Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ship AOPS

[Colin Parkinson]

Yes as previously stated the Bell 429 may be a helo to be used on the AOPS, in fact lots of helo's could be used. The RCN has decided to utilize CCG and RCAF aircraft only. The last thing we need is civilians operating helos off AOPS, we might as well buy them and crew them ourselves.

The USN already contracts civilian helicopters to work off some of their vessels. The CCG helicopters and crews actually belong to Transport Canada, that fleet could be expanded and they provide similar services to the RCN.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Probably because its the only shipboard helo that we operate, with a large cargo capacity and surveillance capability. Who knows down the road it may do anti sub.  When I say operate Griffon it may very well operate them while anchored and not all situations dictate using a haul down device. All RCN assets do SAR but not as its primary mission and you do realize we only have 14 CF 149's spread all across Canada, not many for AOPS eh?

I thought I read something last May that we are expanding the fleet of 14 by another 7 as part of the mid-life extension of the Ch-149’s and that Trenton was going to have them back there doing SAR, replacing the Griffons.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Wow, I’m grateful for all the feedback and great information.
One point that was touched on but not really discussed was decision not to extend the AOPS by 2 meters to provide the opportunity to ever accommodate a CH-149 on board. With both the 148’s and 149’s having roughly double to endurance in terms of travel distance when compared to the 146’s or a Bell 429, wouldn’t it have made sense to do this?
I mean a Griffon can travel only 650km while a Cormorant can travel 1,390km....with distance between population centres in the Arctic being mind boggling, I would think having a helo on board that has double the endurance would be a massive plus.

 

[Stoker]

I thought I read something last May that we are expanding the fleet of 14 by another 7 as part of the mid-life extension of the Ch-149’s and that Trenton was going to have them back there doing SAR, replacing the Griffons.

You are correct, the extra helos will be used to reestablish the SAR base at Trenton and enhance existing capability. No mention of ear marking them for the Arctic, we would need hell of a lot for helos to do that than aquired seven used air frames that were originally bought for spare parts.

 

[Stoker]

Wow, I’m grateful for all the feedback and great information.
One point that was touched on but not really discussed was decision not to extend the AOPS by 2 meters to provide the opportunity to ever accommodate a CH-149 on board. With both the 148’s and 149’s having roughly double to endurance in terms of travel distance when compared to the 146’s or a Bell 429, wouldn’t it have made sense to do this?
I mean a Griffon can travel only 650km while a Cormorant can travel 1,390km....with distance between population centres in the Arctic being mind boggling, I would think having a helo on board that has double the endurance would be a massive plus.

It wasn't a decision, it was never considered in the first place probably for good reason. You know there may be many other reasons why this helo wasn't considered or even possible to put on this ship. You make it sound so simple just to extend the ship by 2M. AOPS at times needs a smaller helo to do simple utilitarian  jobs such as flying crews ashore often in tight quarters, this helo is quite large, probably the reason why the RCN wants the a CG helo onboard at times in the Arctic other than the Cyclone. The simple fact the concept of operations calls of mixed usage on AOPS of helos leaves no room for a dedicated SAR Helo.

 

[Stoker]

The USN already contracts civilian helicopters to work off some of their vessels. The CCG helicopters and crews actually belong to Transport Canada, that fleet could be expanded and they provide similar services to the RCN.

Yes civilian helicopters on AOR's and such. Anythings possible but if we're not doing the same on Asterix, I doubt that will ever happen. It is expected the CCG will be flying off the AOPV while in the Arctic under the MOU.

 

[Underway]

The most important aspect that the Cyclones bring to the table is Recognized Maritime Picture.  If a Cyclone embarked on a AOPS found a submarine then they did their job.  Once you detect a submarine it loses the vast majority of its strategic advantages.  Only nuke boats can recover from that by sprinting away and that provides its own disadvantages.  As AOPS are patrol boats whos job is to build RMP then this would be excellent.

Other assets as required could be moved to deal with this newly found submarine, like the Aurora's.  Ships are part of the combat team.  I find quite a bit of the discussion here is regarding a ship operating alone in isolation. Ships work in teams, and you generally need more than one asset to track and kill a sub.  One needs to track/isolate the other needs to deliver the weapons.  Task groups generally use more than one helicopter to do this in the first place.  A single ship even with a helo against a submarine is fighting a technical overmatch most of the time.  It's like a single section against a sniper. You might be able to root one out but the full platoon will do it much more effectively with less casualties.

 

[Sub_Guy]

The Cyclone with it’s passive capability should be able to handle a one on one submarine engagement with ease (should the need arise).

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

If there's some ice coverage around, I would say good luck to that Cyclone.

Also, DH, if loaded with a couple of 46's, the Cyclone carries a lot smaller load out of "passive systems" than you, as an MLRPA can. The sub has a fair chance if the Cyclone is not supported by a second asset of some sorts.

MHO only here, as I have not had the chance of acquiring knowledge of the Cyclones capabilities (for obvious reasons - called retirement  ;D).

 

[Good2Golf]

AOPS was never intended to support an extension of the NSAR airborne primary response capability.  Nice to have, with any embarked aircraft as a secondary SAR capability? Sure.  But not something that was part of the primary requirements. Secondary/tertiary capabilities always seem simple enough after primary system are delivered, but the “why didn’t they think of X/Y/Z?” question(s) often were asked, and excluded as not feasible for any number of reasons including: policy, cost, schedule or technical.  Heck, even primary capability elements don’t always make the cut!  Ex. what kind of sensor would be really useful in a helicopter which had “find lost people” as a primary mission, but that wasn’t added due to Government-imposes budget restrictions? Hint: starts with “F” and rhymes with ‘orward-looking infrared.’  (For 23 years, CH-149 Cormorant has not had an IR/thermal search capability).  AOPS is another system that has as much capability as it could given all factors.

Regards
G2G

 

[Kirkhill]

AOPS was never intended to support an extension of the NSAR airborne primary response capability.  Nice to have, with any embarked aircraft as a secondary SAR capability? Sure.  But not something that was part of the primary requirements. Secondary/tertiary capabilities always seem simple enough after primary system are delivered, but the “why didn’t they think of X/Y/Z?” question(s) often were asked, and excluded as not feasible for any number of reasons including: policy, cost, schedule or technical.  Heck, even primary capability elements don’t always make the cut!  Ex. what kind of sensor would be really useful in a helicopter which had “find lost people” as a primary mission, but that wasn’t added due to Government-imposes budget restrictions? Hint: starts with “F” and rhymes with ‘orward-looking infrared.’  (For 23 years, CH-149 Cormorant has not had an IR/thermal search capability).  AOPS is another system that has as much capability as it could given all factors.

Regards
G2G

(For 23 years, CH-149 Cormorant has not had an IR/thermal search capability)

Non-Sequitur - 23 years of service - suggests that the Cormorant is due for replacing - perhaps with the CH-148 Cyclone Block 2.1?  Then we could have a common fleet of 44 Medium Helicopters and be right back where we intended in 1993.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Had the RCN adopted the 149, the AOPs probably would have corresponding flight deck and hangar.  I’ve often wondered what a Hal would look like with a 149 ( like a Merlin) on the deck with 80 foot hangar.

 

[Good2Golf]

Had the RCN adopted the 149, the AOPs probably would have corresponding flight deck and hangar.  I’ve often wondered what a Hal would look like with a 149 ( like a Merlin) on the deck with 80 foot hangar.

Since the HALs were originally designed for the EH-101/AW-101, and the hangars had only relatively minor mods, I figure the answer is “HALs would pretty much look like they do today.”  :nod:

Regards
G2G

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Since the HALs were originally designed for the EH-101/AW-101, and the hangars had only relatively minor mods, I figure the answer is “HALs would pretty much look like they do today.”  :nod:

Regards
G2G

:nod:

This is something people not associated with the Maritime Helicopter world forget, all the time:

Whether you are talking Sea King, Cyclone or Merlin, they all (more or less) foldup into the same sized volumetric box to fit into the hangar.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The most important aspect that the Cyclones bring to the table is Recognized Maritime Picture.  If a Cyclone embarked on a AOPS found a submarine then they did their job.  Once you detect a submarine it loses the vast majority of its strategic advantages.  Only nuke boats can recover from that by sprinting away and that provides its own disadvantages.  As AOPS are patrol boats whos job is to build RMP then this would be excellent.

Other assets as required could be moved to deal with this newly found submarine, like the Aurora's.  Ships are part of the combat team.  I find quite a bit of the discussion here is regarding a ship operating alone in isolation. Ships work in teams, and you generally need more than one asset to track and kill a sub.  One needs to track/isolate the other needs to deliver the weapons.  Task groups generally use more than one helicopter to do this in the first place.  A single ship even with a helo against a submarine is fighting a technical overmatch most of the time.  It's like a single section against a sniper. You might be able to root one out but the full platoon will do it much more effectively with less casualties.

Up in the Arctic the only support that an AOP's is going to be able to call upon for much of the time is a CCG ship. Yes an aircraft can be despatched from down south, but how long to get there and how long can you provide support for it? if you have an incident like a cruise ship in trouble or an incursion by "Chinese Tourists" that goes for days or a couple of weeks, supporting that incident with full time aircraft coverage is going to suck up a lot of resources.

 

[Kirkhill]

Up in the Arctic the only support that an AOP's is going to be able to call upon for much of the time is a CCG ship. Yes an aircraft can be despatched from down south, but how long to get there and how long can you provide support for it? if you have an incident like a cruise ship in trouble or an incursion by "Chinese Tourists" that goes for days or a couple of weeks, supporting that incident with full time aircraft coverage is going to suck up a lot of resources.

Even if supported from one of the RCAF's FOLs? (Yellowknife, Inuvit, Iqaluit, Kuujuaq, Rankin Inlet and/or Resolute).

 

[Stoker]

Even if supported from one of the RCAF's FOLs? (Yellowknife, Inuvit, Iqaluit, Kuujuaq, Rankin Inlet and/or Resolute).

Isn't this something we practiced previously on one of the OP Nanooks, or Qimmiq's. Deployments of assets from the south including Cormorants and Auroras based out of Iqaluit. Isn't that something easily achievable during the ice free season in conjunction with the AOPV deployments?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Other than Goose Bay, how many are manned and equipped throughout the navigation season? From Goose Bay, it's a 1,000NM to the NW edge of Hudson Bay. 948NM to Cambridge Bay from Cold lake. None of the FOL's have muntion storage and don't appear to be manned fulltime according to the web. The RCAF can provide support, but it's not easy and would quickly suck up resources from every other task those airframes and crews do to maintain a 24/7 support. Plus there is weather at the site of the incident and enroute. For ships, I don't think the RCN has pushed into the Central Arctic for fear of ice entrapment and I don't think they have done the Western Arctic at all, but I will be happy to be proven wrong on those points.

 

[Stoker]

Other than Goose Bay, how many are manned and equipped throughout the navigation season? From Goose Bay, it's a 1,000NM to the NW edge of Hudson Bay. 948NM to Cambridge Bay from Cold lake. None of the FOL's have muntion storage and don't appear to be manned fulltime according to the web. The RCAF can provide support, but it's not easy and would quickly suck up resources from every other task those airframes and crews do to maintain a 24/7 support. Plus there is weather at the site of the incident and enroute. For ships, I don't think the RCN has pushed into the Central Arctic for fear of ice entrapment and I don't think they have done the Western Arctic at all, but I will be happy to be proven wrong on those points.

The RCN has already operated up to 80N just shy of Hans Island and have operated in the Western Arctic up to Tuktoyaktuk, I would imagine AOPV will be operating further than that. With the RCN being set to enter the North in greater numbers it is only logical that air assets will operating there as well eventually in greater numbers based out of the above mentioned fields.

 

[Good2Golf]

Up in the Arctic the only support that an AOP's is going to be able to call upon for much of the time is a CCG ship. Yes an aircraft can be despatched from down south, but how long to get there and how long can you provide support for it? if you have an incident like a cruise ship in trouble or an incursion by "Chinese Tourists" that goes for days or a couple of weeks, supporting that incident with full time aircraft coverage is going to suck up a lot of resources.

How long?  Depends, but it flies 20-50x faster than a CCGS, so a CCGS would have to be 20-50x closer to the AOPS to get there first....then do what?  Are CCGS constabulary-capable?  I thought this has been discussed before. AOPS is not another icebreaker to keep shoulder-season maritime traffic moving or tending buoys.  Pretty much aside from the Venn intersection of SAR, and some modest, shared oceanographic interest, where is the case for consolidated joint military and civilian operations?

Regards
G2G