Yes, exactly.
The S-92, which is being built by Sikorsky for our maritime patrol aircraft, was a commercial aircraft, and we've only modified the tail, and so on. So we have a fairly high degree of confidence that it was a proven aircraft.
I think it's difficult to say that the government had any real significant role in the difficulty we've had with the Cormorant. It was early in the production of that aircraft, the EH 101. The Royal Navy had bought some. But again, that's fairly typical of developmental aircraft programs, where it takes, in many cases, about a decade to work out the bugs.
We're working hard with AgustaWestland, and in fact we—our engineers—have found the solution, we believe, to the half-hub rotor issue and have solved that for AgustaWestland.
I think it highlights the issue of risk when you get into a very complex piece of military equipment very early in its developmental process and its initial production. There's a lot of risk there, and the Cormorant is a prime example.
We also don't have a single point of accountability with the Cormorant, and we didn't purchase the right type of intellectual property with the Cormorant. As Mr. Rowe, the president of I.M.P. in Halifax, will tell you, as I say, it takes about 10 years to work out those bugs.