National Defence Committee on Nov. 4th, 2010

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm using up some final time.

With respect to quantities of aircraft, the number that's being sold to the U.S. Navy is 500 and change, is that correct?

[Kory G. Mathews]

That's the total program of record, sir, with the multi-year three, 124 aircraft.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Okay. Would you generally agree that there would be a better economy of scale if 3,000 to 5,000 planes were being purchased, as opposed to 500?

[Kory G. Mathews]

Certainly rate can impact cost. Projected rate and how fast one comes down a learning curve certainly would need to be factored into that.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Would the same be true for ongoing maintenance costs and the purchase of spare parts for a higher volume?

[Kory G. Mathews]

That is a consideration. Probably a larger lever is overall reliability and maintainability positions for the incumbent weapon system you're talking about, sir.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Okay, great.

We talked earlier about the production timelines for the Super Hornet. At this point, when are production lines scheduled to shut down?

[Kory G. Mathews]

At this point in time, on firm orders it is 2015.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

It's 2015.

[Kory G. Mathews]

Again, I would submit to you that as the program manager here I am confident that we will be producing these aircraft well past 2020. I think you need to look at even, for example, history on another line in St. Louis, and the ability to extend production there, sir. I'm confident in this weapon system. I'm confident it meets the requirements domestically and internationally, and I'm confident we'll be in production for a long, long time.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Is that decision to shut down the production line, whatever year it may be, a U.S. government decision or a Boeing decision?

[Kory G. Mathews]

Ultimately, sir, that would be a Boeing decision, depending on what we see as production requirements going forward. We have requirements to meet the program of record.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Who owns the equipment on the production line, Boeing or the U.S. government?

[Kory G. Mathews]

I believe you're probably talking specifically about tooling?

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Right.

[Kory G. Mathews]

Sir, I'm going to have to get back to you on that. I believe parts of the tooling is Boeing-owned, but I will get you a whole answer on that, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, Maxime Bernier]

That's it. Thank you very much.

Merci beaucoup, monsieur Mathews.

We will suspend our work for two minutes. After that we'll have witnesses from Dassault Aviation.

Merci.

[The Chair, Conservative, Maxime Bernier]

Welcome back. We will now resume the 32nd meeting of the Standing Committee on National Defence. Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we are continuing our study of the next generation of fighter aircraft.

Our next witness is Mr. Yves Robins, Dassault Aviation official representative.

Thank you for being here today Mister Robins. You have eight to ten minutes for your statement. Then members will have the opportunity to ask questions.

You have the floor.

[Yves Robins, Assistant Director, International General Directorate, Dassault Aviation]

Thank you Mister Chair, distinguished Committee members.

I would first like to thank you for your invitation to appear before you here today and for the opportunity to introduce our company and the Rafale fighter aircraft. It is both a privilege and an honour.

I'd like to first say a couple of words about our company. We are a rather peculiar company in the European aerospace scene, as we are probably the only aerospace manufacturer in the world still belonging to the founding family of the company. Our company was founded by the late Marcel Dassault. It's still owned in majority by Mr. Serge Dassault and his family.

Last year we had a turnover of about 3.5 billion euros. And 70% of our turnover comes from our civilian activities, as we share the privilege of being a world leader in the field of business jets with a Canadian company, Bombardier, and an American company, Gulfstream Aerospace.

We also have the peculiarity of having extensive experience in the field of combat aircraft development. In the last 60 years, about 7,500 aircraft have been delivered to 70 countries by Dassault--not only combat aircraft but also business jets, as well. And they have logged a total of 20 million flight hours.

Our experience is rather unique in Europe, where we are positioning ourselves as the main contractor in the field of combat aircraft and complex systems integrations. Our products, first of all the business jets.... We have delivered more than 2,000 business jets of the Falcon family. Even if we are competitors to the Canadian aerospace industry, as Bombardier is also producing a lot of business jets, we are also a partner of the Canadian aerospace industry, since Pratt & Whitney Canada is providing the engines for several of our business jets, among others, our latest, the Falcon 7X, which is a bestseller in its category.

Another program we are currently working on is the nEUROn program. The nEUROn program is a European cooperation program aimed at developing a technology demonstrator in the field of unmanned combat aircraft. And here we are touching on a topic you have already addressed during this meeting, which is stealthiness. Obviously, one of the UCAV's characteristics will be a very high degree of stealthiness. And its aim is to develop several technologies that the European aerospace industry will need in the next 35 or 40 years in order to develop a further generation of combat aircraft in the future.

And last but not least, our main program in the military field is the Rafale omni-role fighter. I shall spare you all the figures and technicalities of the aircraft. I'm at your disposal to answer your questions. Let me just quickly talk about the founding principles of the Rafale combat aircraft.

The first of the basic principles is the omnirole concept. It stems from the challenges faced by the French defence forces, which in 1995, operated a fleet of approximately 697 aircraft. The White paper on French Defence and National Security has set a goal of a single pool of 300 fighters in 2025. As a result, the Navy and the Air Force will be replacing seven different aircraft with one fighter.

The new aircraft had to be capable of performing aerial defence missions, deep strikes, close support, anti-shipping strikes and tactical and strategic reconnaissance. In addition, France specifically required nuclear strike capability as part of the French nuclear deterrent force.

The initiative currently provides for 284 Rafales to be built. The French Government has placed firm orders for 180. Approximately 90 have already been delivered. They entered service with the French Navy in 2004 and the Air Force in 2006.

The aircraft's second basic principle, which you have already discussed, is interoperability. The aircraft was designed to plug seamlessly into multi-national operations and to provide total interoperability with the hardware of North American and European NATO allies.

The interoperability capability is no longer just a principle but a tangible reality. It has shown its worth several times. The Rafale has been engaged in three combat missions in Afghanistan, where it demonstrated its interoperability in providing support for coalition troops. This same capability has also been tested in three operations aboard various U.S. Navy aircraft carriers. Rafales were deployed on the Enterprise and the Harry S. Truman, and then in June this year, on the Theodore Roosevelt. Four Rafales were embedded in a carrier-based F-18E Super Hornet unit for a week.

The aircraft's interoperability capacity was again documented just a few days ago by the signature of a co-operation agreement between France and the United Kingdom. Under this deal, British F-35s will in the future operate along side Rafales on the British and French aircraft carriers Prince of Wales and Charles de Gaulle.

The final basic design principle of the Rafale is the strong growth potential offered by the open architecture of its systems. The Rafale is required to be in operation with the French armed forces for between 30 and 40 years. As as result, it is essential that it have the capacity to adapt to evolving threats but also to advances in technology and weapons systems. The aircraft's open architecture allows for upgrading to successive standards.

I think I shall stop there for now. It would be a pleasure to answer any questions you may have.

[The Chair, Conservative, Maxime Bernier]

Thank you, Mister Robins.

Mister LeBlanc, you have the floor.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Thank you, Mister Chair.

Thank you, Mister Robins for your presentation and for being here today. I would like to start with a couple of questions that I have already asked your Boeing counterparts. My colleagues will perhaps pick up on my line of questioning later if we have time.

I am sure that you are aware of the paper put out by the Government in October entitled: High Level Mandatory Requirements for Canada's Next-generation Fighter. I take it that you have seen this paper?

[Yves Robins]

Yes, we have seen the paper and I can tell you that the Rafale meets all the specified requirements.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Great. Are you also aware of the testimony of the Lieutenant-General and Air Force Chief-of-staff before this Committee last week? He provided comments on this very paper. Having read his testimony, do you still believe that the Rafale meets the requirements described by Lieutenant-General Deschamps?

[Yves Robins]

Absolutely.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

I have a further question on the price tag. It goes without saying that budgets are a bit tight these days for all governments, including those in Europe.

Imagine the Canadian government was interested in a fixed price... You heard the exchange with your counterparts from Boeing. You require very specific technical information based on very detailed requirements. Were the Canadian Government to provide this, would you be in a position to agree a fixed price for the aircraft?