CMMA - replacing the CP140 Aurora

[Good2Golf]

Yes but the Hercs, C17 and Chinooks were all bought by that big bad Harper. BOO!!!

And two of them made by Boeing!

Double-BOO!!

 

[YZT580]

And all of them with long operational histories prior to purchase and open, foreign, production lines.

Let me rephrase: the last two major a/c purchases where we accepted an airframe that was unproven for the task at hand have been less than satisfactory. Do you want to try for the hat trick? Phraseology will get you every time

 

[lenaitch]

"The current CMMA procurement process has lost credibility. It is sending Canadian tax dollars out of the country without even allowing world-renowned Canadian companies the chance to bid on the project. The process should be restarted in a manner that is both fair and transparent. Most importantly, it should support Canadian companies and give them a chance to show what they can do."

"World renowned" . . . for running all but one of its divisions into the ground.

"Show what they can do" . . . we know what they can do; leach off public coffers and draw pretty pictures of planes.

 

[dapaterson]

Through a series of questions listed at Annex D, the objectives of this RFI are to provide industry with an early opportunity:
a) To assess and comment on Canada’s required capabilities for the CMMA, as outlined at Annex A;
b) To assess and comment on Canada’s High Level Mandatory Requirements (HLMRs) for the CMMA, as outlined at Annex B;
c) To be informed on the options being considered as potential solutions for CMMA as listed in Annex C;
d) To express any interest, capability and experience towards such a Project as CMMA; and
e) To comment on the CMMA Project, its targeted milestones and potential acquisition options and for related ideas on how to best contain technical, schedule and cost risks.

So in February 2022, when those questions went out to industry, why didn't Bombardier respond?

https://buyandsell.gc.ca/cds/public/2022/02/10/40e474721d25ec41e82e2941aa3754f5/canadian_multi-mission_aircraft_project_request_for_information_02.10.2022.pdf

 

[KevinB]

So in February 2022, when those questions went out to industry, why didn't Bombardier respond?

https://buyandsell.gc.ca/cds/public/2022/02/10/40e474721d25ec41e82e2941aa3754f5/canadian_multi-mission_aircraft_project_request_for_information_02.10.2022.pdf

Oh you and your facts…

 

[dimsum]

Yes but the Hercs, C17 and Chinooks were all bought by that big bad Harper. BOO!!!

I think some of those were under Chretien or Martin. Can’t remember what was bought, when.

So in February 2022, when those questions went out to industry, why didn't Bombardier respond?

https://buyandsell.gc.ca/cds/public/2022/02/10/40e474721d25ec41e82e2941aa3754f5/canadian_multi-mission_aircraft_project_request_for_information_02.10.2022.pdf

I would love to have someone ask them out loud, and see their response. I’m betting it’ll be something like “it was skewed towards Boeing!”

 

[Good2Golf]

I think some of those were under Chretien or Martin. Can’t remember what was bought, when.

Nope, both under Harper. ACP-S (Airlift Capability Project - Strategic, also C-17) was approved June 2006 and ACP-T (….Tactical aka C-130J) was Dec 2007. Aside MHLH (Medium to Heavy Lift Helicopter, Chinook) was June 2009…and it wasn’t even an off the shelf variant, but an amalgam of previous variants and some new technology…and still was delivered one month early…47 months, vice the contract’s 48 month term.

The difference with these vs the CH-148 or CC-295? The political will of the day (Evil Harper) was focused on delivering the Forces the most capable systems, not prioritizing Canadian industry’s greatest profits regionally.

 

[FSTO]

Nope, both under Harper. ACP-S (Airlift Capability Project - Strategic, also C-17) was approved June 2006 and ACP-T (….Tactical aka C-130J) was Dec 2007. Aside MHLH (Medium to Heavy Lift Helicopter, Chinook) was June 2009…and it wasn’t even an off the shelf variant, but an amalgam of previous variants and some new technology…and still was delivered one month early…47 months, vice the contract’s 48 month term.

The difference with these vs the CH-148 or CC-295? The political will of the day (Evil Harper) was focused on delivering the Forces the most capable systems, not prioritizing Canadian industry’s greatest profits regionally.

That is not the priority of this government at all.

 

[FSTO]

Canadian Aerospace Companies push back against Bombardier, which is about bloody time.

Aerospace firms push back against Bombardier, tout upsides of a Boeing military deal

Bombardier has been demanding the federal government allow for open competition on the successor to the Royal Canadian Air Force’s 14 half-century-old CP-140 Aurora aircraft

www.theglobeandmail.com

 

[DBNSG]

Nope, both under Harper. ACP-S (Airlift Capability Project - Strategic, also C-17) was approved June 2006 and ACP-T (….Tactical aka C-130J) was Dec 2007. Aside MHLH (Medium to Heavy Lift Helicopter, Chinook) was June 2009…and it wasn’t even an off the shelf variant, but an amalgam of previous variants and some new technology…and still was delivered one month early…47 months, vice the contract’s 48 month term.

The difference with these vs the CH-148 or CC-295? The political will of the day (Evil Harper) was focused on delivering the Forces the most capable systems, not prioritizing Canadian industry’s greatest profits regionally.

The only misstep was we only bought 5 C -17's.

 

[KevinB]

The only misstep was we only bought 5 C -17's.

10-15 would have been a much better number, and 25 the best IMHO

 

[FSTO]

10-15 would have been a much better number, and 25 the best IMHO

Remember the Liberal MPs who said those planes would never be used?

 

[Halifax Tar]

10-15 would have been a much better number, and 25 the best IMHO

Agreed.

I would have liked to have seen the RCN fund 4 for them for RCAF but on call for our needs when we need them.

Our deployed ships constantly need grey tail support to move material and pers... And have had mixed success using contracted services.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Remember the Liberal MPs who said those planes would never be used?

You're joking right ?

 

[KevinB]

You're joking right ?

No he isn’t. Which pretty much explains why you guys are in the situation you are in.

The farce of it, is that of Canada had 25 C-17 (or even 15) your issues with dealing with environmental disasters would be a lot easier to fix by movement of material and personnel in a rapid fashion.

 

[FSTO]

^^^^
But the costs!!!!

It’s always about the Costs.

 

[Good2Golf]

The only misstep was we only bought 5 C -17's.

At the CAF/RCAF level, there was a solid effort to get a 6th (the last white tail at Boeing) but the $250M price tag for the last -17 wasn’t in the cards, unfortunately.

 

[Kirkhill]

You're joking right ?

One of those MPs was the Prime Minister of Canada, Jean Chretien. In a Christmas interview (CTV?) I remember him saying explicitly that he wouldn't be buying aircraft just to have them sit at the end of the runway "just in case".

I think that was when I cemented my opinion that there was a strain in government culture that didn't want capabilities in case they might have to make a decision to use them.

As somebody pointed out recently (@dimsum ?) politicians don't like to make decisions because it closes off options. Conversely closing off options limits the decisions that have to be made.

 

[GR66]

If Canada had 16 x P-8's, 9 x MRTT's and 25 x C-17's our allies would see us as a key partner rather than a laggard because we'd be able to provide key logistics support that many of them are lacking themselves. Direct combat power isn't the only way we can usefully contribute.

 

[CBH99]

At the CAF/RCAF level, there was a solid effort to get a 6th (the last white tail at Boeing) but the $250M price tag for the last -17 wasn’t in the cards, unfortunately.

It IS unfortunate we didn't snag that last white tail, absolutely...

But $250M!??? Holy Moley!!