# DND Details of New Afghanistan Kit



## Allen (30 Nov 2005)

Some more details in today's DND Backgrounder, just for your info. The entire release is too big to post here.

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/newsroom/view_news_e.asp?id=1833


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (30 Nov 2005)

wow the purse strings have opened


----------



## KevinB (30 Nov 2005)

All IOR items.

 Not much NEW per say but MORE of items we already had but desperately needed more of.


----------



## axeman (30 Nov 2005)

hate to poobah all of this , i just wonder how long this will last ie like the new helios for the airforce . its been how long since the first "We will be buying you new airframes." comment and we are still waiting on the replacement .. the money until its actully in the bank should  in my opinion and everyone has one as an election promise.. this is because until the new goverment isvoted in this money is still liable to be yanked away  JUSTLIKE LAST TIME  and we are still waiting on a sea king replacement .... :brickwall:


----------



## KevinB (30 Nov 2005)

Axe -- these are IOR buys - as such a done deal.

they don't have the cash to buy Chinooks and C130's via IOR though so they had to be tabled


----------



## axeman (30 Nov 2005)

ahh they are IOR's sorry about that kev. i thought they were being tabled like lots of our campaign promised kit they when the election was done sorrry not in the budget..


----------



## GINge! (30 Nov 2005)

Is the M777 really an IOR item? I thought gunners had been working on that project at DLR for years?

I wonder how much of this is election timing. Still, always nice to see new kit. Now if I can just convince the right people we need a dedicated medevac chopper...


----------



## KevinB (30 Nov 2005)

A lot of them had been looked at previosuly -- the Nyala (RG-31) we already had -- and yet was competed for...

  Same with others -- however the Immediate Operational Requirment for the kit was used to fund it so it would arrive in time for TF1-06 to start killing badguys.


----------



## McG (1 Dec 2005)

GINge! said:
			
		

> Is the M777 really an IOR item? I thought gunners had been working on that project at DLR for years?


An item that we plan to procure can still become an IOR if we need a certain quantity now for operations.  (Emphasize "need" and "now")


----------



## GINge! (1 Dec 2005)

That's good news for the gunners - it gives them a 'foot in the door' to go with a 155mm option after this IOR.

I was under the impression that an IOR had a limited spending cap - I guess not. Must be getting confused with MR's.


----------



## Spazz (1 Dec 2005)

I really like the idea of Excalibur precision 155-mm munition. The range and accuracy sounds amazing and would certainly get the job done. But I imagine this ammunition would be really expensive with the built in GPS transmitter dealy. Also the armored patrol vehicle, I don't think they are actually naming a specific model (but I could be wrong) what do you think would be the best bet for the military to purchase?


----------



## KevinB (1 Dec 2005)

Spazz said:
			
		

> Also the armored patrol vehicle, I don't think they are actually naming a specific model (but I could be wrong)



Your wrong.


----------



## Spazz (1 Dec 2005)

KevinB said:
			
		

> Your wrong.



Wow ok, that was blunt and unhelpful. I looked up AVP on google and all i got was armoured patrol vehicle. So then what is the model KevinB?


----------



## KevinB (1 Dec 2005)

RG-31 Nyala with RWS.

 Since it is mentioned in the link on this thread - and has been mentioned previous on this board numerous times, I made the mistake of thinking you are an adult, and thus did not need to be spoonfed info.


----------



## Spazz (1 Dec 2005)

Alright, sorry i found it on the site, under Procurement. Also i don't appreciate your comments, I'm trying to just fit in on these boards and get up to date with the Canadian forces. I have done a lot of research into these boards but have not found everything yet. It appears we got off on the wrong start KevinB, maby we could get along?


----------



## Kal (2 Dec 2005)

"Why can't we be friends?   Why can't we be friends?   Why can't we be friends?   Why can't we be friends?"   

Come on, what do you say to him Kevin? ;D


----------



## CBH99 (2 Dec 2005)

lol - wow, just like everything else here on army.ca, this thread has indefinitely be turned into a sarcasm filled shitshow.  

Back to the topic at hand...

-  The miniature new UAV's could be interesting, I am definitely interested to see how they perform.  My only concern about them is their durability.  If this plane is small enough to be carried on a soldier's back, whats to stop it from getting blown way the heck out of the area by a big gust of wind?


----------



## Slim (2 Dec 2005)

CBH99 said:
			
		

> lol - wow, just like everything else here on army.ca, this thread has indefinitely be turned into a sarcasm filled shitshow.



Don't make comments like that unless you want to attract negative reactions from the staff.

There is a reason that its hard for first time users and newer members to post without being stepped on. This site would not of the standard that it is if we stopped every five minutes to pander to every little question that comes up...Especially when the info is already available on the site to begin with.

Also garbage like the above comments will not be tolerated.

Clean it up or find another website that is more in line with the way you lot wish to post....

Slim
StAFF


----------



## CBH99 (2 Dec 2005)

Okay...

Anyhow, back to the topic at hand...

Anybody else have any ideas on how the new miniature UAVs will perform?

My concern is that their small size and limited durability will make them somewhat unreliable in windy conditions.

-  Also in terms of UAVs, and this will have to be answered by KevinB or someone else with experience in A-Stan...were the Spewer UAVs not somewhat unreliable?  I thought all 5 of the Spewers initially deployed were taken out of the field due to crash landings - am I mistaken?

Questions are:  Is the Spewer a reliable UAV?  Does the high elevation of Afghanistan affect the reliability of the Spewer UAV?  Would the fact that is was a new piece of kit play a role in the effectiveness of the Spewer, in terms of crash landings?

I'm glad to see we're getting more of them, they were obviously put to excellent use around Kabul.  My question is simple due to my understanding that all 5 Spewers were taken out of service due to crash landings -- and whether or not crash landings should perhaps be expected?

I'm not very familiar with the deployment/recovery of a vast majority of UAVs.  (Obviously exclusing the Global Hawk, Predator, etc, etc.)


----------



## KevinB (2 Dec 2005)

UAV  ??? - I'm sorry they had all crashed by the time I would have gotten data...

  I have seen some feeds off US AF UAV's -- I think they are a great tool.

  The MINI-UAV - no idea - other than the comments about the Israeli ones I have not heard much mentioned...


----------



## buzgo (2 Dec 2005)

The German UAV (name escapes me) seemed to be very effective. I saw lots of take from them and they seemed to have a high availability rate...

As stated, the Sperwer seemed to crash every time they used, and I recall seeing a KMNB HQ brief where they came out and said that they would not use the sperwer unless they had a very high value target... they knew it would potentially crash...


----------



## Deleted member 585 (11 Dec 2005)

signalsguy said:
			
		

> The German UAV (name escapes me) seemed to be very effective. I saw lots of take from them and they seemed to have a high availability rate...
> 
> As stated, the Sperwer seemed to crash every time they used, and I recall seeing a KMNB HQ brief where they came out and said that they would not use the sperwer unless they had a very high value target... they knew it would potentially crash...



Bang-for-buck-wise, a costly "accident prone drone" is best employed gathering high priority data if it's otherwise being being held in reserve for refit--but it has to make the flight to its mark, right?  However, the choice between (a) loss of a resource or, (b) loss of intelligence is one I'm under-qualified to make.  Here's to Oerlikon getting the wrinkles ironed out so we can fulfill our UAV commitment.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (11 Dec 2005)

I didn't hear of any problems from any of the TUAV's used during BTE and there were 2 (possibly 3 kinds used).


----------



## COBRA-6 (11 Dec 2005)

signalsguy said:
			
		

> The German UAV (name escapes me) seemed to be very effective. I saw lots of take from them and they seemed to have a high availability rate...



LUNA, I've seen a fair amount of take, high quality, high availibility.


----------



## Good2Golf (11 Dec 2005)

Spewer behaved EXACTLY per its flight envelope.  It was clearly understood by all in the formal airworthiness chain that the system was at the upper/outer edge of the launch/op envelope.  While folks were chucking crap at it, it was out there when other systems were not available AT THE TIME...  Yes, systems came along afterwards, including an updated system, Sperwer ER, that operate with far greater reliability, but we got put into service what was available at the time, and it as statistically bang on with what folks in the know expected of it.  I think the minis will work quite fine, especially in the urban canyons where it's meant to best provide support to dismounted troops on patrol.

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## grappa (28 Feb 2006)

Sperwer reliability? 

Well it could be better and Duey's post hits it right on the head. We went with what we got and we were well outside the published flight envelop. The height in Kabul coupled with the mountains and the wind effected the takeoff weight and the landing accuracy. That really is not a reliability problem, but more of using it beyond what it was supposed to do. Using it in the south now, should be better as the alt is not as bad. I don't think the mountains effect the wind as much. Could be wrong.

As to seeing crash all the time....we had about 120 or so missions and lost 2 completely, both on landings. 3 others had to go back to France for repair because we didn't have the expertise in theatre to fix them. Part of the contract. The German Luna lost a lot more then 2. I think they lost about 8 AV, so we are doing pretty good. Also compare that with the USAF who have lost almost half of the Predator fleet since its intro.

As for the Mini UAVs. They should be robust enough to handle the environment too. I would think the problems will be with the landings in high winds. That's about it.

Cheers


----------



## Timberwolfe (13 Mar 2006)

I don't see why we don't replace the Sea King with the Sea Hawk, inturn replace the Griffin with the Black Hawk and fire that POS Cormorant back to Italy and replace it with the Jay Hawk. The UH-60 is a proven platform, and the bonus of using the same airframe for multi rolls just makes sence for budget minded militarys like ours.


----------



## genesis98 (13 Mar 2006)

Timberwolfe said:
			
		

> I don't see why we don't replace the Sea King with the Sea Hawk, inturn replace the Griffin with the Black Hawk and fire that POS Cormorant back to Italy and replace it with the Jay Hawk. The UH-60 is a proven platform, and the bonus of using the same airframe for multi rolls just makes sence for budget minded militarys like ours.



Common you and I both know that idea is way too practical and makes too much sense to implement!


----------



## George Wallace (13 Mar 2006)

Timberwolfe said:
			
		

> I don't see why we don't replace the Sea King with the Sea Hawk, inturn replace the Griffin with the Black Hawk and fire that POS Cormorant back to Italy and replace it with the Jay Hawk. The UH-60 is a proven platform, and the bonus of using the same airframe for multi rolls just makes sence for budget minded militarys like ours.


Money.  The Sea Hawk did not meet the specs for the job it is required to do.  The Black Hawk is also know to have problems.  One Helicopter can not do the job of all Helicopters.  It would be causing more problems than solutions, if we did.


----------



## Zoomie (13 Mar 2006)

Timberwolfe, kindly regale the forum of your direct first-hand knowledge of the CH-149 Cormorant...  

The Cormorant is one of the best helo platforms in the world - it is a tribute to the meshing of modern avionics, high tech composite fibres and aluminum.  It has been chosen to replace the venerable Sea King for the US President.

Teething problems WRT TRHH are being worked out at no cost to Canada or the tax-payer (warranty work).

The Jay Hawk cannot compare to the CH-149, both in size, range and interopability.

Stay in your lane - you are gravely in danger of being side-swiped.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (14 Mar 2006)

> I don't see why we don't replace the Sea King with the Sea Hawk, inturn replace the Griffin with the Black Hawk and fire that POS Cormorant back to Italy and replace it with the Jay Hawk. The UH-60 is a proven platform, and the bonus of using the same airframe for multi rolls just makes sence for budget minded militarys like ours.



Ahh crap.  All that time studying helicopters for last 25 years.  Wasted.  We should have just come to Army.ca and waited to be told what helo to buy.  I feel SO stupid...  

Timberwolfe, buddy.  Forgive me for having fun at your expense.  Every 6 months, someone will come here and make this exact post.  You can set your watch to it...


----------



## Good2Golf (15 Mar 2006)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Ahh crap.  All that time studying helicopters for last 25 years.  Wasted.  We should have just come to Army.ca and waited to be told what helo to buy.  I feel SO stupid...
> 
> Timberwolfe, buddy.  Forgive me for having fun at your expense.  Every 6 months, someone will come here and make this exact post.  You can set your watch to it...



Sadly, SKT...those are 25 years of your life you'll never get back.


Timberwolfe, son...before you make some rash statements, perhaps a bit more research on your part is in order!  

Griffon to B-hawk will NEVER happen.  Trust me on this one...up until early 1992, the CFUTTH (CF Utility and Tactical Transport Helicopter) was [most likely] going to be a Blackhwak (also running in the short-lived competition were Puma/Cougar and NH-90) -- yup....Blackhawk right up until the day (for the record, 29 April 1992) that I flew Marcel Masse ( I was acting on a lawful order) to BHTC Mirabel to announce the purchase of 100 militarized Bell 412s.  The rest is, as most others on this site know, history...

BTW, less the poorly designed/produced tail-rotor half-hub, which DND is working with the OEM to address, the Cormorant is a pretty nice machine.  Unless you know something more than the guys with hundreds and thousands of hours in the cockpit, you should perhaps heed the advice to go back and do some research before you "go off"...

Unless your statement had been something caveatted with an emotional, "*gosh, seeing you guys have to operate some of these aircraft with such significant maintenance or operational limitations makes me wonder if we shouldn't just pack in these airframes and procure something with proven performance, like the Blackhawk family of helicopters, for example...*", you risk coming across as someone with a bad case of RCIS (rectal-cranial insertion syndrome).

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## lawandorder (17 Mar 2006)

Alright I don't know much about helicopters or aircraft, in or out of the CF.  I like riding in the Griffon for the LCF, cause its like the huey, and it has a huge LCF from movies.  I know, I know, LCF isn't always important.

I can see why you want to replace the Sea King, and even the Griffon,  But what is wrong with the Commorant.  This isn't a question in defense of it, I actually just don't know whats wrong with it where it needs to be replaced.  If you guys could let me know that would be great.


----------



## geo (17 Mar 2006)

EH101s aka Cormorant = been having problems with their rotors.
stress cracks that the manufacturer has not been able to resolve...

you can conduct a search on this site for the EH101 for more on the helicopter


----------



## Daidalous (25 Mar 2006)

Nice new sea containers.  About time we got some new ones and send the old long style to the NSE's so they can stop renting them


----------



## CdnArtyWife (25 Mar 2006)

Re: Mini UAVs, I think there is a member here who could give a good perspective on their use and reliability in Afghanistan.

I would state what I know, but I am just a wife of someone who works closely with them, and the guys going overseas with them. I know what I say would only be hearsay and I would rather the info come from a horse's mouth, so to speak. Though, I am really interested to hear what STA_Gunner would have to say about them...my source of info could have a twinge of bias to it.

I was finding the debate interesting, and was hoping someone with some hands-on experience with Mini UAVs could chime in.

If I have overstepped here, I apologize.


----------

