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

[Scoobie Newbie]

http://news.ca.msn.com/top-stories/cbc-article.aspx?cp-documentid=24544016

A senior Canadian air commander says the military is at least five years away from acquiring armed drones.

Maj.-Gen. Yvan Blondin, the commander of 1 Canadian Air Division, says he believes it's likely to take that long before Canada acquires the unmanned aerial vehicles.

Blondin was making a rare visit to Kandahar Airfield, where he was briefed on Canada's air operations in southern Afghanistan.

In addition to Chinook and Griffon helicopters, Canada currently operates unarmed drones in Kandahar province to conduct reconnaissance for NATO forces.

The vehicles, which are flown by controllers on the ground, help the coalition keep watch over roads where Taliban fighters are believed to be planting roadside bombs or plan ambushes.

Canada's air wing at Kandahar Airfield became fully operational a year ago.

 

[392]

Correct me if I am wrong, but does the Heron not have the capability to carry munitions?

 

[aesop081]

Correct me if I am wrong, but does the Heron not have the capability to carry munitions?

No.

 

[dimsum]

Correct me if I am wrong, but does the Heron not have the capability to carry munitions?

Not ours.  There was talk about the Israeli version with the option.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Most recent necro-thread I could find to share the latest corporate hopes re:  JUSTAS:

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA‑ASI), a leading manufacturer of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS), tactical reconnaissance radars, and surveillance systems, and CAE today announced that the companies have signed an exclusive teaming agreement to offer the Predator® B UAS to meet Canada’s Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition, and Reconnaissance (ISTAR) needs.

“GA-ASI’s establishment of a formal partnership with CAE signifies a firm commitment by both companies to help Canada strengthen its security and sovereignty both at home and abroad,” said Frank Pace, president, Aircraft Systems Group, GA-ASI.  “CAE’s expertise in the operation and maintenance of large fleets of manned aircraft, modelling and simulation technologies, and in-service support solutions is well matched by GA-ASI’s proficiency in the design, development, production, and operational support of proven, affordable, and responsive unmanned aircraft systems with integrated reconnaissance payloads.”

Under the program presently referred to as the JUSTAS program, the Canadian Government will establish a requirement to field and support interoperable, network-enabled UASs to provide ISTAR and all-weather precision-strike capabilities in support of its operations worldwide.  GA-ASI and CAE will jointly compete for this program, with GA-ASI serving as the prime contractor supporting a U.S. Foreign Military Sale (FMS) procurement.  The teaming arrangement between GA-ASI and CAE is designed to offer the best combination of experience and proven capability to meet program and Canadian-specific requirements while reducing technical, cost, and schedule risks. 

As the first-tier Canadian subcontractor, CAE would have overall responsibility for a comprehensive In-Service Support (ISS) solution, including operator and mission training systems; integration with Canada’s existing Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) infrastructure; systems engineering support; and lifecycle and integrated logistics support services.  CAE would also have responsibility for assembling a pan-Canadian team of companies to develop and support any Canadian-specific requirements and content for Canada’s national ISTAR capabilities ....

More in the news release here.

More on UAVs:
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/67417.0.html
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/85988/post-845081.html#msg845081
http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/60171.0.html

 

[dimsum]

Pred-B (Reaper) makes sense with interoperability with the Americans and others who are flying them.  It should be interesting to see what (if anything) comes out of this, especially since the USAF just started a formal training program for non-prior-qualified pilots to become UAV operators. 

 

[GAP]

General Atomics, CAE partner for Canada UAV contest
By Zach Rosenberg DATE:25/05/11 SOURCE:Flight International
Article Link

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc (GA-ASI) and simulator manufacturer CAE have announced a partnership to enter Canada's joint unmanned surveillance target acquisition system (JUSTAS) competition.

Under the terms of the deal, announced 25 May, GA-ASI will provide Predator B vehicles and ground control stations, while CAE will provide training consoles, systems integration and logistics support. Any prospective sale would be contingent upon winning a competition and subject to standard foreign military sales (FMS) protocol. Possible competitors in the medium altitude long endurance (MALE) category include the Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) Heron TP, EADS Talarion and BAE Systems Mantis.

Canada's JUSTAS program has been crawling at a snail's pace since its formal launch in 1999, with initial operational capability originally expected in 2009; an RFP is now expected in 2012, with a construction contract awarded in 2013 and initial operational capability in 2015.

In a 2008 the Canadian army leased IAI Heron drones to support forces deployed to Afghanistan. The Heron lease was renewed in 2010, but will expire with the imminent withdrawal of Canadian troops from Afghanistan. GA-ASI declined to bid for the 2008 lease deal, citing concerns about heavy penalties in the contract terms for late aircraft deliveries.
end

 

[dimsum]

To clarify, Project NOCTUA is done when the Heron lease ends, which will end when we cease combat operations.  The JUSTAS project is what GA-ASI and CAE are teaming up to pitch to us. 

 

[aesop081]

In a 2008 the Canadian army leased IAI Heron drones to support forces deployed to Afghanistan.

The Canadian army did no such thing.

 

[The Bread Guy]

The Canadian army did no such thing.

There you go obsessing about facts again.  What kind of reporter would you make?

 

[Drag]

The JUSTAS project is on hiatus until a number of issues are sorted out, the biggest one of which being the PY requirement.  The VCDS allocated 150PYs for this capability, the Air Force wants over 300....  Hence we won't see a MALE UAV operational for a long time to come.

 

[dimsum]

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/02/14/john-ivison-ottawa-sets-sights-on-armed-drones/

2 Points: 

1.  Doesn't 6 seem a little...low?
2.  Why do journalists seem to think that at this point, a UAV is equal to a manned fighter?  It's like comparing apples to hammers.  A UAV in any air-defense threat environment (or against a manned fighter) will mean...well, one less UAV. 

 

[George Wallace]

Love the use of the word "Drone".  A Drone has its flight programed into it and it flies that program.  It has no ground controller to constantly monitor and fly its flight.  An "armed drone" would then be completely useless as it would only be able to effectively attack known fixed targets.  Predator is not a Drone.  It has a 'pilot' on the ground flying it.

Oh well!  The media also calls AVGPs, LAVs, Coyotes, etc. "Tanks".  No wonder the public can't have an informed knowledge of what the CF is all about.

 

[Haletown]

Great story . .  pure comedy gold.

Is someone in the PMO playing Ivison just for fun?

 

[jeffb]

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/02/14/john-ivison-ottawa-sets-sights-on-armed-drones/

2 Points: 

1.  Doesn't 6 seem a little...low?
2.  Why do journalists seem to think that at this point, a UAV is equal to a manned fighter?  It's like comparing apples to hammers.  A UAV in any air-defense threat environment (or against a manned fighter) will mean...well, one less UAV.

I don't think 6 is insanely low. If you are looking at providing ISR coverage over an battle group's AO, 6 would do the job nicely. The big difference between Reaper (AKA, Predator C) and a fixed wing program from a ISR user perspective is the loiter time. Reaper is not just a strike capability, it is a surveillance capability as well. The ability to provide real time sense/strike capability with a slow enough airspeed that even guys walking around can be tracked, is apples to oranges with fixed wing, manned aviation. Not to undercut fixed wing, manned aircraft. They are important too and without them gaining airspace supremacy, the Reaper is an expensive lawn dart.

I can buy the need for the F-35 program but it will not be doing the job of the Reaper unless we find ourselves in a conflict with someone who has a strong armour threat and who's AD has been completely suppressed.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Love the use of the word "Drone".  A Drone has its flight programed into it and it flies that program.  It has no ground controller to constantly monitor and fly its flight.  An "armed drone" would then be completely useless as it would only be able to effectively attack known fixed targets.  Predator is not a Drone.  It has a 'pilot' on the ground flying it.

Oh well!  The media also calls AVGPs, LAVs, Coyotes, etc. "Tanks".  No wonder the public can't have an informed knowledge of what the CF is all about.

Civilians, even fairly well informed civilians, do not need to understand, much less pay attention to the finer linguistic distinctions - "drone" is a common usage general term for different types of UAVs, just as "tank" is a common general term for many armoured vehicles. The public can understand, very well, what the CF is "all about" even if they don't get the terminology exactly right. Within the CF different groups use terms that are misunderstood by other CF members, civilians cannot and should not be expected to understand "our" language.

 

[Haletown]

things like aviation are difficult for  Ottawa bound journalists . . they probably have to rely on "sources" for their info.

It means you get stuff like this.

"The problem for the Tories is that the cost of the planes is likely to rise considerably from the estimated $75-million per plane. Buying 65 jets would burst the $9-billion budget allocated for the F-35 purchase.

The U.S. Defence Department estimates the cost of each F-35 at $195-million this year. The Pentagon said Monday it intends to reduce spending on the F-35s next year and delay future spending because of the soaring costs and technological problems."

The first sentence is  conjecture and contains an error in the price  . . $65m is still the current URF -  and this sentences finishes with more speculation presented as fact  - he has no knowledge of the size of any price rise and if it would "burst" any budget  . . .  if he doesn't know how big any speculated price increase will be and he doesn't know the size and uses of the Program's Contingency Fund, he's just writing words to fill white space.

It is to be noted  that he doesn't speculate on any price reductions that will accrue to the JSF program based on increased foreign sales - look up the Japanese purchase John.

Third sentence - don't have a clue where he got $195m price per jet in the current LRIP batch.  Maybe he called Steve Staples a noted Ottawa aviation and Peace at any Price expert.

Admiral Venlet the head of the F-35 Program Office released these figures in Dec 2011

"The unit cost targets according to the government program office are:

* $111.6 million for the F-35A conventional takeoff and landing version;

* $109.4 million for the short-takeoff-and-landing version; and * $142.9 million for the first production carrier aircraft."


And the last sentence - the deferred deliveries have nothing to do with technical issues  or cost pressures - the reason is the concurrency problem that the level of testing has pointed out. They want  fewer aircraft in the orphan fleet that  will need re-fits to correct issues found in testing.

 

[McG]

Is this part of JUSTAS?

 

[WingsofFury]

Third sentence - don't have a clue where he got $195m price per jet in the current LRIP batch.  Maybe he called Steve Staples a noted Ottawa aviation and Peace at any Price expert.

Admiral Venlet the head of the F-35 Program Office released these figures in Dec 2011

"The unit cost targets according to the government program office are:

* $111.6 million for the F-35A conventional takeoff and landing version;

* $109.4 million for the short-takeoff-and-landing version; and * $142.9 million for the first production carrier aircraft."

For what it's worth, I believe he's talking about 2013 costs as attributed to slower production.

F-35A: $176,488,368 each (3,353,279,000/19)
F-35B: $253,661,000 each (1,521,966,000/6)
F-35C: $279,174,500 each (1,116,698,000/4)

Source:  http://comptroller.defense.gov/defbudget/fy2013/fy2013_p1.pdf  Page 146

Although the number is high, the cost while not in full production is still lower than the per unit price of a Eurofighter Typhoon Tranche 3 aircraft based on Germany's acquisition which puts the Typhoon at about 190M Euros a copy.

 

[Haletown]

For what it's worth, I believe he's talking about 2013 costs as attributed to slower production.

F-35A: $176,488,368 each (3,353,279,000/19)
F-35B: $253,661,000 each (1,521,966,000/6)
F-35C: $279,174,500 each (1,116,698,000/4)

Source:  http://comptroller.defense.gov/defbudget/fy2013/fy2013_p1.pdf  Page 146

It looks like this report is the POTUS budget submission and is for Program costs, all in.

Venlet is using  the actual aircraft/URF price

could you point out where in the report these figures are  . . .  page # . .  thnx ++