Author Topic: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)  (Read 166433 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 427,720
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,030
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #325 on: May 21, 2018, 16:52:57 »
Are the issues with integration, or with keeping the mod line on time?
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline CBH99

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 23,320
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 728
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #326 on: May 21, 2018, 17:22:06 »
CBH99: In fact Sikorsky is pitching a SAR version of its civilian S-92 helo which does work (the H-92/CH-148 Cyclone, though derived from S-92, is effectively a new aircraft):

1) S-92

2) H-92--RCAF only customer:
https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/superhawk/

Mark
Ottawa


Thanks for the clarification Mark.  Initially my thoughts were "Wow, that's pretty ballsy to suggest we buy more of the helicopter they've failed to deliver" -- but I see the difference now.
Fortune Favours the Bold...and the Smart.

Wouldn't it be nice to have some Boondock Saints kicking around?

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 126,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,875
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #327 on: May 22, 2018, 11:42:33 »
Two thoughts spring to my mind:

First, didn't somebody already figured it out in the past, that using the same helicopter for SAR and Maritime Helicopter was a good idea? Oops! Sorry! I forgot someone else, after that fact, said "I'll write zai-roo helicopters!"

Second: 2023 for the first JSS!!! Can we revisit getting Obelix 16 months from ... now, per chance?

In my little "perfect world" Start the Obelix now, continue with the Kingston class, replace 1 Griffon squadron with H-92's rigged for troop/cargo/slinging and guns. Upgraded the remaining Griffons the same was the USMC "upgraded" their helo's. 

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 196,495
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,612
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #328 on: May 22, 2018, 13:27:01 »
...replace 1 Griffon squadron with H-92's rigged for troop/cargo/slinging and guns...

 ???

Which one?  The schoolhouse, or one of the two conventional line units?  If one of the line units, you'd wish to see the three operational line units then look like:  1 x Griffon, 1 x S-92 & 1 x Chinook?  How would you assign armed escort support of the Griffons to the two different heavier types of helicopters?

G2G

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 126,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,875
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #329 on: May 22, 2018, 14:13:29 »
???

Which one?  The schoolhouse, or one of the two conventional line units?  If one of the line units, you'd wish to see the three operational line units then look like:  1 x Griffon, 1 x S-92 & 1 x Chinook?  How would you assign armed escort support of the Griffons to the two different heavier types of helicopters?

G2G

I thought we had 3 squadrons of Griffons and the school?

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 196,495
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,612
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #330 on: May 22, 2018, 15:06:41 »
408 in Edmonton and 430 in Valcartier are the two conventional line Griffon squadrons.  438 in St-Hubert is a Reserve unit that augments and provides technical evaluation and maintenance training, but is not used to provide a main basis of rotation capability.  Arguably, 408 and 430 are stretched to support the utility/armed helo demand. Rarely is the issue about numbers of hardware, but rather about personnel to operate, maintain and support the hardware.  Re-equipping 408 or 430 with S-92s would worsen the situation currently balancing Griffon and Chinook capabilities.

Regards
G2G

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 126,340
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,875
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #331 on: May 22, 2018, 15:15:10 »
What can a Griffon do that the H-92 could not do? Perhaps slinging and small LZ's. In "My perfect world" I would raise up a new squadron, but have heard the issue of manning, it would seem you would get more bang for your personal manning buck with the H-92 than the Griffon.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 197,815
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,321
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #332 on: May 22, 2018, 15:26:27 »
With 427 being Special Ops (in support of CANSOFCOM) doesn't that leave 408, 430 and 450 to support the CMBGs?  Am I wrong to assume that on deployment, as opposed to garrison, that 450 and the Griffon squadrons would swap some flights to produce 3 mixed squadrons of both CH-146s and CH-147s?  Leave that as an Army-Centric force multiplier (with reservists in some of the billets as they have now).

If there is money for more CH-148s where would you put them and where would you find the crews to man them?

A Naval Task Group will only have hangars for 5 CH-148s:  2 in the AOR and one in each of the three CSCs.  At a push those aircraft could lift Company of infantry (22 in the back of each if the electronic stuff is kicked out).  More generally I would imagine that the aircraft would be employed with all the electronic gear on patrols, occasionally dropping a boarding party and once in a decade invading a distant shore.

I like the idea of more helos on the CSCs. I even like the idea of increasing either the number of 148s or 149s. 

But most of all I like the idea of a large flat deck from which 146s and 147s could lift when and as the need arose.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 216,835
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,550
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #333 on: May 22, 2018, 18:39:45 »
408 in Edmonton and 430 in Valcartier are the two conventional line Griffon squadrons.  438 in St-Hubert is a Reserve unit that augments and provides technical evaluation and maintenance training, but is not used to provide a main basis of rotation capability.  Arguably, 408 and 430 are stretched to support the utility/armed helo demand. Rarely is the issue about numbers of hardware, but rather about personnel to operate, maintain and support the hardware.  Re-equipping 408 or 430 with S-92s would worsen the situation currently balancing Griffon and Chinook capabilities.

Regards
G2G

If the Reg F worked Saturdays and Sundays (and took Mondays and Tuesdays as their 'weekend') you'd have way more troops (reservists) available to both service and utilize these airframes....

Heads exploding in 3....2....1....  ;D

"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 196,495
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,612
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #334 on: May 22, 2018, 20:10:41 »
If the Reg F worked Saturdays and Sundays (and took Mondays and Tuesdays as their 'weekend') you'd have way more troops (reservists) available to both service and utilize these airframes....

Heads exploding in 3....2....1....  ;D

Often done in the East.  Sorry, no pipeline, no weekend support for you, D&B!  ;)

G2G

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 216,835
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,550
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #335 on: May 23, 2018, 00:11:19 »
Often done in the East.  Sorry, no pipeline, no weekend support for you, D&B!  ;)

G2G

 :alone:
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 196,495
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,612
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #336 on: May 23, 2018, 10:44:14 »
What can a Griffon do that the H-92 could not do? Perhaps slinging and small LZ's. In "My perfect world" I would raise up a new squadron, but have heard the issue of manning, it would seem you would get more bang for your personal manning buck with the H-92 than the Griffon.

Considering the -92 family (S and H) was based on the Super Hawk, it's not a bad base airframe, but it would lose benefits in its present form, the further and further dry/away it gets from the Littorals.  If I were doing 'stuff' over the water that didn't need a fast flying and floating fortress (147), the 92 wouldn't be a bad machine at all, compared to the 146, but back feet-dry, 146 is not at all a bad airframe - it gets a bad rap, but much of that was based on non-optimal to poor (mis-)employment in the past.

Regards
G2G

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 65,015
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,167
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #337 on: August 28, 2018, 16:27:07 »
Cabinet committee Treasury Board now in charge of defence procurement--PM's announcement:

Quote
Prime Minister announces changes to the Cabinet committees
...
The Treasury Board will assume responsibility for key delivery challenges including defence procurement and modernizing the public service pay system. As the management board of government, the Treasury Board is well-placed to lead the whole-of-government approach needed on these key files...

The Prime Minister is also creating a new Incident Response Group, similar to those in place with our Five Eyes allies. It will be a dedicated, emergency committee that will convene in the event of a national crisis or during incidents elsewhere that have major implications for Canada. The Group will bring together relevant ministers and senior government leadership to coordinate a prompt federal response and make fast, effective decisions to keep Canadians safe and secure, at home and abroad...

The Treasury Board – as the management board of government – will actively assume responsibility for the issues previously addressed by the Cabinet Committee on Defence Procurement...
https://pm.gc.ca/eng/news/releases

New committees:
Quote
...
Treasury Board

Acts as the government’s management board. Provides oversight of the government’s financial management and spending, as well as oversight on human resources issues. Provides oversight on complex horizontal issues such as defence procurement and modernizing the pay system. Responsible for reporting to Parliament.

Is the employer for the public service, and establishes policies and common standards for administrative, personnel, financial and organizational practices across government.

Fulfills the role of the Committee of Council in approving regulatory policies and regulations, and most orders-in-council.

Chair
The Hon. Scott Brison

Vice-Chair
The Hon. Jane Philpott

Members
The Hon. Jean-Yves Duclos
The Hon. William Francis Morneau
The Hon. Mary Ng
The Hon. Carla Qualtrough

Alternates
The Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau
The Hon. James Gordon Carr
The Hon. Patricia A. Hajdu
The Hon. Ahmed Hussen
The Hon. Mélanie Joly
The Hon. Seamus Thomas Harris O’Regan
The Hon. Ginette C. Petitpas Taylor
The Hon. Harjit Singh Sajjan [emphasis added--industry min. Bains not on]
...
Cabinet Committee on Canada in the World and Public Security 

Considers issues concerning Canada’s engagement with and participation in the international community.  Responsible for issues related to domestic and global security and the consideration of intelligence reports.

Chair
The Hon. Ginette Petitpas Taylor

Vice-Chair
The Hon. Kirsty Duncan

Members
The Hon. Marie-Claude Bibeau
The Hon. William Sterling Blair
The Hon. Scott Brison
The Hon. Chrystia Freeland
The Hon. Marc Garneau
The Hon. Ralph Goodale
The Hon. Karina Gould
The Hon. Harjit Singh Sajjan [emphasis added]
https://pm.gc.ca/eng/cabinet-committee-mandate-and-membership

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 196,495
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,612
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #338 on: August 29, 2018, 08:10:59 »
Sounds like TB doing what it always did, now with six members (and seven alternates) in stead of the original five members. Since it’s now considered a Committee, does this mean all the members and alternates now get the additional Cabinet Committee stipend added to their salary? 

Offline MarkOttawa

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 65,015
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 6,167
  • Two birthdays
    • The 3Ds Blog
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #339 on: August 29, 2018, 11:01:14 »
Important procurement qualification from Mercedes Stephenson (now Global) at twitter:
https://twitter.com/MercedesGlobal/status/1034576184019890176

Quote
@MercedesGlobal

Ok SO very important information to correct and clarify what is in the PMO release about changes to cabinet. The responsibilities for defence procurement and Phoenix are changing cabinet committees NOT Ministers

Mark
Ottawa
Ça explique, mais ça n'excuse pas.

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 157,705
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,662
  • I get paid to travel. I just don't pick where.
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #340 on: October 03, 2018, 17:42:00 »
I wanted to post this in the Fighter discussion, but the line below would work equally well with the P-8 that the US, UK, Australia, NZ, South Korea, Norway and India currently have or are ordering.

Quote
But there’s an additional irony here. The F-35 was not just the choice of the Harper government. It was initially selected by the Liberal government of Jean Chrétien. The primary reason: interoperability with our primary allies. The U.S., U.K. and Australia would all be buying the F-35 so it just made sense.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/canadas-fighter-jet-debacle-this-is-no-way-to-run-a-military?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1538563618
Philip II of Macedon to Spartans (346 BC):  "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city."

Reply:  "If."

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 523,060
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,676
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #341 on: October 04, 2018, 08:02:18 »
Important procurement qualification from Mercedes Stephenson (now Global) at twitter:
Quote
Ok SO very important information to correct and clarify what is in the PMO release about changes to cabinet. The responsibilities for defence procurement and Phoenix are changing [or gripping] cabinet committees NOT Ministers
I agree that changing Ministers is mere theatre, allowing the gov't to proclaim "look, we've done....something  :dunno: " -- most real work is overseen at DM and A/DM level. 

A recurring, but often overlooked procurement problem is that "procurement" doesn't start until after  'options analysis' is complete, producing a statement of requirements.  In some instances these analyses have dragged on for 10 years;  as they dither, yes, technology advances, so naturally, it must be included, adding further delays as 'the plan' gets re-jigged..... again.

So one acquisitions step could be reduced by telling the good idea faeries (Mil & Civ) to STFU much earlier, and adapt the construction process to the realities of time/tech advancement.  For example, UK shipbuilding factors in the higher-tech only after construction of hulls, propulsion, etc has already commenced... thus moving inevitable tech obsolescence to the right.


And don't get me going on how 'sole-sourcing' is supposedly some ultimate evil.   ::)

Offline Dimsum

    West coast best coast.

  • Mentor
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 157,705
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 4,662
  • I get paid to travel. I just don't pick where.
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #342 on: October 04, 2018, 08:07:49 »
And don't get me going on how 'sole-sourcing' is supposedly some ultimate evil.   ::)

Well of course it is when Bombardier/Irving doesn't get the contract.   :nod:
Philip II of Macedon to Spartans (346 BC):  "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city."

Reply:  "If."

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 477,035
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,314
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #343 on: October 04, 2018, 08:53:28 »
...

And don't get me going on how 'sole-sourcing' is supposedly some ultimate evil.   ::)

Sole source procurement make good sense, and is, in fact, the ONLY sane thing to so when:

1. You know what it is that you need, i.e. a C-17 not just any big transport aircraft. You may know that because, for example, you know that you want an aircraft that is built and supported by an ally, not by e.g. the Russians;

2. You need it sooner rather than whenever any competitive process might be finished;

3. The item you need is in production; and

4, There is only one source ... thus, there's no point in any competition.

Sole source procurements should, almost always, be political decisions, rarely bureaucratic and almost never (maybe some specialized, super-secret stuff like crypto is the exception) a military one. The C-17s, the Chinooks and the Leopard 2A6M CAN tanks are good examples of good, smart, sole-source procurements. In each case it needed a minister to overrule the bureaucrats, including the ones in CADPAT, because, sometimes, the standard, much loved and defended to the bureaucratic death ~ paper cuts and eye strain ~ process isn't useful or even desirable.
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 427,720
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,030
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #344 on: October 04, 2018, 09:23:53 »
Moving away from a two year posting cycle, and the assumption that receipt of a posting message magically transforms someone into the CAF expert on a subject would also assist.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline E.R. Campbell

  • Retired, years ago
  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 477,035
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 18,314
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #345 on: October 04, 2018, 10:58:52 »
Moving away from a two year posting cycle, and the assumption that receipt of a posting message magically transforms someone into the CAF expert on a subject would also assist.


 :rofl:  Too true!   [:D  As those of us who spent year after painful frustrating year in both requirements and engineering can attest.   ::)
It is ill that men should kill one another in seditions, tumults and wars; but it is worse to bring nations to such misery, weakness and baseness
as to have neither strength nor courage to contend for anything; to have nothing left worth defending and to give the name of peace to desolation.
Algernon Sidney in Discourses Concerning Government, (1698)
----------
Like what you see/read here on Army.ca?  Subscribe, and help keep it "on the air!"

Offline dapaterson

    Mostly Harmless.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 427,720
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 16,030
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #346 on: October 29, 2018, 23:40:18 »
Why the Pentagon Could Never Build A Death Star

https://taskandpurpose.com/pentagon-death-star/

Say what you will about Darth Vader, but he knew how to run a modernization program. When he was put in charge of the Death Star Joint Program Office, that battle station reached initial operating capability on time – a feat the Pentagon seems unable to replicate many years later.

The Defense Department could learn a lot from Vader. For example, is there any mention in the “Star Wars” trilogy of the second Death Star being over budget? Of course not. You best believe that the Sith bad-*** would have locked the prime contractor into a fixed-price contract that included a clause such as, “JPO reserves the right to force choke your CEO every time the software doesn’t work as advertised.”
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html