Canada to Spend $5.0Bil on AEW Aircraft

[ytz]

For the love of God why are we wasting time on a competition that has already been run at a larger scale for the US Army.

We aren't "wasting time". We need all the potential options to actually enter service and mature. If we get to 2032 and the only option is the V-280 that's what it'll be. But given that the first operational V-280 unit isn't going to be in service till 2031, it's extremely high risk to pull the trigger on anything right now.

 

[Underway]

Speaking to AEC Sgt at work today. Wedgetail is the only option in their opinion. The fact the line is still manufacturing aircraft, that it uses less people then the current AEW aircraft and the fact that the UK and US both use it which means for NORAD and NATO they can land it pretty much anywhere in the western northern hemisphere and get parts, which is similar to when everyone was using CP140's.

 

[ytz]

Canada’s gonna Canada…but to be fair, US Army FVL (future vertical lift) project and to some degree similarly NATO’s NGRC (next generation rotorcraft capability) programs are going to be far more integrated in a variety of capability streams than Canada will likely ever achieve, so a more classically platform-focused outcome will likely rule the day in Canada. The US Army will have a significantly increased share of increased systems into the aviation mix, hence why FARA (future, armed reconnaissance aircraft) [future Apache / Kiowa Warrior replacement] subset to FVL was cancelled. FVL will include numerous UAS/UCAV system-of-systems. I’m not sure Canada has the appetite for that. GLLE might be as good as it gets for a long while…

It’s taken a very long time for Canada to come aboard aerospace technology…MAISR close to a decade after it started…so long that the U.S. Army has actually retired its King Air fleets and moved on to mission specialized business jets like the Bombardier Global Express. UAS? JUSTAS RPAS has taken so long that the MQ-9B is in the backside of production and in the path to sunsetting as US DOD looks at the next technological bound of HAT (human-autonomous teaming) will look like. Heck, if Canada waits long enough, it could buy FVL FLRAA V-280 when the U.S. Army replaces them in the 2050s with whatever next rotary systems are out into service.

I wouldn't be this pessimistic. Honestly. The RCAF is just in an awkward spot right now. The Griffons are getting old. But next gen rotorcraft aren't going to actually be operational till the mid-2030s. So anything we decide to acquire now, enters service just in time to be obsolete.

Agree with your take on MAISR and the Sky guardian. But I'll add a slight optimistic spin. The CAF is finally starting to understand the value of sensing. And these fleets, along with the F-35, will help change our understanding of the importance of domain awareness and operationalization of information. I think we'll start leaning a bit more into tech. How much forward we lean might be more about the procurement system though.....

 

[ytz]

Speaking to AEC Sgt at work today. Wedgetail is the only option in their opinion. The fact the line is still manufacturing aircraft, that it uses less people then the current AEW aircraft and the fact that the UK and US both use it which means for NORAD and NATO they can land it pretty much anywhere in the western northern hemisphere and get parts, which is similar to when everyone was using CP140's.

That's funny. Cause we had a patched ABM on my ASPOC course and his preferred option was something small like the GlobalEye. It was even one of his course presentations. He had experience with the Italian Air Force CAEW and said that would be just fine for the RCAF. And he was on TD from his exchange posting in the US. It's not that he didn't like the Wedgetail. It's just that he thought it was overkill and that we couldn't afford it.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

That's funny. Cause we had a patched ABM on my ASPOC course and his preferred option was something small like the GlobalEye. It was even one of his course presentations. He had experience with the Italian Air Force CAEW and said that would be just fine for the RCAF. And he was on TD from his exchange posting in the US. It's not that he didn't like the Wedgetail. It's just that he thought it was overkill and that we couldn't afford it.

My take?

Everyone has their own personal opinions, based on what they have seen, heard and read.

I don’t know that there is a consensus view in our Air Force between Wedgetail and Globaleye. I can see both sides of the argument, myself.

 

[Good2Golf]

But I'll add a slight optimistic spin. The CAF is finally starting to understand the value of sensing. And these fleets, along with the F-35, will help change our understanding of the importance of domain awareness and operationalization of information. I think we'll start leaning a bit more into tech. How much forward we lean might be more about the procurement system though.....

Good on you for your optimism. I was fortunate to direct an MCPnin good times, where the GoC was trying to make things move to support substantive capability implementation. Yes, there was still some skulduggery going on with treasury board, public works, finance and all the other usual players, but at least there was a will to make the system better. I hope that the current climate particularly as it relates to procurement does not overshadow the value of more functional digitization in the battle space as you lead to. Others are moving forward as they should, but Canada risks being left far behind, not only in the cooperative interoperability sense, but as an actual Nation, with any kind of gravitas, no matter how small it could be, on the global scene.

 

[ytz]

My take?

Everyone has their own personal opinions, based on what they have seen, heard and read.

I don’t know that there is a consensus view in our Air Force between Wedgetail and Globaleye. I can see both sides of the argument, myself.

This is where I'm at. I think both have merits. I dislike the automatic default idea that it's good just because the Americans bought it.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

This is where I'm at. I think both have merits. I dislike the automatic default idea that it's good just because the Americans bought it.

That is the thing alot of people miss- you have understand the context behind why the US design and build their weapon systems.

That context is sometimes not transferable between countries/strategic constructs/force structure constructs.

Generally, the US can afford to throw more people at a problem than anyone else can. Which is part of the reason why we have stayed away from US ship designs- we cannot afford their crewing.

 

[ytz]

^ They also do a ton of things because of their defence industrial strategy. The Wedgetail is an Australian designed aircraft that the US is buying at least partly because it's the only option built in the US and available right now. If an AEW competition were to be run today, they'd be using bizjets like the USN and US Army. They'd definitely be using GaN radar. They'd probably use conformal antennas too. The final solution would probably look more like Global CAEW than the Wedgetail.

 

[brihard]

Speaking to AEC Sgt at work today. Wedgetail is the only option in their opinion. The fact the line is still manufacturing aircraft, that it uses less people then the current AEW aircraft and the fact that the UK and US both use it which means for NORAD and NATO they can land it pretty much anywhere in the western northern hemisphere and get parts, which is similar to when everyone was using CP140's.

WRT the crews for a future RCAF AEW capability, and crews: how many troops do we have posted to fly on allies’ aircraft? Do we have enough posted OUTCAN flying on allied AEE that they could form the core personnel for a new domestic AEE capability? Are the PY demands of the new capability going to be partly or substantially filled by pulling bodies back from allied squadrons?

 

[dapaterson]

I suspect that the next cyclical Defence Policy review might identify a need for growth in CAF strength; the focus right now is on reconstituting the force to the SSE target levels.

 

[Furniture]

I suspect that the next cyclical Defence Policy review might identify a need for growth in CAF strength; the focus right now is on reconstituting the force to the SSE target levels.

Are you suggesting the CAF was cut too greedily and too deep?

 

[dapaterson]

Are you suggesting the CAF was cut to greedily and too deep?

I'm suggesting that the pandemic shutdown of the recruiting system highlighted a number of problems that are now being addressed. But that there are still IT&E system design challenges, where additional PY investment are likely needed, to enable building the CAF we need (vs the CAF we have).

 

[Furniture]

I'm suggesting that the pandemic shutdown of the recruiting system highlighted a number of problems that are now being addressed. But that there are still IT&E system design challenges, where additional PY investment are likely needed, to enable building the CAF we need (vs the CAF we have).

Fair, but less entertaining.

I suspect the CAF is suffering from a shortage of PYs created by cuts in the '90s and early '00s. We didn't plan for needing to be able to staff multiple new capabilities when we purged tens of thousands of jobs. We couldn't know exactly how the world would change, but we should have expected it.

My grandmother was born before the jet engine, and she watch humans walk on the moon... We have no excuse for not foreseeing that technology will rapidly change within one lifetime, and that technology will require specialists.

 

[dimsum]

UAS? JUSTAS RPAS has taken so long that the MQ-9B is in the backside of production and in the path to sunsetting as US DOD looks at the next technological bound of HAT (human-autonomous teaming) will look like. Heck, if Canada waits long enough, it could buy FVL FLRAA V-280 when the U.S. Army replaces them in the 2050s with whatever next rotary systems are out into service.

The MQ-9B SkyGuardian (GA’s name for it) or Protector (RAF’s name for it) hasn’t been produced yet. The RAF will be the launch customer in a couple of years.

It is similar to, but not exactly like, the MQ-9A Reaper. Some pretty significant tech differences.

 

[childs56]

I think Canada has a business case for both Aircraft. They both provide complementing services. For most coastal surveillance a smaller aircraft can tuck away and hide easier than a larger one.
The problem is if we buy one and not the other we are loosing capability both domestic supply and also operational capability.

I think we should buy 14 GlobalEyes,
Currently the Coast Guard and Transport Canada operate and or lease 8 fixed wing surveillance aircraft. That gives them 8 patrol aircraft with a extremely capable surveillance capability. Then give 6 to the Canadian Airforce. we can crew off and on for Transport Canada/ Coast Guard.

Then buy 8-10 Wedgetails 2 for each coast and 4 spares/ international commitments.

We often mix Canadian Military ops with Coastal surveillance, give the full capability to the CG and TC to full fill their role of coastal surveillance. This way we can conduct combined ops and share training and experience.

For those who say we can not support multiple fleets we can and we do.

 

[KevinB]

We aren't "wasting time". We need all the potential options to actually enter service and mature. If we get to 2032 and the only option is the V-280 that's what it'll be. But given that the first operational V-280 unit isn't going to be in service till 2031, it's extremely high risk to pull the trigger on anything right now.

At least 2031.

I’m thinking Canada should have done some sort of shenanigans with the GLLE to streamline the Y/Z aspect - but again Bell Commercial via Military.

I think Canada has a business case for both Aircraft. They both provide complementing services. For most coastal surveillance a smaller aircraft can tuck away and hide easier than a larger one.

How do you hide at 30k feet, I’m just curious.

The problem is if we buy one and not the other we are loosing capability both domestic supply and also operational capability.

I think we should buy 14 GlobalEyes,
Currently the Coast Guard and Transport Canada operate and or lease 8 fixed wing surveillance aircraft. That gives them 8 patrol aircraft with a extremely capable surveillance capability. Then give 6 to the Canadian Airforce. we can crew off and on for Transport Canada/ Coast Guard.

Then buy 8-10 Wedgetails 2 for each coast and 4 spares/ international commitments.

Not sure where you would find people or money for that.

We often mix Canadian Military ops with Coastal surveillance, give the full capability to the CG and TC to full fill their role of coastal surveillance. This way we can conduct combined ops and share training and experience.

Then have TC buy some GE’s.

For those who say we can not support multiple fleets we can and we do.

Can or should?

 

[Good2Golf]

The MQ-9B SkyGuardian (GA’s name for it) or Protector (RAF’s name for it) hasn’t been produced yet. The RAF will be the launch customer in a couple of years.

It is similar to, but not exactly like, the MQ-9A Reaper. Some pretty significant tech differences.

Tracking the B-A difference. Corporately, 9 is still sunsetting. RAF and RCAF getting in on a specific type, doesn’t mean the company is pushing that line hard. C maybe, but it’s not really a 9 like the A and B are.

 

[Good2Golf]

Currently the Coast Guard and Transport Canada operate and or lease 8 fixed wing surveillance aircraft. That gives them 8 patrol aircraft with an extremely capable surveillance capability. Then give 6 to the Canadian Airforce. we can crew off and on for Transport Canada/ Coast Guard.

If you’re including NASP’s “Clifford the Big Red Dog” as part of those 8, then you’re being very generous with the “extremely capable surveillance capability.” If you think the RCAF is the only Canadian airborne surveillance operator using obsolete analogue EO/IR systems (yup…analogue RS-170 video feed, just like the TV sets we watched man land on the moon with), think again. If TC actually put the HDMI EO/IR systems that it currently has sitting on a shelf collecting dust because it won’t invest in the engineering solution to install the modern kit onto the actual aircraft, and integrated it with a modern AESA multi mode radar….THEN they would have an ‘extremely capable’ surveillance capability.

 

[ytz]

At least 2031.

I’m thinking Canada should have done some sort of shenanigans with the GLLE to streamline the Y/Z aspect - but again Bell Commercial via Military.

I don't know where you get this stuff. The company was definitely not the limfac on this project. It was the existing airframe and a willingness to invest on the part of the CAF. Nobody supported substantial upgrades for an aircraft that could be out of service in 7-10 years after delivery.