The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)

[Underway]

Honestly, I think she was between a rock and a hard place no matter what she said. I was not impressed by the interview and I agree totally that a focus on process is ridiculous but we all know the true answer.

Liberals made a campaign promise to cancel the sole source and hold a competition. I don't remember the JT soundbite exactly but "Canada doesn't need a stealth fighter that is too expensive and won't fly" or something like that. At the time there were plenty on this website who had similar concerns. The JSF was overcosted (per unit cost), had maintenance problems, stealth materials were peeling off, etc...

It got them votes in some places (Quebec and Manitoba) and served to differentiate them from the CPC. And it was sufficiently different that drawing the line between a replacement competition and the cancelation of the Sea King was harder.

After their win as devout followers of deliverology, it was low-hanging fruit to pick.

Of course then after all that work to have a competition they didn't make the same mistake they did with the MH replacement and ordered a different aircraft intentionally to avoid political fallout. They made a new mistake and got the exact same aircraft they canceled in sole sourcing.

So the minister (I would say poor minister but she's paid enough) is shoved in front of the cameras to try and make an excuse for this, and all she has is to grab onto is "fair competition to ensure money is spent correctly". She's not wrong, no one can actually say that competition is worse than sole source. But it still looks (and is) incredibly stupid to cancel something, spend money to see if it's correct, and then restart it.

After spending money on used CF-18 to prop up the fleet. What were the savings we could have had if we didn't get those extra planes from Australia?

 

[Good2Golf]

Meh, they knew it was the right aircraft even before they said they’d cancel it during the 2015 campaign.

I’m just waiting for Alan Williams to now come out saying, “this makes the most sense, even though I said earlier that just because I recommended joining the JSF program in 2003 didn’t mean we would actually buy the aircraft…” blah, blah, blah.

Politics and common sense don’t often result in R=1.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Honestly, I think she was between a rock and a hard place no matter what she said. I was not impressed by the interview and I agree totally that a focus on process is ridiculous but we all know the true answer.

Liberals made a campaign promise to cancel the sole source and hold a competition. I don't remember the JT soundbite exactly but "Canada doesn't need a stealth fighter that is too expensive and won't fly" or something like that. At the time there were plenty on this website who had similar concerns. The JSF was overcosted (per unit cost), had maintenance problems, stealth materials were peeling off, etc...

It got them votes in some places (Quebec and Manitoba) and served to differentiate them from the CPC. And it was sufficiently different that drawing the line between a replacement competition and the cancelation of the Sea King was harder.

After their win as devout followers of deliverology, it was low-hanging fruit to pick.

Of course then after all that work to have a competition they didn't make the same mistake they did with the MH replacement and ordered a different aircraft intentionally to avoid political fallout. They made a new mistake and got the exact same aircraft they canceled in sole sourcing.

So the minister (I would say poor minister but she's paid enough) is shoved in front of the cameras to try and make an excuse for this, and all she has is to grab onto is "fair competition to ensure money is spent correctly". She's not wrong, no one can actually say that competition is worse than sole source. But it still looks (and is) incredibly stupid to cancel something, spend money to see if it's correct, and then restart it.

After spending money on used CF-18 to prop up the fleet. What were the savings we could have had if we didn't get those extra planes from Australia?

Do you mean to sound like an apologist ?

The easy thing to do here would have been to say we we wrong and we should have done this all along. We own it and were moving forward.

Anything else is just smoke and mirrors to try save some political clout.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Do you mean to sound like an apologist ?

The easy thing to do here would have been to say we we wrong and we should have done this all along. We own it and were moving forward.

Anything else is just smoke and mirrors to try save some political clout.

You must come from the generation where parents raised you to own up to your mistakes, learn from them and continue to move forward.

Sadly the trait of 'ownership' and 'responsibility acceptance' is no longer passed on from generation to generation. This loss of maturity is leading us to where we are today.

 

[Quirky]

She's not wrong, no one can actually say that competition is worse than sole source.

We sole sourced the C-17, C-130J and now the A330MRT is heading that way. The F-35 doesn't have a true competitor in it's generation, the closest competitor was the F-22. The F-35 pick was just a formality and the competition was a complete waste of time.

 

[dimsum]

the A330MRT is heading that way

They did have a competition though - just that the competitor (KC-46) was deemed not satisfactory.

 

[Underway]

Do you mean to sound like an apologist ?

I don't appreciate the snarky inference.

The easy thing to do here would have been to say we we wrong and we should have done this all along. We own it and were moving forward.

Anything else is just smoke and mirrors to try save some political clout.

What do you think procurement is? Politics.

Owning a mistake and winning an election is not normally in the overlapping part of the Ven Diagram. It detracts from the message. The message here is 88 new fighter jets during a war in Ukraine and when NATO wants spending to increase to 2%. All that other stuff that happened before was about winning votes then. This is about winning votes now.

 

[Good2Golf]

^ This.

Once people realize that procurement is first and foremost about votes and a government working to stay in power, everything else just falls into place.

#cynicalbuttrue

 

[Halifax Tar]

I don't appreciate the snarky inference.



What do you think procurement is? Politics.

Owning a mistake and winning an election is not normally in the overlapping part of the Ven Diagram. It detracts from the message. The message here is 88 new fighter jets during a war in Ukraine and when NATO wants spending to increase to 2%. All that other stuff that happened before was about winning votes then. This is about winning votes now.

I calls em likes I sees em.

I know full well the volume of political interference that's in our procurement process.

And it disgusts me, hence my statement(s). And we won't get better until we demand better.

 

[Czech_pivo]

I don't appreciate the snarky inference.



What do you think procurement is? Politics.

Owning a mistake and winning an election is not normally in the overlapping part of the Ven Diagram. It detracts from the message. The message here is 88 new fighter jets during a war in Ukraine and when NATO wants spending to increase to 2%. All that other stuff that happened before was about winning votes then. This is about winning votes now.

Yup, it has nothing to do with protecting Canada/NA, giving our people the best tools for the job at hand now and 30+yrs into the future. It's all a bunch of crap being run by people who actually would love nothing more to than completely dismantle and remove the CAF from existence and go back to pontificating about the latest trend of the day.

 

[YZT580]

Do you mean to sound like an apologist ?

The easy thing to do here would have been to say we we wrong and we should have done this all along. We own it and were moving forward.

Anything else is just smoke and mirrors to try save some political clout.

you are asking the impossible: an honest response!

 

[GR66]

Yup. Someone mentioned above, “the more prices increase, the lower the number of replacements ordered becomes”. Words to that effect.

I totally agree with what you're saying, but if we're being totally honest woe be to anyone that suggests purchasing a cheaper, 80% solution alternative to the latest and greatest piece of kit that we might be able to buy more of.

 

[suffolkowner]

I dont know how we can argue against following the process from one side of our mouth and from the other side complain about political interference?

To my knowledge this is only the third procurement following the "new" process but after and throughout there remains much confusion about the steps and the decision making

MSVS-SMP
FWSAR
F35

Will we ever see anything that details on what basis the F35 was chosen?

 

[Czech_pivo]

I dont know how we can argue against following the process from one side of our mouth and from the other side complain about political interference?

To my knowledge this is only the third procurement following the "new" process but after and throughout there remains much confusion about the steps and the decision making

MSVS-SMP
FWSAR
F35

Will we ever see anything that details on what basis the F35 was chosen?

If you can get a job in the PMO you've got a 50/50 chance of finding out. Other option, start dating Katie Telford.

 

[FSTO]

If you can get a job in the PMO you've got a 50/50 chance of finding out. Other option, start dating Katie Telford.

She's available?

 

[MTShaw]

She's available?

I hope we’re not going down that road.

 

[KevinB]

I totally agree with what you're saying, but if we're being totally honest woe be to anyone that suggests purchasing a cheaper, 80% solution alternative to the latest and greatest piece of kit that we might be able to buy more of.

Better a smaller well equipped Military than a large useless one. Just ask the Russians

 

[dapaterson]

I dont know how we can argue against following the process from one side of our mouth and from the other side complain about political interference?

To my knowledge this is only the third procurement following the "new" process but after and throughout there remains much confusion about the steps and the decision making

MSVS-SMP
FWSAR
F35

Will we ever see anything that details on what basis the F35 was chosen?

The RFP included evaluation criteria. Even without any classified annexes, you can probably make some reasonable inferences.

 

[GR66]

Better a smaller well equipped Military than a large useless one. Just ask the Russians

Just like most things it's not all Black and White. For some things you need the quality or very bad things can happen. For other things you need the quantity...or again very bad things can happen.

HIMARS and Excalibur rounds without a crap ton of regular HE to back it up? Patriot without a bunch of Stingers? Four nuclear subs vs ten AIP?

 

[suffolkowner]

The RFP included evaluation criteria. Even without any classified annexes, you can probably make some reasonable inferences.

Is the RFP available for viewing? The only thing I have read is the 60% technical merit 20% cost and 20% economic benefits. Categories so broad and general without knowing how things are weighted as to be borderline useless