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

[Eye In The Sky]

Unfortunately, both aircraft up for tender are less than optimal.

Anything you feel comfortable elaborating on?

Why not just get more J models.  Can't they do the low/slow and short landing "almost" as good as a Buffalo?

 

[YZT580]

neither a/c offers the manoeuvering capability of the Buf. and neither a/c  can handle the short field landings of a Buf.  The speed differential is not that great either.  The best you can say is that they are pressurized, which is about the only really good thing.  When you think about it, both airframes date to the mid-60's with very few significant improvements.  The best deal imho is increase the fleet of helicopters for the west coast to cover the mountains, purchase enough new-build Dh6's to properly service the north (3 hour coverage from wheels up), at least along the major traffic corridors, and contract with the airlines already operating in the north to operate them, purchase new-build C130's as your prime S&R a/c.  The transit time for any a/c to the arctic makes too long a response time; hence the northern bases a/c.  Few CF crews are going to happily accept a 6 month posting in Yellowknife, Rankin Inlet or Resolute Bay; hence the contracting.  The DH6 is a proven commodity in the north and a lot cheaper than supplying any other airframe.  Should be able to get at least 3 for one which goes a long way towards attaining sufficient coverage even at the admittedly slower transit times.  Helicopters on the west coast because neither of the airframes offered can do what the BUF does in the fiords and the Buffalo isn't available unless you want to pay Viking to completely rebuild our current fleet: which is doable.  Finally, we already have C130's, it is a great a/c and offers the additional benefit of commonality.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Thanks.  This is a pulse I am trying to keep my thumb on somewhat as the talk about us (AES Ops) being employed on the new airframe as payload/sensor ops continues. 

I'll take 3 months in ZF over 3 months in Camp Happy ;D

 

[PuckChaser]

HC-130 seems like an interesting a/c if they place a bid, considering the gap we have in CSAR right now. Would give our SAR techs perhaps something to do expeditionary, similar to a PJ in the USAF.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

There is a huge difference in the way SAR operates when you put a "C" in front of it though...

 

[Good2Golf]

HC-130 seems like an interesting a/c if they place a bid, considering the gap we have in CSAR right now. Would give our SAR techs perhaps something to do expeditionary, similar to a PJ in the USAF.

We don't, as a nation, do CSAR, full stop.  EITS is bang on...add the "C" and it is an entirely different beast...a system of systems, in fact, and the last three letters take second place to the first one.  Take a look at Figure 1.1 Spectrum of Joint Personnel Recovery excerpt from Joint Warfare Publication 3-66 Joint Personnel Recovery.  Combar Rescue, Combat Search and Rescue and SF Ops are all COMBAT operations first and foremost.  SAR as conducted by Canada is way left on the scale of intensity.


To go further, read JP 3-50 TTPs for CSAR, and you'll appreciate that anything in Canada that's yellow with a red stripe would likely be the last thing that goes anywhere near a CSAR situation.  if...IF...Canada ever conducted a CSAR, it would most likely be conducted with Allies and at most might include a package of: CP-140M over top for ISR/C2, C-17s to take the SOF CH-146 in (if not near littorals) or CH-124 is near littoral, and maybe a C-130J in the mix to bring some of the SOF bubbas into the area who didn't come in on the C-17 transporting the SOF CH-146.

:2c:

G2G
 

 

[George Wallace]

I have a strong suspicion that someone associated the "C" with "Canadian" as in the Aircraft designation, not the job description.  ;D

 

[Kirkhill]

Tangent:

WRT the Twin Otter.

Is there a justification for more Twin Otter flights to be stationed around Canada just as "Utility" aircraft?  Trainers?  Local hops?  Local Search?  Remote locations (pontoons, skis, "fat wheels")?  OGD support?

It might beef up the SAR response, off-load some Helo time and perhaps allow for more Medium/Medium-Heavy lift helos and Hercs that could be used for both logistic support and SAR.

I am extending YZT580's thoughts beyond the north and wondering if the Twotter shouldn't be part of every Transport Sqn/Base/Wing?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

And the people to man and fix them come from where? (Yes, yes- I know we have a problem with too many and too large HQs).

 

[Kirkhill]

And the people to man and fix them come from where? (Yes, yes- I know we have a problem with too many and too large HQs).

Actually I was thinking more along the lines of finding them from the bodies that support and maintain the Army Reserve.  Another Squadron's worth of dogsbodies flying and maintaining Twotters seems to me to be a more worthwhile use of my tax dollars than the largely inefficient investment in the Army Reserve.  Heck - you could even up the Air Reserve to assist.

As for fixing them - Send them home to Viking from time to time.

 

[Blackadder1916]

Is there a justification for more Twin Otter flights to be stationed around Canada just as "Utility" aircraft?  Trainers? (training who?) Local hops? (who would be hopping - the already useless bodies in over-inflated HQs looking for a role?) Local Search? (searching for who? -  the CF's primary role is searching for downed aircraft) Remote locations (pontoons, skis, "fat wheels")? ((what is the CF doing in remote locations that isn't accessible by existing larger a/c or by commercial means) OGD support? (what government departments are willing to pay for service that they don't already do in-house or contract from private sector)

Unless there is a "defined" mission that needs a new, currently non-existent, resource (in the form of a Twotter) it's just another waste of money.  I remember our existing Twin Otters, back 30 years ago when I was posted to Edmonton.  I even flew a couple of times in them as pax.  If my memory hasn't been affected too badly by aluminium mess tins, they were only marginally used for SAR back then and my impression when Edmonton closed as an airbase, the remaining a/c were permanently moved north (a/c and crews previously had rotated in sup of NR) because they couldn't find a job for them anywhere else.  It was more of an asset in search of a mission than a mission in need of an asset.

 

[Kirkhill]

Naaah. You're right. What was I thinking?

 

[YZT580]

That is why I specified the north for the DH6.  Larger a/c are useable once they get there but the transit time is in the order of 6 hours for the Herc staging from TR.  Otters locally based and crewed, perhaps by qualified rangers make far more sense then responding from the banana belt. If the hercs were moved north out of TR even as close as YB it would help although Churchill would probably serve the north better.  Failing that, having a second type of a/c in the north even with a cruise speed of 180 knots is a better solution than purchasing relatively expensive mini-hercs and placing them half a day away from most of Canada. 

On the side, as for reserve squadrons, I can still remember the DHC3 squadrons based in Downsview and if memory serves, Winnipeg.  Their standard mission I believe they fulfilled was supply runs into northern lakes in support of army training since they operated on wheel floats and a bit of mapping as well. 

 

[quadrapiper]

Apologies if someone else has already brought this up - would something along the lines of the Japanese US-2 amphibian be worth considering? Not sure if it's suitable for parachutists, but something that can land on lakes, not to mention along the coasts, seems interesting.

 

[Blackadder1916]

The suitability of an amphib a/c has been raised a few times on this thread.  The following replies (from over 8 years ago) were in response to a question similar to yours.

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.

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

There was also a short discussion starting here http://army.ca/forums/threads/23889/post-803513.html#msg803513

 

[CougarKing]

Another platform Ottawa is considering?

Defense-Aerospace

Embraer Promotes KC-390 Military Transport for Search And Rescue Missions At the Canadian Aerospace Summit 2015

OTTAWA, Canada --- Embraer is attending the 2015 Canadian Aerospace Summit, which takes place November 17-18 at the Shaw Center, in Ottawa, Canada. The Company is located at Booth 527 and is promoting the KC-390 tactical transport aircraft for search and rescue missions in Canada.

The KC-390 is designed to set new standards in its category, while presenting the lowest life-cycle cost of the market and the ability to perform multiple missions such as transport and airdrop of troops and cargo, search and rescue (SAR), medical evacuation, aerial refueling and firefighting among others.


(...SNIPPED)

 

[kev994]

One of the requirements is that it has to be a production aircraft, the embraer was expected to be excluded on that basis, but I'm not sure how the change in timeline affects that.

 

[ringo]

Delay FWSAR use the funds to buy last C17 from Boeing.
KC390 to be in production 2018, prototype flying, almost laughable for Canada to insist on quick delivery for 11 year old program.
Would make excellent replacement for Canada's KC130 as well.

 

[YZT580]

One of the issues concerning SAR aircraft has always been manoeuverability.  Is there enough information on the Embraer to know how it will perform in close areas such as the west coast valleys?  The aircraft seems to measure up or be superior in other aspects including speed, endurance and carrying capability and with that wing short field performance shouldn't be a problem either.

 

[kev994]

Turning radius is a direct measure of airspeed, so very little data is required. C-130 manoeuvres at 20 kts above power off stall speed for 45 degrees bank, or roughly 130-140 kias for example.