ExFlyer

I hope you have been made aware of things you were oblivious to, despite your insults and obnoxiousness.

Oh no, just trying to set you straight. It is clear you have no clue about ASW ad SAR helicopters. As I mentioned befloe and as many here are aware, I was in the SAR word and on the SAR procurment project and as a public servant, was on the MHP project so. I am very aware of what we bought and where we bought it. It is you that is clueless and does not like being informed and keeps on trying to sound like you do. You are an epic fail in this regard. And yes, you whine about why we got unique helicopters. Lastly the ignorance is all on your face, regardless how much I taught you

Underthe contract, Sikorsky built a state of the art training centre in Shearwater, flight simulators for Shearwater and Pat Bay and contract maintenance and overhaul out to may companies (lots in Quebec LOL) which they did. The helicopter was assembled in Sikorsky plant in Stafford Connecticut. Like almost all aviation manufacturers these days, the component parts were made all over the world, even some here in Canada.You area aware there are no "off the shelf" shipborne ASW helicopters??

It is you whining about us buying unique helicopters. American ships are different to ours. And they are using Sea Hawks in a different operational mode. If you are going to argue, do some research. You are sounding more and more ignorant with each post. Our Military situation and finances always make us miss opportunities.

Yes, sometimes. Our navt helicopters and SAR helicopters will be soleley our usage. We need not share technology nor equipment . The f35 is a different situation where our fighters will be deployed to international sites and being unique would be a determent. Canada's involvement in F35 design, build and testing has been ongoing for 25+ years. No one had to eat crow, it was well known we would get F35's. "Canada’s total investment in the F-35 to US$613 million since 1997,...to remain a partner country in the F-35 project. " That may be news to you but that Military and government involvement is old news. The political rhetoric by both parties was just an underinflated political football LOL We were always gonna get the F35. Unique to our country (and and every other country) is what military procurement is all about. What Canada needs is different than what the US or Sweden or Germany or Mexico or Great Britain or..on and on needs. Wake up and smell the weapon systems world LOL

Your song is getting tiresome. We got what we got. Military is not a priority in Canada. Social programs are. The Military is happy with anything and everything they get. No, ours is not "so superior" but it is designed and built for us, for our ships, for our needs. All military aircraft are "unique". Unique to the country that procures them for their needs, purposes and for their budget. There ain't no Best Buy for weapons systems.

As always, cost is the biggest factor. Canada has some sort of angst against nuclear power. Prime reason is why we were kept off AUKUS. "AUKUS is intended to strengthen the ability of each government to support security and defense interests, building on longstanding and ongoing bilateral ties. " "Canada doesn't operate or manufacture nuclear submarines, or aspire to build a nuclear fleet, it wasn't part of the dialogue".

Once again "All Military equipment is a money pit. When you live on the pointy end of technology, it costs a lot, not staying at the pointy end will cost you even more. " Being such a smart person when it comes to Military, please give me a list of Military equipment that does not cost a lot to procure and maintain and keep up to date? The CH148 was a desperate requirement for the Navy to replace it's 55 year old helicopters. They were the ones with problems with getting parts.

Oh, is he saying it is all political?? How profound! What a brain fart!! LOL

OK??? All Military equipment is a money pit. When you live on the pointy end of technology, it costs a lot, not staying at the pointy end will cost you even more. You know best LOL

Incorrect, 18 will have definitive plans and dates by the end of the year,not reach the goal.. Canada is the only one that has not committed to plans or dates. The US Ambassador to NATO was just on Question Period saying that.

What aircraft it a one off orphan? Not sure what point you are trying to make? Reliving the woulda shoulda times are long past. Spilled milk has been wiped up. We got what the governments wanted. Also, one of the causes of delay is the Industrial Regional Benefits packages that Sikorsky had to set up. As I said, I was with the program as a public servant. If you think you have some insight, well say it but be sure you know what you are talking about and not stuff you think you might know. Parts are not a problem, new technology and changing requirements (scope creep) are. It is not solely ASW, it is also to be SAR and other military duties. I was there.

Actually, Identification was started by Chretien in 2003 but you are correct, it was anything but the 101. So Sikorsky wins by default. Kinda put them in the drivers seat. They had no ASW helicopter so put forth a bunch of unproven and not yet designed let alone tested proposals and they were all accepted, until they could not be done. They even promised the commercial S-92 could be made into a ASW and combat ready machine. As time went on, that became a falsehood and all the development and design came up short and we still do not have them all delivered. Not only that, there are a bunch of variants in the fleet. Number 1 is far from number 5 and even farther from number 10 and so on. We identified innumerable shortcomings and had to change the contract to make them acceptable. A very sad thing.

The SAR helicopter is an EH101. The SAR Helicopter project went through the entire procurement process with many bidders as opposed to the previous selection which was pretty well pre selected. It was cancelled primarily because the cost of the Maritime Helicopter was out of line and most of all, they did not fit on our ships. Also, as I already said "The Cormorant has more range, more capability, more equipment than the old Labrador ever had. It has also done more than ever before and is far more reliable. " and it has won more International SAR awards than Canada has ever won before. The CH 148 Cyclone is another project (started by the Conservatives) which has had innumerable political interference's as well as Sikorskys failure to provide what they bid and required one contract amendment after another. Sikorsky made promises it could not keep. Both Conservative and Liberal governments could have cared less. I was in both programs, in and out of the Military.

Incorrect. The SAR Helicopter, Cormorant, is far from flawed. The Cormorant has more range, more capability, more equipment than the old Labrador ever had. It has also done more than ever before and is far more reliable. It is very far from flawed.

Oh stop. Your partisanship is showing out of your zipper LOL Harper was as laggard during his tenure. Some years a bit higher some years a bit lower, just like the Liberals. Harper was also as laggard with defence spending as Trudeau. "While the Conservative government claims its defence spending over the years has risen massively, independent studies show the Tories actually underspent their own approved military budgets by close to $10 billion. They also chopped nearly $5 billion from defence since 2012, in large part to help Stephen Harper reach his much proclaimed budget surplus." https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-defence-spending-brian-stewart-1.3242611 I served through several iterations of Liberal and Conservative governments and saw decline in the MIlitary during all of them. Do not try an tell me one party was better than the other, they both decimated the Military and that will continue. If you think PP will save the Military, you are eating too much conservative slop stew. He won't have the money and he will continue with all the social programs the liberals are putting in place because there is no way he can take that away from folks then.

No we won't. The same countries that are laggard now will be laggard tomorrow. No, saying the excuses you make are very conservative like. The conservatives shared in being laggard. We have been laggard for more decades than we want to count. Question is, have we ever lived up to the requirement?

Isn't the Frasier Institute a research company that continually does research and publishes annually?

I disagree. If we cannot calm ourselves and keep on fighting each other, we would not notice or care even if it is foreign.

Never said we were the only ones. Making excuses sounds very conservative LOL

We are losing our Country to political infighting. When we hate and $hit on each other we do not see what the rest of the world is doing.

Topic Title should be "Canada falls from freedom index top 10 list for first time since 2012" In 2012, Conservative Harper was PM

"The reality of an American invasion would be " is that it could very well be welcomed by a lot of Canadians, especially from the West. The Quebecers would be put in their place in a heartbeat LOL We may have done politics better but we have become very American in our politics. Now you are either Conservative or Liberal and there is true hate between one to the other (demonstrated by the rhetoric of the party leaders). This forum is a microcosm of Canadian politics now.

The issue is the influence MP's and Ministers have on the procurement process. The Military has a request for proposal and the bids come in and are evaluated against the requirements. When the evaluation is over and the winning bidder is decided, it must go to Ministers offices for approval and if they don't like it, then we have to evaluate again and/or change the requirement as the Ministers offices see fit. The public hears about scope creep or changes or desire for more and that is rarely the case, it is more often ministerial interference so IRB's (Industrial regional Benefits) are more in flavor to some areas than others. Even Indian Affairs (or whatever they are called these days) has a lot to say about company's bids. The Military gets falsely blames for delays, increased costs and scope creep when in fact, IRB and political pressures and other external factors are to blame.

So, the ship work for those 3 regions is paramount. The head height for the Cyclone is not ideal but it is very workable. Operational range is the biggest problem. I was on that program as a civil servant and am OK with that helicopter. I do have a number of issues but it was OK'd by the Air Force. The cabin height of the Kingfisher and the search capability is a different issue. Being hunched over when having to attend patients in the cabin is not fun and the landing gear structure makes it difficult for spotting when searching. We (Air Force) wanted the C-27J and the Americans offered us some at a huge discount but the government at the time (Conservative) did not accept the offer. There is no single political party to blame as the both were in power for the SAR Helicopter, Ships, Coast Guard, Maritime Helicopter and SAR fixed wing were being procured. The political interference is so severe, no one got what they really needed or wanted.