The RCAF's Next Generation Fighter (CF-188 Replacement)

[Loachman]

This last point is complete bull, as all the requirements for the replacement have been known for years, and a proper competition can be held right now (and could have been held a year ago) and the selection could be made within a year.

I am still awaiting a definition for this "competition" from somebody in either government, media, or commentariat. The term is meaningless, mere empty words, and cliche.

What is currently not known about each of the options? Are we missing some key data that is crucial to making a proper and rational decision? If so, what?

 

[Quirky]

If your maintainers cannot keep 8 aircraft serviceable with 14, they won't be able to make 8 with 20.  Maintenance can only work on so many aircraft at once.  They have a finite capacity.  If you want more aircraft on the line, you need more techs.

Our biggest issue right now is finding parts, they didn't bother finding contractors to fix the ones we have now. Another issue is the parts we have now are not stored at the bases the jets are. There is usually a two day wait for something to be shipped in by military postal service that's only 300km away. More techs won't fix the issue of old airplanes, both will just sit there waiting for a part to come from some depot that's not anywhere near an Air Force base.

 

[McG]

Our biggest issue right now is finding parts, they didn't bother finding contractors to fix the ones we have now. Another issue is the parts we have now are not stored at the bases the jets are. There is usually a two day wait for something to be shipped in by military postal service that's only 300km away. More techs won't fix the issue of old airplanes, both will just sit there waiting for a part to come from some depot that's not anywhere near an Air Force base.

With only two CFSDs, you probably should not expect they will both be picked-up and dropped at Cold Lake and Baggotville respectively.  If local stock-outs are regularly occurring on items that are available in the system, then you should look to adjust local scaling.  If stock-outs are occurring because LCMMs cannot keep the shelves filled with enough of items to cover their expected use, then it will not matter how close you are to the depot.

 

[MilEME09]

https://www.pressreader.com/canada/the-globe-and-mail-bc-edition/20170907/281797104147277

interesting article, as the rest of the industry turns on the government

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

MilEME: Don't confuse ten companies, some not even amongst the largest, in the aeronautical industry as "the rest of the industry" when there are hundreds of companies, just around Montreal, that are in that industry.

 

[Loachman]

Those companies in Quebec that already have F35-related contracts have differing opinions from those that have not.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

That's right Coachman: Those with contracts for the F-35 don't particularly look favourably on Boeing getting a contract for "interim" Super-Hornets.

Though I must say I was surprised to see Heroux-Devtek in there since they do landing gears for both F-18's and F-35's.

 

[dapaterson]

Have to look to the future: more lucrative to chase the JSF business.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Meanwhile French gov't offers big industrial deal on Rafale to Belgium in order to counter F-35--harbinger for Canada (Bombardier)?

1) France offers Belgium warplanes, military deal
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-france-belgium-rafale/france-offers-belgium-warplanes-military-deal-idUKKCN1BI22Z

2) From Dassault itself--"comprehensive partnership offer made by the French Authorities to the Belgian Government":
https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2017/09/07/1114241/0/en/Dassault-Aviation-Rafale-for-the-replacement-of-the-F-16s-of-the-Air-Component-of-the-Belgian-Defense.html

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Quirky]

With only two CFSDs, you probably should not expect they will both be picked-up and dropped at Cold Lake and Baggotville respectively.  If local stock-outs are regularly occurring on items that are available in the system, then you should look to adjust local scaling.  If stock-outs are occurring because LCMMs cannot keep the shelves filled with enough of items to cover their expected use, then it will not matter how close you are to the depot.

I'm not a scale adjuster nor is it my job - or do I care for that matter. All too often the answer I get is "we have none on base but X amount in depot, it'll be about a week". Ok excellent I'll just go home because the supply system didn't reorder stock. Beyond that, there are simply no parts left to order for whatever reason. I'm not about to call up the LCMM and ask him why I can't get a part.

 

[McG]

I'm not a scale adjuster nor is it my job - or do I care for that matter. All too often the answer I get is "we have none on base but X amount in depot, it'll be about a week". Ok excellent I'll just go home because the supply system didn't reorder stock. Beyond that, there are simply no parts left to order for whatever reason. I'm not about to call up the LCMM and ask him why I can't get a part.

Understand that your earlier complaint was that you did not get the responsiveness you want because the depot was not parked on your base.  By your very statements here, it can be seen that you have taken a perspective too shallow to have reached the conclusion that you previously arrived at.  I would also suggest that if you do not care that scaling may be wrong (regardless of it maybe not being your job) and a local cause of your frustrations, then you don't really care that parts are not available in a timely way.  The Depot's geography is not something that can be changed; scaling is.

 

[MilEME09]

Meanwhile French gov't offers big industrial deal on Rafale to Belgium in order to counter F-35--harbinger for Canada (Bombardier)?

1) France offers Belgium warplanes, military deal
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-france-belgium-rafale/france-offers-belgium-warplanes-military-deal-idUKKCN1BI22Z

2) From Dassault itself--"comprehensive partnership offer made by the French Authorities to the Belgian Government":
https://globenewswire.com/news-release/2017/09/07/1114241/0/en/Dassault-Aviation-Rafale-for-the-replacement-of-the-F-16s-of-the-Air-Component-of-the-Belgian-Defense.html

Mark
Ottawa

Wonder if it's as good of a deal as the full technology transfer offer they gave us?

 

[Quirky]

Understand that your earlier complaint was that you did not get the responsiveness you want because the depot was not parked on your base.  By your very statements here, it can be seen that you have taken a perspective too shallow to have reached the conclusion that you previously arrived at.  I would also suggest that if you do not care that scaling may be wrong (regardless of it maybe not being your job) and a local cause of your frustrations, then you don't really care that parts are not available in a timely way.  The Depot's geography is not something that can be changed; scaling is.

Having parts in depots at locations where jets aren't based at is a good way to keep them grounded, needlessly. It's like having our navy on both coasts and the ships part in depots in Winnipeg. If we want new shiney airplanes, and keep them flying, this nonsense needs to end.

 

[MilEME09]

I agree, places like 7 CFSD work fine for the army, but like you pointed out, not so much for the other branches. Having depots for the branches sounds like a good idea to have parts closer to those that use them, however do we have the capacity to even do so? and from a logistical point of view does it make sense?

 

[McG]

There are two main depot for all of the CAF.  They are not placed to the benefit of any particular branch.  Whining that that one is not parked in your back yard (which you cannot influence) while declaring you don't care about local scaling (which, at worst, can be influenced by someone that you can influence) is a sure sign that you do not really care.  There will never be a CFAD for every base with a unit that believes itself to be the centre of everything.  It is not the purpose of the depots to be everywhere.  But, if a unit cannot do its job because it does not keep an adequate maintenance load, then that is a local failing to sort out scaling.

 

[PuckChaser]

I agree, places like 7 CFSD work fine for the army, but like you pointed out, not so much for the other branches. Having depots for the branches sounds like a good idea to have parts closer to those that use them, however do we have the capacity to even do so? and from a logistical point of view does it make sense?

So we quadruple the overhead for spare parts storage? Even if we make RCAF depots in Cold Lake and Bagotville, do we just screw Trenton for parts? Or all the Tac Hel sqns? What about Comox and Shearwater? More depots means more buildings, heating, power, PYs. Its not efficient even if you have to wait an extra day for something to get shipped. I'm sure if it was an urgent operational requirement it would be overnighted to you, or likely there would be some stock on the shelves.

 

[MilEME09]

So we quadruple the overhead for spare parts storage? Even if we make RCAF depots in Cold Lake and Bagotville, do we just screw Trenton for parts? Or all the Tac Hel sqns? What about Comox and Shearwater? More depots means more buildings, heating, power, PYs. Its not efficient even if you have to wait an extra day for something to get shipped. I'm sure if it was an urgent operational requirement it would be overnighted to you, or likely there would be some stock on the shelves.

Now being an army PRes tech I don't deal with local scaling at all, who has control over local scaling? I'm used to everything being one for one exchange which I'm sure is annoying for aircraft parts.

 

[SupersonicMax]

So we quadruple the overhead for spare parts storage? Even if we make RCAF depots in Cold Lake and Bagotville, do we just screw Trenton for parts? Or all the Tac Hel sqns? What about Comox and Shearwater? More depots means more buildings, heating, power, PYs. Its not efficient even if you have to wait an extra day for something to get shipped. I'm sure if it was an urgent operational requirement it would be overnighted to you, or likely there would be some stock on the shelves.

Really?  Cause last time we HPR'd something from Edmonton, it took a week!

Another issue with joint depots is that given the complexity of aircraft parts and their airwhorthiness status, many time we receive parts that, while are technically in good order, are not airwhorthy.  In theater, we had to re-order a generator (I think it was a generator but it is irrelevant) 3 times because its 2nd line inspections had expired.

To me, the solution would be to have all parts for different fleets managed at different bases.  Your base has 3xGriffon/90?  You get 3.3% of all possibie parts on that base.  As inventory decreases on each base, you re-allocate as required.  A bit more overhead but you re-allocate the depot personnel to each base supply sections.  This way, parts are there when you need them.  Fixing the local scale is next to impossible.  We tried it on our 3 fleets and it was denied because "the system is already responsive enough."  We may get our parts in the alloted times however, it is still too slow and mire often than not, the parts need to be re-ordered because they are not airwhorthy.  This aspect is not captured in the Supply QM process as the second order is treated as a different order.  If it comes within the alloted time, it's not something that will be noted.  Yet, we lost mire than twice the time on a repair waiting for the same part.

 

[Loachman]

So we quadruple the overhead for spare parts storage? Even if we make RCAF depots in Cold Lake and Bagotville, do we just screw Trenton for parts? Or all the Tac Hel sqns? What about Comox and Shearwater? More depots means more buildings, heating, power, PYs. Its not efficient even if you have to wait an extra day for something to get shipped. I'm sure if it was an urgent operational requirement it would be overnighted to you, or likely there would be some stock on the shelves.

There are two CF18 bases. Only two. Split all CF18 parts between those two locations. They can balance between themselves and be far more efficient than a centralized depot that is not, by nature (and I do not fault them for lack of specific interests) as responsive.

Trenton has no interest in CF18 parts. There are no other bases operating C17s or C130Js, however, so, if parts for those are not stocked exclusively in Trenton rather than a CFSD, correct that.

Increasingly, though, parts are supplied by manufacturers.

Griffon parts come through the Bell supply system. Commonly-used parts are stocked at Squadrons already, in accordance with historical usage rates.

Don't be too confident that "urgent operational requirement (it) would be overnighted to you". Even manufacturers' supply systems are not always that responsive for various reasons.

 

[The Bread Guy]

This whole saga cannot possibly get any dumber...

Great.  Now you did it, SKT.  Someone's going to try and Viam Inveniemus...

Hold my beer  ;D ...

Three retired air force generals say buying used fighter jets from Australia is a much better plan for Canada than purchasing new Super Hornets from Boeing.

Tom Lawson, Andre Deschamps and Kenneth Pennie say Australia's old F-18s will need modifications to operate alongside Canada's CF-18s, but that would cost a lot less than brand-new Super Hornets ...