Finally New SAR Planes ... again

[Beefitarian]

I wonder if you could put a 737 on skiis?

*sigh*

Here's a video of one with a nose ski. Landing on grass at Hope BC.

[old_man]

Saw something in a magazine a while ago about using the V22 Osprey as a SAR bird? It's got good speed to get you there, and can hover/fly slowly, to extract people. or was it just some journalist's pipe-dream?

It's been talked about as a SAR bird for a while an in other countries as well. The V-22 Osprey was a candidate for the Norwegian All Weather Search and Rescue Helicopter but it was eliminated in 2012.

The problems with it are that it's very expensive to operate. The only advantage it has over a fixed wing aircraft is that it might be possible for it land in a small open area should it need to to extract someone that would be near by. I don't see it being able to hoist due to its downwash. Essentially it's can't do a fixed wing SAR bird's job well (range/payload) and it can't do a SAR helo's job well (hovering). A lot of money for what again? Neat machine though.

Here is what I was talking about down wash of the V-22 that would limit a lot of it's 'helicopter' abilities.

Bell 412 disc loading 7lb/sqft
Cormorant disc loading 10lb/sqft
Chinook disc loading 10lb/sqft
V-22 disc loading 21lb/sqft

Check out this vid at 0:20. Look at what happens to the tree in the back ground. Several people were injured. The last thing you need when approaching someone in distress.

[Tom H]

Considering I am always biased to Canadian design and manufacture...

We already have the C-130J in service and with the Afgan mission winding down they will be more available for domestic missions like long range/faster response SAR duties.

Combine the C-103Js in service with:

A Buffalo airframe with upgrades based on all that has been learned as well as new engines, props, hydraulics and avionics would give us an aircraft suited for the task as typically defined for SAR.

Add in a few http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadair_CL-84

With the same modernized features it would seem to be an ideal team

And the last (2) being proven Canadian designs a mostly domestic answer.

My 2 bits

Tom

[Gannet167]

There's no J's left in the desert. The J's that the Air Force has are designated to tactical airlift squadrons - they're not for SAR units. The older H models and Buffalos are doing SAR duty until the new bird comes on line. The H's the Air Force has are the highest time military Hercs in the world.

The Buff is a great airplane but can't do the legs or speed required for the whole country. The idea of a mixed fleet with different aircraft to meet every need is great. But the government is going to buy one fixed wing type to do everything SAR. That alone will be a pretty expensive, long awaited, complex and controversial event. The combination of the new fixed wing aircraft and the existing Cormorant/Bell 412 is the mixed fleet.

The likely choice is to buy more J models. The common maintenance, parts, service and support, pilot and mechanic training, procedures, and the USAF's claim that it's cheaper overall to operate than C-27's makes it a good solution. The SAR and tactical airlift squadrons could also share airframes to some extent when required.

[Tom H]

There's no J's left in the desert. The J's that the Air Force has are designated to tactical airlift squadrons - they're not for SAR units. The older H models and Buffalos are doing SAR duty until the new bird comes on line. The H's the Air Force has are the highest time military Hercs in the world.

I believe you missed my point

I did not say add more Hercs. With the Afgan with drawl the current J's will be tasked much lighter making them more available for SAR duties, cheap (comparatively cheap to add SAR equipment) and would be a great help in long range, fast reaction cases.

The Buff spread through existing bases can take up the work load and with the modern goodies and a clean up would be a good middle ground.

CL-84-1 in limited quantities would be a great piece of the team. Comparatively fast, can land vertically, 12 pass capacity. With modern goodies lighter more powerful and I would bet even longer range.

As I said a good combination

[old_man]

The Buff spread through existing bases can take up the work load and with the modern goodies and a clean up would be a good middle ground.

CL-84-1 in limited quantities would be a great piece of the team. Comparatively fast, can land vertically, 12 pass capacity. With modern goodies lighter more powerful and I would bet even longer range.

As I said a good combination

You do realize that there is no such thing as a 'modern buff' or a 'modern CL-84'. Neither of those planes exist.

[rigpiggy]

The C-27J is nothing more than a warmed over 1960's G222 an Italian airlifter with the same engine as the Buffalo. If They can upgrade the engines/avionics why can't we.

Our SAR system needs a rethink, having a Cormorant fly 20+ hours to pickup some dumb bunny off an ice floe shows a "Penny wise and Pound foolish" mentality. Putting a detachment in YZF, and rotating the crews/aircraft through would have some benefit in reduced transit times. Hell, if Bonnie Prince Willy can do a 6 week stint in the Falklands, then our precious Cormorant crews could too.

[Tom H]

The Buff spread through existing bases can take up the work load and with the modern goodies and a clean up would be a good middle ground.

CL-84-1 in limited quantities would be a great piece of the team. Comparatively fast, can land vertically, 12 pass capacity. With modern goodies lighter more powerful and I would bet even longer range.

As I said a good combination

You do realize that there is no such thing as a 'modern buff' or a 'modern CL-84'. Neither of those planes exist.

The Buffalo is a proven design many years in production

The CL-84-1 was proven, flight tested extensively and well reviewed

It's not redesigning the wheel simply using modern bolt on systems.
-Engines
-Hydraulics
-Avionics

It is no more than what Viking has done very successfully with the Twin Otter

[Beefitarian]

I'm pretty sure if someone comes up with better utility planes that those three they should have some early production success.

[westcoastwonder]

In the SAR calls, is the Buffalos main job to get into the area quickly and be a platform for human spotters?

[Gannet167]

I did not say add more Hercs. With the Afgan with drawl the current J's will be tasked much lighter making them more available for SAR duties, cheap (comparatively cheap to add SAR equipment) and would be a great help in long range, fast reaction cases.

The Buff spread through existing bases can take up the work load and with the modern goodies and a clean up would be a good middle ground.

CL-84-1 in limited quantities would be a great piece of the team. Comparatively fast, can land vertically, 12 pass capacity. With modern goodies lighter more powerful and I would bet even longer range.

As I said a good combination

I understand what you're saying. The thing is, the J's are allocated to tactical airlift squadrons. I believe the government bought 17 of them to replace what was once probably twice that amount of the old models. Those squadrons operate independently from the SAR units, conducting training, maintenance and maintaining an operational capability, so if an earthquake/ tsunami happens, something like Libya flares up, etc they are able to do their job. They've been out of the desert for some time now but they still aren't free to be used by SAR crews, they still have flights to do - they can't borrow airplanes from those units to put on SAR standby or launch when there's a call out. When they send a bunch of J's to somewhere to do something, you can't stand down the SAR capability. If you borrow airlift J's for SAR on a regular basis, you lose that capability. SAR crews and TAL crews each have their own unique and fairly complex qualifications to maintain. They are very different jobs and generally the crews are not interchangeable without significant training. In short, there is no surplus of J model's to be borrowed. Any use of one squadron's planes reduces operational ability of another squadron.

The Buffalo, while an amazing airplane and a fine example of excellent Canadian engineering, even with modern systems still isn't capable of doing the job across the country. It's not fast enough, doesn't have the range, isn't pressurized, etc. New engines aren't going to significantly change these limitations. If there's a commercial demand for it as a utility aircraft, I'm sure someone will eventually do what Viking is doing with the Twin Otter - with new engines and systems.

The C-27J would be a good choice as it has the same engines and many of the same systems as the J (not as the Buff). This makes training and maintenance a little more simple. But if as the USAF claims the operating costs are as high as a 130J, you may as well buy 130J's and get that much more capability and even more simplicity in common training and maintenance.

[SAR_YQQ]

Hi guys, lots of good discussion here.

I'm happy to see Gannett jumping in and dispelling a lot of the myths associated with what is being posted by the MSM and others in the "know".

Tactical J Hercs are useless as a new FWSAR - we can't just borrow them. They don't have what we need as a modern SAR platform (namely the complete lack of an EO/IR turret). Any 130J contender would have to be a brand new plane - most likely a shorty J (vice the stretch J's we currently have) and they will be painted SAR yellow.

While I love the Buff - she's my first military airlifter - she won't be reincarnated anytime soon. Viking has no experience building a military airlifter. Their drawings for the 1960 era DHC-5 are useless, as any new Buffalo would have so many structural changes to it, that you might as well just build a new plane from the gear up. The new FWSAR will be pressurized - square fuselage is out. The new FWSAR will fly 300+ KIAS, new wing design = whole new aircraft R&D etc. Viking has already made it very clear, they will not be bending any metal unless they are given the contract - they won't get a dime of taxpayer money unless they have a flying demonstrator. I have no gripe against Viking - they did an awesome job with the Twotter reincarnation. I truly don't see a made-in-Canada solution to this program.
My comments above and below are entirely made as a Canadian citizen with an informed opinion. I have no say in what aircraft will/will not be picked - nor should any Main Stream Media take my comments as that of an expert.

21st FWSAR is evolving - we won't be flying low and slow searching with CASARA spotters. We will be joining the modern age and using gyro-stabilized optics with highly accurate IR search technology. The ability to sprint to a crash scene and look for a rapidly cooling engine/post crash fire is what will save lives. FWIW, the search speed on the Buff was/is 120KIAS. Herc can do it around 130-140KIAS. We rely on our RWSAR and our awesome team of CASARA aircraft to do the fine-comb searching.

I agree with the comments of establishing a SAR det in YZF. The airport has plenty of room for expansion and the city can absorb a few more families. The tax payer must be prepared to foot the extra cost however. The infrastructure upgrade alone would be quite costly.

I will be in a position to comment on this thread - as I am no longer directly involved with SAR in Canada. Like I mentioned above, none of my comments should be taken as gospel or as the official stance of the RCAF or the Government of Canada.

[JMACK]

[quote="rigpiggy"]The C-27J is nothing more than a warmed over 1960's G222 an Italian airlifter with the same engine as the Buffalo. If They can upgrade the engines/avionics why can't we.

Bingo let Viking show us what they got "BRING BACK THE BUFF"

With Q400 engines and an FAR 25 flight deck it will surprise and amaze!

My solution J models and Super Buffs maybe even some Q400 for the RCAF.

My 2 cents!

Jim

[Beefitarian]

Someone just has to commission the first military grade buffalo so Viking can build a flying demonstrator.

I hope we see this soon,

21st FWSAR is evolving - we won't be flying low and slow searching with CASARA spotters. We will be joining the modern age and using gyro-stabilized optics with highly accurate IR search technology. The ability to sprint to a crash scene and look for a rapidly cooling engine/post crash fire is what will save lives. FWIW, the search speed on the Buff was/is 120KIAS. Herc can do it around 130-140KIAS. We rely on our RWSAR and our awesome team of CASARA aircraft to do the fine-comb searching.

the problem is even if they are on order, it will take seemingly forever.

I guess that goes for anything including the crowd favorite buffalo.

[Gannet167]

Q400's are a fine Canadian product, but useless for SAR. They not only lack the cabin shape to manage a SAR type kit load, they have no rear ramp. The ramp is an absolute must. I believe their range/endurance is also not intended to depart Trenton, fly to Iqaluit, loiter on scene for 5 hours, drop some rafts, some SAR techs, some survival kits, then recover to wherever the weather permits. Or depart Greenwood and do the same thing at 30 west.

A "Super" Buff with over powered engines would be faster but still lacks the range (no pressurization) the speed or the fuel. It's like taking a 1960 pickup truck and trying to modify it to be a brand new SUV. It's not going to be FAR 25 - and if you put the money into making it FAR 25 compliant, you probably have spent more money changing an antiquated template than if you just started with a clean drawing board and the latest and greatest in design and materials. I'm a big fan of Canadian designed and built products and the Buff is a fine example of this - but it simply does not fit the bill, even with CF-5 turbo fans, massive auxilary tanks, a glass cockpit, some Macgyver'ed way to pressurize a square fuselage, a way to force it to be RVSM compliant etc. etc. etc. At that point you've got the aviation equivalent of this:

When you could just go out and buy the right product.

A I'd rather fly an aircraft certified under FAR 25 than a "military" grade aircraft. Airlines would never tolerate the levels of serviceability that even new "military" airplanes have. They also don't have to comply with all the civilian certification requirements - although they may be able to take a bullet through some component or another.

[Double Wasp]

Q400's are a fine Canadian product, but useless for SAR. They not only lack the cabin shape to manage a SAR type kit load, they have no rear ramp. The ramp is an absolute must. I believe their range/endurance is also not intended to depart Trenton, fly to Iqaluit, loiter on scene for 5 hours, drop some rafts, some SAR techs, some survival kits, then recover to wherever the weather permits. Or depart Greenwood and do the same thing at 30 west.

Gannet I have great respect for what SAR people do however just because this is way that you have been doing it in the past does not mean that this cat can not be skinned a different way. Maybe a step back and a look at how other areas manage their SAR capabilities is what the Canadian government needs to do. Perhaps a mix of front line civillian contracts that is supported by military assets is what is required, this is what is done elsewhere in the world.

Other countries around the world some with equally challenging terrain and equally large regions of responsibilty are able to use Q400's or smaller machines to conduct their SAR. Maybe the SAR kit needs to have a rethink with regards to what is brought to every situation, perhaps the kitchen sink is not required every time. DH8's and other aircraft can have an air operable drop door fitted and they seem to get by without a ramp. While most of these countries do not currently deploy "SAR tech" type personnel from their aircraft do not doubt for a second that this capability is not possible from these types of aircraft, in fact the procedures are generally already set and just waiting for the contract requirement.

Have a look at the capabilities that companies like Provincial Aerospace are putting on a DH8

http://www.provincialaerospace.com/Surv ... dAircraft/

Disclaimer: I work for a company where one of our tasks is to conduct SAR.

Cheers
DW

[fireman1867]

Long time lurker etc etc,

First off, why is everyone so romantic about the Buff? Great plane but it's time has passed lets get over it. Viking in all it's glory would be out of its breadth in developing a new Buff and even then as previously mentioned by others it would be a shambles - nuff said

Being very partial to the Herc for a whole bunch of reasons, legs, pressurization, redundancy, the list goes on, and being a tax payer like all of you my solution would be simple, small purchase of j model stubbies to take care of the arctic and our commitment to 30 west and then wait for it..........

More helicopters gasp! I said the H word!

Seriously I've been there and seen it all for the most part, and at the end of the day everyone is happy to see anything overhead initially but after tha initial euphoria subsides heads begin to be scratched and wonder what is this wonderful yellow or grey plane going to do for me? Well not much for the most part. Yes well send you SAR techs but the plan is always how long until a helo arrives. So let's make this simple, more fixed based SAR helos in more locations with a presence in the real north aka Frobisher or Res, and then J models to fill the big gaps east and west.

My 2 cents.

Enjoy

[Tom H]

One thing is certain

While the people involved with SAR, like members throughout the Armed Forces, have done an exceptional job despite the limitations of equipment, budgets etc.

But much like other military acquisitions the entire SAR mandate should be defined publicly along with the expectations of what it is expected to provide.

Canada, as we all know, is a massive country with large expanses of remote areas and coastlines.

Does the existing system meet expectation?
If so the government needs to be clear it does and what the expectations are.

If not what needs to be changed so it can meet expectation?
How do we fix it? What equipment is required and what personnel?

Then the details of which gimmergrommet to buy can be argued.

As I indicated I have the highest admiration and respect for the people that make SAR work.

It is up to the government in power to define the mission, mandate and expectations...then give the SAR folks the tools to make it happen, they obviously have the skills.

And I still love the Buff and all the work it has done.

[Gannet167]

Other countries around the world some with equally challenging terrain and equally large regions of responsibilty are able to use Q400's or smaller machines to conduct their SAR.

Such as? Canada is still the second largest country in the world with most of it being uninhabited and with the most brutal climactic conditions around.

Maybe the SAR kit needs to have a rethink with regards to what is brought to every situation, perhaps the kitchen sink is not required every time.

When would you propose they load the required kit for this SAR call out's specific and unique requirements? SAR birds are left fuelled and loaded, checks done, crews are on a standby posture ready to spring into action. There's no time to load equipment or unload it. They take off and file airborne. If you get a call out, you need everything and the kitchen sink because you don't know all the particulars and once you've flown 3 hours to the barren north, there really is no opportunity to head back home to pickup that thing you wish you'd brought because it would have saved lives. It's a little like suggesting Ambulance crews switch to using a minivan, and to solve the space problem, just load or unload the bandages, needles, defibrillators, neck braces, IV's, scissors etc depending on what type of accident or injury the ambulance crew is responding to.

If the Air Force's SAR capability is coming looking for me, I WANT them to have every possible thing they might need. As a tax payer, it's good value for my money for them to have that stuff and the airplane to carry it. Life rafts, medical kits, flares, I'm sure the SAR guys can chime in here with the vast amount of kit they carry.

Loading large items like life rafts - and more importantly dropping them to people in need works best with a ramp. It's virtually the perfect design for dropping things and people jumping. Kind of like the pickup truck box of airplanes. Versatile and very easy to load/unload. As a contractor, you could use a Volkswagen station wagon instead of your trusty three quarter ton pickup, shoveling gravel into the hatch back etc. But in reality, you're putting a square peg in a round hole. If we're advocating an airplane it should be for it's capability and inherent design, not on where it's made.

They need the right tool for the job, not to "get by." The public will be stuck with this capability for probably another 40 years so we should try to get it right.

Have a look at the capabilities that companies like Provincial Aerospace are putting on a DH8

But where does the 12+ hours of fuel go? With a cabin not even half the size, where does the kit go? The 6 or more crew members? That's a pretty cool -8, for sure, but it's in an entirely different league of aircraft capability and while PAL may supplement some SAR, the corresponding loss in capability from having C130's would never be tolerated. It's like comparing a Ford Ranger (while a nice little truck) to a 5 ton flat deck with a hydraulic crane. Both are trucks but one can do bigger tasks.

[JMACK]

@Gannet167 and fireman1867

OK I've been persuaded but I think I was looking at SAR from a different point. I was thinking along the lines of having satellite bases like fro-bay with Buffs not launching out of Trenton. I do like the idea of yellow hercs on each coast and something a little father north east and north west than Trenton maybe Coldlake and Bagotville. I would also like to see more yellow hellos. I know we have to pay for it as tax payers but its worth it.

As far as the Q400 goes it has some pretty amazing numbers, range and payload.
On that front I was thinking back to the Andover the RAF modified with a ramp door and stretched the Hawker 748 in to a little lifter maybe far fetched to think the Dash could go thru that transformation. It could be an awesome maritime patrol bird.


You got me I have a soft spot for the Buf having flown it! I hope we never buy the eurobird that the USAF decided was not suitable.

Hercs and Hellos are probably the way to go!

Cheers....Jim

[Double Wasp]

Other countries around the world some with equally challenging terrain and equally large regions of responsibilty are able to use Q400's or smaller machines to conduct their SAR.

Such as? Canada is still the second largest country in the world with most of it being uninhabited and with the most brutal climactic conditions around.

Have a look at the area of SAR responsibility of Australia. To the west they cover nearly 2/3 of the Indian Ocean. To the east they cover a huge area of the south pacific. South they cover the great southern ocean to the Antarctic, which is windier and colder than our arctic. North they cover to the Indonesian coastline including Papua Niugini and East Temore and the Soloman Islands, think very rugged terrain with volcanoes. We are not alone in covering vast areas.

The Aussies use Dornier 328's, supplemented by P3's for the extreme distance stuff. Generally they drop stores from the Dornier to keep the people sustained until a helicopter shows up. Their aircraft are on 30 minute standby (time until airborne) during daylight hours and 1 hour at night. They operate from bases around the country, not 3 or so along the southern border.

Maybe the SAR kit needs to have a rethink with regards to what is brought to every situation, perhaps the kitchen sink is not required every time.

When would you propose they load the required kit for this SAR call out's specific and unique requirements? SAR birds are left fuelled and loaded, checks done, crews are on a standby posture ready to spring into action. There's no time to load equipment or unload it. They take off and file airborne. If you get a call out, you need everything and the kitchen sink because you don't know all the particulars and once you've flown 3 hours to the barren north, there really is no opportunity to head back home to pickup that thing you wish you'd brought because it would have saved lives. It's a little like suggesting Ambulance crews switch to using a minivan, and to solve the space problem, just load or unload the bandages, needles, defibrillators, neck braces, IV's, scissors etc depending on what type of accident or injury the ambulance crew is responding to.

A six man self inflating life raft fits in a medium size duffel bag. A winter survival kit fits in the same size bag. If you need a herc to carry your SAR kit around your kit is too big, unless you are being deployed for a month or so.

Have a look at the capabilities that companies like Provincial Aerospace are putting on a DH8

But where does the 12+ hours of fuel go? With a cabin not even half the size, where does the kit go? The 6 or more crew members? That's a pretty cool -8, for sure, but it's in an entirely different league of aircraft capability and while PAL may supplement some SAR, the corresponding loss in capability from having C130's would never be tolerated. It's like comparing a Ford Ranger (while a nice little truck) to a 5 ton flat deck with a hydraulic crane. Both are trucks but one can do bigger tasks.

I would much rather have the Ford Ranger show up after being stranded for 1 hour than have to wait for an extra 4 for the winch truck to show up. You do not need the 12+ hours of fuel if you can get there in 1 hour and then be able to provide 5 hours on station until the helicopter arrives.

This is the perfect time to have a rethink of how Canada's SAR operates. Having an aircraft that is refueled and ready to go in Trenton is the next thing to useless when you are wrecked on the side of a mountain in the middle of the arctic. The 3,4,5+ hours that it takes for an asset to arrive overhead is what is unacceptable. I agree with the idea of more bases with more helicopters however I would take it one step further and provide a smaller quick aircraft than can still provide drop capability to go out and find the person, drop a small amount of stores to keep them going then hold on station until the helicopter arrives for the extraction.

By the way we currently use the DH5 for SAR, having previously flown one I believe the internal cabin volume of a Q400 would be very close to the same if not greater. It is a 70+ passenger aircraft vs a 50 person troop carrier.

Good Discussion
DW