# Military ponders infrared sensors for rescue choppers



## Nfld Sapper (20 Dec 2008)

Military ponders infrared sensors for rescue choppers
Updated Sat. Dec. 20 2008 9:32 AM ET

The Canadian Press

OTTAWA -- National Defence is examining whether to equip the air force's Cormorant search-and-rescue helicopters with hand-held infrared sensors to detect crash victims and those lost in the wilderness, The Canadian Press has learned. 

Critics say the lack of heat-detecting sensors might have delayed the rescue of two Swedes from an Arctic ice floe earlier this month. 

The air force confirmed Friday that neither the CH-149 Cormorant nor the C-130 Hercules assigned to search missions are equipped with infrared sensors which, among other things, detect body heat and provide high-resolution video at great distances and heights. 

The imaging package is standard among many agencies that conduct rescue missions, including the RCMP, some provincial governments and volunteer organizations. 

Such a system was also recently installed on the air force's CH-146 Griffon utility helicopters bound for Afghanistan. 

The air force did not make it a mandatory requirement to install in the Cormorants when the 15 helicopters were purchased five years ago, said Lt.-Col. John Blakely, a spokesman for the chief of air staff. 

"The air force is examining the potential acquisition of hand-held thermal imaging sensors to further enhance search capabilities," he said. 

Pilots already wear night-vision goggles during missions after dark, Blakely noted. 

The hand-held scopes the air force is considering would be a step down from more advanced systems that can be built into the aircraft. 

Blakely wouldn't rule out acquiring the higher grade infrared systems in the future but did not explain why they are not currently being considered. 

The idea of using a hand-held system came after a military flight crew borrowed a thermal-imaging scope from civilians to help in the search for a missing child near Comox, B.C. 

Their experience prompted what's known in the military as a capability deficiency statement, where defence planners are formally alerted to an important piece equipment that units don't have but should acquire. 

The absence of thermal devices was brought sharply into focus with the crash of a twin-engine Cessna Skymaster south of Baffin Island on Dec. 7, where two men from Sweden survived 18 hours on a frigid, wind-swept ice pan. 

One of the pilots, Oliver Edwards-Neil, said he and his partner heard search aircraft nearby during the first day of their ordeal and their hearts sank as the engine sounds faded into the distance. 

The air force would not say whether the absence of thermal-imaging equipment prevented flight crews from rescuing the stranded men sooner. 

"To comment on this would be highly speculative," said Blakely. 

The old Labrador helicopters, which the Cormorants replaced, were not equipped with any heat-detecting system and defence planners challenged the air force in the late 1990s, questioning whether it was necessary. 

The head of the country's leading civilian search organization said he was surprised when told the military helicopters did not have the high-tech system. 

Harry Blackmore was riding in the back of a Cormorant, skimming the treetops in his native Newfoundland, when he noticed there were no infrared imaging screens. 

"I honestly didn't know," Blackmore, president of the Search and Rescue Volunteer Association of Canada. 

"I honestly thought they had them and having them is definitely a matter of life and death, especially at this time of year." 

A research paper, written at the Canadian Forces Command College in 2004, warned that the country has "lagged behind considerably in updating" its search-and-rescue system to take advantage of new sensor technology.


----------



## KingKikapu (21 Dec 2008)

Seriously?  No IR detectors?  That's downright embarrassing.


----------



## aesop081 (21 Dec 2008)

KingKikapu said:
			
		

> Seriously?  No IR detectors?  That's downright embarrassing.



Do i need to remind you of who was in power when these things were bought ?


----------



## Nfld Sapper (21 Dec 2008)

Would it be the one who said:

"Zero, Helicopters......"

 ;D


----------



## KingKikapu (21 Dec 2008)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Do i need to remind you of who was in power when these things were bought ?



Nope, but god damn that was quite some time ago.  It's not exactly a big piece of kit to acquire.  I know change is slow in a machine as big as the gov't or the military, but that's kinda sad.



Don't even get me started on the choppers.  I'm sure you guys hear about it enough as it is.


----------



## aesop081 (21 Dec 2008)

KingKikapu said:
			
		

> Nope, but god damn that was quite some time ago.  It's not exactly a big piece of kit to acquire.



You cannot even begin to imagine the red tape and crap we have to deal with to add things to an aircraft........


----------



## KingKikapu (21 Dec 2008)

given the simplicity and portability of an IR suite, I'm starting to see that.  This should be a no-brainer.  Sadly, this example hammers your point home pretty well.


----------



## Good2Golf (22 Dec 2008)

KingKikapu said:
			
		

> given the simplicity and portability of an IR suite, I'm starting to see that.  This should be a no-brainer.  Sadly, this example hammers your point home pretty well.



CDN Aviator is right, it will have taken 12 years to get INGRESS on the CH146 Griffon.

G2G


----------



## KingKikapu (22 Dec 2008)

Man academia has really spoiled me when it comes to accessing world class hardware.  I feel for you gentlemen.


----------



## kj_gully (30 Dec 2008)

There are lots of crew based reasons for not having a sensor, there is a lot of talk about screen watching... I have been hearing briefings for several ( i have been in SAR for 7) years about a project to develop a sensor suite, however it seems that the rapid advance of technology is preventing much progress. My take is just as they have "perfected" a package, a new technology comes available to enhance the capability, and they continue to spin tires. Maybe job security? Here's a link I found on AIMS, it is one version of the progam that never ends http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/CFAWC/eLibrary/Journal/Vol1-2008/Iss1-Spring/Sections/06-Measures_of_Effectiveness_For_Search_and_Rescue-Airborne_Integrated_Multi-sensor_System_e.pdf . If you go thru it, I think you can see where I come to my opinion, that sensors in SAR have become a huge treadmill, with years of research&development and no product. Maybe the technology is being used for good elsewhere, like on the UAV, but I don't think we'll see it in my career. As for the handheld version, it still needs to be pointed at the victim to work. So I have to see something I'm curious about and decide to check it out with the sensor. Guess what, right now, if I see something I'm curious about, I check it out, with my eyeball. I continue to check it out until I'm no longer uncertain. Infrared might help 1:100000?0? to accidentlly "see" an infrared signature, but mostly will be used to rule out signature on items already eyeballed.


----------



## geo (31 Dec 2008)

While I see that the politicians are the ones in power....
Any decision to buy new kit should have been made at the Air command level... without going to the politicians.
No doubt Supply & services (or whaqtever their current/future name) can and will lengthen the acquisition process BUT I would imagine that Air command would have enough latitute to prioritize


----------



## KingKikapu (31 Dec 2008)

I guess one of the other problems with sensor suites is the loss of proper night vision in your eyes; going back and forth between Mk1 eyeball and a suite tends to kill your adjusted sight for a few minutes.  Alternating contrast modes on an IR suite might help to quickly identify hot spots in the water at night though.

Interesting article.


----------



## Zoomie (31 Dec 2008)

The guys don't use their eyeballs at night - pretty useless.  They use night vision goggles.

The entire Cormorant crew are outfitted with NVGs.


----------



## cameron (31 Dec 2008)

Excuse my ignorance but I always assumed the Air Force's search and rescue helicopters had infrared sensors.


----------



## aesop081 (31 Dec 2008)

cameron said:
			
		

> Excuse my ignorance but I always assumed the Air Force's search and rescue helicopters had infrared sensors.



Guess you had assumed wrong then.


----------



## Good2Golf (31 Dec 2008)

Geo, all major crown projects are in fact prioritized and endorsed at the Departmental level, meaning that the various capabilities have been considered within the larger CF-context and are supported by all the environmental Commanders (MARCOM, LFC, AIRCOM) as well as other stakeholders, where appropriate.  FWSAR, Chinooks, Tanks, Frigate upgrade, CF Command and Control, all projects that are mutually supportive of the overall CF effort.

Cheers
G2G

p.s.  KingKikapu, while you are generally correct about the affect of direct view of a display vs. fully accommodated unaided (scotopic) night vision, the flip side is that native night vision is not overly useful these days for most folks, especially those who use NVGs (although you would be amazed how much low light your peripheral vision will still pick up.  An interesting bit on NVGs and aviation Pt.1 here and Pt.2 here).  For folks not night flying with primary visual reference to ground features (i.e. not on NVG or PNVS), there are procedures set in place to make up for the greatly degraded night vision, in many cases no better than 20/200.  Procedural terrain/obstacle avoidance at night is not perfect and can be a great strain/pressure on the aircrew, and things can go wrong in a hurry, especially as has been experienced in the North American Helicopter EMS community in recent times.


----------



## KingKikapu (1 Jan 2009)

I hear you G2G.

I have no doubts as to the immediate benefits of NVG for SAR (among other things) over eyeballs.  For SAR though, I would expect IR to be a powerful addition.  The human body can be decently approximated by a black body with peak output somewhere in the mid to far IR band.  The only thing that might hinder using IR a bit in SAR is that a person in the water might experience more thermal loss from convection than actual black body radiation.  More than 50% I would imagine.  Still, the contrast of heat might work a lot better at night than the contrast of light.  Theory aside, there's a lot of other considerations to think of too, to which many of you have pointed out.


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jan 2009)

KingKikapu said:
			
		

> The only thing that might hinder using IR a bit in SAR is that a person in the water might experience more thermal loss from convection than actual black body radiation.



Irrelevant with modern EO/IR systems.



> Still, the contrast of heat might work a lot better at night than the contrast of light.



Why not simply use IR as a search tool day or night ? Thats what i do.


----------



## KingKikapu (1 Jan 2009)

I was merely comparing IR to light amplification at night.

But yeah, IR being out of the visible spectrum makes it available for exploitation day and night.  Fun times.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Jan 2009)

KingKikapu said:
			
		

> I was merely comparing IR to light amplification at night.
> 
> But yeah, IR being out of the visible spectrum makes it available for exploitation day and night.  Fun times.



KK, yes it can be used at any time, as you and CDN Aviator note.  An important aspect, though, was that mentioned by kjgully, regarding technique and procedures augmented by tools, vice using tools as primary cuing devices.  Tools should support and enhance the use of proper tactics, techniques and procedures, vice driving them potential from the revers direction.

Cheers
G2G


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jan 2009)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Tools should support and enhance the use of proper tactics, techniques and procedures, vice driving them potential from the revers direction.



Agreed. As a matter of fact, the SAR procedures in the LRP comunity have not changed with the arrival of the MX-20 but has made them more effective.


----------



## Figment (16 Mar 2009)

I don't know how much ground work was done prior to purchasing the Cormorant, SOR etc but, I do know that when the first one showed up in Shearwater to do icing trials it didn't have a rescue hoist. There was some scrambling around done to get a rescue hoist on the new rescue helicopter. It seemed like some giant heads flew to Italy and kicked the tires and then said "can we get this in yellow?"


----------



## aesop081 (16 Mar 2009)

Figment said:
			
		

> "can we get this in yellow?"



Well they didnt get what they asked....LOL....the hoist housing is red.


----------



## geo (16 Mar 2009)

(I think he was refering to the actual EH101


----------

