CMMA - replacing the CP140 Aurora

[Good2Golf]

Did the bow fall off and was it made of cardboard?

“I mean, it’s not supposed to do that, obviously…”

 

[childs56]

Just reading a few articles on the P8 in regards to issues with lack of spare parts, problems with early equipment failure due to vibrations, the airframe is based on a earlier generation of aircraft and the only new builds are Defence users which are drying up. Does anyone think this will limit or help process Bombardiers claim of building a in Canada platform.

I wonder if General Dynamics Mission Systems–Canada knows something we don't or if they are gambling to provide a service to smaller operators on a semi level field.

 

[Good2Golf]

Just reading a few articles on the P8 in regards to issues with lack of spare parts, problems with early equipment failure due to vibrations, the airframe is based on a earlier generation of aircraft and the only new builds are Defence users which are drying up. Does anyone think this will limit or help process Bombardiers claim of building a in Canada platform.

I wonder if General Dynamics Mission Systems–Canada knows something we don't or if they are gambling to provide a service to smaller operators on a semi level field.

If anyone thinks for a second that Bombardier wouldn’t have significant issues adding a pressurized environmentally-controlled weapons bay to a high-flying luxury business jet, or that GDMS-C wouldn’t have significant challenges creating a bespoke mission system that speaks to USN and other P-8A operators’ aircraft, that would be a rather naive position to hold.

 

[YZT580]

Just reading a few articles on the P8 in regards to issues with lack of spare parts, problems with early equipment failure due to vibrations, the airframe is based on a earlier generation of aircraft and the only new builds are Defence users which are drying up. Does anyone think this will limit or help process Bombardiers claim of building a in Canada platform.

I wonder if General Dynamics Mission Systems–Canada knows something we don't or if they are gambling to provide a service to smaller operators on a semi level field.

perhaps they are looking at creating a viable option for when the P8 line closes and just want the Feds. to finance it. The list of customers for the P-8 is by no means all inclusive. There are a significant number of coastal nations (South America) who prefer not to buy American

 

[Good2Golf]

perhaps they are looking at creating a viable option for when the P8 line closes and just want the Feds. to finance it. The list of customers for the P-8 is by no means all inclusive. There are a significant number of coastal nations (South America) who prefer not to buy American

Out of interest, let’s see who has/would actually buy militarized Bombardier products:

• E-11 BACN (USAF)
• HADES (US Army)
• ARES (US Army)
• ARTEMIS (US Army)

South American countries indeed have a preference for non-American…ie. Embraer…

Brazil


Mexico

 

[KevinB]

perhaps they are looking at creating a viable option for when the P8 line closes and just want the Feds. to finance it. The list of customers for the P-8 is by no means all inclusive. There are a significant number of coastal nations (South America) who prefer not to buy American

Except it isn't a viable P-8 alternative.
1) Still vaporware
2) Airframe size: you are not going to get the range, stores and other capabilities that the P=8 has in a smaller platform, so while IF Bombardier does make one, it will be for nations with much smaller coastal and maritime patrol zones.
3) When the P-8A's airframes start wearing out - you know Boeing will either a) restart the line, or more likely b) have a new platform for the role.

 

[dapaterson]

perhaps they are looking at creating a viable option for when the P8 line closes and just want the Feds. to finance it. The list of customers for the P-8 is by no means all inclusive. There are a significant number of coastal nations (South America) who prefer not to buy American

Beyond Kevin's comment, GDLS would deliver a solution that is reliant on US IP, and be subject to US export controls, so someone not wanting to buy American wouldn't buy it.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Sorry I used the term Civilian. Your quote" The issue in this instance is that Bombardier is trying to use a proven platform in one area (business transport and high-altitude surveillance) in a totally different area (ASW, whether high or low, with munitions)".
Boeing did the same thing with the 737-800, Turned a Passenger/ Cargo plane into a ASW platform. So it is feasible Bombardier could do the same thing, Afterall they do have a few of their planes flying around performing other then normal civilian duties.

I think the biggest issues is how they are trying to muscle their way into a process they failed to provide in the beginning. If they had a viable bid then they should have built the prototype and marketed it. I am sure even if we did not buy it they have other customers who would have been interested. GD I am sure could have got them some funding if Bombardier was serious about being a market contender. Like usual they are asking for money after the fact and hoping it comes through.

I do think the P8 will provide a better platform, better long term servicing/ parts supply, better business support and jobs here in Canada then the Bombardier one. That is based on job numbers and aircraft numbers.

If I was Bombardier I would be putting together a bid for a Aircraft that could do land/maritime surveillance for the Coast Guard and DFO. That had a SKAD droppable capability. That could do surveillance, a bit of radio monitoring/jamming and possibly dual role if the Airforce needed a plane for offense/defence operations. This could set them up for decent sales domestic and around the world. Provide a needed service we are lacking. Help them expand their line of offerings. If they could do that at a reasonable cost then it would be a good combination.

I do not like Bombardier, they are a deep money pit, need to either sink or tread water without all the tax payer bail out.
I hope De Havilland comes out of the gate in a few years and starts to offer a alternative to the current Military aircraft for short, medium haul and surveillance. Canada could have a very competitive Aerospace industry if it was run by competent people.

R & D; an earlier edition of CDR captured the amount of r&d $$ (it was lots) the USN put into the P-8 project. Why would we re-do that process with something like a 6500? It’s the jet equivalent of a CASA 235. A “MPA”, but also “not really”.

Also in the CDR edition, it spoke to the already significant amount of $ generated in Canada by the P-8 fleets other countries are getting. It’s already happening.

The RFI process the GOC chose was public. Bombardier didn’t enter anything because they had nothing that came close to meeting the HLMRs. Now they want to play a shell game and get taxpayers suckered into paying for all that R&D.

They should be kicked in the nads.

DFO should never be considered for “kill stores” missions.

SKAD means Survival Kit Air Droppable. So “SKAD Droppable capability” is like saying “ATM machine”. Or “computer NIC card”…

 

[Good2Golf]

SKAD means Survival Kit Air Droppable. So “SKAD Droppable capability” is like saying “ATM machine”. Or “computer NIC card”…

…or SIN number…

 

[Eye In The Sky]

They kicked a 38kg package out the back door and it hit the engine nacelle. Interesting.
I wonder if the Aurora kicked a box out the door if it would hit the stabilizer?
How about the Kingfisher having Jumpers not clearing the aft section.

Teething problems are expected. I wonder how many mishaps the P8 had during its intial use?

We have a bombbay and an integrated search stores dropping system. We can jump from the main cabin door (used to carry ‘chutes) and there was a specific config the pilots would fly to allow the jump.

The RAAF deployed SKADs out the main cabin door. They aren’t the only ones to do it.

Inside ESQ601: Portugal's P-3C CUP+ Squadron

With the aging Lockheed Martin P-3 Orion commonly being replaced by the Boeing P-8A Poseidon, Joe Campion reports on how the Portuguese Air Force and its fleet prove the maritime patrol legend is still worthy of its role

www.key.aero

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Would there be an advantage for zero-timing the CP140 using it for SAR. It has reasonable speed and range for covering all of Canada within crew duty time. Granted we bought the Kingfisher but it has loads of troubles and is slow to boot. Just asking....

No. The aircraft is getting old, parts are not as readily available. Serviceability just isn’t where primary SAR assets need to be IMO.

 

[dapaterson]

…or SIN number…

Reported and blocked.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

If anyone thinks for a second that Bombardier wouldn’t have significant issues adding a pressurized environmentally-controlled weapons bay to a high-flying luxury business jet, or that GDMS-C wouldn’t have significant challenges creating a bespoke mission system that speaks to USN and other P-8A operators’ aircraft, that would be a rather naive position to hold.

I’ve been an end user of GDMS-C IMSs, with experience in LRP and exposure to MH ones.

I hope the CMMA replacement avoids a GDMS-C IMS. Taxpayers and crews deserve better for our dollar.

 

[Spencer100]

After reading two pieces in two days about the P-8 in the Ottawa paper (wink) I do belive the game is afoot.

The "Larentian" masters, Quebec Inc. Or the Family which ever you want name it are moving pieces on the board.

If you are Trudeau or his puppet masters, the best outcome here is to throw to competition. You hate Boeing and are under pressure to help the Bomber. So give Bombardier time to throw something together. Push the timeline out. Even better scale back the mission set. I'm still amazed there is a weapons bay requirement. I have thought the government would go for a just surveillance aircraft. No dirty and icky weapons.

For evidence look at the JUSTAS program. Pushing out.

 

[dimsum]

After reading two pieces in two days about the P-8 in the Ottawa paper (wink) I do belive the game is afoot.

The "Larentian" masters, Quebec Inc. Or the Family which ever you want name it are moving pieces on the board.

If you are Trudeau or his puppet masters, the best outcome here is to throw to competition. You hate Boeing and are under pressure to help the Bomber. So give Bombardier time to throw something together. Push the timeline out. Even better scale back the mission set. I'm still amazed there is a weapons bay requirement. I have thought the government would go for a just surveillance aircraft. No dirty and icky weapons.

For evidence look at the JUSTAS program. Pushing out.

The RPAS program isn’t being pushed due to political reasons though. Actual, technical (well…lack of technical, I guess) reasons.

Also, Mandatory Requirements are a thing. If those aren’t met (assuming bomb bay is one bc the CGI picture includes one), then the bidder gets cut.

There can be lots of political scheming in Ottawa but military procurement isn’t always (or even usually) some House of Cards-level drama.

 

[Spencer100]

More

Ottawa’s plans to buy Boeing jets based on ‘flawed’ information, Bombardier CEO says

Chief executive Eric Martel contends federal government’s plan, with a price tag of up to $10-billion, will hurt domestic military manufacturing potential

www.theglobeandmail.com

The PR machines are going full on.

The hopes of getting the P-8 are fastly diminishing.

The Liberals would prefer to buy nothing. Always push things down the road is easiest thing to do. There are no votes to be had here.

Trudeau is still mad at Boeing.

Bombardier needs a win here because as a company they have no else to go. Mission aircraft is the only area they can grow into. They have no where else to go. Having sold or chopped everything else there really is no where else to grow the company.

 

[KevinB]

More

Ottawa’s plans to buy Boeing jets based on ‘flawed’ information, Bombardier CEO says

Chief executive Eric Martel contends federal government’s plan, with a price tag of up to $10-billion, will hurt domestic military manufacturing potential

www.theglobeandmail.com

The PR machines are going full on.

The hopes of getting the P-8 are fastly diminishing.

The Liberals would prefer to buy nothing. Always push things down the road is easiest thing to do. There are no votes to be had here.

Trudeau is still mad at Boeing.

Bombardier needs a win here because as a company they have no else to go. Mission aircraft is the only area they can grow into. They have no where else to go. Having sold or chopped everything else there really is no where else to grow the company.

Sorry all I see is a petulant company that is totally clueless.

Bombardier had years to develop an airframe for this. They didn’t.
Pretty open and shut case.

 

[Spencer100]

Sorry all I see is a petulant company that is totally clueless.

Bombardier had years to develop an airframe for this. They didn’t.
Pretty open and shut case.

All true. Except for the part they weren't really allowed too before. The government deal with them was little to no military business lines. After they worked their way down to just a biz jet maker they were released from that deal.

Then looking around at the market after their giant downsizing. The mission aircraft is really the only market they have they can move into with the very limited capital they have.

I am sure anyone put in position as CEO of that company would doing the exact same thing. This does not mean its right for Canada or the CAF. But I understand Bombardier's position here. Limited capital, just one line of business with just a couple products.

At this moment in time they have no where else to go.

 

[KevinB]

All true. Except for the part they weren't really allowed too before. The government deal with them was little to no military business lines. After they worked their way down to just a biz jet maker they were released from that deal.

Then looking around at the market after their giant downsizing. The mission aircraft is really the only market they have they can move into with the very limited capital they have.

I am sure anyone put in position as CEO of that company would doing the exact same thing. This does not mean its right for Canada or the CAF. But I understand Bombardier's position here. Limited capital, just one line of business with just a couple products.

At this moment in time they have no where else to go.

Maybe they should just go away?

If they had actually read the requirements for the competition they’d see they will never be complaint with that airframe.

 

[dimsum]

More

Ottawa’s plans to buy Boeing jets based on ‘flawed’ information, Bombardier CEO says

Chief executive Eric Martel contends federal government’s plan, with a price tag of up to $10-billion, will hurt domestic military manufacturing potential

www.theglobeandmail.com

The PR machines are going full on.

The hopes of getting the P-8 are fastly diminishing.

The Liberals would prefer to buy nothing. Always push things down the road is easiest thing to do. There are no votes to be had here.

Trudeau is still mad at Boeing.

Bombardier needs a win here because as a company they have no else to go. Mission aircraft is the only area they can grow into. They have no where else to go. Having sold or chopped everything else there really is no where else to grow the company.

As with the RPAS project, if the Liberals really wanted to buy nothing, they could have directed the cancellation of the project years ago.