Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

RCAF Hornet replacement.

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

RCAF Hornet replacement.

Old 24th Jan 2018, 16:24
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: UK
Age: 39
Posts: 476
RCAF Hornet replacement.

I read on Flight Global today that Boeing didn't turn up for a day with the RCAF Hornet replacement team and that Boeing are still deciding if they'd like to offer the Super Hornet to the Hornet replacement competition (whilst stating that its clearly the best option...). Obviously this doesn't sit in isolation from the other problems Boeing and Canada have had just recently.

So, if no F35 due to cost and if no Super Hornet due to politics....what then? Could Typhoon have a shot?
unmanned_droid is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2018, 16:40
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Here
Posts: 1,393
Did you see the statement from the Canadians that effectively said any bidder should not be seen to be damaging Canada's interests?

Maybe Boeing thinks it's US airliner market is more lucrative than the Canadian fighter one?

I still think it will be F-35
Davef68 is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2018, 17:06
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,997
Rafale stands a reasonable chance....
BEagle is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2018, 17:12
  #4 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: UK
Age: 39
Posts: 476
Originally Posted by Davef68 View Post
Did you see the statement from the Canadians that effectively said any bidder should not be seen to be damaging Canada's interests?

Maybe Boeing thinks it's US airliner market is more lucrative than the Canadian fighter one?

I still think it will be F-35
I didn't want to make that issue so in your face, in case the thread went down that path. Problem is, its almost certainly a massive part of this bid.

Boeing might compete and never actually have a hope of winning regardless of the performance of their aircraft. Boeing might not compete and therefore would definitely not win.

I am actually genuinely interested in whether the Typhoon suits. I understand that it would be introducing a different 'ecosystem', but is that so terrible?
unmanned_droid is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2018, 17:14
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: UK
Age: 39
Posts: 476
Originally Posted by BEagle View Post
Rafale stands a reasonable chance....
That would be interesting...
unmanned_droid is offline  
Old 24th Jan 2018, 17:18
  #6 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: UK
Age: 39
Posts: 476
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
Reported previously on the F-35 thread. Canada is buying the old Australian F-18s to extend the life of the current fleet.

It delays the decision over the replacement and allows a new competition between the Typhoon, Rafale, FA-18E/F/G and F-35 and a decision until the fuss over Bombardier and the F-35 argument has gone away.

Come back in 5-10 years.....

https://www.theguardian.com/australi...-in-snub-to-us
Apologies, yes I should have said that RAAF airframes were being bought so as to offset the decision on a replacement airframe to the right.

If you were buying which one would you go for?
unmanned_droid is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2018, 08:17
  #7 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 12,359
Canada's CF-18s to fly until 2032 as new fighter jets expected to be slowly phased in

Canada will squeeze even more flying time out of its aging CF-18s, keeping the jets operating for another 15 years. There had been plans to take the jets out of service shortly after 2025. But representatives from companies who took part in a Jan. 22 industry day outlining the Liberal government’s program to buy new fighter planes were told the RCAF will now keep the CF-18s operating until 2032.....

In November 2016, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan acknowledged that the CF-18s might have to keep flying longer than planned, suggesting they could even continue until 2030 or perhaps beyond. The briefing to industry representatives was the first official government confirmation that the RCAF would stretch out the life of the aircraft until 2032.

The Liberals have committed to buying 88 new fighter jets in a program that could cost as much as $19 billion. That price-tag does not include long-term maintenance. Troy Crosby, director general of defence major projects at Public Services and Procurement Canada, said in an interview with Postmedia that a request for proposals from companies for the new fighter jets is expected to be issued in spring 2019. A contract would be signed in late 2021 or early 2022.
ORAC is online now  
Old 20th Jun 2018, 07:47
  #8 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 12,359
Canada to buy more used Australian fighter jets ? number goes from 18 to 25 | Ottawa Citizen

Canada to buy more used Australian fighter jets - number goes from 18 to 25

The Liberal government originally announced it would buy 18 used Australian F-18 jets to augment the Royal Canadian Air Force’s CF-18s until new aircraft can be purchased in the coming years. But it has added seven more used Australian F-18 aircraft to the deal, the Department of National Defence has confirmed. Those extra aircraft will be stripped down for parts, Dan Blouin, a spokesman for the DND, said Friday. It is not known yet if the seven aircraft will be flown to Canada or shipped, he added.

The exact cost of purchasing the 25 aircraft, along with weapons and other equipment is not yet known as negotiations are still underway on the deal, Procurement Minister Carla Qualtrough recently told journalists. The Liberal government has set aside up to $500 million for the project. An Australian Senate hearing was recently told that Canada was presented with a cost proposal from the Australian government last year. “They accepted our offer in December, but they have also put in a further request for some seven aircraft for system testing, training and spares,” Australian Air Vice Marshal Cath Roberts told the hearing.

The U.S. government is examining the deal and will have to give its approval to Australia before that country can sell the F-18s to Canada. Approval is needed because the F-18s were built in the U.S. with American technology. Canada is hoping for the U.S. approval sometime in the summer........

ORAC is online now  
Old 20th Jun 2018, 11:30
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 2,007
Oh Canada...

I love Canada for many reasons (I ought to, they let me become a citizen!).

Right now I especially love Canada because they enable me to feel a little less irked by our own (UK) procurement system.

What a mess they have got themselves into. Once again.

BV

Last edited by Bob Viking; 20th Jun 2018 at 11:42.
Bob Viking is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2018, 14:20
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,997
It certainly looks like the RCAF is being messed abooot, eh BV?
BEagle is offline  
Old 20th Jun 2018, 18:57
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Not lost, but slightly uncertain of position.
Posts: 13
Originally Posted by Bob Viking View Post
I love Canada for many reasons (I ought to, they let me become a citizen!).

Right now I especially love Canada because they enable me to feel a little less irked by our own (UK) procurement system.

What a mess they have got themselves into. Once again.

BV

Not to worry BV. Although I thought Denmark postponed the decision for an awful looooong time, Canada will too, when the time is right, chose the F-35. Trust me, its the only aircraft that will do the job, from now and 40+ years onward.
F-16GUY is offline  
Old 22nd Jun 2018, 07:44
  #12 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 12,359
https://ca.reuters.com/article/busin...BN1JH2IA-OCABS

Exclusive: Canada could make it harder for U.S. to win fighter bid

ORAC is online now  
Old 31st Oct 2018, 09:02
  #13 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 12,359
https://www.defensenews.com/global/t...l-competitors/

Canada to accept bids for new fighter jet in May

VICTORIA, British Columbia — Canada expects to accept formal bids for a new fighter jet in May, with the first aircraft delivered by 2025, according to Canadian government procurement officials.

A draft bid package for 88 fighters was issued to companies for their feedback by the end of this year, said Pat Finn, assistant deputy minister for materiel at the Department of National Defence. From there, the final bidding instructions for the CA$16 billion (U.S. $12 billion) procurementwill be issued and bids required by May 2019, he added.

The aircraft will replace Canada’s current fleet of CF-18 fighter jets. The aircraft expected to be considered include Lockheed Martin’s F-35, the Eurofighter Typhoon, the Dassault Rafale, Saab’s Gripen and the Boeing Super Hornet.

The Canadian government will require a robust package of guaranteed industrial benefits or offsets from the winning bidder, government officials said. But that could be a problem for the F-35, as Canada is still a partner in that program, which does not guarantee participating-nations contracts. Work on the F-35 program is based on best value and price. Canadian industrial participation in the F-35 program has reached $1 billion, as more than 110 Canadian firms have landed contracts related to the aircraft program.

Jeff Waring, director general for industrial benefits policy at the federal Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, said the country sees the fighter jet program as a “once-in-a-generation opportunity for the Canadian economy.” But he noted the industrial benefits policy is flexible. “It is a market-driven approach,” he said. “It encourages suppliers to make investments that make sense to them.”

The issue of industrial benefits has already been discussed with companies interested in bidding on the project, and those talks will continue as feedback is received on the draft bid package, government officials said.

ORAC is online now  
Old 31st Oct 2018, 20:03
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 68
Posts: 1,954
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
The Canadian government will require a robust package of guaranteed industrial benefits or offsets from the winning bidder, government officials said. But that could be a problem for the F-35, as Canada is still a partner in that program, which does not guarantee participating-nations contracts. Work on the F-35 program is based on best value and price.
So Canada is already a partner on the F-35 program and reaping economic benefits from that partnership. Buying F-35 will not increase/improve those economic benefits. But buying another fighter, be it European or American, will likely bring new economic benefits to Canada while not effecting Canada's existing F-35 partnership?
KenV is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2018, 01:37
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Not of this world
Posts: 44
Originally Posted by KenV View Post
So Canada is already a partner on the F-35 program and reaping economic benefits from that partnership. Buying F-35 will not increase/improve those economic benefits. But buying another fighter, be it European or American, will likely bring new economic benefits to Canada while not effecting Canada's existing F-35 partnership?

not exactly true
spannermonkey is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2018, 16:39
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Up and away in the mountains of Canada
Posts: 52
All items defense procurement related are in a shambles with the current govt. in office. Far too many political considerations getting priority over common sense and reason. The Trudeau gang has messed with many contracts, for purely political purposes, which always costs more in the long term than just going with earlier choices would.
Grizzz is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2018, 19:11
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 68
Posts: 1,954
Originally Posted by spannermonkey View Post
not exactly true
I did not make a statement. I asked a question. How can a question be "not exactly true?"
KenV is offline  
Old 1st Nov 2018, 19:57
  #18 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 12,359
Putting a question mark at the end of a statement doesn’t make it a question - except in the case of a rhetorical question.

The question would, presumably, have been:

”But will buying another fighter, be it European or American, will likely bring new economic benefits to Canada, not adversely effecting Canada's existing F-35 partnership?”

To which the answer is obviously yes - but leaves open whether the end result will be more or less advantageous.
ORAC is online now  
Old 1st Nov 2018, 22:30
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,631
<devils advocate mode on>Bae don't want more Typhoon orders far more $$$ to be made selling off UK real estate and binning skilled workers.<off>
glad rag is offline  
Old 2nd Nov 2018, 00:35
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Not of this world
Posts: 44
Originally Posted by KenV View Post
I did not make a statement. I asked a question. How can a question be "not exactly true?"
Statement - Not entirely correct
Question response - No, not entirely correct

Happy? (question). Some people need to be a little less sensitive (statement).
spannermonkey is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.