• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

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

I'm still gob smacked that the Deputy Wing Commander at CFB Comox has apparently sent out the suggestion that CAF members and their families can just apply for housing through a local to BC social housing scheme for 'on the edge of financial ruin' families, thus setting comparatively well paid CAF members up to compete with underpriviledged residents for limited housing resources.

'Pound sand' or 'Let them eat cake' might be comments that more accurately reflect the look and feel of that message from the Boss.
 
I'm still gob smacked that the Deputy Wing Commander at CFB Comox has apparently sent out the suggestion that CAF members and their families can just apply for housing through a local to BC social housing scheme for 'on the edge of financial ruin' families, thus setting comparatively well paid CAF members up to compete with underpriviledged residents for limited housing resources.

'Pound sand' or 'Let them eat cake' might be comments that more accurately reflect the look and feel of that message from the Boss.
to bring this back towards the topic of the thread, while we have the official reason, how much do we think personal shortages and issues have caused delays in the fielding of the new aircraft?
 
I'm still gob smacked that the Deputy Wing Commander at CFB Comox has apparently sent out the suggestion that CAF members and their families can just apply for housing through a local to BC social housing scheme for 'on the edge of financial ruin' families, thus setting comparatively well paid CAF members up to compete with underpriviledged residents for limited housing resources.

'Pound sand' or 'Let them eat cake' might be comments that more accurately reflect the look and feel of that message from the Boss.
Can we bring back tar and feathers?
 
I'm still gob smacked that the Deputy Wing Commander at CFB Comox has apparently sent out the suggestion that CAF members and their families can just apply for housing through a local to BC social housing scheme for 'on the edge of financial ruin' families, thus setting comparatively well paid CAF members up to compete with underpriviledged residents for limited housing resources.

'Pound sand' or 'Let them eat cake' might be comments that more accurately reflect the look and feel of that message from the Boss.

While not familiar with BC's chapters of "Habitat For Humanity", I assume that they are similar to branches of the organization elsewhere, such as here in Alberta. To characterize them as "social housing" would probably elicit a quick and firm denial that they fall under that label. Their common theme is "a hand up, not a handout". While they provide an affordable mortgage (with no down payment) to families who may otherwise not be able to move into home ownership, one of the requirements is the ability to pay that mortgage from a regular income that is not dependent on any form of assistance (e.g., EI, Income Assistance, etc).

Social housing, on the other hand, is usually defined as subsidized accommodation.

While it may be somewhat at odds with the vision one has of "comparatively well paid CF members", the income levels to qualify for subsidized housing in BC could place some of the more junior in the category of qualifying.

 
Last edited:
To be fair - RHUs are not costed at industry standard. 4 bedroom Q at Comox is close to $1k/month. That would be around $3k on the street.

We (DND, CFHA) have built 4 new apartment buildings - each with 8 x 2 bedroom apartments. Only helps a niche group of troopies posted to QQ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MJP
to bring this back towards the topic of the thread, while we have the official reason, how much do we think personal shortages and issues have caused delays in the fielding of the new aircraft?
I only hear rumours but it seems to be all airbus this far. We haven’t made it far enough for crewing/staffing to be a problem yet
 
While not familiar with BC's chapters of "Habitat For Humanity", I assume that they are similar to branches of the organization elsewhere, such as here in Alberta. To characterize them as "social housing" would probably elicit a quick and firm denial that they fall under that label. Their common theme is "a hand up, not a handout". While they provide an affordable mortgage (with no down payment) to families who may otherwise not be able to move into home ownership, one of the requirements is the ability to pay that mortgage from a regular income that is not dependent on any form of assistance (e.g., EI, Income Assistance, etc).

Social housing, on the other hand, is usually defined as subsidized accommodation.

While it may be somewhat at odds with the vision one has of "comparatively well paid CF members", the income levels to qualify for subsidized housing in BC could place some of the more junior in the category of qualifying.


I had two friends get a habitat house one in P.E.I. and one in Kitchener. Both had to give "sweat equity" the down payment required was volunteer hours helping with the build and other builds going on at the time. Even if the person had little building skills they would be trained or they could do other things like clean up the work site or fundraising.
 
I had two friends get a habitat house one in P.E.I. and one in Kitchener. Both had to give "sweat equity" the down payment required was volunteer hours helping with the build and other builds going on at the time. Even if the person had little building skills they would be trained or they could do other things like clean up the work site or fundraising.

Build your own house on work time. I like this idea.
 
Build your own house on work time. I like this idea.
Yes, it's a good system. The house isn't free, they pay a mortgage to Habitat with the payments based on what you can afford. I forget the terms but there is little or no interest on the principal. The sweat equity is for the down payment. Habitat tries to get donations for materials, they use the money paid to buy land and pay a carpenter to oversee the volunteers. There are rules about selling the house also, I forget what the rules are but they are free to sell it.
 
Yes, it's a good system. The house isn't free, they pay a mortgage to Habitat with the payments based on what you can afford. I forget the terms but there is little or no interest on the principal. The sweat equity is for the down payment. Habitat tries to get donations for materials, they use the money paid to buy land and pay a carpenter to oversee the volunteers. There are rules about selling the house also, I forget what the rules are but they are free to sell it.

If you sell the house, Habitat has the first option to purchase and the price is based on an independent appraisal for "fair market value". There is also a amount deducted (5% here in AB) in lieu of real estate commissions to cover legal fees and other program costs associated with the sale.
 

a decent update hopefully the IOC/FOC timelines are very conservative and they can get this thing working

Two thoughts from the article:

"Airbus made 30 design changes to the platform to meet Canadian mandatory and rated requirements."

Is this a reflection of our tendency to Canadianize everything, or an indirect way of saying they are trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear?

"Though there is now a “defined safe envelop for jumpers to leave the aircraft,” the test teams are still finalizing procedures to retrieve a jumper whose parachute gets snagged behind the airplane. “There is a way of pulling them back into the airplane safely . . . "

Is this something done with every 'egress-type aircraft', or a reflection of something mentioned a while back that there might be a problem with jumping out of this particular airframe?
 
Two thoughts from the article:

"Airbus made 30 design changes to the platform to meet Canadian mandatory and rated requirements."

Is this a reflection of our tendency to Canadianize everything, or an indirect way of saying they are trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear?

"Though there is now a “defined safe envelop for jumpers to leave the aircraft,” the test teams are still finalizing procedures to retrieve a jumper whose parachute gets snagged behind the airplane. “There is a way of pulling them back into the airplane safely . . . "

Is this something done with every 'egress-type aircraft', or a reflection of something mentioned a while back that there might be a problem with jumping out of this particular airframe?
I believe airbus made the changes on their own accord in an effort to meet the requirements (eg range and tasks in a crew day).
They’re jumping SARTechs and retrieving them if they hang up. We don’t egress airborne other than ejection seats and for some reason the Grob.
 
Is this something done with every 'egress-type aircraft', or a reflection of something mentioned a while back that there might be a problem with jumping out of this particular airframe?

I don't know how often parachutists get snagged but it does happen.

. . .
The preventative measures recommended include: re-evaluating current hung-up jumper detection and associated hung-up parachutist retrieval procedures; amending publications to document aircraft equipment stowage location; securing ancillary equipment when configuring the CC130J aircraft for paratrooper operations; and addressing the Airworthiness Program with respect to parachute operations across the CAF.

And Canada is not the only country concerned.

. . . "Generally, there are a handful of towed jumpers per year, which can be potentially dangerous situations," said Samuel Corner, project manager for the U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command Soldier Center Aerial Delivery Directorate.

Until recently, there were two ways to help a towed jumper, which occurs when the static line attached to the aircraft anchor cable becomes tangled with the jumper and/or the equipment and the parachute is not released -- cut the jumper's static line so the Soldier can deploy his or her reserve parachute or pull the Soldier back into the aircraft. Both scenarios are dangerous because the Soldier is dragged alongside or behind the aircraft until he is either released or pulled into the aircraft.

March 2017, in an effort to eliminate the possibility of a towed jumper situation, the Aerial Delivery Directorate's Airdrop Technology team submitted a project proposal to the U.S. Army Foreign Comparative Testing Program, which is embedded in RDECOM's Global Technology Office, as part of their annual call for proposals. The proposal was selected, enabling the Airdrop Technology Team to purchase ten Hung Up Parachutist Release Assemblies, or HUPRA, from the United Kingdom company, IrvinGQ (formally Airborne Systems Europe) for tests and evaluation.

The HUPRA, which includes an emergency parachute that is released once the Jumpmaster cuts the aircraft anchor line cable, is manufactured by IrvinGQ in the UK. The HUPRA is used by the UK as well as other nations on C-130 and other military aircraft.

By purchasing the system from the UK, the Army saved approximately $500,000 in non-recurring engineering costs and additional costs to develop, integrate and validate a new recovery system.

"Testing, which includes aircraft time and manpower to design validation tests, is very expensive," Corner said. "We built on efforts of the UK by using their lessons learned to accelerate our process and decrease our costs."

The tests, which were conducted at Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona, used mannequins that "jumped" out from the aircraft's side doors and ramp. The testing was conducted on C-130 aircraft and divided into seven phases; minor changes were made to the system after the first phase was completed.

Before a Soldier jumps out of an aircraft, a Jumpmaster conducts a personnel inspection of the Soldier's attaching, jumping and releasing equipment. Jumpmasters must complete a rigorous training program before they manage airborne jump operations.

. . .
 
Is this something done with every 'egress-type aircraft', or a reflection of something mentioned a while back that there might be a problem with jumping out of this particular airframe?
It's a flight safety and jumper safety requirement for static line parachuting. The parachutist can't do anything about it if they get hung up, and normally are now beyond the DZ so they need to be brought back in by a winch-like system.

On my BPara, flight safety changed the rules just before J Stage by limiting the full up jumper weight allowed to exit the Herc due to a weakness in this retrieval system. Forced half the course into a Skyvan to do their equipment jumps (its system could handle full rated weight of the parachute) while the rest of us skinny folks got to stay in the Herc.
 
Back
Top