Our North - SSE Policy Update Megathread

[childs56]

A couple of SAAB Erieyes mounted on a Bombardier product.

Saab Announces Undisclosed Saab 2000 Erieye AEW&C Buyer

On 18 May 2020, Saab announced that it signed a SEK 1.553 billion ($160.5 million US) contract with an undisclosed buyer for its Saab 2000 Erieye airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) system.

quwa.org

I wonder if that's the deal Bombardier and Saudi were trying to get the Canadian Government to assist with?

 

[GR66]

I don't expect our NATO allies to get any warm and fuzzies from this defence review. To my eye this review looks very much like a country retreating into it's shell. Nothing suggesting any type of improvement of our expeditionary capabilities (beyond duct-taping the CPFs to keep them floating and keeping Asterix a little longer)

Everything from the first two words in the title "Our North" in here is 100% focused on domestic capabilities other than replacing some worn-out vehicles - and it's replacing/upgrading/modernizing capabilities like tanks and artillery - definitely no mention of increasing any capabilities.

Even the GBAD element is for defending "critical infrastructure". No mention of deployable AD systems to protect an expeditionary Army.

 

[dapaterson]

Not at 307 Million spread over 20 years.

If it's in years 18+, it could be the front end of a much larger acquisition...

 

[PrairieFella]

So what are you guys calling it, total fucking failure or a tone deaf attempt to show fiscal responsibility before being annihilated next election?

 

[rmc_wannabe]

So what are you guys calling it, total fucking failure or a tone deaf attempt to show fiscal responsibility before being annihilated next election?

I'm calling it:

-"Cheque is totally in the mail....we can make rent, man......" for our Allies;

-"Hey, look over there!" for the Electorate; and

-"You don't matter to my re-election plans...and can't really complain about this... so... try not to get killed from now until then..." to the CAF.

 

[Navy_Pete]

I think they are vastly underfunding what the actual scope is for what is even listed; if they want new subs and more than we have now that alone will cost as much as CSC in capitol and maintenance funding, and our current subs won't last 20 years.

At least they recognize on paper we need PMQs etc, but just means that some projects may get through TBS now.

I had to laugh where someone asked about recruiting, and they skirted around the massive retention issue which won't be helped by ongoing NP underfunding and operational overcommitments. Hopefully when the RCN tries to park ships and boats because they aren't safe and we can't afford to fix them they don't go full surprised pikachu. Who knows what gets briefed up though? The RCN may as well use Pollyanna as a mascot.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Well, the news pod casts should be interesting for a couple days.

Its really sad how election cycles govern everything.

 

[dimsum]

They didn't just kick the can down the road, they hoofed it into orbit.

I pray to God this Defence Policy is another nail in this unserious government's coffin.

The last time we were “serious” on Defence matters was probably in the 1950s.

It’d also help if we released White Papers more frequently than every few decades (1994-2017).

I'm calling it:

-"You don't matter to my re-election plans...and can't really complain about this... so... try not to get killed from now until then..." to the CAF.

Us getting killed will definitely matter to their re-election plans.

 

[rmc_wannabe]

The last time we were “serious” on Defence matters was probably in the 1950s.

It’d also help if we released White Papers more frequently than every few decades (1994-2017).

It would also help if National Defence was a truly bipartisan issue and not the political hot potato no one wants to deal with.

 

[dimsum]

It would also help if National Defence was a truly bipartisan issue and not the political hot potato no one wants to deal with.

It is a bipartisan issue. None of the major parties want anything to do with it

 

[Cloud Cover]

It is a bipartisan issue. None of the major parties want anything to do with it

Accurate.

 

[Cloud Cover]

So what are you guys calling it, total fucking failure or a tone deaf attempt to show fiscal responsibility before being annihilated next election?

Political treachery.
Betrayal and disloyal to those who hold the highest calling.
Dereliction of Parliament’s responsibility to defend the nation.

Take your pick.
They all suck, but deep down we all know he’s going to win the next election with all the other spending promises and sorcery type modifications to mortgage rules. So you’re stuck with it.

 

[daftandbarmy]

It's here

Our North, Strong and Free: A Renewed Vision for Canada’s Defence - Canada.ca

Today, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Defence Minister Bill Blair released Our North, Strong and Free – a defence policy update that responds to the significant global shifts we have witnessed since Canada’s comprehensive defence policy, Strong, Secure, Engaged, was announced in 2017.

www.canada.ca

Should make things about this much better

But at least he's open about where alot of the CAF will be working in the near future.... get those parkas tuned up folks

https://twitter.com/x/status/1777394529571594561

 

[dimsum]

Political treachery.
Betrayal and disloyal to those who hold the highest calling.
Dereliction of Parliament’s responsibility to defend the nation.

Take your pick.
They all suck, but deep down we all know he’s going to win the next election with all the other spending promises and sorcery type modifications to mortgage rules. So you’re stuck with it.

Deep down, we know he’s going win because Canadians writ large do not care about the CAF.

We are not a big enough voting bloc, and we have been figuratively (and sometimes literally) shoved to the boonies for so long that the public forgets we’re here until an OP LENTUS rolls around.

I hate the term “it is what it is” but in this case, it’s pretty apt. Short of a 9/11 event within Canada, people won’t take notice anyways so shouting to the void publicly will just make your throat hurt.

It was pretty enlightening living in Ottawa next to a bunch of federal public servants of various departments, and we all said essentially the same thing about Canadian public perception of [insert department here]. They thought that Defence would have had a higher priority.

 

[Kirkhill]

I am guessing you will be getting new Griffons.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Who knows what gets briefed up though? The RCN may as well use Pollyanna as a mascot.

Truth

 

[MilEME09]

I am guessing you will be getting new Griffons.

plural? feeling bold today aren't we?

 

[PuckChaser]

I am guessing you will be getting new Griffons.

Like everything else in this abortion of an update, in 20-30 years maybe.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Can our arctic patrol vessels currently not operate maritime helicopters at sea?

 

[Kirkhill]

Can our arctic patrol vessels currently not operate maritime helicopters at sea?

Can't find the original SOR on helicopter ops anymore but this is what I understood was supposed to be delivered.


Aug 24, 2019

• 
  
• Add bookmark
• #2,009

I don't know if these requirements made the cuts but as I understand it the AOPS is/was expected to operate a Coast Guard Bell 412 in the ice, an RCAF CH-148 in open water for short durations with limited capabilities, and provide a roost on the open deck for the RCAF CH-149 in domestic waters in support of SAR ops. The Coast Guard 412 is also expected to supply SAR and light logistics support.

Arctic Offshore Patrol Ship Helicopter/Ship Interface Requirements Rev 3

1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
This document describes the characteristics and capabilities of the helicopter/ship
interface between the Arctic Offshore Patrol Ships (AOPS) and:
a. Canadian Coast Guard helicopter1,
b. CH-148 Cyclone helicopter, and
c. CH-149 Cormorant helicopter.

3 CONCEPT OF AOPS HELICOPTER OPERATIONS
3.1 General
Within the limits and restrictions described below, the AOPS shall be capable of:
a. controlling an approaching helicopter,
b. recovering a helicopter to the flight deck,
c. launching a helicopter from the flight deck,
d. controlling a departing helicopter,
e. securing a helicopter on the flight deck, and
f. fuelling a helicopter on the flight deck.

The AOPS shall be capable of HIFR in accordance with CFTO C-12-124-A00/MB-002
Shipborne Helicopter Operating Procedures (SHOPS) (dated 14 May 2008), Section 3 –
Helicopter Fuelling Procedures.
The AOPS shall be capable of VERTREP in accordance with SHOPS, Section 4 –
Vertical Replenishment, Hoist Transfers and Administrative Flights.

3.2 Canadian Coast Guard Helicopter

The AOPS will operate a Canadian Coast Guard helicopter during deployments to the
Canadian Arctic.

The AOPS may operate a Canadian Coast Guard helicopter on occasion during
deployments in other Canadian waters, including: the Atlantic Ocean, the Pacific
Ocean, the Gulf of St. Lawrence and the Great Lakes.

The AOPS will employ the Canadian Coast Guard helicopter for:
a. ice reconnaissance,
b. personnel and light cargo transfer between ship and shore,
c. medical evacuation, and
d. Search and Rescue.

The AOPS shall operate Canadian Coast Guard helicopters2:
a. day and night,
b. under Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR)3,
c. in seas up to and including the top of Sea State 34,
d. at any ship’s speed,
e. at any relative heading, and
f. at any relative wind over the arc from 30 degrees port to 30 starboard at any speed
up to 355 knots.

The AOPS shall be capable of:
a. moving a Canadian Coast Guard helicopter from the stowed position in the hangar
to the ready position on the flight deck,
b. moving a Canadian Coast Guard helicopter from the landing position on the flight
deck to the stowed position in the hangar,
c. sheltering a Canadian Coast Guard helicopter in the hangar,
d. securing a Canadian Coast Guard helicopter in the hangar,
e. securing a Canadian Coast Guard helicopter on the flight deck, and
f. providing logistical support to a Canadian Coast Guard helicopter.

The AOPS shall provide sufficient protection for one Canadian Coast Guard helicopter
for it to survive the same high sea states experienced by the AOPS.

The AOPS shall provide the facilities and services required to maintain one Canadian
Coast Guard helicopter for deployments of up to 120 days duration, during which the
helicopter is assumed to fly for a total of approximately 150 hours6.

The AOPS shall carry sufficient aviation fuel to support the assumed operational tempo
of one Canadian Coast Guard helicopter.

The AOPS shall be capable of supporting personnel and light cargo transfer by a
Canadian Coast Guard helicopter.

3.3 CH-148 Cyclone Helicopter

The AOPS will support limited operations of a CH-148 Cyclone Helicopter on occasion
and for short periods of time during deployments in the Atlantic Ocean, the Pacific
Ocean and in international waters.

Within the limitations described below, the AOPS will employ the CH-148 Cyclone
Helicopter for:
a. sovereignty patrol and enforcement,
b. surveillance in the Canadian Exclusive Economic Zone,
c. delivery of a Naval Boarding Party,
d. support to Other Government Departments,
e. aircrew training for free deck recovery, VERTREP and HIFR,
f. personnel and light cargo transfer,
g. medical evacuation, and
h. Search and Rescue.

The AOPS shall have a flight deck (of size, strength and configuration), flight deck
markings and operational lighting, flight deck tie-downs, sensors, communications and
control systems sufficient for a CH-148 Cyclone Helicopter to land on, and take-off from
an AOPS:
a. day and night,
b. under Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR),
c. in seas up to and including the top of Sea State 3,
d. at any ship’s speed, ande. with the ship on any relative heading within the arc defined by ship’s best relative heading for launching and recovering the helicopter ± 30 degrees7.

The AOPS shall be capable of:
a. moving a CH-148 Cyclone Helicopter from the stowed position in the hangar to the
ready position on the flight deck,
b. moving a CH-148 Cyclone Helicopter from the landing position on the flight deck to
the stowed position in the hangar,
c. sheltering a CH-148 Cyclone Helicopter in the hangar,
d. securing a CH-148 Cyclone Helicopter in the hangar, and
e. securing a CH-148 Cyclone Helicopter on the flight deck.

The AOPS shall provide sufficient protection for one CH-148 Cyclone Helicopter for it to
survive the same high sea states experienced by the AOPS.

The AOPS will have a limited ability to support8 the CH-148 Cyclone Helicopter.
In accordance with the AOPS Statement of Operational Requirements, AOPS will not
be fitted with:
a. Canadian Recovery Assist, Secure and Traverse (C-RAST) system9,
b. Mission Preparation and Analysis System (MPAS) or interfaces for MPAS,
c. interfaces with Integrated Vehicle Health, Monitoring System (IVHMS),
d. Air Detachment Room (ADR),
e. comprehensive aviation workshops, or
f. magazines for helicopter launched munitions (except as stated below).

3.4 CH-149 Cormorant Helicopter

The AOPS will provide an emergency flight deck and refuelling service for CH-149
Cormorant Helicopters in support of Search and Rescue missions in Canadian waters.

The AOPS shall have a flight deck (of size, strength and configuration), flight deck
markings and operational lighting, sensors, communications and control systems
sufficient for a CH-149 Cormorant Helicopter to land on and take-off from an AOPS10:
a. day and night,
b. under Visual Flight Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR),
c. in seas up to and including the top of Sea State 3, and
d. at ship’s speed and relative heading most conducive to launching and recovering the
helicopter.

The AOPS shall be capable of securing a CH-149 Cormorant Helicopter on the flight
deck.

I believe this draft was issued circa 2010 in conjunction with the original SOR and ConOps.

Edited to correct annotations on highlighted numbers. No Excuses.