It was funny hearing the officer say, "Mark One Eyeball" at the beginning of the video. I used to hear that expression all the time when I was an army reservist 45 years ago. Some things never change.
Thank you very much for the kind words / feedback. Your support and viewership is greatly appreciated. Stay tuned, we have a lot more on the way, and Season 2 of Go Bold is soon to be released! 🙂
Viking Air proposed the Buffalo NG which would have had a modernized and pressurized cockpit, and new engines. It would have been a great evolution to the Buffalo, but the Govt opted otherwise.
If anyone would like to read a little more into Canada’s newest military acquisition debacle known as the C-295 Kingfisher I urge you to read The Hill Times article by Richard Shimooka May 30, 2022. It doesn’t paint a pretty picture of CAFs newest failure.
“As a Canadian all my life” I was dumbfounded to find out our new SAR aircraft are not DHC. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot is this country’s fascination with outsourcing this equipment to foreign companies?
Ive heard.....from pilots and reading online there is a lot of issues with the Kingfisher. Hopefully they get worked out.....sounds bad to be honest (centre of gravity problems when people parachute out, not suitable for mountainous terrain, not suitable for cold weather)
We fly in the mountains all the time, SAR Techs parachute out with no problem, we've flown them to Alert and had multiple 1 month cold weather training trips to Goose Bay for Cold weather testing among the many trips we've done, cant believe all the misinformation being spread. Training has taken longer than expected on both the Air and Groundcrew side unfortunately but considering a new training school had to be built along with standing up a new training Squadron including two simulators , when all the aircraft were already built and sitting in Spain definitely contributed to the delay. I've been with the program as an AVN Tech for 4 years its a great plane, is it perfect no but what aircraft is, is it the Buff no but SAR is different now with all the new Technology, the days of just looking out a window are over. I loved the Buff worked as a Tech on her for 21 years all together but time moves on.
It doesn’t appear to have room for stretchers, I am curious as to what it was really designed for? Have they been able to solve the centre of gravity issues?
All good questions Ray! The configuration is clearly more focused on the search aspect as opposed to evacuation. You can hear a great perspective about some of the capabilities Fixed-Wing SAR aircraft bring to the table in Episode 58 of the "Go Bold with Joetey Attariwala" podcast, which can be found on all major podcast platforms. I think you'll enjoy it. As for the centre of gravity issue, I'm not sure, but it's on my radar for sure! I'll update when I learn more.
It was empty because the video is from when the Kingfisher was inducted into the RCAF. The Air Force is making headway, but it's a lot slower than was planned. Initial Operational Capability (IOC) is currently scheduled for Fiscal Year 2025/26.
Nice to see an officer that still has proper dress and deportment unlike that pilot on the snowbirds that touring nations making a damn fool of himself and making our military look soft.
I still think Canada could have built a new replacement aircraft for the Buffalo than going for the Airbus C-295. But as Canadians we prefer the path of least resistance.
Oh I am, and I've come away with 2 key perspectives... 1. It's an amazing search platform with its sensors. 2. It's tight for the SAR Techs to operate in, but doable.
@@goboldwithjoeteyattariwala or to get a more accurate perspective and read a little more into Canada’s newest military acquisition debacle known as the C-295 Kingfisher I urge you to read The Hill Times article by Richard Shimooka May 30, 2022. It doesn’t paint a pretty picture of CAFs newest failure- Robert might be a bit too close to this program to get anything but biased information .
@@darwoo I have indeed seen that piece and there's a lot to digest from it. I don't think anyone thinks the platform is the best out there for Canada's needs, and there is no doubt the procurement process AND the program management could have been MUCH better. Having said that, with time, effort, and money, it appears it will be able to do the job. That's not a glowing comment about the entire process, but it's a genuine synopsis of it all.
Word on the street is that this plane has so many performance issues it may never be accepted into service. It is possible these will be sold or pressed into alternate service. An expose should be done on this program- another debacle.
@@RobertHunt-y8n excellent input, spitting facts right there. W&B, second segment climb, SE go around are all a mess- but let’s go with ‘you are wrong’ 👍
Why would they not consider an amphibian in this roll which could if required land on water and pick up people immediately rather than have to wait maybe hours for a chopper.
Valid point in principle however there are very few options for such an aircraft, and I think the calculus falls on determining what frequency you'd actually need to land on water. I believe it's more sensible to have a traditional aircraft of which there are many to choose from when it comes to a procurement project. Thanks for watching! 🙂
I'm very familiar with the fixed-wing SAR procurement and this was the costliest and less capable plane in the running. The other two, C130J and C27, were far superior aircraft and cheaper. This procurement is yet another one that should be investigated.
@3storiesUp Have you seen the actual cost of the C295? And it was also a cost to capability comparison, which the C130J is far more capable than the C295. I worked with people who were part of the acquisition process, including a visit in Spain to see theirs, and they all said it was wholly inadequate compared to other competing models.
@@morrij01 I have seen an actual tender for a C295, and it is nowhere near the unit price of a C130J. Comparing a C130J with a C295 is apples to oranges. The C235 and the 295 have been carrying out missions similar to those proposed by the Canadians for years, and they are carrying out those missions well. You have a biased view of this A/C based on absolutely nothing. It's as simple as that.
@3storiesUp I don't know which ones you've seen, but a few examples of the C295 deficiencies is that many SAR techs can't stand up comfortably in the back, there's not enough room to fit all the sensors and personnel on the SOR, so they had to go back and modify it to keep the 295 in the running.
@@morrij01 This has nothing to do with the cost or the effectiveness of the A/C .. it goes back to people who are not very proficient at their jobs making bad choices. This is feeding into your bias of what is a very good A/C.
I interviewed the Commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force in Episode 67 of the "Go Bold with Joetey Attariwala" podcast, which can be found on all major podcast platforms. The General speaks about the CC-295 and its future. Please check it out for an answer to your statement.
The Kingfisher is unfortunately another botched government military purchase. A new version of the Buffalo would have been the more suitable SAR aircraft.
Hate to be that guy; however, this aircraft could be a failure. They've been delayed by 3 years. They have center of gravity issues, can't operate in the mountains, struggle with winter operations and are underpowered. I don't know very much at all about the Kingfisher, but was told by friends in the know that it wouldn't be a surprise if the program is cancelled as some of the issues are major issues that are not easily fixed.
@@dodoDodo-of6pu You admit you don't know anything about the Kingfisher but feel like you need to comment we`ve been to Yellowknife, Alert , Goose bay and even Arizona and Florida multiple training missions with Sar Techs jumping and training I've been on low level missions slow and low in the mountains and over the ocean working with the coast guard the plane is awesome and its avionics are unreal and great step up for us technicians who are working our butts off to get this plane operational.
I was going to get all excited about the military finally starting to buy Canadian designed and manufactured aircraft again and then I saw that it was an airbus….😑 We are losers just like the crew that is still wearing face diapers after all this time….
![Canada's Next Fixed Wing SAR Air-Frame [FWSAR]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/UFldVi0m9Kw/mqdefault.jpg)
Nice to know that our military is getting modern. As a Canadian I have every reason to be proud.
It was funny hearing the officer say, "Mark One Eyeball" at the beginning of the video. I used to hear that expression all the time when I was an army reservist 45 years ago. Some things never change.
It's an oldie but a goodie, and smile every time I hear it too! Thanks very much for watching! 🙂
Why is delivery delayed for 3 years?
Great video Joetey. Keep ‘em coming.
Thank you very much for the kind words / feedback. Your support and viewership is greatly appreciated. Stay tuned, we have a lot more on the way, and Season 2 of Go Bold is soon to be released! 🙂
Nice piece of kit!
What's woth the masks??
Very googplane. Enjoy it, canadians.
I find it odd that they never approached DeHavilland for a new model or a Canadian made solution? Someone must have really wanted a holiday.
Viking Air proposed the Buffalo NG which would have had a modernized and pressurized cockpit, and new engines. It would have been a great evolution to the Buffalo, but the Govt opted otherwise.
@@goboldwithjoeteyattariwala
Of course.
Should’ve gone with the spartan
If anyone would like to read a little more into Canada’s newest military acquisition debacle known as the C-295 Kingfisher I urge you to read The Hill Times article by Richard Shimooka May 30, 2022. It doesn’t paint a pretty picture of CAFs newest failure.
“As a Canadian all my life” I was dumbfounded to find out our new SAR aircraft are not DHC. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot is this country’s fascination with outsourcing this equipment to foreign companies?
Ive heard.....from pilots and reading online there is a lot of issues with the Kingfisher. Hopefully they get worked out.....sounds bad to be honest (centre of gravity problems when people parachute out, not suitable for mountainous terrain, not suitable for cold weather)
There are issues indeed, and that's why IOC is currently planned for 2025/26.
We fly in the mountains all the time, SAR Techs parachute out with no problem, we've flown them to Alert and had multiple 1 month cold weather training trips to Goose Bay for Cold weather testing among the many trips we've done, cant believe all the misinformation being spread. Training has taken longer than expected on both the Air and Groundcrew side unfortunately but considering a new training school had to be built along with standing up a new training Squadron including two simulators , when all the aircraft were already built and sitting in Spain definitely contributed to the delay. I've been with the program as an AVN Tech for 4 years its a great plane, is it perfect no but what aircraft is, is it the Buff no but SAR is different now with all the new Technology, the days of just looking out a window are over. I loved the Buff worked as a Tech on her for 21 years all together but time moves on.
It doesn’t appear to have room for stretchers, I am curious as to what it was really designed for? Have they been able to solve the centre of gravity issues?
All good questions Ray! The configuration is clearly more focused on the search aspect as opposed to evacuation. You can hear a great perspective about some of the capabilities Fixed-Wing SAR aircraft bring to the table in Episode 58 of the "Go Bold with Joetey Attariwala" podcast, which can be found on all major podcast platforms. I think you'll enjoy it.
As for the centre of gravity issue, I'm not sure, but it's on my radar for sure! I'll update when I learn more.
This is a plane that will never see operational SAR tasking. The Fact that it was empty adds to that.
It was empty because the video is from when the Kingfisher was inducted into the RCAF. The Air Force is making headway, but it's a lot slower than was planned. Initial Operational Capability (IOC) is currently scheduled for Fiscal Year 2025/26.
Horrible we couldn’t make these in Canada. Too bad we had no experience in STOL multi engine utility planes.
Should’ve chosen the Spartan
No argument that it has much more space than the C-295, however it has had issues and modest success in comparison.
@@goboldwithjoeteyattariwala yeah but the c295 has had a bunch of issues too which ultimately made it more expensive than choosing the spartan
@@Themapleleaforever Yeah, now the RCAF has to do the best with what they've got.
going to bmq in 3 days for AESOP. hoping to work on this. anyone know of one who said good things
they wont even let you pick that plane on BAQC. You also dont want Cyclone. LRP all the way.
That’s what the cabinetry looks like loaded to MTOW, eh?
Nice to see an officer that still has proper dress and deportment unlike that pilot on the snowbirds that touring nations making a damn fool of himself and making our military look soft.
Not yet arrived in Comox right?
I shot that video in Comox. There are 4 there for sure, maybe 5.
@@goboldwithjoeteyattariwala Copy that
I still think Canada could have built a new replacement aircraft for the Buffalo than going for the Airbus C-295. But as Canadians we prefer the path of least resistance.
Hey Joetey maybe talk to people that actually know these aircraft to get the answers you want.
Oh I am, and I've come away with 2 key perspectives... 1. It's an amazing search platform with its sensors. 2. It's tight for the SAR Techs to operate in, but doable.
@@goboldwithjoeteyattariwala Very doable and yes its a great platform despite the negativity
@@goboldwithjoeteyattariwala or to get a more accurate perspective and read a little more into Canada’s newest military acquisition debacle known as the C-295 Kingfisher I urge you to read The Hill Times article by Richard Shimooka May 30, 2022. It doesn’t paint a pretty picture of CAFs newest failure- Robert might be a bit too close to this program to get anything but biased information .
@@RobertHunt-y8n Agreed. It will be able to do the job.
@@darwoo I have indeed seen that piece and there's a lot to digest from it. I don't think anyone thinks the platform is the best out there for Canada's needs, and there is no doubt the procurement process AND the program management could have been MUCH better. Having said that, with time, effort, and money, it appears it will be able to do the job. That's not a glowing comment about the entire process, but it's a genuine synopsis of it all.
Word on the street is that this plane has so many performance issues it may never be accepted into service. It is possible these will be sold or pressed into
alternate service. An expose should be done on this program- another debacle.
I am tracking... it will be interesting to see how this project pans out.
then that is a manufacturers issue for failure to deliver as ordered
I've heard this from the team at Bell helicopter who maintain the Griffon. They've told me it will never enter service with SAR.
Word on the street as usual is wrong
@@RobertHunt-y8n excellent input, spitting facts right there.
W&B, second segment climb, SE go around are all a mess- but let’s go with ‘you are wrong’ 👍
Why would they not consider an amphibian in this roll which could if required land on water and pick up people immediately rather than have to wait maybe hours for a chopper.
Valid point in principle however there are very few options for such an aircraft, and I think the calculus falls on determining what frequency you'd actually need to land on water. I believe it's more sensible to have a traditional aircraft of which there are many to choose from when it comes to a procurement project.
Thanks for watching! 🙂
I'm very familiar with the fixed-wing SAR procurement and this was the costliest and less capable plane in the running. The other two, C130J and C27, were far superior aircraft and cheaper. This procurement is yet another one that should be investigated.
That is a ridiculous comment .. the unit cost of a C130J alone (without mission configuration) is more than this cost in its configured state.
@3storiesUp Have you seen the actual cost of the C295? And it was also a cost to capability comparison, which the C130J is far more capable than the C295. I worked with people who were part of the acquisition process, including a visit in Spain to see theirs, and they all said it was wholly inadequate compared to other competing models.
@@morrij01 I have seen an actual tender for a C295, and it is nowhere near the unit price of a C130J. Comparing a C130J with a C295 is apples to oranges. The C235 and the 295 have been carrying out missions similar to those proposed by the Canadians for years, and they are carrying out those missions well. You have a biased view of this A/C based on absolutely nothing. It's as simple as that.
@3storiesUp I don't know which ones you've seen, but a few examples of the C295 deficiencies is that many SAR techs can't stand up comfortably in the back, there's not enough room to fit all the sensors and personnel on the SOR, so they had to go back and modify it to keep the 295 in the running.
@@morrij01 This has nothing to do with the cost or the effectiveness of the A/C .. it goes back to people who are not very proficient at their jobs making bad choices. This is feeding into your bias of what is a very good A/C.
I've heard these things are never going to be in service for SAR. Another procurement failure..
I interviewed the Commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force in Episode 67 of the "Go Bold with Joetey Attariwala" podcast, which can be found on all major podcast platforms. The General speaks about the CC-295 and its future. Please check it out for an answer to your statement.
Liberals
they didn't build it , That is a manufacturer issue not government or RCAF . Try thinking
There's always one clown ..
The Kingfisher is unfortunately another botched government military purchase. A new version of the Buffalo would have been the more suitable SAR aircraft.
dummy a manufacturer did not deliver the a/c ordered. So they wil;l likely not be paid for .
I am happy my tax money is going in such good planes :)
Hate to be that guy; however, this aircraft could be a failure. They've been delayed by 3 years. They have center of gravity issues, can't operate in the mountains, struggle with winter operations and are underpowered. I don't know very much at all about the Kingfisher, but was told by friends in the know that it wouldn't be a surprise if the program is cancelled as some of the issues are major issues that are not easily fixed.
@@dodoDodo-of6pu You admit you don't know anything about the Kingfisher but feel like you need to comment we`ve been to Yellowknife, Alert , Goose bay and even Arizona and Florida multiple training missions with Sar Techs jumping and training I've been on low level missions slow and low in the mountains and over the ocean working with the coast guard the plane is awesome and its avionics are unreal and great step up for us technicians who are working our butts off to get this plane operational.
🇨🇦🫡
I was going to get all excited about the military finally starting to buy Canadian designed and manufactured aircraft again and then I saw that it was an airbus….😑
We are losers just like the crew that is still wearing face diapers after all this time….
It's important to know when that video was filmed. It was during COVID.
@@goboldwithjoeteyattariwala
True, although it was indicated as having been posted 11 months ago so that’s the reference I used.
@@marcusaetius9309 Yup, totally makes sense. Sometimes it just takes a while to get these videos out. I always try my best.