Herc SAR?
 

Reading through the threads this week WRT the deletion of the Nimrod someone said / typed that the Hercules could undertake some of the long range SAR elements.

Now, I am not so blind to think that there are a cupboard full of C-130s just sat around in RAF colours to be tasked to this. However, a photo-thread today on UKAR showed a C-130 in USCG colours.

AFAIR the US Coasties have been using the Herk for many years, so I am asking an honest question.

Could the Herc provide a good long range SAR asset? What percentage of the Nimrod's capability would it provide for this role? (I did like the Snoopy / MAD Boom comments)

Try nil.:mad:

'Nil' is a bit harsh -
say 10% as good?

Wrong.....

I believe the Herc has a homer system to allow a search for beacons operating on 243, i.e standard UK military system, so eletronic search capabilities of the two aircraft would be similar. The current Herc radar is good enough to find smallish contacts, fishing boats etc, but will undoubtably not be as capable in a maritime environment as a Nimrod's. Herc will have greater endurance than a Nimrod, although, given its slower speed, that does not necessarily mean a greater patrol radius. Herc can fly slower in the search, giving more time for a pair of eyes to scan the same area of sea. Herc can drop a SAR package but probably won't carry the number of dingies a dedicated SAR Nimrod would have available. Nimrod has more extensive maritime comms and a crew compliment to run several intensive radio nets simultaneously. Nimrod has more comfortable positions for carrying out visual seach procedures....

So, the Herc can do a capable electronic/visual search in a SAR incident, especially given a well trained crew. It will be nowhere near as capable as a Nimrod in a large scale, command and control type incident, such as a repeat of the Piper Alpha. However, to write off a Hercs capabilities in SAR as nil is incorrect, as has been demonstrated before in the South Atlantic.

On all three of the long range rescues done by the USAFE in recent years using their MH53, MH-60 and MC-130 Combat Shadows, the Nimrod was always on scene first and providing communications support for all the assets combined relaying it to the ARCC.
I'm sure the USCG HC-130's are very capable at their job otherwise they wouldn't use them for the SAR role but surely it wouldn't be too hard to modify a few C-130J's at Lyneham to be capable SAR cover?

So,if you were sat in your little orange dinghy ,BP,you wouldn`t like to see Albert come chugging over the horizon,drop a few smokefloats,and then a luxurious 10 seater ,with tv and internet,even a blow-up doll to keep you company.Admittedly the radar is probably not as good,it isn`t as fast,it can stay up as long as you want,with AAR, the hold is full of food,can drop a lifeboat,or two,even drop some nice hairy Marines who will know how to keep you warm,and a tin of Vaseline,so you don`t get `happy-rash`...
So,BP, think again before you press `submit`....

Searchwater can find contacts significantly smaller than fishing boats, and what matters is the range that can be done at - if your detection range is greater then the legs of your search pattern can be further apart and you will cover a greater area in the same period of time.... coupled with a higher speed I would expect that to translate into a significant difference in surface search capability. Although visual lookout is useful for finalising an exact position (and there are rather more windows, 3 'goldfish bowls' specifically designed for eyeballing seagulls from, on Norman) it's cock all use for actually finding things unless you get really lucky.

The Herc will be far better than nothing, but looking back over quite a lot of SAR flying, ie the actual job done on a callout, the majority seeemed to come in three flavours:

1) Small boat/Lone yachtsman etc lost and discovering a previously unnoticed jacuzzi downstairs, which often involved the Nimrod doing a quick search to locate the nearest surface vessel to conn onto the 'sinkee' to assist.

2) EU fisherman in need of NHS operation to be winched from far SW, Nimrod to provide top cover for helo op at long range - requiring minimum delay finding vessel, conn helo on, provide SAR cover for helo operating outside its comfort zone.

3) Major epic, Piper Alpha type of event - rare, but the C+C from the Nimrod could involve controlling numerous helo and surface vessels, coordinating search areas etc whilst simultaneously handling lots of comms. (Including safety reports from the rescue craft themselves). That kept everyone busy, and the large Nav area was a godsend, I would suggest. It's not about comfort, it's about having a fairly large number of specialists and room to work.

Obviously the Herk can do a search, it can also drop stuff like dinghies, so 'zero' isn't really the case and I doubt BP seriously thinks that - but for capability, for actually doing the job, it is a long long way from as well fitted for the job as the Nimrod.

Comparing a "standard" RAF transport Herc with the Hercs operated by the US Coast Guard is apples and cobblestones.

The USCG Hercs (and the Talon package, but with bad guys possibly involved) were designed and equipped for SAR /CSAR respectively and very little else.

So if its a "real" SAR Herc coming to find you, just wait an hour longer before you switch on SARAH or whatever you call it this week, PLB, ELB, annoying beepy thing on Guard?

And the Herc can carry and drop a lot more Lindholme gear than a Nimrod. Even chuck you a boat maybe.

Hmm, could we fit a bunch of side-firing artillery too? Not everyone needs hoying out of the Oggin.

Another route is keep the Nimrods.

The Herc can drop as many ASRA kits as you can fit in the freight bay. The radar is pretty good at picking up surface contacts (to the trained eye) and has the capability to handle multiple comms including Marine and Satcom and has homing capabilities. Its also got the range and endurance (incl AAR) to provide on scene cover & comms for a good length of time.

Notwithstanding the fact that we'd all rather stick pins in our eyes than do SAR standby, the Herc is more than capable enough to do the task albeit obviously not as well as a dedicated kipperesque maritime asset. If you don't have one of those then it's the next best thing in our otherwise empty "golf bag".

Have we got the aircraft? Perhaps - it sounds like a job for the Mk3 slicks of 70 Sqn if you ask me. Form an orderly queue fellas! I'd reckon BP would be the man for the job! ;)

:ok:

davejb

Reference the second of your typical incidents. The fishing vessel in question has GPS these days, as does the rescue helo. Therefore the requirement to "find" the vessel, and to "conn" the helo on have largely disappeared. It is almost a case of "nice to have" rather than essential.

With regard to some of your general comments in respect of radar performance, search sweep width, etc. The object of your search either has some form of "comms" with the outside world or not. If they do have a voice link, in this day and age they will almost certainly have a GPS position, and can tell you exactly where they are. Alternatively they will have a rescue beacon you can use to locate them.

If there are no electronic signals (voice or beacon) from them, you might well elect to commence a radar search (base on possibilities of damaged vessel still afloat/wreckage/loss of power for radios). However, how do you know this is the case? With lack of electronic signals the worse case scenario is that they are now in the water (in a dingy or not), in which case the search pattern to adopt would be a visual one. It would be no good adopting a sweep width of say 10nm based on radar performance if you are actually looking for a dingy with a visual detection range of 1nm. Obviously you would investigate radar contacts as you conducted a visual search.

Therefore, a SAR search based on radar performance of the aircraft is not likely. Either the object of the search has some form of electronic comms which the searcher can use, or you can only assume the worst and act accordingly.

Biggus

You say "The fishing vessel in question has GPS these days, as does the rescue helo. Therefore the requirement to "find" the vessel, and to "conn" the helo on have largely disappeared. It is almost a case of "nice to have" rather than essential".

I disagree. The system you describe works well if the crew of the vessel in question speak the same language as the helo crew - English, in this case - and is able to quickly relay that position to the helo. Unfortunately, it sometimes proves extremely difficult to communicate in a common language with our non-fluent EU colleagues and comms can be relayed via several sources/translations before actually ending up with the crew of the helo. therefore, any GPS position passed to the helo crew via a remote (foregin) MRCC, etc, is only as accurate as the last time it was updated. So picture the scene when the rescue helo pitches up, in fog or at night, at extreme range with only 20 minutes fuel on scene and the vessel in question is not there. The crew then waste valuable time swanning round trying to locate said vessel, and even 10 miles between last GPS update and actual position can lead to considerable delays in location. In this case, the ability of another airborne asset to "find and conn" is invaluable and hardly a "nice to have".

"....largely....."

"....almost...."

Your experience may be different, and I don't dispute it. I described my personal experience in this particular area.

The Canadian Forces have been using the C-130 for SAR (long range and otherwise) for 35 plus years. Not once did I hear of the need to replace them with the Nimrod, so it must be somewhat capable.....;)

Hercs have been based in the South Atlantic for 26 years and have been tasked with Maritime Radar Reconnaissance and Search and Rescue. Amongst the many crews who have detached, there will be experience in davejb scenarios 1 and 2.

In 1993 there was a little publicised SAR incident involving a Russian merchant ship that sunk halfway (I believe) between Tristan de Chuna and FI. The rescue effort required multiple sorties at long range in difficult weather and pre-GPS. The effort required AAR, dropping of dinghies to pockets of survivors and 'conning' a nearby ship to the scene.

I am sure the Herc is not as capable as the Nimrod in some aspects. However the crews and aircraft are not the lame duck that other have alluded to.

For scenario 3, how about E3?

Time to tender out to civilian operators perhaps?

Air Atlantic? GAMA? Highland? Directflight? A.N. Other?

The IAC CASA flies out a fair way over the Atlantic on two turbines.....

C130k SAR
 

I guess you youngsters weren't around when a 48Sqn Changi based Herc used to carry out SAR duties based at GAN or when a 242OCU crew won a SAR trophy in Cyprus in the late'70s.

The USCG, another small SAR outfit, flies both C-130's and CASA 225's (HU-144) aircraft in the SAR role.

Whilst it is indeed a useful aircraft I cannot help but think that it's a waste of resources when something like a 146 with mods could do it cheaper .

Re Scenario 3
 

Not a player for the E3D, yes the radio fit is VHF but does not cover down to the Maritime band unless a mod is paid for and sitting on SAR alert is no going to be popular with the Engineers. With limited frames and other tasking to of various priorities a conflict that would have to be resolved at very high level.

Oh dear - lots of people posting with no real idea about how short of C130s the RAF is and how ineffective at Long Range SAR the fleet really is.

C130Js - all a bit busy at the moment. No external tanks so limited endurance. ASRA kit awaiting final release to service.

C130Ks - no airframes at all. 2 ASRA kits left in service. Good range and endurance but painfully slow - would you want to be at 30 West waiting for a frame from LYE? Weather radar average, comms relay and SAR top cover ability - limited at best. Crappy SAR homer and no 406 facility.

The boys have been in MPA for the last 6 years - MRR primary role with SAR standby only, 1312 Flt are well aware of the limitations of C130 SAR.
The C130J boys are in for a treat - no low flying, no AR due to VC10 fatigue limitations, no drops and constant SAR standby duties - enjoy.
The 'slicks' you refer too will all be retired by Jul 10 - so no airframes anyway.

And as I've done 3 long range SAR jobs and dropped ASRA for real I can tell you it's not easy, the C130K isn't a suitable platform and the kit we drop (if we can find you) isn't great.

Unfortunatley Stoppers, if you keep saying we can with platforms we shouldn't then the capability gaps just get bigger.:ok: