- Reaction score
- 17,221
- Points
- 1,010
CMMA - replacing the CP140 Aurora
- Thread starter Eye In The Sky
- Start date
Eye In The Sky
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,780
- Points
- 1,160
Under this setup, the Wing Ops O effectively is the shot caller; s/he delegates day to day C2 down to a Major in the WOps staff.
There is a LRP planning flight at Wing Ops; there are folks that look at “next 24 hours”, short term and long term forecasting for exercises, op deployments, etc.
Weekly, there is an Ops Planning meeting; reps from Wing Ops, Maintenance, and each Sqn Ops flights all sit down and go over the FLYPRO. Events are assigned priority, the Ops staff from each Sqn are there to indicate high pri/no fail events with supporting info/requirements. From there, events are assigned Priority and matched to aircraft. Recent history is there are frequently more LOTs than aircraft.
Day to day, Wing and Sqn Ops staffs are back and forth as realities happen and juggle the stuff that needs juggling.
It works at the Wing and fleet level to meet the Comds intent and expectations from the Div, CJOC, etc. Having done a tour recently as a Sqn Ops WO, it’s a PITA at the Sqn and crew level.
Eye In The Sky
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,780
- Points
- 1,160
Truth; after amending a 455 for the 47th time, notifying the crew…you start to be a little…
- Reaction score
- 649
- Points
- 890
So how often to aircraft fly from one coast to the other? How many P-8's would we need to buy so the Squadrons wouldn't have to share?
Eye In The Sky
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,780
- Points
- 1,160
It’s not common for an aircraft to go from one coast to the other unless it’s transmitting to an op/ex, doing the torp range or just tail swapping for maint reasons.
Quick from the hip, I’d go with 4 serviceable (not scheduled for 2nd or 3rd line Maint) at each Operational Sqn, 3 for Force Development (testing and eval, tactics development, etc) and 3 at the training Sqn. Plus whatever # required to maintain those numbers consistently at each respective FE/FG/FD org; maybe someone more experienced at the numbers game than I am can do the numbers better. But, for that ORBAT I just fired out, 14 aircraft serviceable (defined here as not inducted into 2nd or 3rd line maint). Maybe 4 - 6 more (WAG) to meet that, so 18-20 minimum?
However, one thing to consider with the 140; they are older and more maint demanding. They’ve also been in various stages of upgrade (AIMP Block 3 and 4) for a prolonged period, as well as normal TLIR (third line inspection and repair) at IMP; I shouldn’t say how many of them are inducted at any given time but can say that definitely impacts how many aircraft are available on the FLYPRO daily/weekly/monthly.
As a NCM from my view of the world, I would have said “24” as a minimum number but that would also be so I could put more crews at each Sqn and handle the demand for FE better and for more sustained periods.
Personally I don’t think a “one for one” replacement is enough. I don’t write the cheque though…and I’m just a scope dope at the end of the day so my numbers could be way off. Maybe a Major or above pilot/ACSO/AERE can amend/correct my numbers…
- Reaction score
- 649
- Points
- 890
Fair enough, thanks. Just seems dumb to me that we would run things that way instead of just buying enough to do the job and extend the service life of all the airframes, but as you so helpfully pointed out we're not the ones writing the cheques. And this is definitely not the only part of the CAF making due with less than they need.
Eye In The Sky
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,780
- Points
- 1,160
Back in the day, we had 31 Argus we replaced with 18 Aurora (and later on, 3 Arcturus…Aurora without the ASW kit). I’m sure the reason was “the Aurora is more capable”.
This is the GoC/CAF way and we cut ourselves off at the knees when we constantly do it,
IMO.
This is the GoC/CAF way and we cut ourselves off at the knees when we constantly do it,
IMO.
Eye In The Sky
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,780
- Points
- 1,160
(hopefully they will not go block 2.1 - MH joke)https://www.navair.navy.mil/news/Australian-P-8A-Poseidon-Fleet-Receive-Upgrades/Wed-09202023-1626
Is that still the config at the gun sqns? That was an example of how designing and implementing an upgrade should never happen…
- Reaction score
- 8,332
- Points
- 1,160
Don't forget the Tracker fleet. There were about a hundred of them flying concurrently with the Argus.
DeHavilland CP-121 Tracker Royal Canadian Navy Forces Patrol
cp-121 tracker de havilland maritime patrol aircraft royal canadian navy forces grumman s-2
www.seaforces.org
- Reaction score
- 19,085
- Points
- 1,280
I would love to be a fly on the wall during those “conferences” - it’ll prob make Regimental rivalries seem civil.
Even more fun, some of those have tail art associated with a squadron. Whose crew may not be from that squadron. And where said aircraft may not be based at that particular time.
Of course, if I really wanted to throw a grenade into the LRP conversation and make people like @Eye In The Sky Forrest Whittaker eye-twitch, I could suggest that we follow the RAAF and have all of the LRP Sqns co-located in a central location where to reach either coast and work with the ships, they need to fly for a few hours to pre-position prior to exercises.
So, Winnipeg.
Eye In The Sky
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,780
- Points
- 1,160
Perhaps but…they weren’t doing the same missions…the Tracker didn’t have the legs.
- Reaction score
- 8,332
- Points
- 1,160
No, but there were an awful lot of them covering the inshore. That left the Argus to focus on the blue waters.
Eye In The Sky
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 3,780
- Points
- 1,160
I would love to be a fly on the wall during those “conferences” - it’ll prob make Regimental rivalries seem civil.
I’m laughing. For real.
Even more fun, some of those have tail art associated with a squadron. Whose crew may not be from that squadron. And where said aircraft may not be based at that particular time.
Of course, if I really wanted to throw a grenade into the LRP conversation and make people like @Eye In The Sky Forrest Whittaker eye-twitch, I could suggest that we follow the RAAF and have all of the LRP Sqns co-located in a central location where to reach either coast and work with the ships, they need to fly for a few hours to pre-position prior to exercises.
So, Winnipeg.
Greenwood folks might cheer. Comox folks…mutiny?
Mrs EITS: “so you like IR do you?”
- Reaction score
- 27,896
- Points
- 1,090
Comox folks: Wait, I don't have to live in my car?
- Reaction score
- 27,896
- Points
- 1,090
The Army's "Whole Fleet Management" enters the chat...
Ok but I was a toon. We had our screaming LSVW and sometimes an MLVW that we could throw kit in and we were damned grateful for them.
lenaitch
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,757
- Points
- 1,160
Churchill !! Handy to all three coasts.
Maxman1
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,569
- Points
- 1,160
Maybe we should buy a fleet of E-2 Hawkeyes for AEWAC.
Also, I wonder if it's possible to build an ASW aircraft on the Hawkeye airframe.
GK .Dundas
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 1,645
- Points
- 960
It should be as I recall one of the contenders for the S 3 competition was base on the E 2 and C 2 COD aircraft.
- Reaction score
- 19,085
- Points
- 1,280
What would be the benefit? The idea of the E-2C is to be able to operate off carriers, which we don’t have.
The range/endurance wouldn’t be as long as a P-8, because the mission is to protect the fleet off their carriers, not long range patrol.
Similar threads
