RCAF Replacement of Rescue Aircraft Delayed... Yet Again
Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog
Re: RCAF Replacement of Rescue Aircraft Delayed... Yet Again
Yah!! lets get a bunch of osprey tilt rotor planes/helicopters 
I'm sure they would be cheaper to operate than the current fleet and they must have at least a 40 yr lifespan on the airframe right? 
How could that machine ever be considered for search and rescue when the current budjet is under question. Surely Viking can refit, make all the parts, or build new buffalo for for chaper than that.
Friday morning ranting, i know, sometimes these stories are just too much to read.
I'm sure they would be cheaper to operate than the current fleet and they must have at least a 40 yr lifespan on the airframe right? How could that machine ever be considered for search and rescue when the current budjet is under question. Surely Viking can refit, make all the parts, or build new buffalo for for chaper than that. Friday morning ranting, i know, sometimes these stories are just too much to read.
Re: RCAF Replacement of Rescue Aircraft Delayed... Yet Again
Questions and answers about the requirement taken from Public Works and Services site http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/app-acq/st ... w-eng.html
Though I'm biased (flew the Buf for seven years,) I certainly agree with the poster above, re: Viking new or renewed DHC5s. Ospreys would be ridiculous given that we already have the CH149. Probably rumours being spread by V-22 builders...
Since the plenary session on August 16, the industry consultation has generated much interest and the FWSAR project team is now ready to share some of the common themes. The subset selection is based on relevance and frequency, and no attribution is made.
1. Question: Is there a possibility that the Government might modify mandatory components listed by the Essential Elements (DND requirements)?
Answer: Changes to the Essential Elements were made in response to the National Research Council recommendations. While DND will consider feedback received from Industry and use it to add detail to specifications as necessary, no significant change to the required capability is expected to take place.
2. Question: Was the Essential Elements document designed for the acquisition of an aircraft instead of geared for a service offering?
Answer: The Essential Elements document was built around the assumption that DND would acquire replacement aircraft. If the decision was made to proceed with a full Alternate Delivery Service solution, the Essential Elements may be modified. However, it is clear that the Statement of Interest and Qualification (SOIQ) or the Request for Proposal (RFP) would be based on level of service and its associated performance measurement criteria.
3. Question: When will the Statement of Requirement (SOR) be published?
Answer: The SOR is an internal DND document and it is used to produce subsequent contractual documents that will be part of the SOIQ and the RFP packages. The SOR itself will not be released. The Essential Elements document was created to provide industry with the essential elements and the concept of operations. As part of an SOIQ and RFP the government will release a vehicle requirements specification and performance work statement, or similar type of documents, and these are the requirements for which the government will contract.
4. Question: Will the Government consider a mixed-fleet to replace the existing FWSAR capability?
Answer: As the Statement of Operational Requirement is now capability based, mixed fleet options will be considered.
5. Question: Would the Government entertain the idea of upgrading the existing fleet of Hercules C-130 as a potential solution?
Answer: The intent of this process is for Industry to provide the Project Office with options to meet the requirements of the FWSAR capability. Therefore, it is expected that Industry would provide details on such a proposal as part of their discussion paper submission.
6. Question: Can you share the flight usage, yearly flying rate (YFR), for the existing FWSAR fleet?
Answer: This is a rough estimate. The C115 Buffalo YFR is anywhere between 1,400 and 2,000 hours per year while the C130 Hercules YFR is between 4,000 to 5,000 hours per year.
7. Question: Are civilian pilots an option for a service delivery contract?
Answer: All options are being considered and industry is invited to address this option as part of their discussion paper submission.
8. Question: On the presentation, the first level of maintenance is shown as a DND function. For a performance-based contract, would it be preferable to outsource this service?
Answer: If Industry can show that outsourcing this service is achievable and makes sense as an option to meet the requirements for this capability then it will be considered. It is expected that Industry will provide specific details on how this will be accomplished as part of their Industry discussion paper submissions.
9. Question: Could you explain the meaning of "conning of the aircraft"?
Answer: "Conning" refers to maintaining visual reference and directing the aircraft to an object of interest by providing verbal direction to the pilot.
10. Question: What does "Controller Pilot Data Link Communications" mean?
Answer: It refers to the ability to electronically transmit Air Traffic Control (ATC) Clearances, Aircraft Communication Messages, etc. Due to the evolving technologies and regulatory standards, detailed specifications will be researched in the Definition Phase.
11. Question: Will the budget for the FWSAR project be released and if so, when?
Answer: At this point in time, this information is confidential.
12. Question: Do you have a scoring matrix available to weight the rated requirements?
Answer: The scoring matrix will be generated as part of the project definition phase. The immediate goal is to seek Government approval on strategic procurement issues and to obtain funding from Treasury Board to proceed with project definition.
13. Question: What are the next steps?
Answer: Following receipt of the discussion papers from industry, we will take several weeks to analyse the input and formulate a recommendation to Government. The current plan is to seek Government approval during the Fall of 2011, and then, obtain Treasury Board funding for project definition.
14. Question: Are you planning a 20-year life-cycle?
Answer: The foreseen in-service support contract duration is for a period of 20 year. That being said, an aircraft life of 30 years or more is desirable. Industry may make recommendations for a different contract duration as long as the associated advantages are substantiated.
15. Question: Will the Government consider two contracts: one for the West region and one for the East?
Answer: The Government is looking for a single point of accountability but remains open to industry suggestions.
16. Question: What do you mean by a Canadian led In-Service Support (ISS) provider?
Answer: The ISS approach for this project would require a legally binding business arrangement between the Canadian ISS integrator and the aircraft provider to ensure a single point of accountability. The aircraft provider would need to ensure that the ISS integrator and its sub-contractors would have access to all intellectual property and other support required to perform the ISS work. In terms of Industrial and Regional Benefits (IRB) requirements, high intellectual value work - work that will preserve critical defence capabilities or support the sustainment and growth of Canadian industry will be a consideration.
17. Question: What importance does DND place on maximizing the capability through the use of tactical sensors?
Answer: DND recognizes the importance of the role of tactical sensors in a search and rescue operation and acknowledges that further work is required to develop requirement specifications.
18. Question: What is your vision of how best value would be determined for capability that exceeds the minimum requirement?
Answer: The criteria will be published, but they have not yet been developed. There will be cost and technical components.
19. Question: Some assets could be available for secondary tasks. To what extent will those secondary capabilities be assessed?
Answer: The secondary missions will not determine fleet size or be a part of the evaluation criteria.
Though I'm biased (flew the Buf for seven years,) I certainly agree with the poster above, re: Viking new or renewed DHC5s. Ospreys would be ridiculous given that we already have the CH149. Probably rumours being spread by V-22 builders...
Re: RCAF Replacement of Rescue Aircraft Delayed... Yet Again
I agree.
In my CASARA days, I spent many hours as a spotter in Hercs. They are big, fast, and expensive for the job of carrying a few spotters. Anything smaller, slower, with two engines, would probably be better.
In my CASARA days, I spent many hours as a spotter in Hercs. They are big, fast, and expensive for the job of carrying a few spotters. Anything smaller, slower, with two engines, would probably be better.
Re: RCAF Replacement of Rescue Aircraft Delayed... Yet Again
From the link gannet posted.
"Alenia, makers of the C-27-J Spartan, are also in the running.
The U.S. Air Force recently announced that it would scrap its fleet of Spartans as cost-saving measure. Canadian officials quietly expressed interest, according to defence sources, but the company's president warned the Pentagon that if the fleet was sold off to another country, it would refuse to service them."
That is complete BS. If we buy the US inventory Alenia would refuse to sell spares to Canada! I think Canada should tell Alenia to go piss up a rope, their aircraft will not be considered factory new, its these used ones or nothing at all.
"Alenia, makers of the C-27-J Spartan, are also in the running.
The U.S. Air Force recently announced that it would scrap its fleet of Spartans as cost-saving measure. Canadian officials quietly expressed interest, according to defence sources, but the company's president warned the Pentagon that if the fleet was sold off to another country, it would refuse to service them."
That is complete BS. If we buy the US inventory Alenia would refuse to sell spares to Canada! I think Canada should tell Alenia to go piss up a rope, their aircraft will not be considered factory new, its these used ones or nothing at all.
Re: RCAF Replacement of Rescue Aircraft Delayed... Yet Again
http://australianaviation.com.au/2012/0 ... enia-says/Edo wrote:Canada should tell Alenia to go piss up a rope...
The RAAF is interested in those used Spartans too, and Alenia is playing games there also.
Re: RCAF Replacement of Rescue Aircraft Delayed... Yet Again
Considering the other anglo/italian POS's aftermarket support buy them for spares. you might even keep the fleet in the air
Re: RCAF Replacement of Rescue Aircraft Delayed... Yet Again
As much as I love the old girl - she is not even in the running. Nor does Viking have deep enough pockets to compete internationally.ch135146 wrote: Viking new or renewed DHC5s.
Re: RCAF Replacement of Rescue Aircraft Delayed... Yet Again
You're right SAR_YQQ. A shrink would say I was in denial.
