Author Topic: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)  (Read 159181 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dapaterson

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 408,580
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,636
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #325 on: May 21, 2018, 16:52:57 »
Are the issues with integration, or with keeping the mod line on time?
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline CBH99

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • 19,035
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 603
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #326 on: May 21, 2018, 17:22:06 »
CBH99: In fact Sikorsky is pitching a SAR version of its civilian S-92 helo which does work (the H-92/CH-148 Cyclone, though derived from S-92, is effectively a new aircraft):

1) S-92

2) H-92--RCAF only customer:
https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/superhawk/

Mark
Ottawa


Thanks for the clarification Mark.  Initially my thoughts were "Wow, that's pretty ballsy to suggest we buy more of the helicopter they've failed to deliver" -- but I see the difference now.
Fortune Favours the Bold...and the Smart.

Wouldn't it be nice to have some Boondock Saints kicking around?

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 114,765
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,437
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #327 on: May 22, 2018, 11:42:33 »
Two thoughts spring to my mind:

First, didn't somebody already figured it out in the past, that using the same helicopter for SAR and Maritime Helicopter was a good idea? Oops! Sorry! I forgot someone else, after that fact, said "I'll write zai-roo helicopters!"

Second: 2023 for the first JSS!!! Can we revisit getting Obelix 16 months from ... now, per chance?

In my little "perfect world" Start the Obelix now, continue with the Kingston class, replace 1 Griffon squadron with H-92's rigged for troop/cargo/slinging and guns. Upgraded the remaining Griffons the same was the USMC "upgraded" their helo's. 

Online Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 181,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,305
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #328 on: May 22, 2018, 13:27:01 »
...replace 1 Griffon squadron with H-92's rigged for troop/cargo/slinging and guns...

 ???

Which one?  The schoolhouse, or one of the two conventional line units?  If one of the line units, you'd wish to see the three operational line units then look like:  1 x Griffon, 1 x S-92 & 1 x Chinook?  How would you assign armed escort support of the Griffons to the two different heavier types of helicopters?

G2G

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 114,765
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,437
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #329 on: May 22, 2018, 14:13:29 »
???

Which one?  The schoolhouse, or one of the two conventional line units?  If one of the line units, you'd wish to see the three operational line units then look like:  1 x Griffon, 1 x S-92 & 1 x Chinook?  How would you assign armed escort support of the Griffons to the two different heavier types of helicopters?

G2G

I thought we had 3 squadrons of Griffons and the school?

Online Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 181,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,305
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #330 on: May 22, 2018, 15:06:41 »
408 in Edmonton and 430 in Valcartier are the two conventional line Griffon squadrons.  438 in St-Hubert is a Reserve unit that augments and provides technical evaluation and maintenance training, but is not used to provide a main basis of rotation capability.  Arguably, 408 and 430 are stretched to support the utility/armed helo demand. Rarely is the issue about numbers of hardware, but rather about personnel to operate, maintain and support the hardware.  Re-equipping 408 or 430 with S-92s would worsen the situation currently balancing Griffon and Chinook capabilities.

Regards
G2G

Offline Colin P

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 114,765
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 8,437
  • Civilian
    • http://www.pacific.ccg-gcc.gc.ca
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #331 on: May 22, 2018, 15:15:10 »
What can a Griffon do that the H-92 could not do? Perhaps slinging and small LZ's. In "My perfect world" I would raise up a new squadron, but have heard the issue of manning, it would seem you would get more bang for your personal manning buck with the H-92 than the Griffon.

Offline Chris Pook

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 192,030
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 12,132
  • Wha daur say Mass in ma lug!
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #332 on: May 22, 2018, 15:26:27 »
With 427 being Special Ops (in support of CANSOFCOM) doesn't that leave 408, 430 and 450 to support the CMBGs?  Am I wrong to assume that on deployment, as opposed to garrison, that 450 and the Griffon squadrons would swap some flights to produce 3 mixed squadrons of both CH-146s and CH-147s?  Leave that as an Army-Centric force multiplier (with reservists in some of the billets as they have now).

If there is money for more CH-148s where would you put them and where would you find the crews to man them?

A Naval Task Group will only have hangars for 5 CH-148s:  2 in the AOR and one in each of the three CSCs.  At a push those aircraft could lift Company of infantry (22 in the back of each if the electronic stuff is kicked out).  More generally I would imagine that the aircraft would be employed with all the electronic gear on patrols, occasionally dropping a boarding party and once in a decade invading a distant shore.

I like the idea of more helos on the CSCs. I even like the idea of increasing either the number of 148s or 149s. 

But most of all I like the idea of a large flat deck from which 146s and 147s could lift when and as the need arose.
"Wyrd bið ful aræd"

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 201,650
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,804
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #333 on: May 22, 2018, 18:39:45 »
408 in Edmonton and 430 in Valcartier are the two conventional line Griffon squadrons.  438 in St-Hubert is a Reserve unit that augments and provides technical evaluation and maintenance training, but is not used to provide a main basis of rotation capability.  Arguably, 408 and 430 are stretched to support the utility/armed helo demand. Rarely is the issue about numbers of hardware, but rather about personnel to operate, maintain and support the hardware.  Re-equipping 408 or 430 with S-92s would worsen the situation currently balancing Griffon and Chinook capabilities.

Regards
G2G

If the Reg F worked Saturdays and Sundays (and took Mondays and Tuesdays as their 'weekend') you'd have way more troops (reservists) available to both service and utilize these airframes....

Heads exploding in 3....2....1....  ;D

"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Online Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 181,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,305
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #334 on: May 22, 2018, 20:10:41 »
If the Reg F worked Saturdays and Sundays (and took Mondays and Tuesdays as their 'weekend') you'd have way more troops (reservists) available to both service and utilize these airframes....

Heads exploding in 3....2....1....  ;D

Often done in the East.  Sorry, no pipeline, no weekend support for you, D&B!  ;)

G2G
+300

Offline daftandbarmy

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 201,650
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,804
  • The Older I Get, The Better I Was
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #335 on: May 23, 2018, 00:11:19 »
Often done in the East.  Sorry, no pipeline, no weekend support for you, D&B!  ;)

G2G

 :alone:
"The most important qualification of a soldier is fortitude under fatigue and privation. Courage is only second; hardship, poverty and want are the best school for a soldier." Napoleon

Online Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 181,020
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,305
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Canadian Military/Defence procurement process (Mega Thread)
« Reply #336 on: May 23, 2018, 10:44:14 »
What can a Griffon do that the H-92 could not do? Perhaps slinging and small LZ's. In "My perfect world" I would raise up a new squadron, but have heard the issue of manning, it would seem you would get more bang for your personal manning buck with the H-92 than the Griffon.

Considering the -92 family (S and H) was based on the Super Hawk, it's not a bad base airframe, but it would lose benefits in its present form, the further and further dry/away it gets from the Littorals.  If I were doing 'stuff' over the water that didn't need a fast flying and floating fortress (147), the 92 wouldn't be a bad machine at all, compared to the 146, but back feet-dry, 146 is not at all a bad airframe - it gets a bad rap, but much of that was based on non-optimal to poor (mis-)employment in the past.

Regards
G2G