10 September 2026
There was much fanfare at CANSEC this year when Prime Minister Mark Carney attended the breakfast and not only addressed the industry show but also announced that Canada would acquire Saab’s GlobalEye multi-role airborne early warning & control (AEW&C) aircraft. The GlobalEye is based on Bombardier’s Global 6000/6500 long-range business jet.
It seemed like a win for the government and for the Canadian defence industrial sector. The government could choose a competitor for the contract, and it also benefited Canada’s Bombardier and the Canadian supply chain tied to the company.
A new article by the CBC’s Murray Brewster outlined something different. It was reported that the commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force was surprised by the announcement at CANSEC. The government had not outlined the technical and operational needs for the new AEW&C aircraft. Usually, this comes in the form of a large report called a Statement of Operational Requirement (SOR).
Brewster’s article also reported that the “…military is concerned that the plane, under its current design and configuration, doesn’t have 360-degree radar coverage. Saab clarified that “ the GlobalEye’s sensors offer 360-degree coverage, but the main radar on top of the fuselage offers coverage in the 300-degree range.”
There are also concerns about the radar’s range and frequency. The military is seeking a plane that can be refuelled in flight, and there are concerns over the “number of crew stations and connectivity equipment to plug the plane into the NORAD network, which would limit the GlobalEye’s ability to offer a ‘control’ function during operations that involve a series of military assets.”
This is the alarming part of the article. The government said there will be trade-offs, and Stephen Fuhr, secretary of state for defence procurement, said other factors need to be considered besides requirements.
This brings me back to replacing the legacy Sea King fleet with the CH-148 Cyclone. Replacing the 50+ year old Sea King helicopter fleet was a legacy error in defence procurement, but the decision to go with the Cyclone was almost as monumental. I co-authored a report about it called “The Worst Procurement in the History of Canada”.
The Cyclone was based on the civilian Sikorsky S-92, and there were concerns over gearbox issues in the S-92 civilian variant. In essence, the Cyclone was a military helicopter only on paper. But the Cyclone was not a military helicopter and the creation of it led to “requirements creep”.
This is when the requirements are continuously being re-examined and readjusted. The additional equipment and weapons systems meant General Electric had to provide new, more powerful engines for the helicopter. Of course, this meant more redesign and engineering work at Sikorsky. Delays and cost overruns.
It was recently reported that the fleet of 28 helicopters will not be fully operational by 2029 – 25 years after they were first delivered. The last delivery was in 2025. Vice-Admiral Angus Topshee commented that he would replace them if he could. Spare parts issues grounded all but three helicopters in May 2025. None of the allies bought the CH-148; the German Navy was interested but chose the NH-90.
Currently, the UAE is the only country operating the GlobalEye, and Sweden, France, and NATO have selected it as their AEW&C replacements. That still does not exclude the GlobalEye from “requirements creep” or another term, “Canadianization”. That is when we place technical requirements to meet our needs. The UAE, Sweden, France, and NATO may not need mid-air refuelling, as Canada requires. That list of requirements may grow or may not be limited to that one aspect. The SOR was incomplete, not sent to competitors, and not even assessed by the government.
This is where the GlobalEye programme could go. Cost overruns, delays from redesign and re-engineering, and requirements creep. Saab said it will do whatever it can to meet the requirements as laid out.
What implications will this have for the Canadian Armed Forces? Delays and cost overruns, the potential for a lack of spare parts and maintenance risks with a limited supply chain. The equipment that we buy is for their operational use. Canadian jobs matter, but policy already provides stopgaps, such as the Industrial and Technological Benefits policy.
Canada has a litany of bad defence procurement decisions, and GlobalEye may not be one of them. However, what has come to light does offer some hesitation. This is why Murray Brewster’s article matters, and why Canadians may not fully understand it. Buying military equipment is a difficult process, but if it is not entirely suited…it can lead to cost overruns and developmental hiccups.
Feature Photo: “Paper Aircraft – CH-148 & Global Eye” ChatGPT, 2026
Inset Photo: “Saab Global Eye”, Stewart Webb, CANSEC, 2026
Inset Photo: “Cover of “Worst Procurement in History” Report”, CCPA & Rideau Institute