Author Topic: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)  (Read 692111 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline YZT580

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 24,770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 747
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2575 on: June 08, 2019, 15:03:31 »
From Flight Global, perhaps a freudian slip?
Beyond Europe, Canada and Singapore are interested in buying the F-35. Singapore plans to buy four examples initially to test, with the option to buy eight more. Canada is one of the original nine partner nations in the Joint Strike Fighter development programme, but has dithered over buying the aircraft. Quebec is expected to release a request for proposals for 88 advanced fighters as part of its Future Fighter programme in mid-2019.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 72,550
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,509
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2576 on: June 11, 2019, 12:30:42 »
This is nuts--rating the strike mission as 3.5 times more valuable than NORAD one, which is the only crucial, non-discretionary role of RCAF fighers:

Quote
Canada puts premium on fighter jets’ ability to conduct attacks on foreign soil

The federal government’s plan to buy new fighter jets puts greater emphasis on the aircraft’s ability to conduct “strategic attacks” in foreign countries than their capacity to defend Canada and North America from enemy incursions, government documents show.

The importance awarded to the new aircraft’s offensive and first-strike capabilities abroad, rather than their defensive capabilities in places such as the Arctic, is causing concerns among some companies [emphasis added] in the running for the $19-billion contract to replace Canada’s CF-18s, industry sources said.

In particular, some manufacturers have told the government they are worried the process will end up favouring the Lockheed-Martin F-35 at the expense of bids from the Boeing Super Hornet, Saab’s Gripen and the Eurofighter Typhoon, which is built by a consortium led by Airbus. The industry sources who spoke about the matter were granted anonymity because federal rules prevent them from speaking publicly.

Federal officials said they are aware of the concerns from various aircraft manufacturers and that government experts are reviewing the evaluation grid. The government is planning to launch the competition for new fighter jets by the end of July.

“We are continuing to have discussions with the companies,” said Pat Finn, the assistant deputy minister in charge of procurement at National Defence.

He added that 80 per cent of the technical requirements are related to NORAD and NATO operations, while the rest are needed to be able to respond to government missions in hot spots around the world. “We’re in a good spot for a competition,” he said.

Canada’s defence policy, which was released in 2017, made it clear that the priority for the new fighter jets would be defending the country’s territory.

“The fighter aircraft fleet is a critical Canadian Armed Forces capability necessary to enforce Canada’s sovereignty, enable continental security, and contribute to international peace and stability,” the policy said.

David Perry, a military analyst at the Canadian Global Affairs Institute, said the acquisition process to this point gives the impression that foreign missions are more important than domestic ones.

“At the high level, the optics of the way it is presented aren’t very good at all,” he said.

The federal government’s assessment grid for the new fighter jets is based on an evaluation of all requirements worth a total of 100 points, with 60 points going to technical capabilities, 20 points to the acquisition and sustainment costs, and 20 points to the package of industrial benefits. The government has shared its draft evaluation grid with potential bidders, a copy of which was provided to The Globe and Mail.

Of the 60 points going to technical requirements, 31.5 points are based on the aircraft’s performance on six potential missions: conducting NORAD operations, intercepting a foreign aircraft carrying a cruise missile, carrying missions against maritime targets, detecting and attacking foreign aircraft such as enemy fighter jets, providing “close air support” in an attack against targets on foreign soil and participating in a “strategic attack” against a foreign country.

The first two missions, which are seen to be domestic in nature, are worth a total of 3.5 points. By contrast, the mission worth the most points (12 out of 31.5, or nearly 40 per cent of the points in this category) is the one based on an aircraft’s ability to conduct a first-strike “strategic attack” in a foreign country [emphasis added], which is known to be a forte of the F-35.

The evaluation grid has led some companies to complain to the government that the process favoured the F-35 at the expense of their aircraft, industry and government sources said.

Following complaints from the American government, the federal government changed last month the way it will evaluate the 20 points related to industrial benefits. Under a new process, Ottawa will no longer force all bidders to commit 100 per cent of the value of the aircraft’s acquisition and sustainment on spending in Canada. Instead, manufacturers will lose points in the scoring system if they do not make this commitment, but they will still be allowed to remain in the competition

Before the changes were made, the F-35 could have been automatically disqualified because the international consortium that builds the aircraft doesn’t allow for the provision of traditional industrial benefits.

Of the 20 points that are attributed to the cost of the new aircraft, 10 are determined based on the acquisition costs and 10 are determined based on the sustainment of the aircraft after their purchase.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-canada-puts-premium-on-fighter-jets-ability-to-conduct-attacks-on/

And what about ability to shoot down cruise missiles after launch? Hell, let the F-15EX into the competition.

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 141,990
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,483
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2577 on: June 11, 2019, 13:27:49 »
Because historical we are an expeditionary force.

Offline AlexanderM

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 10,330
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 450
  • Resident George Constanza
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2578 on: June 11, 2019, 14:10:34 »
I thought most here want the F-35, so it would be good news for the F-35.

Offline MTShaw

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • New Member
  • *
  • 2,645
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 49
  • Dont believe everything you say.
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2579 on: June 11, 2019, 14:13:13 »
I thought most here want the F-35, so it would be good news for the F-35.

They’d have to develop (hopefully) stealthy drop tanks.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 72,550
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,509
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2580 on: June 11, 2019, 16:18:09 »
And find a way to carry a whole lot more missiles internally to be able to have real combat NORAD air intercept capability in stealth mode--if stealth is necessary for that mission for now (but what about fighter-escorted Russkie bombers, maybe Su-57 eventually?).

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 141,990
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,483
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2581 on: June 12, 2019, 09:45:35 »
Particularly with modern stand off weapons, you need to intercept them in the high arctic to prevent them from getting into weapons range.

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 210,710
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,035
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2582 on: June 12, 2019, 16:40:33 »
And find a way to carry a whole lot more missiles internally to be able to have real combat NORAD air intercept capability in stealth mode--if stealth is necessary for that mission for now (but what about fighter-escorted Russkie bombers, maybe Su-57 eventually?).

Mark
Ottawa

“Real” capability?   I didn’t know four (4) AIM-120 AMRAAMs was not a real capability.  Anyway, technology exists to increase the AIM-120 load out to six (6): https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/amp27347465/f-35-missile-increase/

This compares to zero (0) stealthy-stowed missiles on any other contender...mathematically, this makes the F-35 ‘infinitely’ better. ;)

Regards
G2G

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 195,580
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,733
  • Freespeecher
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2583 on: June 13, 2019, 20:25:06 »
There does not seem to be any reason that the stealthy "pod" featured on the Advanced Super Hornet concept aircraft (which allows stealth carriage of either external fuel or weapons) could not be adapted for the F-35, answering most objections.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 206,785
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,690
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2584 on: June 13, 2019, 20:28:38 »
Might could be a bit difficult to launch G2G's AMRAAMs from the internal weapons bay with that thing attached. 

But I'm no expert.   ;D
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline Thucydides

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 195,580
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,733
  • Freespeecher
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2585 on: June 13, 2019, 20:43:48 »
Might could be a bit difficult to launch G2G's AMRAAMs from the internal weapons bay with that thing attached. 

But I'm no expert.   ;D

The weapons in the pod would be expended first, then the pod dropped to reveal the internal bay. This way you always fly with the wings in a "clean" configuration, and don't excessively increase the RCS by carrying underwing stores.
Dagny, this is not a battle over material goods. It's a moral crisis, the greatest the world has ever faced and the last. Our age is the climax of centuries of evil. We must put an end to it, once and for all, or perish - we, the men of the mind. It was our own guilt. We produced the wealth of the world - but we let our enemies write its moral code.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 72,550
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,509
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2586 on: July 08, 2019, 20:33:16 »
The almost never-ending farce plays on. This FUBAR procurement (both big parties) is making Canada an international joke:

Quote
Exclusive: Airbus, Boeing indicate they may pull out of Canada fighter jet race - sources

Airbus SE and Boeing Co may pull out of a bidding process to supply Canada with new fighter jets because they say the contest is unfairly tilted toward Lockheed Martin Corp, two sources with direct knowledge of the situation said on Monday [July 8].

The three companies competing with Lockheed Martin’s F-35 jet have already complained about the way the contest is being run, and expressed concern some of the specifications clearly favor the U.S. firm, industry sources have said in recent weeks.

Next week the government is due to release the so-called request for proposals - the final list of requirements - for the 88 new planes it wants to buy. The contract is worth between C$15 billion ($11.5 billion) and C$19 billion and the planes are due to be delivered between 2025 and the early 2030s.

Boeing and Airbus have now formally written to Ottawa expressing concerns about the current requirements, said two sources familiar with the matter who declined to be identified given the sensitivity of the situation. The fourth bidder is Sweden’s Saab AB.

Pat Finn, the defense ministry’s top official in charge of procurement, confirmed one of the four companies had sent a formal letter but gave no details. The final request for proposals is due out on July 17 and modifications are still being considered, he said.

“We continue to engage all four of them,” he said in a telephone interview. “We have had some comments (such as) ‘If changes are not made in such a place then we would frankly consider possibly not bidding.’”

“We are looking at those very seriously. I can’t say that we will make every change, but as far as we know we continue to have four bidders in the race.”

Airbus declined to comment. Boeing did not respond to a request for comment.

Canada has been trying unsuccessfully for almost a decade to buy replacements for its aging F-18 fighters. In May, Ottawa changed the rules to allow Lockheed Martin to submit a bid, prompting Boeing to take the unusual step of announcing publicly it was surprised.

“Anyone who is not Lockheed Martin has expressed a very strong view,” said one of the sources. “We have been pretty clear with the government that this is not a request for proposals that lends to our participation.”

At least one firm has expressed unhappiness that the requirements emphasize the ability to carry out first strikes on targets abroad, a strength of the F-35, said the sources.

The government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau insists the competition is not rigged. Finn said the defense ministry also had made changes to the requirements at the request of Boeing, Airbus and Saab.

Canada is part of the international consortium that developed the F-35. The former Conservative administration said in 2010 it would buy 65 of the jets but later scrapped the decision, triggering years of delays.

Trudeau came to power in 2015 vowing not to buy the F-35 on the grounds that it was too costly, but Ottawa has since softened its line.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-canada-fighterjets-exclusive/exclusive-airbus-boeing-indicate-they-may-pull-out-of-canada-fighter-jet-race-sources-idUSKCN1U32EX

Mark
Ottawa

Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Hamish Seggie

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 222,382
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,203
  • This is my son Michael, KIA Afghanistan 3 Sep 08
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2587 on: July 08, 2019, 23:44:06 »
🤦‍♂️ It’s downright embarrassing.
Freedom Isn't Free   "Never Shall I Fail My Brothers"

“Do everything that is necessary and nothing that is not".

Offline BurmaShave

  • New Member
  • **
  • 2,865
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 42
  • Hates lines.
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2588 on: July 09, 2019, 01:10:58 »
Boeing can take their Congressman tricker and kick rocks IMO. Between the Bombardier rubbish, the 737 Max crashes, and the persistent QC issues, they're not in my good books.

The requirements are stilted in favour of the F-35 for sure...because it's a competition to select the best aircraft. If we water it down with long term cost, Canadian content, or industry benefits (which we will and maybe even should), those odds will change.
YQR Pirep from DH8: And it’s hard to fly an airplane, in the cold November rain

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 548,370
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,053
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2589 on: July 09, 2019, 08:22:25 »
Airbus SE and Boeing Co may pull out of a bidding process to supply Canada with new fighter jets because they say the contest is unfairly tilted toward Lockheed Martin Corp...
Yet when PMJT was elected on the promise that the F-35 would simply be disallowed from any competition, I didn't hear them saying that that  was in any way unfair. 
Cry me a river.   :'(


However, in May the Macdonald-Laurier Institute published an interesting assessment from Richard Shimooka, "Catastrophe:  Assessing the Damage from Canada’s Fighter Replacement Fiasco."
Quote
...Ottawa’s performance on this file mirrors the SNC-Lavalin Scandal and the Mark Norman Affair.  “At their heart, these two incidents represent attempts by the Liberal government to circumvent established processes to meet their partisan interests,” Shimooka explains. “This description is just as apt for the fighter program.”

“During the 2015 election campaign, the Liberal Party promised not to buy the F-35 jets, but instead to use a competition to identify and subsequently purchase a lower-cost competitor… this decision proved to be impossible, unethical, and potentially illegal.”

From billions of dollars being wasted on a procurement process to fix a contrived capability gap to potentially threatening Canada’s defence relationship with the US, the report finds that political interests have consistently been put above Canada’s defence needs.

The press release that covers the report's key issues is here.

The full report is here.

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 141,990
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,483
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2590 on: July 09, 2019, 10:00:00 »
Boeing can take their Congressman tricker and kick rocks IMO. Between the Bombardier rubbish, the 737 Max crashes, and the persistent QC issues, they're not in my good books.

The requirements are stilted in favour of the F-35 for sure...because it's a competition to select the best aircraft. If we water it down with long term cost, Canadian content, or industry benefits (which we will and maybe even should), those odds will change.

Boeing would be better off arguing to have the 30% FMS cost done away with so it can compete with the F-35 on a more level playing field.

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 72,550
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,509
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2591 on: July 09, 2019, 13:56:45 »
How much for 88 planes at Cold Lake and Bagotville? Big security requirements upgrade?

Quote
Belgium Spending €275 Million On F-35 Infrastructure

Belgium has begun tendering for new infrastructure worth up to €275 million ($308 million) to support its new F-35 Joint Strike Fighter fleet.

Because Brussels wants to base its 34 F-35As across two air bases, Florennes and Kleine Brogel, two sets of facilities will be required. This will include facilities for operational planning, mission preparation and training infrastructure, each with four flight simulators and hangarage for maintenance facilities for six aircraft. The costs also cover the building of new flight lines and 16 covered aircraft shelters. Also stemming from these funds is a so-called quick reaction alert facility to support the national air policing mission operating on a 24 hr.-a-day, 365-day-a-year basis.

The tender issued on July 3 is separate from the wider F-35 Foreign Military Sale which Brussels agreed to last October. The documents also provide insight into the security requirements demanded by the U.S. Department of Defense for nations operating the fifth-generation aircraft, calling for the new facilities to be enclosed and equipped with intrusion detection and alarms [emphasis added]. Belgian ministers have already approved plans to recruit additional personnel to guard the aircraft. On several occasions, protesters have broken into the Kleine Brogel base over the housing of U.S. dual-key nuclear weapons there.

The new F-35 facilities must be approved and certified to U.S. government standards, the tender documents say, and the selected company or contractors will have to hold national security clearances and be vetted by the U.S. State Department [emphasis added].

Florennes will be the first of the two airbases to receive the F-35, with construction work starting in the second quarter of 2022, while work at Kleine Brogel will begin in the first quarter of 2024.

This development is in line with the delivery profile for Belgium’s aircraft. The first  F-35will be based in the U.S. from 2023 to support training, likely at Luke AFB, Arizona, similar to the activities of other F-35 operators. Four or five F-35s will be delivered in 2023, officials say, and the aircraft will arrive in batches of four from 2024-2028 and in 2030. A batch of five aircraft will be delivered in 2029. The first F-35 will not be based in Belgium until 2025.
https://aviationweek.com/defense/belgium-spending-275-million-f-35-infrastructure

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Quirky

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 7,805
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 270
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2592 on: July 09, 2019, 14:29:36 »
🤦‍♂️ It’s downright embarrassing.

In this case, it’s embarrassing that Boeing and Airbus are whining that they can’t compete with reasonable requirements like “conducting bombing runs in contested airspace”. They know their jets are inferior and have never beat out the F35 in any competition.

Offline Iron 1

  • Guest
  • *
  • 140
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2593 on: July 09, 2019, 20:49:51 »
In this case, it’s embarrassing that Boeing and Airbus are whining that they can’t compete with reasonable requirements like “conducting bombing runs in contested airspace”. They know their jets are inferior and have never beat out the F35 in any competition.
Truth...

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 177,235
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,210
  • I get paid to travel. I just don't pick where.
Re: The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)
« Reply #2594 on: July 18, 2019, 11:50:15 »
Long-ish article about the requirements of the future fighter.

Quote
The Rubik’s Cube of fighter procurement
Posted on July 17, 2019 by Alan Stephenson
   
This article originally appeared in the 2019 edition of RCAF Today magazine.

Purchasing a fleet of fighter aircraft is a complex process with many variables and the Canadian government has a duty to ensure the billions of procurement dollars are properly spent. The interplay between the four dimensions involved in military procurement — military, technological, economic, and political — defies simple analysis.

Rest at link

https://www.skiesmag.com/features/the-rubiks-cube-of-fighter-procurement/
Philip II of Macedon to Spartans (346 BC):  "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city."

Reply:  "If."