By Tim Naumetz, iPolitics
The planned government acquisition of a new fleet of 88 fighter jets will not be completed with full operational capability until 2031 – 14 years after defence and procurement officials launched the project last December.
A timetable for the acquisition that was shared with aerospace industry representatives at an industry event on Jan. 22 confirms there will be at least four years of information exchanges with potential suppliers and contract bidders before a contract award in either 2021 or 2022.
Following another two-years set-up phase for aspects involving infrastructure, future maintenance, facility development, operations and “initial cadre training” at the “host nation” producing the aircraft, the first aircraft delivery is scheduled for 2025.
After that, another six years are slated for gradual acquisition of the fleet and pilot training, with an acquisition average of at least 12 jets each year and “steady state full operational capacity” in 2031.
By then, three federal elections will have been held since the project’s launch in December 2017.
2031 is also the year the timetable projects for the retirement of what remains of Canada’s legacy fleet of CF-18 hornets – already upgraded and modernized several times since their acquisition under the government of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau in the 1980s.
A military expert says the time frame would be routine for a project of similar scope and complexity, but the CF-18 replacement project has been in the works since at least 2007.
“If you’re looking at a project of that degree and complexity, from a genuine start point 14 years is probably not at all out of the ordinary,” said David Perry, senior analyst and a vice-president of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute.
“But the thing is, this file did not start on December 12. The previous government did an exhaustive review of options. The clock on this starts at least a decade ago,”
All of the aircraft from five different companies in Europe and the United States who have been invited to compete underwent a thorough market analysis under the Conservatives. The Harper government suspended its plan to acquire 65 Lockheed-Martin F-35 warplanes following a raging controversy after the 2011 federal election.
“All timelines are estimated and subject to change,” the briefing document said, a copy of which was obtained by iPolitics.
National Defence and Procurement Canada officials at the project’s launch last Dec. 12 said the acquisition is expected to cost between $15 billion and $19 billion, not counting infrastructure, training, other development aspects and sustainment through the fleet’s lifetime.
The estimate works out to an expected cost of between $170 million and $216 million per fighter jet with a fleet of 88.
Showing posts with label F-35 and Canada. Show all posts
Showing posts with label F-35 and Canada. Show all posts
Friday, February 16, 2018
Tuesday, September 19, 2017
RCAF Fighter Replacement Reaching New Depths
By: David Bercuson
The government’s initiative to replace Canada’s long-serving CF-18s with a new jet fighter (88 of them according to the June defence policy paper) is reaching new depths of hilarity.
Canadian governments have known for almost two decades that the day of the CF-18 is almost over. Stalwart aircraft, the fighter jets have been updated at least twice – but there is only so much that can be done with an obsolete airframe, and it is time for Canada to join virtually all its allies in updating to a new and much more modern jet.
But Prime Minister Trudeau declared during his election campaign that Canada would never, ever buy the Lockheed-Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter – a solemn election declaration based on zero facts – and he is now in a very delicate situation.
Sometime last year, the government suddenly decided that the current CF-18 fleet (which was supposed to last at least another five years after its last update) was no longer viable, and that the air force needed a quick “gap filler” to fulfill Canada’s NORAD commitments between now and whenever the government actually decides which aircraft it will pick for a wholesale replacement of the CF-18. And when would that be? Why, after the next election, of course, when the Trudeau pledge would be forgotten and Canada could follow virtually every one of its major allies – especially the United States – and purchase the F-35.
Why wait until after the next election? In truth, there is no reason under the sun to take up to four years (the Liberal proposal) to hold a fighter competition. First of all, the F-35 is the only fighter aircraft (aside from the very advanced F-22, which is unavailable for export) the U.S. will be flying for at least the next three decades. Second, there have been at least a dozen countries that have picked the F-35 in their own competitions, and third, because almost all of Canada’s allies have selected the F-35 already.
In any case, what to do about filling the "gap" that the government suddenly decided exists between our CF-18s and the next fighter? Initially the government decided early this year to buy 18 Boeing F-18 Super Hornets. These fighters are somewhat larger and more capable than their CF-18 predecessors, and are flown almost exclusively by the U.S. Navy and by Australia. The Aussies bought them to fill a gap between their old F-18s and their new F-35s which will soon be delivered. Israel and Japan are, right now, taking delivery of their F-35s and other countries will soon begin to receive theirs.
Not long after the Liberal government announced it was going to acquire the Super Hornets, Boeing brought a case to the United States trade commissioner complaining that the new Bombardier single-aisle jetliner was being “dumped” in the United States at artificially low prices. Ottawa took umbrage and has, at least for now, quashed its deal with Boeing.
How then to “fill the gap”? Last week Canada sent representatives to Australia to check out the Royal Australian Air Force’s fire sale of its old F-18s because the Aussies are about to take delivery of their new F-35s. So, Canada is ready to lay cash on the line in “Hairy Harry’s Hornet sale” to buy airplanes to “fill the gap” that are as old as the fighters we are flying now. They can probably buy a few hundred bins of spare parts while they are at it. Maybe we will rummage around some Australian airfields to pick the best old set of wings here and the best old engine there so that we can make one flyable plane out three or four old ones that are not so flyable.
The whole situation has become a vast tragicomedy of errors, and it's beginning to look as silly as the decades-long effort (now finally coming to a conclusion) to replace the 1960s era Sea Kings. All because of a partisan political announcement by a man aspiring to become prime minister who knew nothing about the issues.
The government’s initiative to replace Canada’s long-serving CF-18s with a new jet fighter (88 of them according to the June defence policy paper) is reaching new depths of hilarity.
Canadian governments have known for almost two decades that the day of the CF-18 is almost over. Stalwart aircraft, the fighter jets have been updated at least twice – but there is only so much that can be done with an obsolete airframe, and it is time for Canada to join virtually all its allies in updating to a new and much more modern jet.
But Prime Minister Trudeau declared during his election campaign that Canada would never, ever buy the Lockheed-Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter – a solemn election declaration based on zero facts – and he is now in a very delicate situation.
Sometime last year, the government suddenly decided that the current CF-18 fleet (which was supposed to last at least another five years after its last update) was no longer viable, and that the air force needed a quick “gap filler” to fulfill Canada’s NORAD commitments between now and whenever the government actually decides which aircraft it will pick for a wholesale replacement of the CF-18. And when would that be? Why, after the next election, of course, when the Trudeau pledge would be forgotten and Canada could follow virtually every one of its major allies – especially the United States – and purchase the F-35.
Why wait until after the next election? In truth, there is no reason under the sun to take up to four years (the Liberal proposal) to hold a fighter competition. First of all, the F-35 is the only fighter aircraft (aside from the very advanced F-22, which is unavailable for export) the U.S. will be flying for at least the next three decades. Second, there have been at least a dozen countries that have picked the F-35 in their own competitions, and third, because almost all of Canada’s allies have selected the F-35 already.
In any case, what to do about filling the "gap" that the government suddenly decided exists between our CF-18s and the next fighter? Initially the government decided early this year to buy 18 Boeing F-18 Super Hornets. These fighters are somewhat larger and more capable than their CF-18 predecessors, and are flown almost exclusively by the U.S. Navy and by Australia. The Aussies bought them to fill a gap between their old F-18s and their new F-35s which will soon be delivered. Israel and Japan are, right now, taking delivery of their F-35s and other countries will soon begin to receive theirs.
Not long after the Liberal government announced it was going to acquire the Super Hornets, Boeing brought a case to the United States trade commissioner complaining that the new Bombardier single-aisle jetliner was being “dumped” in the United States at artificially low prices. Ottawa took umbrage and has, at least for now, quashed its deal with Boeing.
How then to “fill the gap”? Last week Canada sent representatives to Australia to check out the Royal Australian Air Force’s fire sale of its old F-18s because the Aussies are about to take delivery of their new F-35s. So, Canada is ready to lay cash on the line in “Hairy Harry’s Hornet sale” to buy airplanes to “fill the gap” that are as old as the fighters we are flying now. They can probably buy a few hundred bins of spare parts while they are at it. Maybe we will rummage around some Australian airfields to pick the best old set of wings here and the best old engine there so that we can make one flyable plane out three or four old ones that are not so flyable.
The whole situation has become a vast tragicomedy of errors, and it's beginning to look as silly as the decades-long effort (now finally coming to a conclusion) to replace the 1960s era Sea Kings. All because of a partisan political announcement by a man aspiring to become prime minister who knew nothing about the issues.
Monday, June 12, 2017
Liberals Might be Changing Course on Interim Fighter Purchase
By: David Pugliese, Defence Watch
The Liberal government seems to be ready to change course on the interim fighter jet replacement program.
Last week Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan said Canada was still in discussions with the U.S. government over the purchase of Boeing Super Hornets as an interim fighter jet. This was despite the government’s anger and disappointment with Boeing who has filed a complaint about Bombardier.
Steven MacKinnon, parliamentary secretary to Public Services and Procurement Minister Judy Foote, also told journalists that despite the Boeing complaint, the Liberal government was not talking to any other fighter jet companies. (But it had broken off any discussions with Boeing itself).
Now the interim fighter jet project looks like it could change again. Sajjan has suggested other fighter aircraft options could be examined. He told CTV’s Evan Solomon that, “Right now we are looking at many different options.”
“Keep in mind this all just happened,” he said in the interview with Solomon. “It does take time to be able to develop some various options.”
“We are committed to making sure that we have this capability gap filled,” Sajjan added.
When the Liberals announced that they would buy the Super Hornet as an interim fighter jet they argued that the plane was selected because a U.S. fighter was needed for the role. No other country could provide the needed aircraft, was the argument.
So based that, these new options Sajjan is looking at would only come down to something like the F-35 (which Prime Minister Justin Trudeau promised Canada would not purchase) or perhaps another U.S.-built fighter jet.
Is Sajjan bluffing? Would Canada buy 18 F-35s on an interim basis?
The Liberal government seems to be ready to change course on the interim fighter jet replacement program.
Last week Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan said Canada was still in discussions with the U.S. government over the purchase of Boeing Super Hornets as an interim fighter jet. This was despite the government’s anger and disappointment with Boeing who has filed a complaint about Bombardier.
Steven MacKinnon, parliamentary secretary to Public Services and Procurement Minister Judy Foote, also told journalists that despite the Boeing complaint, the Liberal government was not talking to any other fighter jet companies. (But it had broken off any discussions with Boeing itself).
Now the interim fighter jet project looks like it could change again. Sajjan has suggested other fighter aircraft options could be examined. He told CTV’s Evan Solomon that, “Right now we are looking at many different options.”
“Keep in mind this all just happened,” he said in the interview with Solomon. “It does take time to be able to develop some various options.”
“We are committed to making sure that we have this capability gap filled,” Sajjan added.
When the Liberals announced that they would buy the Super Hornet as an interim fighter jet they argued that the plane was selected because a U.S. fighter was needed for the role. No other country could provide the needed aircraft, was the argument.
So based that, these new options Sajjan is looking at would only come down to something like the F-35 (which Prime Minister Justin Trudeau promised Canada would not purchase) or perhaps another U.S.-built fighter jet.
Is Sajjan bluffing? Would Canada buy 18 F-35s on an interim basis?
Tuesday, September 20, 2016
Liberals accused of hijacking report recommending CF-18 Replacement and BMD Debate
Lee Berthiaume, The Canadian Press
OTTAWA — Opposition parties have accused the Liberals of hijacking a committee report that recommended buying new fighter jets within a year and re-opening the debate over ballistic missile defence.
The House of Commons defence committee on Monday released the results of a two-month study into the defence of Canada and North America that had been requested by Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan as part of the Liberal government's plan to publish a new defence policy.
Three of the 13 recommendations contained in the final report deal specifically with replacing the Royal Canadian Air Force's aging fleet of CF-18 fighter jets, including one calling on the government to decide on a replacement "within the next 12 months."
Another recommendation lays down a number of criteria for the new warplane, including compatibility with the air force's existing infrastructure and "well-defined" costs that won't shortchange other military projects.
The Liberals promised during last year's election not to buy the F-35 stealth fighter, and redirect any savings back into new warships for the navy.
The report also calls on the government to "reconsider Canada's position with regard to ballistic missile defence (BMD) in the context of Canada's defence priorities and limited financial resources."
But in dissenting opinions attached at the end, both Conservative and NDP committee members accused the Liberals of having written the report and recommendations without opposition input.
"No opposition members were present for the final stages of drafting," the Conservatives wrote.
"Some members of the committee, with the tyranny of the majority, rushed through the final stages of the draft report, which included making recommendations and established the short deadline for the dissenting opinions for opposition members."
Conservative committee members alleged the final report simply reflects the Liberal government's political agenda with regards to defence, a charge echoed by the NDP.
"The committee report marshals evidence to bolster the Liberal decision to sole-source the purchase of Super Hornets, their desire to reposition Canada's current fighter jets, and their attempt to justify participation in the U.S. missile defence program," the NDP wrote.
The Liberals have said they need to replace the CF-18s quickly to avoid a shortage of aircraft. Opposition parties, however, have accused the government of manufacturing a crisis to justify buying a fighter jet other than the F-35 without a competition.
The report released Monday is the second in as many years from the Commons' defence committee dealing with defending North America. The first, published in June 2015, received unanimous approval from all committee members.
- Follow @leeberthiaume on Twitter.
OTTAWA — Opposition parties have accused the Liberals of hijacking a committee report that recommended buying new fighter jets within a year and re-opening the debate over ballistic missile defence.
The House of Commons defence committee on Monday released the results of a two-month study into the defence of Canada and North America that had been requested by Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan as part of the Liberal government's plan to publish a new defence policy.
Three of the 13 recommendations contained in the final report deal specifically with replacing the Royal Canadian Air Force's aging fleet of CF-18 fighter jets, including one calling on the government to decide on a replacement "within the next 12 months."
Another recommendation lays down a number of criteria for the new warplane, including compatibility with the air force's existing infrastructure and "well-defined" costs that won't shortchange other military projects.
The Liberals promised during last year's election not to buy the F-35 stealth fighter, and redirect any savings back into new warships for the navy.
The report also calls on the government to "reconsider Canada's position with regard to ballistic missile defence (BMD) in the context of Canada's defence priorities and limited financial resources."
But in dissenting opinions attached at the end, both Conservative and NDP committee members accused the Liberals of having written the report and recommendations without opposition input.
"No opposition members were present for the final stages of drafting," the Conservatives wrote.
"Some members of the committee, with the tyranny of the majority, rushed through the final stages of the draft report, which included making recommendations and established the short deadline for the dissenting opinions for opposition members."
Conservative committee members alleged the final report simply reflects the Liberal government's political agenda with regards to defence, a charge echoed by the NDP.
"The committee report marshals evidence to bolster the Liberal decision to sole-source the purchase of Super Hornets, their desire to reposition Canada's current fighter jets, and their attempt to justify participation in the U.S. missile defence program," the NDP wrote.
The Liberals have said they need to replace the CF-18s quickly to avoid a shortage of aircraft. Opposition parties, however, have accused the government of manufacturing a crisis to justify buying a fighter jet other than the F-35 without a competition.
The report released Monday is the second in as many years from the Commons' defence committee dealing with defending North America. The first, published in June 2015, received unanimous approval from all committee members.
- Follow @leeberthiaume on Twitter.
Friday, June 10, 2016
Lockheed may shift F-35 fighter work away from Canada
By: ANDREA SHALAL, Berlin, Reuters
Top U.S. weapons maker Lockheed Martin Corp is studying whether to shift work on its multibillion-dollar F-35 fighter jet away from Canadian firms amid uncertainty over Ottawa’s plans to buy the jet.
Jack Crisler, Lockheed’s vice president of business development for the F-35 program, told Reuters Lockheed was under pressure from other partner countries that had placed firm orders or accelerated orders to shift more work to them.
“This is not anything punitive. It is just business,” he said in a telephone interview from the Netherlands, where the F-35 will fly in its first international air show on Saturday.
Canadian firms will account for development and production work on the F-35 program worth about $1 billion by the end of 2016, Crisler said.
But future work could be in jeopardy if Canada decides to skip a competition and order F/A-18E/F fighter jets built by rival Boeing Co, as indicated by recent Canadian media reports, he said.
A spokeswoman for Canada’s defense ministry said the reports were not accurate, but gave no further information.
Crisler said Lockheed had been unable to secure a meeting with the Canadian government to discuss the issue.
He said F-35 supply chain contracts were competitively awarded in rough proportion to the purchase plans of the nine original partner countries that helped fund development of the radar-evading jet: the United States, Britain, Canada, Turkey, Italy, Norway, the Netherlands, Australia and Denmark.
Canada’s ruling Liberals won an election last October on a promise not to buy F-35s because the planes were too expensive. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told the House of Commons the opposition Conservatives had “clung to a plane that does not work and is far from being able to work.”
Joe DellaVedova, a spokesman for the Pentagon’s F-35 office, said Canada remained a partner in the $379 billion program, and U.S. officials continued to provide the Canadian government information about the jets as they decided how to proceed.
More than 180 of the new jets are now flying, including an initial squadron of U.S. Marine Corps F-35 jets that were declared ready for combat a year ago, he said.
Crisler said if Canada held an open competition, Lockheed would retain contracts with Canadian firms, but it would need to rethink if Ottawa opted for a sole-source deal with Boeing.
“We are evaluating all that now,” he said. “The most important thing is that we’ve got to protect the enterprise as we get ready to ramp up production.”
However, in a note to clients on Friday, Macquarie analyst Konark Gupta questioned Lockheed’s rhetoric, noting that the company recently awarded long-term F-35 contracts to another Canadian supplier.
“(This) suggests to us that Lockheed could simply be threatening Canada to win an F-35 order,” Gupta wrote.
Sixty Canadian firms had worked on the F-35 development program, and 70 others are now involved in production of the jets, including Magellan Aerospace, Crisler said.
Canadian firms involved urged Ottawa on Thursday to hold a fair and open competition to replace its aging fleet of CF-18 fighter jets. Their supply contracts, they wrote in the joint statement, were contingent on Canada buying the F-35.
“Not selecting the F-35 will set off a chain of events that will see hundreds of millions of investment dollars lost, and high-tech jobs leaving Canada, going to countries who are buying the F-35,” they said.
Top U.S. weapons maker Lockheed Martin Corp is studying whether to shift work on its multibillion-dollar F-35 fighter jet away from Canadian firms amid uncertainty over Ottawa’s plans to buy the jet.
Jack Crisler, Lockheed’s vice president of business development for the F-35 program, told Reuters Lockheed was under pressure from other partner countries that had placed firm orders or accelerated orders to shift more work to them.
 |
| In this July 7, 2006, file photo, the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is shown after it was unveiled in a ceremony in Fort Worth, Texas. (Matthew Otero/THE ASSOCIATED PRESS) |
Canadian firms will account for development and production work on the F-35 program worth about $1 billion by the end of 2016, Crisler said.
But future work could be in jeopardy if Canada decides to skip a competition and order F/A-18E/F fighter jets built by rival Boeing Co, as indicated by recent Canadian media reports, he said.
A spokeswoman for Canada’s defense ministry said the reports were not accurate, but gave no further information.
Crisler said Lockheed had been unable to secure a meeting with the Canadian government to discuss the issue.
He said F-35 supply chain contracts were competitively awarded in rough proportion to the purchase plans of the nine original partner countries that helped fund development of the radar-evading jet: the United States, Britain, Canada, Turkey, Italy, Norway, the Netherlands, Australia and Denmark.
Canada’s ruling Liberals won an election last October on a promise not to buy F-35s because the planes were too expensive. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told the House of Commons the opposition Conservatives had “clung to a plane that does not work and is far from being able to work.”
Joe DellaVedova, a spokesman for the Pentagon’s F-35 office, said Canada remained a partner in the $379 billion program, and U.S. officials continued to provide the Canadian government information about the jets as they decided how to proceed.
More than 180 of the new jets are now flying, including an initial squadron of U.S. Marine Corps F-35 jets that were declared ready for combat a year ago, he said.
Crisler said if Canada held an open competition, Lockheed would retain contracts with Canadian firms, but it would need to rethink if Ottawa opted for a sole-source deal with Boeing.
“We are evaluating all that now,” he said. “The most important thing is that we’ve got to protect the enterprise as we get ready to ramp up production.”
However, in a note to clients on Friday, Macquarie analyst Konark Gupta questioned Lockheed’s rhetoric, noting that the company recently awarded long-term F-35 contracts to another Canadian supplier.
“(This) suggests to us that Lockheed could simply be threatening Canada to win an F-35 order,” Gupta wrote.
Sixty Canadian firms had worked on the F-35 development program, and 70 others are now involved in production of the jets, including Magellan Aerospace, Crisler said.
Canadian firms involved urged Ottawa on Thursday to hold a fair and open competition to replace its aging fleet of CF-18 fighter jets. Their supply contracts, they wrote in the joint statement, were contingent on Canada buying the F-35.
“Not selecting the F-35 will set off a chain of events that will see hundreds of millions of investment dollars lost, and high-tech jobs leaving Canada, going to countries who are buying the F-35,” they said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)