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

[TCBF]

... Awacs is required due to the fact that both pine tree line and dew line radars are old and require maintenance.  ...

- It's not that they're OLD, it's that they're GONE.  Pine Tree has been decommissioned.  DEW has been replaced by the NWS, which uses old and new locations.

 

[Loachman]

Having our own AWACS

How many?

At what cost?

What about all of the other higher priorities starved for funding?

as the number of aircraft operating in the area would most certainly increase.

By how much, and why? At what altitudes?

This would also assist in SAR operations when needed.

How?

Has there been a demonstrated need?

Before you say it I know that NATO has E-3's with Canadian aircrew aboard, just answer this question any permanently based in Canada?

No. Geilenkirchen, Germany.

 

[Loachman]

-organize patrols into 1 control aircraft ,1 AWACS, 2-4 UAV/UCAV, 2 new MPA.

Today's UAVs have two-man crews, and sometimes an Int guy. They take up space, and so do their control stations. Each AV requires uplink and downlink antennae, including backups, and these are directional so they are fairly large and would require fairings around each. How big an aeroplane do you want, and how many big knobby things do you want sticking out of it into the slipstream?

Line-of-site control is limited to about eighty to a hundred nautical miles, so you would have these things flying in wide formation on the control aircraft - or trying to, as they tend to be not very fast (built for endurance rather than speed).

As already pointed out, they have to take off from and land at some location with support facilities.

This is all extremely expensive, ineffective, inefficient, and impractical.

Sometimes there are perfectly good reasons for not doing the things that we do not do.

 

[observor 69]

Thanks for the info guys, great discussion from the two last replies.

 

[thunderchild]

OK I understand that anything we do in the Arctic is expensive so somebody give me an  Idea that will work, is inexpensive and practical.

According to the posts that I have been reading this is what I have got
1-satellites no too expensive and the orbital mechanics don't work out
2- ground control no too many stations needed to hard to support and too expensive (I'll include any naval system here as LOS becomes a problem here too)
3- airborne control no too expensive, not efficient and not practical

so what do we do. If the government decides that the arctic is a defence priority the only thing we can say is we can't do it.  Is that not giving up our claim to the area. I never claimed to have the answers. so somebody lets hear a plan that will work because I'm stummed. 

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I never said North Sovereignty was impossible- just expensive. 

Do not let wishful thinking about the state of technology cloud your judgement, either.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

OK I understand that anything we do in the Arctic is expensive so somebody give me an  Idea that will work, is inexpensive and practical.

According to the posts that I have been reading this is what I have got
1-satellites no too expensive and the orbital mechanics don't work out
2- ground control no too many stations needed to hard to support and too expensive (I'll include any naval system here as LOS becomes a problem here too)
3- airborne control no too expensive, not efficient and not practical

so what do we do. If the government decides that the arctic is a defence priority the only thing we can say is we can't do it.  Is that not giving up our claim to the area. I never claimed to have the answers. so somebody lets hear a plan that will work because I'm stummed. 

Why are you just looking at it from an air POV?

 

[aesop081]

so somebody lets hear a plan that will work because I'm stummed. 

I'll get on a plan for you as soon as i stop patroling the coast AND the north...........Unlike you, we havent thrown in the towel.

 

[medaid]

Funny, the only thing I don't seem to get is why you appear to have this illusion that you're entitled to something? i.e. Why do 'WE' have to come up with something?

It just seems odd to me you know? You've been given answers and you've been shot down for many a reason.. I'm curious why you are so worried? Who are you? Why do you have such a vested interest in this?

 

[KingKikapu]

This has been an interesting chat.  I knew that the North was a royal pain in the butt due to technical reasons, but after hearing from the pros, it's even more apparent that there are no easy solutions to this pickle.  The next few decades are going to be interesting if the passage stays open.

 

[TCBF]

...next few decades are going to be interesting if the passage stays open.

- It won't.  As the Russians predicted, we are starting to head into the cooling cycle. 

 

[KingKikapu]

- It won't.  As the Russians predicted, we are starting to head into the cooling cycle. 

You don't know that, nor do the Russians in any definitive sense.  I've seen first hand how complicated, yet at the same time quick and dirty, the radiation transfer code the climate scientists use really is.  Don't even get me started on their cloud models and convection criteria.  From what I've seen in various upper-level physical science courses, there's lots of good evidence for climate change.  Note I didn't write global warming or cooling.  That said, predictions using the climate models have proven to be a rather hit and miss endeavor.  Sometimes I think our stellar interior models are much more accurate than anything we've done for Earth.  Mind you, the sun is easier to understand than a system as complicated and dynamic as Earth's atmosphere. Anyways, the next few decades will be interesting.  I'm not totally sure what's going to happen.  Jury's still out on that one.

 

[thunderchild]

I was an officer cadet until I was released due to a car accident.  I am not throwing in the towel but I am concerned that as usual too much is being asked but the government is not doing it's bit and leaving the military to clean up the mess.  After all this is our territory and it is going to be a very important part to the world, I want to make sure as you do that it stays ours.

 

[drunknsubmrnr]

Who's going to take the Arctic? Our problems are bad, but everyone else's dwarf ours.

 

[Loachman]

Precisely. Nobody has ever invaded anybody else's Arctic areas, for good and obvious reasons.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

We can make dog sleds into mortar carriers, it will be our secret weapon!!

 

[McG]

... so what do we do.

We can continue what we've been doing.  It is also conceivable that UAVs which are being bought could replace some crewed aircraft flights in more hospitable environments (obviously dependant on the requirements of any given mission and the capabilities of whichever UAV we get).

 

[thunderchild]

to replace the CP-140 we are most likely to buy the U.S. P-8. (I'm assuming the nimrod upgrade will not be available due to the technical problems and added cost over runs the RAF is having.) Given the projected capabilities of the aircraft how many will we need to patrol all 3 coasts with shipping lasting all year long? (asume no uav's for MPA missions)

 

[aesop081]

to replace the CP-140 we are most likely to buy the U.S. P-8.

How do you figure ? Do you know how much of those things is going to cost ?

I have a vested interest in what replaces the CP-140 but i'm not as optimistic as you are that the P-8 will replace it.

how many will we need to patrol all 3 coasts with shipping lasting all year long? (asume no uav's for MPA missions)

Theres alot more to the MPA mission that patrolling the 3 coasts for shipping. Seems that you are unable to grasp that concept.

 

[Zoomie]

CP-140 will not be replaced this decade or the next.

New wings under ASLEP means at least 2025 until the government even has to start thinking about that airframe again.  By the then the P-8 will be in its 5 generation and be old news - perfect aircraft for the CF!