Views on air force modernization and capabilities expansion

[Sf2]

I submit that Tac Hel duties could be just as easily tasked to CHC - they have the ability, why not let them

That's a pretty bold statement, for a number of reasons:

1)  Yeah, when was the last time TAC HEL did a company airmobile into a Hot LZ with guns ablazing, but there IS the remote possiblity.  Would CHC be will to perform such a task?
2)  NVG ops are still very very new to the civi side.  There are very few civi helo pilots trained on NVG, let alone night contour flying, and formation flying on NVG.
3)  Don't forget a small, very small portion of TAC HEL performs SOA duties (special ops aviation) - are you going to hand that over to CHC?  Not likely.

 

[Zoomie]

I concur Short Final - my response was more tongue-in-cheek to Duey than anything else.

Everything that you mentioned about Tac Hel is a military skill that is honed over years of training and experience.  I can say the same about SAR in the CF - it would be difficult to hand this role over to civi's as it would be to task CHC to play with the boys at DHTC.

Mr. Harding - I am sorry that your experience with 440 Sqn was less than ideal - I can share your pain and even recognize what you went through.  Being ex-green myself, it has been an "interesting" past 6 years.  I tend to get along with our unit's SARTechs better than fellow aviators - mainly due to my initial indoctrination into Her Majesties CF.  The airforce is more of a gentleman's flying club - even our Hu-Ah Tactical Aviators tend to pale with the true esprit de corps found within the LFC.  I trust you have found your niche...

Combat SAR is not something that can be picked up overnight and is not, at this moment (IMHO), a role that the CF: (a) requires; (b) has the aircraft/equipment; and (c) has the necessary political backing to support.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Allright folks, i figured i'd open myself to flaming.   A while ago there were some people saying that some of us were afraid of making suggestions on what we saw as ideal force structure for the army so, staying in my lane, here's what i think for the air force.   Feel free to question and pick apart as this is in no way perfect.

Fighter aviation:

Even with the current modernization, the CF-18A/B airframe is getting seriously old.   I realize that Canada is , at first glance anyways, waiting for JSF to come to production but, IMHO, this is somewhat of a long way off and will be a very expensive option.   I propose to replace the CF-18s sooner rather than later with the Eurofighter Typhoon or Dassault Raffale.   personaly i favour the Raffale but since the Typhoon already has several custumers there could be economies of scale to be had there.

Fighter aviation would be concentrated around 4 Wing in Cold lake ( 416 & 441 sqn) and 3 Wing in Bagottville ( 425 & 433 sqn) and of course 410 sqn as the fighter OTU.   Cold lake ( 410 sqn) would assume the duties of center-of-excellence for all fighter aviation in similar fashion to what the army is doing.

Maritime patrol

IMHO, the current incarnation of AIMP is a complete disaster.   I feel that the CP-140 has to be replaced in the medium-to-long term.   Prospective candidates include the US MMA and the British Nimrod MR.4.   There are not very many options for replacements in this role.   One option would be to seriously accelerate the AIMP program.   14 Wing Greenwood would be the COE for maritime aviation. 405,415 and 407 as the operational sqns and 404 as the OTU.   MP&EU and 14 SES would remain in place to rpovide support the maritime patrol operational community.

Tactical airlift

I propose the replacement of CC-130 E/H employed in the TAL role with the C-130J for 429 & 436 sqn ( 8 wing trenton) and 435 sqn (17 wing Winnipeg).

Strategic airlift

I propose the purchase/lease of 6-8 C-17/A400M to be based at 8 Wing trenton ( 437 sqn)

Search and rescue

Purchase/lease 16 C-27 and equip 442(Comox), 413(Greenwood), 429(Trenton) and a new sqn in Winnipeg for the current "coast guard-type" SAR

Snowbirds

I would like to see the current aircraft replaced by Hawk ( lease or purchase)

Maritime hellicopters

Not to be marginalized, i would like to see the number of CH-148 purchased increased to 41 to compensate for long term attrition, maintenace and training.


Now for some other stuff:

1 Wing would lose 408, 427 and 430 qns as those would fall directly to the army brigades.   They would remain air force, responsible directly to 1 CAD for the airworthiness of the aircraft and crew currency but would report directly to the brigade commanders for training and day to day operations.   1 wing would concentrate around 400, 438 and 403 sqns to provide CH-146 initial training, augmentation fro the line sqns and deployable capabilities for "air force only" ops. 1 Wing should also gain 2 to 3 sqn of medium lift helicopters based on the Merlin HC.1 ot S-92 to provide more robust support to the army.

I would also like to see the creation of 2 dedicated combat SAR ( CSAR) squadrons based in Both 3 & 4 wing equiped with Merlin HC.1 / S-92 with modifications similar to the MH-53E/HH-53.   This would provided Canada with its own organic CSAR capabilities and would give of greater freedom of action during a crissis. Additionaly, 444 sqn, currently based at 5 wing Goose Bay would convert from the CH-146 to the new CSAR aircraft and move to cold lake to become the CSAR OTU after 5 wing closes.

Once a new strateic airlifter has entered service with 437 sqn, all of the CC-150 Polaris aircraft woud convert to full-time AAR and remain in trenton with that sqn.

In order to provide greater support the land operation i propose the establish a sqn   ( 6 aircraft) whos role would be similar to what the E-8 JSTARS is doing for the USAF.   As this aircraft is large and expensive, i propose to take a similar approach to what the UK Royal air force is doing.   They have decided to put in service the Bombardier Sentinel R.1, the first deliveries of which will begin next year to RAF Waddington's 5 sqn.   This would give the air force a true capability to support ISTAR for the army. This unti would be most likely based in trenton or Winnipeg.

I would also like to see the air force aquire an AWACS capability.   I beleive that the E-3 is far too expensive for us so options would be the E-2C Hawkeye ( proven design) or even the Embraer 145 AEW&C which has proven itself rather surprizingly during exercises such as CRUZEX 2004.   It is employed in that role by the Brazilian AF.   We could even benefit by using the same airframe for bot JSTARS and AWACS role by going with Embrarer's entire ISR line based on the EMB 145 airframe. AWACs would operate out of Cold lake where it would be in a good position to work directly with the fighter community and participate in MAPLE FLAG.

Thats as far as my thinking gets me for now.   Its a bit to ask but is more realistic for canada than some other options i have heard floating around.

Start flaming away troops......

Fighter Aviation
I'd designate the new JSF-B as the NEXT Canadian Fighter because I believe it will provide a significant dominance over any of the current alternatives available including:  F-16 Block 60, F-18 E/F, Rafale or Typhoon.  Short Version:  I think it's worth the wait.

In the meantime, I'd identify the airframes in greatest need of refurbishment and set-up a line identical to the one being used by the US Navy for its "Center Barrel Replacement Plus Program" for its F-18 C/D's.  The Americans I believe are forecasting their F-18 C/D fleet with this refurbishment to last past 2017.

In addition, I agree with the idea of downsizing squadron sizes as I don't see the likelihood of an airborne attack being high, but having a deterent in each area of the country (especially the north) seems absolutely necessary.

Lastly, the JSF-B would be my choice due to its abiltiy to operate off of LHD's (which I continue to believe MUST be part of our future navy - in particular I think the new Navantia design is just about perfect), or off rough runways should we deploy in areas with limited infrastructure.


Maritime Patrol/AWACS/JSTARS-equivalent/SAAR
Going to step outside the box for a moment on this one.  I propose we explore the possibility of going to a single airframe for all these roles - specifically the Airbus A320 (CC-150).  With that airframe add the Erieye radar system (as per 737 wedgetail), the Raytheon Raytheon ASARS-2 (from ASTOR) and the magnetic anomaly detectors/magnetic compensators (from the AIMP upgrade) to build one multipurpose surveillance platform.  With this new fleet of 12-16 aircraft (and the matching SAAR assets) we should be able to provide excellent coverage of our coastal areas, the north, as well as full-spectrum analysis of any expeditionary areas we may deploy to.


Tactical/Strategic Lift
I continue to argue since the C-130 cannot lift our primary land warfare system, it has outlasted its usefulness unless we start re-design all our ground units into light infantry that are going to be specifically restricted to allow for C-130 deployment.

Since I believe that would be insane and assume the we will to continue to use the LAV-III as the basis of our ground forces in my mind that justifies the transition to a different class of aircraft.  That leaves only two choices:  C-17 or A400M.  Based on its track record I would lean towards a C-17/C-27 mix however since we are still years away from redesigned land force, we probably have the luxury to wait for the A400M if we can work an economic deal similar to what was done with Sikorsky at which point I would propose we move to an all A400M force.


Search and Rescue
Based on the comments here and elsewhere, it appears the C-27J is a no-brainer.  My only change with what aesop said, was again for political reasons, I would be building bases in the North now.  Specifically, I would look at a building a series of small northern bases (Resolute, Holman, Kugluktuk, Pond Inlet, Clyde River, etc.) with a combination of JORN Radars and runways for C-27J.  I would also build two larger bases (one at Iqalut and the other at Inuvik) with the objective of maintaining full-time AIMP's and eventually JSF-C/A320 multi-role aircraft.


Snowbirds
Hawk makes the most sense due to low cost operation.


Maritime Helicopters
Agree with the increase in numbers and again would at least have a seasonal deployment to a new Northern Base.


New Medium Lift Helicopter + CSAR
Makes sense to me.  Using the Cyclone as the base considering we're building them here makes further sense.  Designing them to operate off our JSS ship, with recovery by current/future frigates, destroyers makes further sense.  Keeping a single platform with one engine type to simplify supply/logistics for all expeditionary deployed helicopters seems smarter still.


Other Stuff
I remain a proponent of long endurance unarmed UAV's remaining over deployed battlegroups at all times with the ability to provide surveillance and targeting information to ground-based firing systems such as GPS-guided 120mm mortar, 155mm artillery and HIMARS.


That's the end of my brain cell tonight....off to the bar.

Cheers all...



Matthew.

P.S.  As a side note, it would also be worthwhile to begin planning for naval bases to control the Beaufort Sea and Hudson Straits as well...

 

[Roy Harding]

...

Mr. Harding - I am sorry that your experience with 440 Sqn was less than ideal - I can share your pain and even recognize what you went through.  Being ex-green myself, it has been an "interesting" past 6 years.  I tend to get along with our unit's SARTechs better than fellow aviators - mainly due to my initial indoctrination into Her Majesties CF.  The airforce is more of a gentleman's flying club - even our Hu-Ah Tactical Aviators tend to pale with the true esprit de corps found within the LFC.  I trust you have found your niche...

Combat SAR is not something that can be picked up overnight and is not, at this moment (IMHO), a role that the CF: (a) requires; (b) has the aircraft/equipment; and (c) has the necessary political backing to support.

Please call me Roy - I wasn't fishing for sympathy, and I did, eventually, re-claim my "niche" in the Army.

Back to the discussion at hand - I've always been curious, what resources (if any) are currently tasked to the role of CSAR?  Given the fact that we contributed Airforces to both the Gulf War and Kosovo, and that the possiblity of actually employing CSAR assets was very real (especially in the first instance), did we simply rely upon our allies for this function?  For that matter, we have assets flying into/out of Afghanistan as well - same question applies here.

 

[Sf2]

New Medium Lift Helicopter + CSAR
Makes sense to me.  Using the Cyclone as the base considering we're building them here makes further sense.  Designing them to operate off our JSS ship, with recovery by current/future frigates, destroyers makes further sense.  Keeping a single platform with one engine type to simplify supply/logistics for all expeditionary deployed helicopters seems smarter still.

My opinion - FLAME SUIT ON - but what you said makes about as much sense as buying the Griffon - they're built here, mass spare parts availability ect.....However, the Cyclone, like the Griffon, is a civilian derivative.  What does that mean? A number of things

1)  no matter how hard you try to modify it, it will never be a hardened, military aircraft
2)  there will be regimes that us as users will want to fly the machine in, however, due to the fact that its a civilian bird, will not have been tested during its design stage, which means we can't use it in those regimes - this is very common with the Griffon (eg: beep back to 97 with mission kits).  Can you fly the S-92 with the main ramp open in ALL regimes?
3)  Has the S-92 been tested in high DA environments?  Even the 53's are having problems with tail rotor authority in afganistan
4)  Has the S-92 been designed with CSAR in mind?  Deep penetration with a laser/radar warning receiver on board?  Self defense?  This has do be designed with the helicopter, not as an afterthought.

Something to chew on........


We need a proven, military purpose machine - not to purchase because its convenient, but because it works well.  We all know what chopper I'm talking about, so I'll leave it at that.

 

[h3tacco]

short final I think you are bit off base on your S-92 comments. First of we purchased a variant of the H-92 not the S-92. The H-92 is a military variant of the S-92, a civilian helicopter, which in turn was a evolutionary extension of the military H-60 series. The H-92 (ie CH-148) will be hardened, mainly in the form of its marinization. The H-92 will be tested for all regimes to be used by the military. In high DA conditions there is nothing that gives performance advantage to civilian vs military variants aerodynamics are the same throughout, not withstanding differences in engines and gearboxes. The CH-148 will be equiped with RWR, MAWS, LWR and chaff/flare. As for the CSAR the CH-148 will not be directly designed for it but Sirkosky is currently pitching the H-92 to the USAF to do exactly the CSAR role replacing the HH-60H, including the addition of a refueling boom. As for another corretion the CH-148 will not be built in Canada but at the sikorsky plant in Connecticut. I think it is in Sikorsky's best  interest to fully develop the H-92 since it will continue to market it to a vast number of larger contracts to other nations. At the end of the day there may end up being similarites between the CH-146 and CH-148 only time will tell. However, the process to purchase the two were distinctly diiferent. The CH-146 deal was closed before  Statement of Requirement (SOR) was finished  whereas the CH-148  SOR was finished long before the contract was signed.

 

[Cloud Cover]

However, the process to purchase the two were distinctly diiferent. The CH-146 deal was closed before   Statement of Requirement (SOR) was finished   ...

And that, my friends, pretty much sums up how we were forced to do things under the backwards regime that was in power for far too long. 

"The times are 'a changing ..."  Thanks h3tacco!!!

 

[h3tacco]

Where shall I begin?  Keep in mind that most things I will mention are skill based, which can be easily countered with a retort such as "...they can learn to do that.."

CCG does not practice the following NSAR skillsets:

- SAR Tech - no such creature outside of the CF - you can't just hire them off the street you know
- helicopter hoisting
- para insertion of supplies, equipment, personnel - akin to Buffalo skills - if CCG can do this, why not let them do TAL too?
- overland Search and Rescue - CCG is water based

We are basically examining a fundamental role of the CF and trying to think of ways that we can farm out the service to our civilian brethren.  I concede that NSAR could be outsourced, it would be a very expensive and foolish foray - why not do the same for the entire CF.

I submit that Tac Hel duties could be just as easily tasked to CHC - they have the ability, why not let them?  Operational duties(ie overseas, domestic Ops, etc)  do not preclude a civilian from taking over - please rememeber that the most operational unit in the CF are our SAR squadrons.

First off I think that conceptually the CCG should handle NSAR. I think it is possible even despite zoomies points, however I am not sure the cost benefits. There would be a cost of  the transition itself and then if DND simply lost its portion of the budget dedicated to NSAR DND would be no more better off than before.

How would we do the transition well I am sure there a million ways to skin a cat but here it is  off the top of my head:

1) The CF couldn't just drop NSAR on the CCG's lap and say here you go as Zoomie points out they don't have most of the skill set. There would have to be a transition period  that could be at least 10 years or more.

2) The coast guard could start by sending people through the OTU and SAR Tech school. Difficulties here would obviously arise in finding suitable candidates. I firmly believe that if you can  teach a military student pilot to fly the Cormorant and Buff with only some 200hrs you can find civilian or CCG members to do the same, albeit CF has pretty high ab itio  standards that would have to be considered. An option would be for the CCG to piggy back onto CF pilot training system, NFTC already  provides training to other customers. The USCG piggy backs onto USN pilot training. The same can be said about other aircrew ie Flight Engineers, NAVs, Loadmasters. Unfortunately, this wouldn't really save the government any money. As for SAR techs my experience with them is limited at best but IMHO there are people outside of the CF capable of conducting SAR tech training, of course selection would be critical. The CF would basically be left with the burden of getting the CCG up and running and giving them all the skill sets zommie mentioned.  The CF isn't the only one able to do hoisting or SAR in general. One only has to look at Europe to see that a vast number of countries completely or partially outsource SAR to civilian companies, not simply  another Federal Department.  As for techs this might be easier since there is not as much difference (correct me if I wrong) military techs working on SAR birds and civilian  techs working on civilian aircraft.

3) What to do with current military members in the SAR community would also be a difficult issue. I am not sure how many would want to lateral transfer to CCG. If no one wanted to lateral transfer than the CF would be basically either have to force people or wait to current members finish there career and the CCG has built up a cadre to completely take over completely. I think that this would be probably be poorly handled and would leave a lot of upset people.

Anyway I am sure people will find issue with what I just said and to be honest I don't really think the CF would be any better off if we didn't have to do NSAR at least not in the next twenty years. As for outsourcing to civilians in general,  if people don't believe almost everything the military does can be outsourced to private military contractors (PMCs), they haven't been paying attention to the news in Iraq. Blackwater operates a fleet of helicopters in support of its employees in roles vary similar to what the TAC hel community. Of course PMCs may not have the size or more complex weapon systems (attack helos, MBTs, fast-air) (I doubt we will see the PMC CVBG anytime soon) and not to mention the majority of its employees are ex-military in the first place. Given the money and time there is no doubt you could outsource majority of what we do overseas to CHC but that opens a whole other can of worms and I personally don't see it as good option. All that to say I believe conceptually/doctrinally the NSAR lays within the realm of the CCG and it is realistic option to consider but at least in the short term it would cost too much money and cause too many headaches to be worth it.

 

[Sf2]

all good points tacco - I guess I learn something new every day.

I guess I'm in the mindset that when you say med/heavy lift, I think SOG first, then what ever is left over goes to 1 Wing.  And I don't think the new SOG would remotely consider an H-92

 

[Good2Golf]

Where shall I begin?   Keep in mind that most things I will mention are skill based, which can be easily countered with a retort such as "...they can learn to do that.."

CCG does not practice the following NSAR skillsets:

- SAR Tech - no such creature outside of the CF - you can't just hire them off the street you know
- helicopter hoisting
- para insertion of supplies, equipment, personnel - akin to Buffalo skills - if CCG can do this, why not let them do TAL too?
- overland Search and Rescue - CCG is water based

We are basically examining a fundamental role of the CF and trying to think of ways that we can farm out the service to our civillian breathren.   I concede that NSAR could be outsourced, it would be a very expensive and foolish foray - why not do the same for the entire CF.

I submit that Tac Hel duties could be just as easily tasked to CHC - they have the ability, why not let them?   Operational duties(ie overseas, domestic Ops, etc)   do not preclude a civilian from taking over - please rememeber that the most operational unit in the CF are our SAR squadrons  ??? .

Good counter-points, Zoomie..........  

Yup, I better stop while I'm behind...


Duey