Domestic and Arctic Mobility Enhancement Project

[GK .Dundas]

I get the distinct impression that the only people who ever discussed this sort of thing were people like us , the press occasionally.
But by and and large both Air Canada and the Government were almost desperately trying to avoid that conversation.
I suspect that had the balloon gone up assuming everybody in Ottawa hadn't been reduced to a catatonic state by the shock of reality intruding on their world.
Their would have been a series of orders in council. Basically commissioning enmasse' every commerical aircrew in the country. Not to mention ground crews.
A very selective form of conscription.
Part of the problem is that mobilization is dirty word. And so is war. And we tend to avoid discussing it as a result.

 

[captloadie]

Honestly the CAF needs more C-130 anyway, so getting 30 or so to spread out on Northern Airfields would be a major boost.

Honestly if I was king, I’d make a Crown Corp to have a Northern Airline - that doubles as Air Reserve, with Hooks and Herc’s spread around the North. “Double Double Airlines”

We can't even crew the fleets we have now, and the knitting has already started for just the capabilities coming on board. Nor will we ever have enough unless we dramatically change the way we recruit and employ personnel.

 

[KevinB]

We can't even crew the fleets we have now, and the knitting has already started for just the capabilities coming on board. Nor will we ever have enough unless we dramatically change the way we recruit and employ personnel.

Or maybe just have an effective strategy for training the pilots. How many have been sitting for how long?

 

[Kirkhill]

We can't even crew the fleets we have now, and the knitting has already started for just the capabilities coming on board. Nor will we ever have enough unless we dramatically change the way we recruit and employ personnel.

Private pilot licenses aeroplane in Canada ca 2018 - 22,132
Commercial pilot licenses aeroplane in Canada ca 2018 - 7,470
Airline transport pilot licenses aeroplane in Canada ca 2018 - 12,834

Private pilot licenses helicopter in Canada ca 2018 - 709
Commercial pilot licenses helicopter in Canada ca 2018 - 2,745
Airline transport pilot licenses helicopter in Canada ca 2018 - 911

Can't we convert some portion of those flyers to government contracts on government aircraft occasionally?

Young pilots wanting to build up their hours?

 

[lenaitch]

With only a couple of hundred thousand people north of sixty how many pilots are necessary? A few hundred sounds like a few squadrons worth to me. And so what if they are only there temporarily? The bigger issue, as far as I am concerned is that they can be organized and put on the government payroll when necessary.

It sounds like you're arguing for an aviation version of the Royal Fleet Auxiliary or the US Military Sealift Command rather than an active Reserve. I'm not familiar with arctic pilots but worked quite a bit with the commercial aviation industry in northern Ontario, became friends with a couple. I could be wrong but I'm not sure how many would be interested in the non-flying aspects of being a member of a Reserve unit. In more than a few cases, there were a number I'm not sure you would want.

 

[Dana381]

Or maybe just have an effective strategy for training the pilots. How many have been sitting for how long?

When it takes two years just to approve someone to join the CAF I can't imagine how Long it takes to get them trained as pilots. Hell I bet some finish training just in time to retire.

 

[Kirkhill]

De Haviland has announced a new manufacturing complex to be built east of Calgary. Facility to have the ability to produce aircraft, spare parts, and train staff. Once completed in 2025 would employ 1500 staff. This in in addition to the 1000 staff already in calgary. Giving the company a significant presence in western Canada.

Varcoe: De Havilland to build massive aircraft manufacturing complex with corporate offices east of Calgary

De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Ltd. will today unveil ambitious plans to build a major manufacturing complex and aerodrome east of Calgary

calgaryherald.com

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.

A Twin-Otter / Air Ranger option?

De Havilland Eyes Restarting Production Of Short’s Cargo Sherpa | Aviation Week Network

De Havilland Aircraft of Canada is reviewing the potential market for a modernized version of the Short Sherpa twin-turboprop cargo aircraft, last produced in 1990.

aviationweek.com

The Sherpa's cabin is 6.5 ft (1.98 m) wide, 6.5 ft (1.98 m) high and 29 ft (8.84 m) long.[1] It offers a cargo volume of 1,230 cu ft (34.83 m3), with a cargo capacity of 8,000 lb (3,629 kg).[1]

Not big enough for Bandvagons but big enough for Argo/Missionmaster 8x8s, MRZRs, ATVs and Snowmobiles.

 

[Kirkhill]

Related

https://www.naadsn.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Airports_CI_2020_11_05.pdf

Even with a STOL fleet there would still be a role for a long range heavy lift helicopter like the Chinooks.

 

[Cloud Cover]

New Snowmobiles for the Royal Marines.

£10m investment in snowmobiles for Royal Marines

Royal Marines will strike faster and further across the Arctic snow thanks to a £10m investment in new snowmobiles for reconnaissance and raiding operations.

www.royalnavy.mod.uk

 

[Kirkhill]

New Dogsleds for the Royal Marines

Commandos look to huskies on the Arctic battlefield

Britain’s elite commandos have trialled using dogs to supply troops operating deep behind enemy lines with ammunition and food in the Arctic Circle.

www.royalnavy.mod.uk

 

[GR66]

Read an interesting article on the Corporal Frisk website about Patria showcasing a new ATV at EUROSATORY 24.

This vehicle is touted as a potential replacement for the BV206 in Finnish service.

A possible contender vs the BVs10 or Bronco 3 for Canada?

The FAMOUS ATV concept, weighing 15 tons with a payload capacity of 3.5 tons, can accommodate a crew of two and transport ten troops. Powered by a 250 kW engine, it reaches speeds up to 80 km/h and has an operational range of 600 km. It is designed to function in extreme temperatures ranging from -46°C to +44°C and complies with STANAG K1 and M1 protection standards for light armored personnel carriers (APCs). The vehicle also has amphibious capabilities, allowing water operations at speeds of 4 km/h with a fording depth of two meters.

 

[Fabius]

Crazy that in that article it mentions Norway just finishing retrofitting 669 BV206s. That’s an impressive amount.

I think this FAMOUS ATV won’t really be considered for DAME. Several reasons, first it’s unproven and not in service yet, developmental risk is to high for the budget allocated. Second, DAME is focused on domestic only, the armour package integral to FAMOUS and its higher road speed are likely actually negatives for our employment concept. Third, we are wanting a few different variants that are better supported by a BV type vehicle than thus one, ie Amb, CP, MRT, although I forget exactly what variants we want.

It’s an interesting Arctic APC though.

 

[GR66]

Crazy that in that article it mentions Norway just finishing retrofitting 669 BV206s. That’s an impressive amount.

I think this FAMOUS ATV won’t really be considered for DAME. Several reasons, first it’s unproven and not in service yet, developmental risk is to high for the budget allocated.

"Unproven" and "not in service yet" are certainly valid considerations. You might end up with another Cyclone or Kingfisher. However if you never take ANY risk you don't see advancement. F-35's and River-Class are certainly risks but necessary risks to keep pace.

Second, DAME is focused on domestic only, the armour package integral to FAMOUS and its higher road speed are likely actually negatives for our employment concept.

No idea why double the road speed and double the range of a Bv206 would be seen as negatives? As for armour, it's got K1 (small arms)/M1 (AP mine fragmentation) protection. It's still an ATV not an APC/IFV. Again, no idea why providing a minimal level of small arms protection to a military vehicle would be seen as a negative.

Third, we are wanting a few different variants that are better supported by a BV type vehicle than thus one, ie Amb, CP, MRT, although I forget exactly what variants we want.

Sounds like they are already planning for that:
"Future adaptations could include roles as an ambulance, command-and-control center, or mortar carrier."

It’s an interesting Arctic APC though

Agreed. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of the BvS10/Beowulf and the Bronco 3 ATV's. Both are proven and good fits for Canada. Personally I'd probably go for the BvS10/Beowulf for commonality with the US Army but Patria's certainly does look interesting. As a bonus I believe it uses the same Kongsberg RWS as the TAPV.

 

[KevinB]

Some of the Famous’s specifications are odd, and looks almost contradictory.

Amphibious but a 2M Fording depth?

 

[GR66]

Some of the Famous’s specifications are odd, and looks almost contradictory.

Amphibious but a 2M Fording depth?

I saw that too. I'm assuming it means that it can ford up to 2m depth without preparation for amphibious ops.

Was curious so did some digging and found an article on the DieselArmy website that talks about the BvS10 and it states:

The Viking is capable of fording through up to five feet of water with no preparation. Outfitting the vehicle for amphibious duty is said to take less than two minutes, and the vehicle can travel at up to 5 kilometers per hour in water.

 

[Fabius]

No idea why double the road speed and double the range of a Bv206 would be seen as negatives? As for armour, it's got K1 (small arms)/M1 (AP mine fragmentation) protection. It's still an ATV not an APC/IFV. Again, no idea why providing a minimal level of small arms protection to a military vehicle would be seen as a negative.

I am somewhat skeptical that it is as capable off road in the terrain we have as the BV. The higher road speed is gained at the expense of something else, same as the ground clearance to get a lower overall height. It might be as good but I would want it proved.

The armour is not a problem and I would want it, but that’s not how the CAF thinks. DAME is purely domestic in conception and if it costs anything extra to have armour I doubt we will go for it.
Apparently DAME can’t even afford BvS 10 etc in any worthwhile numbers due to its fixed budget, that’s why I say any developmental risk is a non starter.
Maybe that will change if we are going to spend 2% of GDP on continental defence.

 

[GR66]

I am somewhat skeptical that it is as capable off road in the terrain we have as the BV. The higher road speed is gained at the expense of something else, same as the ground clearance to get a lower overall height. It might be as good but I would want it proved.

Absolutely. Never buy based on the glossy brochure.

The armour is not a problem and I would want it, but that’s not how the CAF thinks. DAME is purely domestic in conception and if it costs anything extra to have armour I doubt we will go for it.

I think you put your finger on a major part of the problem right there.

Apparently DAME can’t even afford BvS 10 etc in any worthwhile numbers due to its fixed budget, that’s why I say any developmental risk is a non starter.
Maybe that will change if we are going to spend 2% of GDP on continental defence.

Hopefully (not holding my breath) the renewed focus on the Arctic in "Our North Strong and Free" might see this program as something that could be expanded in order to meet our re-focus on the North. A strong Arctic mobility capability would seem to be a no-brainer for me...but for Canada no-brainers seem to be our specialty.

 

[Kirkhill]

"Unproven" and "not in service yet" are certainly valid considerations. You might end up with another Cyclone or Kingfisher. However if you never take ANY risk you don't see advancement. F-35's and River-Class are certainly risks but necessary risks to keep pace.

No idea why double the road speed and double the range of a Bv206 would be seen as negatives? As for armour, it's got K1 (small arms)/M1 (AP mine fragmentation) protection. It's still an ATV not an APC/IFV. Again, no idea why providing a minimal level of small arms protection to a military vehicle would be seen as a negative.

Sounds like they are already planning for that:
"Future adaptations could include roles as an ambulance, command-and-control center, or mortar carrier."

Agreed. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of the BvS10/Beowulf and the Bronco 3 ATV's. Both are proven and good fits for Canada. Personally I'd probably go for the BvS10/Beowulf for commonality with the US Army but Patria's certainly does look interesting. As a bonus I believe it uses the same Kongsberg RWS as the TAPV.

It looks to me like the Soviet MTLB that was built in Ukraine and was also operated by the Finns.

 

[GR66]

It looks to me like the Soviet MTLB that was built in Ukraine and was also operated bt the Finns.

The Finnish MTLB is one of the vehicles this is meant to replace (along with the Bv206)

 

[lenaitch]

Some of the Famous’s specifications are odd, and looks almost contradictory.

Amphibious but a 2M Fording depth?

I don't know the technical differences but to me, 'fording' means depth of water something can handle while operating on the bottom without drowning occupants or equipment; whereas 'amphibious' implies some manner of actual 'swimming'. You 'ford' cattle across a river, but they are walking on the bottom; frogs and turtles swim (sort of).