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

[HB_Pencil]

Something tells me this isn't over.

I'm not as familiar with this area as fighter capabilities, but from what I know the C-295 isn't the better aircraft... the C-27 won hands down the first iteration and nothing has really changed since then. The C-27J is significantly faster (key for reaching remote locations quickly). As someone joked to me "I guess the government is mandating people stay alive for an extra few hours while in distress. The C-27 also had much more power, which was seen as extremely useful while flying in mountainous terrain. Furthermore the C-295 does not have cockpit ceiling vision, another strike against it while flying in difficult terrain. Finally there is the Cabin size, which the -295 is a bit of a tight squeeze for a sartech.

Basically this decision was based on Cost and the new Value proposition format, which allowed IRBs to dictate what the Military gets. Yes the C-295 is better than the Buffallos, but its significantly less capable than the C-27. It just puts our personnel and the civilians we serve at greater risk.

I'm quite sure it's over.  The specs were drawn up by the NRC and an independent fairness monitor signed off on the entire process - it's over.

So... I wrote my post because I was pretty confident that Leonardo was going to protest this. Yet of course JMT, in his infinite wisdom at the time knew better. Will you admit that you were wrong?

 

[Zoomie]

So here's the unsanctioned opinion of a private citizen - it's better than what we currently have.

Buff's are underpowered.  Hercs are old, expensive to run and way too much for what is needed.

FWSAR will undergo a complete re-org when it comes to how they do their job.  Valley-shoots, close contouring, soft-field landings, etc - will most probably no longer be required.  We will enter the 20th century and use a synergistic blend of high tech sensors and human factors to get the job done.

By choosing the C-295W, the government has effectively given the RCAF their marching orders on what limitations they now have to develop their new FWSAR tactics and procedures.  We knew we weren't getting another Buff or Herc.  These are our limitations, time to accept them and adapt accordingly to using this new machine to its fullest extent.  SARTechs will continue to jump, we will continue to cover Cormorant missions over open water, we will drop equipment to people in need, we will find people in distress, we will continue to do our job "That Others May Live".

 

[HB_Pencil]

So here's the unsanctioned opinion of a private citizen - it's better than what we currently have.

Buff's are underpowered.  Hercs are old, expensive to run and way too much for what is needed.

FWSAR will undergo a complete re-org when it comes to how they do their job.  Valley-shoots, close contouring, soft-field landings, etc - will most probably no longer be required.  We will enter the 20th century and use a synergistic blend of high tech sensors and human factors to get the job done.

By choosing the C-295W, the government has effectively given the RCAF their marching orders on what limitations they now have to develop their new FWSAR tactics and procedures.  We knew we weren't getting another Buff or Herc.  These are our limitations, time to accept them and adapt accordingly to using this new machine to its fullest extent.  SARTechs will continue to jump, we will continue to cover Cormorant missions over open water, we will drop equipment to people in need, we will find people in distress, we will continue to do our job "That Others May Live".

From what I hear, that's exactly what's going on. As is apparent in other areas of war, sensors are vastly improving in their ability to do work. However its just going to cost more to do it on the 295, because it has performance limitations that will require those capabilities more than the C-27. Its false economies, especially when the outcome was dictated in significant part by ITB considerations.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Buff's are underpowered.

If the numbers I am reading are accurate, isn't the 295 *more* underpowered then?  And as the engines age, over time they will be less efficient/more underpowered? 

We will enter the 20th century and use a synergistic blend of high tech sensors and human factors to get the job done.

Even us self-loading meat sacks in the back agree on the blend aspect. 

*quick sidenote - I do say that sensors are important on a SAR FW platform.  Yes, the Mark 1 eyeball is needed but at night, a good RADAR is going to see a raft (well...most likely), IR is awesome at night, SAR modes can *see* nice big shiny backscatters that may stand out miles away if staring at a fuselage.  Keep the sensors, add 1 or 2 swept up sensor operators.. keep the spotter Mk 1 Eyeball and add a few key electronic ones.  Neither work perfectly all the time/every situation...

 

[jmt18325]

I worked with our SAR Techs seen the way they load up an aircraft, they may be flying SAR on the west coast with a search, drop a pump and or liferaft, finish that mission , fuel in Sandspit, then be tasked from there to the Yukon and be asked to parachute into a forest. The plane is going to be loaded to the max all the time.

As opposed to the Buffalo that they would have been using instead?

 

[jmt18325]

So... I wrote my post because I was pretty confident that Leonardo was going to protest this. Yet of course JMT, in his infinite wisdom at the time knew better. Will you admit that you were wrong?

It's quite usual that companies do protest.  It's quite usual that they fail.  If they succeed, then I'll admit I was wrong.

 

[jmt18325]

So here's the unsanctioned opinion of a private citizen - it's better than what we currently have.

Thank you for making my argument so much better than me. 

 

[Colin Parkinson]

As opposed to the Buffalo that they would have been using instead?

Space in the back will still be at a premium with the smaller aircraft. No one is arguing they don't new a new aircraft and better sensors, both offer that, The C27J is a far better choice aircraft wise, the C295 is going to be easier to get parts and support for. As for comparing SAR scenarios, Canada is pretty unique in the variety of missions, size of area and minimal resources we have. Getting the lesser aircraft regardless of the other benefits will have long term consequences.

 

[suffolkowner]

Colin, you bring up an interesting point about SAR in Canada, what do other countries do? Just as a matter of curiosity, are the C-27 and C-295 even used for SAR anywhere? What platforms are other countries using instead and why?

I'm thinking that the C-295 won on cost alone both initial and operating, not performance?

 

[jmt18325]

No argument there.  I was simply going with the scenario.  The C-295SAR is faster than the DHC-5, can fly further than the DHC-5, and can carry more cargo than the DHC-5.  Yes, the cabin is slightly smaller than the DHC-5, but will allow most people to stand up (barely).  It also requires more room to take off (but will work on most air strips).  It's better and more reliable than what we're using now in many cases, and will have support for decades.  It also performs long range missions over water and mountains now.  The C-27j would have been better in many aspects, but like the Super Hornet purchase, these complaints are very much making the perfect the enemy of the good.

 

[jmt18325]

Colin, you bring up an interesting point about SAR in Canada, what do other countries do? Just as a matter of curiosity, are the C-27 and C-295 even used for SAR anywhere? What platforms are other countries using instead and why?

I'm not Colin - but as far as I know, we will be the first (only) people to use it.  The closest comparison would be the US use of the C-235 in the USCG.  As far as I know, few countries have dedicated fixed wing SAR assets.

I'm thinking that the C-295 won on cost alone both initial and operating, not performance?

That would be mostly correct.

 

[kev994]

I'm thinking that the C-295 won on cost alone both initial and operating, not performance?

I suspect that the track record of the manufacturers may have been taken into account. The USCG is having an awful time getting parts for the C27.

 

[suffolkowner]

an older piece explaining Peru's decision to choose performance over cost

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/feature/5/149884/the-story-behind-peru%E2%80%99s-c_27j-buy.html

as you can see the AN-26 is actually more powerful than the c-295
c-295 2645 hp x 2
AN-26 2820 hp x 2 plus tubojet booster


http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/amd-dp/air/arsvf-fwsar/index-eng.html
Innovative evaluation

In the past, bids were evaluated on the basis of best price and capability. However, today’s innovative practices are more comprehensive, and the proposals were evaluated based on three mandatory criteria, for an overall score:

Capability: Search and rescue response performance, aircraft and system characteristics, proposed maintenance and support services program and an evaluation of their capability to deliver on potential risks, as well as ground and flight testing of the actual proposed aircraft (worth 65 out of 100 points)
Cost: Based on cost of acquisition and option years. The winning proposal provided the best long-term, operational capability and maintenance and support services benefits to Canada (worth 25 out of 100 points)
Economic benefits for Canada (Industrial and Technological Benefits Policy and Value Proposition): The bidders had to commit to undertake business activities in Canada equal to the contract value, for both the acquisition and maintenance and support services components of the contract. The winning proposal developed an innovative approach to ensure the aircraft are maintained in Canada by Canadians (worth 10 out of 100 points)
Additional methods and tools were used for evaluating bids, and various processes were reviewed by an independent third party, which concluded that the methods used were consistent with the objective of promoting competition and best value. The capability-based procurement also led to innovative elements incorporated into the Request for Proposals, such as an aircraft performance assessment tool and a proposal cost evaluation tool.

A two-step bid evaluation process was also used to avoid rejecting bids for minor errors and omissions. Bidders were offered the option to provide Canada with a submission prior to the closing of the bid process, for a preliminary assessment of their proposed response to key requirements.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Hat tip to suffolkowner for explanation...

 

[jmt18325]

I suspect that the track record of the manufacturers may have been taken into account. The USCG is having an awful time getting parts for the C27.

I would imagine that they're not having the same problem for the SAR/MPA C-235s.

 

[Kirkhill]

I wonder how the Aussies are making out with their Spartans?

Unlike the Yanks the Aussies didn't stiff Alenia

Rome, 10 May 2012

Finmeccanica: Australia selects C-27J Spartan for a contract up to EUR 800 million

Finmeccanica was selected by the Australian Government to supply 10 newly built Alenia AermacchiC-27J Spartan Battlefield Airlifters. The total value of the contract, which also includes logistic supportand training, is around EUR 800 million (AUSD 1.4 billion). First aircraft are expected to be delivered in2015.

“This achievement represents a milestone in Finmeccanica's strategic expansion in the high-potential international markets like Australia and confirms the value of a successful program such as the C-27J”, Giuseppe Orsi, Finmeccanica's Chairman and CEO, said. “In addition to the contract award forNATO's Cyber Security and the selection of the M-346 trainer by Israel - both of which occurred in thefirst months of 2012 - this announcement proves Finmeccanica's capability to be a major high-technology global player, thus reaching the top position of the most advanced ‘Made in Italy’ brand. The investment in technology is for Italy the best way to ensure its sustainable development, thusmaintaining and developing the Country's industrial capabilities, rendering them even morecompetitive in the international markets”.

The acquisition of the aircraft will be conducted through a Foreign Military Sales (FMS) arrangementwith the United States and the contract will be awarded to the partnership between L-3 (as prime contractor) and Alenia Aermacchi, a Finmeccanica company. The contract will also include associated support equipment, several years of initial logistic support, training for aircrew and maintenance personnel and additional capability to ensure that the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) can operate,maintain and modify the aircraft throughout its planned life.

The C-27J will replace the Caribou aircraft which was retired from service in 2009 after 40 years of service. The C-27J complements the capabilities of the RAAF C-130 and C-17 aircraft and uses common infrastructure and aircraft systems such as engines, avionics and the cargo handling systems.

The C-27J has already been ordered by the air forces of Italy, Greece, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Romania,Morocco, Mexico and by the US Air Force and selected by Slovakia’s air force. The total number of aircraft ordered goes up to 89, as the best seller among aircraft of its category”.

The C-27J is a twin-engine turboprop tactical transport aircraft with state-of-the-art technology in avionics, propulsion and systems. It provides high performances, high cost effectiveness, extreme operating flexibility and is the only aircraft of its class offering interoperability with heavier airlifters

https://www.scribd.com/document/93215100/Finmeccanica-Australia-selects-C-27J-Spartan-for-a-contract-up-to-EUR-800-million

The USAF and the Joint Cargo Aircraft fiasco muddied the waters royally.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

In fact, isn't one of the reasons we couldn't get them second hand from the USAF ourselves that Alenia said they would not support anyone who bought them used from the USAF, as they only had a contract with the USAF for support. I would assume this means that even the USCG has to negotiate a separate maintenance/repairs contract with Alenia, who is in no hurry to oblige and will milk it for whatever it can.

 

[kev994]

I would imagine that they're not having the same problem for the SAR/MPA C-235s.

They can get parts but their legs are too short for some missions and it does not do well in icing conditions, a bit of a problem in Cape Cod, so pick your poison.
Edit to add that the 295W is a couple generations of improvements from the 235 so hopefully some of those issues have been mitigated.

 

[kev994]

In fact, isn't one of the reasons we couldn't get them second hand from the USAF ourselves that Alenia said they would not support anyone who bought them used from the USAF, as they only had a contract with the USAF for support. I would assume this means that even the USCG has to negotiate a separate maintenance/repairs contract with Alenia, who is in no hurry to oblige and will milk it for whatever it can.

From what I understand the problem has more to do with the fallout between Lockheed and Alenia, but it doesn't help that they didn't come with spares.

 

[Blair Gilmore]

I was contacted by LGen(Ret'd) Steve Lucas, a spokesperson for Leonardo, on their position reference the awarding of the contract. Below are the items that we discussed:

http://www.happydiver.space/?p=347