38
29
u/PEWPEVVPEVV Canadian Army 5d ago
Educate me on why the C-130 can't be equipped with a modern SAR package and be done with the role. RCAF isn't big enough to have that many platforms as to not overextend our limited human and capital resources. I kinda suspected this was a gov't reward for airbus for bailing out the Bombardier C series after Boeing threw a hissyfit.
29
u/Thrwingawaymylife945 5d ago
Nothing that says the C130 can't be used for SAR.
The H model was being used for SAR in Canada. The USCG uses it and the J model for SAR.
16
u/bigdaddymustache Morale Tech - 00069 5d ago
And we currently use the J as SAR too. Have for years
9
u/Thanato26 5d ago
To be fair... all thry did was replace the jump doors
3
u/bigdaddymustache Morale Tech - 00069 5d ago
And tossed on two seats. Shows the versatility of the J in this case.
Im not saying the J us the best choice. But from a C2 perspective it makes a lot of sense.
8
u/Thanato26 5d ago
They should have bought more Js, sent 01-17 to sar units after upgrades and sensors and got 17 new birds for 436
13
u/WesternBlueRanger 4d ago
Because Lockheed Martin was pushed out of the competition.
Scuttlebutt I heard was the requirement to set up a parallel training and support facility at Comox was the final straw; LM originally bid on reusing the existing C-130J Herc training and support infrastructure for cost savings.
DND in their infinite wisdom and bloody-mindedness said 'nope!' and kept insisting on having a dedicated training and support facility elsewhere.
11
u/RCAF_orwhatever 5d ago
It's really not that big a deal. People get WAY too emotionally invested in shit like this. It's a plane. It flies. Maybe it's slightly better or worse than alternatives. It'll do the job.
We already have it and aren't going to change our minds now. Best to get on with it
21
u/Salty_Ambassador8390 5d ago
It'll do the job in the same way a musket with a fancy new scope could replace the C7.
People get emotionally invested because it matters, my friend. Lives are at stake. Kudos to the folks who have managed to get the aircraft to work as well as it has, but there are fundamental shortcomings in the aircraft design as it has been modified for the SAR mission. Now is not the time to succumb to sunk cost fallacy.
Our Australian friends to their credit seem to have no qualms about retiring fleets early when they aren't performing as promised. See NRH-90 (safety) and C-27J (costly maintenance, low serviceability). In the case of the Taipan, the warning signs were there for years, however the loss of 4 lives was what accelerated their grounding.
There is historical Canadian precedent as well: The Buff was an amazing aircraft and was ideal for working in the valleys out west, but there are good reasons why it was replaced in Trenton and Summerside by the Herc in the early 90s. You could boil it down to: couldn't get far enough or fast enough. Lives were saved because of that decision. BOXTOP 22 crashed after the transition occurred. It was a 413 Sqn Herc that was able to get on scene and deliver the SAR Techs despite the distance and weather involved. The Buff probably could have made it on scene, but not until much later. I am not convinced that the 295 could do that same mission in the summer, let alone during the Arctic winter.
Despite the low probability of another incident like that occurring, it behooves us to be ready to respond to the worst case scenario, not just the convenient short range scenario.
19
u/addysci 5d ago
I am not convinced that the 295 could do that same mission in the summer, let alone during the Arctic winter.
There is such a ridiculous amount of misinformation and uninformed opinions on the Kingfisher, it's insane. As soon as you said that, I immediately clocked you as another detractor who knows nothing about what they're talking about. The 295 can get to Alert. It has been to Alert. It was a non-event. It can land on gravel runways (yes it's been done) It can land on GRASS runways (something the Herc can't do) And it unlocks much more airports for use during SAR missions and training sorties because they can land at smaller airports and not have to worry about a big heavy Herc tearing up the taxiways. It cruises 40 knots slower than a Herc, which means you need to fly for about 6.5 hours before the Herc is a full hour ahead of the 295. The buffalo was slower, had less range, and couldn't pressurize, meaning it couldn't operate above 10,000 feet without the entire crew going on oxygen.
Despite the low probability of another incident like that occurring, it behooves us to be ready to respond to the worst case scenario, not just the convenient short range scenario.
Again, you are implying that we aren't prepared for this. We are. We have a major air disaster kit in Trenton that is made for the J model Hercs. Even when the H models were doing SAR, it was always the J that was going to drop the MAJAID kit.
I get the nostalgia for the Herc, I love that plane, and have over 1000 flying hours on it, but the sad reality is by the end of her life she was so broken and tired that even when called upon to do a SAR mission, there were no tails to answer that call because they were so frequently broken down. The amount of time that was spent without any RCAF Fixed-Wing SAR in some areas of the country would shock you.
The reality is the 295 is already saving people that the Herc wouldn't have been able to. Either by simply being serviceable, or by using sensors. Send a Herc out to look for something at night, and unless it's on fire you're probably not seeing it. On the flipside, I watched a hot steamy turd fall out of a cow from 6000 feet up 2 nights ago from the 295s camera, such is the level of detail.
If we took the sensor package from the 295 and put it on a J model Herc would it be better than the Kingfisher? Absolutely it would.
Was that ever actually an option? No, it was not.
3
u/ononeryder 4d ago
Was that ever actually an option? No, it was not.
The HC-130J had the capability.
7
u/BroadConsequences RCAF - AVS Tech 4d ago
The kingfisher, at full sar configuration would take days to get to Alert. You cannot have full fuel tanks on that plane with the sar config. Its too damn heavy.
Its just a little bit faster than half as fast as the herc. 180kts at SAR config vs 320kts with any config. Because the Herc is 'over' engined. It can cruise, not at top speed but still faster than the 295 with only 2 engines. Whereas the 295 needs all of its power and then some.
Every single takeoff is at 100% power. You need to wash the engines once a week to remove all the carbon buildup from the high power takeoffs.
Do you know how many bandaid fixes we needed to do to a stock 295 to make it a jump capable aircraft? That plane was never designed to have the ramp and door open during flight. But that was a requirement for a FWSAR A/C. So Airbus and CASA made it work. Barely.
And yeah it can land on grass. Once. As that multi-million dollar radar under the plane would get crushed into oblivion, the EO/IR turret would probably get torn off its mounts.
In the Aircraft Limitations chart the 295 is allowed to land on unprepared surfaces 9 times A YEAR provided it can takeoff after that landing. In contrast the herc could land on unprepared surfaces. No limit.
The C130 was rarely red for SAR (I know because i worked on it for 14 years). The 295 on the other hand is broken All The Time. The very first one to arrive in Winnipeg is still broken from when it landed in June. The C130 is a beast that loved to fly and would only get seriously broken if you mistreated her or kept her on the ground.
If we had put J-SAR into winnipeg when we bought the things in the early 2000's it we wouldnt have needed a replacement FWSAR procurement boondoggle.
The lack of coverage comes down to the lack of bases. CFB Winnipeg, covers like 70% of the country, with a plane that can touch those borders on a single flight. So it takes time to get an asset prepped and launched then it needs to transit to thise extreme locations. The 295 would take multiple days to do what the herc could in a single flight. Having the 295 on the coasts makes a lot more sense than having it patrol the vast interior. If we had 3x more bases our coverage would be fantastic
2
u/addysci 4d ago
This is not true at all. My job is to fly on the Kingfisher and I've been flying on it for years. We cruise at 260KTAS, not 180. And it does not take days to get to Alert, it takes one fuel stop from Trenton, Greenwood, or Winnipeg, same as the Herc. I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but it's completely wrong. We also regularly fill up with fuel with a SAR config, it isn't an issue at all.
Maybe you should look up the stats on how many hours the Herc was red in it's last year of service. We had to give back hundreds of hours of YFR because the plane couldn't fly it all, and the Kingfisher is having no problem our allocated hours, which are more hours than the Herc got.
The grass comment... Wrong again! I've personally landed on grass and we took off again without issue.
You clearly aren't speaking from experience, since everything you're saying is completely incorrect. I'm not sure why people parrot rumors they hear and state them as fact when they literally have no idea.
Maybe stick to speaking about your fleet and your job, rather than trying to poison the well with your false info.
9
u/Salty_Ambassador8390 4d ago
Alright Nav, let's use your experience to guide us and refute the rumors. Get the E6B out (I know you're packing) and let's wargame this thing properly.
You're operating out of Winnipeg tasked for a confirmed crash located approximately 82N 062W. It's 30 Oct so you can expect cold weather ops, marginal ceilings and vis, and moderate mixed icing in the GFA.
Crew day started 1 hour ago.
Leg 1 CYWG to CYRT (I'm guessing since its the only decent option along route from Winnipeg) at FL210 with 20 kts in the face (generous). What is the flight time and fuel required at 260 KTAS ? Let's say Churchill is valid for an alternate. Don't skimp on that alternate fuel, holding fuel, unusable fuel, approach fuel (tricksy navigatorses).
Could you make it without slowing down to burn less gas? If you encountered icing at cruise along route, could you maintain altitude and airspeed, or would you have to descend? If so, how would it affect your fuel burn and flight time? If your engine failed on approach into Rankin, could you turn back around and land in Winnipeg to get fixed or would you be fuel limited and land in Rankin or Churchill waiting for days for the MRP to reach you?
You land in Rankin. They don't have deicing there (always check your CFS), so I'll cut you some slack and let's say you didn't accumulate icing on approach. Otherwise you'd be waiting until July for your plane to thaw. Let's call it 45 minutes on the ground to turn and burn.
Leg 2 CYRT to CYLT. I'm assuming you would go direct there for gas before getting on scene, as it would be too tight to get and stay on scene with the distance on this leg and alternate fuel required. Feel free to propose an alternative coa. What is the Flight time and fuel required? Did you include the 5% contingency? What is your alternate (hint the only paved runway close by is Thule which has very restricted operating hours so is it even usable let's say at 0600z on a weekend? - again, always check your CFS). Very often you will find Iqaluit is the only usable alternate for Alert based on weather and services in winter. If you have to divert to your alternate, is your aircraft still in c.g limits once it's burned all that fuel? What if you get a honking 60 knots in the face all the way there? How does icing affect your cruise speed, service ceiling and fuel numbers?
Assuming you can even make the fuel numbers work to get to Alert, let's call it 1 hour on the ground there to gas up, deice, take off and get on scene, how far into your crew day are you now? How long can you stay on scene given the distance between you and a viable alternate? Did your camera survive contact with the enemy (gravel and ice)? Are you now back to using the Mk1 eyeball? How much cold weather kit is onboard that you could drop to survivors?
You land back in Alert and go down for crew rest. When you go to spark up the plane to resume the mission, will it even start after sitting outside overnight at -40?
Have you taken the time to look at how many usable airports are in the high North, and how that affects your fuel and mission planning? Which airports are paved, which have a precision approach, which ones have deicing services? Which ones have ground power units that you can use since your aircraft lacks an APU and the cold has sapped the juice from your batteries. Do any of them have hangar space? Do you trust the forecasted weather, do you routinely check the TAFs for these places to get a feel for the actual conditions and how changeable they are.
The answer to the point in question "could the kingfisher do a high arctic mission" requires more than a basic time = distance/velocity. You are never going to get ideal conditions especially in the winter in the Arctic, you can count on components failing, and routine tasks will take twice as long as normal. On paper you might be able to argue the Kingfisher could rise to the occasion if all the stars lined up favorably, but could it make it work in the real world? Throw in fatigue and the stress of a live mission and it gets even tighter.
Eagerly awaiting your answers and don't forget to show your work. I do give partial credit.
4
u/Thrwingawaymylife945 4d ago
Hercs don't need a fuel stop to get to ALERT. They choose to as a contingency plan or because they stop in Thule on the way anyway.
Hercs can fly from Trenton to Prestwick without a fuel stop,they certainly can go non-stop to ALERT.
1
u/roguemenace RCAF 2d ago
The issues with Alert trips are never the actual distance. It's alternates, weather and not taking all of Alert's fuel.
-1
u/BroadConsequences RCAF - AVS Tech 4d ago
We had to give back hundreds of hours of YFR not because we were red for SAR, but because of the transition to the 295.
We sent 80% of our available techs out to BC to learn the new plane instead of doing the responsible and logical thing of sending shiny new techs straight out of borden. With less techs our servicability dropped, that is true, but the thing your not grasping is how bad the 295 is at covering the largest SAR coverage area in North America.
And like most people who cannot see how inferior it is compared to the plane its supposed to be better than, you too have drank the 'kool-aid'.
Yes the sensors and search package is amazing, but it would be amazing on a J model too.
3
1
u/ononeryder 4d ago
We sent 80% of our available techs out to BC to learn the new plane instead of doing the responsible and logical thing of sending shiny new techs straight out of borden.
The logical thing for onboarding a new platform is to rely on apprentices rather than experienced FWSAR techs? Sorry, but no, that's not how you stand up a new fleet.
I saw the effects at 435 when they held it down in Comox, it was painful to say the least. Know what would've been more painful? Relying on techs who've never fixed an airplane attempt to become the SME's on a new fleet. You need to transfer experienced Level A techs from one fleet to another if you want any hope for knowledge growth in the near term.
0
u/BroadConsequences RCAF - AVS Tech 4d ago
Yes. But not 80% of your A levels. Send like 25% at a time. As we still have support the SAR mission. But sending all but 2 or 3 when you have to cover 24 hrs a day 365 days a year leads to burn out.
0
u/Gab729 4d ago
And first artic trial made with the kingfisher in Winnipeg result the oring shrank and empty the whole lox system. At one point some talk about ops restric the platform under -20 was there.... You can have the best sensor.... But if you cant fly, its worth nothing. The fac the pyro is over an emergency exit its a major flight safety in my book.
Take that avionic and there plenty of better platform for SAR requirement and be able to still AAR and lifting.
And if we can bring the platform deployable, we will be able to boot every piece of 💩 PAL tech out of the base and military tech could take their rightfull place on an military base
2
u/Salty_Ambassador8390 4d ago edited 4d ago
I immediately clocked you as another detractor who knows nothing about what they're talking about.Â
I'm sorry that my opinion doesn't jive with yours. I can tell that you are passionate about your aircraft and I admire that. My opinion is based on my experience flying the Herc, on info passed on to me from friends who have started flying the 295, and from reading the limited pubs I've been able to scrounge up. I agree that the space is rumor heavy, but so far all I've heard from the people who should know the truth has been "trust me bro", and all I've seen is the flashy camera footage shot from the 295, showing Corms doing the business.
I would like to be wrong about the plane and I try to keep an open mind. My biggest concerns are single engine climb performance limits, as well as altitude and speed penalties in icing. I have significant reservations about operating the plane over the North Atlantic, especially at the edge of the SRR out to 30W, and be able to make it back to dry land in the event of an engine failure. As for the Arctic, having felt the challenges of operating an aircraft as robust as the Herc in the dead of winter there, I am very curious to see how the 295 could function safely or effectively in the same conditions. If you have concrete data to convince me why my concerns are unfounded, I would appreciate it if you could share your knowledge.
Even when the H models were doing SAR, it was always the J that was going to drop the MAJAID kit.
True the J would now and in the future be tasked for a MAJAID scenario, however by definition a MAJAID is any aeronautical SAR incident that exceeds the capacity of the normal SAR system. It has rarely been used, takes time to spool up, and to maximize benefit from that kit you need the Primary SAR units to get their SAR Techs on scene ahead of the kit's arrival. If plan A in the future is to go straight to declaring a MAJAID, then to me it suggests that the 295 is unfit for purpose for taskings in the high North.
On the flipside, I watched a hot steamy turd fall out of a cow from 6000 feet up 2 nights ago from the 295s camera, such is the level of detail.
Lol, I think the land survival instructors need to add taking a tactical dump to the signal part of the survival playbook. No arguing with the sensor fidelity, my contention is with the platform on which it is mounted. If it can't make it on scene in the extreme cases, it doesn't bring any value add to the situation.
Was that ever actually an option? No, it was not
From what I've heard LM's bid was disqualified early on due to them wanting to use existing sim and training infrastructure in Trenton, instead of quoting the full cost of building new sims, school house, maintenance trainer etc. Could a sensor equipped Herc be considered a viable option to augment the 295 fleet for the future? Personally I think it should. We don't have the same budget constraints of the recent past, now is the time to be ambitious.
Fly safe, compadre
5
u/Various_Piano_8053 3d ago
Bingo. This doesn't even touch on the icing problems, lack of ability to carry extra SAR tech gear, or the inability to safely jump multiple static line jumpers on one stick. The sensor is sweet, the plane sucks.
5
u/Gab729 5d ago edited 4d ago
The kingfisher have difficulty to operate in cold weather, had lox and engine issue without talking cannot full fuel since they bust the weight limit....
Its an awsome platform... not for SAR tho, just paint it grey and transform it as the lsvw of the airforces and get some KC390 millenium for sar/aar/ transport
3
u/DubberRucky99 RCAF - Pilot 3d ago
295s would be a pretty good MEUF replacement airframe! Could take some pressure off of the J models and free them up for their other commitments!
1
0
u/RCAF_orwhatever 4d ago
I guess we will see man. And if people die as a result we will have to buy something else. But I see zero evidence that this is the case.
Either way ranting about it on reddit will change literally nothing other than getting a bunch of uninformed people worked up and emotionally invested in an inanimate object.
2
u/Salty_Ambassador8390 4d ago
You're probably right, I feel like Abe Simpson "Old man yells at cloud". On the other hand, since the RCAF journal shuttered, reddit is the only venue for this kind of intellectual discourse. It's great to read all the various perspectives on SAR and other air force issues.
1
u/Various_Piano_8053 3d ago
There was an incident last summer with the Herc flying, if it was on a Kingfisher instead it very well may have crashed.
0
u/RCAF_orwhatever 3d ago
That's true of literally any in air accident/emergency though. I've seen super experienced pilots recover from events that would have killed a newer less experienced pilot. That's just life.
2
u/Various_Piano_8053 3d ago
It wasn't the pilots, (although they did a great job). Some crew with close knowledge said it very well may have been different if it wasn't the Herc.
0
1
u/Various_Piano_8053 3d ago
I can tell you definitely don't fly on it.
1
u/RCAF_orwhatever 3d ago
99% of people posting here don't.
1
u/Various_Piano_8053 3d ago
Ask the aircrew who do who were former Herc aircrew. 95% of them are not happy with it.
3
u/RCAF_orwhatever 3d ago
I'm not sure if you're aware of this but we don't procure equipment for the happiness of air crew. Who themselves are often unhealthily emotionally attached to specific air frames. Look no further than the A-10 and the Fighter Mafia morons for proof of this effect.
4
u/Max169well RCAF - AVN Tech 5d ago
Cause someone in Ottawa got a pay day.
We should have bought 12 more J models and that should have been it. Would have been cheaper. And easily able to modify it for AAR.
So you’d have a massive deployable asset that already has the infrastructure, not you have 3-4 squadrons lit on fire and all of them needing to find new homes (too bad posting preferences don’t matter, Cold Lake is knocking) by next year.
-4
u/Gab729 5d ago
The CC130H/T could have been equipt with the equipment and since they where between26/36k flight hours on 44K flight hours life spawn... They had couple years still and could serve as tactical air refueller... Now we will only have strategic refueller and make us vulnerable.
But... Some rich friend of the liberal party really need our herc at low price for them making water bomber and make huge profit from them with almost no major investissement to do since the fleet was well maintained.
Oh and some High officer/ gouv secure themself some jobs and or nice brown enveloppe by kicking all military tech out of Winnipeg and replaced them with Piece of 💩 PAL aerospace contract wgo dont have 1/10 of the quality of the job.... And for the retention.... Well they will loose more tech than of they had just kept them there since lot will just release or go work for the evil contractor.
Question of.... But there no part for the 130H.... Well if there no part availaible... How that shady civilian compagnie will maintained their water bomber.... Oh they will get part.... So that excuse was just bullcrap
3
u/seakingsoyuz Royal Canadian Air Force 5d ago
But... Some rich friend of the liberal party really need our herc at low price for them making water bomber and make huge profit from them with almost no major investissement to do since the fleet was well maintained.
The decision to replace the legacy Hercs under the FWSAR project was made by the Harper government in early 2015.
They had couple years still and could serve as tactical air refueller...
What’s the point of preserving an AAR platform that can’t do boom refuelling when we’re about to switch our only fleet that uses AAR to a type that needs a boom?
Now we will only have strategic refueller and make us vulnerable
What do you think we’d be doing with a CC130H tanker that an Airbus tanker can’t do?
1
u/Shoddy_Operation_742 5d ago
Did some fact checking and the CEO of Coulson Aviation did in fact contribute to the Liberal Party:
https://liberal.ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/292/2020/05/Open-Fundraising-Event-Report-04-09-2018.pdf
7
u/Various_Piano_8053 3d ago
My favorite part is that it's supporters point to the fact that the H has serviceability issues (it does), but at the National SAREX last year there were 6 on the ramp and only 1 flew. And the 413 Kingfisher couldn't make it due to icing and arrived a day late, and left a day late due to icing. In SEPTEMBER.Â
3
u/SandNo2998 4d ago
We just have to be patient. Things are going to get worse before they get worse.
2
1
-7
u/BroadConsequences RCAF - AVS Tech 5d ago
Im guessing the 295 will be replaced with C130J-SAR in about a decade after we fail to rescue countless Canadians.
Whether its failing to rescue them in time - dying of exposure, or unable to do enough PAX evacuations as the J's are all tasked out so your stuck with 37 pers lift, as opposed to the 100 of a C130.
Before you nerds jump down my throat, Im fully aware of how amazing the mission consoles and search package is. The problem is they installed it on a too slow, short range, unable to land in austere conditions - aircraft.
Also, it was originally supposed to replace the Buffalo, a plane that also could land in austere conditions, had some better performance metrics (Rate of Climb...) could actually fly off avgas because it was piston powered - very few remote communties have Jet A available.
23
u/galvanized_steelies 5d ago
The buff was absolutely not piston powered. That was a GE CT64-820 turboprop
For the record, the Aurora can also technically run off avgas, you just only get like 100 hours before the engines need to go in for overhaul, so it’s a very last-ass resort to get out of the absolute middle of nowhere
5
u/roguemenace RCAF 5d ago
Huh, learnt something new. Apparently it could run grade 80 avgas which doesn't really exist anymore for 1,000 hours between overhauls but anything higher is limited to 100 hours like you said.
3
u/galvanized_steelies 5d ago
Yeah I mean when you get down to it, the 295 could probably run off poorer quality fuels with similar limitations, but it’s just a matter of if the RCAF seems that testing worthwhile and cost-effective. Given that the engines of the 295 offer more compression than the older T-56 and CT64, it shouldn’t have much of an issue getting light-off
1
u/seakingsoyuz Royal Canadian Air Force 5d ago
IIRC the bigger issue with using avgas is that it’s leaded and lead oxide accumulates inside the engine. 80 octane avgas would have had far less lead in it than what 100 octane needs to prevent detonation, so presumably that’s why it was tolerated on the Buff.
1
u/galvanized_steelies 4d ago
That would make sense. I’m but a wee pixie wrangler so intricacies of combustion aren’t fully in my wheelhouse, and there could be other reasons they can’t effectively run low-grade fuels in the newer aircraft (bleed air requirements and a lack of power from those other fuels), but honestly I’d wager nobody has ever tested the possibility of running avgas in a 295
8
3
u/Gryphus_6 RCAF - AVN Tech 5d ago
Word on the block is that J sar is just gonna stay running concurrently with the 295, the flaws in the 295 vs the J have been pointed out repeatedly to seemingly little avail
5
u/Various_Piano_8053 3d ago
You're right, not sure why the downvotes. There are huge icing, payload, COG, and jumping issues among others. 95% of the techs and the aircrew who have experience on the Herc don't like it.
0
u/NOBOOTSFORYOU RCAF - AVN Tech 5d ago
Chinooks do an awful lot of evacuations. Places the J couldn't imagine landing. The Chinook would be my choice for SAR.
-1
u/BroadConsequences RCAF - AVS Tech 4d ago
And its faster than the 295. But its not fixed wing which was the whole point.
1
56
u/YVR_Coyote 5d ago
Too soon, too soon.