CMMA - replacing the CP140 Aurora

[Good2Golf]

Kills at night, with a mixed gender crew? We'll name it the Rene Levesque.

Well, it at least rules out the CP-738 Payette

Add to that the Army National Guard warrant officer program flying all manner of helicopters from Apaches to Chinooks.

Also, I’ve mentioned this before but the US Army WO isn’t the same as our definition of a WO. They are more “officer” than “warrant”.

Let the Messes lead one to the light…

Commissioned and Warranted Officers in the U.S. Army are all members of the…Officers Mess.

 

[childs56]

I want popcorn now

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Nope not a single exposure to aircrew training or flying operationally.

Watching people/seeing aircrew at work and understanding everything that they need to do to be able to fill a crew position are pretty different. There are many small to big parts for flyers, with Pilot being the most stringent; both in a simulator and aircraft. I can’t speak for all fleets but some folks struggle to maintain their minimums in flying/sim time because of demands of their positions and demands for YFR/sim hours. Then all the other currencies that are platform/trade specific. Going on an op used to be a bit of a break…

But I fixed the leaky little buggers and listened to the concerns of attrition.
I do know our system is broken, I do know it can be fixed. but in order to do that we need to actually want to fix it. The people on the floor want to fix it, and have viable solutions in the near, short, medium and long term. The bosses have not figure it out, do not want it fixed or are absolutely useless.

I am sure West Jet and Air Canada could provide a few experienced Pilots through a Reserve program that would be useful with the new P8s.
I am also sure there are enough retired Pilots in Canada who could be enticed back to fly part time that would be of benefit, again China hired a few recently.
A few more people who have started the Civilian Pilot training and could be enticed to move over.
Afterall Portage Starts Pilots off with Jet Rangers, King Air C-90A and Harvard II. Then they move on from there.

Going of what I said above, if we don’t have bigger fleets (not talking the 2 CAD piece), how are OTUs and line sqns going to train and employ reserve pilots at op sqns?

What would the OTU look like? You couldn’t necessarily do it the same way PRes Armour Officers do it, a block each summer when university is out. There would be no benefit to that for the RCAF.

I’ve flown with reserve aircrew before, more than once. All of them were former reg force in the same trade on the same platform with the same category they had before CTing.

 

[KevinB]

Let the Messes lead one to the light…

Commissioned and Warranted Officers in the U.S. Army are all members of the…Officers Mess.

WO1->CWO5 are also saluted down here…

 

[Good2Golf]

WO1->CWO5 are also saluted down here…

I was going to add that, but figured it would be enough of a mind blow to let some folks know that all officers, no matter commissioned or warranted, did similar jobs and hung in the same messes…

 

[KevinB]

I was going to add that, but figured it would be enough of a mind blow to let some folks know that all officers, no matter commissioned or warranted, did similar jobs and hung in the same messes…

Well, on the pilot side at least. The deviation is on the technical side where the Warrants are SME’s and more like some of the commonwealth SNCO positions.

I also know some CWO’s that run ODA’s as there are groups short of Captains, which is the very unusual situation of Warrants actually commanding something (other than a single helicopter)

 

[Zoomie]

We can't hire enough reservists to fill the positions available on the REO. I have two open Capt/Air Ops positions with zero interest.

Civilian type rated pilots are of no value to the RCAF - flying a 737-NG is easy, tactically flying a P-8A and maintaining currency/proficiency is not feasible for part-time employment.

 

[KevinB]

Civilian type rated pilots are of no value to the RCAF - flying a 737-NG is easy, tactically flying a P-8A and maintaining currency/proficiency is not feasible for part-time employment.

I can guarantee you that there are Air Guard personnel down here that have more experience than CAF pilots.

Navy Proposes Conversion of 2 Active P-8 Squadrons to Reserve - Seapower

ARLINGTON, Va. — The U.S. Navy proposes to shift two P-8A Poseidon patrol (VP) squadrons from the active component to the reserve component in 2026, budget documents show. The Navy’s 2023 budget highlights book published this month shows a proposal...

seapowermagazine.org

The RCAF could have Res Squadrons, from P-8A to F-35 however it would require a slew of effort and money.

1) Infrastructure: both in terms of actual airport runways, structures and simulators in reasonable locations to work with airline pilots.

2) Equipment: Enough planes to equip both the Regular Force, and Air Res Squadrons. Right now there aren’t enough platforms to even arguably meet the needs of the Regular Force.

3) Training: Given the RCAF already has pipeline issues, there would need to be a large increase in the throughput. Because @Zoomie is correct that regardless of one’s currency on a commercial AC, the pilot still needs to be trained and proficient in the operational aircraft.

I’m not a pilot, but I would assume that a 737 commercial pilot dual certified on the P-8A probably wouldn’t need additional currency training (checks?) for take off, landings etc - and so there could be some theoretical savings - but I would assume those are theoretical only as to fly mission profile currency flights one also needs to take off, fly, and land (and all the related checklist stuff from start to finish).

I see Res Squadrons as a bonus, but they are only practical if the RCAF has platforms for them, and frankly I don’t see that occurring in any of our lifetimes without a major change in the mindset of the Canadian public.

 

[YZT580]

I see Res Squadrons as a bonus, but they are only practical if the RCAF has platforms for them, and frankly I don’t see that occurring in any of our lifetimes without a major change in the mindset of the Canadian public.

If the GOC can convince Canadians that they need to spend millions of dollars on a part-time wind generated electrical system and a duplicate natural gas system to fill in when needed then I am certain they could convince those same Canadians that they need to pay to ensure that our country remains strong and free. It is not so much the public as the politicians who have to change their attitude. Canadians take their cue from the press and from the schools and sadly both sources of attitude consider military a waste of money. We can give Volkswagen billions of dollars to make batteries but have nary a penny to spend on things that actually matter in the long view

 

[captloadie]

It is funny that when I posed the question of personnel and resource shortages, the group think was to go directly to the "pilot shortage". In some of the busiest fleets, pilots are not the limfac. Its the loadmasters, maintenance pers, and support personnel and their equipment that is the thing holding the RCAF back. And the infrastructure, but that's a whole other issue.

It is time to make some hard decisions on how we hire into these positions, and then employ them. For purple trades, especially those employed on the flight line, stop cross posting them to non-RCAF positions at the tactical level. Turn them blue and keep them blue. Stop cross posting maintainers across fleets, so that you lose all that experience, and bringing in supervisors who are unfamiliar with the airframe outside of the trg system. And its time to look at legacy MOSIDs and determine if they are still valid, instead of reinventing tasks for them when their legacy airframe no longer has a seat in or around the cockpit for them.

 

[KevinB]

It is funny that when I posed the question of personnel and resource shortages, the group think was to go directly to the "pilot shortage". In some of the busiest fleets, pilots are not the limfac.

Generally as an outsider, the Pilot aspect has been brought up more often, and has the largest visibility.

Its the loadmasters, maintenance pers, and support personnel and their equipment that is the thing holding the RCAF back. And the infrastructure, but that's a whole other issue.

It is time to make some hard decisions on how we hire into these positions, and then employ them. For purple trades, especially those employed on the flight line.

Why would a flight line trade be purple?

Just curious.

stop cross posting them to non-RCAF positions at the tactical level. Turn them blue and keep them blue. Stop cross posting maintainers across fleets, so that you lose all that experience, and bringing in supervisors who are unfamiliar with the airframe outside of the trg system.

Uhm that’s a little disconcerting…

And its time to look at legacy MOSIDs and determine if they are still valid, instead of reinventing tasks for them when their legacy airframe no longer has a seat in or around the cockpit for them.

Now your just being a heretic

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Why would a flight line trade be purple?

Traffic tech still has green DEU types (I think).

Refueling trucks are MSE Ops, as are Flt Feeding delivery vehs.

There’s an sub-unit “LRP Supply” in the Op hanger in ZX; I’ll guess they fall under WLog somehow but would probably be very type-specific in experience/knowledge after a posting/rotation thru there.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

And it’s time to look at legacy MOSIDs and determine if they are still valid, instead of reinventing tasks for them when their legacy airframe no longer has a seat in or around the cockpit for them.

FEs are still flying RW…but there is a project that is (the last I heard…) looking at ways to modernize all flying NCM trades, I believe some of our Allies were looked at and visited to see how they break theirs out. Like, one MOSID with Occ specialities/sub-MOSIDs.

 

[Edward Campbell]

I was going to add that, but figured it would be enough of a mind blow to let some folks know that all officers, no matter commissioned or warranted, did similar jobs and hung in the same messes…

Back in the old, old, old days warrant officers were often quite senior, including, sometimes, the "master" (sailing g master) of a ship. The Royal Navy, in Nelson's day, thought that the commander - Captain Hardy if 'Victory,' for example - had more than enough to do in deciding where the ship should go and what it should be doing day-by-day, hour-by-hour and even minute-by-minute at sea/on station and in battle. The very complex business of making a sailing ship obey the captain's orders involved setting and adjusting sails and so on to change speed and course - that was the job of a very skilled and experienced sailor who was the Master and a warrant officer.

 

[childs56]

Watching people/seeing aircrew at work and understanding everything that they need to do to be able to fill a crew position are pretty different. There are many small to big parts for flyers, with Pilot being the most stringent; both in a simulator and aircraft.

The same as maintaining the same aircraft, loading it, fueling it, running various systems. Lots of small little moving parts to make the big parts works.
It is always funny how Pilots always feel, they are the most "stringent".

I can’t speak for all fleets but some folks struggle to maintain their minimums in flying/sim time because of demands of their positions and demands for YFR/sim hours. Then all the other currencies that are platform/trade specific. Going on an op used to be a bit of a break…

Let pilots fly thats why people join.

Going of what I said above, if we don’t have bigger fleets (not talking the 2 CAD piece), how are OTUs and line sqns going to train and employ reserve pilots at op sqns?

There are solutions to this. It will take a serious rethink of how things work.

What would the OTU look like? You couldn’t necessarily do it the same way PRes Armour Officers do it, a block each summer when university is out. There would be no benefit to that for the RCAF.

It depends on how you would set up the training. But looking outside of the normal relm of the current training system one would have to overhaul the entire system.
lots of butt time waiting.

I’ve flown with reserve aircrew before, more than once. All of them were former reg force in the same trade on the same platform with the same category they had before CTing.

With us comming out with P8s
With new F35s
Lots of sim time can and will make the bulk of training for crews.
I know a couple West Jet Pilots who would like to fly a 737 a few Hundred feet off the water and put the plane though it's paces.

As for the back of the plane folks. Lots of sim time.
Bigger problem is fix the training system back log.
But it is easier to just let it get worse and hopefully the magic training fence fixes everything.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

The same as maintaining the same aircraft, loading it, fueling it, running various systems. Lots of small little moving parts to make the big parts works.
It is always funny how Pilots always feel, they are the most "stringent".

How often do maint have to do egress currency? If they don’t turn a wrench in 30 days, do they need a STF by a STDs quald person to get them current again? Minimum flight and sim hours every 30 days? Quarterly? Semi and annual currency requirements?

The tail chase aircrew deal with re: quals and cureenies adds up quicky in terms of work days; I know flyers who are Class A and it eats up a lot of their time they aren’t flying, so this is where I struggle to understand how a “off the street” reservist in an aircrew trade would be a viable option for the RCAF.

Unless the answer is “lower the requirements and/or standards to which I think the answer is “absolutely not”.

Let pilots fly thats why people join.

Armour officers join to command armoured forces; but they are also officers and have non-field related duties. Same can be said for many classifications.

Back to trg; using P-8 reserve pilots. MOAT is about 6 months long full time. How would this look for a West Jet pilot who comes to the reserves and still has to fly their Company hours monthly?

As you said, the idea would take huge resources and time. To me, the potential juice is not worth the squeeze here.

Simulators are exactly that; simulators “a trg aide”. They have their limitations and can’t replace flying. “more simulation” isn’t the golden answer to the RCAF issues.

 

[childs56]

How often do maint have to do egress currency? If they don’t turn a wrench in 30 days, do they need a STF by a STDs quald person to get them current again? Minimum flight and sim hours every 30 days? Quarterly? Semi and annual currency requirements?

The tail chase aircrew deal with re: quals and cureenies adds up quicky in terms of work days; I know flyers who are Class A and it eats up a lot of their time they aren’t flying, so this is where I struggle to understand how a “off the street” reservist in an aircrew trade would be a viable option for the RCAF.

How do our Allies do it is the first question?

Unless the answer is “lower the requirements and/or standards to which I think the answer is “absolutely not”.

Maybe some of the training needs to be modified.
Lots of industries performing extremely dangerous jobs evolve.

Armour officers join to command armoured forces; but they are also officers and have non-field related duties. Same can be said for many classifications.

Back to trg; using P-8 reserve pilots. MOAT is about 6 months long full time. How would this look for a West Jet pilot who comes to the reserves and still has to fly their Company hours monthly?

Again how do our Allies work through this? I bet they have some pretty sweet cooperative training agreements.

As you said, the idea would take huge resources and time. To me, the potential juice is not worth the squeeze here.

we keep doing the same thing but worse and getting less results.

Simulators are exactly that; simulators “a trg aide”. They have their limitations and can’t replace flying. “more simulation” isn’t the golden answer to the RCAF issues.

I think you would hate to become a F35 Pilot. Alot of their training is sim time to begin with....

We need to change the way we recruit, train or we won't be retaining very much.

 

[KevinB]

How do our Allies do it is the first question?

Maybe some of the training needs to be modified.
Lots of industries performing extremely dangerous jobs evolve.

Again how do our Allies work through this? I bet they have some pretty sweet cooperative training agreements.

we keep doing the same thing but worse and getting less results.

I think you would hate to become a F35 Pilot. Alot of their training is sim time to begin with....

We need to change the way we recruit, train or we won't be retaining very much.

None of which matters when the CAF doesn't have enough airframes anyway...

If the RCAF fleets where doubled, then I suggest it may be practical...

 

[GR66]

I wonder how much of the current personnel crisis is actually a result of our ever declining fleet sizes. Take fighters for example:

200 x CF-104's + 132 x CF-101's + 135 x CF-5's = 467 (overlapping) reduced to
138 x CF-18's reduced to
88 x F-35's

I'm sure the same is true of all our other fleets (transport, MPA, rotary wing, SAR, etc.). Over the years we have steadily reduced the number of aircraft in our fleet and the personnel have been reduced similarly. The problem is that many of the positions outside the normal practice of the trades (both aircrew and maintainers) like schools, administrative positions, command positions, exchange positions, etc. most likely have not been reduced at the same rate. Meanwhile the increasing complexity of the aircraft likely means that the training time required to attain/maintain proficiency in the trades has likely increased over time.

The result is there is a much smaller pool of personnel maintaining/operating a smaller fleet of aircraft while at the same time having to also fill a variety of outside roles that hasn't decreased as quickly as the pool of personnel. As a result the loss of a few individuals has an outsized impact on the whole (loss of experience, difficulty backfilling a position, inability to ramp up training volumes due to lake of qualified instructors available, etc.).

Losing 10 pilots when you have a pool of 500+ for a fleet of 467 aircraft doesn't put the same pressure on the system as losing 10 when you have a fleet of 88 aircraft and a pilot pool of only 100+.

The question is how do you solve the problem?

 

[childs56]

None of which matters when the CAF doesn't have enough airframes anyway...

If the RCAF fleets where doubled, then I suggest it may be practical...

Agreed.
More with less and less and even less is the way they do things here. When we say less we actually mean way less.