What can replace the Twin Otter?

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I know people are going to say "Well who's gonna fly them? We don't have enough pilots as it is!"

Maybe we contract some pilots at first?

Maybe we expand our training Cadre to include some additional slots?

Maybe we let Air Reserve pilots fly them?

Who knows, don't care... planes are useless without pilots but pilots aren't all that useful without planes.

At least this way half the problem gets solved.

I have flown into Nunavik a few times with both Air Inuit and Air Creebec. There are tons of bush pilots who fly Otters and Twin Otters up there. I am sure it's the same in Nunavut and the Territories.

To fly the type of flying we do in the Arctic with those T.O., do we really need fully trained military personnel?

How about minimal military indoctrination and use some of those bush pilots in an organized "Air Ranger" patrol? They already know the place and the challenges better than us from the South ever will.

 

[OldSolduer]

Yup. Spent a few years in N/W Ontario around an array of DeHaviland equipment, Otter, Beaver, turbo Beaver, Twin Otter (plus an assortment of Cessnas, Beech 18s, Norsemans, etc.) on floats and wheel/skis. I was always amazed at what the DH equipment could do

That’s a cool snowmobile. Those engines have to be freakin powerful

 

[childs56]

They could always buy new Twin Otters or buy a fleet of modern Buffaloes, use it as a marketing tool to sell Internationally. Kick start Canadian defence industries again..

 

[Colin Parkinson]

They could always buy new Twin Otters or buy a fleet of modern Buffaloes, use it as a marketing tool to sell Internationally. Kick start Canadian defence industries again..

There is no modern Buf or Caribou out there at the moment. There is the new Twin Otter however. In a perfect world I would also stand up a squadron of 415's for patrol and SAR in the North. If the ice keeps receding up North, they could patrol up there in the summer months and assist some of the communities that don't have runways. That's dreaming in technicolor however.

 

[foresterab]

There is no modern Buf or Caribou out there at the moment. There is the new Twin Otter however. In a perfect world I would also stand up a squadron of 415's for patrol and SAR in the North. If the ice keeps receding up North, they could patrol up there in the summer months and assist some of the communities that don't have runways. That's dreaming in technicolor however.

I like the -415s' and the proposed new CL-515 looks great...but they are also a limited tool. Relatively slow and have limited cargo capacity for many tasks. I do view them as an excellent aid for the Coast Guard due to the ability to land on open water but it also requires somewhat flat chop and only certain water bodies fit....in the absence of water you're back to paved strips.

Personally my preference would be to double? triple the number of C-130 airframes in use. They're overkill for alot of SAR taskings but have significantly more cargo/passenger capacity, proven rough strip/ski options and allow for a large, relatively rare logistical capacity that enables either the CAF or allied forces to be more effective.

Want civillian support for wildfires? Add a MAFFS module and it's a water bomber. Earthquake evacuation situation...send in the fleet. Crash deployment to Europe for the CAF...load up as much ammo as possible and get heading over while troops go on civilian jets.

Unfortunately, especially in the north, it is very evident that a range of aircraft needs exist based around logistical hubs/end destinations/volumes/cargo form and it's been a struggle to find the perfect mix from the first flights in many of those areas.

foresterab

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Hey this is my dream, get your own magic carpet buddy

 

[YZT580]

I like the -415s' and the proposed new CL-515 looks great...but they are also a limited tool. Relatively slow and have limited cargo capacity for many tasks. I do view them as an excellent aid for the Coast Guard due to the ability to land on open water but it also requires somewhat flat chop and only certain water bodies fit....in the absence of water you're back to paved strips.

Personally my preference would be to double? triple the number of C-130 airframes in use. They're overkill for alot of SAR taskings but have significantly more cargo/passenger capacity, proven rough strip/ski options and allow for a large, relatively rare logistical capacity that enables either the CAF or allied forces to be more effective.

Want civillian support for wildfires? Add a MAFFS module and it's a water bomber. Earthquake evacuation situation...send in the fleet. Crash deployment to Europe for the CAF...load up as much ammo as possible and get heading over while troops go on civilian jets.

Unfortunately, especially in the north, it is very evident that a range of aircraft needs exist based around logistical hubs/end destinations/volumes/cargo form and it's been a struggle to find the perfect mix from the first flights in many of those areas.

foresterab

which summarizes why the DC3 and C46 are still in use. For all of our technological improvements we have not really been able to improve on them very much. Good on gravel and ice, reasonable payload, rugged airframe but getting harder and harder to find parts. Perhaps Viking could resurrect another airframe (DHC7) upgrade to a twin and install a rear door. Has good stol capabilities, pressurized and reasonable flight legs though I still think that a re-vitalized Buffalo would solve a lot of our northern problems and fit nicely just below the herc.

 

[Spencer100]

which summarizes why the DC3 and C46 are still in use. For all of our technological improvements we have not really been able to improve on them very much. Good on gravel and ice, reasonable payload, rugged airframe but getting harder and harder to find parts. Perhaps Viking could resurrect another airframe (DHC7) upgrade to a twin and install a rear door. Has good stol capabilities, pressurized and reasonable flight legs though I still think that a re-vitalized Buffalo would solve a lot of our northern problems and fit nicely just below the herc.

DHC with have enough on their plate just opening the new plant in Alberta. Getting the Twin Otter production going etc. Managing the certs and spares for DHC 1-8, CL waterbombers and the Shorts 330 and Sherpa will keep them busy. Just the Dash 8 in-fleet management will be a big lift. The Toronto plant gone with it the employees and management with the decades of knowledge. I would think the Dash-8 fleet management program will be keeping them going.

 

[foresterab]

Hey this is my dream, get your own magic carpet buddy

Ha ha...keep up the dreams man . I love -415's...especially when I'm on the fireline and they're dropping nearby as it means I'm safe and I will hopefully have less work to do.

I know the boreal but I sure don't know the coastal stuff you used to deal with so fire away if I ever stray. Somewhere between us is the dream we all want for the CAF. I like what Thailand/Malaysia use the -215's for SAR for as an example or Japan with the HU-16's (I think that's the airframe) for dealing with emergency transport.

Now to return to those dreams of LottoMax and retirement...

 

[Spencer100]

They could always buy new Twin Otters or buy a fleet of modern Buffaloes, use it as a marketing tool to sell Internationally. Kick start Canadian defence industries again..

I think they should buy new Twin Otters. But think they are hamstrung by the procurement rules. They go out with a single source contract for new planes.....here come the lawsuits. There are international competitors with planes that would in theory comply to a RFQ. The RFQ written too tight more lawsuits (ei the FWSAR)
So then use the National Defence exemption....we don't do that much on large fleets (I don't remember one) And the twin otter is not really a weapon. Plus its mean a Political member has to defend the purchase....no Pol is going to that. Can't use the Emergency cause because there is really not one.

So it is so much easier to go Ship of Theseus way.

Perfect example is the LAV-3 to LAV-6. That thing was a master stoke of a contract. Done quietly and not much fuss. It was sold as almost just a reset of the vehicle after hard use in Afghanistan. How much of the original is still on the thing? The gun?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Got to watch the Martin Mars drop water on a fire near us and we were on a rise, that was deeply awesome. Having that baby thunder over you is a sight to behold.

 

[childs56]

There is no modern Buf or Caribou out there at the moment. There is the new Twin Otter however. In a perfect world I would also stand up a squadron of 415's for patrol and SAR in the North. If the ice keeps receding up North, they could patrol up there in the summer months and assist some of the communities that don't have runways. That's dreaming in technicolor however.

De Havilland said they can tool up for a upgraded Buff if there is interest, I think would be a good program. Honestly I can see them moving towards a foreign market as they have with their Water Bombers. Canada does not seem interested in anything successful here unless it is built in Quebec or lower Ontario.
Time will tell as to what happens. I think if De Havilland keeps building on their program we may see some larger lift Aircraft coming from them along with a drone program in the near future.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I certainly hope De Havilland continue to be successful and if they can resurrect the Buff and sell it, then I will be very happy.

 

[foresterab]

There is a still a market out there for long range, fuel efficient cargo haulers that can handle rough conditions/ski's. I think of Kenn Borek Air who operate BT-47's (turbine engined DC-3/C-47's) and are a major supplier to Antartica expeditions. Buffalo Airways tends to use older airframes but even the regional airlines in Canada offering flights on Dash-8's or Fokker's have a role.

Is the Buffalo Version 2 the solution? Maybe especially as the 1960's airframes start to get retired out and/or expectations change. The issue is getting enough of a book order to justify the design and tooling costs to keep a line going without tipping into the next tier of transports (C-130/ Boeing 737 etc.) which is a tougher sweet spot to hit these days.

 

[lenaitch]

There is no modern Buf or Caribou out there at the moment. There is the new Twin Otter however. In a perfect world I would also stand up a squadron of 415's for patrol and SAR in the North. If the ice keeps receding up North, they could patrol up there in the summer months and assist some of the communities that don't have runways. That's dreaming in technicolor however.

Heck, don't even need landing gear:

I don't think the Buffalo/Caribou ever had skiis, if that it important.

 

[daftandbarmy]

They could always buy new Twin Otters or buy a fleet of modern Buffaloes, use it as a marketing tool to sell Internationally. Kick start Canadian defence industries again..

There is a still a market out there for long range, fuel efficient cargo haulers that can handle rough conditions/ski's. I think of Kenn Borek Air who operate BT-47's (turbine engined DC-3/C-47's) and are a major supplier to Antartica expeditions. Buffalo Airways tends to use older airframes but even the regional airlines in Canada offering flights on Dash-8's or Fokker's have a role.

Is the Buffalo Version 2 the solution? Maybe especially as the 1960's airframes start to get retired out and/or expectations change. The issue is getting enough of a book order to justify the design and tooling costs to keep a line going without tipping into the next tier of transports (C-130/ Boeing 737 etc.) which is a tougher sweet spot to hit these days.

Viking Air owns the type certificate...

DHC-5 Buffalo​

With nearly twice the payload as the DHC-4 Caribou and improved STOL capabilities, the DHC-5 Buffalo was designed to be a tactical transport aircraft for militaries worldwide. Many Buffalo would also later be used for search-and-rescue operations by the Canadian Air Force.

Viking owns the Type Certificate for the DHC-5 Buffalo and provides parts and support services to the fleet worldwide. If you would like more information on Viking's support for this aircraft, please visit our Customer Support page for details.

De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited

Since 1928, De Havilland Canada has been building utility-built aircraft for customers here at home, and around the world.

www.vikingair.com

 

[Spencer100]

There is a still a market out there for long range, fuel efficient cargo haulers that can handle rough conditions/ski's. I think of Kenn Borek Air who operate BT-47's (turbine engined DC-3/C-47's) and are a major supplier to Antartica expeditions. Buffalo Airways tends to use older airframes but even the regional airlines in Canada offering flights on Dash-8's or Fokker's have a role.

Is the Buffalo Version 2 the solution? Maybe especially as the 1960's airframes start to get retired out and/or expectations change. The issue is getting enough of a book order to justify the design and tooling costs to keep a line going without tipping into the next tier of transports (C-130/ Boeing 737 etc.) which is a tougher sweet spot to hit these days.

First it all depends on Sherry Brydson and what she wants to do.

Like I said before the New DHC will have its hands full for company in the short term.

I don't think they have the engineering to put a "new" Buffalo in production even with just new avionics and new spec parts and systems. Making a cabin pressurized is a little more than putting a gasket around the doors and a pressure pump I would say is beyond them right now.

Plus I would doubt the market would make a business case for it at this time. The Leonardo C27J and the Airbus C295 have the current demand and they are not selling great. And if just for the RCAF they will cost more than a F35 per copy.

 

[YZT580]

There is a still a market out there for long range, fuel efficient cargo haulers that can handle rough conditions/ski's. I think of Kenn Borek Air who operate BT-47's (turbine engined DC-3/C-47's) and are a major supplier to Antartica expeditions. Buffalo Airways tends to use older airframes but even the regional airlines in Canada offering flights on Dash-8's or Fokker's have a role.

Is the Buffalo Version 2 the solution? Maybe especially as the 1960's airframes start to get retired out and/or expectations change. The issue is getting enough of a book order to justify the design and tooling costs to keep a line going without tipping into the next tier of transports (C-130/ Boeing 737 etc.) which is a tougher sweet spot to hit these days.

Columbia is still operating DC3 turbos for their special forces i.e. drug squads

 

[YZT580]

Heck, don't even need landing gear:

I don't think the Buffalo/Caribou ever had skiis, if that it important.

I think they tried the Buffalo with an augmented wing, jets, and some type of float system. It was awesome to watch but very limited payload

 

[Prairie canuck]

A mixed fleet of new built Twin Otters and Q200s. (you tell me how many)
Both are in production (Q400 line would have to switch to Q200s but they are basically the same plane) no need to build a whole new DHC5 assembly line, certificates etc etc for a plane that may only have the GoC as a very limited customer. Although, the ramp may draw more interest from private cargo haulers.