RPAS (was JUSTAS): the project to buy armed Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) UAVs

[Colin Parkinson]

I have always said on the civilian side of the house is that the biggest issue with the regs is that they were written by pilots. In the case of most civilan drones/UAS, you don't fly them, you just tell it where to go. it does the flying and obstacle avoidance on it's own. also I think the UAS/Drone market will become to important to allow manned aircraft to interfere with it and manned aircraft will be regulated to minimum altitude and flightpaths, particularly near areas of high drone usage.
Canada has the technology capability to build drone and UAS components and systems in the small to large range. There is a strong market for small semi-disposable drones that can be certified for NATO usage. It would help that the CAF commits to buying X number of drones/UAS a year and fly them hard and use them all the time. the technology moves so fast that there is no point in doing one large buy and hanging onto them for 10 years. That logic starts to change as you get into the RPAS sized systems and then perhaps a 10 year lifecycle makes sense.

 

[Kirkhill]

So, can we split this to a UAS thread and keep the RCAF RPAS project on its own thread?

I would happily.

We have a problem with a lot of our threads that technologies are impacting all the discussions.

EG

GBAD was an Army thing for 4 Artillery Regiment (GS) to worry about but now the UAV threat has morphed to encompass all arms and all branches. It also has a real world civilian factor. Add in the USVs and UUVs to the mix and we now are looking at automated active defences on 24/7 alert on shore and at sea, wherever Canadians live and work under the Canadian flag. Trophy systems on Canadian embassies?

Robotics are now part of the landscape.

Jointery is going to be forced by events.

 

[KevinB]

@Kirkhill you can’t realistically put APS on Embassies, while you may own the land, but you don’t own the airspace and the area around.

Embassies realistically are EW/DE protection areas, as well as ensuring the sites are hardened.
*unless you get into the massive compound structures we (the US) had in Iraq and Afghanistan, and have a larger security perimeter, as well as large security force, combined with the willingness to create host nation casualties by your defensive measures.

Furthermore having been part of a security audit of the CDN Embassy in Afghanistan, Canada doesn’t have the right mentality.
While the CAF sometimes (depending on what part of it) takes security seriously, the rest of the GoC is utterly devoid of that sort of mentality.

 

[FJAG]

I would happily.

We have a problem with a lot of our threads that technologies are impacting all the discussions.

EG

GBAD was an Army thing for 4 Artillery Regiment (GS) to worry about but now the UAV threat has morphed to encompass all arms and all branches. It also has a real world civilian factor. Add in the USVs and UUVs to the mix and we now are looking at automated active defences on 24/7 alert on shore and at sea, wherever Canadians live and work under the Canadian flag. Trophy systems on Canadian embassies?

Robotics are now part of the landscape.

Jointery is going to be forced by events.

Not to get territorial about this but you basically need an OPI of excellence for these things. More like two OPIs because I think navy and ground based requirements differ although in cases, sensors and weapon systems that are multi-launcher capable may overlap.

Back when we had air defence in reasonable quantities the centre of excellence was at the Air Defence Artillery School at Chatham which moved to become part of the Royal Canadian Artillery School in Gagetown (which coincidentally is not that far from Halifax). It has atrophied and will need some serious restarting.

Ground Based Air Defence is an integrated system of layers. It needs to be centrally designed and procured even if some of the smaller systems are decentralized in the field.

Interestingly in the distant past air defence writ large was an RCAF matter which seems to have become largely ignored except for the NORAD component - and let's face it that hasn't included RCAF ground based systems for over a half a century. I'm not sure how you amalgamate the though processes for continental air defence with maritime and field force air defence. I do not think that there is a real "joint" role here albeit it looks logical that there should be. The various stakeholders interests are too disparate and the geographically affected areas too vast to expect much in the way of a common theme.

Too cynical?

 

[Halifax Tar]

Not to get territorial about this but you basically need an OPI of excellence for these things. More like two OPIs because I think navy and ground based requirements differ although in cases, sensors and weapon systems that are multi-launcher capable may overlap.

Back when we had air defence in reasonable quantities the centre of excellence was at the Air Defence Artillery School at Chatham which moved to become part of the Royal Canadian Artillery School in Gagetown (which coincidentally is not that far from Halifax). It has atrophied and will need some serious restarting.

Ground Based Air Defence is an integrated system of layers. It needs to be centrally designed and procured even if some of the smaller systems are decentralized in the field.

Interestingly in the distant past air defence writ large was an RCAF matter which seems to have become largely ignored except for the NORAD component - and let's face it that hasn't included RCAF ground based systems for over a half a century. I'm not sure how you amalgamate the though processes for continental air defence with maritime and field force air defence. I do not think that there is a real "joint" role here albeit it looks logical that there should be. The various stakeholders interests are too disparate and the geographically affected areas too vast to expect much in the way of a common theme.

Too cynical?

Continental (Ground and Air based) AD is the realm of the RCAF.

Mobile/Expeditionary Ground Based AD is the realm of the Army, Air based AD is the real of the RCAF.

I don't know that just how my simple mind sees it. I may have missed the mark though...

 

[Kirkhill]

Continental (Ground and Air based) AD is the realm of the RCAF.

Mobile/Expeditionary Ground Based AD is the realm of the Army, Air based AD is the real of the RCAF.

I don't know that just how my simple mind sees it. I may have missed the mark though...

And as a troop on the ground my remit would be to shoot at anything in the sky coming my way and curse the buggers in the RCAF and the RCA for letting them leak through.

 

[FJAG]

Continental (Ground and Air based) AD is the realm of the RCAF.

And it used to be when we had Bomarc missiles and Voodoos and other things and the RCAF ran a thing called Air Defence Command. All of that was valuable until the bomber threat decreased when we should have turned our attention to ABM systems. Instead we turned it into a fighter group which plays a role in NORAD along with other roles.

Mobile/Expeditionary Ground Based AD is the realm of the Army,

Yes.

Air based AD is the real of the RCAF.

Actually it should be part of the theatre AD system run by whichever entity has the lead for that. The RCAF is a contributor of aircraft for that but really doesn't have role in the command and control field - We were a big contributor to NATO's AWACS back in the day but withdrew from it for budgetary reasons. It's come back to it in a reduced manner and are supplying a part of an AWACS crew but no aircraft.

I don't know that just how my simple mind sees it. I may have missed the mark though...

I think its a field where the vast majority of us are neophytes although a few old curmudgeons with some knowledge may still be haunting the halls.

 

[Gorgo]

Anyone have any idea why this is being effectively kicked back until 2028 due to worries about northern weather?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mq-9-reaper-drone-canadian-forces-1.7005625

 

[Good2Golf]

Anyone have any idea why this is being effectively kicked back until 2028 due to worries about northern weather?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mq-9-reaper-drone-canadian-forces-1.7005625

Waiting for enough global warming to negate the cold weather requirement…

 

[Kirkhill]

Pilots correct me....

Temperature at flight altitudes of 38,000 to 65,000 feet = -56.5 C
Ceiling for the MQ9 is 50,000 feet.

Table 1-6.U.S. Standard Atmosphere Heights and Temperatures

It seems to me that if you are flying over Toronto, Alert or the Equator at 50,000 feet the aircraft is going to experience the same temperatures.

 

[Kirkhill]

Anyone have any idea why this is being effectively kicked back until 2028 due to worries about northern weather?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/mq-9-reaper-drone-canadian-forces-1.7005625

The words "developmental" and "Canadianization" are red flags for anyone who follows the glacial defence procurement process in this country, said Dave Perry, president of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute, an Ottawa-based organization that occasionally has hosted conferences partly sponsored by major defence contractors.

No doubt!

 

[dapaterson]

Less weather than satellite coverage (or lack / limitations thereof).

 

[KevinB]

Less weather than satellite coverage (or lack / limitations thereof).

It really shouldn't be that hard to put up some GPS and comms satellites above the arctic...

 

[Good2Golf]

It really shouldn't be that hard to put up some GPS and comms satellites above the arctic...

You mean like….GPS….and Iridium?

Asking for a friend…

 

[Good2Golf]

Pilots correct me....

Temperature at flight altitudes of 38,000 to 65,000 feet = -56.5 C
Ceiling for the MQ9 is 50,000 feet.

Table 1-6.U.S. Standard Atmosphere Heights and Temperatures

It seems to me that if you are flying over Toronto, Alert or the Equator at 50,000 feet the aircraft is going to experience the same temperatur

Ironically, the Tropopause (layer between the Troposphere and Stratosphere, underneath which most weather phenomena occur) is lower towards the poles (approx 35,000’ altitude +/-) than near the equator (up to 50-55,000’ feet), so there is actually less chance of inclement weather due to inclement weather in the North. Issue is navigation and communications, but neither are insurmountable.

 

[dapaterson]

You mean like….GPS….and Iridium?

Asking for a friend…

When the default option does not include Iridium, you're into NRE.

 

[Good2Golf]

When the default option does not include Iridium, you're into NRE.

Or ticking the box in the pre-existing option list…

 

[Kirkhill]

Ironically, the Tropopause (layer between the Troposphere and Stratosphere, underneath which most weather phenomena occur) is lower towards the poles (approx 35,000’ altitude +/-) than near the equator (up to 50-55,000’ feet), so there is actually less chance of inclement weather due to inclement weather in the North. Issue is navigation and communications, but neither are insurmountable.

Couldnt they revert to ground stations when out of GPS range?

 

[Good2Golf]

Couldnt they revert to ground stations when out of GPS range?

Which ground station(s) up North?

 

[AmmoTech90]

Huff duff in reverse.

HF is the answer to all radio woes.