RPAS (was JUSTAS): the project to buy armed Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) UAVs

[TechCrmn]

What occupation do you think would end up flying the fleet of drones if we ever choose/purchase them? Pilot, ACSO, Other...?

 

[blacktriangle]

Not that things worked out for them, but ISIL got their RPAV fleet up and running in about a weekend. Heads must have rolled to get that done though.

They definitely fielded more armed RPA than us, that's for sure...

 

[dimsum]

What occupation do you think would end up flying the fleet of drones if we ever choose/purchase them? Pilot, ACSO, Other...?

Both Pilots and ACSOs flew the Heron in Afghanistan with AES Ops being the sensor operator, so I'd imagine the same arrangement would happen.

 

[CBH99]

Not that things worked out for them, but ISIL got their RPAV fleet up and running in about a weekend. Heads must have rolled to get that done though.

Ha!  I see what ya did there with the rolling head thing... 

 

[Eye In The Sky]

What occupation do you think would end up flying the fleet of drones if we ever choose/purchase them? Pilot, ACSO, Other...?

DRONES don't need pilots. 

CANFORGEN 082/17 C AIR FORCE 15/17 021253Z MAY 17

UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEM (UAS) TERMINOLOGY

UNCLASSIFIED

REFS: A. CANFORGEN 080/15 C AIR FORCE 13/15 231956Z APR 15 IMPLEMENTATION OF NATO UAS CLASSIFICATION TABLE
B. NATO STANDARD ATP-3.3.7, GUIDANCE FOR THE TRAINING OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (UAS) OPERATORS, EDITION B, VERSION 1, APRIL 2014

1. AS DIRECTED BY THE CAF AIRWORTHINESS AUTHORITY AT REF A, THE CAF ADOPTED THE NATO UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (UAS) CLASSIFICATION TABLE (REF B). THIS TABLE IDENTIFIES THREE DISTINCT CLASSES OF UAS. WHILE THESE CLASSES ARE DEFINED BY SIZE AND WEIGHT, CLASS III UAS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE CAPABLE AND, UNLIKE CURRENT CLASS I AND II, ARE INTENDED TO OPERATE IN MORE COMPLEX AIR ENVIRONMENTS SUCH AS NON-SEGREGATED AIRSPACE

2. NATO AND OTHER ALLIES HAVE ADOPTED A NEW LEXICON. THE TERMS UAV AND DRONE ARE OBSOLETE. THE SPECIALISED TERMS, REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT (RPA) AND REMOTELY PILOTED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS (RPAS), ARE NOW USED AS A SUBSET OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT (UA) AND UAS RESPECTIVELY TO DESCRIBE THE LARGER MORE CAPABLE CLASS III SYSTEMS SUCH AS GLOBAL HAWK, PREDATOR B, AND HERON TP. THE RCAF JOINT UNMANNED SURVEILLANCE AND TARGET ACQUISITION SYSTEM (JUSTAS) PROJECT WILL ALSO PROCURE A CLASS III SYSTEM WHICH FALLS WITHIN THE RPA(S) SUBSET OF UA(S)

3. EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY THE CAF WILL ADOPT THE TERMINOLOGY OF RPA(S) FOR NATO CLASS III UA(S). THE TERMS RPA(S) SHALL BE USED WHEN REFERRING TO THE JUSTAS PROJECT. ALL OTHER CURRENT AND PROGRAMMED CLASS I/II WILL CONTINUE TO EMPLOY THE TERMS UA AND UAS. ALL APPLICABLE PUBLICATIONS ARE TO BE AMENDED AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE

 

[dapaterson]

The Term "pilot" is obsolete

 

[Kirkhill]

The Term "pilot" is obsolete

So, is this a pilot project?

 

[TechCrmn]

Haha, yea I guess if there were a thread to use the proper terminology for a "drone", it would be this one.

That being said, anyone have any ideas of who will be Remotely Piloting these Aircraft? 

 

[dimsum]

Haha, yea I guess if there were a thread to use the proper terminology for a "drone", it would be this one.

That being said, anyone have any ideas of who will be Remotely Piloting these Aircraft? 

My guess would be either a Pilot or ACSO, with an AES Op as the sensor operator.  They will be working very closely with some Int Ops (maybe Int Os as well).

 

[dimsum]

Remotely Piloted Aircraft System Project - List of Qualified Suppliers

On May 2, 2019 Canada published the Invitation to Qualify (ITQ) W847A-190247/B as the first phase of the procurement process for the Remotely Piloted Aircraft System (RPAS) Project. Respondents were invited to pre-qualify in order to participate in any subsequent phases of the procurement process including the Review and Refine Requirements (RRR) Phase. Interested suppliers were informed that only Qualified Suppliers would be permitted to participate and bid on any subsequent solicitation issued as part of the procurement process.

With the completion of the ITQ Phase and in accordance with the ITQ terms, Canada is publishing the list of Qualified Suppliers.

The Qualified Suppliers (in alphabetical order) are:

1. L3 Technologies MAS Inc.
2. The United States Government and General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc.

https://buyandsell.gc.ca/procurement-data/tender-notice/PW-RPS-002-27338?fbclid=IwAR16ind32vLmKx93hzEa5guHyepGeKqg3nsrvszGD2m8lAsrUX9YML5VmKQ

 

[Kirkhill]

Dimsum -

I guess that means that GAA and the USG will be offering Predator variants.

But what about L3?  Are they the Canadian supplier for Global Hawk variants?  I gather they supplied/supply the comms suite for some/all the Global Hawks?  Or is there something else other than tactical UAVs in their arsenal?

 

[MarkOttawa]

I suspect the fix may well be in for L3 given all the Quebec connections:

ISRAELI AND CANADIAN COMPANIES TEAM UP ON BREAKTHROUGH SPY DRONES
...
June 5, 2018 - By ANNA AHRONHEIM - The Jerusalem Post

Updated June 7, 2018 - more on this story here http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2018/06/07/des-dr...

Ottawa has been seeking a high-altitude, long-endurance system for surveillance as well as an armed UAV for its deployments abroad.

Israel Aerospace Industries has partnered with Canada's L3 MAS (Mirabel, Quebec) to offer the state-of-the-art Artemis Unmanned Aerial System for the Royal Canadian Air Force's Remotely Piloted Aircraft System (RPAS) program, the company announced on Sunday.

Based on IAI's Heron TP, the Artemis UAS is a Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) UAS with a proven operational track record. While it is not clear if it will be a weaponized UAS [emphasis added], it will be equipped with a wide variety of sensors and other payloads designed specifically to meet Canada's requirements.

Even though Israel is not a member of the Missile Technology Control Regime – an informal voluntary association of 35 countries which act to limit trade in UAS systems that can deliver Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) – it has agreed to only export strategic weapons systems such as combat UAVs to member countries, such as Canada.

According to IAI, L3 MAS will be the prime contractor and will be building on its extensive ISS, airworthiness, integrated logistics and program management experience.

L3 MAS, which is located in Mirabel, Quebec, will also lead the Artemis Canadian industrial team, including Pratt & Whitney Canada, which will provide the power plant for the UAS, as well as other prominent Canadian partners to be named at a later date [emphasis added].
Read it all https://m.jpost.com/Israel-News/Israeli-and-Canadian-companies-team-up-on-breakthrough-spy-drones-559077

https://www.fliegerfaust.com/l3-pratt-whitney-iai-uav-2575318816.html

Meanwhile looks like Transport Canada may be using drones in Arctic for National Aerial Surveillance Program ( https://www.tc.gc.ca/en/programs-policies/programs/national-aerial-surveillance-program.html ),
https://www.tc.gc.ca/en/programs-policies/programs/national-aerial-surveillance-program/drones-canadian-arctic.html

and maybe ex-Luftwaffe Global Hawk/Euro Hawk:
https://globalnews.ca/news/4979117/canada-high-altitude-surveillance-drone/

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Dale Denton]

Team SkyGuardian Canada Looking to Grow

OTTAWA – 29 May 2019 – As members of Team SkyGuardian Canada and supporters of the MQ-9B SkyGuardian Remotely Piloted Aircraft System (RPAS) for Canada’s RPAS Project, L3 WESCAM and General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) are integrating WESCAM’s MX™-20 electro-optical and infrared (EO/IR) imaging system onto the SkyGuardian RPAS, as well as the MQ-9 Reaper that is currently being operated by several NATO countries. Team SkyGuardian Canada is a coalition of Canadian companies committed to delivering the best RPAS for Canada.

http://www.ga-asi.com/team-skyguardian-canada-looking-to-grow

http://www.ga-asi.com/ga-asi-integrating-l3-wescams-mx-20-onto-multiple-platforms-as-part-of-team-skyguardian-canada

 

[tomahawk6]

Just buy MQ-9 Reaper and it should do well enforcing the arctic.

https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104470/mq-9-reaper/

 

[dimsum]

Just buy MQ-9 Reaper and it should do well enforcing the arctic.

https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104470/mq-9-reaper/

SkyGuardian is the MQ-9B.  Reaper is the MQ-9A. 

Realistically, the Arctic is so big that something more like Global Hawk or Triton is required to cover it.

 

[tomahawk6]

Neither Global Hawk or Triton appear to be armed. I like Reaper as it has seen put an end to many of our enemies. Triton or Global Hawk might put an end to manned surveillance but I hope not.

Reaper Cost:
Unit cost: $64.2 million (includes four aircraft, sensors, GCSs, and Comm.) (fiscal 2006 dollars) 

 

[Kirkhill]

Is being armed a major issue in the Arctic?

Satellites aren't armed and yet they are integral to understanding what is going on in the area and allowing for other resources to be deployed in a timely fashion.  Rather than seeing the RPAS systems as unmanned CP-140s don't they also have value if they are nothing more than low-altitude, re-targetable "satellites" that stay on station and provide eyes on the scene?

And with that, does the RPAS service have to be a uniformed service or could it, like the satellite capability, be a civilian service?

 

[dimsum]

Is being armed a major issue in the Arctic?

Satellites aren't armed and yet they are integral to understanding what is going on in the area and allowing for other resources to be deployed in a timely fashion.  Rather than seeing the RPAS systems as unmanned CP-140s don't they also have value if they are nothing more than low-altitude, re-targetable "satellites" that stay on station and provide eyes on the scene?

And with that, does the RPAS service have to be a uniformed service or could it, like the satellite capability, be a civilian service?

Good point, and that's why I see both armed and unarmed RPAS being useful. 

If unarmed and only for domestic patrols (or within our EEZ at least), then there's really no difference whether uniformed services fly it or not - like what Transport Canada does with the Dash-7 and Dash-8s with the NASP.  If it becomes an expeditionary capability and/or armed then I believe the armed forces (RCAF for large ones, Army/Navy for smaller ones) should fly it.

 

[Kirkhill]

I agree entirely on the expeditionary force being a uniformed service (RCAF most probably).

I suppose the question becomes: Can we afford two fleets?  One for domestic service and one for overseas duties.

Conversely, do we have to afford two fleets if the requirements of the expeditionary force and the domestic force are just too dissimilar?

In the past we have justified buying equipment necessary for expeditionary service on the basis that we can shoe-horn it into a domestic role.  In other instances we have bought kit for domestic roles and then made do with it on expedition.

 

[Kirkhill]

Just as  ;D a reminder of what we are up against -

75% of the population in 2006 lived in the red areas of the cities.
24% of the population lived in the adjacent rural areas
1% of our 30,000,000 - or 300,000 people - lived in the rest of the country.

In addition we have our EEZ and Continental Shelf areas

And, further, we have our International Fisheries Organization and SAR responsibilities

15,540,000 km2 to survey and patrol and cover.

As a good, international, citizen, laying claim to all of that surface, we should, at least, be able to monitor what is going on in our claim.