armrdsoul77
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 477
- Points
- 930
Visiting Comox this week and was happy to see 2 SAR Techs jump out the back of a Kingfisher at 2500ft and parachute down to the sports field. Call sign Bluenose. Testing must be progressing.
armrdsoul77
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 477
- Points
- 930
Footage from the final day of SAREX 24, held at CFB Comox from September 9-13, 2024. Various aircraft from the USCG, RCAF and US Navy participated.
Good thing they didn't use the side doors....
Almost there?
canadiandefencereview.com
CC-295 Kingfisher Proves SAR Capabilities in Operational Testing
CC-295 Kingfisher completes rescue phase of its Operational Test and Evaluation Program, proving Search and Rescue (SAR) capabilities.
canadiandefencereview.com
- Reaction score
- 17,705
- Points
- 1,010
I guess if you keep moving where “there” is- sure.
- Reaction score
- 22,364
- Points
- 1,260
Is it really that bad? I spoke to one of the test and eval pilots at Cansec a few years ago, and his take was that is was just "different", and people had to get used to that fact. His take was that it was better in "almost" every way than the Buffalo. I realize that's the pilot's perspective, and not that of the SAR Tech community, but is this really the POS that people are making it out to be?
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 12,386
- Points
- 1,160
I think for the pilot the Kingfisher and the C27J would both be better in every way from the Buff. But from a behind the cockpit, the C27J is very likely superior in every way over the Kingfisher.
- Reaction score
- 17,705
- Points
- 1,010
No- just noting “there” is different from “the way we used to do it”.
I never understood why Canada did not take the Opportunity to real time test both aircraft by posting staff in USCG units. Real life missions and the tweaks and problems that come with that. The Puzzle palace seems to had too much influence as opposed to common sense.
- Reaction score
- 17,705
- Points
- 1,010
You must be new, here…
- Reaction score
- 363
- Points
- 880
Lab pilots hated the Cormorant. They complained about it almost as much as Herc pilots are complaining about the Kingfisher. Fast forward 25 years and the Corm is an accepted SAR machine. It’s all a matter of perspective. The J-Herc can’t home an ELT and for the first 10 years of its life was unable to fly north of 65. The H Herc has the distinct honour of having the worst serviceability rate in the RCAF.
During the latest SAREX, the Kingfisher participated and found the target within 11 mins, no other search platform came even close to them. That includes the USCG C-27J that came up from California to participate.
Nobody who flies on the -295 has any real issues with the platform. The loudest voices are those who have no real exposure.
During the latest SAREX, the Kingfisher participated and found the target within 11 mins, no other search platform came even close to them. That includes the USCG C-27J that came up from California to participate.
Nobody who flies on the -295 has any real issues with the platform. The loudest voices are those who have no real exposure.
Fundamentally the problem is that people think the FWSAR replacement was supposed to replace the Buff. It wasn't. There was only one region of the country that used the Buff. The rest of the country used the Herc. And the Kingfisher is terrible compared to the Herc across multiple dimensions from payload-range at cruise to cabin height and space to separation aerodynamics for the human payloads they have to deliver.
It's not really the pilots that have to worry that much though. If they Bingo on a search they are leaving. The aircraft's specs guarantee that the outer regions of our AOR won't be well served. I also worry about the safety of our SAR Techs with this airplane.
This is the real plus point for this platform. The one area where the project team was really given leeway to write good specs was on sensors. And we wrote in specs that make it as as any other ISR platform. The intent was to compensate for the reduced endurance forced on us with better sensors that cut search time as much as possible. But just imagine what that same sensor suite could do on a more capable airframe.
- Reaction score
- 1,757
- Points
- 1,140
To be fair, there were a lot of airworthiness, safety and requirements issues, even not too long ago. Having been involved with FWSAR since 2019, the project wasn’t well managed, at least initially.
- Reaction score
- 28,537
- Points
- 1,090
At least it's better than TCR...
Who said we didn't? Not with official evals. But we had personnel posted to the USCG who flew both aircraft on exchange. Their views actually influenced some of the spec writing (most notably the sensor suite). We also had the USCG actually bring up the aircraft so our crews could get a look, talk to their crews and provide feedback.
Last edited by a moderator:
Exactly. I fear the guys flying it now don't even know what they are missing. Imagine if that CARP functionality worked as advertised in IFR.
It can be an acceptable platform while still being a disappointment both on original goals and on what was contracted for.
- Reaction score
- 22,785
- Points
- 1,360
They say, “no matter where you go, ‘there’ you are…”
Alena didn’t do itself or the C27J any favors when it told Canada it *wouldn’t support the C27 if Canada bought the used units from the USCG. #owngoal
I mean, it’s not like the project was ever named BuRP…
Sacrilege! How could a multispectral EOIR sensor be more effective at finding thermally emissive targets at long range than biological imaging units of spotters and SAR techs?
Dude, you win the internet, at least for the first half of the day.
Last edited:
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 12,386
- Points
- 1,160
FTFY
But you are right, that attitude likley played a part in the selection. As I said before, I believe we selected the right company, but the wrong aircraft.
