Back to news

July 23, 2019 | Local, Aerospace

Next-gen aircrew training

Rarely in the life of a large, complex military program do you get the opportunity to reshape it from the ground up. But with two pilot training contracts coming to an end in the mid-2020s, the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) is taking advantage of the moment to “reimagine how we are doing training,” said Col Pete Saunders, director of Air Simulation and Training.

RCAF pilots obtain their wings through two contracted training services, Contracted Flying Training and Support (CFTS) and NATO Flying Training in Canada (NFTC), delivered from two schools in Manitoba and Saskatchewan: 3 Canadian Forces Flying Training School (3 CFFTS) at the Southport Aerospace Centre in Portage la Prairie and 2 Canadian Forces Flying Training School (2 CFFTS) at 15 Wing Moose Jaw.

CFTS, delivered by Allied Wings and led by KF Aerospace, ends in 2027 while NFTC, provided by CAE Military Aviation Training, runs until December 2023, with the option for a one-year extension–the program was recently extended from 2021.

At same time, the RCAF would like to transition in-house training of its air combat systems officers (ACSO) and airborne electronic sensor operators (AESOp) to the same program as pilot training, a move partially driven by the end of service life of their primary training platform, the Dash-8 “Gonzo” in 2028.

“There are things we have done really well, things we probably wouldn’t do that way again, so this is an opportunity to re-baseline everything,” said Saunders.

By concentrating all aircrew training under one program, the RCAF is requesting one of the more comprehensive and ambitious industry-managed programs worldwide, from courseware and training devices to aircraft and maintenance, instructors and facilities management.

The Future Aircrew Training (FAcT) program hasn’t yet released an official price tag, but with NFTC worth about $3.8 billion over 25 years and CFTS valued at $1.8 billion over 22 years, the eventual contract could exceed $10 billion over 20 plus years.

More than 80 companies initially expressed interest in the program and five have been down-selected to offer bids when a request for proposals is released in early 2020: Airbus Defence and Space, Babcock Canada, Leonardo Canada, Lockheed Martin Canada, and SkyAlyne Canada, a joint venture between the two incumbents, CAE and KF Aerospace. A sixth qualified bidder, BAE Systems, withdrew in April.

What they will be asked to bid on boils down to a single word: Output. In presentations to industry over the past two years, Saunders has stressed, “it is not an aircraft acquisition program, it is a training service, [and] what we are contracting for is output. How a successful supplier gets there, I am not that fussed. What I care about is the output.”

And that is a straightforward demand: 120 pilots, 40 ACSOs and 36 AESOps, plus or minus 15 per cent, to a defined standard every year. The flexibility to ramp up or down is intended to deal with shortages–the RCAF is at about 82.6 per cent of manning or around 275 pilots short at the moment–the introduction of new fleets like remotely-piloted aircraft systems (RPAS), and the transition from legacy to new airframes when throughput may not be as high.

The numbers are based on demographic shifts and forecasted attrition rates, a “sweet spot” that acknowledges the fact the newer generations may be less likely to enroll for a 25-year career, he said.

The Air Force also wants a program adaptable to technological change as both training systems and teaching methodologies evolve. “Our existing programs are delivering exactly what we are asking for, but they don’t have that flexibility baked into them, which then handcuffs the contractor who would love to do things slightly differently, but it comes at a certain cost,” said Saunders.

FASTER WINGS

The current training system produces around 100 to 115 pilots each year for the RCAF’s fleets of multi-engine, rotary wing and fighter aircraft. Though the schools delivered a record 116 pilots in 2016, the number has been scaled back to 107 for 2018 to manage a bottleneck developing at many of the operational training units (OTU).

The Air Force revised its selection process about five years ago, from a series of aptitude tests and hand-eye coordination simulators to a computer-based assessment purchased from the Royal Air Force, and has seen a significant drop in its overall attrition rate from about 15 per cent to six to eight per cent.

On average, 155 students from a pool of almost 1,200 are selected for the four-phase program that begins with primary flight training on the Grob 120-A in Portage la Prairie. About 130 advance to Phase II in Moose Jaw for basic flight training on the CT-156 Harvard II turboprop–an additional 10 often remain on the Grob if there is a capacity issue with the Harvard or they suffer from air sickness on the faster aircraft and are likely going to become helicopter pilots.

At the end of Phase II, students are streamed into multi-engine, rotary wing and fast jet. Approximately 35 multi-engine and 60 helicopter candidates will return to Portage for Phase III advanced flight training on the Raytheon King Air C-90B or the Bell CH-139 Jet Ranger and Bell 412 while around 30 remain in Moose Jaw for advanced fighter training on the CT-155 Hawk, learning advanced aerobatics, instrument flying, and tactical formation flying.

With Wings proudly pinned to their uniforms, multi-engine and rotary-wing pilots are assigned to operational training units while fighter pilots move on to Phase IV, also known as Fighter Lead-In Training (FLIT), still on the Hawk but at 419 Tactical Fighter Training Squadron at 4 Wing Cold Lake, Alta.

The Air Force is also in the process of analyzing the options for a future FLIT program, but has opted to separate FAcT from the more specialized FLIT requirements.

One of the many objectives of FAcT will be to stream pilots earlier in the process, rather than waiting until the end of basic flight training after Phase II. In preparation for a new program, the RCAF has revised the qualification standards for all its aircrew trades, but especially for pilots to reflect the mission management component of flying more data-generating aircraft.

“There will be a basic flying training phase for all pilots. And then as early as possible, we want to stream them between rotary and fixed-wing,” said Saunders. “Then rotary folks will go off and do their basic rotary training and advanced training, be that on one aircraft or two aircraft. On the fixed wing stream, there will be [additional training] and then they will split again between fast jet and multi-engine.”

Whether that is delivered as four distinct phases has yet to be defined, he said, but the Air Force has been working with potential bidders through workshops to develop the training plan. “As long as they meet the standard we have laid out, how we get there will be unique to each one of these qualified suppliers.”

The Air Force recently adjusted its training plan to a block approach where student performance is measured by passing certain gates rather than following a linear progression. “The result has been very positive in that we’ve reduced our extra do-overs, our extra training by half,” said Col Denis O’Reilly, commander of 15 Wing Moose Jaw.

By allowing students to focus on areas where they know they need the work and giving them more input into their flights, “it has decreased attrition rates and increased student confidence,” he said. “That has allowed us to use these hours more wisely… [I]nstructors are more successful on every trip they take a student on.”

ACSOs and AESOps will remain in Winnipeg, but bringing them under the same training program is intended to capitalize on the fact that much of the basic courseware is common to both pilots and systems operators.

Specialized training for future RPAS pilots and weapon systems operators will be done at an OTU, but the initial skills will be to the same standard as other aircrew, said Saunders. “If we determine that the nature of the work is so different that it requires a change in the qualification standard or that we need to make a different stream, then we will have the ability to do that.”

The CFTS and NFTC programs are delivered with a mix of 12 Grobs, seven King Airs, 10 Jet Rangers, nine 412s, 22 Harvards and 17 Hawks, and all have an availability rate of over 90 per cent. And at 17,600 hours per year, no one flies Harvards more than Canadian pilot candidates.

However, Saunders has told industry not to assume access to any of the current training fleets. “The [18-year-old] Hawks and the Harvards have done a great job and we’re pretty confident they will be fine to the end of the contracts,” he said. “But we put a lot of abuse on them. Let’s just say pilot training is not kind to aircraft. So those aren’t going to be available. Similar with the rotary wing aircraft. We are seeing a clean slate. I’m not telling [qualified bidders] which airplane … as long as it achieves my training objectives.”

TRAINING INNOVATION

In 2015, the RCAF released a long-term simulation strategy intended to “transform [the] training system from one that relies on aircraft to one that exploits new technologies to train aviators in a simulation-focused system that creates, in effect, a ‘virtual battlespace’.” Leveraging the latest in technology is still an Air Force goal, but the RFP for FAcT will not prescribe percentages for live flying versus simulation training.

“We haven’t given them a specific ratio,” said Saunders. “We spoke with allies who have introduced programs over the last couple years, and looked at our own experience on the CH-148 Cyclone and the CH-147 Chinook, where we have more modern simulators, and said, ‘Is there a sweet spot?’ I can’t say there is a consensus out there.”

Rather, the Air Force has looked at its performance objectives and tried to determine how many can be completed in a simulator. “Our initial cut is probably more flying hours than we are currently getting,” he admitted.

Because the Air Force also wants to push more training down from the OTUs to the pre-Wings phase of a pilot’s development–skills like VFR navigation, night vision systems, and formation flying operating with night vision goggles–Saunders also expects the number of simulator hours to increase. “I want to teach the whys and hows and get them comfortable trusting these things on a much less expensive aircraft,” he said.

At present, the majority of simulation flying is done during Phase III of rotary wing (42%) and multi-engine (59%) training. Peter Fedak, a former commanding officer of 3 CFFTS and the site manager for Allied Wings in Portage, said the “pendulum has swung back a bit” when it comes to simulation. The school recently acquired an advanced simulator for the Bell 206, but instead of replacing hours one-for-one, “we are trying to use the sim to the best of its ability and seeing how many things we can take out of the aircraft.” In fact, the changes added five days to the training curriculum.

However, the Air Force will be looking to industry for ideas and technologies to improve how students learn. O’Reilly noted training is expensive and industry is well ahead of the military on new methodologies. “I don’t think we can be closed minded about it,” he said.

Added Saunders: “That is where I think we are going to see the largest differentiator between bidders, is in how they want to get somebody from point A to point B using some of these more advanced technologies. But it has to be cost-effective. I’ve been very clear that this is not a developmental program. Canada can’t be the guinea pig in terms of new and unproven technology.”

CONTRACTING EXPERIENCE

All the improvements to the training system won’t matter much if the operational training units are unable to absorb Winged pilots more quickly. At present, the Air Force has a bottleneck at most OTUs due to challenges retaining experienced pilots and an operational tempo that has pulled veteran instructors from most fleets for deployments.

That has resulted at times in lengthy delays for some young pilots, observed Fedak. “The gap is longer than we would like and we are seeing some fade and a lot of returns. Because of that wait, we have had to do refresher training for a lot of people who we would love to never see again, unless they come back as instructors.”

Saunders said the ideal wait is no more than six months to finish advanced training and then move, get settled, complete some ground school and begin flying at an OTU. “That is motivating and it’s also efficient.”

As part of FAcT, the Air Force is open to more contracted flight instructors. While industry under both the CFTS and NFTC provides simulator-based instruction, live flying has remained the purview of the military, a commitment that requires around 130 instructors in both locations, said O’Reilly.

“The intent is to allow the OTUs to be better staffed from a uniform perspective, which is where I really need those instructor pilots,” said Saunders. As the former commander of 406 Maritime Operational Training Squadron in Shearwater, N.S., when the Cyclone was introduced, he relied on a dozen serving and contracted instructors to manage the conversion from the CH-124 Sea King to the Cyclone.

“Half of those are probably contracted flight instructors on any given day, and you would not be able to tell who is who,” he explained. “My focus at the time was to create that one team, one standard, one mission approach. There were things the contracted folks don’t teach–tactics that are a classification level beyond what they hold–but they definitely teach everything up to that point, interspersed with our uniform flight instructors.”

Transitioning from a program managed by two companies to a single provider of what are now three distinct programs won’t be straightforward, even if the winner is the joint venture of CAE and KF Aerospace. Though the two companies have been “very responsive” managing an inter-related program, ensuring the right number of aircraft are on the line each day, students transfer back and forth and “an issue with one creates a ripple effect with the other,” noted Saunders. “These are different companies under different contracts with different metrics, so just by the very nature of it, it creates a challenge.”

The RCAF, however, has experienced enough fleet transitions in recent years to “have learned what things work well,” he said. Through a series of workshops with industry on everything from training plans, to aircraft, to infrastructure that will extend into the fall, the Air Force hopes to present an RFP in early 2020 that is well understood and not subject to unexpected delays.

“I’ve said, ‘I know it isn’t going to be a cheap program, but tell me if there is something we are asking for that is going to create a significant cost driver’,” he said.

To date he has been getting that type of feedback. Potential bidders, for example, have raised questions about his contention flying hours may increase. “We have provided our rationale based on what we’ve learned from our allies, but we are not being prescriptive, we are saying this is what we see as a benchmark. And if you are telling me something different, tell me why.”

The Air Force created two documents, Concept of Training and Concept of Training Support, to guide prospective vendors through the current process, from weather and number of flying days in both locations to meals and accommodation. “I would argue by the time the RFP comes out, most people would have their bids in a 95 per cent completion state because we have been working with them all the way through,” he said.

Among other measures, the Air Force will stand up a Training Implementation Working Group led by 2 Canadian Air Division to monitor the process and assess the implications of various decisions once a contract is awarded in 2021.

“It will be very complicated,” but when you have that rare opportunity to makes changes, you need to seize it, he said.

https://www.skiesmag.com/features/future-aircrew-training-program-next-gen-aircrew-training/?utm_source=skies-daily-news-top-story&utm_campaign=skies-daily-news&utm_medium=email&utm_term=top-story&utm_content=V1

On the same subject

  • Federal government considering delaying acceptance of bids for new fighter jets

    May 6, 2020 | Local, Aerospace

    Federal government considering delaying acceptance of bids for new fighter jets

    David Pugliese  •  Ottawa Citizen Publishing date: 21 hours ago  •  3 minute read The federal government is looking at once again delaying acceptance of bids on new fighter jets. The bids were originally supposed to be submitted in May 2019 but that was pushed back to March 30 this year. That deadline, in turn, was pushed back to June 30 at the request of the aerospace industry, Public Services and Procurement Canada announced in February. But now the department is once again evaluating a request from industry to further extend that deadline for the proposals, Procurement Canada spokesman Marc-André Charbonneau confirmed in an email to this newspaper. “We remain committed to providing members of the Royal Canadian Air Force with the fighter aircraft they need to do their jobs, and ensuring the best possible value for Canadians,” he added. “This procurement is a once in a generation opportunity to support the growth of Canada’s aerospace and defence industries for decades to come.” If that happens it is unclear on how the current timetable for buying the fighter jets, to replace the CF-18 aircraft, might be affected. A winning bidder was to have been chosen in 2022. The first aircraft would have been delivered by 2025, according to the government’s schedule. Industry representatives say they expect the bid submissions to be pushed back at least until the end of the summer. The federal government is focused on dealing with its response to the novel coronavirus pandemic and Public Services and Procurement Canada is deeply involved in setting up procurements of protective gear and medical supplies. It has also been difficult for companies to collect and provide the necessary classified information to the federal government that is needed for the bids. Much of that has to be delivered directly to government officials and cannot be transmitted over the internet because of the sensitivity of the information. The fighter jet competition was launched on Dec. 12, 2017 and at this point three aircraft are to be considered. Those include the F-35, the Super Hornet, and the Gripen. The program is expected to cost around $19 billion and will see the purchase of 88 new jets. Information about how Canada intends to evaluate the jets is limited. But Public Services and Procurement Canada has noted that technical merit will make up the bulk of the assessment at 60 per cent. Cost and economic benefits companies can provide to Canada will each be worth 20 per cent. But Canada won’t conduct a fly-off between fighter jets competing to become the country’s new warplane nor conduct testing to see how such aircraft perform under cold weather conditions, Public Services and Procurement Canada confirmed earlier this year. Concerns have been raised by Lockheed Martin’s rivals that the competition has been designed to favour the F-35. This newspaper reported last year the requirements for the new jets put emphasis on strategic attack and striking at ground targets during foreign missions. That criteria is seen to benefit the F-35. In addition, the federal government changed criteria on how it would assess industrial benefits after the U.S. government threatened to pull the F-35 from the competition. The Conservative government had previously selected the F-35 as the air force’s new jet but backed away from that plan after concerns about the technology and growing cost. During the 2015 election campaign, Justin Trudeau vowed that his government would not purchase the F-35. But at the same time, Trudeau stated his government would hold an open competition for the fighter purchase. The Liberal government backed away from its promise to freeze out the F-35 and the aircraft is now seen as a front-runner in the competition as it has many supporters in the Royal Canadian Air Force. Many of Canada’s allies plan to operate the plane. Canada is a partner in the F-35 program and has contributed funding for the aircraft’s development over the years. It has already made its latest payment on that program. https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/federal-government-considering-delaying-acceptance-of-bids-for-new-fighter-jets/wcm/2c331c83-e437-45d8-8d1c-9be59ccb7dc3/

  • Industry, government, and law enforcement have a responsibility to work together to protect aircraft and airports from drones

    January 30, 2019 | Local, Aerospace

    Industry, government, and law enforcement have a responsibility to work together to protect aircraft and airports from drones

    New Advisory Bulletin on drone-related disruption to aircraft operations published Montreal, 28 January 2019 – Airports Council International (ACI) World has today published an Advisory Bulletin to help airports address the risks posed by drone-related disruption to aircraft operations. ACI World believes that, while regulators and police will likely be the authority in addressing both enforcement and the preparation of anti-drone measures, all industry stakeholders must work with the relevant agencies to take action to protect the safety of aircraft operations. The recent disruption caused by the reported drone sightings at London Gatwick Airport – and recent temporary cessation of some operations at London Heathrow Airport and Newark Liberty International Airport following reported sightings of a drone – are the most widely-publicised of a series of incidents which have created debate about the best approach to preparing for – and dealing with – drone-related issues. ACI’s latest Advisory Bulletin proposes that airports lead the discussion and work closely with national authorities and local law enforcement agencies to develop a risk-based approach to dealing with the risks of drone incursions. This approach should take into account the impact on aircraft operations and available mitigation measures including anti-drone actions. “The recent drone-related disruption at airports in Europe, and their potential impact on airport safety and operations, have raised significant questions for airport operators around the world on their preparedness to handle situations like this,” ACI World Director General Angela Gittens said. “The highest authority for enforcement activities and initiating anti-drone measures will clearly be the relevant national authority, such as the Civil Aviation Authority in the case of the UK, and local law enforcement agencies. “It is incumbent on all industry stakeholders, however, to take action to protect the safety of aircraft operations in coordination with these agencies. Airport operators should be aware of national laws and regulations pertaining to drones, with an understanding that these may reside outside of civil aviation.” The Advisory Bulletin lays out actions that an airport could take to lead the discussion with governments, regulators and law enforcement agencies to strengthen anti-drone measures and mitigations; they include: Coordinating with national authorities on the creation of bylaws governing the operation of drones in the vicinity of the airport Identifying geographic boundaries of “No Drone Zones” (no fly zones for drones) on and in the vicinity of the airport, especially approach and take-off flight paths Coordinating with authorities on regulations and obtaining guidance on the requirements for airports to implement anti-drone technologies Reviewing its assessment of the security risks associated with the malicious use of drones as part of the airport Security Risk Assessment Establishing means to suppress/neutralize unauthorized drones within the airport boundary especially adjacent to runways and flight paths, and agreeing which agency is responsible for areas outside the airport boundary or not on the airport operator Ensuring that any new anti-drone measures do not create unintended safety hazards and unmitigated risks to other manned aircraft, authorized drones and aviation infrastructures, and Establishing a Concept of Operations and Standard Operating Procedure for anti-drone measures based on advice from the national authorities. ACI World has requested that members share their experience and lessons learnt on anti-drone measures and drone related incidents so that relevant practices can be adopted across the industry. Notes for editors Airports Council International (ACI), the trade association of the world’s airports, was founded in 1991 with the objective of fostering cooperation among its member airports and other partners in world aviation, including the International Civil Aviation Organization, the International Air Transport Association and the Civil Air Navigation Services Organization. In representing the best interests of airports during key phases of policy development, ACI makes a significant contribution toward ensuring a global air transport system that is safe, secure, efficient and environmentally sustainable. As of January 2019, ACI serves 646 members, operating 1,960 airports in 176 countries. ACI World’s Advisory Bulletin – Airport preparedness – Drone related disruption to aircraft operations – has now been published. ACI has issued an Advisory Bulletin in July 2016 and a Policy Paper on Drones in July 2018. https://aci.aero/news/2019/01/28/industry-government-and-law-enforcement-have-a-responsibility-to-work-together-to-protect-aircraft-and-airports-from-drones/

  • Airbus eyes Canadian military deal, further cooperation with Bombardier

    November 9, 2017 | Local, Aerospace

    Airbus eyes Canadian military deal, further cooperation with Bombardier

    OTTAWA/MONTREAL (Reuters) - Airbus SE (AIR.PA) could cooperate further with Bombardier Inc (BBDb.TO) beyond a recent venture in the CSeries jets, if its fighter jet is permitted to compete in a Canadian military procurement, and its partners agree, an executive said on Wednesday. Canada said last year it will launch an open competition to replace its aging fleet of fighter jets and a request for proposal for the open competition is expected in 2019. Dirk Hoke, chief executive of Airbus Defense and Space, said the Eurofighter Typhoon fighter jet could be an option for further collaboration with Bombardier, although he did not specify further. “We will definitely also look at additional potential further cooperation with Bombardier beyond just the CSeries,” Hoke told Reuters on the sidelines of an Ottawa aerospace conference, adding that he was “very optimistic and positive about us entering this competition.” Airbus last month agreed to take a majority stake in Bombardier’s CSeries jets program, bolstering the Canadian plane’s sales and giving it a possible way out of a damaging trade dispute with Boeing Co (BA.N) and U.S. regulators. The CSeries trade dispute has muddied a potential interim military contract between Boeing and Canada for 18 Super Hornet fighter jets, creating new opportunities for rivals like Airbus, Dassault Aviation SA (AVMD.PA) and Lockheed Martin(LMT.N). Boeing and Canada had initially discussed purchasing the fighters as a stop-gap measure while the country prepared an open five-year competition to replace its aging fleet of 77 Boeing CF-18 fighter jets. Canada has halted talks with Boeing because of the dispute. Hoke said Airbus is not considering jumping into the interim bid for fighter jets and is waiting to see the specifics from the Canadian government on the open competition. “Right now, we have a very positive feeling about it but of course we have to see ... what (are) the specifications that have been finally defined and confirmed.” In 2016, Canada selected Airbus C295W aircraft for its fixed-wing search and rescue program, estimated at C$3 billion ($2.36 billion). Boeing has accused Bombardier of receiving illegal subsidies and dumping the CSeries at “absurdly low” prices in the U.S. market to win a key April 2016 order from Delta Air Lines Inc (DAL.N). The U.S. Commerce Department has notched up proposed trade duties on U.S. sales of CSeries jets at nearly 300 percent, in a case that will be decided next year at the International Trade Commission.

All news