Canadian Forces in sad shape!

[wulf42]

As a former member it is really sad to see our forces reduced to this!

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Front/1090520.html

Edited November 16, 2008 by wulf42

[Sir Bandelot]

By now the CPC should have done something about it.

But they chose to bail out banks who make windfall profits year after year instead.

[wulf42]

By now the CPC should have done something about it.

But they chose to bail out banks who make windfall profits year after year instead.

The real problem is having a minority Government, those guys in Ottawa will never get anything through! One party suggests something the other shoots it down even if they did agree with it! and our Military gets screwed in the middle.

Edited November 15, 2008 by wulf42

[Smallc]

There are new helicopters on order an its not the fault of the government that they have been delayed so much. It is the fault of the government that they canceled the first contract, though given the probllems with the EH 101, it may have been a blessing in disguise. Hopefully the new helicopters don't get delayed again. There should be (and I hope there are) penalties applies to Sikorsky.

As for not enough ships to train on, well, there are always ships at sea. Usually between 6 and 10 at a time.

[Wilber]

By now the CPC should have done something about it.

But they chose to bail out banks who make windfall profits year after year instead.

Say what? Chretien cancelled the EH101 contract in 93 at the cost of a half billion in penalties to the Canadian taxpayer. 13 years of Liberal majority government later and the Navy still didn't have their helicopters but it's the CPCs fault because they haven't been able to fix it after two years with a minority.

[Sir Bandelot]

There wasn't as much going on during those 13 years. I'm not making excuses for anyone, but we are at war now, in case you haven't noticed... now is the time to do something for sure.

And lest we forget, the CPC government authorized the mission to go into southern Afghanistan and hunt for the Taliban, a more dangerous mission. So that was all the more reason to make sure, the troops have adequate resources.

But instead, the CPC wasted the surplus that the Liberals created. They coulda bought a lot of new Jeeps with that money. What did they do with it? Well now it seems the banks are getting some.

[noahbody]

There wasn't as much going on during those 13 years. I'm not making excuses for anyone, but we are at war now, in case you haven't noticed... now is the time to do something for sure.

Not much going on? We were in Afghanistan in year eight.

[Sir Bandelot]

Not much going on? We were in Afghanistan in year eight.

And the mission was expanded beyind our obligations in 2006. At that point Canada became leaders of the multi-national brigade hunting the taliban in southern Afghanistan.

Are you saying that it's ok for the CPC to continue to do nothing, and blame it on the Liberals because they did nothing?

[Smallc]

Not much going on? We were in Afghanistan in year eight.

Which has very little to do with the Navy. I'm not saying we shouldn't have bought the helicopters in the first place, but with the problems the EH 101 has, it may have very well been a blessing in disguise.

[Wilber]

There wasn't as much going on during those 13 years. I'm not making excuses for anyone, but we are at war now, in case you haven't noticed... now is the time to do something for sure.

And lest we forget, the CPC government authorized the mission to go into southern Afghanistan and hunt for the Taliban, a more dangerous mission. So that was all the more reason to make sure, the troops have adequate resources.

I believe it was the Martin government that first authorized the mission in Kandahar but yes the Conservatives have expanded it. Maybe something to do with the philosophy that if something was worth doing, it was worth doing right. If there wasn't much going on, you would think the Liberals could get a lousy couple of dozen helicopters for the Navy with a 13 year majority. Not to worry, it is the way Canada has always gone to war. Unprepared and a bunch of people end up getting killed unnecessarily before we can get our shit together and give them what they should have had from day one.

[Smallc]

If there wasn't much going on, you would think the Liberals could get a lousy couple of dozen helicopters for the Navy with a 13 year majority.

The Liberals did buy helicopters. The company can't seem to deliver them. We should have gotten the first one by now.

[kengs333]

Say what? Chretien cancelled the EH101 contract in 93 at the cost of a half billion in penalties to the Canadian taxpayer. 13 years of Liberal majority government later and the Navy still didn't have their helicopters but it's the CPCs fault because they haven't been able to fix it after two years with a minority.

Yes, because they've blown big money and gotten away with it. So if this kind of problem still exists, it is their fault.

Stop blaming it on a minority government. The Liberals are more than willing to prop up the Cons, so in reality it is a majority for at least two years. Think of some other excuse.

[Wilber]

Yes, because they've blown big money and gotten away with it. So if this kind of problem still exists, it is their fault.

Stop blaming it on a minority government. The Liberals are more than willing to prop up the Cons, so in reality it is a majority for at least two years. Think of some other excuse.

Excuse for what?

[bush_cheney2004]

The Liberals did buy helicopters. The company can't seem to deliver them. We should have gotten the first one by now.

True, but Canada shouldn't expect the original delivery schedule to be met after post contract award requirements / design changes.

What is it about rotary winged aircraft that vexes Canada so?

[Smallc]

True, but Canada shouldn't expect the original delivery schedule to be met after post contract award requirements / design changes.

What is it about rotary winged aircraft that vexes Canada so?

This is a new helicopter that the company keeps pushing back. It was always supposed to be custom and it was all taken into consideration. In this case, it seem that the company simply can't deliver.

[bush_cheney2004]

This is a new helicopter that the company keeps pushing back. It was always supposed to be custom and it was all taken into consideration. In this case, it seem that the company simply can't deliver.

Canada doesn't get to avoid procurment realities.....if a new engine and landing gear (major subsystems) are needed to meet "custom" requirements, then such risks should have been factored into the operational qualifications and deployment schedule.

This thread's OP concerning Sea King deficiencies reveals just how close to the edge Canada operates with their helos and air crew, regardless of the risks involved.

Certainly United Technologies - Sikorsky can produce and manufacture helicopters. Based on casual observations of this Canadian fiasco over the years, political and procurement wrangling would have doomed any contract to a similar fate.

The bottom line is that Canadian Forces go wanting for airworthy assets and capability, while there is ample time to argue about who is to blame.

[Smallc]

Canada doesn't get to avoid procurment realities.....if a new engine and landing gear (major subsystems) are needed to meet "custom" requirements, then such risks should have been factored into the operational qualifications and deployment schedule.

This thread's OP concerning Sea King deficiencies reveals just how close to the edge Canada operates with their helos and air crew, regardless of the risks involved.

Certainly United Technologies - Sikorsky can produce and manufacture helicopters. Based on casual observations of this Canadian fiasco over the years, political and procurement wrangling would have doomed any contract to a similar fate.

The bottom line is that Canadian Forces go wanting for airworthy assets and capability, while there is ample time to argue about who is to blame.

The bottom line is, the company was to deliver the first aircraft by the end of the month. I was one month of on my earlier remembering. The company will not meet contract obligations and they should be punished as a result. I also hope that this is taken into consideration in the awarding of future contracts.

[bush_cheney2004]

The bottom line is, the company was to deliver the first aircraft by the end of the month. I was one month of on my earlier remembering. The company will not meet contract obligations and they should be punished as a result. I also hope that this is taken into consideration in the awarding of future contracts.

This is a perfect example of what I am talking about....your expectations do not meet up with the realities of the original RFP, contract award, subsequent design changes, and cost overruns. There are mechanisms built into the procurment process to address such things, but apparently that doesn't include mitigation of political damage.

The risk model for developing a non-existing military variant of Sikorsky's airframe isn't hard to project. Punishing the contractor is all well and good, but does nothing to solve the immediate (and indeed longstanding) problem.

I am sure that helo procurments from Canada are not the most coveted based on historical experiences...just ask the Cormorant Team.

[Smallc]

This is a perfect example of what I am talking about....your expectations do not meet up with the realities of the original RFP, contract award, subsequent design changes, and cost overruns. There are mechanisms built into the procurment process to address such things, but apparently that doesn't include mitigation of political damage.

There are mechanisms....and they include penalties for the company. The company told the military these things could be delivered at end of month. Then it was end of January. Now its mid 2010 or later. Its getting ridiculous. Yes, the Sea King should have been replaced sooner, but it wasn't and now we have to deal with the problem of the company not being able to deliver the product we did order.

They won the tender with a product that they pitched. This product was to be delivered within a certain time frame. The government can be blamed for not buying the helicopter sooner. They can't be blamed for whats happening now.

Edited November 16, 2008 by Smallc

[bush_cheney2004]

There are mechanisms....and they include penalties for the company. The company told the military these things could be delivered at end of month. Then it was end of January. Now its mid 2010 or later. Its getting ridiculous. Yes, the Sea King should have been replaced sooner, but it wasn't and now we have to deal with the problem of the company not being able to deliver the product we did order.

Indeed....the decision to "gap" procurement of the Sea King's successor only adds to the problem, and beating up the contractor is little consolation even if found to be non-compliant. Cost overruns and schedule shifts to the right are normal events, not exceptions to such procurements. That is why one shouldn't wait 50 years.

The suits at Sikorsky have the leverage to play a waiting game over cost-plus arguments. "Custom" rotary-wing aircraft are not "ordered" like GMC pickup trucks. Apparently, the maximum penalty for late delivery is $36 million....I leave the math to you.

Edited November 16, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

[Smallc]

The suits at Sikorsky have the leverage to play a waiting game over cost-plus arguments. "Custom" rotary-wing aircraft are not "ordered" like GMC pickup trucks. Apparently, the maximum penalty for late delivery is $36 million....I leave the math to you.

At the rate things are going, I would not be completely surprised if the contract were canceled.

[Wilber]

At the rate things are going, I would not be completely surprised if the contract were canceled.

Then what?

[Smallc]

Then what?

I don't know, but earlier this year, I believe PW was talking about canceling as Sikorsky asked for more money. When they didn't get the presidential helicopter, the program costs shifted completely to Canada. Just something I had heard.

Edited November 16, 2008 by Smallc

[Wilber]

They were 30 years old when the EH101 contract was canceled. They are now 45 years old. Canceling another contract is not an option unless they know of some suitable aircraft that can be obtained sooner.

[Smallc]

They were 30 years old when the EH101 contract was canceled. They are now 45 years old. Canceling another contract is not an option unless they know of some suitable aircraft that can be obtained sooner.

The only thing that could be done is some kind of temporary lease arrangement, but that is unlikely given our landing and take off requirements. An alternative option would be available if Augusta Westland could deliver helicopters in a time frame of about 2 years.

Its just something that was floated for a while. This really worries me because there is no saying that the delivery will not again be delayed.

Edited November 16, 2008 by Smallc