CF seeking 3 or 4 manned fixed-wing ISR planes

[tomahawk6]

The Army has its own fleet of ISR aircraft. No need to rely on the USAF for support.

https://www.army.mil/article/137612/army_fixed_wing_aircraft

https://www.janes.com/article/85670/us-army-seeks-high-altitude-isr-aircraft

Bombardier Global 6000 seems to be a potential winner.

 

[Good2Golf]

The Army has its own fleet of ISR aircraft. No need to rely on the USAF for support.

Was thinking more the difference between the EMARSS and Java Man MC-12 variants, not US DoD end user.  That said, 6000 for US Army would be a sweet rig. :nod:

 

[Zoomie]

To be clear, I wasn't suggesting they would or they should; only pointing out that it will be the same airframe (though likely employed somewhat differently...)

Ack - the decision makers involved in this project had a very “fling-wing ” influence and thus made their calls as their experience deemed it.  Not a very attractive platform or mission from the AM community, it will have its own challenges WRT manning IMHO.

 

[Good2Golf]

Ack - the decision makers involved in this project had a very “fling-wing ” influence and thus made their calls as their experience deemed it.  Not a very attractive platform or mission from the AM community, it will have its own challenges WRT manning IMHO.

Non-hermetically shielded lav...  :nod:

 

[Eye In The Sky]

...or a detachment of 427.  It depends on whether the RCAF wants to chop another squadron OPCOM to CANSOF.

Regards
G2G

I'm not 100% plugged in on this one, but I'd put 5 bucks on a flight that falls under 427 SOAS.  Not that weird of an idea, really.  413 has seized and rotary wing airframes, 442, etc.  427 already lives/breathes SOF.  Makes sense to me...

 

[SupersonicMax]

Well, it's a start.  Most likely, 434 Squadron will get the aircraft.

434 has exactly 0 aircraft on its UE and fall under the RCAF.  Why would they maintain and operate a SOF aircraft, and have to set up the overhead a flying squadron has (Int, Ops, Standards, Training, Plans)?

 

[Gorgo]

Reason why I suggested 434 OE&T Squadron is that it responds to the CF Aerospace Warfare Centre.  414 EWS Squadron also falls under the CFAWC, so it made sense to me that a new and unique combat ability would go to this group and not say 427 SOA Squadron.

Or even better, reform 428 "Ghost" Squadron as a separate ISR unit.  Given it hasn't been seen on the RCAF ORBAT for quite some time...

 

[SupersonicMax]

Providing ISR is well outside the scope of an OT&E Squadron...

 

[dimsum]

Or even better, reform 428 "Ghost" Squadron as a separate ISR unit.  Given it hasn't been seen on the RCAF ORBAT for quite some time...

...and fold the RPAS into it as well when it's stood up.  Manned and Unmanned ISR/strike platforms together in one unit 

 

[dapaterson]

...and fold the RPAS into it as well when it's stood up.  Manned and Unmanned ISR/strike platforms together in one unit 

What, we're gonna stick the Auroras in there as well?  :nana:

 

[Zoomie]

What, we're gonna stick the Auroras in there as well?  :nana:

Plus the CC-295, since CJOC has already declared it as an ISR asset.

 

[Good2Golf]

Plus the CC-295, since CJOC has already declared it as an ISR asset.

They probably have the 147F on that list as well, what with both the 295 and the 147 (and 146) working with that crazy new (to 1990s) digital imaging technology. :nod: