FWSAR (CC130H, Buffalo, C27J, V22): Status & Possibilities

[Colin Parkinson]

Searching is boring and eye straining, it would take enormous computing power for a UAV to pick up all of the clues being looked for on the surface of the ocean or flying over a endless forest. An AUV is a great way to search for a sunken vessel, but still requires someone to look at the collected data.

 

[Kirkhill]

True but rather than putting 6 pairs of eyes in one aircraft looking at one spot of the ocean you could have dozens of uavs looking at dozens of parts of the ocean simultaneously with dozens of feeds to dozens of screens surveyed by dozens or viewers. You could even make the feed available to the public and have millions of pairs of eyes looking.

In addition the platforms can add sensors (IR, Thermal, Acoustic, Magnetic, Platforms) that can be viewed in analog mode or that can be digitally alarmed to report anomalies.

It isn't an either/or situation.  It is a matter of piling on the layers.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

True but rather than putting 6 pairs of eyes in one aircraft looking at one spot of the ocean you could have dozens of uavs looking at dozens of parts of the ocean simultaneously with dozens of feeds to dozens of screens surveyed by dozens or viewers. You could even make the feed available to the public and have millions of pairs of eyes looking.

Oh that would be some quality info.  I'll go with a good LKP and a trained crew who can actually do something once they get there and start the search, i.e. who can drop kit and/or pers to the crash site/raft/etc.

Dozens of feeds.  And who would be watching those feeds, and who would be operating these UAVs?  Sounds pretty expensive to have something go out there that might find something and then be able to do nothing about it.

UAV/Remote systems and sensors have their uses but there are places I think their use can be "not worth the bang for the buck".  If I have a Herc in a SAR Sqn, I can also use it in a Transport function.  If I have a SAR UAV, I have...a SAR UAV. 

Just some quick thoughts...

 

[Colin Parkinson]

A small drone hovering over a SAR team on the ground would be useful and allow them to scout difficult areas. launching one off a SAR vessel at sea might be a one way trip as winds could easily exceed 25kts.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

A FWSAR platform with something like a MX-15 onboard would be a huge benefit too IMO. 

 

[YZT580]

Please don't put the idea in OW's head until after they sign a deal for new SAR aircraft.  They don't need another excuse for delay.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

For the payload or the UAV?  8)

 

[YZT580]

The UAV.  Programme would require 20, they would order 10 go through a budget review and reduce to 8 and contract for delivery in another 10 years.

 

[George Wallace]

The UAV.  Programme would require 20, they would order 10 go through a budget review and reduce to 8 and contract for delivery in another 10 years.

Then the Liberals will run on the platform that they will cancel the contract.

 

[Spencer100]

Maybe something happening....but don't count on it 

Opps  Sorry......I did not read the byline at time.

The article can be googled....

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Considering the plummeting cost of small drones, eventually a search aircraft could drop one in the search area for it to search various areas perhaps with a datalink to the aircraft and then to an operator back at the base.

another scenario
plane spots wreckage/raft/survivors. Drop conditions are not safe/doable.  A small drone could be dropped that flies to the site, acts as a beacon and has two way communications. It could also send video data back to the aircraft to assess the scene such any survivors, which would help determine what level of risk the SAR techs will take. If the drone can show that everyone is deceased, then parachuting might not be worth the risk when a recovery crew can walk 10 km from a place a helicopter can land or vis versa, survivors in desperate need of help means the risk of jumping is justified. 

 

[quadrapiper]

By "two way communications," do you mean accessible to survivors as a dropped package or ditched, floating drone?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

For a crash site, after the drone has sent video feedback it could land and provide survivors with 2 way comms whether voice or text. For marine it could survey the site and then land and float will providing a electronic and light beacon, or even fly right to the liferaft and land. While the SAR guys are great at dropping a raft package with a line to survivors it's not perfect. The drone would not replace a raft but could provide a good comms link and beacon. Right now the biggest downsides to this idea are costs and battery life. I expect in 5 years costs will drop significantly again and battery life will likely jump by 15-30%

 

[Loachman]

"UAV", please.

Thermal imagery on the main aircraft would be cheaper and simpler.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I'm not sure how comfortable I'd be with a UAV bearing in at me in (likely) crappy conditions/IMC.  If its shitty enough the SAR Tech's can't get to me...

I know a lot of people really like the idea of UAVs, I don't see them as useful in applications like SAR and stuff MPAs normally do.  :2c:

 

[Loachman]

There are far too many limitations.

 

[dimsum]

I'm not sure how comfortable I'd be with a UAV bearing in at me in (likely) crappy conditions/IMC.  If its shitty enough the SAR Tech's can't get to me...

I know a lot of people really like the idea of UAVs, I don't see them as useful in applications like SAR and stuff MPAs normally do.  :2c:

As Loachman and you have said, UAVs currently have too many limitations (IMC flight being one of the big ones).  I wouldn't rule it out permanently, just not now.  The big benefit compared to an LRPA would be endurance.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Any idea from a 'cost per hour' perspective what an avg MALE costs in the air per hour, all-in?

 

[kev994]

I don't see the advantage, the current weather limitations for FWSAR  800' ceiling and 1 SM vis, any less than that and you can't see anything anyway. So you have the uav transit 1000 miles, have a look, then send a manned aircraft behind it hours later to effect the rescue? Seems like a big waste of time. EO/IR doesn't see through cloud.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

"UAV", please.

Thermal imagery on the main aircraft would be cheaper and simpler.

Back when I was in it was RPV  ;D

What I am talking about is a very small drone dropped by the aircraft near the scene to actually get a close look. Drone could be controlled by either someone onboard or datalinked to someone at base.

We talking this size and the tech is growing leaps and bounds, own GPS, some will operate in winds 25kts and stay on station