Canadian Armed Forces Thread

[Gurn]

Extreme weather and a loss of power is a terrible combination, the loss of steerage renders you unable to keep your bow into the waves.

Capsizing becomes a concern.

Glad they got back to port, good thing this happened when help was around.

[Gurn]

Explosion, likely from ruptured gas line, at CFB Comox:

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/10-people-are-injured-in-an-explosion-at-one-of-canada-s-military-bases/ar-AAQUjFp?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531

 

Multiple people were injured in an explosion at one of Canada's military bases, according to local emergency personnel.

 

The blast happened at Canadian Forces Base Comox on Vancouver Island at around 9 a.m. PT on Thursday.

Photos posted on social media from eyewitnesses show damage to one of the buildings on the base and debris scattered around it.

The blast occurred in a former barracks building, according to Dean Stoltz, a CHEK News reporter at the scene.

The Town of Comox said that Comox Fire sent two engines and 12 firefighters to the scene for support but that their services were not required.

B.C. Emergency Health Services told CBC that 10 people had been injured including one person who was airlifted to hospital in serious condition.

In addition to the person who was airlifted to the hospital, the statement to CBC added that three people were taken to hospital in stable condition and six people were treated at the military base's medical centre.

The cause of the explosion is not yet known.

 

 

 NOTE- Local radio saying likely gas line rupture caused by excavator.-

[24K PureCool]

Guess someone forgot to call Fortis...

[Gurn]

2 hours ago, 24K PureCool said:

Guess someone forgot to call Fortis...

Isn't that against the law? I seem to recall hearing that somewhere .........  8 to 12 times a day.

[24K PureCool]

13 minutes ago, gurn said:

Isn't that against the law? I seem to recall hearing that somewhere .........  8 to 12 times a day.

It is illegal. Those excavators gonna get dinned pretty hard or someone at Fortis is gonna lose their job for providing faulty information.

[Gnarcore]

11 hours ago, gurn said:

Explosion, likely from ruptured gas line, at CFB Comox:

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/10-people-are-injured-in-an-explosion-at-one-of-canada-s-military-bases/ar-AAQUjFp?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531

 

Multiple people were injured in an explosion at one of Canada's military bases, according to local emergency personnel.

 

The blast happened at Canadian Forces Base Comox on Vancouver Island at around 9 a.m. PT on Thursday.

Photos posted on social media from eyewitnesses show damage to one of the buildings on the base and debris scattered around it.

The blast occurred in a former barracks building, according to Dean Stoltz, a CHEK News reporter at the scene.

The Town of Comox said that Comox Fire sent two engines and 12 firefighters to the scene for support but that their services were not required.

B.C. Emergency Health Services told CBC that 10 people had been injured including one person who was airlifted to hospital in serious condition.

In addition to the person who was airlifted to the hospital, the statement to CBC added that three people were taken to hospital in stable condition and six people were treated at the military base's medical centre.

The cause of the explosion is not yet known.

 

 

 NOTE- Local radio saying likely gas line rupture caused by excavator.-

I played a ton of hockey at the rink at the base. Pretty sure I know where that was. I hope they all fully recover! <3 

[Gnarcore]

[Gurn]

Local radio now saying 22 people taken to hospital, one flown down to Vancouver with serious lacerations. All others now released.

 

Also, maybe not an excavator, but rather a contractor could have caused the explosion.

[Gurn]

News on replacement fighter options;

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/canada-kicks-boeing-from-jet-competition-narrows-search-to-f-35-and-swedish-gripen/ar-AARmbbt?ocid=msedgntp

 

OTTAWA — Canada has officially narrowed its decade-long hunt for a new fighter jet to two choices as the federal government confirmed U.S. aerospace giant Boeing’s Super Hornet is out of the running to replace the military’s aging CF-18s.

The announcement from Public Services and Procurement Canada came nearly a week after The Canadian Press reported the surprise news that Boeing had been told its bid for the $19-billion contract did not meet Ottawa’s requirements.

The Liberal government refused to comment publicly at that time, and there was uncertainty around whether the U.S. aerospace giant had been dropped from the competition to provide Canada with 88 new fighter jets.

But the federal procurement department confirmed in a statement Wednesday that Lockheed Martin's F-35 stealth fighter and the Swedish Saab Gripen are the only two aircraft still in contention.

While the statement did not say why Boeing's offer did not make the cut, the fact that one of the two U.S. companies competing for the contract failed to make the final shortlist represents a major turn of events.

“Proposals were rigorously assessed on elements of capability, cost and economic benefits,” Public Services and Procurement Canada said. “The evaluation also included an assessment of economic impact.”

Following the government’s announcement, Boeing issued its own statement saying it was “disappointed and deeply concerned” that its Super Hornet had not made it to the next phase of the competition.

“We are working with the U.S. and Canadian governments to better understand the decision and looking for the earliest date to request a debrief to then determine our path forward,” the company said.

Many observers had seen the Super Hornet and F-35 as the only real competition because of Canada’s close relationship with the United States, which includes using fighter jets together to defend North American air space on a daily basis.

Those perceptions were only amplified after two other European companies dropped out of the competition before it even started, complaining the government’s requirements had stacked the deck in favour of their U.S. rivals.

In particular, both Airbus and Dassault had complained about what they saw as onerous requirements associated with adapting their aircraft — the Eurofighter and Rafale, respectively — to meet Canada’s intelligence-sharing requirements.

Those requirements included ensuring their aircraft could integrate with the top-secret Canada-U.S. intelligence network known as “Two Eyes,” which is used to defend North America.

Sweden is not a member of NATO or Norad, the joint Canadian-American defence command responsible for protecting the continent from foreign threats. That had prompted questions about the Gripen’s compatibility with U.S. aircraft.

Airbus, which dropped out of the running in August 2019, also expressed frustration over the government's decision to change a long-standing policy that requires bidders on military contracts to legally commit to invest in Canada.

That change followed U.S. complaints the previous policy violated an agreement Canada signed in 2006 to become one of nine partner countries in developing the F-35. The agreement says companies in partner countries will compete for work.

Both Lockheed Martin and Saab said Wednesday that they looked forward to working with the government during the final stretch of the competition.

“Together with our industry partners, we look forward to continuing to support the government in the competitive process,” Lockheed Martin Canada chief executive officer Lorraine Ben said in a statement.

Exactly what happens next wasn’t immediately clear on Wednesday, with the procurement department saying it will “finalize next steps” in the coming weeks.

However, the department did indicate those steps could involve final negotiations with the top bidder or “entering into a competitive dialogue, whereby the two remaining bidders would be provided with an opportunity to improve their proposals.”

The government is still hoping to award a final contract next year, it added, with the first new aircraft delivered in 2025.

The fact two aircraft remain in the running at this stage suggests some type of final negotiation or discussion will occur in which Lockheed Martin and Saab will be able to sweeten their bids, said defence analyst Timothy Choi of the North American and Arctic Defence and Security Network 

“It suggests that neither current proposal is sufficiently superior to the other, and they are preparing the teams — and us observers — to expect that additional stage where both teams will spend more time improving their offers,” he said.

“This, of course, will require the (government) to re-review these new proposals, which will require further time.”

There have been long-standing concerns in some corners that the entire competition has been set up from the beginning to select the F-35, which is being purchased by many of Canada's closest allies.

Canada joined the U.S. and other allies as a partner in developing the F-35 in 1997 and has paid US$613 million to stay at the table. Partners get a discount on the jets and can compete for billions of dollars in work building and maintaining them.

But David Perry, vice-president of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute, noted the terms of the competition meant Lockheed Martin’s bid started at a disadvantage because the company cannot guarantee money spent on the F-35 would be reinvested in Canada.

Stephen Harper’s Conservative government then committed to buying 65 F-35s without a competition in 2010, before concerns about the stealth fighter’s cost and capabilities forced it back to the drawing board.

The Liberals promised in 2015 not to buy the F-35, but to instead launch an open competition to replace the CF-18s. They later planned to buy 18 Super Hornets without a competition as an “interim” measure to ensure Canada had enough aircraft until permanent replacements arrived.

Some at the time questioned that plan, suggesting the Liberals were trying to find a way to lock Canada into the Super Hornet without opening itself up to a legal challenge from Lockheed Martin or any other jet makers.

But the government cancelled the plan after Boeing launched a trade dispute with Montreal aerospace firm Bombardier over the latter’s C-Series planes. It launched the current bidding process in July 2019, at which point both the Super Hornet and F-35 were allowed to compete.

Meanwhile, the government has been forced to invest hundreds of millions of additional dollars into the CF-18 fleet to keep it flying until a replacement can be delivered. The last new plane isn’t scheduled to arrive until 2032, at which point the CF-18s will have been around for 50 years.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 1, 2021.

Lee Berthiaume, The Canadian Press

 

 

[Gurn]

It is worth noting the Gripen fighter/bomber is a single engine plane, something Canada has previously not wanted, due to flights over our Northern air space.

It would be a long cold walk back to anywhere, if the single engine suffers a failure; and that is if they are lucky enough to come down on land.

 

Also going with the F-35 is fraught with issues as well. They are expensive, not all that 'stealthy' and had been previously selected by the Conservative government

 

I'm rather surprised they didn't just go with Boeing Super Hornets for the next 20-30 years, as crewed airplanes get eliminated in favour of smart drones.

[Gurn]

Trouble with choppers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=387ZDGSKVSghttps://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/cracks-in-tails-of-rcaf-cyclone-helicopters-raise-serious-concerns-says-expert/ar-AARuS27?ocid=msedgntp

 

Cracks in the tails of 19 Royal Canadian Air Force Cyclone helicopters are a cause for concern, says an expert.

Michael Byers, a professor and defence policy analyst at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, said the cracks could be indicative of much larger problems with the aircraft.

"Each of these helicopters costs more than $150 million, and the oldest helicopter in the fleet is only five years old," he said on Sunday. "So the fact that there is this problem does raise some very serious concerns as to the quality of the helicopters, the safety of the helicopters."

Only two of Canada's 23 Sikorsky CH-148 Cyclone helicopters are currently fit to fly. The rest of the multibillion-dollar fleet is in need of repair.

On Nov. 26, cracks were found in the tail of one of the helicopters at 12 Wing Shearwater in Dartmouth, N.S. Because of this, the rest of the fleet was examined and most of the helicopters were found to be compromised.

On Saturday, the Department of National Defence (DND) said just four of the Cyclones were affected, but after further questions from CBC News, it was revealed there are actually 19 with cracks. Two helicopters have been out of service due to other matters.

"I'm concerned about the limited news that we have so far," Byers said. "This appears to be a fleet wide problem.... That's obviously an issue in terms of Canada's capabilities. These are the helicopters that go on our frigates and are an essential part of our maritime ability."

n the early 2000s, the CH-148 Cyclone model was chosen to replace the RCAF's five-decade-old CH-124 Sea Kings. Considered a "developmental" helicopter, Canada has the only Cyclones in the world.

The procurement of the Cyclones has been heavily criticized, with former Conservative defence minister Peter MacKay calling the Cyclone program the "worst procurement in the history of Canada."

The original 2004 budget for the Cyclone's procurement was $3.2 billion, but the number grew to $5.7 billion by 2014.

According to the DND, "the cost for major in-service support until 2038 is $5.8 billion."

Canada is still waiting for five Cyclones to be delivered.

"We're spending upwards of $5 billion on this particular small fleet of helicopters, so we need to get it right. And so far, it's all going wrong," Byers said.

'A bunch of lemons?'

Byers said since the Cyclones are new, they should not be having such significant and widespread problems.

"Have we bought a bunch of lemons? Is this a flawed aircraft that will require billions and billions of dollars of additional taxpayer money to keep safe and to keep operational?"

Byers said it's a good sign that the aircraft have been grounded, and the worst-case scenario would be if the air force tried to "muddle through" to avoid further criticism of the Cyclones.

"The Canadian military needs to get to the bottom of this, it needs to fix the problem and it needs to be fully transparent throughout that process because these are the lives of young men and young women that are put at risk every time these aircraft fly," he said. 

Fraught history

This isn't the first time there have been concerns about the tail section of the helicopter.

In 2017, the Canadian Forces grounded its Cyclones after Sikorsky issued a worldwide notice for safety checks to be conducted.

Operators were told to immediately check the tail rotor section of the S-92 aircraft. Cyclones are a militarized variation of that aircraft.

In 2009, an S-92 helicopter crashed off the coast of Newfoundland due to an oil pressure issue, killing 17.

Then in 2020, a Cyclone crashed in the waters off Greece because of a glitch with the autopilot function, killing six members of the Canadian military. 

Impact on operations

Seventeen of the Cyclone aircraft are based at Shearwater and six are in Patricia Bay, B.C.

Some of the fleet was supposed to take part in Operation LENTUS, to provide relief after the mass flooding in British Columbia, but it was impossible due to the cracks. Older military aircraft, search-and-rescue helicopters and non-military aircraft were used instead.

"12 Wing Shearwater, which encompasses the entire fleet, is prioritizing the order of repair to maximize return to serviceability for each aircraft," a DND spokesperson said in a statement to CBC News.

The department says it hopes to have some of the helicopters back in the air within the next few days.

[MattJVD]

On 12/1/2021 at 5:07 PM, gurn said:

It is worth noting the Gripen fighter/bomber is a single engine plane, something Canada has previously not wanted, due to flights over our Northern air space.

It would be a long cold walk back to anywhere, if the single engine suffers a failure; and that is if they are lucky enough to come down on land.

 

Also going with the F-35 is fraught with issues as well. They are expensive, not all that 'stealthy' and had been previously selected by the Conservative government

 

I'm rather surprised they didn't just go with Boeing Super Hornets for the next 20-30 years, as crewed airplanes get eliminated in favour of smart drones.

F35 is a single engine fighter too, so they're on even footing in that regard.

[MattJVD]

An Australian Defence review is concerned their Hunter Class Frigates (the same the Canadian Surface Combatant) are shaping up to be overweight and slow. 

https://www.navalreview.ca/2022/02/australian-study-raises-concerns-about-new-ships/

 

Minutes from the Senate question period that produced these headlines have defence officials saying the full-load displacement could be up to 10,000 tonnes for the ships. At this weight, the propulsion the ships are designed to have would not be able to reach the required speed of 27+ knots. The ship builder disputes this, saying the frigates' weight has not changed during the design process.

 

Fortunately, for Canada, the British will be launching their first ship of the class for sea trials before the end of 2022. So we'll have time to evaluate the weight issue (if it exists) and make revisions before construction starts on the Canadian Surface Combatants in 2024.

 

 

[NewbieCanuckFan]

On 12/1/2021 at 4:07 PM, gurn said:

It is worth noting the Gripen fighter/bomber is a single engine plane, something Canada has previously not wanted, due to flights over our Northern air space.

It would be a long cold walk back to anywhere, if the single engine suffers a failure; and that is if they are lucky enough to come down on land.

 

Also going with the F-35 is fraught with issues as well. They are expensive, not all that 'stealthy' and had been previously selected by the Conservative government

 

I'm rather surprised they didn't just go with Boeing Super Hornets for the next 20-30 years, as crewed airplanes get eliminated in favour of smart drones.

You were talking about 'alternate history' in another thread.  How about another alternate history where the PM "Chief" didn't cancel/scuttle the Arrow program:

 

 

[Gurn]

17 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

You were talking about 'alternate history' in another thread.  How about another alternate history where the PM "Chief" didn't cancel/scuttle the Arrow program:

 

 

Imo, one of the worst moves done by a Canadian Prime Minister.

We keep that plane going, we keep those engineers and designers working; plus it takes America an extra 10 years to get to the moon.

[MattJVD]

4 hours ago, gurn said:

Imo, one of the worst moves done by a Canadian Prime Minister.

We keep that plane going, we keep those engineers and designers working; plus it takes America an extra 10 years to get to the moon.

Yeah losing the engineering talent was the real national tragedy. The plane, not so much.

[bishopshodan]

4 hours ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

You were talking about 'alternate history' in another thread.  How about another alternate history where the PM "Chief" didn't cancel/scuttle the Arrow program:

 

 

My grandfather worked on the Arrow.

I never met him, died before I was born. I have a framed photo of him in his lab coat standing under the plane. My mum claims the photo was classified for a long time. 

[Ilunga]

3 hours ago, bishopshodan said:

My grandfather worked on the Arrow.

I never met him, died before I was born. I have a framed photo of him in his lab coat standing under the plane. My mum claims the photo was classified for a long time. 

My dad designed the landing gear on the Concord amongst other things.

Both my parents were involved the the aviation industry.

Dad was a design engineer, mum was a draughtswoman.

This was in the 50's when not many women had jobs like that. 

 

My parents were inspirational on so many levels.

[Gurn]

Thread started May 18 2017.

Still no new planes.

Just starting on building frigates

Trouble with our helicopters

Trouble with the subs

 

And while we were waiting to get stuff done, the world changed-drastically.

 

[Warhippy]

8 minutes ago, gurn said:

Thread started May 18 2017.

Still no new planes.

Just starting on building frigates

Trouble with our helicopters

Trouble with the subs

 

And while we were waiting to get stuff done, the world changed-drastically.

 

It's so sad and unfortunate that we've paid out more in interest than the actual delivery of some of these items.  I 100% agree with making and creating this industry within canada, but we've been waiting on these choppers since the 80s.  So long now that had we taken delivery of them at the outset, we'd have already been seeking upgraded replacements....