A quick followup today, because I have been asked about this.
Two days ago, the Ottawa Citizen put out an article regarding nTACS. The article, to its credit, is working off info from a few months ago; however, I felt the need to involve myself and clarify their information.
Usually, I don't respond to these kinds of things from other publications. It somewhat runs a fine line on our ethics policy, and I find it rude to essentially call out others over the info they have. That's especially true for projects like nTACS, where the project has shifted rapidly over the last few months.
Sometimes people are out of date a bit, and that's okay. I'm sometimes out of date too! However, a lot of people have been coming to me asking for clarification, given I recently discussed the topic a few weeks back.
To start, the number of helicopters procured for the 427th is eighteen. I wanna get that out of the way quick. That is the working number that I myself have seen as of about a month ago, and as far as I know, it hasn't changed.
Second, the timelines that the Ottawa Citizen presents are woefully out of date. Again, not their fault; it happens. Especially these days. I can safely say that by 2033, nTACS will be well into delivering, if not done, depending on how quickly we move.
The 2038 timeline is an old, very out-of-date timeline before recent funding increases and approvals were given. nTACS is actually a case of a project cutting its timeline by several years.
The working timeline that I know is for delivery on nTACS proper to start ~2030/2031. The 'Phase I' that is being discussed here is supposed to be delivered before 2030, ahead of nTACS proper, but not significantly.
I honestly don't even count it as a Phase I, to be honest. It is essentially a separate sole-source being procured outside the proper nTACS project that we often discuss. It's currently awaiting approval on someone's desk right now. They're ready to go.
nTACS itself actually expects to release an RFI this year, potentially in relatively short order. That itself is massively ahead of the original timeline being discussed. The nTACS team, to their credit, wants to move fast. They have the funding and the mandate to move quick.
While nTACS isn't under the DIA, as far as I know, I wouldn't be shocked to see it as one of the projects that falls under its banner soon. For all intents, they're ready to go. They're ready to start getting this done, and for good reason. The current Griffon fleet is old, no matter what Life Extension they get, and past 2032 is questionable. There is a tight deadline to start delivery and have platforms in service before then.
On that note, a few of you had seen my comments on Twitter and asked if there had been a change in the current Blackhawk plans. I can safely say that this has not changed. Blackhawks are still the plan. What version? I can't fully say still. It will likely either be the UH-60M or MH-60M. I have a good reason to believe it will be the full MH-60M variant, as I said before.
No matter what, yes, it will be a Blackhawk they procure. They are the most cost-effective, most readily available option on the market. They fit the requirements and align most with our most common partner in USSOCOM. At least, that's the story.
While nTACS has been shifting quite a bit as time goes on, this is one area where things have remained firm. I doubt we will see any change on this front. As a side note, I have also not heard of Sikorsky (Lockorsky) offering them as a 'deal' to offset some of the tension regarding the Cyclone. As far as I know, they never have.
And, like, I don't wanna come off like I'm trying to go after Dave or the Ottawa Citizen here. Again, info is hard. However, I do believe a bit of clarification to their story with more accurate, timely information was worth it. We don't need people overly confused about things when the answers are out there.
So yes, just a quick clarification today. Nothing major, no new info. I just wanted to quickly get on here and write up something for those of you who might be confused.
Hats off to you Noah. Your journalistic ethics cannot be faulted. But for an ex serviceman who has had to put up with that paper and writer for as long as you’ve been alive….sorry, I don’t have the time left on this world to put up with their shoddy and forever negative opinions of our Canadians in uniform.
Not counting on too much American kit going forward, with Carneys ridiculous mentioning of ready for a new world order with China and now putting another nail in our automotive sector by allowing cheap Chinese EVs into our country, I can see sooner rather than later, Trump will turn his security threat ire toward Canada now. But hey maybe it'll take some heat off of Greenland. Not really sure what good Carney has actually done. Seems alot of smoke and mirrors so far for our military. Out of the additional 9 billion spending to make 2% this year he has rolled the Coast Guard into defense 2.5 billion that is simply an accounting trick by relocating, not extra spending, 2.5 billion given to Ukraine (not sure why giving money to another Country comes from our Defense budget, it shouldn't ) 2 billion in pay raises. Close to a billion in funding set aside for companies to produce duel use technologies ( though how much is actually geared to military use is yet to be actually seen). That leaves a questionable 1.5 billion of actual effectual military spending. Not much of you ask me. How does this help fix the problem of our underfunded, underarmed, aging military ? Future procurement promises are just that. Future promises. Purposely delaying decisions on fighter jets, Submarines etc.. in the name of focusing on what non military economic benefits we could possibly get, does not help our military or the defense it provides. Sorry I'm ranting, but seeing the stupidity of Carney in China really makes me wonder and go back over his actual progress on things that he was supposed to be doing well, like increased military spending. Not liking the true results. Trump will be gone in 3 years yet here's Carney still underfunding our military not seemingly taking re-arming with speed seriously, while simultaneously making us a larger security threat to the US while they have an expansionist autocratic President in charge. Not good.