FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities

[PO2FinClk]

Well, I must say that search and rescue planes would be of no use to us if we were fighting the war against terrorism on OUR soil.

Wartime SAR is a role & responsibility of the SAR occupation, thus would be of absolute use in the condition you mention.

Agreed that the focus is on A-Stan, but the CF must also ensure they maintain their domestic responsibilities which include SAR. The CF's entrusted responsibilities must all be maintained concurently and cannot compromise any for the benefit of another. As others have mentioned, the Herc as mighty as it may is not suited for mountain SAR (I would want to be onbaord while doing a cliff shoot).

 

[ChrisG]

Far too much politics in choosing a ew airplane.  Maybe they should let the pilots and maintenance chaps go try them out and then take their word!

Just as an aside.  It is unfashionable these days but is there any benefit in SAR to being amphibious?  ( I know some of the drawbacks to amphibious aircraft,  I fly one,  but I am wondering whether they compromise operational requirements significantly without offering any advantages at all.)  For instance,  how do the specs of the Canadair CL415 compare to the Buffalo or the Spartan?  (I can't find the CL415 specs and performance,  only sappy pictures of aircraft picking up water!)

 

[kj_gully]

Before the Buffalo, Air Force Rescue units flew Albatross flying boats. There is definite "upside" to having an amphibious aircraft, In fact there is a  picture on pg 2 of the aircraft folder in the Milnet gallery (not super tech saavy, so tried to insert it 2 different ways with no success...) of amphib trial for the buff. From an operator standpoint, I guess that i would say that many times when a Marine incident requires a fixed wing Sar Asset, the sea is WAY too bumpy to want to land. Often when it is not, the Chopper is close at hand to affect (effect?) rescue. I suspect the biggest, or at least some of the biggest factors with amphibs is speed, fuel economy, pressurisation,  things the new aircraft must have to increase our capability. The disclaimer is that I am not a pilot, an aircraft engineer, or in any way involved in the SOR (statement of requirement) for the new aircraft, just an interested observer. 

 

[Good2Golf]

Caveat that I'm not a Buff driver, but I think Gully hit the nail on the head.  CL415/215's would have some advantages in very specific situations, but I think that would be far outweighted by the lack of capability that such an aircraft would have in the other...95-98%?...of the time.  If I recall correctly, the CL415/215s do not have particularly low manoeuvring speeds like the Buff has, and it's max dash speed is 60 knots slower than the Buff.  It is also not particularly suited to dispatching SAR Techs without a ramp.

A couple of Buff drivers will probably be along to provide more input.

G2G

 

[Kirkhill]

Is there a problem in terminology that tends to muddy the waters?

We talk about Search and Rescue as a capability, an organization and as platforms.  But aren't they actually three things?

Search, to find the distressed party
Contact, to determine the condition of the party and supply the means to stabilize the situation until a rescue can be effected
Rescue, to extract the distressed party.

On some missions it seems that all those capabilities could be covered by one platform (eg a Twin Otter conducting a beacon search, locating the downed aircraft, putting down on a beach, ice or water, patching up the injured and flying them all out) but on many missions the Search will be conducted by multiple platforms, the Contact by a team of SARTechs dropped from a Buff or a Herc and the extraction, or rescue effected by anything from Cormorant, to a Coast Guard boat, to a Bv206 (as at Alert some years ago).

So when we are talking about a Search and Rescue aircraft which of these capabilities are we talking about.  The Buff and the Herc do the Search and Contact.  They can't do much on the Rescue front.  Other platforms can handle the Search but not do much in the way of dropping SARTechs and gear to stabilize the situation.  Helicopters are brilliant in the rescue mode when the weather permits but from where I sit appear to be limited in their Search abilities by their range.

So what combination of capabilities should be held within the organization and which should be combined in single platforms?

 

[kj_gully]

You bring up a good point. B4 Cormorant, We had very less capability in Search or as you say "contact" phases of a Mission, due to the limitations you pointed out. However, the Cormorant, Despite it's maintenance issues, is quite capable as a Search platform, and has many times been dispatched solo on missions within a few hundred miles from home. That is where the challenge lies with the new FWSAR program, do we look for a plane that does things the same as B4, or look to change the way we do SAR? Enhanced reliance on sensors would be terrific, some of you may be surprised to hear that we have no thermal or infrared capability in the Herc, Buff Or Cormorant. Maybe we don't need a plane to shoot valleys anymore, the Cormorant can do the tight stuff, leave the new plane to tacklke tamer terrain. I think I've already discussed this in another thread, so I'll leave it there, but suffice to say, that if we are to move forward, whatever the aircraft, it will mean some rethinking of our SAR response.

 

[McG]

So what combination of capabilities should be held within the organization and which should be combined in single platforms?

Building on this, what performance characteristics must the platform have?

For instance,  how do the specs of the Canadair CL415 compare to the Buffalo or the Spartan?

How would the V-22 Osprey measure up?

 

[Zoomie]

Excellent discussion!

Valid points brought up by Gully and Kirkhill.  SAR is more of a capability - any aircraft in the CF is capable of SAR, it just takes team work to carry out the complete mission.

Canada has designed its entire SAR structure around individual capabilities working as a part of a well oiled machine.  Just this weekend I was exercising CASARA spotters on the mighty Buffalo.  These awesome volunteers are called upon very frequently by JRCC to conduct ELT searches in lieu of launching the Buffalo or Cormorant.  They are a cog in the SAR world, yet really have no effective means of Rescue. 

The Buffalo is a very capable search platform and can, at times, be called upon to take the mission from start to completion - including the final rescue and recovery.  This is where the STOL capabilities of such a platform is utilized.  The other week, a small light aircraft attempted a landing on a small grass strip in B.C. - the airplane flipped on landing, hurting the two passengers in the back.  We were launched to the airfield and prepared ourselves for the eventual extraction and MEDEVAC of the pax.  As it turned out - we were scooped by EHS out of another city - and we elected to land at another grass strip nearby and await the transfer of the victims to that location.

I must echo what Gully has already astutely stated - FWSAR will not be the same creature when/if a new platform arrives.

 

[Good2Golf]

Zoomie, related to Gully's comment about the Cormorant, would it be fair to say that the Buff was an excellent complement to the Lab, but as the rotary-wing SAR capability increases in envelope, the FWSAR pieace can adjust as well and something other than the Buff may be better suited to the final SAR capability package?

G2G

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

I apologize but I have a civvie question.

When minimum search speed requirements were determined, were they based on naked eye ability to identify potential victims or did they take into account alternate systems like thermal imaging to see heat?


Many thanks, Matthew.   

 

[Zoomie]

When minimum search speed requirements were determined, were they based on naked eye ability to identify potential victims or did they take into account alternate systems like thermal imaging to see heat?

Search speed is always based on the Mark 1 Eyeball - we slow down or speed up according to our ST's wishes.

GTG - Gully is right that the Cormorant is so much more the Search platform than the Lab ever was.  That being said, it does not have the endurance/speed to conduct an effective survivor search.  We need a FWSAR platform that go up and over the rocks (above 10'000MSL) cruise GPS direct to LKP and then slow down to start looking for post-crash fires, flares, signals, etc.

 

[aesop081]

into account alternate systems like thermal imaging to see heat?

Now thats what i do for a living.

Let me tell you what searching with IR is like.  Try looking out the aircraft through a straw going at 180 Kts.........not a good search tool.  Mk 1 eyeball is what works best unless you have a very, very, very specific spot to look at.

 

[Loachman]

And anything swallowed under tree cover is going to be invisible to thermal anyway. I've heard tell of wrecks being found purely because an alert spotter noticed a tree-top snapped off.

 

[Globesmasher]

And anything swallowed under tree cover is going to be invisible to thermal anyway.

Hey fellas:

I was down in Fort Polk, Louisianna one year on JRTC (about 1998 or so) and I was doing a "runner" .... one of the poor saps selected at the end of an 18 hour crew day to be the "downed aircrew" and to go for a run for 24 hours through louisanna swamp land.

I did everything according to the rules, spins etc ... and after about 20 hours of running I made it to the safe house and into "partisan" hands.

I felt really proud of myself ..... but, in the mass debrief ... and entirely unknown to me or the blue force .... the staff showed a video of me as I was tracked by IR from a very high altitude UAV as part of an experiment being conducted by the US on this joint exercise.  They didn't use the info for any "counter CSAR" ops, but I was horrified to see that I was easily tracked under wooded canopy ..... just my "glowing" little fat body jogging along a grey background unaware and oblivious that I was being watched silently from above.

I would have thought IR would be really useful to you SAR folks .... but I know nothing about it .. way out of my lane.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Perhaps it was a seismic shift in the normality continuum because an Air Force personal was actually running that was being tracked?


Oh come on......it was a fastball right down the middle and I had to swing at it. :deadhorse:

 

[GAP]

Did he get to keep the tricycle?  ;D

 

[kj_gully]

We have brought Thermal/ IR resources to bear on search, Aurora, Griffon from 408 Sqn, even "Hawk one" Calgary Police helicopter. however, there has been more than once, when arriving onscene in the black of night over a particularily large stretch of land or Sea, when the crew has commented on how we would like to try out some of this technology. DRDC, or whatever Valcartier R&D is called, has been working on a sensor package for years, but it seems as though that they are unable to provide the technology to us. Every year we hear the same brief at SAREX, as they go over the various mods that have taken place, as each new technology has come along. If they ever get it together we will make a giant leap in Search capability. Pedators in a SAR Sqn? maybe someday, Zoomie could be a joystick pilot!

 

[bilton090]

     What a load of s**t, besides the c-130's flying from the (removed by mod) to Afgn. the airforce don't do s**t, choppers that can't fly outside of canada ( junk ), f-18's that are to old ( to many hours ), ship choppers ( to old ), S.A.R plane's to old.  ???




Edited by Vern to removed OPSEC ... It may be common knowledge, but CF and Government policy is to mention in...people who do that, are EXACTLY the reason it is common knowledge.

 

[aesop081]

   the airforce don't do s**t,

Yeah, thats why i'm not home alot

:

 

[mover1]

     What a load of s**t, besides the c-130's flying from the (removed by mod) to Afgn. the airforce don't do s**t,

Sir I respectufully ask you to step outside and make love to your hat! And yourself while you are at it.




Edited by Vern to removed OPSEC ... It may be common knowledge, but CF and Government policy is to mention in...so from now on if you choose to quote someone who's violated OPSEC...please remove the OPSEC portion of the quote before posting.