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

[Spencer100]

More info

The Canadian FWSAR Program and Its Diverse Surface Search Radar Candidates

(Source: Forecast International; issued June 2, 2015)


Although the Canadian Forces' efforts to replace its aging Fixed Wing Search and Rescue (FWSAR) aircraft was formalized in 2004, advancements were stymied repeatedly. On March 31st, 2015, this changed when Canada released a new Request for Proposals (RFP); the due date is September 2015. The all-new aircraft will feature an all-new electronics suite, with new radars and new electro-optics, making for a long-lived, lucrative prospect for airborne electronics manufacturers.

The Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) currently operates six CC-115 Buffalo (DHC-5) and 13 CC-130H Hercules aircraft in the SAR role. The DHC-5 went out of production in 1986 and the C-130H had reached the end of its heyday by the late 1990s. According to the Canadian Military Journal, the RCAF's DHC-5s date mostly from the 1960s and many of the C-130Hs were built in the 1970s, both platforms carry similarly dated surface search radar architectures. The need to revise the aging fleet with new platforms and new electronics is clear, especially considering the dual challenges of Canada's broad range of terrain and expansive territory.

The FWSAR requirement stipulates the choice of one to two platforms, and, to date, five manufacturers have emerged as strong potential bidders. The leading manufacturers are seen as Lockheed Martin with the C-130J which, like the U.S. Coast Guard's HC-130Js, could carry the Exelis APY-11 radar (a licensed Elta EL/M-2022) and FLIR Systems' Star Safire III EO/IR sensor, and Alenia Aermacchi with the C-27J Spartan for which the most probable electronics setup is currently unknown.

It is believed that if Canada selects the C-27J, it will follow the U.S. Coast Guard's lead concerning the electronics setup. The USCG is in the process of identifying a surface search radar for its HC-27Js, but the process has been complicated by the service possessing an insufficient amount of technical data. A belly-mounted or nose cone-mounted radar are both options.

The three other candidates are viewed as having a distinctly less likely chance of winning the award. These are: Airbus Military's C-295, Embraer's KC-390, and Viking Air's DHC-5NG. Brazil's Embraer has only just recently been identified as a bidder. Its KC-390 aircraft could be hurt by the fact that it only recently rolled out its first prototype in October 2014; its equipment set, like the C-27J's, is unknown at this time, but could feature an Italian-made Selex ES Gabbiano radar.

Airbus's C-295 may have a higher chance of winning the contest than the KC-390 and DHC-5NG. In its most common SAR outfits, the C-295 carries the APY-11 (EL/M-2022), like the C-130J. It also carries the APN-241 navigation radar in its nose like the C-27J, which could give the two aircraft a similar layout if the USCG selects a nose cone-mounted surface search radar for its C-27Js and the technology is then ported to the C-295.

Even though the aircraft is produced by a Canadian company, Viking Air and its DHC-5NG are seen in a distant last place. The platform has seen limited market uptake and its electronics are unknown.

If performance of past SAR choices is a guide, the winning FWSAR platform or platforms could be a part of the RCAF's fleet for a very long time. Considering the potential need for future radar upgrades and support contracts, competition for this award will be hard fought. Circumstances favor the RCAF following the USCG's example and procuring the C-130J with the APY-11 radar and/or the C-27J with an as-yet unidentified radar.

-ends-

- mod edit to add link -

 

[Eye In The Sky]

More info

The Canadian FWSAR Program and Its Diverse Surface Search Radar Candidates

(Source: Forecast International; issued June 2, 2015)

The leading manufacturers are seen as Lockheed Martin with the C-130J which, like the U.S. Coast Guard's HC-130Js, could carry the Exelis APY-11 radar (a licensed Elta EL/M-2022) and FLIR Systems' Star Safire III EO/IR sensor

A decent suite, on initial quick-look at their websites although for SAR, some of the bells and whistles could be left out to reduce costs.

and Alenia Aermacchi with the C-27J Spartan for which the most probable electronics setup is currently unknown.

It is believed that if Canada selects the C-27J, it will follow the U.S. Coast Guard's lead concerning the electronics setup. The USCG is in the process of identifying a surface search radar for its HC-27Js, but the process has been complicated by the service possessing an insufficient amount of technical data. A belly-mounted or nose cone-mounted radar are both options.

360 radar coverage seems like a sweet setup, the Japanese have gone to this in their latest MPA. 

Circumstances favor the RCAF following the USCG's example and procuring the C-130J with the APY-11 radar and/or the C-27J with an as-yet unidentified radar.

-ends-

- mod edit to add link -

Nor sure what the SAR community is hoping for.  J model would seem to fit better into current fleets for maint, parts, tech trg, crewing, etc.

Either way, its going to be a good thing for the SAR community and, if things go the way they are looking, for the AES Op trade who are likely going to take on the sensor operation/employment stuff.

 

[captloadie]

Either way, its going to be a good thing for the SAR community and, if things go the way they are looking, for the AES Op trade who are likely going to take on the sensor operation/employment stuff.

You don't think the ACSOs are going to fight tooth and nail to keep themselves on the SAR platform and use this function to justify it?

 

[Eye In The Sky]

I have no idea what the ACSO mafia is up to, but I do know how many SENSOR OPERATORS the RCAF is looking to add to the current stock of AESOps.  ACSOs aren't sensor operators.  Why pay a Capt to operator kit a Cpl can and is already trained to do?

I haven't heard there is no requirement for a Nav on SAR missions yet.  Anyone know the plan there?

 

[Eagle_Eye_View]

From my CoC it is confirm AESOP will have a seat on the new fix wing SAR platform while ACSO lost theirs.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Prof. Michael Byers jumps in:

Italian Search and Rescue Plane Wrong for BC: Expert
Feds ignore more agile craft fitting province's terrain -- and built in Victoria

A plan to purchase one model of search and rescue airplanes for the entire country will end up putting people on Canada's west coast in danger because the craft aren't suited to the terrain, says an expert on government procurement.

Last week Michael Byers issued a report [ https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/reports/smart-defence ] on the shortcomings of Canada's military procurement, including failures to purchase desperately needed equipment.

Byers is a professor at the Political Science Department at UBC and once ran for the federal New Democrats in Vancouver Centre. He has been a vocal critic of the federal government's planned F-35 purchase.

Tuesday [June 30] he told The Tyee another shortcoming of the Harper government's military procurement strategy is its a plan to purchase long-range, fast, fixed-wing aircraft for search and rescue duty across Canada.

He said such aircraft may be fine for the East Coast, but British Columbia needs something different.

"We need a plane that can fly lower and slower and can turn more sharply than these bigger, faster planes," he said...

An updated request for proposals was released in April [ http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/stamgp-lamsmp/svtvn-rscfw-eng.html ] and Byers said the craft suited to the request is consistent with planes like the C-27J.

He said that doesn't help B.C. and suggests Canada purchase locally made aircraft, such as the new Viking Twin Otter built in Victoria or the Bombardier Q400.

Byers said the Twin Otter is already being built and sold specifically for rescue capabilities in other countries.

"The solutions are there and yet our government in its pigheaded way is pressing forward toward a single aircraft for all of Canada," he said. "The specifications have been written in such a way to exclude the Viking aircraft and the Bombardier."

One such requirements written in the RFP required a rear ramp so that rescuers could parachute out of the plane, but that's an old method of search and rescue used before long-range helicopters existed and has been phased out in developed countries except Canada, according to Byers...

But purchasing new helicopters that can winch people on and off after aircraft have spotted them is a far better way to conduct a rescue than parachuting rescuers out to wait with those being rescued, he said...
http://thetyee.ca/News/2015/07/02/Plane-Wrong-For-BC/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The Twin Otter is a great aircraft, but not for this type of SAR, Byers sigh

 

[GR66]

The Twin Otter is a great aircraft, but not for this type of SAR, Byers sigh

For those uneducated readers like myself, could you please give your take on the shortcomings of the Twin Otter for SAR?

 

[dapaterson]

For those uneducated readers like myself, could you please give your take on the shortcomings of the Twin Otter for SAR?

Other than range, speed and carrying capacity?

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Well, I am no expert (like prof. Byers I suppose  ;D), but just off the top of my head, I would say that the Spartan having TWICE the speed of the Twin Otter is a pretty good reason to chose it over the T.O. in a huge country like Canada.

And I am pretty sure the Spartan is just about as manoeuvrable as a T.O.

 

[dapaterson]

Comparing the Twin Otter to a Herc: Half the speed, half the range, one third the cargo carrying capacity, and no commonality with the transport fleet for reduced crewing and maintenance costs.

 

[GR66]

Other than range, speed and carrying capacity?

I'm thinking that baseline specs might not always show the whole picture.  Other contending aircraft might have greater range, speed and carrying capacity, but are there other performance factors that make them less capable to actually perform their job once they get there?  A Twin Otter might have LESS range, speed and carrying capacity, but does it have ENOUGH range, speed and carrying capacity for the task?  Do its other attributes make up for those baseline shortcomings (at least in relation to the specific issue of BC SAR requirements)? 

I have absolutely no knowlege of these matters and no stake in or preference over which aircraft is selected.  I'm simply interested in understanding the issues a little bit better.

Thanks

 

[Blackadder1916]

. . . . . Do its other attributes make up for those baseline shortcomings (at least in relation to the specific issue of BC SAR requirements)? 

Its other attributes in relation to this topic?

Mmm . . . .  It's made in Canada.  It has a traditional sounding Canadian name and pedigree.  It may be able to operate from shorter and less developed airfields, but that's because it is smaller and thus less capacity for personnel and equipment - so let's call that a wash.  Can't think of anything else.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

For those uneducated readers like myself, could you please give your take on the shortcomings of the Twin Otter for SAR?

Cramped cabin for SAR gear, it will be at max payload most of the time. Slower speed, lower operating ceiling. Can it do SAR, yes it can. Can it effectively cover the vast areas we require our limited resources to cover, I do not think so and we are not likely to create new SAR air stations to spread aircraft around so we can benefit from it's strengths. The Buff is as likely the smallest aircraft that would fit the current needs. 

 

[Blackadder1916]

For those uneducated readers like myself, could you please give your take on the shortcomings of the Twin Otter for SAR?

While my previous response was sarcastic (but the best sarcasm should be mostly factual), I will add this.  The CAF already operate four Twotters, however, those airframes date from the early 1970s which make them middle aged in Twin Otter years.  They are already painted in SAR livery, though I don't know how much of their operational use is SAR vice transport and utility tasks.  It's nearly 30 years since I last flew in one (shortly after this) and that was on an aeromedevac - nothing too exciting, really just a patient transfer.  In that instance, we had to configure the a/c for a stretcher (along with minimal eqpt and a two pers med crew); there wasn't a lot of room left in the cabin.  While the Twin Otter is legendary for its ability to operate in marginal areas there is more to the requirement than flying low and slow.

 

[GR66]

Thanks everyone for the education.

 

[Kirkhill]

Actually, if Byers were intellectually consistent he would be arguing for the elimination of FWSAR over the Rockies and replacing the Buffs with an additional 6 pack of CH147/148/149.

He argues that dropping more victims(rescuers) out the back of serviceable aircraft is silly.  Consequently none of the Fixed Wing solutions make sense using his criteria.

Equally he argues the value of low and slow.  Ain't nuffink going lower and slower than a helicopter.

I'd would use his argument as a club to buy additional FW Tactical Lift that can be used for long range search (Herc or C27J) and also to buy another half dozen CH-147s to be stationed in Edmonton to cover the Rockies from the East.  Paint Yellow stripes on 2 of them.

 

[Kirkhill]

Rescuers ready for the call if trouble hits on Mount Rainier

Link

You know what I find truly amazing?  There isn't a scrap of yellow anywhere on that Chinook.  How did the guys on the ground find it?

 

[dapaterson]

The larger question is why is SAR a role for the CAF.  While MND is the lead for SAR in the Government of Canada, that could easily be transferred to Public Safety, and the CAF could pass off this legacy function to someone else.

 

[Kirkhill]

The larger question is why is SAR a role for the CAF.  While MND is the lead for SAR in the Government of Canada, that could easily be transferred to Public Safety, and the CAF could pass off this legacy function to someone else.

I believe it is a great example of the dog being wagged.  What started as a secondary task for any available air assets, transport in particular, became a publicity generating department that demanded its own budget and specialized gear.