# SAR/non-core MH-related info (split from: CH-148 Cyclone Progress)



## Good2Golf (5 May 2008)

peaches said:
			
		

> Agree with everything you say here except for the SAR role.  I do not believe the military should be doing domestic SAR, that is the Coast Guards job, but that's my opinion.  Giving the maritime helo folks the EH101, plus each brigade a sqn of them, and then have 1 Chinook & 1 Apache sqn at division level would make sense for our helo needs.



Clearly, Baden Guy can snatch the pebble from the master's hand...

Peaches, National SAR will go to the Coast Guard the day we get rid of the Snowbirds --welcome to the world of slightly-less-than-operational-imperatives.  


G2G


----------



## George Wallace (5 May 2008)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Clearly, Baden Guy can snatch the pebble from the master's hand...
> 
> Peachess, National SAR will go to the Coast Guard the day we get rid of the Snowbirds --welcome to the world of slightly-less-than-operational-imperatives.
> 
> G2G



We're getting rid of the Snowbirds?  

I said that jokingly, but there are "Bean Counters" out there looking at the matter.


----------



## peaches (5 May 2008)

SAR is a very high profile role that gets the media and publics attention.  It is one of the few roles we do where we come into direct contact with Canadians as we are saving their lives.  what could be better than that.... but, domestic SAR is not a combat role.  Now if our SAR units had a CSAR role in addition to domestic SAR, they have EH101's with mini guns, if they could deploy (what a good fit to support JTF2 & CSOR) I would think different.  Leadership is saying, SAR is great but not our job.  we do combat, Coast Guard over to you.  I know where they could get 85 Griffons cheap

I agree, will never go away, just like the Snowchickens, another total waste of pers & $$.


----------



## Good2Golf (5 May 2008)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> We're getting rid of the Snowbirds?
> 
> I said that jokingly, but there are "Bean Counters" out there looking at the matter.



George, only when Hell drops below 32F....


Peaches, not to insult anyone in the National SAR machine but the three letters of S and A and R are about the ONLY thing shared between the National SAR capability and the right spectrum of Joint Personnel Recovery (Google "JWP 3-66").  Some folks think SATCOM means an Iridium antenna stuck to the side window to be able to talk to the JRCC, others know it to be a MIL-STD-188-181B compliant system keeping the warfighter intimately integrated into the battlespace.  ELT and dayglo panels for some, CSEL or Hook 112, SERE and R2I skills for others.  That National SAR (in the primary role sense) remains in the CF's inventory is due to perceptions, rightly or wrongly, that the Canadian public would not support the CF as much as it does if we were also not out there rescuing the unfortunate.  Any asset is still game for assistance to secondary (back-up) SAR activities.  Griffons and Sea Kings and Auroras and even Hornets provide additional SAR capability when a national primary capability cannot respond appropriately.

G2G


----------



## peaches (5 May 2008)

I do not think that a military that is struggling to maintain core com,bat capabilities needs units like the Snowbirds.  I see the value in public relations, but perhaps roles like SAR & Snowbirds could be funded from another budget, outside the DND budget.


----------



## George Wallace (5 May 2008)

peaches said:
			
		

> I do not think that a military that is struggling to maintain core com,bat capabilities needs units like the Snowbirds.  I see the value in public relations, but perhaps roles like SAR & Snowbirds could be funded from another budget, outside the DND budget.



Interesting concept.  We should be funding some of these through other Depts, just as when we contribute the DART, and all other operations in Aid to the Civil Power.  Why should DND funds be bled dry.  The Provinces should anti up.  Dept of Heritage should anti up.  Transport Canada should anti up.


----------



## peaches (5 May 2008)

Other budgets funding these noncombat missions should be considered.  DND could provide people & bases for SAR, TC and the Provs could provide the funding for equipment & operations.  As well, I have always thought there should be a completely separate budget for capital projects like the C17 & Cyclone.  A DND operating budget, & a Capital budget.

I am a subscriber to Airforces Monthly Mag for the UK.  There is a great article in their recent mag with regards to the UK's Joint Personnel Recovery Operations and their Joint Helicopter Commad.  There were some excellent ideas about employing joint helicopter operations.  Actually the RAF is not going to replace their Seaking rescue fleet due to $$.. Instead they are contracting out SAR to a private company.  Australia has done the same thing.  There is a company called Australian Coast Watch, they fly Canadian Dash-8's, they have taken over SAR & coastal surveillance from the RAAF.


----------



## Jammer (5 May 2008)

You're not that far off.
The UK, Australia, and Ireland have a unique way of providing SAR coverage that Canada might well have a look at.
Essentially, it's a co-operative venture with their respective Coast Guards over who would provide inshore and offshore coverage.


----------



## geo (5 May 2008)

George & peaches....
If DND is removed from providing services..... some of the funding that is ours will be going to someone else ...


----------



## Colin Parkinson (5 May 2008)

The Province of BC contracts out air ambulances, the Coast Guard operates one S61 on the West Coast with a winch, but as the CCG will not fund training it rarely gets used and they relay mostly on the USCG. To replace the offshore SAR helo ability of the Navy ships would be very expensive. None of the CCG shipborne helo’s (MB105) are equipped or designed for SAR work, although they have done some in an emergency, including one pilot I know that scooped a pilot of a crashed helo out of the water with his skid!! To fund this contract or upgrade the CCG, the money would be sucked out of the Navy funds. Not to mention the navy generally goes further offshore than the CCG. The two fleets complement each other, a loss of capability of either hurts the system.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (5 May 2008)

Colin P said:
			
		

> The Province of BC contracts out air ambulances, the Coast Guard operates one S61 on the West Coast with a winch, but as the CCG will not fund training it rarely gets used and they relay mostly on the USCG. To replace the offshore SAR helo ability of the Navy ships would be very expensive. None of the CCG shipborne helo’s (MB105) are equipped or designed for SAR work, although they have done some in an emergency, including one pilot I know that scooped a pilot of a crashed helo out of the water with his skid!! To fund this contract or upgrade the CCG, the money would be sucked out of the Navy funds. Not to mention the navy generally goes further offshore than the CCG. The two fleets complement each other, a loss of capability of either hurts the system.



Just so we are clear, you do realize the SAR role for the Sea King is secondary and is only when needed as compared to the roles such as ASW and Surf Pic compliation...


----------



## peaches (5 May 2008)

Colin P said:
			
		

> The Province of BC contracts out air ambulances, the Coast Guard operates one S61 on the West Coast with a winch, but as the CCG will not fund training it rarely gets used and they relay mostly on the USCG. To replace the offshore SAR helo ability of the Navy ships would be very expensive. None of the CCG shipborne helo’s (MB105) are equipped or designed for SAR work, although they have done some in an emergency, including one pilot I know that scooped a pilot of a crashed helo out of the water with his skid!! To fund this contract or upgrade the CCG, the money would be sucked out of the Navy funds. Not to mention the navy generally goes further offshore than the CCG. The two fleets complement each other, a loss of capability of either hurts the system.




The whole issue here comes down to money and government priorities.  There is not money because our government does not feel that defending and protecting Canadians is important.  Governments will not be fired by voters if the SAR helos don't fly.  They will if they view a threat to their "free" healthcare.  

The CCG should be funded and equipped to conduct the CCG role and provide SAR.  They should have the funds to purchase gear and train.  The military should be equipped properly to conduct combat operations air, land & sea.  We can and should assist the CCG when and where we are needed, but we should not be putting $$ into a noncombat or combat support mission.  You do not take $$ aawy from DND to fund CCG, you increase CCG's budget.  That's what leadership is, strong militray leadership that wil not allow us to loose $$ to fund another dept.  Trans Canada who runs CCG should demand additional funding for SAR.

Canada is a filthy rich country, we have plenty of $$.  We just have no political will to spend it on anything other that healthcare and welfare!!!


----------



## Colin Parkinson (5 May 2008)

peaches said:
			
		

> The whole issue here comes down to money and government priorities.  There is not money because our government does not feel that defending and protecting Canadians is important.  Governments will not be fired by voters if the SAR helos don't fly.  They will if they view a threat to their "free" healthcare.
> 
> The CCG should be funded and equipped to conduct the CCG role and provide SAR.  They should have the funds to purchase gear and train.  The military should be equipped properly to conduct combat operations air, land & sea.  We can and should assist the CCG when and where we are needed, but we should not be putting $$ into a noncombat or combat support mission.  You do not take $$ aawy from DND to fund CCG, you increase CCG's budget.  That's what leadership is, strong militray leadership that wil not allow us to loose $$ to fund another dept.  Trans Canada who runs CCG should demand additional funding for SAR.
> 
> Canada is a filthy rich country, we have plenty of $$.  We just have no political will to spend it on anything other that healthcare and welfare!!!



Well now that you feel better after getting that rant out!!  ;D

Up to 1964, the RCAF was responsible for most SAR including Marine inshore with their fleet of crashboats. In 1964, several RCAF bases were turned over to the newly minted CCG (born from the Dept of Transport, which did operate some dedicated lifeboats) these bases came with structures, boats, people and spare parts, at the same time we built 95’ cutters based on a US design. 
The CCG was never thrilled about SAR and the big ship fleet as saw their main duties as tending Navigation Aids and Icebreaking and the SAR fleet was the poor cousins. Due to some unfortunate incidents it became clear the CCG was good at searching but not so good at rescue, about the early 90’s a grassroots movement amongst the small boat SAR personal created the Rescue Specialist program (we are talking about people who are at the leading Seaman level) the program was fought tooth and nail by the senior management, but finally won acceptance throughout the fleet and is now standard. 

Next CCG was shoved from Transport Canada to DFO. DFO is a seriously mismanaged and highly political organization with a cutthroat management. Then there was amalgamation of the RED fleet (CCG) GREY fleet (DFO) & WHITE Fleet (science) a lot of spare capacity was sliced and sold off, the CCG was a shade of it’s former self, barely able to do it’s tasks. Now it has been made a Special Operating Agency, but barely has the funds it needs. I used to be able to task CCG for inspections, but now I can’t unless we pay up front for all costs. CCG is in a mess, mostly from the fiddling by DFO.

A lot of the senior staff still dislike SAR, mostly them will (hopefully) have a stroke when the government decides to arm them!


----------



## beenthere (5 May 2008)

In reality we don't have a coast guard. We have a few buoy tenders, ice breakers, fisheries research and hydrographic vessels and a fleet of assorted rescue boats all painted red and white that someone dubbed the coast guard. They go about their business of looking after buoys, keeping shipping lanes open, doing mapping and research and providing coastal SAR  all within the limits of a very tight budget. They don't guard anything. Their helicopter fleet is used for quick trips to repair nav aids and other related duties. If needed any of their resources can be used within their limitations to provide search and rescue service as they have done for decades back when they weren't called coast guard.
It would take a lot of time, money and effort to change them into a real coast guard that could assume a dedicated SAR role and I doubt if anyone in government or the buoy service has an interest in doing that. The red and white paint provides a nice secure feeling for the public and the government is pleased with the illusion so nothing is going to change. Sleep tight.


----------



## Kirkhill (5 May 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> George & peaches....
> If DND is removed from providing services..... some of the funding that is ours will be going to someone else ...



geo, I think that might depend on the inclination of the government.

IF  the government is inclined to downsize the CF then it can do as you suggest and remove Responsibility and Budget from the CF and transfer it to a Civilian agency.  That will sell, and has sold with a "Peace Loving" civilian population.

But IF the government is inclined to grow the CF, in the face of the same population, then one way to do it is to leave the Budget intact and transfer the Responsibility to a new Civilian agency and fund it with new dollars.

That way the CF gets an effective Budget boost while the government gets credit for improving services to Canadians.

It's all about the Spin (or is that Auto-Rotation?).


----------



## hippie (6 May 2008)

How did we get talking about SAR responsiblities??  MODS?!

New thread?!


----------



## Zoomie (6 May 2008)

Interesting tangent - I second the motion for a split topic.

As for getting rid of all non-combat CF roles, why stop at just SAR and 431 (AD) Sqn?  Get rid of DART, shut down all the bases across Canada and move the entire CF to Wainwright (no need for IRU's anymore, so why be spread out across Canada).  Give the CC-177's to the CCG (they need to move DART now).  

If we want the CCG to take over SAR, why not emulate our Southern neighbours?  We'll have to militarize them first, arm them, train them to high level, equip them with frigates, helicopters and bases of operations.  Hmmm... sounds just like how it is now, just a new name and look.  So the Navy and Airforce takes a hit and the new branch of the CF - Coast Guard - is formed.

I am pretty confidant that I could serve another 20 years and stay SAR for all of it.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (6 May 2008)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Just so we are clear, you do realize the SAR role for the Sea King is secondary and is only when needed as compared to the roles such as ASW and Surf Pic compliation...



Quite clear, we only used a Sea King once, to transport a diver to the VGH Chamber. RCC will use whatever assets it has on hand, usually with a little prodding from the On Scene Commander.


----------



## STONEY (3 Jul 2008)

Some other items that maybe of interest to readers.

The CCG does not have any pilots .  Its helo's are flown by Transport Canada pilots and they are serviced and maintained by Transport Canada engineers as are all Federal Gov . non military A/C.  Every cg helo type has a hourly cost that includes such things as pilot salary,fuel & a/c hours and any branch,division or agency requesting its use must pay the freight for its use. The CCG helo fleet has dwindled in recent years , some due to crashes and others due to budget cuts. When last i heard a couple years ago the very future of the fleet was in doubt. I'm afraid the wheel would have to be reinvented for them to take over SAR .
To get new helo's (we know how long that takes) & recruit and train pilots ( ex CAF) , build bases and stand up an organization would take deecades.

cheers


----------



## geo (3 Jul 2008)

For that... there has to be a political will to do it


----------



## Colin Parkinson (8 Jul 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> For that... there has to be a political will to do it



I gave my last jar of political will to Harper.


----------

