# RCAF Fighter Sqn ReOrg



## dimsum (6 Jan 2018)

Heck, let's go full New Zealand and disband the fighter force altogether.  

No more Cold Lake/Bagotville postings would probably make some people pretty happy


----------



## SupersonicMax (6 Jan 2018)

Most people posted to Bagotville end up being really happy.  A 250,000 people in the immediate area, lots to do for all interests and 2 hrs from Quebec City.

It is really the best kept secret in the RCAF.

Cold Lake on the other hand...


----------



## angus555 (6 Jan 2018)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Heck, let's go full New Zealand and disband the fighter force altogether.
> 
> No more Cold Lake/Bagotville postings would probably make some people pretty happy



Yes.

I think we could even refuel the Bear bombers instead of turning them around...good for the economy.  ;D


----------



## PuckChaser (6 Jan 2018)

Til Valhall said:
			
		

> Yes.
> 
> I think we could even refuel the Bear bombers instead of turning them around...good for the economy.  ;D


Only if they're probe and drogue.


----------



## angus555 (6 Jan 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Only if they're probe and drogue.



Bob's your uncle


----------



## Good2Golf (6 Jan 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Only if they're probe and drogue.



Ba-doom-tssss!


----------



## dapaterson (6 Jan 2018)

Move the entire fighter community to Mirabel.  Send a six pack for three months at a time to Cold Lake / Bagotville.  Voila.  Long term career stability.  Close to a major urban area for spousal employment.  Colocated with the maintenance facility.


----------



## Old Sweat (6 Jan 2018)

Does your six pack include the maintainers and the rest of the support trades that keep the birds flying? I sense the presence of several unseen alligators in this lagoon


----------



## dapaterson (6 Jan 2018)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> Does your six pack include the maintainers and the rest of the support trades that keep the birds flying? I sense the presence of several unseen alligators in this lagoon



Yes. Treat it as a deployment.  Turn the bases into FOLs; keep only a small custodial crew in location.

Of course, GoC would likely object to closing two bases...


----------



## PuckChaser (6 Jan 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Yes. Treat it as a deployment.  Turn the bases into FOLs; keep only a small custodial crew in location.
> 
> Of course, GoC would likely object to closing two bases...


How long would it take for the fighter pilots to complain that they should get higher hardship and risk levels than the maintainers when deployed to Cold Lake? My vote is Roto 2.


----------



## Downhiller229 (7 Jan 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> How long would it take for the fighter pilots to complain that they should get higher hardship and risk levels than the maintainers when deployed to Cold Lake? My vote is Roto 2.



Yes pilots are degenerates and crybabies, they can barely handle the rigors of airforce life as it is  :


----------



## SupersonicMax (7 Jan 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Move the entire fighter community to Mirabel.  Send a six pack for three months at a time to Cold Lake / Bagotville.  Voila.  Long term career stability.  Close to a major urban area for spousal employment.  Colocated with the maintenance facility.



As a Government, how do you justify stripping a town (Cold Lake) of a third of their residents and half of its economy?

As DND, how do you convince the People that we still need the CLAWR when there is no-one using it on a regular basis?

As the RCAF, where do you train for large-ish (4v4) scale employment?  Which airspace are we going to use that is big enough to accomodate 5 Squadrons? Who's going to man the other DOBs and FOLs?  The same guys that just got back from Cold Lake?  Who's going to go and support the JTAC courses in Wainwright, US and Gagetown?  What about exercises?  As it is, a Fighter Pilot is away for the better part of 4-6 months a year.  Adding 3 months on top of that isn't going to help the family life.

More importantly:  where is the infrastructure to support 76+18 CF-18 in Mirabel?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (7 Jan 2018)

How about a Roto through Comox?


----------



## SupersonicMax (7 Jan 2018)

Should it make a difference?


----------



## MilEME09 (7 Jan 2018)

Would make more sense for the government to make investment's into the long term economic viability of our two fighter towns. They aren't going anywhere, if we ever see the day of the RCAF expanding it's fighter force then maybe a third fighter base will be called upon, that is unlikely though, even in my life time.


----------



## Rifleman62 (7 Jan 2018)

> How long would it take for the fighter pilots to complain that they should get higher hardship and risk levels than the maintainers when deployed to Cold Lake?



And a medal.




> As a Government, how do you justify stripping a town (Cold Lake) of a third of their residents and half of its economy?



It's Western Canada, it's Alberta. Who cares in Ottawa?


----------



## SeaKingTacco (7 Jan 2018)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> As a Government, how do you justify stripping a town (Cold Lake) of a third of their residents and half of its economy?
> 
> As DND, how do you convince the People that we still need the CLAWR when there is no-one using it on a regular basis?
> 
> ...



Cold Lake is in Alberta. This Govt is not demonstrably concerned with anything that happens, economically, in that province.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (7 Jan 2018)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> Should it make a difference?



Max, I think even you can agree that defence policy wrt fighters in Canada stopped making military sense a long time ago.

Even this half baked proposal is a better idea than buying used Australian Hornets...


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (7 Jan 2018)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> As a Government, how do you justify stripping a town (Cold Lake) of a third of their residents and half of its economy?



Oh! I don't know. Perhaps they should ask the people of Summerside how you go about doing that. 

You have to be careful here: Either the job of the military is to defend the country or it is to provide economic opportunities for civilians, regardless of defence needs (OK, it's not quite a "either-or" situation, I know). But you cannot simply continue a military activity somewhere that doesn't make military sense just to provide for the local economy. Manufacturing single-employer-of-the-town has closed more towns in Canada than the military has. Those towns downsized and somehow survived. The loss of fisheries in small Newfoundland villages has been a lot more devastating.

However, Cold Lake is here - now - and it is useful still in military terms. That the same could be done from somewhere else does not justify closing it.

As for Bagotville: I agree, Max: Best kept secret in the RCAF. Nice town, lots to do, close to Quebec City. And on top of that, if it didn't exist, how would all those strapping young Canadian flyers find those beautiful French Canadian galls to marry?  ;D


----------



## McG (7 Jan 2018)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> As a Government, how do you justify stripping a town (Cold Lake) of a third of their residents and half of its economy?


Is it the federal government’s job to provide residents to isolated Canadian communities? If yes, why does Cold Lake deserve such a large concentrated chunk when so many other communities go with no federally provided residents? If the federal government does not owe communities a population infusion, then your point here is moot.


----------



## dapaterson (7 Jan 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> As for Bagotville: I agree, Max: Best kept secret in the RCAF. Nice town, lots to do, close to Quebec City. And on top of that, if it didn't exist, how would all those strapping young Canadian flyers find those beautiful French Canadian galls to marry?  ;D



Post them to 430 Sqn.


----------



## Rifleman62 (7 Jan 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver: 





> You have to be careful here: Either the job of the military is to defend the country or it is to provide economic opportunities for civilians, regardless of defence needs (OK, it's not quite a "either-or" situation, I know). But you cannot simply continue a military activity somewhere that doesn't make military sense just to provide for the local economy. Manufacturing single-employer-of-the-town has closed more towns in Canada than the military has. Those towns downsized and somehow survived. The loss of fisheries in small Newfoundland villages has been a lot more devastating.



Either the job of the government military is to defend the country or it is to provide economic opportunities for civilians, regardless of defence needs (OK, it's not quite a "either-or" situation, I know). But you cannot simply fiddle military requirements and eventually deliver military equipment  continue a military activity somewhere that doesn't make military sense just to provide for the local economy.

That the LPC policy.


----------



## dimsum (7 Jan 2018)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> As a Government, how do you justify stripping a town (Cold Lake) of a third of their residents and half of its economy?
> 
> As DND, how do you convince the People that we still need the CLAWR when there is no-one using it on a regular basis?
> 
> ...



OGBD already suggested Summerside, PEI.

As for the rest, and I hesitate to say this normally, but look at the Australians - their fighter home bases are Amberley (1h from Brisbane), Newcastle (2h from Sydney, on the nice part of the coast) and Tindal (3h south of Darwin).  Tindal is like Cold Lake but that was relatively new - they used to be in Darwin.  The big difference is that people don't generally stay in Tindal as the HQ and such are in Newcastle.

Their ranges are out in South Australia and other places not close to their bases.  They deploy there as a detachment; otherwise there is a caretaker crew.  As for their "bare bases" or FOLs, there is also a caretaker crew per base.  Bear in mind that these crews aren't from the Squadrons - more like a Sup Tech, MSE OP, and clerk to keep things running.  I have no idea what their QRA posture is like but it's not like they have planes scattered to the FOLs in the north and west all that often.  

*If* we were to do the same, I'd say either consolidate all the sqns in Bagotville and keep CL as a site for the range and a larger caretaker crew, like Goose Bay.  If AETE stays there, keep the bare minimum and have the rest in Ottawa.  If we absolutely need defence in the west, maybe move the Sqn down to Edmonton International Airport (or Calgary Airport).


----------



## Altair (7 Jan 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Oldgateboatdriver:
> Either the job of the government military is to defend the country or it is to provide economic opportunities for civilians, regardless of defence needs (OK, it's not quite a "either-or" situation, I know). But you cannot simply fiddle military requirements and eventually deliver military equipment  continue a military activity somewhere that doesn't make military sense just to provide for the local economy.
> 
> That the Whatever Party is in power policy.


Fixed that for you


----------



## Rifleman62 (7 Jan 2018)

Don't fix that for me. I quoted a post, then using the sentences in that post expressed my thoughts on the quote. I did not FTFY.

Based on the LPC record to date, and from decades of living it, I stand by my post.You may disagree based on your life experiences.


----------



## PuckChaser (7 Jan 2018)

Split this off as its definitely a standalone discussion, especially with the apparent increase in total operational fighters once we get a replacement chosen.


----------



## Quirky (7 Jan 2018)

Cold lake just needs to be shut down. Period. There is no reason to keep a permanent presence there. The range would be just as easily accessible from Edmonton or Saskatoon. Hell, build up Moose Jaw, it’s already an established CF base that’s close to civilization. The majority of people aren’t into the whole redneck style of life, hunting, fishing or woodland activities. This is 2018 now, people want urban areas with malls, coffee shops, big box stores, modern movie theatres and easy access to a major airport and health services. Cold lake will always be a huge retention crap storm of the RCAF. People aren’t going to waste away their lives in a crap hole that their spouse hates as well, nevermind having to deal with the whole PLD rate non sense. 

The leadership is obviously aware of the issue and either A: doesn’t care or B: doesn’t care enough to push for changes. 

I will always recommend the new guys coming in to seek other forms of employment or career options that doesn’t involve living in f***ville.


----------



## MilEME09 (7 Jan 2018)

What if the government investing more in cold lake, and made it more attractive for business's to set up shop and living conditions more suitable for modern life?


----------



## Downhiller229 (7 Jan 2018)

For the record I enjoy it up there. I think some people are going to be unhappy regardless of their situation. Could it be better? Yeah for sure but I don't see any change coming anytime soon. PLD would go a long way in making it tolerable, maybe giving the airport bus a stop in town so people can go to Edmonton for the weekend and such? Short of that I don't think you'll see this place erode, the Hawks for example can't practically get to the CLAWR from Edmonton and get the work they need done.


----------



## Quirky (7 Jan 2018)

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> What if the government investing more in cold lake, and made it more attractive for business's to set up shop and living conditions more suitable for modern life?



Turning cold lake into a city will take decades. Plus you still can’t mask the biggest issue - isolation. 



			
				Downhiller229 said:
			
		

> For the record I enjoy it up there. I think some people are going to be unhappy regardless of their situation. Could it be better? Yeah for sure but I don't see any change coming anytime soon. PLD would go a long way in making it tolerable, maybe giving the airport bus a stop in town so people can go to Edmonton for the weekend and such? Short of that I don't think you'll see this place erode, the Hawks for example can't practically get to the CLAWR from Edmonton and get the work they need done.



You are still travelling a total of 7-8 hours on a bus for what, a mall? That’s the entire problem.

The Hawks and hornets can do whatever they need to do without the range. They are too dependent on it and it’s a lazy excuse to remain in cold lake. There are dozens of smaller countries that produce fighter pilots just fine without an airspace the size of Europe.


----------



## SupersonicMax (7 Jan 2018)

Where do you suggest we train without a range?  Do you have the slightest clue of what we do on a training mission?


----------



## daftandbarmy (8 Jan 2018)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> Where do you suggest we train without a range?  Do you have the slightest clue of what we do on a training mission?



No. That's why we're glad that they put you so far out of harm's way


----------



## SeaKingTacco (8 Jan 2018)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> Where do you suggest we train without a range?  Do you have the slightest clue of what we do on a training mission?



What do you do in Bagotville? Serious question.


----------



## SupersonicMax (8 Jan 2018)

We have airspace where we train which is 25nm North of the base.  To drop weapons, we go to Valcartier (75 nm).  There is no such airspace around Edmonton.  The closest is the airspace surrounding the CLAWR which is too far (130 nm) from Edmonton to be useful (fuel limited) or efficient.  You'd spend 30-40 minutes transiting for 30-40 minutes of training.  Our transit is normally litterally 5-10 minutes normally.  The flight time fraction spent training would reduce dramatically, reasulting in more hours required to train someone up to the same level.  And that's for good weather with a 2-bag jet.  Then you are in the BFM/ACM phase (single centerline fuel tank jet) and need to hold alternate fuel and you get 10 minutes of training.  Not even worth launching for.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (8 Jan 2018)

Thanks, Max.


----------



## PuckChaser (8 Jan 2018)

Why couldn't Cold Lake be kept open like Goose Bay with civilian contractors keeping the airport and range facilities open, allowing Sqns to surge to them for a week to conduct intensive training? Couple 52 footers for spare parts and some buses for the maintainers/technicians. Reachback to Edmonton isn't far away if something goes pear-shaped that's not in the trucks, and you alleviate the loiter time issues for that BFM/ACM training.

Convenience isn't/shouldn't be a huge factor when you're hemorrhaging the technicians that keep the A/C airborne because of the austere location that isn't suitable for a single income spec pay Cpl salary. Perhaps that hard recommendation to close down Cold Lake would even kick the PLD update process in the ass.


----------



## SupersonicMax (8 Jan 2018)

This isn't about convenience.  Even with a full complement of maintainers, you'd have a hard time generating the extra hours on the aircraft to account for the transit.  Even in optimal conditions.  The problem is not unique to BFM/ACM.  It is just compounded by conducting BFM/ACM sorties.


----------



## PuckChaser (8 Jan 2018)

No no, I'm suggesting you fly your 6-pack up to Cold Lake for a few days and get what you need done and then fly home. You could even stay at the Best Western instead of the shacks.


----------



## angus555 (8 Jan 2018)

Surely, there must be a better location in Canada to have an air weapons range rather than over an oil sands deposit. :facepalm:


----------



## SupersonicMax (8 Jan 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> No no, I'm suggesting you fly your 6-pack up to Cold Lake for a few days and get what you need done and then fly home. You could even stay at the Best Western instead of the shacks.



Sure. But what do you do when you are not in Cold Lake?  Stop flying?  My point is that Edmonton is not suitable in term of distance from the training areas to have meaningful training accomplished.


----------



## Downhiller229 (8 Jan 2018)

The jets fly training missions every day at a constant rate. They already go on Det about twice a year to "surge" training as suggested but it only gets the system caught up. Doing that as a constant practice would be impractical. 

In the US the airspace is much more scarce, leading to much of the airspace being over water and the ranges small and congested. A lot of time is devoted to transit to and from and less to actually doing the meat of the work which is the tactical stuff. 

We are definitely lucky to have the CLAWR easily accessible to the fighter community and others but there is much more to it then just convenience. It allows a higher degree of flexibility in training which probably produces a better product.


----------



## BurmaShave (8 Jan 2018)

Quirky said:
			
		

> Cold lake just needs to be shut down. Period. There is no reason to keep a permanent presence there. The range would be just as easily accessible from Edmonton or Saskatoon. Hell, build up Moose Jaw, it’s already an established CF base that’s close to civilization. The majority of people aren’t into the whole redneck style of life, hunting, fishing or woodland activities. This is 2018 now, people want urban areas with malls, coffee shops, big box stores, modern movie theatres and easy access to a major airport and health services. Cold lake will always be a huge retention crap storm of the RCAF. People aren’t going to waste away their lives in a crap hole that their spouse hates as well, nevermind having to deal with the whole PLD rate non sense.
> 
> The leadership is obviously aware of the issue and either A: doesn’t care or B: doesn’t care enough to push for changes.
> 
> I will always recommend the new guys coming in to seek other forms of employment or career options that doesn’t involve living in f***ville.



I'm having the opposite problem in Toronto. Lines! 25 minutes for groceries. Traffic! 30 minutes each way minimum. Strangers everywhere; haughty, busy people. People busy doing the rat race in their God damn leased Mercedes turning right on pedestrians.

Redneckville? Sounds like home, sign me up! Just get me the hell outta here.


----------



## dimsum (8 Jan 2018)

BurmaShave said:
			
		

> I'm having the opposite problem in Toronto. Lines! 25 minutes for groceries. Traffic! 30 minutes each way minimum. Strangers everywhere; haughty, busy people. People busy doing the rat race in their God damn leased Mercedes turning right on pedestrians.
> 
> Redneckville? Sounds like home, sign me up! Just get me the hell outta here.



Well, besides Goose Bay, I think the Toronto v Cold Lake divide (in terms of population and isolation) is probably the largest you'll get in Canada.  But it does illustrate that there are some people who like big cities, and some who don't.  However, it is a hard sell to post young, single folks to CL for a decade or more, especially if said folks came from a place like Toronto, Montreal or Vancouver.

I don't think I can move back to Toronto because of what you said, but I'd be perfectly happy with London ON, Kingston, or such.  Big enough that it has everything, but small enough that it's all busy for no reason.  

Actually, on second thought, I'll stay in Vancouver Island  thanks


----------



## Quirky (8 Jan 2018)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> We have airspace where we train which is 25nm North of the base.  To drop weapons, we go to Valcartier (75 nm).  There is no such airspace around Edmonton.  The closest is the airspace surrounding the CLAWR which is too far (130 nm) from Edmonton to be useful (fuel limited) or efficient.  You'd spend 30-40 minutes transiting for 30-40 minutes of training.  Our transit is normally litterally 5-10 minutes normally.  The flight time fraction spent training would reduce dramatically, reasulting in more hours required to train someone up to the same level.  And that's for good weather with a 2-bag jet.  Then you are in the BFM/ACM phase (single centerline fuel tank jet) and need to hold alternate fuel and you get 10 minutes of training.  Not even worth launching for.



This seems like an issue with poor aircraft range of the F18 more than anything else. With the eventual purchase of the F35 this won’t be as big of an issue with the internal fuel load being 1500lb more vs a three bag F18. That will give you enough fuel to takeoff from YEG, go to CLAWR, do the mission, come back and do a couple low passes over whyte ave.


----------



## GR66 (8 Jan 2018)

Quirky said:
			
		

> This seems like an issue with poor aircraft range of the F18 more than anything else. With the eventual purchase of the F35 this won’t be as big of an issue with the internal fuel load being 1500lb more vs a three bag F18. That will give you enough fuel to takeoff from YEG, go to CLAWR, do the mission, come back and do a couple low passes over whyte ave.



Is that an efficient use of fuel, time and airframe life?


----------



## Quirky (8 Jan 2018)

GR66 said:
			
		

> Is that an efficient use of fuel, time and airframe life?



The same question could be asked of loitering around Eastern Europe for 4 months training Romanian MiG-21 pilots.


----------



## dapaterson (8 Jan 2018)

GR66 said:
			
		

> Is that an efficient use of fuel, time and airframe life?



What's wrong with Whyte ave?


----------



## PuckChaser (8 Jan 2018)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> Sure. But what do you do when you are not in Cold Lake?  Stop flying?  My point is that Edmonton is not suitable in term of distance from the training areas to have meaningful training accomplished.



Are not most Gen 4 and 5 aircraft supposed to be far more simulator heavy, vice actual butt in seat flight hours? There's absolutely no airspace anywhere near Edmonton you can fly in with a temporary ROZ? This is a future fighter problem, as moving the Sqns to Edmonton would likely coincide with the CF-188 replacement as you can't just pick up and move that many things.


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (8 Jan 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Are not most Gen 4 and 5 aircraft supposed to be far more simulator heavy, vice actual butt in seat flight hours? There's absolutely no airspace anywhere near Edmonton you can fly in with a temporary ROZ? This is a future fighter problem, as moving the Sqns to Edmonton would likely coincide with the CF-188 replacement as you can't just pick up and move that many things.



Civilian airspace doesn't use a ROZ or any other ASCM though class F may be possible. Class G in a major city is right out of the picture. Even class F would be unlikely as ATC is unlikely to shut down approach/take off corridors to allow fighters to do anything other than to move somewhere else.

While I agree that army units should be garrisoned in cities and rural bases such as shilo and pet left only as trg bases I don't velieve it's feasible for the RCAF due to airspace restrictions.


----------



## SupersonicMax (8 Jan 2018)

The airspace you need has to be at least 40x80nm from 5,000 ft to 50,000 ft to be of use for the beyond visual range training.  Oh, it also needs to be supersonic.  Try setting up a supersonic airspace of those dimensions for most of the day during weekdays around an international airport...

5th gen or not, 20-25 minutes (one way) is still a long time to transit to your working area.  Now, add the requirements to hold enough gas to go to an alternate an you are stuck with the same as you would with the Hornets, unless you are an F-15E or an F-22 then gas is never an issue.

You could collocate tankers with then but then how many tankers do we have and how many are we going to get?

Quirky:  because it holds more gas doesn't necessarily mean you can stay up longer.  That engine burns a lot of gas...  

The Romanian deployment has a purpose for our government: pulling (or at least projecting we are) pulling our weight within NATO.


----------



## Underway (8 Jan 2018)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> The Romanian deployment has a purpose for our government: pulling (or at least projecting we are) pulling our weight within NATO.



Don't forget learning how to fight against the North Korean airforce.  Seems like they still operate Mig-21's as well...


----------



## Good2Golf (9 Jan 2018)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> We have airspace where we train which is 25nm North of the base.  To drop weapons, we go to Valcartier (75 nm).  There is no such airspace around Edmonton.  The closest is the airspace surrounding the CLAWR which is too far (130 nm) from Edmonton to be useful (fuel limited) or efficient.  You'd spend 30-40 minutes transiting for 30-40 minutes of training.  Our transit is normally litterally 5-10 minutes normally.  The flight time fraction spent training would reduce dramatically, reasulting in more hours required to train someone up to the same level.  And that's for good weather with a 2-bag jet.  Then you are in the BFM/ACM phase (single centerline fuel tank jet) and need to hold alternate fuel and you get 10 minutes of training.  Not even worth launching for.



Really?  

A 0.3 each way is not practical?  

Fack!  And I thought a tanked CT-114 was fuel-critical at V2.  I didn't realize a CF-18 was such a useless hunk of metal.   

 :not-again:

G2G


----------



## SeaKingTacco (9 Jan 2018)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Really?
> 
> A 0.3 each way is not practical?
> 
> ...



To be charitable, I think the issue is a lack of viable IFR alternates within the Edmonton-Cold Lake cooridor.


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jan 2018)

You'll do a 1.5 in a mission.  So a 0.6-0.7 for transit isn't ideal.  That's half of your time spent transiting.  Depending on the training objectives, it may not be enough to complete the sortie.

Of course, we could just cruise at maximum endurance and fly a 2.5 but then you don't achieve anything....

Flying both the Tutor and the Hornet now, the Tutor is a LOT worst.


----------



## Good2Golf (9 Jan 2018)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> To be charitable, I think the issue is a lack of viable IFR alternates within the Edmonton-Cold Lake cooridor.



As opposed to the plethora of viable IFR alternates in the YWA-YOW corridor in a 146.   

#sympathymeterbroken


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jan 2018)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> To be charitable, I think the issue is a lack of viable IFR alternates within the Edmonton-Cold Lake cooridor.



Alternates in the "Cold Lake-Edmonton corridors" (or lack thereof) are irrelevant as you would still need to plan on flying to destination then to your alternate.  But of course, you knew this...

If you want to argue, at least bring up something relevant.  I am saying that from my fairly significant fighter experience, basing fighters in Edmonton isn't viable unless we get Raptors or Strike Eagles, or base a fleet of tanker to support daily operations in Edmonton.

I am happy to discuss but please bring uo facts and stop letting your hatred for me get in the way.


----------



## Good2Golf (9 Jan 2018)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> Alternates in the "Cold Lake-Edmonton corridors" (or lack thereof) are irrelevant as you would still need to plan on flying to destination then to your alternate.  But of course, you knew this...
> 
> If you want to argue, at least bring up something relevant.  I am saying that from my fairly significant fighter experience, basing fighters in Edmonton isn't viable unless we get Raptors or Strike Eagles, or base a fleet of tanker to support daily operations in Edmonton.
> 
> I am happy to discuss but please bring uo facts and stop letting your hatred for me get in the way.



So let me get this right.  Protect CANR from Alaska to Greenland you're okay.  Transit from YED to YOD and you need a large fleet of KCs?   ???

Why don't you need  fleet of KCs to get from Bagtown to Valcatraz?


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jan 2018)

We have tankers to protect CANR.  We don't do it on our own and we don't exactly have the same mission profiles than let's say an opposed self-escort strike. But I somewhat expected you to know this.

As far as Bagtown is concerned, it's half the distance to the range and we only conduct some very limited mission profiles there (Academic Range, or Academic practice at dropping dumb weapons (and sometimes laser guided weapons).  The rest of the missions are conducted in the restricted areas North of Bagtown.


----------



## Good2Golf (9 Jan 2018)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> We have tankers to protect CANR.  We don't do it on our own and we don't exactly have the same mission profiles than let's say an opposed self-escort strike. But I somewhat expected you to know this.



So when you eventually get to your ground tour in NDHQ, don't be surprised in your first interaction with Treasury Board Secretariat, should you be so lucky to have the opportunity to see past your aircraft checklist or unit SOPs or CONPLAN, that you consider that maybe that hill you would gladly have died on to defend the YED-YOD issue was in fact a mole-hill and there were bigger issues, as far as how Government sees that capability, writ large.  But until then, enjoy living life pushing into the NW quadrant - and I mean that genuinely. :nod:

Cheers
G2G


----------



## SeaKingTacco (9 Jan 2018)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> Alternates in the "Cold Lake-Edmonton corridors" (or lack thereof) are irrelevant as you would still need to plan on flying to destination then to your alternate.  But of course, you knew this...
> 
> If you want to argue, at least bring up something relevant.  I am saying that from my fairly significant fighter experience, basing fighters in Edmonton isn't viable unless we get Raptors or Strike Eagles, or base a fleet of tanker to support daily operations in Edmonton.
> 
> I am happy to discuss but please bring uo facts and stop letting your hatred for me get in the way.



How in the actual Fcuk do you get that I "hate you" out of that quote?

I was stating a fact- if you do a hypothetical mission plan from Edmonton to the CLAWR and the nearest viable alternative is, say, Saskatoon and your fly to destination, fly to alternate plus hold gas add up to more than you can carry onboard, you don't launch. In effect, I was supporting your position that, for a lot of reasons, YEG would not be a good fighter base.

But go ahead- keep on being that charming ambassador of good will that we have come expect from the fighter world.  :


----------



## SupersonicMax (9 Jan 2018)

I am not making this my hill to die.  I could not care less for Cold Lake. I am just presenting facts as I know them and how, at the tactical/operational level, it would be have second and third order impacts that, from an uninformed person may not be obvious, but that cannot be ignored.  I don't believe it would be in the best interest of the RCAF, even if it solves some of the technician retention issues.  Moving it to Comox though (or anywhere in close proximity to suitable airspace) could work.  Edmonton?  Nope.

I only interacted in this thread because I feel I have relevant experience that could contribute to the discussion. I know there are bigger fish to fry at the Goverment level but for the CAF, I sincerely hope that fixing retention issues that have long-term impacts on our readiness is a priority.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (9 Jan 2018)

SupersonicMax said:
			
		

> I am not making this my hill to die.  I could not care less for Cold Lake. I am just presenting facts as I know them and how, at the tactical/operational level, it would be have second and third order impacts that, from an uninformed person may not be obvious, but that cannot be ignored.  I don't believe it would be in the best interest of the RCAF, even if it solves some of the technician retention issues.  Moving it to Comox though (or anywhere in close proximity to suitable airspace) could work.  Edmonton?  Nope.
> 
> I only interacted in this thread because I feel I have relevant experience that could contribute to the discussion. I know there are bigger fish to fry at the Goverment level but for the CAF, I sincerely hope that fixing retention issues that have long-term impacts on our readiness is a priority.



Comox could probably work again for a single Sqn. The airspace all still exists. The tough part would be dropping iron, unless you plan on specializing on throwing it into the Pacific Ocean. The closest land range is likely Ft Lewis. 

The reality is that Cold Lake isn't going anywhere, soon.


----------



## Loachman (12 Jan 2018)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> As opposed to the plethora of viable IFR alternates in the YWA-YOW corridor in a 146.



Farmer's fields must have become a lot more rare since I last flew around there...


----------



## Good2Golf (12 Jan 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Farmer's fields must have become a lot more rare since I last flew around there...



You guys used hope on the 136, I used an AFCS to stay out of the fields, 146 decent (although crappy not having the 4th axis) and then the RNP/RNAV 0.3 dream IFR machine.  ;D


----------



## Loachman (12 Jan 2018)

We just flew under the cloud, or stayed on the ground if ceiling or vis were too low. I never found the "lack" of IFR capability to be limiting in any way.

There was bad weather forecast along the northern edge of Lake Superior as we were preparing to depart from Wainwright after RV83 (when we exercised the CAST Composite Helicopter Squadron, which included three older Chinooks). The Chinook guys were bragging that they would beat us home as they were going IFR. They encountered icing, turned back out of it, and spent the night somewhere. We flew the shoreline and had no problem. I think that we dropped to 400 feet once or twice at one point, but vis was generally great.

Our min vis for VFR in Germany was 800 metres, and our min VFR altitude was 250 feet (any higher risked getting hit by a fighter, even though they were not supposed to be below 500 feet). Weather seldom limited us cross-country. Tactically was different, as any precip on the bubble destroyed depth perception as well as reducing vis. Even if it didn't, one would not have been able to see far enough for recce anyway.

We encountered icing conditions (murk and precip, 1C OAT, slush forming on windscreen lower edge) on my first CH146 ticket ride, over Lake Ontario on vectors to Hamilton, and then lost radio and intercom due to loud buzz caused by the early static problem, then watched our NDB needle rotate to the 090 position and lock. Not fun at all. I was not a fan of Helicopter IFR before that, and even less so afterwards. Fortunately, the buzz died out fairly soon, and we turned back. I had stated that I did not think that conditions were safe due to forecasts and actuals during the brief and we really should have stayed on the ground.


----------

