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

[ytz]

I'm suggesting that it will be spun that way.

It's not like the CAF doesn't have a history of rigging competitions to favor a particular platform.

This one was exceptionally scrutinized. Complete with things like fully cleared non-government fairness monitor to do oversight even of requirements writing. Not even the AG has insinuated what you are here.

And the model used by FFCP is actually being adopted by other projects specifically because it was so stringent on avoiding bias.

On the technical portion, the bidders were given a few mission sets. And they were given an open hand. They were allowed to design the force package, pick the weapons loadout and accessories (like pods) to meet the mission. All they had to do was price in everything they did. All the pods they used. The number of aircraft. Etc. No surprise that the 5th Gen won. It takes a lot fewer F-35s than 4th gen to do the same tasks. And this is actually wanted the bidders wanted. None of them wanted a line by line spec comparison. That would favour the F-35. They argued that there's ways they could overcome the F-35s advantages. So the project designed an evaluation process that gave them a free hand.

 

[ytz]

Leaked or released under access to information? Lots of so called leaks are actually the latter.

Leaked. No way these could be ATIP'd. As mentioned in the article, and I know myself, this wasn't released to anybody outside the project office and chain of command. Even those of us who helped in bid eval weren't told anything. Just told to do our piece and screw off. As is appropriate.

 

[Fabius]

An interesting item is that if we are serious about building out Cdn industry we can’t do projects like that.

We can’t have competitions open to all. We need to invest in and develop the industry. It would mean not doing a fly off for the next fighter lead in etc. it would mean we need to design, build and buy our own.

Is Canada willing to do that or are we going to insist on a competition when we need to replace the Gripen and /or F35? That’s a key question.

It’s not just operating two fleets.
It’s about doing the entire R&D though to operating one fleet while also procuring and operating a second fleet.
The same as the South Koreans have done with the FA-50, KFX and the F16 and F35.

 

[dapaterson]

Leaked. No way these could be ATIP'd. As mentioned in the article, and I know myself, this wasn't released to anybody outside the project office and chain of command. Even those of us who helped in bid eval weren't told anything. Just told to do our piece and screw off. As is appropriate.

It looks like the sort of thing that might have been in a SRB deck, hence my question.

 

[MilEME09]

View attachment 96924

The numbers really put the headline into perspective. Saab did not enter the C/D model for review in the procurement, otherwise the percentages would be even lower.

Geez if the runner up got 33%, I'd hate to see the scores of the Rafale, and Eurofighter. Id be curious how each category breaks down

 

[ytz]

It looks like the sort of thing that might have been in a SRB deck, hence my question.

Sure. But this is not an SRB deck going on Sharepoint. This is at least CSNI and NTK/RTK staffed with notes on MESH to go check CSNI. This stuff was close hold. Otherwise even industry would have ATIP'd their own scores.