Finding Canada’s next generation fighter
Canada may have millions invested in the development of the Joint Strike Fighter, but the novel multinational airplane faces some stiff competition. Over the past year, officials with DND’s Next Generation Fighter Capability Office have been gathering data on a range of potential bidders for the project to replace the F/A-18, but the department has yet to set a date. Glenn Erutti, Boeing’s program manager for F/A-18 international new business, spoke with Vanguard about the Super Hornet during DEFSEC Atlantic in Halifax.
What is your understanding of DND’s strategy at this point?
Last year they gathered information from ourselves and competitors. Since then, we have really not had much communication with them. What we understand is that they are comparing data from a number of competitors and they are going to come forward with a decision sometime in the near future.
Is there a timeline on this?
If they want aircraft in 2015 we would need 48 months lead time, so they would probably need to make a decision by 2011 or 2012. I’ve also heard that the date they want an aircraft by has slipped somewhat. We’ve provided prices for 2015 deliveries and we’ve read in the press that the date may now be 2017. We’re unsure as to what that timeframe is.
Where does Canada fit within Boeing’s international strategy for the F-18?
Canada is a key customer right now. They fly the legacy Hornets. They’ve been a great customer for us – we have a great relationship with DND and industry. Canada bought about 130 out of about 1300 A-D Hornets that were delivered, and you were an early buyer. That’s pretty significant, especially when you are doing about 40 airplanes a year. Industry is a big driver of this competition. Every one of our Super Hornets has half a million dollars of Canadian content on them already, and we haven’t sold to Canada yet. We have a great relationship with suppliers in Canada through our one billion dollar per year IRB commitments. We really enjoy working with them.
Do you have a sense of how the current political climate in Canada plays into this decision?
I won’t pretend I understand all the nuances of Canadian politics. I just know that there are a number of drivers that make that decision – defence, industry and the political landscape. We think we provide something for everybody. How the politics actually plays out I’m unclear of right now. With any country we work with, there are always political issues. That’s why we continue to drive the message that we have a stable program, the best fighters at a stable price, low risk – you know what you are getting. No matter who is making the decision, or whether governments change, we’re going to put the best offer on the table and hopefully somebody takes a look at it and makes a decision in our favour. It’s a variable you have to deal with. You have to make sure you communicate broadly, that everybody gets the same story, and it’s accurate.
In that vein, how unusual is this competition given that Canada has already invested in the development of a competitor, the F-35? What effect does that have on your ability to compete?
It probably slants the government in one way because they have put money into a program. It’s hard to ignore that. But at the same time, you’ve invested about $150 million into a program that costs about $6-$8 billion, not including the long term support, so you don’t have to make a decision based solely on that initial investment. And the way I understand the investment, there are different colours of money – they may not be procurement dollars. And that’s not a waste of an investment if you went with the Super Hornet. You’ve brought up the level of technology. That supplier equipment and technology can be used in a Super Hornet or any other competitor.
You mentioned the investment you already have in the F-18 E/F: do you have an IRB strategy prepared for it as well?
Absolutely. We are going in with the intent to do the 100 percent offsets we do on any other project. It’s not an opportunity to bid for work on the Super Hornet program, it’s an opportunity to do the work. That’s $8 billion worth of work that will come to Canada. We are talking with members of Canadian industry about how we can work together above and beyond that half a million we already have today in the aircraft.
How much of the aircraft is different from the F-18 legacy aircraft? Is it a brand new plane?
Essentially. It’s a Hornet in name. It’s about 30 percent larger; it’s got two more weapons stations; it is a low observable platform – it’s a multi-role aircraft with the best radar today. It’s in use in conflicts. We’ve delivered over 400 so far. We have a very reliable platform, whether it’s the radar, avionics or the airframe – the airframe has a projected 9500 hrs worth of flight. And it’s all fully integrated. You’re not worried about the EW [electronic warfare] system messing up the radar when both are on, for example.
Low observability – there seems to be some discussion around that. Can you expand on that?
Some competitors like to claim that theirs is a less observable airplane than ours. I can’t get into how close they are. But when you weaponize them and get them into the configuration to fight, I don’t know what the numbers are but I’ve got to believe they are close.
Australia is one of your customers. Is Australia a good Canadian comparable?
It is a perfect fit. It is analogous to the Canadian situation. With the legacy Hornet procurement history, a decision to make a low risk Super Hornet procurement, the desire for two engine safety and rugged terrain to fly over for long distances. We have a buddy tank on our airplane so that they can refuel each other. So if they operate up North, you won’t have to send a C-130 to tank them, they can have a buddy tank them.
Given overlap between the current F/A-18s and the introduction of a new fighter, are there any compatibility issues with the Super Hornet?
Actually, we have 60 to 70 percent commonality whether you’re talking ground support equipment, certain parts, or maintenance. Training and transition is very short for pilots and maintainers. That’s one of our biggest stories. We think for Super Hornet customers that transition will be a big deal. You don’t have to spend a lot of money on your infrastructure. Maintenance is easier on a Super Hornet than a Hornet. We’ve increased the capability of the Super Hornet, but when we do flight evaluations in some countries, they can’t believe it: a handful of guys can gas up the airplane, turn it around and walk away in 15-30 minutes. They say, where is the rest of the crew and the ground equipment?
Are you anticipating further delays on this project given the current economic climate?
I don’t know the ‘ins and outs’ of what Canada has budgeted. But if you’re looking for a lower cost solution with the highest capability, we are the best fit.
