase a new fighter.

As it searches for more customers, the company has slowed Super Hornet production to just two aircraft per month in hopes additional orders will extend production into the 2020s, reports my former Defense News colleague Marcus Weisgerber (Marcus is now global business editor at Defense One).

Boeing Super-Hornet Assembly plant, 2008. Boeing is currently just producing 2 aircraft per month. Without new orders, Boeing plans to end production in 2018. Something Canada needs to consider when choosing a new fighter; the availability of spare parts. (Photo: Boeing) 

The U.S. has already purchased more Super Hornets and EA-18G Growlers (the electronic attack versions of the Super Hornet) for the U.S Navy.

But without new orders, Super Hornet and Growler production would end in 2018, Dan Gillian, the Boeing vice president who oversees both aircraft, told Weisgerber.

There are potential orders in the wings. Kuwait wants to buy 28 aircraft but the Obama administration has yet to approve the deal. The U.S. Navy wants at least 30 more Super Hornets but so far money has been made available for only two.

Boeing sees the Kuwait deal as a key bridge to keeping the Super Hornet line open and potentially receiving an order from Canada, noted Weisgerber.

CF-18 Life-Extension Risks; Canada looks to fly fighters past the age of 40.

By: Daniel Maillet, CAF Dispatch author
April 25, 2016

As Canada's Defence Review gets started the debate as to which fighter should replace the Royal Canadian Air Force's aging CF-18 Hornet's continues - despite the fact that much of the budget for their replacement has been postponed until after 2021. Something that could cause major problems for the RCAF.

The CF-18s are going through another life extension to keep the fleet air-worthy until 2025; but that is based on a 5 year acquisition rate of a new fighter; which would mean a contract awarded sometime soon - and not in 2021-2022 as the current budget figures would seem to show. According to senior members of the RCAF; if the current life extension is not complete by 2021, it is not economically viable - as more upgrades will be needed. Just because this extension date is 2025 - does not mean the fleet will be retired in 2025; but the risks get much higher when flying a combat aircraft over 40 years old. If the entire fleet is retired in 2025, the oldest aircraft will be 43 years old.

But according to the RCAF plans are in place for a 2025-2030 life expectancy plan for the ageing CF-18s.



The CF-18 Hornet entered service in 1982 as a multirole fighter/interceptor replacement for the CF-5 Freedom Fighter, the CF-101 Voodoo and the CF-104 Starfighter. The Hornet fleet’s Estimated Life Expectancy (ELE) was initially set to 2003, which represented a service life of 20 years after the declaration of Initial Operational Capability. This value was based upon projected initial usage when calculated against the original equipment manufacturer’s certified design life.

In the case of the CF-18 fleet, early structural lifing concerns led to the implementation of a structural fatigue life management program (FLMP) in 1988, and a collaborative full-scale structural fatigue test program with the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) to re-certify the CF-18’s design life based on Canadian and Australian usage. This collaborative effort was known as the International Follow-on Structural Test Program (IFOSTP) and was completed in 2006. Results from this test program formed the basis from which the CF-18 Hornet’s structural Life Extension Program (LEP) was developed. As the aircraft’s structural life is an airworthiness limitation, it is an important factor in calculating a realistic ELE.

The implementation of the FLMP, a LEP tailored to Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) usage requirements, changes to how the CF-18 was flown, and reductions in the planned yearly flying rate (YFR) over the years have all combined to extend the CF-18’s projected physical life.  The CF-18 ELE was extended to 2020 with an assumed three-year overlapping transition window to a new fighter (i.e. 2017-2020) following an extensive study first started in 2004. 

The problem however, is the RCAF has now entered this period; and no replacement has been chosen. Therefore, the CF-18 ELE has once again been examined to determine if it can be viably extended beyond 2020. The analysis for this report assessed the option of extending the CF-18 ELE to 2025 and 2030, using a new five year overlapping transition window to a new fighter.

An ELE of 2020-2025 represents a target beyond which significant structural investments will be required to maintain the fleet’s airworthiness. As such, it represents an ELE extension for modest cost while still resulting in reasonably low to moderate technical and operational risk respectively.

An ELE of 2025-2030 represents a technically feasible albeit risky stretch target. It would require the entire fleet to undergo the Control Point 3 (CP3) Life Extension Program (LEP) along with other significant structural refurbishment investments. This option is a high risk solution, from both a technical and operational perspective.

The operational relevance of the CF-18 Hornet is assured until 2020. Based on the analysis conducted during the Operational Analysis phase of the Next Generation Fighter Capability (NGFC) project, the modernized CF-18 avionics suite remains compliant with the current interoperability requirements of other Canadian services and allies until 2020. However, beyond 2020, some core CF-18 avionics systems will need to be upgraded.

The CF-18 was a leading edge state-of-the-art fighter when it was introduced in the 1980s and it gradually fell behind over time until during the Kosovo conflict it had reached the ‘back edge’ of coalition capability. The capability upgrades over the last 10 years have resulted in the CF-18 again being near the ‘front edge’ during the 2011 Libya operations. This capability has once again  began to erode over the remainder of the Hornet’s service life as technology continues to evolve.

CF-18 fleet size has decreased 44% since the aircraft were purchased due to attrition (operational losses due to accidents) and the management decision to retire older configuration aircraft which would have required significant NRE costs to modernize to the current configuration. Current fleet size is sufficient to meet CFDS commitments; however the flexibility to withdraw significant numbers of aircraft for required upgrades has decreased significantly. Any decision to pursue lengthy and complex upgrades would result in a commitment-capability gap.

With the above information; it would seem that the Canadian Government needs to move forward on a replacement for the CF-18s, or else Canada risks entering a period with a higher attrition rate of older aircraft and a significant capabilities gap in our areal defences.

Sources: 

CF-18 Estimated Life Expectancy