Public Works and Government Services Canada
Symbol of the Government of Canada

Common menu bar links

Final Industry Engagement Request: Capability, Production and Supportability Information Questionnaire

1.0 Purpose

The purpose of the Industry Engagement Request (IER) is to support the completion of one key element of the Government's Seven-Point Plan: that the Department of National Defence continue to evaluate options to sustain a Canadian Armed Forces fighter capability well into the 21st century. The evaluation of options will review and assess all available fighter aircraft and will result in a comprehensive report with the best available information on the capabilities, costs and risks of each option, including bridging, extending the CF-18 and mixed-fleet options.

As part of the evaluation of options, a market analysis will be informed by way of this IER, which will be anchored in the principles of openness, due diligence and third party oversight. The market analysis will be led by the National Fighter Procurement Secretariat (NFPS) in collaboration with the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces (DND/CAF), Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) and Industry Canada (IC). The purpose of the IER is to provide companies with a full and fair opportunity to present information on their fighter aircraft to support the Government of Canada in making its decision on a replacement aircraft for Canada's fleet of CF-18s.

The IER will be conducted through two separate but related questionnaires. The first questionnaire seeks detailed information from identified companies on the technical capabilities associated with fighter aircraft currently in production or scheduled to be in production and associated support elements to sustain the fleet throughout its lifespan. The second questionnaire will request cost estimates of the aircraft and responses should be informed by KPMG's Life-Cycle Cost Framework that was commissioned by Treasury Board Secretariat. Information on the potential benefits to Canadian industry will be requested later in the process.

An analysis of the current marketplace for fighter aircraft currently in production or scheduled to be in production has identified five (5) companies with available fighter aircraft: Boeing, Saab, Dassault, Eurofighter, and Lockheed Martin. These five companies are being provided with a copy of this questionnaire.

Respondents should note that information received in response to this IER will also be supplemented with information already in the public domain or in Government repositories.

2.0 Background

The multi-role CF-18 entered service in 1982 with an original Estimated Life Expectancy (ELE) of 2003. Aggressive fatigue management and structural repair programmes have extended the current ELE to the 2017-2020 timeframe. Concurrently, a comprehensive CF-18 modernization programme has ensured the aircraft will remain survivable and operationally relevant in both the Counter-Air and Counter-Surface roles throughout this extended lifetime. No other platform within the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) inventory is capable of fulfilling all CF-18 mandated roles. With the retirement of the CF-18, the CAF will lose its capability to contribute to aerospace/land/maritime effects in the domestic, continental and international domains unless a suitable capability replacement is introduced into service.

Canada has an operational requirement to replace the existing fleet of CF-18s with a fighter aircraft capable of delivering aerospace capabilities in support of CAF operations. Canada's mission needs were captured in the Canada First Defence Strategy (CFDS) announced on May 12, 2008, which specifies three roles and six missions for the Canadian Armed Forces. The CFDS is the Government of Canada's policy foundation for the evaluation of options.

On December 12, 2012, the Government of Canada released several key documents further to its Seven-Point Plan on the replacement of Canada's fighter jets. The Government of Canada announced that it is hitting "reset" and ensuring a thorough evaluation of options to replace Canada's fleet of CF-18s. One of the documents released on December 12, 2012 was the Terms of Reference (TOR) that will govern the evaluation of options work.

The objective of the evaluation of options work is to perform an analysis of options to replace the CF-18. The assessments of Canadian Armed Forces mission needs and fighter-specific mission needs will be collated and the information integrated into a framework that details and assesses potential courses of action for the sustainment of a Canadian Armed Forces fighter capability derived from a valid threat analysis, mission needs, and available fighter capabilities. This evaluation will be made against Canadian Armed Forces missions and result in an in-depth assessment of the cost, capabilities and risks associated with each aircraft. Considering the estimated life expectancy of the CF-18, the risks associated with various courses of action will be assessed against the Canada First Defence Strategy. The assessment of each fighter aircraft against the mission needs will not remove any aircraft from the options evaluation process.

Based on aerospace doctrine and using the Canadian Armed Forces Capability Based Planning, the CAF has identified seven Aerospace Capabilities which the CF-18 fighter replacement will need to execute in order to accomplish the six core CFDS missions. Aerospace capabilities are derived from the roles and missions outlined in CFDS but are not mandatory or rated requirements, as found in a Statement of Operational Requirement. Each Aerospace Capability is broken down into Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs). These MOEs provide qualitative tools to assess how the performance of many independent subsystems can combine to produce system-independent effects. When combined, MOEs can be used to characterize a risk-based assessment of Aerospace Capabilities. The performance of underlying aircraft systems will be assessed using Measures of Performance (MOPs). These MOPs are a measure of individual system capability and provide the basis for the assessment of effects delivered by those systems, measured by MOEs. A review of the strategic and operational suitability of each aircraft will also be assessed against the CFDS missions over the time horizons outlined below.

Canada requires a replacement fighter capability for a period of at least 30 years. In order to analyze potential fighter options to meet the Government of Canada's needs for the future, the questionnaire timeframe is divided into two time horizons: 2020-2030 and 2030+. These time horizons capture the operating environment for the estimated introduction of a new fighter (2020-2030) and the future environment (2030+). The two time horizons are characterized by representative threats predicated on current and emerging technologies as well as threat proliferation. By requesting industry information on fighter capabilities within two distinct time horizons, there is an added benefit of allowing industry to describe capability roadmaps or spiral upgrades. This information will prove useful in describing fighter capabilities across the entire intended period of employment.

3.0 Requested Information

Interested Parties are requested to provide responses on the Capability, Production and Supportability Information questionnaire attached as Section B, and provide them to the NFPS Executive Director identified herein. Please note that no costing/pricing information is to be included in any of the identified sections at the present time. Information on costs will be sought during the second phase of the IER.

Government of Canada officials are prepared to meet with identified companies, at a mutually convenient location and time to respond to questions and/or provide clarification. Companies will have the opportunity to present to Government of Canada officials any information that would contribute to a better appreciation of the capabilities of their respective aircraft.

Regarding the information requested that is not immediately releasable or is sensitive, you are requested to proceed with the necessary release processes that would allow the information to be shared with the Government of Canada. Companies should identify sensitive information at the earliest possible opportunity in the IER process. In addition, any obstacles to releasing information should be brought up as early as possible during the proposed communication period and one-on-one meetings.

3.1 Format of Responses

Canada requests that respondents provide ten (10) paper copies and thirty (30) electronic copies (CD) of their response (classified, unclassified and export controlled (if applicable)). Respondents also have the option of providing only one (1) paper copy and one (1) electronic copy (CD) of their response and explicitly providing a permission to Canada to make 9 additional paper copies.

4.0 Note to Industry

There will be no short listing or pre-qualification of suppliers for the purposes of undertaking any future work as a result of the IER. The IER is neither a call for Tenders nor a Request for Proposal (RFP). No agreement or contract will be entered into with any person or entity based on the IER. The issuance of the IER is not to be considered in any way a commitment by the Government of Canada or as authority to undertake any work, which could be charged to Canada. The Government of Canada has not committed to any specific procurement process or strategy at the present time. The procurement strategy will be finalized upon completion of the Governmen's Seven-Point Plan.

5.0 Response Costs

Respondents will not be reimbursed for any cost incurred to provide a response to the draft or final IER. Any and all expenses incurred by industry in responding to this request are at its sole risk and expense.

6.0 Treatment of Responses

Use of Responses: Government of Canada officials will review all Responses received by the IER closing date. We may, in our sole discretion, also review Responses received after the IER closing date.

Review Teams: The National Fighter Procurement Secretariat will lead the review process and will participate as appropriate. Review teams composed of representatives of DND/CAF will review the Responses. The Secretariat reserves the right to engage any independent consultant or third party, or use any Government resources that it considers necessary to review any Response while respecting the limitations applicable to non-disclosure and other agreements. Not all members of the review team will necessarily review all Responses.

Independent Review Panel: Independent Reviewers will assess the methodology used and the analysis performed at key milestones in the work. The involvement of independent reviewers will ensure that the work performed is both rigorous and impartial, and that the results are comprehensive and understandable.

Confidentiality: Written Responses will become the property of Canada and will not be returned. Respondents should clearly mark any portions of their response that they consider proprietary or confidential or if the response contains controlled goods or information that could be considered classified information. Responses will be handled in accordance with the provisions of the Access to Information Act (R.S. 1985, c. A-1) and the Privacy Act (R.S., 1985, c. P-21).

Government of Canada officials will be conducting the analysis with the most detailed information available to the Government and is not limited to that which is provided in a Response.

Full and precise information is sought in order for the Secretariat to lead a complete market analysis. In the event that companies choose not to provide the information requested or do not provide sufficient level of detail, Canada reserves the right to supplement the Response with information that is available to the Government in order to complete the analysis.

7.0 Closing Date And Delivery Instructions

7.1 Unclassified information:

Responses to this IER will be accepted at any time until April 15, 2013. The NFPS reserves the right to accept late responses at its sole discretion.

Unclassified responses are to be sent to the Executive Director of the National Fighter Procurement Secretariat:

Rachel Wernick
Executive Director
National Fighter Procurement Secretariat
Public Works and Government Services Canada
Place du Portage, Phase 3, 9C2
Gatineau, Quebec, Canada
K1A 0S5

Responses submitted in any other manner than that which is outlined above will not be binding upon any party.

7.2 Classified information:

A government-to-government Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is in place between Canada and respective respondent’s countries to facilitate the transfer of CLASSIFIED information. Your company's Chief Security Officer should contact your countries National Security Authority/Designated Security Authority (NSA/DSA) who will in turn coordinate with his/her counterpart at the Canadian International Industrial Security Directorate (IISD).

The IISD is Canada's Designated Security Authority for Industrial Security and will liaise with your countries NSA/DSA to facilitate the transfer of CLASSIFIED information.

For further details on submitting CLASSIFIED information please contact:

Robert Guindon (Canada’s Designated Security Authority)
Manager, International Operations Division
International Industrial Security Services Directorate
Public Works and Government Services Canada

7.3 Export Controlled Information:

Respondents are requested to advise the NPMS of, and proceed with; any necessary release processes that would allow the following information to be shared with the Government of Canada:

  • controlled Goods information
  • defence articles and defence services subject to US International Traffic in Arms (ITAR)
  • subject to foreign export controls or restrictions that is not immediately releasable

8.0 Point of Contact for Enquiries

Questions regarding this IER must be directed to the NFPS Executive Director. Companies are to assume all responsibility for the successful delivery of all questions to the NFPS Executive Director named herein.

To ensure the consistency and quality of information provided from companies, significant enquiries received and the replies to such enquiries will be provided simultaneously to companies to whom the IER has been sent, without revealing the sources of the enquiries.

Canada is prepared to meet with companies at a mutually convenient location and time for the purpose of responding to questions and/or providing clarification. As a result, Canada reserves the right to postpone responding to questions until such time.

Questionnaire 1 Section A: Capability, Production and Supportability Background Information

The information and definitions contained in this section are to be used to inform the Responses to the questions in the Capability, Production and Supportability Questionnaire.

Government of Canada Policy

The Canada First Defence Strategy (CFDS) provides Government policy guidance and sets a detailed road map for the modernization of the Canadian Armed Forces. It puts forward clear roles and core missions for the Canadian Armed Forces that will maintain the ability to deliver excellence at home, be a strong and reliable partner in the defence of North America, and project leadership abroad by making meaningful contributions to operations overseas.

The CFDS provides the Canadian Armed Forces with clear direction concerning their three roles:

  1. First and foremost, to defend Canada;
  2. Defending North America; and
  3. Contributing to international peace and security.

Through the CFDS, the Government has accordingly established a level of ambition that will see the Canadian Armed Forces carry out the following missions, potentially all at the same time:

  1. Conduct daily domestic and continental operations, including in the Arctic and through North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD);
  2. Support civilian authorities during a crisis in Canada such as a natural disaster;
  3. Support a major international event in Canada, such as the 2010 Olympics;
  4. Lead and/or conduct a major international operation for an extended period;
  5. Respond to a major terrorist attack; and
  6. Deploy forces in response to crises elsewhere in the world for shorter periods.

Canada will be assessing the capability of each fighter aircraft to contribute to the completion of each of the missions outlined in CFDS, noting that missions abroad are conducted in partnership with allies and coalition partners. Mission priorities are determined by the Government of Canada and are informed by the current strategic context and the three roles outlined above. It is important to note that no fighter capability contribution has been identified for the CFDS Mission - Support civilian authorities during a crisis in Canada, such as a natural disaster.

Canadian Armed Forces Mission Needs

Development of the Canadian Armed Forces mission needs focuses on operational level military requirements in a joint context – specifically, the applicability of a fighter capability to the CFDS missions. The mission needs analysis is informed by Canadian Armed Forces' Capability Based Planning documents and threat analyses emphasizing technological trends as well as geo-political and proliferation intents. The development of mission needs applies the assessment of fighter capabilities to the CFDS mission roles, each mission in turn, and the contribution in a joint context. The mission needs assessment is put into an operational context while using operational-level weighting reflecting a "system of systems" approach to analyzing Canadian Armed Forces capabilities. Operational weighting considers the fighter's contribution to a capability and the criticality of that capability in the context of the mission. The results of the mission needs outlines the tactical value of each fighter and the applicability of fighter capability depending on the CFDS mission.

Mission Context

While it would be impossible to detail the full range of mission scenarios that a Canadian fighter capability may be called on to execute, fighter vignettes have been produced as a means of providing additional mission context to assist the respondents in developing answers to the capability questions in Section B. These vignettes can be found in Appendix A.

Fighter-Specific Mission Needs

Based on the CFDS and informed by the threat analysis, the Canadian Armed Forces mission needs have been established using existing Capability-Based Planning methodology. This methodology focuses on the operational-level military requirements in a joint context while considering Canadian Armed Forces aerospace doctrine. Mission needs analysis concentrates on the requirements of the whole system rather than those of the individual fighter platforms, and emphasizes the capability integration requirements of the Canadian Armed Forces within a joint force construct in consideration of national, bi-national and international commitments including NORAD and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). The output of this analysis provides a defined need for a sustained Canadian Armed Forces fighter capability well into the future. Fighter-specific mission needs derived from this construct, and in the Canadian airpower context, are listed below as the aerospace capabilities. These capabilities are considered core for any fighter replacement weapon system.

Aerospace Capabilities

Based on aerospace doctrine and using the Canadian Armed Forces Capability Based Planning, the CAF has identified seven Aerospace Capabilities which CF-18 fighter's replacement will need to execute in order to accomplish the six core CFDS missions. Aerospace capabilities are a set of functions to be carried out by a particular aircraft and are not mandatory or rated requirements such as those prepared for a Statement of Operational Requirement. The Aerospace Capabilities have been defined as follows:

Defensive Counter Air (DCA)

Airborne measures taken to defend friendly airborne and surface-based forces against threats/attacks by opposing aerospace/airborne forces;

Offensive Counter Air (OCA)

Airborne measures taken to destroy, disrupt, or neutralize the source of an adversary's aerospace force, including warning and control facilities, aerospace bases, launch facilities, and adversary aircraft or targets of opportunity;

Strategic Attack

Missions against the adversary's centre of gravity or against selected vital targets to progressively destroy and disintegrate an adversary's capacity or will to wage war;

Close Air Support (CAS)

Missions to produce brief, but focused effects on adversary land forces in order to halt attacks, help create breakthroughs, cover and guard flank of friendly forces. Effects may be necessary to ensure the mission success or survival;

Land Strike

Missions aimed to destroy, neutralize, or delay an adversary's military potential by reducing their capability to mount an offensive, restrict an adversary's freedom of action, prevent an adversary from countering an increase in friendly strength, or reduce battlefield reserves;

Tactical Support to Maritime Operations (TASMO)

The conduct of Anti-Surface Warfare (ASuW) missions in support of Maritime assets;

Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR)

The ability to detect, locate, track, identify and display relevant information that enhances situational awareness. This also includes the transfer of information which may be used for decision making and planning purposes.

When providing responses to the Questionnaire, respondents are encouraged to provide any information that would outline the particular capabilities of the aircraft in terms of these Aerospace capabilities and in contribution to the CFDS missions.

Operational, Tactical and Strategic Context

The CAF conducts military operations, planning and doctrine divided among three levels: tactical, operational and strategic. This is the method in which the assessment of aircraft will be conducted.

Fighter Measures Of Effectiveness (Operational level)

Each Aerospace Capability is broken down into Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs). These MOEs provide qualitative tools to assess how the performance of many independent subsystems can combine to produce system-independent effects. When combined, MOEs can be used to characterize the ability of a fighter aircraft to execute a specific Aerospace Capability.

Awareness

The ability to gather, assimilate and display real-time information from on-board sensors. Awareness is largely dependant on the fidelity and capability of all on-board sensors. In addition, the capability of the entire system to display comprehensive information derived from inputs produced from multiple sensors is beneficial.

Survivability

The ability to operate within the operational battle space by denying or countering the enemy's application of force. Survivability can be increased by detecting, classifying, and locating threats and subsequently evading them or negating their effectiveness. Once alerted to a threat (via radar warning receiver, missile approach warning system, etc.), a variety of active (electronic attack, decoy use, etc.) or passive (signature reduction, manoeuvre, chaff/flares, etc.) means can deny an engagement by that threat.

Reach and Persistence

The distance and duration across which a fighter aircraft can successfully employ airpower. Factors such as speed, endurance, range, and internal and external fuel loads should contribute when determining Reach and Persistence.

Responsiveness

The timely application of airpower, including the ability to re-target while prosecuting multiple tracks, and potentially even re-role from one Aerospace Capability to another, within a Core Mission. Responsiveness should also include the potential for the weapons system to conduct more than one function simultaneously. For example, while conducting defensive counter-air missions, can a given aircraft also continue to contribute to the Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance (ISR) picture? Also, the speed at which an aircraft can re-target, re-role, and reposition within the area of operations should be considered.

Lethality

The combined ability to obtain an advantageous position and negate/prosecute a target or threat. Obtaining an advantageous position speaks to the performance of an aircraft. Once there, it is desirable that a weapon system be able to negate or prosecute the target via a variety of kinetic and non-kinetic means. This process of employing kinetic and non-kinetic means may require supporting sensors and other avionics sub-systems to support weapons.

Interoperability (Operational level)

The ability to operate and exchange information with a variety of friendly forces in order to contribute to joint and coalition operations. Interoperability with other coalition and organic ground, sea, and air assets is critical. This interaction can include, but is in no way limited to, the use of data link and communications.

Measures of Performance (Tactical level)

In order to provide more detailed analysis of the fighter MOEs, each set of contributing systems will be assessed according to their performance. The performance of these underlying aircraft systems will be assessed using Measures of Performance (MOPs). Capability descriptions provided by industry should clearly describe the performance of the fighter systems in terms of the MOPs below:

Radio Frequency (RF) Sensors

Any sensor, or collection of sensors, that emits and/or receives in the RF spectrum. RF Sensors include, but are not limited to: Radar, Combined Interrogator Transponder (CIT), and Radar Warning Receiver (RWR).

Electro-Optical (EO)/ Infrared (IR) Sensors

Any sensor, or collection of sensors, that emits and/or receives in the EO/IR spectrum. EO/IR Sensors include, but are not limited to: Advanced Targeting Pod (ATP), Infrared Search and Track (IRST), and Distributed Aperture System (DAS).

Air to Air (A/A) Weapons

Weapons employed against airborne targets. This encompasses weapons that are employed beyond and within visual range. Weapon capacity in the intended configuration should also be considered.

Air to Ground (A/G) Weapons

Weapons employed against land-based targets. Weapon capacity in the intended configuration should also be considered.

Air to Surface (A/Su) Weapons

Weapons employed against sea-based targets. Note that some aircraft do not have dedicated A/Su weapons, but it may be possible to employ traditional A/G weapons to some degree. Weapon capacity in the intended configuration should also be considered.

Non-Kinetic Weapons

Offensive weapons that do not rely on kinetic engagements.

RF Self-Protection

Non-deployable self-protection that exploits the RF spectrum and protects against threats in the RF spectrum. Examples include, but are not limited to: RWR and Electronic Protection (EP).

IR Self-Protection

Non-deployable self-protection that exploits the IR spectrum and protects against threats in the IR spectrum. Examples include, but are not limited to: Missile Approach Warning System (MAWS) and Distributed Aperture System (DAS).

Counter-Measures

Any devices deployed by the aircraft to negate or disrupt and attack. These devices can work in any spectrum. Examples include, but are not limited to: Chaff, Flares, BOL Infrared (BOL IR), towed decoys and expendable decoys.

Data Link

The means of connecting the aircraft to another or other assets in order to send or receive information. Data link can be used to share stored or real-time sensor and track information, to pass non-verbal orders, to pass full-motion video, or any other transmissions. Consideration should be given to the ability to send this information in a secure manner.

Communications

The means of sending and receiving voice communications between the platform and other aircraft or assets, both within and beyond line of sight. Consideration should be given to the ability to send and receive secure and jam-resistant voice communications. In addition, the number and type of devices on-board should be considered.

Sensor Integration

The ability to use all available sensors to build a more complete picture of the situation. Combining data from multiple sensors to achieve improved accuracies when compared to those achieved from the use of individual sensors should also be considered.

Pilot Workload

This includes any means of transferring information between the pilot and the platform, and vice versa, and any means of reducing pilot workload. Examples include, but are not limited to, Helmet Mounted Cueing System (HMCS) and Hands on Throttle and Stick (HOTAS).

RF Signature

The relative amount of RF energy reflected and emitted by the platform.

IR Signature

The amount of IR energy emitted by the platform.

Engine/Airframe

A measure of the aircrafts kinematic and aerodynamic performance. Items such as thrust to weight, instantaneous and sustained turn rates and radii, 'g' available and sustainable, and other general performance measures would fall in this category. In addition, new enabling technologies such as thrust-vectoring control would also be included here.

Combat Radius, Range and Endurance

The unrefueled distance over which an aircraft can be employed, and/or the time that it is able to remain airborne.

Operational and Strategic Suitability (Strategic level)

Additional consideration in our examination will include the operational and strategic suitability of available fighter aircraft.

Operational suitability

The ability to introduce, sustain and operate a suitable weapon system that is capable of meeting mission needs when and where required. Examples of performance indicators include aircraft acquisition, the long-term sustainability of the aircraft and logistics supportability, management of the fleet and the associated personnel, aircraft reliability and operational capability within a range of operational battle spaces and environments.

Consideration will be given to the following factors, generally described as follows:

Aircraft Acquisition

Factors that would affect acquisition of aircraft types. This includes:

  • planned production periods of the aircraft;
  • the manufacturer's successful completion of any required developmental work required before the aircraft are ready for acquisition; and
  • the ability of each aircraft type to be certified for airworthiness under Canadian Armed Forces regulations.
Interoperability

Broad interoperability within the Canadian Armed Forces and with allied forces. This includes interoperability with air-to-air refuelling assets, common ground/spares support with allies and their supply lines, and the ability to feed data into Canadian Armed Forces and Government of Canada networks, taking into consideration national security requirements.

Growth Potential

Growth potential and technological flexibility to respond to unforeseen future advances in threat capabilities, to implement required enhancements to fighter technology, and to evolve as needed to meet the Canadian Armed Forces' needs. This includes analysis of the architecture of aircraft types, power and cooling capability for new systems.

Supportability and Force Management

Long-term supportability and aspects related to management of the fighter force. Also related is the ability to introduce, sustain and operate the weapon system when and where required.

Time Horizons

Canada requires a replacement fighter capability well into the 21st century, for a period of at least 30 years. In order to analyze potential fighter options to meet the Government of Canada's needs for the future, the service life of Canada's replacement fighter aircraft is divided into two time horizons: 2020-2030 and 2030+. The selected time horizons capture the operating environment for the estimated introduction of a new fighter (2020-2030) and the future environment (2030+). The new fighter will be required to operate in the presence of any combination of representative threats as characterized below.

By requesting industry information on fighter capabilities within two distinct time horizons, there is an added benefit of allowing industry to describe capability roadmaps or spiral upgrades. This information will prove useful in describing fighter capabilities across the entire intended period of employment.

Threat Characterization

The 2020-2030 time horizon is characterized by proliferation of current threat technologies as well as digital upgrades and increased integration of systems including:

  • Fighter Aircraft such as SU-27 armed with a mix of weapons such as AA-12 and AA-11;
  • Bomber Aircraft such as Tu-160 employing sub-sonic to low supersonic guided cruise missiles;
  • Civilian Aircraft including airliners and low/slow civilian aircraft;
  • Anti-Aircraft Artillery (AAA) ground or ship based systems such as ZSU-23/4;
  • Surface-to-air missile (SAM) ground or ship based systems such as SA-15 or SA-20:
  • Man-Portable Air-Defence Systems (MANPADS) such as the SA-18; and
  • Early Warning Radar Systems such as digital Spoon Rest and/or airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) integrated into a defence network.

The 2030+ time horizon is characterized by the proliferation of emerging technologies including:

  • Fighter Aircraft such as PAK-FA armed with a mix of advanced multi-spectral high off-boresight weapons.
  • Bomber Aircraft such as next-generation strategic bombers with a reduced Radar Cross Section (RCS) and employing supersonic, low RCS, guided cruise missiles;
  • Anti-Aircraft Artillery (AAA) ground or ship based systems such as upgraded 2K22 or SA-19;
  • Surface-to-air missile (SAM) ground or ship based systems such as SA-22 or upgraded SA-20;
  • Man-Portable Air-Defence Systems (MANPADS) such as the  SA-24;
  • Early Warning Radar Systems such as phased arrays integrated into a defence network.

Questionnaire 1 Section B – Capability, Production and Supportability Questionnaire

Appendix A contains six vignettes to provide respondents with a general level of Canadian mission context to allow them to answer the following questions. Please ensure that all responses to the questions are as complete and detailed as possible.

Basic Mission Configuration Definition

In the scope of this assessment, it would be impractical and/or impossible to assess all potential aircraft mission configurations available for any fighter aircraft. With this in mind, this assessment will be constrained to a set of basic mission configurations defined by each of the respondents.

Respondents are requested to provide a set of basic mission configurations for their aircraft as detailed below. These basic mission configurations must allow the aircraft to conduct the range of fighter tasks associated with the Appendix A vignettes. Once provided, respondents are to use these basic mission configurations to describe the capabilities of their aircraft in the remaining questions. It is important to note that companies will be asked at a later date to provide rough order of magnitude cost estimates for each of the basic mission configurations provided.

For the purposes of standardizing the assessment, it is assumed that aircraft will be delivered in full operational configuration allowing for full mission capability from delivery outset, unless otherwise stated.

  1. Air-to-Air Basic Mission Configuration (Defensive Counter Air and Offensive Counter Air)

    Based on the full range of air-to-air tasks that may be required by the Appendix A vignettes, respondents are to provide one, company-defined, air-to-air basic mission configuration for the 2020-2030 time horizon and one air-to-air mission configuration for the 2030+ time horizon. These two configurations should reflect the threat characterization for the two time horizons (provided in Section A) as well as any planned capability upgrades for the aircraft that may affect the air-to-air basic mission configuration. These configurations should comprise a typical loadout of Radio Frequency (RF), Infrared (IR), beyond visual range and within visual range missiles, cannon, sensors, external fuel tanks (if applicable), self protection systems (flares, decoys, etc) and associated pylons and launchers.

  2. Air-to-Ground Basic Mission Configuration (Strategic Attack, Close Air Support and Land Strike)

    Based on the full range of air-to-ground and self escort tasks that may be required by the Appendix A vignettes, respondents are to provide one, company-defined, air-to-ground basic mission configuration for the 2020-2030 time horizon and one air-to-ground basic mission configuration for the 2030+ time horizon. These two configurations should reflect the threat characterization for the two time horizons (provided in Section A) as well as any planned capability upgrades for the aircraft that may affect the air-to-ground basic mission configuration. These configurations should comprise a typical loadout of munitions, sensors, self-protection systems, external fuel tanks (if applicable), self escort air-to-air weapons and associated pylons, racks and launchers.

  3. Anti-Surface Warfare Basic Mission Configuration (Tactical Support to Maritime Operations)

    Based on the full range of anti-surface and self escort tasks that may be required by the Appendix A vignettes, respondents are to provide one, company-defined, anti-surface warfare basic mission configuration for the 2020-2030 time horizon and one anti-surface warfare basic mission configuration for the 2030+ time horizon. These two configurations should reflect the threat characterization for the two time horizons (provided in Section A) as well as any planned capability upgrades for the aircraft that may affect the anti-surface warfare basic mission configuration. These configurations should comprise a typical loadout of munitions, sensors, self-protection systems, external fuel tanks (if applicable), self escort air-to-air weapons and associated pylons, racks and launchers.

Capabilities

For all questions below, please provide a description of your weapon system capability in the two time horizons defined in Section A to this Industry Engagement Request (under "Time Horizons") and in the presence of the indicative threats included in that horizon. Capabilities must be restricted to those provided by your basic mission configurations as described above.

For the following questions, respondents are encouraged to provide any capability information that may contribute to the Measures of Performance described in Section A. If supplementary information is provided, respondents should indicate which Measure of Effectiveness may be affected and how the additional capability enables the aircraft to contribute to CFDS missions.

We further ask that you identify whether the expected performance of your aircraft is based on test flights, simulators or past deployments.

1. RF Sensor Capabilities Describe the basic mission configuration aircraft RF sensor capabilities and how these capabilities will contribute to the Measures of Effectiveness described in Section A. Please include metrics to substantiate the capability description. Additionally, please respond to the following:

  1. What is the primary onboard RF sensor?
  2. Approximate Radar detection ranges (5 degrees look up and 10 degrees look down over Arctic snow and ice/land background) for a 0.1m², 1mm², 5mm², 10mm² target?
  3. What is the Radar operating frequency range?
  4. Describe the azimuth and elevation coverage?
  5. Describe methods for identification, both cooperative and non-cooperative.

2. EO/IR Sensor Capabilities Describe the basic mission configuration aircraft electro-optical (EO) and/or infrared (IR) sensor capabilities and how these capabilities will contribute to the Measures of Effectiveness described in Section A. Please include metrics to substantiate the capability description (including, but not limited to, spectrum coverage, probabilities of detection, resolution, etc). Additionally, please respond to the following:

  1. Approximate IR/EO detection range of a SU-27 ("Flanker B") in dry thrust Military Power (MIL Power) in the frontal aspect, look down over Arctic snow and ice/land background (no cloud)?
  2. Approximate IR/EO detection range of a cruise missile size target (based on the AS-15) in the frontal aspect, look down over Arctic snow and ice/land background (no cloud)?
  3. What is the EO/IR sensor spectrum coverage?

3. Kinetic Weapon Capabilities Describe the air-to-air, air-to-ground and anti-surface warfare weapons capabilities intended for operational use on the aircraft and how these capabilities will contribute to the Measures of Effectiveness described in Section A. Please include metrics to substantiate the capability description. Additionally, please respond to the following:

  1. What is a typical air-to-air combat load, including external fuel tanks and sensors?
  2. What is a typical air-to-ground combat load, including external fuel tanks and sensors?
  3. What is a typical anti-surface warfare combat load, including external fuel tanks and sensors?

4. Non-Kinetic Weapon Capabilities Describe the non-kinetic weapon capabilities (e.g.:  Electronic Attack, excluding active electronic self protection intended for operational use on the aircraft and how these capabilities will contribute to the Measures of Effectiveness described in Section A. Please include metrics to substantiate the capability description (including, but not limited to, output power, frequency coverage, weapon effects, etc).

5. RF Self-Protection Capabilities Describe the basic mission configuration aircraft RF self-protection capabilities and how these capabilities will contribute to the Measures of Effectiveness described in Section A. Please include metrics to substantiate the capability description. Additionally, please respond to the following:

  1. What RF self protection systems (active and passive) does the aircraft employ?
  2. Describe the Radar's electronic protection capabilities.
  3. Are jammers incorporated internally or carried externally?
  4. What is the output power and frequency coverage?

6. IR Self-Protection Capabilities Describe the basic mission configuration aircraft IR self-protection capabilities and how these capabilities will contribute to the Measures of Effectiveness described in Section A. Please include metrics to substantiate the capability description (including, but not limited to, output power, sensitivities, frequency coverage, protection effects, etc).

7. Deployable Self-Protection Counter Measures Capabilities Describe the basic mission configuration aircraft self-protection countermeasures capabilities such as chaff, flares, and towed decoys, and how these capabilities will contribute to the Measures of Effectiveness described in Section A. Please include metrics to substantiate the capability description. Additionally, please respond to the following:

  1. What number and types of countermeasures does the aircraft employ?
  2. What is the frequency coverage and output power, if applicable?

8. Data Link Capabilities Describe the basic mission configuration aircraft data link capabilities and how these capabilities will contribute to the Measures of Effectiveness described in Section A. Please include metrics to substantiate the capability description (including, but not limited to, frequencies, data/video bandwidth, reception/transmission ranges, output power, frequency agility, etc). Additionally, please respond to the following:

  1. What is the datalink the aircraft employs?
  2. What is the compatibility with other existing datalink systems?
  3. What is the reception/transmit range?
  4. Is the link secure/encrypted?
  5. Is the link a low probability of intercept/detection waveform?

9. Voice Communication Capabilities Describe the basic mission configuration aircraft voice communication capabilities and how these capabilities will contribute to the Measures of Effectiveness described in Section A. Please include metrics to substantiate the capability description (including, but not limited to, frequencies, radio bands, reception/transmission ranges, output power, frequency agility, encryption/decryption, etc). Additionally, please respond to the following:

  1. Does the aircraft employ Beyond Line Of Sight communications? If so, by what method?

10. Pilot Vehicle Interface Capabilities Describe the basic mission configuration aircraft pilot-vehicle interface capabilities and how these capabilities will contribute to the Measures of Effectiveness described in Section A. Please include metrics to substantiate the capability description (including, but not limited to, display size/type, Hands on Throttle and Stick (HOTAS) functions, voice command, helmet mounted cueing, night vision devices/compatibility, etc).

11. Sensor Fusion Capabilities Describe the basic mission configuration aircraft sensor fusion capabilities and how these capabilities will contribute to the Measures of Effectiveness described in Section A. Please include metrics to substantiate the capability description (including, but not limited to, sensor contributors, display integration, data resolution, fusion process, duty cycle automation, etc).

12. Aircraft RF Signature Describe the basic mission configuration aircraft RF signatures and how these signatures will contribute to the Measures of Effectiveness described in Section A. Please include metrics to substantiate the signature description as they pertain to basic mission configurations (including, but not limited to, 0, 90 and 180 degree aspect radar cross-section measures in the following frequency bands, 1-2 GHz, 4 GHz, 8-12 GHz, 12-14 GHz).

13. Aircraft IR and Visual Signature Describe the basic mission configuration aircraft IR signatures and how these signatures will contribute to the Measures of Effectiveness described in Section A. Please include metrics to substantiate the signature description as they pertain to basic mission configurations (including, but not limited to 0, 90 and 180 degree aspect IR/visual measurements in dry thrust (MIL power), 0, 90 and 180 degree IR measures in dry thrust (MIL power), front/beam/rear aspect IR/visual measurements in reheat/afterburner (MAX power), etc).

14. Emissions Control Describe how the aircraft's basic mission configuration emissions control features (EM spectrum) will contribute to the covert completion of a mission (covert is to be interpreted as 'concealed', or 'disguised'). Include responses to:

  1. How can the aircraft conceal its electromagnetic or other environmental emissions?
  2. How can the aircraft reduce its electromagnetic or other environmental emissions to reduce its detectability by opposing units?
  3. By how much and in what in-flight regimes can the aircraft reduce its electromagnetic or other environmental emissions?
  4. This reduction or concealment comes at what impact to aircraft systems payload, operational efficiency or effectiveness?

15. Aircraft Engine and Airframe Capability Describe the basic mission configuration aircraft engine and airframe capabilities and how these capabilities will contribute to the Measures of Effectiveness described in Section A. Please provide Energy-Manoeuvrability (E-M) diagrams specific 10k, 20k and 30k MSL, basic mission configuration at 50% mission fuel. Please include metrics to substantiate the capability description (including, but not limited to, max speed at 30K feel Mean Sea Level (MSL/ISA), thrust in dry thrust (MIL power), thrust in reheat/afterburner (MAX power), angle of attack limitations, max G, etc). Additionally, please respond to the following:

  1. What is the aircraft thrust to weight ratio in the following configurations:
    1. At take off weight in the air-to-air basic mission configuration described above;
    2. During typical air-to-air mission with 50% mission fuel and 50% weapons remaining (pylons installed, if required for the mission);
    3. Take off weight in the air-to-ground basic mission configuration described above;
    4. During typical air-to-ground mission with 50% mission fuel and no weapons remaining (pylons installed, if required for the mission);
  2. What is the aircraft wing loading in the following configurations:
    1. Take off weight in the typical air-to-air load described above;
    2. During typical air-to-air mission with 50% mission fuel and 50% weapons remaining (pylons installed, if required for the mission);
    3. Take off weight in the air-to-ground basic mission configuration described above;
    4. During air-to-ground basic mission with 50% mission fuel and no weapons remaining (pylons installed, if required for the mission).
  3. What is the aircraft instantaneous and sustained turn rate at 10kft, 15kft, 30kft MSL in the following configurations:
    1. At take off weight in the air-to-air basic mission configuration described above;
    2. During typical air-to-air mission with 50% mission fuel and 50% weapons remaining (pylons installed, if required for the mission);
    3. At take off weight in the air-to-ground basic mission configuration described above;
    4. During typical air-to-ground mission with 50% mission fuel and no weapons remaining (pylons installed, if required for the mission).
  4. What is the aircraft time to accelerate from M0.90 to M1.1 at 30Kft, remaining level in the following configurations:
    1. During air-to-air mission with 50% mission fuel and 50% air-to-air missiles;
    2. During typical air-to-ground mission with 50% mission fuel and no weapons (pylons installed if required for the mission).
  5. What is the required aircraft take off roll distance in the mission configuration aircraft assuming the following parameters: Runway bare and dry, 0 feet MSL, 15 degrees C, no wind:
    1. Air-to-air basic mission configuration;
    2. Air-to-ground basic mission configuration;
    3. Air-to surface basic mission configuration.
  6. What is the required aircraft landing distance (from main wheel touchdown to stop, without reducing aircraft turnaround time - no hot brakes scenarios) in the mission configuration aircraft assuming the following parameters: Runway bare and dry, 0 feet MSL, 15 degrees C, no wind, no use of airfield infrastructure (such as cables or barriers), landing after take off. If unable to land at take off weight, state maximum allowable landing weight, with restrictions:
    1. Air-to-air basic mission configuration;
    2. Air-to-ground basic mission configuration;
    3. Air-to-surface basic mission configuration.

16. Aircraft Combat Radius, Range and Endurance Describe the un-refueled basic mission configuration aircraft combat radius, range and endurance capabilities and how these capabilities will contribute to the Measures of Effectiveness described in Section A. Please include metrics to substantiate the capability description (including, but not limited to, fuel flow at MIL power, fuel flow at MAX power, endurance speed at 30K feet MSL, etc). Additionally, please respond to the following:

  1. What is the maximum radius of the air-to-air basic mission configuration in the following mission profile:
    • Max power take off (at 0 feet MSL) and climb to 30,000 feet MSL and remain;
    • Cruise at best range airspeed for 100nm from departure airfield;
    • Increase airspeed to M0.85 and maintain for XXXnm (respondent to fill in);
    • Dash at M1.2 for 100nm (continuing in a straight line away from departure airfield);
    • Reduce airspeed to M0.85 and return to airfield (external fuel tanks, if applicable, are retained);
    • At optimum descent point, descend and complete an Instrument flight rules (IFR) approach to landing with dry tanks.
  2. What is the maximum radius of the air-to-ground basic mission configuration in the following mission profile:
    • Max power take off (at 0 feet MSL) and climb to 30,000 feet;
    • Increase airspeed to M0.85 and maintain for XXXnm (respondent to fill in);
    • Dash at M1.0 for 100nm;
    • Reduce airspeed to M0.85 and return to airfield (external fuel tanks, if applicable, are retained);
    • At optimum descent point, descend and complete an IFR approach to landing with dry tanks.
  3. What is the maximum radius of anti-surface warfare basic mission configuration in the following mission profile:
    • Max power take off (at 0 feet MSL) and climb to 30,000 feet;
    • Increase airspeed to M0.85 and maintain for XXXnm (respondent to fill in);
    • Dash at M1.0 for 100nm;
    • Reduce airspeed to M0.85 and return to airfield (external fuel tanks, if applicable, are retained);
    • At optimum descent point, descend and complete an IFR approach to landing with dry tanks.
  4. What is the maximum range of the air-to-air basic mission configuration (from question 1) in the following mission profile:
    • Max power takeoff (at 0 feet MSL) and optimum climb profile to optimum cruise altitude;
    • Cruise for XXXnm (respondent to fill in) at max range speed;
    • At optimum descent point, descend and complete an IFR approach to landing with dry tanks.
  5. What is the maximum range of the air-to-ground basic mission configuration in the following mission profile:
    • Max power takeoff (at 0 feet MSL) and optimum climb profile to optimum cruise altitude;
    • When 100nm from departure airfield, increase airspeed to tactical M0.85;
    • Maintain M0.85 for XXXnm (respondent to fill in);
    • Return to departure airfield at 0.85M until optimum descent point;
    • Complete an IFR approach to landing with dry tanks.
  6. What is the maximum range of anti-surface basic mission configuration in the following mission profile:
    • Max power takeoff (at 0 feet MSL) and optimum climb profile to optimum cruise altitude;
    • When 100nm from departure airfield, increase airspeed to tactical M0.85;
    • Maintain M0.85 for XXXnm (respondent to fill in);
    • Return to departure airfield at 0.85M until optimum descent point;
    • Complete an IFR approach to landing with dry tanks.
  7. What is the maximum endurance of the air-to-ground basic mission configuration in the following mission profile:
    • Max power takeoff (at 0 feet MSL) and climb to 30,000 feet;
    • Best cruise airspeed until 100nm from departure airfield;
    • Maintain M0.85 in a Combat Air Patrol (CAP) orbit for XX minutes (respondent to fill in);
    • Return to departure airfield at best cruise airspeed until optimum descent point;
    • Complete an IFR approach to landing with dry tanks.
  8. What is the maximum endurance of the air-to-ground basic mission configuration in the following mission profile:
    • Max power takeoff (at 0 feet MSL) and climb to 30,000 feet;
    • Best cruise airspeed until 100nm from departure airfield;
    • Maintain M0.85 in a CAP orbit for XX minutes (respondent to fill in);
    • Return to departure airfield at best cruise airspeed until optimum descent point;
    • Complete an IFR approach to landing with dry tanks.
  9. What is the maximum endurance of anti-surface warfare mission configuration in the following mission profile:
    • Max power takeoff (at 0 feet MSL) and climb to 30,000 feet;
    • Best cruise airspeed until 100nm from departure airfield;
    • Maintain M0.85 in a CAP for XX minutes (respondent to fill in);
    • Return to departure airfield at best cruise airspeed until optimum descent point;
    • Complete an IFR approach to landing with dry tanks

17. Please provide a description of any other capability that may be part of your mission-configured weapon system that you deem would contribute to the overall effectiveness of the mission.

18. Please provide a detailed description, including metrics where applicable of the aircraft system safety features or capabilities which enhance mission success such as ground avoidance collision systems, etc.

Production and Supportability

19. Procurement The following questions are oriented towards understanding when Canada will be able to procure aircraft, possible buy profiles (aircraft/year), and any risks to on-time delivery of aircraft with the needed capabilities:

  1. Provide the date at which the production line for your aircraft is expected to shut down, based on current confirmed customer orders.
  2. Provide the aircraft's planned production capacity (minimum annual) from 2017 to 2030, the associated currently known production orders as well as the planned closure of the production line, including options to acquire additional aircraft after the original fleet order is fulfilled. Provide the lead time for delivery from placement of order. Describe important assumptions related to production capacity and flexibility in production planning and delivery.
  3. Provide a list of current customers operating your aircraft type, and the status of current customer deliveries.
  4. Describe the airworthiness and flight clearance process and authorities involved in the flight certification of the aircraft.
  5. Describe which developmental work – if any – remains to be performed on your aircraft to achieve the capabilities provided by the mission-configured weapon system as described in response to Question 1, and the planned date at which those capabilities will be achieved. If delivery of capability is to be staggered in stages or blocks, please provide information about which capabilities will be available at which time.

20. Supportability and Connectivity The following questions are oriented towards understanding the potential issues that Canada may need to assess regarding the long-term sustainability of the aircraft, management of the fleet and the associated personnel (especially pilots and maintainers), assurance of continued operational capability, and interoperability within the Canadian Armed Forces and with allies:

  • a. Provide the aircraft's designed structural life, in terms of number of years, maximum number of flying hours, maximum number of take off-offs and landings, or other structural life constraints/limitations, as applicable. Provide appropriate assumptions that form the basis for these estimates (e.g. basis for usage spectrum, Mean time between failure (MTBF), Mean time to repair (MTTR), Maintenance Load Factor, etc). If possible, describe safe landing and damage tolerance qualification, fatigue testing and service life monitoring system, including verification procedures.
  • b. Indicate forecast (or demonstrated, if available) weapon system reliability in terms of average monthly flying rate per aircraft. In the context of the anticipated maintenance and support program for the proposed aircraft, provide an assessment of combat sortie rates per day in a surge and sustain environment, provide its ability to generate 15 hrs per aircraft per month, and provide turn-around times including role changes. Describe important assumptions, as applicable, and describe key performance parameters if possible.
  • c. Describe your concept of operations for reprogramming of the electronic warfare system and software upgrades for the aircraft's mission systems and defensive electronic warfare systems for a period of at least thirty years following delivery of the last aircraft. Describe any features that provide flexibility to adapt the systems' software configuration.
  • d. Describe any security-related infrastructure requirements to support the aircraft's operations. If there is a special-access program requirements, list the requirements of the program.
  • e. Describe the aircraft's depot maintenance support concept and weapon system support network, in particular as it relates to long-term availability of replacement/spare parts for the aircraft, for a period of at least thirty years following delivery of the last aircraft. Provide an estimate of until when spares lines are expected to remain open for the aircraft's components, based on current and expected future operators of the aircraft type.
  • f. Provide the date (firm or estimated) beyond which your company is not expecting to provide any additional support for the aircraft, if applicable.
  • g. Describe any integrated training solutions to provide aircrew, ground crew and support personnel to include; available all training devices/simulators and provide in particular a description of their fidelity and their capability for performing distributed simulations/learning through secured networks such as high-level architecture (HLA) or other means. Describe the courseware capabilities and ability for the Government of Canada to modify and control these products.
  • h. Provide a list of anticipated cleared and integrated air-to-air, air-to-ground, and anti-surface weapons (note if currently cleared). If applicable, provide weapons capability roadmaps to clear and integrate additional weapons.
  • i. Describe the overall support and maintenance concept, including: manning, infrastructure and other logistical elements; and models for main operating base (MOB), forward operating locations (FOL) and deployed locations for peacetime and combat operations.
  • j. Describe requirements for self-sufficient operations in deployed locations, including, if possible, the logistical footprint such as resources and manning.
  • k. Describe the aircraft and weapon systems' suitability and experience to perform operations in a range of environments, including the Arctic. Please provide a description of the following capabilities for your aircraft in the Arctic: landing speed, required runway length, arrested landing capability, and backup power options.

Regarding aircraft sensor, communications or weapons systems or components:

  • l. What connectivity architectures are required in order to provide connectivity outside of the aircraft? What connectivity equipment would be provided as part of the acquisition?
  • m. What bandwidth, data rate, data format, standardization agreement, security requirements and modes/means of transmission are needed/used?
  • n. Identify connectivity, releasability or security limitations that exclude or limit flexibility in equipment choice or use.
  • o. Describe total aircrew life support equipment concept, including but not limited to: flight suit, helmet, anti-G suit, oxygen mask and immersion suit, unique enhancements/requirements and chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) capability.

21. Supportability Please describe any additional characteristics related to product support of the fighter aircraft that should be considered.

22. Growth Potential The following questions are oriented towards understanding the growth potential of the aircraft to accommodate future un-forecasted technological developments and/or capability enhancements:

  1. Describe your company's capability upgrade approach for this aircraft, and any planned upgrade programs to include software and hardware upgrade and plans to avoid parts obsolescence.
  2. Describe your company's concept for any pre-planned product improvement or block upgrade programs as well as your approach to dealing with a more complex future threat (e.g. more contested RF, electronic warfare (EW) spectrum, jamming, spoofing, cyber threats). Will this be driven by anticipated internal National requirements, foreign export demands, or as part of an international program office.
  3. Describe features of the aircraft's systems and design that enable future growth (e.g.: available space, cooling/power capacity, "open architecture"). Provide an overview of mission/avionics system architecture and description of how it can accommodate future unplanned improvements.
  4. List any additional features or capabilities that the weapon system could provide beyond those already described in response to previous questions in this questionnaire.

23. Global Systems Integration (Strategic Interoperability)

The following questions are oriented towards understanding the strategic level (beyond aircraft systems) interoperability of the aircraft within the Canadian Armed Forces and with allied forces for global deployabilty, employability, and supportability.

  1. Describe your company's capability to be interoperable with our allies. This includes: threat/electronic warfare (EW) libraries, reprogramming facilities, weapons, munitions, and stores integration requirements throughout the life of the aircraft, the compatibility with our allies' weapons, chaff/flares, Universal Armament Interface (NUAI) (NATO Universal Armament Interface), etc
  2. Describe your company's in-service support concept throughout the life of the aircraft. What is the in-service support concept for current customers and the ability to access host nation/allied support for the aircraft in theatre while globally deployed?
  3. Describe your company's ability to utilize NATO, coalition partners and/or Allies support (ground/pre-flight/flight) services, equipment, consumables, and tools while employed domestically and worldwide.
  4. Describe your company's command and information networking concept. This includes; C2 and ISR integration within Canada, coalition partners, and/or other allies for LOS and BLOS communications/tactical data link systems, including networking protocols.
  5. List any additional features or capabilities that the Company and its weapon system could provide to enhance Global deployabilty, employability, and supportability beyond those already described in response to previous questions in this questionnaire.
  6. Describe details of your weapon system fuel type and its air-to-air refuelling capability/configuration.
  7. Describe details of networking capability with other potential coalition participants.

24. Safety Describe the details of your weapon system that contribute to the operational safety of the pilot and weapon system.

Controlled Goods Requirements and Procurement Approach

25. Does the fighter aircraft weapon system include any equipment, software or other information that may be subject to foreign export controls or restrictions, including US International Traffic in Arms (ITAR) controls? And if so, what is the anticipated process including timelines to address those controls or restrictions, such as initiation of an export license, Government to Government transfer arrangement or others?

26. Is the fighter aircraft weapon system and its associated In Service Support available through Foreign Military Sales (Government to Government) or Direct Commercial sales (industry) or through other means?

Appendix A – Fighter Vignettes

In order to contribute to the roles and missions prescribed by the Canada First Defence Strategy, the Canadian fighter may be required to conduct a wide-ranging set of tasks that could result in a significant number of specialized configurations. It would be impractical and/or impossible to include all possible aircraft configurations in the scope of this assessment.

Instead, it is the intent of this assessment to focus on a set of basic mission configurations for each respondent aircraft including air-to-air, air-to-ground and anti-surface warfare. Each respondent will be asked to define their basic mission configurations as required to enable their aircraft to conduct a range of fighter tasks in the Canadian context provided below.

The following mission vignettes provide additional information on the types of missions and tasks that a Canadian fighter aircraft may be required to complete. The intent of these fighter vignettes is to provide Canadian contextual information to the respondents to better understand how the Canadian fighter will be employed. Combined with information contained in the Section A threat characterization, these vignettes will allow the respondents to define their set of basic mission configurations requested in Question 1.

Vignette 1 - Conduct daily domestic and continental operations, including in the Arctic and through North American Aerospace Defence (NORAD).

The Canadian fighter is conducting normal daily and contingency NORAD missions at normal alert levels, and is prepared to react to elevated alert levels. Operations are conducted from Main Operating Bases as well as Forward Operating Locations, and missions may be over land and over water. The threats for these missions can be air and maritime-based.

Vignette 2Support a major international event in Canada, such as the 2010 Olympics.

The CAF is being employed in support to a major international event being held in Canada. Canada's fighter assets are based in Deployed Operating Bases and/or civilian airfields that are closer to the expected area of operations. The Canadian fighter will be used to prevent disruption during a major international event held in Canada. Given an identified threat, the fighter will prosecute any potential land, maritime, and air threats. If an attack does materialize, the fighter, combined with other joint assets, will be used to maintain over watch and negate further attacks.

Vignette 3 - Lead and/or conduct a major international operation for an extended period (Complex peace enforcement operation in a failed state).

The CAF has been tasked to deploy in support of multi-national North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) operations in a failed state. An expeditionary fighter unit is included in this deployment, and will be based in a nearby nation that is sympathetic to NATO forces. The Canadian fighter will participate in this peace enforcement operation as part of a joint coalition effort. Civilian population and key infrastructure must be protected, and an environment conducive to an influx of humanitarian relief must be established. The Peace Support Operation will also use the Canadian fighter to locate and destroy known terrorist cells. Instability in the region may lead to a requirement to use the Canadian fighter to maintain sovereignty in the face of threatening neighbour states.

Vignette 4 - Lead and/or conduct a major international operation for an extended period (Coalition war fighting - state on state).

Canada has committed the CAF as part of a coalition responding to the threat of aggression from a foreign state. Included in the CAF contribution to the allied force is a fighter expeditionary force aimed at helping to deter aggression from the threatening state. If deterrence fails, the threatening state will be defeated. State on state war fighting will require the conduct of the full-spectrum of operational capabilities in a joint coalition. The Canadian fighter aircraft will be deployed to a forward coalition base, and will make use of coalition support assets in any ensuring air campaign.

Vignette 5 - Respond to a major terrorist attack.

A terrorist threat to Canada has been identified. This threat is in the form of an attack that is being planned abroad, is underway with weapons in transit, or has just taken place. Canada's fighter assets are based as per normal posture, and can be moved forward to Deployed Operating Bases or civilian airfields as dictated by the threat and intelligence on the situation. In the case of the attack being planned abroad, an expeditionary fighter unit will deploy to a sympathetic country in the region in preparation to support a pre-emptive, joint force attack. In the case of weapons in transit the Canadian fighter will be used to prevent the attack in progress, or respond to this major terrorist attack after it has occurred. Given the identified terrorist threat, the Canadian fighter will prosecute asymmetric land, maritime, and air terrorist threats before they strike. If an attack has already taken place, the Canadian fighter, combined with other joint assets, will maintain over watch and negate further attacks.

Vignette 6 - Deploy forces in response to crises elsewhere in the world for shorter periods (Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief).

Canada has offered CAF units to assist in response to an international, United Nations-led humanitarian crisis or disaster. Included in this response is a deployed expeditionary fighter unit, which will be based alongside of other assistance efforts. The Canadian fighter will contribute to stabilization and policing missions, in support of international aid efforts. Relief efforts are hampered by criminal activity and general lawlessness, which pose a threat to the successful execution of the relief assistance.