Author Topic: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities  (Read 808688 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 219,872
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,504

Offline suffolkowner

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 14,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 398
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1676 on: May 10, 2017, 13:26:40 »
Looking for corroboration, but looks like Leonardo wants to know why Airbus was allowed to go/knew that the budget for FWSAR had been changed....
https://www.skiesmag.com/news/exclusive-team-spartan-reveals-details-fwsar-court-challenge/
« Last Edit: May 10, 2017, 13:33:23 by suffolkowner »

Online Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 166,455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,288
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1677 on: May 10, 2017, 14:40:46 »
If Leonardo can prove even a reasonable doubt to the court that Airbus received information that they did not get, the court might toss the decision on that basis alone. Of course if Airbus/government shows that Leonardo did receive the information at the same time and failed to account for it, much face will be lost.....

Online Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 166,455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,288
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca

Offline suffolkowner

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 14,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 398
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1679 on: May 15, 2017, 19:23:51 »
https://www.skiesmag.com/news/exclusive-team-spartan-reveals-details-fwsar-court-challenge/

It's like deja vu [lol:

The article does a good job explaining the APU situation. It seems hard to believe that Leonardo could be cheaper than Airbus based on the published numbers but that is why you put it out for tender! I'd like to know what Leonardo was offering for that much of a price difference. I think the CPFH difference would be interesting as well but 3000 versus 2000 is a lot different than 30000 versus 20000.

More importantly I wonder where the RCMP investigation is on this file how exactly did Airbus know they could go over the budget by that much and not Leonardo. What would be the justification for the government not informing both bidders?

Offline dapaterson

    Halfway to being an idiot-savant.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 522,805
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,082
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1680 on: May 15, 2017, 19:49:15 »
It's like deja vu [lol:

The article does a good job explaining the APU situation. It seems hard to believe that Leonardo could be cheaper than Airbus based on the published numbers but that is why you put it out for tender! I'd like to know what Leonardo was offering for that much of a price difference. I think the CPFH difference would be interesting as well but 3000 versus 2000 is a lot different than 30000 versus 20000.

More importantly I wonder where the RCMP investigation is on this file how exactly did Airbus know they could go over the budget by that much and not Leonardo. What would be the justification for the government not informing both bidders?

Notice that Leonardo is not raising the budget issue in their court filings.  Which is curious - if there was information asymmetry that could be an actionable thing, yet it's not part of the appeal.  Reading the article, it almost sounds as if Leonardo is arguing against the evaluation criteria.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Online PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 944,040
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,653
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1681 on: May 15, 2017, 20:02:58 »
Notice that Leonardo is not raising the budget issue in their court filings.  Which is curious - if there was information asymmetry that could be an actionable thing, yet it's not part of the appeal.  Reading the article, it almost sounds as if Leonardo is arguing against the evaluation criteria.

They likely can't/would be overly difficult to prove the asymmetry. It's better for them to focus on the actual SOR and how they believe the C-27J is the superior aircraft, and force PSPC to release the scoring criteria and scores on how they came up with the winner.

Offline suffolkowner

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 14,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 398
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1682 on: May 15, 2017, 20:09:41 »
They likely can't/would be overly difficult to prove the asymmetry. It's better for them to focus on the actual SOR and how they believe the C-27J is the superior aircraft, and force PSPC to release the scoring criteria and scores on how they came up with the winner.

I would certainly like to know how things were scored, to me it's not a good start to our non political procurement process!

Offline dapaterson

    Halfway to being an idiot-savant.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 522,805
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,082
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1683 on: May 15, 2017, 20:15:26 »
Generally, the evaluation criteria are part of the package released to bidders.  And afterwards, the bidders are given (on request) a debrief and information on how they scored.

This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Online PuckChaser

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 944,040
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,653
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1684 on: May 15, 2017, 20:28:39 »
How they scored, but are they given the other bidders scores, or is that held in confidence? The first step to an open and fair procurement process is publishing the scoring for each company for the public to see.

Offline suffolkowner

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 14,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 398
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1685 on: May 15, 2017, 20:46:22 »
You can see the problem in developing a scoring system though. If you can't manage FWSAR how are you going to do with more complicated procurements?

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 85,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,085
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1686 on: May 30, 2017, 15:06:17 »
Leonardo claims gov't played dirty with them:

Quote
Losing search plane bidder not aware of feds 'budget flexibility'
Public works says the max $3.4B search plane budget 'never a mandatory requirement'

A new and crucial wrinkle has emerged in the Liberal government's first major military equipment purchase: the ongoing saga to replace the air force's fixed-wing search and rescue planes.

The losing bidder in the $4.7-billion program has told CBC News that it was never informed there was flexibility within the federal government's proposed acquisition budget.   

Leonardo S.p.A., an Italian aircraft maker, found itself on the outside of the deal last fall when the Liberal government chose to buy 16 new C-295W transports from rival Airbus Defence and Space.

The company with the losing bid, which offered its C-27J aircraft, has launched a Federal Court challenge. It also recently lost a bid before the Canadian International Trade Tribunal to halt the project.

Central to its case is how the program budget envelope went to $4.7 billion from $3.4 billion, which was initially approved and set aside by the previous Conservative government. 

    [further links]
    Trade challenge of RCAF search plane contract tossed
    Airbus search plane contract faces court challenge
    Airbus chosen to build Canada's new search planes

The three companies bidding on the replacement contract and 20 years of in-service support — Leonardo, Airbus Defence and Space  and Embraer — were told that exceeding the budget envelope could lead to disqualification.

"If the financial proposal of the winning bid is higher than the notional budget, Canada could, at its sole discretion exercise any of its rights," which includes rejection of the offer, said the request for proposals.

Federal officials, in explaining the mechanics of the decision last December, told CBC News that the contract was being broken up into two stages.

The Airbus bid came in at $2.4 billion and included only 11 years of maintenance. There would be an option to renew in-service support for up to 15 years, and, if fully extended, it would add an additional $2.3 billion to the value of the tender.

As the Canadian partner of Airbus, Provincial Aerospace in St. John's would be the main beneficiary of those contract extensions.

Bidder left in the dark?

Public works conducted extensive consultations with the bidders and trumpeted the openness and transparency of the contract process.

Yet, a senior official at Leonardo says nowhere in those discussions was his company given the indication that the project budget could be exceeded.

"All efforts made by Leonardo during the proposal preparation were focused, for the benefit of Canada, on considering the notional budget as a target to meet," Filippo Bagnato, the managing director of Leonardo Aircraft Division, told CBC News.

"Leonardo was not aware of any budget flexibility, beyond that described in the RFP (request for proposal), and that an increase in budget would be remotely possible."

A spokesperson for public works underlined the fact the program budget was "notional," meaning it was hypothetical with figures that were prepared a few years ago when bids were first solicited.

"While the Government of Canada shared a notional budget of $3.4 billion as information for the replacement of its fleet of Fixed-Wing Search and Rescue (FWSAR) aircraft with bidders, it was never a mandatory requirement nor was it a ceiling price that bidders had to bid under," said spokesperson Pierre-Alain Bujold.

"The notional budget was based on best information available at the time when the solicitation was released to industry. The solicitation documents clearly identified a best value approach for the selection of the winning bid, which considered capability and socio-economic benefits as well as cost."..
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/search-rescue-plane-contract-1.4136145

I.e. Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!

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

Online MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 85,655
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,085
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1687 on: May 30, 2017, 15:14:01 »
Meanwhile Twotters will be kept flying until 55 years old--but some Jobs! Jobs! Jobs!

Quote
Canada Invests in Maintenance of Buffalo and Twin Otter Aircraft

...maintenance contracts were awarded to KF Aerospace of British Columbia as a result of open, transparent and competitive processes. With much of the work being done in the country, these contract will help support Canada’s world-class aerospace industry and maintain approximately 40 high-value middle-class jobs [emphasis added] for Canadians...

The second contract, valued at $9.6 million (including taxes), will help maintain the Royal Canadian Air Force’s CC-138 Twin Otter aircraft for a period of four years and includes the possibility of four additional one-year extensions. Canada’s four Twin Otters are based in Yellowknife, Northwest Territories. These aircraft are used in transport roles for the Canadian Armed Forces’ northern operations and occasionally in search and rescue missions. This investment will help maintain the equipment until at least 2025, so that the Canadian Armed Forces can continue delivering operations in the northern territories...
https://www.canada.ca/en/public-services-procurement/news/2017/05/canada_invests_inmaintenanceofbuffaloandtwinotteraircraft.html

Sigh...what about this jobs alternative?

Quote
Why Not Just Buy New-Build Viking Air Twotters for RCAF?
https://cgai3ds.wordpress.com/2015/03/26/mark-collins-why-not-just-buy-new-build-viking-air-twotters-for-rcaf/

From that post, new Twotter with Vietnamese navy, great paint job:



Mark
Ottawa
« Last Edit: May 30, 2017, 15:49:04 by MarkOttawa »
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Online Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 166,455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,288
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1688 on: May 30, 2017, 15:33:50 »
With a "trade in" clause that Viking takes and resell the older Otters, which they would be happy to do I suspect. Write a sole source contract, because they are the only ones that seem to work.

Offline suffolkowner

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 14,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 398
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1689 on: May 30, 2017, 16:40:17 »
The Twin Otter seems like a slam dunk solution, especially if one considers the jobs aspect.

Regarding FWSAR it seems hard to believe that Leonardo could match Airbus's numbers, I sure would like to know how their bids compared. You would think the RCMP would be investigating this instead of Admiral Norman


Offline Loachman

  • Former Army Pilot in Drag
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 219,872
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,504
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1690 on: May 30, 2017, 18:48:06 »
Leonardo claims gov't played dirty with them:

Further down in that article, it states:

"Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan ... "When we made the announcement I was very happy to hear from our search and rescue community that this aircraft is going to deliver all the necessary tools and be able to enhance our ability. I'm looking forward to having new equipment for our search and rescue because our men and women deserve that."

One wonders who told him that, or if he's imagineering again.

I've not heard anybody in the SAR community speak favourably about this decision, but there could be some who feel that anything shiny is better than anything old, I suppose.

Online Colin P

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 166,455
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,288
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1691 on: May 31, 2017, 10:36:57 »
His career would not have him rub shoulders with the day to day SAR ops. Likely he is hearing what the hand puppets at the top want him to hear.

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *
  • 206,770
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,021
  • Living the staff life
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1692 on: July 27, 2017, 16:37:59 »
So, has anyone seen/toured the Brazilian C-295 that did the tours of Comox, Winnipeg and Trenton?  If so, now that you've seen it in the flesh, how does it compare to the Buffalo?
“If you run into an a-hole in the morning, you ran into an a-hole. If you run into a-holes all day, you're the a-hole.”

- Raylan Givens, Justified (cleaned up for content)

Offline my72jeep

  • It is the duty of all canadians to be prepared to defend thier country
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 38,300
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,060
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1693 on: July 27, 2017, 21:59:40 »
So, has anyone seen/toured the Brazilian C-295 that did the tours of Comox, Winnipeg and Trenton?  If so, now that you've seen it in the flesh, how does it compare to the Buffalo?
Looks like a herc that never grew up.
MA Davidson CD
Wawa,Ont.
Army.ca coin #53

Offline Ditch

  • Established 1998
  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 30,282
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,521
  • I routinely step in it, but like conflict...
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1694 on: August 26, 2017, 20:23:37 »
So, has anyone seen/toured the Brazilian C-295 that did the tours of Comox, Winnipeg and Trenton?  If so, now that you've seen it in the flesh, how does it compare to the Buffalo?

Apologies for delay - I spent about 4 hours crawling over the Brazilian variant of our new CC-295. 

It is superior in every way to the Buffalo - faster, more comfortable, pressurized and more room.   

It's not a Herc - nor was it ever meant to be. 

Airbus has built a nice package for our SAR crews - it will be a welcome addition to our modern fleet. 
Per Ardua Ad Astra

Offline George Wallace

  • Army.ca Fossil
  • *****
  • 436,695
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 31,592
  • Crewman
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1695 on: August 26, 2017, 20:36:33 »
Apologies for delay - I spent about 4 hours crawling over the Brazilian variant of our new CC-295. 

It is superior in every way to the Buffalo - faster, more comfortable, pressurized and more room.   

It's not a Herc - nor was it ever meant to be. 

Airbus has built a nice package for our SAR crews - it will be a welcome addition to our modern fleet.

???

So?  What happens when SAR has to jump?  Rapid decompression?....  :warstory: ......I know.....The cabin will be depressurized and then the doors opened, and away they or cargo go. 

That was my initial impression though.   [:D
DISCLAIMER: The opinions and arguments of George Wallace posted on this Site are solely those of George Wallace and not the opinion of Army.ca and are posted for information purposes only.
Unless so stated, they are reflective of my opinion -- and my opinion only, a right that I enjoy along with every other Canadian citizen.

Offline jmt18325

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 22,750
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,219
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1696 on: August 26, 2017, 22:04:14 »
I thought I read here earlier that it would be nothing but a total disaster?

Offline Eye In The Sky

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 238,125
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,286
    • VP INTERNATIONAL
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1697 on: August 27, 2017, 05:57:25 »
I thought I read here earlier that it would be nothing but a total disaster?

The comparison was to the Buffalo only the 295 isn't just replacing the Buffalo. I'd also wait to hear what the backenders think, they are the ones doing to work in the back right?  The Buffalo isn't the ideal 1-solution FW platform either and I don't remember anyone saying that.  I'd expect Buff drivers to love the new plane, glass cockpit etc.  Doesn't mean it was the ideal choice over the other available choices for a single FWSAR.

The RCAF also announced that the sensors would not be operated by the RCAF sensor operators.  That also shows you how some of the RCAF thought processes occur.   ::)
"What a f$$kin' week!" - me, every Monday at about 1130hrs.

Offline jmt18325

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 22,750
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,219
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1698 on: August 27, 2017, 11:00:26 »
It's also worth noting that while it's not replacing only the buffalo, it's only replacing one role of the SAR Hercs.  It's not meant to replace their other functions. 

Offline suffolkowner

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 14,195
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 398
Re: FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities
« Reply #1699 on: August 27, 2017, 14:22:30 »
the status of defence recruitment in canada where anything is better than nothing