I used to work with a lot of MDA guys and after Orbital Science bought them the joke was "It may not be rocket science, but now we are rocket scientists".
A loyt of good people just had their economic futures screwed over by this decision.
Let's hope everyone who fabricated the stories of "Canada paid for Radarsat2" and "it is needed for our arctic sovereignty" get equally screwed over.
I would start with UBC and the Faculty that pays Byers his salary every year. No more funds there, all that money should be diverted to our Space Program so these MDA engineers have a job next week.
Unbelievable. After the initial mindless furore and reactionary hand-wringing died down, it seemed as if the correct decision would be made and logic might prevail. I suppose that's become too much to ask, especially in any dealings with moustache-twirling villains from perfidious America.
What a mistake.
The arrow decision was the right one for so many reasons and the "saving" of MDA is the wrong one for as many. Yet the first beget the latter. This is a very good lesson on how politics works. MDA's sale was not the hill to die on for the CP. POLITICALLY the CP made the right decision. And frankly, this is very small potatoes no matter how you look at it.
Posted at 2008-04-13 19:12:10 [PermaLink]I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry whenever leftists (almost always leftists who are otherwise against military spending) decry the cancellation of the Arrow. The real tragedy in Canadian aviation was the cancellation of the Avro Jetliner.
[External Link]
[External Link]
"Opportunities to sell into the likely most lucrative market, the United States, will be killed"
Now this gives me pause.
Why exactly is the American market inaccessible to a Canadian company?
The Post article cites the requirement of American ownership for the company to take some contracts. In my experience, if the contract requires American ownership, then it's a security issue.
The unmentioned corollary to this is that anybody working on a secure project needs to not only be employed by an American company, but also be an American citizen themselves. This potentially puts most Canadians employed by MDA out of a job since companies don't tend to hold onto people who can only work on a subset of their projects.
Corcoran misses on this dilemma as he assumes that the employees of the company will benefit from the additional American work available under new ownership. As far as I know (and I've dealt with quite a few cross-border projects), Canadian MDA employees without full US citizenship will not be able to work on those projects.
Radar sat 2 is not just 'any' technology'.. it is the leading edge of defence technology, and one i would prefer to keep close to the vest.
We have very few trump cards to play in Canada, and this is one we should covet almost religiously
When you can 'see' what others cannot, in any weather or atmospheric condition, you do not give up that edge easily..i for one am glad we have a govt that recognises the value of made in Canada high technology.
What would we be saying in 5-10 years time if this item was used against our best interests, or we were not allowed to access the technology, designed and paid for by Canadian taxpayers..?
Kursk: RADARSAT-2 is not "the leading edge of defence technology". The US has had very capable SAR intelligence satellites for some time, known as "Lacrosse":
[External Link]
[External Link]
On the civilian side the European Space Agency is developing the Sentinel-1 C-band SAR satellite with launch for 2011. It is to have a ground resolution of five metres (RADARSAT-2's is three):
[External Link]
[External Link]
Mark
Ottawa
JohnB; the Avro scenario was a disaster NOT because we lost the fighter but because we lost our fledgling aerospace industry. Those extremely skilled engineers, now jobless, with no prospects in Canada, went South. What else is new. It's been that way since the Plains of Abraham.
If MDA is sold to a US firm, you KNOW that the whole shebang will be migrating; why on Earth would they leave their most valuable asset up here?
As a strategic industry, MDA will NOT be selling any technology deemed 'sensitive' to any purchaser not approved by the US Govt (assuming it was sold to a US owner.)
MDA's been doing just fine, parked in B.C. and with a wide range of shareholders.
MDA has already been owned by a US company once before. It didn't "migrate". And it was allowed to sell data when it was part of that same US company.
Posted at 2008-04-14 18:34:45 [PermaLink]Crispytoast,
The world is a different place post-9/11.
Dan: First of all, the Jetliner wasn't canceled to male for the Arrow but for the CF-100. Nevertheless, the disaster was placing all their eggs in one basket, in this case an advanced fighter. By definition this airplane could only be sold to another government - and each government responds to its own needs first. Regardless of the merits, if any, of the Arrow, it was the Yank's choice whether or not to buy the Arrow (foreign sales were needed to make production feasible) and they chose to buy domestic.
Canada's aerospace industry certainly took a hit but didn't die after the Arrow's cancellation. De Havilland did quite well within their niche, STOL bushplanes and commuter aircraft. Canadair (after Bombardier's purchase) has also done quite well in it's niche of regional jets and corporate aircraft. There is also the case of Pratt & Whitney's development of small turbines in Quebec.
As for the loss of key jobs to the U.S., when the call went out by NASA for the Mercury program, followed up by Kennedy's promise to land a man on the moon by 1969, how many would have left anyway for a pretty interesting opportunity.
No argument with your time line, JohnB, my point was that at the time, the industry couldn't absorb the engineering talent thrown out of work by the loss of a major project. They went South BECAUSE their was nowhere else to go here. The loss of all that skill and talent did irreparable harm to our nascent aerospace industry, Bombardier notwithstanding.
Posted at 2008-04-15 09:24:26 [PermaLink]Dan: What was the alternative to cancellation since there weren't any foreign sales of the Arrow as far as I know. It was just too expensive a project for Canada to do on its own. The tragedy is that a potentially leading commercial aircraft like the Jetliner was terminated when Howard Hughes was standing there, cheque in hand:
"He (i.e. Howard Hughes) became a believer, imagining TWA and National delivering passengers from New York to vacation spots in Florida in half the time of the competition. He became desperate to buy 30 Jetliners, but Avro had to repeatedly turn him down due to limited manufacturing capabilities and overwork on the CF-100 project. Hughes then started looking at US companies to build it for them; Convair proved interested and started studies on gearing up a production line. C.D. Howe again stepped in and insisted that Avro concentrate on its Orenda turbojet and CF-100 jet fighter programs."
[External Link]
The only NATO members with a requirement for an interceptor anything like the Arrow were the US and UK.
But the Americans had the F-102, then F-106:
[External Link]
[External Link]
The Brits had the English Electric Lightning:
[External Link]
Mark
Ottawa