Air patrols cancelled

[Slim]

Air patrols cancelled

PLANE SHORTAGE ENDS ANTI-TERROR MISSION EARLY

By STEPHANIE RUBEC, OTTAWA BUREAU

A SHORTAGE of planes has forced the Canadian military to cut an anti-terrorism air surveillance mission down to two months. Two Aurora maritime patrol aircraft and their crew of 65 will pull out of Operation SIRIUS, the air force's contribution to the war on terrorism, by Christmas -- they deployed only last month.

Lieut-Col. Yvan Boilard, Commander of the Canadian contingent stationed in Sigonella, Italy, said the planes' age and the need for upgrades has limited Canada's ability to answer NATO's calls for air surveillance.

CREWS TAKE BREATHER

"And as a result of the aircraft being modernized in Canada, the length of our deployment was basically dictated by the fact that the aircraft will be required to go into the shop," Boilard said in a teleconference call from Italy.

Boilard said that means Aurora crews are going "to take a breather" from deployments until enough planes have been upgraded.

"Once the aircraft is fully modernized, which is an ongoing project at this stage, I would anticipate the Aurora fleet will be deployed probably more readily and for longer periods of time," he said.

The army is in the midst of an 18-month break from major missions abroad, while the navy has just ended its respite. The majority of military commitments are usually six months, but Canada decided last month to cut the deployment of the two Auroras and their crews down to two months.

PLANES ARE GETTING OLD

"When we consider all of the things that we can do, we also have to consider the fact that the aircraft is getting old and it needs to be modernized," Boilard said.

The only Auroras currently working abroad are the two in Italy. The remaining 16 long-range patrol planes are patrolling Canada's coastlines unless they're grounded for maintenance.

Canada purchased its 18 Auroras in 1980.

They are able to fly for 9,000 km or 12 hours before they need to refuel, making them an ideal fit for a Mediterranean mission, Boilard said.

"And, indeed, it's one of the best (planes) in the world to do this," he said, adding Canada can take credit for significantly cutting back on illegal immigration, tracking suspected terrorists and keeping the Mediterranean safe.

"These people are able to move around fairly well undetected at least in the past," he said. "And we are doing our best to make sure that we detect them."

UPGRADES IN STAGES

Defence spokesman Tamara Murphy said the military is modernizing the Aurora fleet in stages to ensure some planes can still patrol Canadian coasts. To date, 16 of 23 upgrade contracts have been tendered.

 

[Franko]

Doesn't surprise me at all. What do you expect after years of neglect?

Regards

 

[Bograt]

Franco,

The CP-140 is probably one of the more capable P-3 platforms used in the world today. The upgrades mentioned in this article are part of their "modernization program." Although a 20+ year airframe, the avionics,  acoustics and reconnaissance suits will provide us with a "very" capable piece of kit for the next 15-20 years.

 

[RDA]

What are the advantages of using manned planes in air patrols rather than unmanned crafts?

 

[Bograt]

Hmmm..

Good question. I am about to speak out of my butt, so please be kind with your response.

I do not think we have the capability now to do the things with UAVs that are required in maritime surveillance. Given the environment and needs of the task, UAVs currently do not have what is required.

The CP-140s are evolving from their traditional ASW role to a coastal recon platform. There are plans in place to transform the capabilities of the CP-140s into coastal JSTARs (for lack of a better analogy). This would compliment their current ASW duties. I envision Auroras being as significant in the maritime theater as JSTARS and AWACS are in theirs.

Cheers,

 

[Bograt]

This is what happens when you privatize coastal patrol.


http://stjohns.cbc.ca/regionalnews/caches/nf-aerial-birds-20041201.html
Aerial surveillance takes a dive
WebPosted Dec 1 2004 06:29 AM NST

ST. JOHN'S  â ”  The number of aerial surveillance flights which try to identify the tankers and cargo ships that illegally dump their bilges at sea has been cut drastically.

Until a year ago, the Coast Guard was responsible for offshore monitoring. It contracted the work to Provincial Airlines.

 
Bob O'Brien

However, the Coast Guard lost responsibility for marine pollution investigations to Transport Canada.

That department now uses aircraft out of Moncton to do all the aerial surveillance off Newfoundland.

During the last two weeks â “ when more than 165,000 litres of oil spilled at the Terra Nova field, and hundreds of seabirds have been washing up on the southern Avalon Peninsula with dumped bilges as the key suspect â “ only three surveillance flights have occurred.

 
Critics say there are too few surveillance flights over shipping lanes

"We're really let down here as a province and a people," says Bob O'Brien, a member of a committee that advises Ottawa on oil pollution.

Three years ago, O'Brien's committee recommended that surveillance be increased. He says it's distressing to see the opposite now happening.

'Last straw'

"Surveillance is like the last straw," he says.

"We need surveillance here. We have the evidence that the deliberate discharge is happening routinely."

The seabirds now being recovered along the southern Avalon represent a fraction of the seabirds killed by pollution.

However, charges against dumpers are rare, and scientists have been stumped trying to prevent further damage.

"This annual loss of 300,000 birds a year is a serious concern for us," says Bruce Turner of the Canadian Wildlife Service.

"If the incidents are not being observed, if they're not being prosecuted, then presumably they will continue and likely with increased frequency," Turner says.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

This is pretty much what happens when the Govt. has privatized anything, profit then becomes more important than the actual project.
Sad to think that this can be done and no one is held accountable.  Surely the clean-up costs will be more than any money saved or even better, hold the shipping company responsible in court.

 

[RDA]

I do not think we have the capability now to do the things with UAVs that are required in maritime surveillance. Given the environment and needs of the task, UAVs currently do not have what is required.

The CF may not have the right UAVs for maritime surveillance, but I assure you that UAVs with the required capabilities do exist.

The CP-140s are evolving from their traditional ASW role to a coastal recon platform. There are plans in place to transform the capabilities of the CP-140s into coastal JSTARs (for lack of a better analogy). This would compliment their current ASW duties. I envision Auroras being as significant in the maritime theater as JSTARS and AWACS are in theirs.

That would be great!!!   I'm a civy and even I know the CF could use some improvement in the ISTAR side of things.

Well, I won't argue that using the Auroras to deliver maritime and coastal surveillance is a bad idea in the short run, but what are we going to do when the Auroras become old and grey?   Are there compelling reasons to keep using manned crafts versus UAVs and/or satellites, or is there a "that's the way we've always done it" mentality holding us back from considering other means of delivering these capabilities?   (I don't know if satelites are a viable option, but my butt wanted me to mention them anyways.)

Does anybody know how manned delivery compares with unmanned delivery from an economic standpoint?

 

[Zoomie]

Excellent points by Bograt!

During my time in Maritime Patrol flying (very limited but eye-opening) I saw exactly what is involved with their job.

UAV's are very much capable of performing the tasks of a CP-140 - except that they lack the ability to be flexible.  An operator sitting hundreds of miles away can never quite appreciate the situation that his/her aircraft is involved in.  A pre-programmed task of surveillance is a pretty straight-forward mission - but as soon as you combine that with an immediate requirement for SAR response - the UAV loses.  Our CP-140's routinely carry SKAD's (Survival Kit Air Droppable) and have the ability to conduct searches for missing vessels/personnel (which the UAV does not).

Another thing that our Aurora's have over a UAV is their "Fear Factor"...  Let me explain.

When you are sailing at sea - 700 nm from anywhere and a 100,000 pound aircraft with four spinning propellers buzzes your ship at 300 feet AGL - you know that you have been seen and reported!  A UAV is relatively invisible and never seen - it would be the equivalent of never seeing a police vehicle while on the Highway or driving in the city. 

Visibility and notoriety is key to patrolling our borders.  The ships that are out there know we are around -but never know when we are looking for them as we do not fly on a schedule.  Their speed averages between 10-30 knots - we fly between 200 - 300 knots - our RADAR can paint them from over their horizon - they cannot escape us and do not see us until we are overhead their position.

I am sure that UAVs and Satellites can effectively "watch" our coasts - the CP-140 actively defends our coast!

 

[DJL]

It's a shame that the Trackers were never replaced, they sure would have reduced the workload on the Auroras............

 

[Kirkhill]

I am sure that UAVs and Satellites can effectively "watch" our coasts - the CP-140 actively defends our coast!

Sounds like an argument for a mixed Squadron or Wing to me.

 

[a_majoor]

Some other alternatives are the teathered blimps the US uses to do surveillance over the southern approaches to the US. The blimp is like a staring eye, it alerts the powers that be to dispatch a plane to prosecute the target. A large UAV like "Global Hawk" can do the same, only actively patrolling an area. In an ideal world, the information developed by unmanned platforms, satellite constellations etc. is followed up by an aircraft intercept, or vectoring a nearby warship.

There is no reason privatization cannot work, the contract process has to be very detailed, and compliance monitored by the purchasing agency. If companies like FEDEX which work for a profit can outperform an allegedly not for profit Government agency like the Post office, then perhaps "our guys" are unable to deal with the private sector effectively due to extraneous influences (we have to get our ads through what company...?)

 

[Storm]

It's a shame that the Trackers were never replaced, they sure would have reduced the workload on the Auroras............

I like the idea of getting a few dash 8's (or "Q series" rather :) and getting some reserve flights set up with comercial pilots to watch coastal waters. I'm pretty sure there are a sufficient number of civilian pilots who would jump at the chance to switch up their regular point to point flying routine, and a number would already be very familiar with the aircraft. This could augment the Aurora surface surveilance duties nicely as far as I can make out.

The one big barrier I suppose would be that if it was done under military rules, the pilot qualification (CF wings standard training) would be a time issue as it currently stands for reserve pilots. Realistically though these flights could be coast guard, MOT, or just about anything else since they wouldn't be doing the combat/ASW thing, so there shouldn't be too much problem with pulling someone who's civilian qualified on type and getting them checked out through operational training (especially if MOT is in charge, as they've already declared that they're fit to fly).

 

[RDA]

There is no reason privatization cannot work, the contract process has to be very detailed, and compliance monitored by the purchasing agency. If companies like FEDEX which work for a profit can outperform an allegedly not for profit Government agency like the Post office, then perhaps "our guys" are unable to deal with the private sector effectively due to extraneous influences (we have to get our ads through what company...?)

Keep in mind that FEDEX must compete to be profitable.   I imagine FEDEX would not be as efficient if they had a monopoly.   Maybe the government should give out multiple short-term contrats, and make it explicitly clear that only the best performers will have their contract renewed.

 

[Sam69]

I am sure that UAVs and Satellites can effectively "watch" our coasts - the CP-140 actively defends our coast!

Sounds like an argument for a mixed Squadron or Wing to me.

I believe that this will in fact be the long term solution. UAVs will do much of the mundane coastal and arctic surveillance with the AIMP CP-140 tasked to perform the more complex missions and execute the defence role.

Sam

 

[Bograt]

Another thing that our Aurora's have over a UAV is their "Fear Factor"...   Let me explain.

When you are sailing at sea - 700 nm from anywhere and a 100,000 pound aircraft with four spinning propellers buzzes your ship at 300 feet AGL - you know that you have been seen and reported!   A UAV is relatively invisible and never seen - it would be the equivalent of never seeing a police vehicle while on the Highway or driving in the city.  

I have a funny story. Its not mine, but I'll share it.

My Father used to fly Argus and Auroras. He told me of one occasion in the late seventies where they were "curious" about a Soviet "fishing trawler" that was shadowing a one of our warships. They found the boat and flew closer for a better look. They approached with full flaps and reduced throttle. They were about 75-100 feet and flew directly over the ship. When they were about to pass over the ship, they applied full throttle. Unfortunately, the wash from the engines broke off most of the antennas and other communication poles from the ship. Thankfully, the fishing crew never never filed a complaint with Canadian authorities. It was a surprise because they were obviously very upset when the Argus made her second pass to say good bye.
;D