# Liberals preparing to buy second-best helicopter



## bossi (9 Apr 2003)

In my PERSONAL opinion, the federal Liberal party is preparing to purchase ANOTHER inferior helicopter for the CF.

No surprise here - the Gryphon is already proving itself to be nearly useless for international operations (i.e. once you bolt on some armour to this CIVILIAN pattern helicopter, it is incapable of taking off unless it‘s empty ... but then what good is a chopper without payload or fuel ... and who the ****  spells it "GRIFFON" anyway?  I‘m leery of deliberate illiteration ... but, I digress ... no need to slag the rocket scientist spin doctors here ...)

It is painfully obvious the CF would benefit from a common navy/army/airforce fleet of EH-101 helicopters, capable of operating at much higher altitudes than Marcel Masse‘s Griffons (oh, did I mention they were built in Marcel‘s riding ... ?)  

However, the federal Liberal political advisors wearing red suspenders, unaccountable to the electorate because they‘re paid by the party and not taxpayers, and addicted to the polls, would attempt to dupe the unsuspecting Canadian public into believing another piece of crap helicopter would be just peachy (but politically correct, since it includes Membertou).  After all, who cares if it‘s too small and underpowered to do anything meaningful - unlike other armies and air forces who operate Chinooks, CH53‘s, Puma‘s, etc. ... (oh, sorry - I forgot - the only people who really care are the suckers who have to fly them, or ride in them, and their opinion doesn‘t matter to the smarmy political advisor pukes in red suspenders ... grrr ...)

Pity.
Here‘s an indication of what‘s to come.
BOHICA.

Lockheed Martin Canada and Eurocopter seek navy helicopter contract

Canadian Press 
Tuesday, April 08, 2003 

OTTAWA (CP) - Lockheed Martin Canada and Eurocopter Canada have teamed with a group of smaller Canadian firms to promote the NH-90 helicopter as a replacement for the aging Sea Kings used aboard Canadian warships. 

The formal announcement of the partnership comes Wednesday. Lockheed Martin Canada is a unit of Lockheed Martin Corp. of the United States, the world‘s largest defence company. Eurocopter is a subsidiary of a European firm. 

While Eurocopter offers the NH-90 as the basic aircraft, Lockheed and the other team members will provide the mission systems and integrate them into the helicopter. 

Until last December, the federal government had planned to sign two contracts: one for the chopper and the other for the electronics and other systems. But it changed that after years of protest from the aerospace industry and is now going with a single tender. 

The government announced three years ago that it would spend about $3.1 billion for 28 helicopters to replace the Sea King fleet. It wants the first helicopter delivered by late 2005, although it has yet to sign the key contracts. 

Prime Minister Jean Chretien and his Liberals have been criticized for years for not acting fast enough to replace the Sea Kings, which were built in the 1960s. 

When he took office in 1993, Chretien cancelled a contract signed by the previous Conservative government to replace the choppers, saying it was too expensive. 

Lockheed has already signed up a team including xwave, LearnStream Inc, Honeywell, Provincial Airlines, Northstar Network Inc., and Membertou, an aboriginal firm based in Nova Scotia. The team will provide mission systems as well as engineering and in-service support to the new fleet.


----------



## SpinDoc (9 Apr 2003)

Just to help put things into a bit of perspective:

Maritime Helicopter Candidates 

(Frankly, I couldn‘t tell you which one is best)


----------



## bossi (9 Apr 2003)

The EH-101/Merlin/whatever has de-icing feature on rotors - others don‘t (but, who cares about this when you‘re flying over the North Atlantic in February ... ?  Chretien and his fart-catchers don‘t.)

The EH-101/Merlin/whatever has three engines, the others only have two (but, who cares about having a third engine when you‘re flying over the North Atlantic in February ...?  Chretien and his fart-catchers don‘t.)

My engineer buddies tell me the NH-90 is an engineering nightmare.

My chopper buddies tell me the Sikorsky is over-priced for what is offered.

But, I‘m not an expert (and neither are the red suspender-wearing fart-catchers in the PMO‘s office, but that doesn‘t stop them from trying to subvert a decision that will impact upon the lives and safety of CF personnel ... and heaven forbid we ever, ever achieve the economy of commonality of airframe amongst the three services ...

Thanks for the link - it‘s informative.


----------



## RoyalHighlander (9 Apr 2003)

MAybe they could build the GOOD choppers in some ones riding here under contract. Maybe we could get a decent one then??


----------



## Korus (9 Apr 2003)

The reason the CF isn‘t going to get the Commorants, is because Chretien would have to admit that he made a mistake in canceling the Commorants in the first place.


----------



## Jason Jarvis (9 Apr 2003)

While it‘s true that the Liberals could decide not to purchase the Cormorant because of the face they would lose, I have my fingers crossed that the PM‘s obsession with protecting his reputation and legacy might just work in the CF‘s favour -- does he really want to be the PM that  *really* screwed the military (which I believe someone else pointed out recently, too)?

I suspect that what will happen is that the government will delay making the decision until this time next year.  McCallum seems to be listening to the military, and I would hope that he would fight to get the Cormorants, even if that means waiting until Chretien retires. He‘s an excellent economist, and I have to believe that the cost-savings inherent with a homogenous medium helicopter fleet would definitely appeal to him.

Sounds funny, eh? Fighting to delay. . . .   

Now, if we could just find some money for army Cormorants and some armed recce helos. . . .


----------



## onecat (10 Apr 2003)

Man, only in Canada can we look forward to a new PM that won‘t be elected because it bought the liberal vote.  Then once he‘s PM, to certian he‘ll stay our PM because your system sucks, and is so out of date and totally un-democratic.  What will it take to get a gov‘t in power that will change the system so your vote actually counts no matter where you live and no matter who vote for.

We need Regime change!!!!!!

I hope we get the EH-101‘s, but Jean doesn‘t care if he‘s remembered as the PM who F*** the Forces.  He‘s a liberal and they just care about national defence.


----------



## RoyalHighlander (12 Apr 2003)

> We need Regime change!!!!!!


LMFAO Call G.W. Bush....


----------



## bossi (16 Apr 2003)

BOHICA - it‘s so incredibly, pathetic, insane - the quislings in the federal Liberal party are interfering with this process to the point of treason (I mean - really - who in their right mind would deliberately purchase a helicopter that carries only one torpedo when you could purchase another that carries more ... ?  And, why on Earth would you listen to the whining of a non-compliant bidder who says it‘s not fair to expect a helicopter to lose one engine and still be able to keep it‘s passengers alive ... ?  Good grief - no cargo hook, no spotlight, no speaker ... it‘s a USELESS PIECE OF CRAP ... which, ironically, describes the PM, too ... IMHPO.)

Helicopter checklist cut back
By DANIEL LEBLANC
From Wednesday‘s Globe and Mail 

Ottawa â€” Federal officials have watered down the specifications for the next generation of Canadian military helicopters, calling for them to carry one fewer torpedo in hot weather and one fewer life raft than the military first requested, documents show.

The endurance and lift capability specifications were lowered to allow a larger number of companies to bid on the politically charged, $3-billion contract to replace the 40-year-old Sea Kings.

But the makers of the big and expensive Cormorant helicopter, which was the only one to meet the first set of draft specifications, say the federal government is favouring the makers of smaller and less powerful helicopters.

Prime Minister Jean Chrétien refused to buy Cormorants in 1993, dismissing them as "Cadillacs," and backed out of a deal signed by the Mulroney government to buy them. Critics of the decision to kill the program say Mr. Chrétien has done everything in his power since to prevent the Cormorant from winning the new contract.

The specifications were reduced after the Department of National Defence concluded that the 2001 version of the requirements, in terms of endurance, had "proven to be too stringent for the marketplace."

"Only one competitor is compliant: Team Cormorant," said a report from helicopter evaluators at the air force base at Shearwater, N.S.

The report said that one of the Cormorant‘s competitors, the Sikorsky S-92, had "performance shortfalls" of 1,100 kilograms in temperatures of 35 degrees, meaning it could not carry all necessary equipment in hot weather.

In response, DND calculated the weight it could drop by allowing the new helicopters to carry, among other things:

smaller sonobuoys (45 kg less);
one fewer life raft (25 kg);
one torpedo instead of two in hot weather (225 kg);
no spotlight (30 kg), speaker (27 kg) or cargo hook (18 kg).

The goal, as the DND document said, was to "rationalize specification" to open the process to "greater competition."

"There were changes made where there were, in the initial draft specifications, areas where one would say we had overspecified, added stuff that was not required," Colonel Wally Istchenko said in an interview. "The challenge was to ensure that ... you made changes in those areas to make sure you‘re not buying stuff you actually don‘t need."

He insisted the government has never compromised on safety and that it has closely abided with the 1999 Statement of Operational Requirements, which laid out Ottawa‘s overall needs in a new helicopter.

Another document said that the Cormorant, with its three engines, was the only aircraft to meet the initial requirement to fly away or safely land after losing one engine. All the other helicopters in the running have two engines, and would be more affected by the loss of one of them.

A French helicopter company, Eurocopter, warned federal officials in 2001 that if the requirement relating to a one-engine loss was kept, it "would eliminate all competing twin-engine helicopters for technical non-compliance."

The specifications for the new helicopter are now final, having undergone six revisions. All companies still in the running â€” NHIndustries (partly owned by Eurocopter), Sikorsky, Lockheed-Martin and the makers of the Cormorant, Agusta-Westland â€” say their aircraft meet Ottawa‘s current requirements.

But the makers of Cormorant argue Ottawa has hijacked the selection process in favour of cheaper, less-effective and more politically palatable helicopters. Federal documents show that the body of a Cormorant costs about $33-million, compared with about $20-million for a Sikorsky.

"The government determined what [other companies] could meet, and reverse-engineered the requirements to achieve that," said Larry Ashley, a retired air force lieutenant-general who is now a consultant for Cormorant.

The way the selection process is set up, Ottawa has just issued a set of final requirements, and the contract will go to the company that meets all of them at the lowest price. 

Even if the Cormorant offers superior performance and additional size, it cannot win the contract if it costs more than its competitors. The government in the past allowed for the purchase of more expensive military equipment that cost more but also offered better value.


----------



## Pikache (16 Apr 2003)

This is bull****.

Is the govt deliberately trying to get another set of Griffon-like choppers?


----------



## bossi (28 Apr 2003)

(heck - they‘re only playing with the lives of military personnel ... no big deal, right?  It‘s much more important for the Liberal party fart-catchers to protect the "legacy" of Papa Doc Crouton ...)

Helicopter warning ignored
Splitting Sea King replacement contract worst scenario, deputy minister said

By DANIEL LEBLANC
Monday, April 28, 2003 - Page A6 

OTTAWA -- The federal government ignored a warning from a top bureaucrat in 2000 that a plan to hire two companies instead of one to build the Canadian Forces‘ next generation of military helicopters would create "the worst possible scenario" and would waste precious time, documents show.

The warning over plans to replace the 40-year-old Sea King helicopters was issued by then-deputy defence minister Jim Judd.

"Both the risk and the cost of the project could grow exponentially given our lack of experience and expertise," Mr. Judd wrote in a memo to the Privy Council Office on May 15, 2000.

"This would exacerbate the problem of the overall acquisition timetable (which is already late now)."

Three months later, in August, 2000, the government put aside Mr. Judd‘s concerns and publicly announced that it would buy $3-billion worth of new military helicopters through two contracts: one to purchase the aircraft, the other for the electronic equipment to go inside them.

After trying the dual-contract strategy for more than two years, Ottawa retreated in December and "rebundled" the two contracts into one, losing time in the process to replace the badly needed aircraft.

At the time, Ottawa was promising new helicopters by mid-decade. "The bottom line for Defence is to get the replacement by the year 2005," then-defence minister Art Eggleton said.

That deadline is now unworkable, and Public Works said it does not know when the military will replace the Sea Kings. New aircraft probably will arrive late this decade.

But military officials say the matter is urgent. A Sea King crashed on the deck of HMCS Iroquois this year after losing power, highlighting the need for new helicopters. Ottawa did not have a single spare helicopter it could send with Iroquois to the Persian Gulf.

The 2000 split-procurement decision by the highest levels of government was part of an untested strategy for such a large military purchase. Many analysts and opposition critics said it was designed to prevent the contract from going to Agusta-Westland, the makers of the big and expensive EH-101 Cormorant helicopter.

Prime Minister Jean Chrétien had refused to buy helicopters from Agusta-Westland in 1993, dismissing them as "Cadillacs" and scrapping a purchase deal signed by the previous Conservative government.

Critics of Ottawa‘s decision to renege on the 1993 helicopter deal accused Mr. Chrétien of having done everything in his power to prevent a deal from being signed while he remains in office.

In Mr. Judd‘s note, released under the Access to Information Act, he says the split procurement would mean the government would have to integrate the body of the aircraft and its electronic equipment, instead of letting the private sector do the job. It would be "the worst possible scenario for us in dealing with this acquisition," Mr. Judd says in the note.

"The government would be left in the middle of two contractors and all disputes that might ensue between them," he wrote to the Privy Council Office.

In the note, Mr. Judd predicts further delays to the program in order to draft new documentation and hire more staff.

In another document, Mr. Judd says the government had adopted a "sub-optimal-procurement approach" that was demoralizing to staff working on the file.

Defence Minister John McCallum announced late last year that he would revert to the single-contract approach.

Two-and-a-half years after Mr. Judd‘s note, Mr. McCallum said: "I had consultations, and I came to the conclusion . . . it‘s more efficient to proceed with a single contract rather than two. Partly because with one contract, it will take a shorter time to get the helicopters, partly because with a single contract there‘s less risk and therefore likely to be a lower cost."

As part of the procurement process, Ottawa has said it will award the contract on the basis of "lowest-cost compliant."

As a result, the government has laid out a set of requirements for the new helicopters, and the maker that meets all of them at the lowest price will get the contract.

In the past, Ottawa usually gave itself leeway to purchase more expensive products if they provided better value.

Agusta-Westland, an Anglo-Italian consortium, argues that it does not stand a chance under the lowest-cost-compliant process, given that its three-engine helicopter offers more power than competitors and costs 20- to 30-per-cent more.

The other helicopters in the running for the contract are the European NH-90 and the U.S. Sikorsky S-92.

The competition winner is expected to be announced this year or in early 2004.


----------



## bossi (28 Apr 2003)

Sea King saga: Defending the indefensible

By HUGH WINSOR
(Globe and Mail) Monday, April 28, 2003 

If one had to choose who has the most unpleasant assignment on Parliament Hill this week, the nettle would have to go the Assistant Deputy Minister of National Defence, Allan Williams.

He has drawn the short straw to appear before the Commons Defence Committee to defend the indefensible: why the Liberal government has not been able to get its act together to buy a couple of dozen helicopters in more than nine years and why lobbyists, especially the French, have had so much influence.

Of course, it isn‘t Mr. Williams‘s fault. He is just one civil servant (albeit a very senior one with a background in military procurement) and his oath of confidentiality will probably prevent him from being candid with the committee about how he and his colleagues have been hamstrung by political interference that goes to the very top.

The politics surrounding the navy‘s helicopter-replacement program is particularly tawdry. But in the broader picture, the government of Prime Minister Jean Chrétien is now beginning to pay a price in terms of Canada-U.S. relations and Canada‘s broader international reputation for having allowed the Canadian Armed Forces to slip into near-irrelevance for lack of bodies and equipment.

Turning the Canadian military into a lightly armed, civil-order police force rather than a capable fighting force is a policy option. That is the butter-over-guns equation. But if that is the government‘s choice, it should be done honestly, in an open and transparent policy shift, instead by default.

It would also mean ceasing to pretend we are still a major nation accepting international assignments that we are not equipped to fulfill.

In the Sea Kings helicopter-replacement project, a story by Daniel Leblanc in today‘s paper provides a partial explanation for the sad saga of shifting policies and unconscionable delays. It gives a glimpse of the behind-the-scenes manoeuvring by senior civil servants such as former deputy minister of national defence Jim Judd, who tried to warn the cabinet that breaking up the helicopter contract to give more bidders a crack at the lolly was unworkable, more costly and left the government to take all of the risk.

Another part of the explanation can be sieved from a companion document obtained under Access to Information showing how high-powered lobbying by French officials influenced the Chrétien government to change its approach.

In a secret memorandum to the Prime Minister‘s Office, the Privy Council Office, the former government services minister Alfonso Gagliano and former deputy prime minister Herb Gray written two years ago, Canada‘s ambassador to France, Raymond Chrétien (nephew of the Prime Minister) warns about "renewed French misgivings."

The French complained that a requirement in the Canadian specifications for the helicopter to be able to make a "safe descent" after losing one engine, as well as other criteria, limited the selection to the British-Italian EH-101 entrant (which was politically unacceptable.)

The Raymond Chrétien note got quick action from Mel Cappe, then the clerk of the Privy Council.

Shortly afterward, the specification was modified to a less-demanding "controlled descent." This is just one example of how original requirements were scaled back under lobbying pressure from other competitors, who argued the original requirements were "fixed" to favour the EH-101. The ambassador‘s memo showed how the French consortium had a direct line to the PMO.

There is little doubt the military would prefer the EH-101. And why not? If you were flying over the cold North Atlantic, you would want the most powerful helicopter available, one that could perform all of the roles the navy needs.

It really comes down to whether the government thinks the armed forces deserve the best helicopter, or only the cheapest. But it should say so.


----------



## bossi (10 May 2003)

(it‘s particularly significant to note reference to flying capability ... or lack thereof ... in hot climates ... like the Griffon ... ??!!)

Copter project ‘abject failure‘

Political ‘interference‘ could compromise safety of replacement fleet, officer says
(Globe and Mail) By DANIEL LEBLANC

OTTAWA -- There has been so much political "interference" in Ottawa‘s bid to buy new naval helicopters that the winning aircraft could end up offering less performance than the 40-year-old Sea Kings that they will replace, a Canadian Forces officer says in a document obtained by The Globe and Mail.

In a rare critique of the government by a serving officer, Colonel Brian Akitt accused the federal government of sacrificing the need for a safe and highly capable helicopter in an attempt to save face politically.

Col. Akitt is the former project director of the Maritime Helicopter Project, set up to replace the Sea Kings. He is an officer of the Order of Military Merit and recently commanded Canada‘s fleet of Sea Kings at Shearwater, near Halifax. He will soon head to Belgium for a high-profile appointment, where he will represent Canada at North Atlantic Treaty Organization headquarters.

Col. Akitt expressed his views on the helicopters in a 34-page academic paper written during a six-month course on national security at the Canadian Forces College last year.

He called the process to replace the Sea Kings an "abject failure."

The Sea Kings are in urgent need of replacement. They were supposed to be replaced in the 1990s, then by 2005, but will now be kept until early into the next decade. Over a one-year period, each Sea King needs an average of 30 hours of maintenance for every hour of flight. The government insists the aircraft are safe, but a Sea King crashed on the deck of HMCS Iroquois earlier this year, shortly after lifting off.

In his paper, Col. Akitt wrote that because of political intervention by a special cabinet committee created in 1999, the specifications for the new helicopters were diluted to the point where there is a "significant risk to a safe and credible operation."

He pointed to the reduction of requirements in terms of lift and endurance in hot weather. (The government has reduced the amount of weight the new helicopters must be able to carry in places such as the Persian Gulf.)

"The conditions were now set for the selection of a helicopter, given the procurement strategy, that would not be capable of operating to a level comparative to the current Sea King," he said.

The helicopter fight between the military and the government goes back to Prime Minister Jean Chrétien‘s decision in 1993 to cancel a deal with the makers of the EH-101, in which Ottawa ended up paying $500-million in cancellation fees.

Mr. Chrétien argued that the previous Conservative government was buying "Cadillac" helicopters that were no longer necessary in the post-Cold War environment.

After that high-profile decision, the government moved to obtain new, less-expensive helicopters in two steps.

The first step entailed the purchase of search-and-rescue helicopters. The second, maritime helicopters to replace the Sea Kings.

When the Department of National Defence announced a winner for the $800-million search-and-rescue contract in 1998, it went to Cormorant, a stripped-down variant of the EH-101. The contract dealt an embarrassing political blow to Mr. Chrétien, who was ridiculed for going through so many hoops to end up buying the helicopter that his government had earlier rejected.

After that episode, Col. Akitt said, the government moved to ensure that the contract for the Sea King replacement would not once again be awarded to the EH-101 family, which was widely seen as the military‘s favourite aircraft and the front-runner.

Since Cormorant is the biggest helicopter in the running, the government has since been accused of diluting what it wants in a new helicopter to allow more companies to compete for the contract and win.

"The government politicized the process to ensure the acceptability of the outcome," Col. Akitt said.

He said Ottawa selected a process in which "the government could intervene at each level" to influence the final decision.

The federal government rejects any allegation of political interference in the handling of the file. Defence Minister John McCallum said that Ottawa is buying exactly what DND is calling for in a helicopter. "The statement of requirements [for the new helicopters] was developed in 1999 with the approval of the military leadership of this country. That statement of requirements has not changed one iota," Mr. McCallum said in the House yesterday.

But Col. Akitt said that a special cabinet committee, created in 1999 and chaired by former deputy prime minister Herb Gray, made crucial changes to the procurement strategy in order to deny the contract to Cormorant.

The government announced in 2000 that it would buy the new naval helicopters through two contracts: One for the aircraft itself, and another one for its electronic equipment. In a rare move, Ottawa decided to award the contracts to the lowest bidder, instead of the company that offered "best value."

This was seen as working against Cormorant, because its basic aircraft is more expensive than its competitors.

"In fact, the introduction of the Gray Committee ensured that the Government had intervention into the process at the Departmental level thereby ensuring that the choice of procurement strategy and the definition of requirements would no longer fall within the purview of the Department. The military component of the relation was effectively neutralized," Col. Akitt said.


----------



## Pikache (10 May 2003)

Well, this colonel may have just killed his career, but at least he‘s calling it as he see it.


----------



## Deleted member 585 (14 May 2003)

Col. Akitt‘s critique comes from experience as he was previously the Base Commander of CFB Shearwater - home to (30+ Sea Kings), Director of the Shearwater Aviation Museum, Director of the Maritime Helicopter Project, etc...  he‘s more than familiar with the shortcomings of the current chopper procurement model.

If appointment as Canadian representative to NATO HQ in Belgium is a career-ender, I‘ll take it!


----------



## Pikache (28 May 2003)

Got it off from the new army forum...

 http://www.herald.ns.ca/stories/2003/05/26/f181.raw.html 

Ottawa in no hurry for new choppers - firm 
Feds turn down company‘s offer to rush Sea King replacements 
By The Canadian Press

Ottawa - Even if aerospace companies can quickly deliver new choppers to replace the military‘s aging Sea Kings, the federal government doesn‘t want them, the Ottawa Citizen reported Sunday. 

According to the requirements for the Sea King replacement program, the government is stipulating that it will not take delivery of a new helicopter until four years after it signs a contract. 

"This situation is ludicrous," said retired lieutenant-general Larry Ashley, a former head of the Canadian air force and a retired Sea King pilot. 

Ashley works as a consultant for Team Cormorant, one of the helicopter companies bidding on the program. 

Team Cormorant says it can get a chopper onto the runway within 35 months. And it says it can have all 28 choppers needed by the Canadian Forces delivered by 2008-09. The government‘s schedule calls for delivery of the first chopper by 2008. 

"Usually (a customer must) pay a premium to get something accelerated," Ashley said. "If a guy says to me, ‘I can deliver it in six weeks and the other guy says it will take six years,‘ give me the six weeks any time." 

The 40-year-old Sea Kings were scheduled to be retired several years ago but approval was given to continue operating the aircraft until 2005, when replacement choppers were expected. 

With that date now changed to 2008, the military is examining what has to be done to keep the Sea Kings flying. 

The first of the Sea Kings entered service on May 23, 1963. Last week, three Nova Scotia New Democrats served birthday cake to mark the anniversary and sent a giant card to Defence Minister John McCallum, prodding him to speed up the process to replace the helicopters. 

The Sea Kings have suffered a series of embarrassing accidents in recent years. 

In March, one of the helicopters crashed onto the deck of HMCS Iroquois as it was bound for the Arabian Sea to participate in the war on terrorism. The Iroquois had to return to Halifax to drop off the damaged Sea King. 

Team Cormorant, whose assembly line is already producing choppers for several countries, has also recently delivered new search and rescue helicopters for the Canadian Forces. 

Ashley said he believes the government‘s delivery schedule is designed to benefit Team Cormorant competitors, whose choppers are not as far along in production. 

For years, Team Cormorant officials have alleged that the Sea King chopper replacement program is rigged against their helicopter, a version of the EH-101 that the Conservative government planned to buy in the early 1990s. 

Prime Minister Jean Chretien scored political points when he campaigned against the EH-101, calling it too expensive. His first act as prime minister was to cancel the contract, a move that cost taxpayers $400 million in penalties. 

Team Cormorant officials contend that the government doesn‘t want their aircraft selected to replace the Sea Kings, since that would prove to be too embarrassing for Chretien. 

That claim has been denied by government bureaucrats, McCallum and the prime minister. 

Defence spokesman Lt.-Cmdr. Dave Scanlon said there were two main reasons why it was decided that the first helicopter should not be delivered until four years after the signing of the contract. 

He said that 48-month figure is based on extensive consultations with the aerospace industry on what would be a reasonable delivery time. The other has to do with the training of new pilots and mechanics and the construction of facilities to handle new helicopters. 

"That doesn‘t happen overnight," Scanlon said. 

There is also the possibility that some of the navy‘s ships might have to be modified so the choppers can operate from their decks. 

The Sea King replacement has turned into what many in the military community believe is the longest-running defence procurement program in Canadian history. 

The Canadian Forces started the process of replacing the choppers in the early 1980s. 

***
Twenty freaking years to decide on a chopper...


----------



## Etown (28 May 2003)

This is all a part of McCallum‘s "smarter and better equipped" military, right?


----------



## Pikache (10 Jun 2003)

http://www.canada.com/national/story.asp?id=6A217788-BC32-46DA-BC69-B374AC5ECA2A 

No toilet privacy on new choppers

Peter O‘Neil  
CanWest News Service 


Tuesday, June 10, 2003
ADVERTISEMENT 


There will be no privacy curtain around the unisex toilet facilities in Canada‘s new $3-billion fleet of maritime helicopters, the Defence department has concluded.

AgustaWestland, a European helicopter firm, alleged yesterday that the move is part of a broader scheme to "dumb down" the aircraft‘s specifications to help its competitors.

Removing the curtain apparatus that would surround a male or female user of the "unisex urinal/relief tube" will reduce the chopper‘s weight by just over two kilograms, said Larry McWha, a retired colonel and a former Sea King pilot.

Lowering payload requirements make it easier for smaller two-engine helicopters manufactured by Sikorsky Helicopter Corp., a U.S. firm, and NH Industries, a European consortium, to compete with AgustaWestland‘s Cormorant.

"It‘s an indication of the extremes they‘ve had to go to save a few pounds," Mr. McWha said. But the Defence department dismissed the toilet allegation, which is featured prominently in the latest AgustaWestland advertisement in a newspaper that circulates on Parliament Hill. The ad is part of a campaign suggesting that the Chrétien government is manipulating the procurement process.

Col. Wally Istchenko, deputy manager for the helicopter replacement project, said the curtain was removed for safety reasons. Crews have to be prepared for rapid emergency escapes with little or no lighting if a helicopter ditches in the ocean. Anything that could potentially come loose and entangle someone was deemed potentially lethal. "Obviously, initially it seemed like a good idea." But "it became a safety hazard, and (there was) really no good way of dealing with it."

He said female air crew will adapt to the lack of privacy just as they do on the Sea Kings, which went into service in the 1960s. The Sea Kings are equipped with an emergency "relief tube" behind the cockpit between the pilot and the navigator. While it was initially installed to allow men to urinate in an emergency situation, it has been used by women, Col. Istchenko said.

"I‘ve been told women have used it ‘in extremis‘ because it was considered a serious situation for them," he said.

Col. Istchenko, a former Sea King pilot, dismissed AgustaWestland‘s allegation that the specification change is related to weight.

"You‘ll have to just understand that any of the competitors are using whatever they can, including the media, to put themselves in a better position."

© Copyright  2003 The Ottawa Citizen


----------



## Pikache (12 Jun 2003)

http://www.canoe.ca/EdmontonNews/es.es-06-12-0050.html 

Bidder gives up on chopper contract

By STEPHANIE RUBEC, SUN OTTAWA BUREAU


OTTAWA -- One of four consortiums vying for the lucrative contract to replace the Canadian Forces‘ Sea Kings has dropped out of the race. 

NH Industries has withdrawn the NH90 helicopter that it was pitching until this week as "the world‘s most technologically advanced maritime helicopter" and a great replacement to Canada‘s 40-year-old maritime choppers. 

NH Industries, largely owned by Eurocopter, was selling the NH90 as an off-the-shelf package deal. 

Olivier Francou, NH Industries spokeman, said the model was withdrawn because it doesn‘t meet the contract requirement for Canadian investment. 

The Defence Department requires bidders to lay out a plan to invest the amount of the contract in industries across Canada. The 28 choppers are expected to cost about $1.85 billion. 

NH Industries is still offering up a modified version of the NH90, the MH90, to the Canadian Forces. That chopper is being promoted by Lockheed Martin Canada, the company that will build the electronic component with Thales Systems. 

Sikorsky and Agusta-Westland are also in the running for the contract. 

The Liberal government has shunned the tradition of buying the best valued product, deciding instead to buy the cheapest helicopter that meets the military‘s basic requirements. 

Agusta-Westland, the consortium offering up their Cormorant, had accused the Liberal government of dumbing down the specs to favour Eurocopter.


----------

