CH-148 Cyclone debris (and human remains) located. Recovery operations are underway: HMCS Fredericton personnel and Stalker 22 located - Canada.ca
Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) News and Discussions
- Thread starter John Fedup
- Start date
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #1,362
This recovery along with the flight recorders should allow for determining a cause. Hope it isn’t a software/FBW problem.
Sandhi Yudha
Well-Known Member
Canada is to procure two new Bombardier Challenger 650 business jets to replace a pair of older 601-model aircraft that have been in service for more than 30 years.
More information at
More information at
Canada to procure two new Challenger 650 liaison aircraft
Canada is to procure two new Bombardier Challenger 650 business jets to replace a pair of older 601-model aircraft that have been in service for more than 30 years. The Canadian Department of National Defence (DND) announced on 6 June that...
www.janes.com
Looks like the CH-148 Cyclone crash was likely due to combination of a software flaw (or, more accurately, there was a flight envelope scenario that was not in the programming) and some "unexpected" pilot input. A hardware problem appears to have been ruled out. At this point the investigation is still ongoing, but limited flight operations are going to start up shortly. So, it appears they are fairly confident they know the cause (or causes), and can mitigate against a recurrence with further training on what to do if the same scenario happens again.
The video at the following link is quite informative: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cyclone-helicopter-crash-1.5613239
The video at the following link is quite informative: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cyclone-helicopter-crash-1.5613239
Last edited:
That interview sounded like the investigators were extremely cautious about criticising the FCS.
My interpretation is that the FCS overrode the pilots inputs and crashed the aircraft, is that what the experienced members take from this?
A bit more detail here: Military to return Cyclone helicopters to service 'in the coming days'
"National Defence officials say a conflict arose between the helicopter's autopilot software and the flight crew's maneuvers in the moments before the crash."
Canada Cleared To Upgrade Its Aging CF-18 Hornets With New Radars, AIM-9X Sidewinders
The Royal Canadian Air Force is looking at a Hornet Extension Program amid an ongoing saga over buying new fighter jets that it needed years ago.
www.thedrive.com
So days after the order of 2 new Challenger jets and 2 new JSS, military procurement is still definitely proceeding apace despite pandemic budget pressures. We're now spending $862.3 million USD to upgrade 36 CF-18 Hornets with new radars and missiles to keep them combat relevant and allow them to serve alongside the future CF-18 replacements until the new fleet is fully delivered in the 2030s. Not exactly cheap, but at this point after more than a decade of bungling on the CF-18 replacement there's not much choice.
The munitions can carry forward to the CF-18 replacement, but the APG-79(V)4 AESA will only get a decades use. There was some talk recently in the Navy Forum about the Lockheed Martin Vigilance pod design which mounts removable fighter-size radars on helicopters to provide an AEW capability. One way to get the most of this Hornet Extension Program would be to convert the APG-79(V)4 to Vigilance pods for the CH-148 Cyclone as the CF-18s are retired.
Last edited:
Here is the official announcement from the DSCA. A fairly extensive package all up.
This sale will provide Canada a 2-squadron bridge of enhanced F/A-18A aircraft to continue meeting NORAD and NATO commitments while it gradually introduces new advanced aircraft via the Future Fighter Capability Program between 2025 and 2035.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #1,369
DND and junior’s minions trying to appease the public over the recent Challenger purchase. Why all the BS for something that is actually required. Hell, just saying these are needed for COVID prevention for critical VIPs, political or professional, would be deemed reasonable by most people.
ottawacitizen.com
Challenger jets no longer primarily for use by PM and VIPs, Canadian military claims
The Canadian Forces is pushing ahead with rebranding the role of its Challenger jets by claiming they are mainly used for military purposes even as the air force po…
ottawacitizen.com
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #1,370
Perhaps 1 or 2 of these jets would be better than Challengers, which are already a export success. These VIP A220 jets may appeal to electorates worldwide that don’t want to pay for larger narrow bodies or especially wide body VIP jets. From junior’s perspective, this alternative appeases his friends in Quebec.
www.flightglobal.com
Airbus A220 VIP cabin concept revealed
A VIP cabin concept for an Airbus A220-300 has been unveiled by two US business aviation services companies in a bid to showcase the regional airliner as a viable alternative to traditional large-cabin, long-range business jets and established VIP narrowbodies.
www.flightglobal.com
The A220-300 doesn't have the range of the Challenger 650 though. Personally, I thought they should have considered a Global Express 7500/8000. It's large enough to put the VIP, a few staff, and a few reporters so could better fill in for the CC-150 Polaris on international trips if required now that they are getting long in the tooth and a CC-150 replacement supposedly has to wait until after the CF-18 replacement is selected to ensure air-to-air refuelling compatibility. It's also faster than the Challenger, still has similar take-off and landing distances, and has enough range to reach pretty much anywhere in the world from Ottawa. Admittedly that flexibility does double the price per plane.Perhaps 1 or 2 of these jets would be better than Challengers, which are already a export success. These VIP A220 jets may appeal to electorates worldwide that don’t want to pay for larger narrow bodies or especially wide body VIP jets. From junior’s perspective, this alternative appeases his friends in Quebec.
Airbus A220 VIP cabin concept revealed
A VIP cabin concept for an Airbus A220-300 has been unveiled by two US business aviation services companies in a bid to showcase the regional airliner as a viable alternative to traditional large-cabin, long-range business jets and established VIP narrowbodies.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #1,372
The standard A220-300 has a range of 3300 nautical miles versus Challenger’s 4,000 but perhaps a VIP version could accommodate additional fuel. However, your suggestion of going with a Global 7500 is a good one. Great range and speed but the price is higher.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Honestly I have to question just how long, and how effective, such an upgrade programme would take and be. IIRC the initial production run of Block I F/A-18E/F SHornets, kitted with the APG-73 radar instead of the APG-79 AESA radar, could not be upgraded to the APG-79 without changing the entire nosecone/radome. The space and shape the APG-73 occupied was different from what the APG-79 required. Now the F/A-18 A/B Classic Hornets, or at least the ones in RAAF service, had been upgraded from the earlier APG-65.
Here is the official announcement from the DSCA. A fairly extensive package all up.
This sale will provide Canada a 2-squadron bridge of enhanced F/A-18A aircraft to continue meeting NORAD and NATO commitments while it gradually introduces new advanced aircraft via the Future Fighter Capability Program between 2025 and 2035.
This makes me wonder whether or not the APG-79(V)4 has been purposefully redesigned to fit into the same space, or whether the exterior shape of the RCAF Hornets getting upgraded will also need modification. The other, related question is just how long this is expected to take? Reading through the DSCA release, it seems the intent is to provide the RCAF and upgraded bridging capability while Canada's Future Fighter Capability Program runs between 2025 and 2035. Unless Canada can purchase the required bits and bobs for the upgrades for dirt cheap pricing, and then carry out the actual upgrades for minimal cost and very rapidly, I suspect that Canada will have once again spent more than it needed to and gotten less value than what it paid for.
The phrase, "you can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear," comes to mind. I do sort of wonder whether or not the RCAF (if the USN was willing to let them 'jump' the production queue) would have been able to purchase a sqd or two of Growlers and gotten them into RCAF service faster and for overall comparable or less money. Sustaining a fighter fleet that has already seen service for a generation is going to become more and more resource intensive.
Raytheon To Supply AESA Radar for Marine Hornets | AIN
Marine Hornets will receive e-scan radar so that they can maintain combat relevance while the Corps transitions to an all-F-35 fleet.
www.ainonline.com
Yes the APG-79(V)4 is a scaled version of the APG-79 from the Super Hornet, but specifically designed to fit the Classic Hornet. What makes Canada's upgrade program kind of sensible is that the USMC already announced an upgrade program which includes the APG-79(V)4 for their Classic Hornets to keep them viable into the 2030s so Canada isn't having to pay for/invent something new and is largely tacking on to the US program. The USMC and RCAF on the same page should keep sustainability manageable and overall aircraft capability acceptable for NORAD and expeditionary operations.
There was originally a Canadian plan a few years ago for an interim Super Hornet buy, but then Boeing decided to try to sink Bombardier's C-Series program and accusations flew that an interim Super Hornet buy would bias the overall CF-18 replacement process toward the Super Hornet so we ended up buying second-hand Australian Classic Hornet's instead.
As noted above the APG-79v4 can drop straight into the nose cone without requiring extensive modifications (e.g extra cooling). The original APG79 as fitted to SuperHornet cannot. For the RCAF or other classic users this sounds like a no brainer if you wanted to extend their life and will make the jets better at DCA and some mission roles. However, unless the RCAF incorporate aspects like the RAAF HUG the survivability in complex environments becomes a challenge. Makes them distinctly DCA, homeland defence and unopposed CAS assets.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #1,376
Delay, delay, junior’s replacement plan. This upgrade is lipstick on a pig and money down the drain.
UPDATED - RAAF Hornet sale to Canada finalised - Australian Aviation
Canadian media has reported the sale of 25 former RAAF F/A-18A/B classic Hornets to Canada has been finalised and the transfer of the aircraft will commence this year.
australianaviation.com.au
I don't have a direct comparison, but the CF-18s did undergo a Incremental Modernization Project in the 2000s that on the surface seems similar to the RAAF HUG including upgrades to communications, navigation, computer, electronic warfare, etc. If the RAAF Hornets were significantly different than the CF-18s, even if they were better, it would have been even harder to justify the purchase since they'd have to be maintained as 2 fleets. So with the upcoming upgrades we'll probably end up having some of the best Classic Hornets in a world where everyone else is moving to 5th gen fighters.
From what I could find the RCAF hornets have the same RWR (ALR-67v3) but I didn’t see anything else about EW suite. Increasingly if you don’t have a Jammer (e.g 8222 for the RAAF), Significant amounts of countermeasures ( BOL), Towed Decoys (not fitted to RAAF classics) it is becomingly difficult to suggest you have a survivable jet, particularly when it is not LO.UPDATED - RAAF Hornet sale to Canada finalised - Australian Aviation
Canadian media has reported the sale of 25 former RAAF F/A-18A/B classic Hornets to Canada has been finalised and the transfer of the aircraft will commence this year.
I don't have a direct comparison, but the CF-18s did undergo a Incremental Modernization Project in the 2000s that on the surface seems similar to the RAAF HUG including upgrades to communications, navigation, computer, electronic warfare, etc. If the RAAF Hornets were significantly different than the CF-18s, even if they were better, it would have been even harder to justify the purchase since they'd have to be maintained as 2 fleets. So with the upcoming upgrades we'll probably end up having some of the best Classic Hornets in a world where everyone else is moving to 5th gen fighters.
Last edited:
without getting into any politics you could argue buying late will save some money.
For example by pushing an F-35 buy back 10 years you can save a significant amount of money from LRIP to FRP, (just compare LRIP7/8 to LRIP14 costs) whilst not requiring subsequent upgrades.
this cost may or may not be offset by what the RCAF are having to spend to maintain the FA18 fleet.
the danger you have is a capability issue if you go to war in the meantime...
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
The maintenance costs are one of the concerns I have about attempting to upgrade even two dozen Classic Hornets and delay their replacement until circa ~2035. By that time, any CF-18 Hornets built for Canada will be at least 46 years old, and any ex-RAAF Hornets would be at least 44 years old. Given that the design had a planned service life of ~6,000 flight hours IIRC, trying to keep even a small and decreasing number of airframes going by that time is going to take more resources and effort to ensure that aircraft are airworthy. Even if all the avionics are completely replaced with upgraded systems, there will be concerns about metal fatigue and structural cracking. These concerns can of course be addressed by more frequent and thorough inspection and maintenance regimes, but at some point the resource costs in terms of funding, time and personnel, plus the capability outputs of the basic design are almost certainly going to be outweighed by either what else is available, and/or what others are using.