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

[Ostrozac]

The larger question is why is SAR a role for the CAF.  While MND is the lead for SAR in the Government of Canada, that could easily be transferred to Public Safety, and the CAF could pass off this legacy function to someone else.

Good point. I'm of two minds on this. On the one hand, I can't see SAR being done in a country like Canada except by a unlimited liability force. But on the other hand, take the two countries that have the distance and climate issues most similar to Canada (Russia and the USA); neither have their primary SAR service as a branch of their defence department. The primary SAR service in the USA is the US Coast Guard, an agency of the Department of Homeland Security (and before that, the Department of the Treasury) and the primary SAR service in Russia is the Maritime Border Guards, an agency of the FSB (and before that the KGB).

Is there scope for one of our civilian agencies expanding to full unlimited liability, and then incorporating the SAR task? Maybe under the umbrella of DFO or the RCMP? Or is the current system working better than what DFO or the RCMP would do with the job? After all, there is only one taxpayer, and if those yellow birds and men in orange are transferred out of DND, a chunk of the defence budget will go with them to the new agency. 

 

[Underway]

Good point. I'm of two minds on this. On the one hand, I can't see SAR being done in a country like Canada except by a unlimited liability force. But on the other hand, take the two countries that have the distance and climate issues most similar to Canada (Russia and the USA); neither have their primary SAR service as a branch of their defence department. The primary SAR service in the USA is the US Coast Guard, an agency of the Department of Homeland Security (and before that, the Department of the Treasury) and the primary SAR service in Russia is the Maritime Border Guards, an agency of the FSB (and before that the KGB).

Is there scope for one of our civilian agencies expanding to full unlimited liability, and then incorporating the SAR task? Maybe under the umbrella of DFO or the RCMP? Or is the current system working better than what DFO or the RCMP would do with the job? After all, there is only one taxpayer, and if those yellow birds and men in orange are transferred out of DND, a chunk of the defence budget will go with them to the new agency.

That's a bit disingenous.  The US and Russia have massive populations and militaries as well.  The US Coast Guard is armed and a part of their military structure no matter which budget it comes from.  If you were to give up SAR in the CAF then enjoy spending the money on developing your entirely new training, maintenance, infrastructure etc...  One more reason to cut the defense budget as well.

 

[Kirkhill]

What is wrong with the Washington State / US Army Reserves solution?

The personnel involved are military seconded from other duties.  The helicopters they use are military seconded from other duties.  The helicopters and personnel are used because they have militarily advantageous capabilities that can be employed usefully in Aid to the Civil Power.

The helicopters are well equipped with comms and surveillance capabilities to permit air-ground co-operation.  It makes them effective SAR systems. That makes them useful not just to the military but also to the civilian powers.  That allows the military to defray the costs, financial and political, of maintaining a capability by hiring themselves out to the civil power.

What the Americans don't do is purchase high tech systems for civilian aircraft with no combat utility while, at the same time, starving the military of equally vital, useful kit.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The larger question is why is SAR a role for the CAF.  While MND is the lead for SAR in the Government of Canada, that could easily be transferred to Public Safety, and the CAF could pass off this legacy function to someone else.

Well that is exactly what happened in 1962, elements of marine SAR was transferred from the RCAF to the newly formed Coast Guard with assets from the Department of Marine. Kitsilano base was handed over to the CCG, including base, boats and personal.

However I am not sure the CCG would be up to the task, as much of the SAR calls are away from the coast. Considering CCG is already wracked with internal politics between nearshore vs offshore SAR and Navigation aids groups, I suspect they would do badly at it. 

 

[kev994]

I can't imagine a Twotter doing a mission in the middle of the Pacific....

 

[YZT580]

If Canada were to purchase a dozen DH6 aircraft and position them in pairs across the north country, attaching them to local ranger battalions then the twin otter makes sense but not as a primary SAR aircraft for the rest of the country.  A revitalized buffalo would be great to replace the current fleet but again not as a primary aircraft unless they produce a  pressurized aircraft similar to the one Boeing created back when they owned Dehavilland.  The Q400 does not have the performance specs to make a suitable SAR aircraft at all.  It lacks the wing structure of the earlier dehavilland products that made them such great performers.  The DH7 was the last true STOL machine.  Folks were criticizing the DH6 for being so slow well, all the aircraft in contention are slow in comparison to the C17 for example which has all the same advantages as the Spartan and herc plus an additional 200 plus knots to get somewhere faster.  Maybe we should invest in a few more of those before they are gone and equip them with a helicopter in the belly for after they locate the victims.  They could still air-drop rafts, technicians, radios, food and then land and unfold the chopper long before one could be ferried up from TR.  (dreaming)

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Actually the day of a remotely controlled drone helicopter being dropped into the area to affect rescue is not far off. For a rescue in a remote area, subject is found alive and moving. C-17/C130-J flies in with a drone helo, that deploys out the back possibly on chutes till it can fly itself. Then it flies in, lands, persons clambers aboard and is flown to a pickup point. The hardest part is the transition from deploying the drone till it can fly itself. The technical difficulties make make it impractical cost wise.   

 

[Kirkhill]

Don't over complicate.

Find site.  Deploy Scan Eagle to monitor site.  Land C17/C130 at nearest airfield (there are some 5000 landing fields scattered across Canada IIRC).  Deploy and assemble stowed rotary wing device.  CH-147/CH-146/KMax/Firescout B or C.

All the above technology currently exists.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I suspect the next generation of high speed helicopters might change the mix and threaten the Osprey niche.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurocopter_X3

Frankly we should lease a few Osprey's and their crews and let them do SAR and training up here to see how much difference it may make to how we do things.

 

[Ostrozac]

Not to try to oversimplify things -- but if you want an aircraft capable of jumping in SAR Techs and bundles, a fixed-wing transport aircraft to get them there, and a rotary wing helicopter to recover casualties and move them to a hospital, then didn't you just describe the V-22 Osprey? It isn't pressurized, so it shares that weakness with the Twin Otter and Buffalo, but unlike older aircraft it can be mid-air refuelled.

But I guess it doesn't matter, as the Ottawa Citizen reports that Boeing has dropped out of the FWSAR competition.

 

[SupersonicMax]

Have you ever been in the rotor wash of a V-22 hovering above you?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Sadly my career fell into between the times of the Canadair CL-84 and the V-22, but I got to experience the joys of slinging stuff with a Chinook, S61, plus winching exercises with Sea Kings and Labradors. 

As for V-22, I suggested leasing the crews and aircraft to experiment and learn with, not necessarily to buy. It's good to step outside the box and look at things differently once and awhile.

 

[Ostrozac]

Have you ever been in the rotor wash of a V-22 hovering above you?

Nope. Just watched them take off and land at KAF. But people seem to use them as a fast-rope and sling-load platform, so it can be done.

As I said, though, it's all academic if Boeing's dropped out of the competition.

 

[SupersonicMax]

I have, both standing outside and sitting in an aircraft.  Both time, it was relatively scary.  After talking to the pilots, they don't even think it would be possible to pick up somebody safely from the hover.  They said they would have to land away to get the injured loaded up...

 

[Infanteer]

I have, both standing outside and sitting in an aircraft.  Both time, it was relatively scary.  After talking to the pilots, they don't even think it would be possible to pick up somebody safely from the hover.  They said they would have to land away to get the injured loaded up...

They didn't seem to have issues fast-roping us out of them; it ain't that scary.

 

[SupersonicMax]

The wash itself is not.  The shit that gets thrown everywhere is.

 

[Good2Golf]

The wash itself is not.  The shit that gets thrown everywhere is.

SKAD or winch PPE in for the rescuees.  ;D

 

[SupersonicMax]

If you mean Personnal Protection Equipment, it may be fine if the survivor has no injury.  If the survivor has a broken back however...  Why pick something that will beat the shit out of the survivor when there are better options out there?

It is a kick ass PR platform (mix of speed and unprepared site landing, can bring half a TRAP team, AAR capable) Domestic SAR?  Not so much.  Exactly how many countries use it ad a Domestic SAR platform?

 

[Loachman]

Don't over complicate.

But do not over-simplify, either.

Deploy Scan Eagle to monitor site.

Where would the GCS (Ground Control Station) be? Range is limited. If you are suggesting an airborne control station, why not just keep the controlling aircraft overhead and use an onboard MX-15 or similar sensor to do the job?

UAVs are more weather-limited than manned aircraft. Not many are able to see through cloud, or operate under it - and lower altitudes also compromise range from the GCS.

Land C17/C130 at nearest airfield (there are some 5000 landing fields scattered across Canada IIRC).

Of suitable minimum length?

With instrument approaches in the event of poor weather?

Deploy and assemble stowed rotary wing device.  CH-147/CH-146/KMax/Firescout B or C.

A Griffon takes several hours to re-assemble, if transported by C17. It takes at least a day if transported by C130. A Chinook takes two days to re-assemble if deployed by C17. Similar time is required to prep and load. There are few small airfields around that have hangars, and doing this work outside, especially in cold or poor weather, is not easy.

All the above technology currently exists.

And is not the easy or practical solution that some might think.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Exactly how many countries use it ad a Domestic SAR platform?

Lets start with how many countries even have Ospreys. Last I checked it was only the US, and Japan has recently  approved a purchase but not gotten any yet.