Bombardier and BAE Systems today announced the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to explore opportunities for collaboration in support of next-generation combat air capabilities in Canada.
Areas of focus may include aircraft and mission-system design, systems integration, digital engineering and digital thread technologies, advanced manufacturing, and long-term product support, sustainment and security.
Simon Barnes, Group Managing Director, BAE Systems’ Air sector, said: “BAE Systems brings decades of combat air experience spanning aircraft design, systems integration, manufacturing and support. This agreement marks an important step in our ambition to strengthen international partnerships that support the future of combat air. We’re excited by the opportunity to collaborate with Bombardier to help deliver the strategic aims of Canada’s Defence Industrial Strategy.”
Stephen McCullough, Bombardier’s Executive Vice President of Engineering, Product Development and Bombardier Defense, said: “Bombardier has a proud history of designing, building and supporting world-class aircraft while advancing aerospace technology. We are well positioned to bring together and develop the talent and expertise needed for programmes that can carry a generational impact on the worldwide defence industry. This MOU with BAE Systems provides a clear framework to explore how these capabilities can support next-generation defence programmes, while strengthening industrial capacity, high-value jobs and long-term aerospace leadership.”
The companies share an ambition to develop an enduring set of capabilities that support the delivery of next-generation combat air solutions, creating value across the entire lifecycle—from early-stage design and digital development through systems integration, manufacturing and in-service support.
Bombardier’s MOU with BAE Systems is a way of bringing together mutual capabilities in aerospace and defence to develop long term sovereign combat air capabilities in Canada and for international markets.
About BAE Systems
We provide some of the world’s most advanced, technology-led defence, aerospace and security solutions, helping customers stay ahead of evolving threats across land, sea, air, cyber and space. We are a skilled workforce of around 110,000 people, working with customers and local partners in more than 40 countries to deliver military capability, protect national security and keep critical information and infrastructure secure..
Noah Note: I had an ongoing bet that the first Canadian company to get some form of agreement related to GCAP would be CAE. God Damnit. Ah well. Anywho, a fairly basic MOU, and coming after we talked about Bombardier not caring about the fighter game right now! Of course this is a fairly bog-standard MOU, with broad focus areas, no details on next steps, and no commitment too it.
As always MOU like these do play an importsnt role in defining partners, setting first stages, and creating some form of dialogue between two companies. I know many folks had non-binding MOU, but they do uave a role in the ecosystem and are important, just not something we can say is set.
Of course that also tends to make people like Bombardier more open to things, and given the GCAP timelines being so far out? It's inconsequential to them to not explore. One of the big arguments kinda against GCAP for some is the fact we're coming in late.
The workshare between the UK, Japan, and Italy is already defined and set in contract as I know it. Any changes means revisions to that agreement, and so for many, especially those with an economic forst focus, GCAP presents a weird area. Clearly, we wanna particioate and be involved.
It costs us nothing right now, creates a good dialog with allied partners, puts Canada in a position to try and reap some Industrial benefits, and puts us in priority as the ‘fourth’ partner over other potential observers.
But to some the lack of pathway to really mandate Industrial participation is a big red flag, and the collapse FCAS opens up multiple new possibilities that didn't exist a few months ago. Granted, nothing stops us from being an observer in multiple projects, but typically you don't want too. Isnt a great look and allied governments will question our long-term commitment.
So getting some agreements on the GCAP sode of things, no matter how minor they might be, is a big boost to the programs legitimacy and to convincing some of the skeptics that there is an inherent value to being an observer, that it does open the door to participation. We might not have a set workshare. We might not be considered an Industrial partner. That doesn't mean were locked out of the system, of participating entirely like some commentators try to push.
It just means that we have to work for it, and admittedly we're reliant of the big three (BAE, Leonardo, JAIEC) to make investments and bring industry into their supply chain.
Keep note that this is also an agreement with BAE itself, not the actual Edgewing. I think it’s important to remind of that distinction between the two of them. Agreements between the three partners is still valid and good to participating in the supply side, but calling it a ‘GCAP Contract’ might be a bit of a stretch given.
With Canada now an official observer to GCAP, and still the only one, we do have a bit of a period to capitalize on deepening collaboration before other potential suitors show up and try to edge in on the program. That incentivizes, especially on the Federal side, some deeper advocacy in my mind to try and get these kinds of agreements out there.
It also means we need to start talking about being Sixth-Gen ready, something we ain't right now. That means having the industry and capacity to support Advanced Manufacturing, Software Development, and components related to the Sixth-Gen Supply Chain.
And to disclaimer a bit. No program is giving that. Being involved in the F-35 isn't necessarily building a sixth-gen supply chain. Neither is Gripen, with how it is right now. Those two, no matter what, can't build that.
That isn't an insult to either, but it speaks to the level of jump we talk about from Fifth to Six-generayion capabilities when we discuss actually being a major supplier. We want to be building a foundation to go beyond our Tier-IV or III role. That isn't easy, and maybe with GCAP we are locked out in many cases, but it also isn't impossible. Not at all.
What it takes is a plan, a proper look at to what roles we can fill, and a strategy to get it done on timelines that don't take a decade or more to deliver results, by which point we will be long pushed out. That starts, really, before any agreement, and I can't say if the Feds are taking those steps.
But if we want to maximize our participation, to actually benefit from such a program, we need something to actually move beyond the areas where we traditionally play support, and that's the place where we sadly are likely to fuck up in.