Canada's National Fighter Procurement Secretariat (NFPS) released its long anticipated report today outlining there research into the four (formerly five) fighters studied to replace the CF-18 Hornet.
The "public" report is not for public release yet. The NFPS did make a statement, however. You can read the statement here: http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/stamgp-lamsmp/dpei-sirp-eng.html
The report makes no recommendations. No decisions. Nothing set in stone. Instead it merely outlines the costs and capabilities of each aircraft being considered.
The actual decision is now in the hands of the Federal government. By most accounts, it looks like the F-35 is still the front-runner. There was talk of a mixed fleet of fighters, possibly leading to a similar decision as that made by South Korea recently.
The "Reset" may finally be coming to an end soon. Then again, things may soon get even more complicated. Stay tuned...
When I read this statement I had three opinions:
ReplyDelete1. The section that describes what they did not do. They did not question policies, missions or statement of work (SOR). This , to me, would seem like the whole basis of how you do your research. If all the guidelines provided to the independent experts were skewed towards the F35 strengths then the process would be compromised. So, the panel should have had the authority to question this.
2. They only performed qualitative reviews. Basically, this is just interviewing experts and getting their opinions. I imaging the same experts may have created the missions, policies and SOR. This information should be rated and the highest scoring elements would be subjected to quantitative assessment. Industry resources would be used to validate their findings and aid in reducing biases in the information. The fact they described qualitative as the only real way to assess should send off warning signals.
3. While the general tone of the whole statement sounded very honorable, on its own it means nothing. We would need access to the report and supporting documents to truly assess for ourselves if the review of the panel was fair.
Oh well, I sent me email to Diane Finley in hopes we can get an open competition.