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

[The Bread Guy]

This just in from someone who appears to have attended the industry info session - highlights mine:

At the end of Wednesday’s Fixed Wing SAR industry day, some participants were impressed enough to applaud the government’s new approach to a problem that has been getting old – buying a new search and rescue aircraft. A full complement of the right ADM’s and DG’s from Industry, Public Works and DND turned out, and it was noteworthy that they stayed until the end of the day.

In a procurement with this kind of history, little things can mean a lot, so government representatives handed out all their slide decks and notes in advance, before they worked through an agenda that looked at:
There appears there were multiple objectives to the recently hosted FWSAR Industry Day including:
1) Providing an Update to the Project Status
2) Providing to industry an outline of the essential elements
3) Open discussion about the impending procurement strategy options
4) Seek industry feedback on options

On that last point, industry has until September 16 to get back to the government with its feedback, with a major focus on where the fixed-wing purchase can and should sit on a spectrum from full government ownership and ISS all the way through to full ASD, provided it still delivers the same ‘world-class’ capability as today.

This does not appear to be the only interaction the Crown intends, as this briefing is being followed by individual one on one corporate briefings, with the promise of follow-up sessions once inputs have been received and digested.

Source:  Richard Bray (editor), Vanguard Canada blog, 17 Aug 11

 

[Kirkhill]

New Information on the PWGSC Website on the FWSAR Project - PPT presentation and revised SOR

http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/stamgp-lamsmp/svtvn-rscfw-eng.html
http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/documents/partie-part-2-eng.pdf
http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/documents/partie-part-3-eng.pdf

Highlights

Speed/Range – Anywhere in Canadian SAR Area within one crew day (2hrs briefing, 13 hrs flying, 1 fuelling stop)
Cargo Compartment – Must have ramp
Cargo Compartment – Height now Rated (97th Percentile Equipped Standing plus Clearance)
Certification, Cockpit Visibility, Delivery, Manoeuverability – Reworded to achieve the same effect
Fleet Size, Basing, Personnel – Alternate Basing Plans and Mixed Fleets considered on cost basis
- Military Personnel Only
ASD acceptable for Ground Support and Maintenance

Sensors, Gravel Runways, SAR Interagency Comms – Uprated to mandatory requirements.

Crew: 6
Pilot and Co-Pilot
Sensor Operator and Technical Crewman
2 SAR Techs

My take on the above is that the outcome of the delays and NRC review and the Air Force Ergonomic study is that the winner will be...... the Alenia C27J, perhaps supported by IMP or Spar or some such.

If I understand all the comings and goings it is the only one that meets the ramp requirement, the cargo bay height requirement, and the cargo bay width requirements - as restated.  Not to mention gravel strip capability etc.

The only real difference that I can see in the impact of the SOR is that the new SOR delivers an aircraft that WILL have an EO/IR suite (complete with SensO or AESOP) instead the EO/IR suite merely being a "nice-to-have" add-on.

 

[Zoomie]

Interesting time-line.  Not holding my breathe, but we'll see in 4 years where we are.  It would pigeon hole nicely for my next posting.  Standing up the OTU in Comox would be definitely up my alley. 

 

[benny88]

Interesting time-line.  Not holding my breathe, but we'll see in 4 years where we are.  It would pigeon hole nicely for my next posting.  Standing up the OTU in Comox would be definitely up my alley. 

Need an eager young student?  ;D


This raises the question about switching between aircraft types. From what I've seen, pilots flying the legacy Herc switched pretty easily between SAR and TAL (obviously provided they get their SAR conversion, etc) Will pilots on the new FWSAR platform rotate between 424, 435, and 442 only, or will there be mobility between airframes? If we go with the C-27J, how similar is the avionics suite to the CC-130-J?

 

[benny88]

This raises the question about switching between aircraft types. From what I've seen, pilots flying the legacy Herc switched pretty easily between SAR and TAL (obviously provided they get their SAR conversion, etc) Will pilots on the new FWSAR platform rotate between 424, 435, and 442 only, or will there be mobility between airframes? If we go with the C-27J, how similar is the avionics suite to the CC-130-J?

This may be poor forum etiquette, but I'd like to bump this as I'm very curious. Zoomie?

 

[Zoomie]

Sorry Benny - totally got occupied with learning the E-3's subsystems...

Rotation amongst all the multi-engine platforms is common-place.  A dedicated FWSAR will definitely provide opportunities for experience to be built on that new machine that exceeds 4 years in length.  Much like the current E/H Hercules - SAR pilots move from posting to posting - flying the same airplane just a different SOR.

It benefits the RCAF and the taxpayer to retain that experience and eliminate the 3-6 months of training required every 4 years.  In my case I have always been flying on orphan fleets (CC-115, BE-90, now E-3B/C) - so it is inevitable that I must be trained on a new machine every 4 years.  It may very well be difficult to leave the FWSAR community once trained - usually the way to "escape" from the multi-posting airframes (E/H Herc, CP-140, CF-188, CH-146, CH-124) is to take a tour doing instructing.  Orphan fleets now out-number the multi-posting fleets, allowing for move places to move about in the RCAF.

As to the question of avionics - similarity really doesn't mean anything to a pilot.  In the end avionics are pretty similar in what they portray to the pilot - flying a plane is about power/thrust settings, airspeeds, pitch angles and SOPs.

 

[benny88]

Sorry Benny - totally got occupied with learning the E-3's subsystems...

Rotation amongst all the multi-engine platforms is common-place.  A dedicated FWSAR will definitely provide opportunities for experience to be built on that new machine that exceeds 4 years in length.  Much like the current E/H Hercules - SAR pilots move from posting to posting - flying the same airplane just a different SOR.

It benefits the RCAF and the taxpayer to retain that experience and eliminate the 3-6 months of training required every 4 years.  In my case I have always been flying on orphan fleets (CC-115, BE-90, now E-3B/C) - so it is inevitable that I must be trained on a new machine every 4 years.  It may very well be difficult to leave the FWSAR community once trained - usually the way to "escape" from the multi-posting airframes (E/H Herc, CP-140, CF-188, CH-146, CH-124) is to take a tour doing instructing.  Orphan fleets now out-number the multi-posting fleets, allowing for move places to move about in the RCAF.

As to the question of avionics - similarity really doesn't mean anything to a pilot.  In the end avionics are pretty similar in what they portray to the pilot - flying a plane is about power/thrust settings, airspeeds, pitch angles and SOPs.

    Thanks for the reply. Hard to predict whether I'll want to/have the opportunity to swtich between airframes, but good to know that it's a possibility. I'm thinking that going between Trenton-Winnipeg-Comox might agree with me.
    Cheers, enjoy the AWACS.

 

[dimsum]

    Thanks for the reply. Hard to predict whether I'll want to/have the opportunity to swtich between airframes, but good to know that it's a possibility. I'm thinking that going between Trenton-Winnipeg-Comox might agree with me.
    Cheers, enjoy the AWACS.

The worst part will be leaving Comox  ;D

 

[benny88]

The worst part will be leaving Comox  ;D

Going for Sea Survival in Feb, and taking leave while I'm out there to ride Whistler and generally bum around. I'm fully expecting to fall in love.

 

[Haletown]

The AW&ST version of events . . .

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_generic.jsp?channel=aerospacedaily&id=news/asd/2011/09/28/02.xml&headline=Canada%20Retries%20Fixed-Wing%20SAR%20Aircraft

 

[McG]

While the article is about the Cormorant and VH-71, I have trimmed it down to the comments about another airframe that has come up in this thread:

Spare parts for Cormorants?
Buying surplus U.S. choppers an option, says MacKay
Murray Brewster
The Chronicle-Herald
29 Sept 11

OTTAWA - Defence Minister Peter MacKay says buying surplus American aircraft will boost the availability of Canada's beleaguered Cormorant helicopters.

His comments came Wednesday as more questions were raised about how often the country's 14 front-line search-and-rescue helicopters are in the shop.

Defence planners are also paying more attention to a controversial U.S. tilt-wing aircraft, seen as a possible magic-bullet replacement.

…

One possible solution under serious consideration is the purchase of Bell-Boeing's V-22 Osprey, which could fill the gap in not only helicopter operations, but with the country's aging fixed-wing search planes that the government has been trying to replace for a decade.

The Osprey, which had a series of spectacular crashes in the developmental stage, is expensive at almost US$67 million per aircraft. It is currently flown by U.S. marines.

The Conservative government sent the company a letter of interest in late 2009, according to defence sources.

In the meantime, the air force has plugged along, trying to keep the Cormorants flying. Its availability rate has often dipped below 40 per cent, according to the documents.

…

 

[GAP]

I was under the impression that the long range endurance of the V-22 Osprey didn't come close to the other contenders, but I stand to be corrected......

Is not the downwash on the V-22 Osprey much higher than on a helicopter?

 

[benny88]

After speaking to a SAMEO, I gathered they had serious concerns about the ability of the V-22 to have a good sortie rate due to servicability issues. It's a cool aircraft for sure, with some really interesting implications for SAR, but it would be pretty ironic to replace or supplement a fleet with a history of maintenance problems with one that is just as bad or even worse.

I think this may be a knee-jerk reaction to this story, coming out tonight:

http://www.digitalhome.ca/2011/09/fifth-estate-examines-canada%E2%80%99s-maritime-search-and-rescue-capabilities/

Fifth Estate examines Canada’s maritime search and rescue capabilities
Posted by Hugh Thompson on September 29, 2011 · Leave a Comment

The North Atlantic Ocean is one of the most hostile marine environments in the world. The Atlantic-Canadians who make their living from the fishery, merchant shipping and offshore oil and gas go about their work shadowed by an ever-present danger.

So why, then, must they rely on a search and rescue service with one of the slowest response rates in the world?

This Friday, Sept. 30, at 9 p.m. ET, the fifth estate’s Linden MacIntyre presents Mayday, a detailed look at the questionable state of Canada’s maritime search and rescue capabilities. The show recounts the memories of those who have survived brushes with death, and the stories of those who perished in the frigid waters, waiting for rescue. There are also new details about the tragedy of the Melina and Keith II, on which four men perished in 2005.

On the show, MacIntyre asks why the Department of National Defence believes three helicopters are sufficient to cover the search and rescue needs of an area the size of Europe, and why required response times can stretch up to two hours.

Mayday airs Friday, Sept. 30, at 9 p.m. (9:30 NT) on CBC TV.

Pretty quick to decry the performance of our SAR crews, but even quicker to complain about funding and procurement for more aircraft...

 

[Colin Parkinson]

As the tech progresses and the costs of beacons goes down (such as SPOT) the focus will switch more to rescue than search. Coast Guard went through this in the late 80's, we were good at searching but not so much on the rescue and care of the survivors. Hence the start of the Rescue Specialist program (which was fought tooth and nail by management).

 

[Zoomie]

Imagine in instead of new planes we bought more med lift helos(Cormorants?) and spread them throughout the country.

That is a relevant plan on a smaller nation scale (like the UK, or any other European nation).  With the vast distances involved - the need for FWSAR will always exist.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Hence spreading out helo's appropriately. "Pararescue" only happens because  a Herc/Buff beats a chopper to the scene. A Cormorant in Yellowknife will be more effective then a Herc in Trenton.

Really?  You know this based upon what?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Hmmm.  I have "a bit" of experience with helicopters and some of that involves SAR. Your experience appears o be currently unquantifiable.


I'll just state that I think the answer to SAR in Canada is a bit more complicated than liberally distributing rescue helicopters though out the country.

 

[Zoomie]

A Cormorant in Yellowknife will be more effective then a Herc in Trenton.

True enough - if a plane goes down within 50nm of YZF.  What happens when JRCC tasks the asset to go out north of the arctic circle to a place where there isn't an airport within 500nm?  Helicopters lack range, speed and endurance.  FWSAR can sprint on-scene, drop equipment, flares, ST's and remain on scene for hours if needed.  Unless you plan on basing a chopper every 200nm, I will always see the need for what currently works.

FWIW - I agree 100% that if a RWSAR and FWSAR arrive on-scene at the same time, the helo will always dispatch its ST's.  It only makes sense for the FWSAR to retain its SAR capability for any other cases that might pop up.  Once the helo arrives - it is effectively negating its usefulness as a SAR asset until it drops off its survivors to the next level of care.  On the other hand, I have also been involved in SAR cases where the ability of the FWSAR to climb over 10,000' MSL and sprint to the crash location has enabled the follow-on helo asset to assist in recovery, with the FWSAR crew doing the lion share of the work.

We have a great system in place.

 

[Good2Golf]

I got to admit, I'm not convinced that we need new FWSAR. In fact I'd wager the days FWSAR have come and gone. Imagine in instead of new planes we bought more med lift helos(Cormorants?) and spread them throughout the country. You'd see faster access and more actual missions(the current stats are skewed) happening which in my opinion would keep SAR relevant.

Probably a logistical nightmare, but just a thought.

Just my opinion.

Others' opinions are that RWSAR's days are numbered, primary RWSAR that is.  Spare parts from the VH-71 fleet may make a small dent, but some feel that the Primary RWSAR capability has passed the tipping point and it is but a matter of time before things change dramatically for Military primary RWSAR.  Private RWSAR, resourced by industry to provide specific response as a matter of business, is growing exponentially.  RWSAR, on the other hand....well, your guess is a good as the next persons how much longer, if at all, it will take to regain original CH149-based Primary RWSAR.

FWSAR is what can reach the large areas of Canada's geography and put medical capability on the scene.  When you say that "'Pararescue' only happens because  a Herc/Buff beats a chopper to the scene," this seems to imply that it would be better if RWSAR was present -- is a ST from a hoist in some way more capable of stabilizing a casualty than a parachuted ST?  I was under the impression that stabilization was a higher priority than extraction.  Is this not the case?  Wouldn't you want a ST on scene as soon as possible, and doesn't a jumper ST from a significantly faster FW platform achieve this?

Regards
G2G

 

[Good2Golf]

???

Are you saying JRCC tasks Ornge medivac helicopters because RWSAR assets aren't "nearby"?  Really?


Regards
G2G