Support to Air Force Transformation (Search and Rescue)

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Support to Air Force Transformation (Search and Rescue)"

Bernard Townsend
5 years ago
Views:

1 Support to Air Force Transformation (Search and Rescue) Sean Bourdon Directorate of Air Staff Operational Research ORD Technical Report TR 2005/15 April 2005 Defence R&D Canada Operational Research Division

3 Support to Air Force Transformation (Search and Rescue) Sean Bourdon Directorate of Air Staff Operational Research DRDC Operational Research Division ORD Technical Report TR 2005/15

5 Abstract Résumé i

6 ii

7 Executive Summary iii

8 Bases: Vancouver, Trenton Bases: Vancouver, Trenton, Halifax Bases: Vancouver, Trenton, Halifax, Gander Bases: Vancouver, Toronto (Downsview), Saint-Hubert, Halifax, Gander Figure 1. Optimal SAR Helicopter Base Locations (TRANSIT Metric with a 250 nm SAR Radius) Table 1. Performance Improvements of Optimal Helicopter Base Configurations over Current Basing INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE TRANSIT 2 Base Optimal -37.3% -95.9% -89.8% -25.0% 3 Base Optimal -15.1% -22.8% -22.6% -2.4% 4 Base Optimal -0.8% -0.8% -0.4% +12.7% 5 Base Optimal +4.6% +6.1% +4.0% +22.9% iv

9 Bases: Comox, Fredericton Bases: Comox, Trenton, Sydney Bases: Comox, Trenton, Moncton, Gander Bases: Comox, Gimli, Trenton, Moncton, Gander Figure 2. Optimal Fixed-Wing SAR Base Locations (TRANSIT Metric with 600 nm and 750 nm SAR Radii) Table 2. Performance Improvements of Optimal Fixed-Wing Base Configurations over Current Basing INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE TRANSIT 2 Base Optimal -5.8% -46.1% -30.8% -20.4% 3 Base Optimal -1.6% -3.9% -0.3% -1.3% 4 Base Optimal +1.1% +11.7% +9.2% +8.8% 5 Base Optimal +5.3% +22.4% +28.0% +13.2% v

10 vi

11 Sommaire vii

12 Bases: Vancouver, Trenton Bases: Vancouver, Trenton, Halifax Bases: Vancouver, Trenton, Halifax, Gander Bases: Vancouver, Toronto (Downsview), Saint-Hubert, Halifax, Gander Figure 3. Emplacement Idéal de Bases d Hélicoptères pour SAR (Métrique TRANSIT avec un Rayon d Action de SAR de 250 milles nautiques) Tableau 3. Amélioration de Performance des Configurations Optimales de Bases d Hélicoptères par Rapport aux Bases Courantes NOMBRE D INCIDENTS DISTANCE PARCOURUE NIVEAU DE SERVICE DE SAR TRANSIT 2 Bases Optimales -37,3% -95,9% -89,8% -25,0% 3 Bases Optimales -15,1% -22,8% -22,6% -2,4% 4 Bases Optimales -0,8% -0,8% -0,4% +12,7% 5 Bases Optimales +4,6% +6,1% +4,0% +22,9% viii

13 Bases: Comox, Fredericton Bases: Comox, Trenton, Sydney Bases: Comox, Trenton, Moncton, Gander Bases: Comox, Gimli, Trenton, Moncton, Gander Figure 4. Emplacement Idéal de Bases d Aéronefs à Voilure Fixe pour SAR (Métrique TRANSIT avec Rayons d Action de SAR de 600 et 750 milles nautiques) Tableau 4. Amélioration de Performance des Configurations Optimales de Bases d Aéronefs à Voilure Fixe par Rapport aux Bases Courantes NOMBRE D INCIDENTS DISTANCE PARCOURUE NIVEAU DE SERVICE DE SAR TRANSIT 2 Bases Optimales -5,8% -46,1% -30,8% -20,4% 3 Bases Optimales -1,6% -3,9% -0,3% -1,3% 4 Bases Optimales +1,1% +11,7% +9,2% +8,8% 5 Bases Optimales +5,3% +22,4% +28,0% +13,2% ix

14 x

15 Table of Contents xi

16 xii

17 List of Figures xiii

18 xiv

19 List of Tables xv

20 xvi

21 1 Introduction 1.1 Aeronautical SAR in Canada Table 5. CF SAR Aircraft WING SQUADRON MOB AIRCRAFT Trenton, ON CC-130 Hercules, CH-149 Cormorant Gander, NF CH-149 Cormorant Greenwood, NS CC-130 Hercules, CH-149 Cormorant Winnipeg, MB CC-130 Hercules Comox, BC CC-115 Buffalo, CH-149 Cormorant 1

22 Figure 5. Locations of Canadian Forces SAR MOBs 1.2 SAR Transformation 2

23 Figure 6. Potential SAR Base Locations distressfalse alarm aeronautical, maritime, humanitarian, or unknown 3

24 Figure 7. SAR Incident Locations 1.3 Report Organization 4

25 2 SAR Metrics R R R R 2.1 The Total Range-Limited SAR Distance Travelled (TRANSIT) Metric R RR R R 5

26 R IB r R bb ii B R d i b di,bib B RB B r BB B R d i b BB ii bb R R d i b R BB ii bb R Rdib complementary TRANSIT metric rcomp B R R d i b R ii bb merged p-median/coverage model 6

27 R R Figure 8. Notional Cumulative Distribution of Incident to Nearest Base Distances: TRANSIT Metric R R R R 2.2 Other SAR Metrics Number of Incidents Covered ri B R xi B R x i ii 7

28 d ib Rb B x i B R B R BB r I maximal set covering problem maximal covering location problem y R R Figure 9. Notional Cumulative Distribution of Incident to Nearest Base Distances: Number of Incidents Covered Total Distance Travelled r B di b T ii bb 8

29 p-median problem B r T BB R Figure 10. Notional Cumulative Distribution of Incident to Nearest Base Distances: Total Distance Travelled Combinations of Incident Coverage and Distance Travelled 9

30 x R R Figure 11. Notional Cumulative Distribution of Incident to Nearest Base Distances: SAR Level of Service 10

31 3 SAR Basing Analysis 3.1 Optimal Base Locations R R 11

32 R 12

33 a) Incident Coverage b) Travel Distance Bases: Port Hardy, Gatineau Bases: Comox, Fredericton c) SAR Level of Service d) TRANSIT Bases: Edmonton, Mont-Joli Bases: Vancouver, Trenton Figure 12. Optimal Two Base Coverage for a 250 nm SAR Radius Table 6. Performance of Two Base Configurations with a 250 nm SAR Radius INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE (NM) SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE (NM) TRANSIT (NM) Combination a) 1,438 1,331, ,914 Combination b) 1,357 1,165, ,837 Combination c) 365 1,468, ,023 Combination d) 1,396 1,382,506 1, ,038 13

34 a) Incident Coverage b) Travel Distance Bases: Edmonton, Mont-Joli Bases: Comox, Fredericton c) SAR Level of Service d) TRANSIT Bases: Edmonton, Mont-Joli Bases: Comox, Fredericton Figure 13. Optimal Two Base Coverage for a 750 nm SAR Radius Table 7. Performance of Two Base Configurations with a 750 nm SAR Radius INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE (NM) SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE (NM) TRANSIT (NM) Combination a) 2,894 1,468, ,707 Combination b) 2,813 1,165, ,261,118 Combination c) 2,894 1,468, ,707 Combination d) 2,813 1,165, ,261,118 14

35 a) Incident Coverage b) Travel Distance Bases: Port Hardy, Gatineau, Summerside Bases: Comox, Muskoka Lakes, Sydney c) SAR Level of Service d) TRANSIT Bases: Prince George, Timmins, Stephenville Bases: Vancouver, Trenton, Halifax Figure 14. Optimal Three Base Coverage for a 250 nm SAR Radius Table 8. Performance of Three Base Configurations with a 250 nm SAR Radius INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE (NM) SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE (NM) TRANSIT (NM) Combination a) 1, , ,533 Combination b) 1, , ,075 Combination c) 833 1,030, ,509 Combination d) 1, , ,683 15

36 a) Incident Coverage b) Travel Distance Bases: Fort Nelson, Thunder Bay, Gander Bases: Comox, Muskoka Lakes, Sydney c) SAR Level of Service d) TRANSIT Bases: Prince George, Timmins, Stephenville Bases: Comox, Trenton, Sydney Figure 15. Optimal Three Base Coverage for a 750 nm SAR Radius Table 9. Performance of Three Base Configurations with a 750 nm SAR Radius INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE (NM) SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE (NM) TRANSIT (NM) Combination a) 3,076 1,468, ,532 Combination b) 2, , ,563,461 Combination c) 3,052 1,030, ,336,018 Combination d) 2, , ,564,672 16

37 a) Incident Coverage b) Travel Distance Bases: Port Hardy, Trenton, Fredericton, Deer Lake Bases: Comox, Muskoka Lakes, Moncton, Gander c) SAR Level of Service d) TRANSIT Bases: Prince George, Dryden, Montréal (Dorval), Deer Lake Bases: Vancouver, Trenton, Halifax, Gander Figure 16. Optimal Four Base Coverage for a 250 nm SAR Radius Table 10. Performance of Four Base Configurations with a 250 nm SAR Radius INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE (NM) SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE (NM) TRANSIT (NM) Combination a) 2, , ,204 Combination b) 2, , ,510 Combination c) 1, , ,422 Combination d) 2, , ,587 Current 2, , ,468 Current SAR helicopter bases are in Comox, Trenton, Greenwood, and Gander. 17

a) Incident Coverage b) Travel Distance Bases: Terrace, The Pas, Montréal (Mirabel), Gander Bases: Comox, Muskoka Lakes, Moncton, Gander c) SAR Level of Service d) TRANSIT Bases: Prince George,

38 a) Incident Coverage b) Travel Distance Bases: Terrace, The Pas, Montréal (Mirabel), Gander Bases: Comox, Muskoka Lakes, Moncton, Gander c) SAR Level of Service d) TRANSIT Bases: Prince George, Dryden, Montréal (Dorval), Deer Lake Bases: Comox, Trenton, Moncton, Gander Figure 17. Optimal Four Base Coverage for a 600 nm SAR Radius Table 11. Performance of Four Base Configurations with a 600 nm SAR Radius INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE (NM) SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE (NM) TRANSIT (NM) Combination a) 3, , ,620 Combination b) 2, , ,245,993 Combination c) 3, , ,970 Combination d) 2, , ,247,138 Current 2, , ,146,281 Current fixed-wing SAR bases are in Comox, Winnipeg, Trenton, and Greenwood. 18

39 a) Incident Coverage b) Travel Distance Bases: Port Hardy, Muskoka Lakes, Rivière-du-Loup, Halifax, Gander Bases: Comox, Gimli, Trenton, Moncton, Gander c) SAR Level of Service d) TRANSIT Bases: Prince George, Gimli, Sudbury, Fredericton, St. John s Bases: Vancouver, Toronto (Downsview), Saint-Hubert, Halifax, Gander Figure 18. Optimal Five Base Coverage for a 250 nm SAR Radius Table 12. Performance of Five Base Configurations with a 250 nm SAR Radius INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE (NM) SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE (NM) TRANSIT (NM) Combination a) 2, , ,808 Combination b) 2, , ,389 Combination c) 1, , ,569 Combination d) 2, , ,836 19

40 a) Incident Coverage b) Travel Distance Bases: Terrace, The Pas, Iqaluit, Ottawa, St. John s Bases: Comox, Gimli, Trenton, Moncton, Gander c) SAR Level of Service d) TRANSIT Bases: Prince George, Gimli, Sudbury, Fredericton, St. John s Bases: Comox, Gimli, Trenton, Moncton, Gander Figure 19. Optimal Five Base Coverage for a 600 nm SAR Radius Table 13. Performance of Five Base Configurations with a 600 nm SAR Radius INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE (NM) SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE (NM) TRANSIT (NM) Combination a) 3, , ,775 Combination b) 2, , ,297,810 Combination c) 3, , ,098,206 Combination d) 2, , ,297,810 20

41 3.2 Discussion Trends in the Location of SAR Bases Evaluation of the Metrics: Small SAR Radii 21

42 Table 14. Performance of Five Base Configurations with a 50 nm SAR Radius BASE LOCATION CRITERION BASE LOCATIONS NUMBER OF INCIDENTS Incident Coverage Port Hardy, Victoria, Comox, Toronto (Downsview), Halifax 823 (26%) Travel Distance Comox, Gimli, Trenton, Moncton, Gander 440 (14%) SAR Level of Service Prince George, Gimli, Sudbury, Fredericton, St. John s 106 (3%) TRANSIT Victoria, Comox, Vancouver, Montréal (Dorval), Shearwater 736 (24%) Evaluation of the Metrics: Large SAR Radii R 22

43 Figure 20. Cumulative Distribution of Base-Incident Distances with Bases Optimized for a 650 nm SAR Radius Table 15. Performance of Three Base Configurations with a 650 nm SAR Radius BASE LOCATION CRITERION BASE LOCATIONS DISTANCE TO 50% OF SAR INCIDENTS (NM) Incident Coverage Fort St. John, Thunder Bay, Stephenville 427 Travel Distance Comox, Muskoka Lakes, Sydney 191 SAR Level of Service Prince George, Timmins, Stephenville 300 TRANSIT Comox, Trenton, Sydney

Bases: Fort Nelson, Thunder Bay, Gander Bases: Fort

Optimal Incident Coverage for Three, Four, and Five

44 Bases: Fort Nelson, Thunder Bay, Gander Bases: Fort Nelson, Thunder Bay, Iqaluit, Gander Bases: Vancouver, Hay River, Sault Ste. Marie, Iqaluit, St. John s Figure 21. Optimal Incident Coverage for Three, Four, and Five Bases at a 750 nm SAR Radius Evaluation of the Metrics: Additional Considerations 24

45 Table 16. Robustness to Changes in the SAR Radius NUMBER OF SAR BASES INCIDENT COVERAGE NUMBER OF UNIQUE CONFIGURATIONS TRAVEL DISTANCE SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE TRANSIT

46 Table 17. Incremental Robustness AVERAGE DISPLACEMENT (NM) INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE TRANSIT Helicopters Fixed-Wing Aircraft Table 18. Performance of the TRANSIT Metric for Four Bases with a 150 nm SAR Radius BASE LOCATION METHOD INCIDENT COVERAGE PERFORMANCE TRAVEL DISTANCE Incident Coverage 1, ,399 Travel Distance 1, ,749 TRANSIT 1, ,690 26

47 4 Conclusions and Recommendations 27

48 Bases: Vancouver, Trenton Bases: Vancouver, Trenton, Halifax Bases: Vancouver, Trenton, Halifax, Gander Bases: Vancouver, Toronto (Downsview), Saint-Hubert, Halifax, Gander Figure 22. Optimal SAR Helicopter Base Locations (TRANSIT Metric with a 250 nm SAR Radius) Table 19. Performance Improvements of Optimal Helicopter Base Configurations over Current Basing INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE TRANSIT 2 Base Optimal -37.3% -95.9% -89.8% -25.0% 3 Base Optimal -15.1% -22.8% -22.6% -2.4% 4 Base Optimal -0.8% -0.8% -0.4% +12.7% 5 Base Optimal +4.6% +6.1% +4.0% +22.9% 28

49 Bases: Comox, Fredericton Bases: Comox, Trenton, Sydney Bases: Comox, Trenton, Moncton, Gander Bases: Comox, Gimli, Trenton, Moncton, Gander Figure 23. Optimal Fixed-Wing SAR Base Locations (TRANSIT Metric with 600 nm and 750 nm SAR Radii) Table 20. Performance Improvements of Optimal Fixed-Wing Base Configurations over Current Basing INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE TRANSIT 2 Base Optimal -5.8% -46.1% -30.8% -20.4% 3 Base Optimal -1.6% -3.9% -0.3% -1.3% 4 Base Optimal +1.1% +11.7% +9.2% +8.8% 5 Base Optimal +5.3% +22.4% +28.0% +13.2% 29

50 5 References Air Force Transformation Tiger Team National Search and Rescue Manual Fixed-Wing Search and Rescue Statement of Operational Requirement Search and Rescue Helicopter Capability Requirements Canadian Forces SAR Aircraft Employment and Their Impact on Search and Rescue Operations Modelling Canadian Search and Rescue Operations Locating the Search and Rescue Bases in the Presence of Partial Coverage Analysis of Fleet Requirements for Fixed-Wing Search and Rescue Replacement Aircraft Optimum Locations for Civil Search and Rescue Squadrons Optimal Location for New CASARA Units Analysis of Optimal CASARA Locations A New Model for Allocating Search and Rescue Bases SAR Location Evaluation Program SISAR 7.0 User s Guide 30

51 Canadian Forces Search and Rescue Level of Service and Roles and Responsibilities Heuristic Methods for Estimating Generalized Vertex Median of a Weighted Graph 31

52 Annex A Potential SAR Base Location Table 21. Airfield Locations BRITISH COLUMBIA SASKATCHEWAN Abbotsford Moose Jaw Comox Regina Cranbrook Saskatoon Dease Lake MANITOBA Fort Nelson Brandon Fort St. John Churchill Kamloops Gimli Kelowna Portage la Prairie Penticton The Pas Port Hardy Winnipeg Prince George ONTARIO Prince Rupert Dryden Terrace Earlton Vancouver Hamilton Victoria London Williams Lake Muskoka Lakes ALBERTA North Bay Calgary Ottawa Cold Lake Sault Ste. Marie Edmonton Sudbury Edson Thunder Bay Fort McMurray Timmins Grande Prairie Toronto (Downsview) Jasper Toronto (Pearson) Lethbridge Trenton Pincher Creek Windsor

53 Table 17. Airfield Locations (Continued) QUÉBEC NOVA SCOTIA Bagotville Greenwood Baie-Comeau Halifax Bonaventure Shearwater Chibougamau Sydney Gatineau Yarmouth Kuujjuaq NEWFOUNDLAND La Grande Rivière Deer Lake Mont-Joli Gander Montréal (Dorval) Goose Bay Montréal (Mirabel) St. John s Québec Stephenville Rivière-du-Loup Wabush Rouyn-Noranda YUKON Sept-Iles Whitehorse Sherbrooke NORTHWEST TERRITORIES Saint-Hubert Fort Simpson Val-D or Fort Smith NEW BRUNSWICK Hay River Charlo Inuvik Fredericton Norman Wells Gagetown Yellowknife Moncton NUNAVUT Saint John Iqaluit PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND Rankin Inlet Charlottetown Summerside

54 Annex B Modifying the SAR Range to Account for Partial Coverage S R S R SR SRpartial coverage functionf f f x f x x x S S x R x R ff r b B ii B R f d i b R f di b di b di,bs RSRf 34

55 Annex C The Merged p-median/coverage Model and the TRANSIT Metric gdi b BB ii bb g g x x f x R x R f fxrx R di b BB ii bb R d i b R BB ii bb d i b R R B B ii bb R BB ii d i b bb R 35

56 Annex D Optimal Location Analysis Results R R R R 36

57 SAR RADIUS 50 nm 100 nm 150 nm 200 nm 250 nm 300 nm 350 nm Table 22. Optimal Two Base Configurations BASE LOCATIONS INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE (NM) SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE (NM) TRANSIT (NM) a: Victoria Comox 533 4,497,644 2,604 11,010 b: Comox Fredericton 270 1,165, ,528 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 18 1,468, d: Comox Vancouver 477 4,456,442 2,582 11,926 a: Vancouver Trenton 855 1,382,506 1,006 40,560 b: Comox Fredericton 656 1,165, ,342 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 64 1,468, ,251 d: Comox Vancouver 689 4,456,442 2,582 42,507 a: Comox Toronto (Downsview) 1,125 1,476,026 1,084 85,862 b: Comox Fredericton 967 1,165, ,438 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 134 1,468, ,237 d: Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) 1,055 1,481,270 1,084 89,055 a: Comox Trenton 1,300 1,377,606 1, ,888 b: Comox Fredericton 1,190 1,165, ,194 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 241 1,468, ,905 d: Vancouver Trenton 1,274 1,382,506 1, ,984 a: Port Hardy Gatineau 1,438 1,331, ,914 b: Comox Fredericton 1,357 1,165, ,837 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 365 1,468, ,023 d: Vancouver Trenton 1,396 1,382,506 1, ,038 a: Port Hardy Fredericton 1,579 1,220, ,627 b: Comox Fredericton 1,562 1,165, ,503 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 593 1,468, ,731 d: Comox Trenton 1,510 1,377,606 1, ,787 a: Prince George Sherbrooke 1,803 1,326, ,183 b: Comox Fredericton 1,687 1,165, ,581 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 843 1,468, ,015 d: Comox Trenton 1,594 1,377,606 1, ,283 37

58 SAR RADIUS 400 nm 450 nm 500 nm 550 nm 600 nm 650 nm 700 nm 750 nm BASE LOCATIONS INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE (NM) SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE (NM) TRANSIT (NM) a: Prince George Sherbrooke 2,059 1,326, ,431 b: Comox Fredericton 1,818 1,165, ,142 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 1,022 1,468, ,987 d: Comox Trenton 1,686 1,377,606 1, ,163 a: Prince George Sherbrooke 2,206 1,326, ,197 b: Comox Fredericton 1,926 1,165, ,913 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 1,344 1,468, ,343 d: Comox Trenton 1,765 1,377,606 1, ,334 a: Prince George Québec 2,310 1,310, ,207 b: Comox Fredericton 2,091 1,165, ,520 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 1,917 1,468, ,199 d: Comox Saint-Hubert 2,200 1,228, ,212 a: Grande Prairie Rivière-du-Loup 2,423 1,393, ,835 b: Comox Fredericton 2,309 1,165, ,169 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 2,303 1,468, ,256 d: Comox Saint-Hubert 2,292 1,228, ,946 a: Fort St. John Mont-Joli 2,629 1,430, ,895 b: Comox Fredericton 2,547 1,165, ,574 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 2,571 1,468, ,711 d: Comox Saint-Hubert 2,372 1,228, ,466 a: Fort St. John Mont-Joli 2,748 1,430, ,506 b: Comox Fredericton 2,675 1,165, ,283 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 2,740 1,468, ,393 d: Comox Fredericton 2,675 1,165, ,283 a: Edmonton Mont-Joli 2,842 1,468, ,375 b: Comox Fredericton 2,749 1,165, ,121,849 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 2,842 1,468, ,375 d: Comox Fredericton 2,749 1,165, ,121,849 a: Edmonton Mont-Joli 2,894 1,468, ,707 b: Comox Fredericton 2,813 1,165, ,261,118 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 2,894 1,468, ,707 d: Comox Fredericton 2,813 1,165, ,261,118 38

59 Table 23. Optimal Three Base Configurations SAR RADIUS BASE LOCATIONS INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE (NM) SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE (NM) TRANSIT (NM) 50 nm 100 nm 150 nm 200 nm 250 nm 300 nm 350 nm a: Victoria Comox Toronto (Downsview) 639 1,454,070 1,084 12,567 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney , ,292 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 31 1,030, d: Victoria Comox Vancouver 561 4,452,249 2,582 14,963 a: Vancouver Trenton Greenwood 1, , ,971 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney , ,230 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 77 1,030, ,208 d: Comox Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) 936 1,450,314 1,084 52,378 a: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Halifax 1, , ,236 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 1, , ,761 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 199 1,030, ,787 d: Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) Halifax 1, , ,429 a: Comox Trenton Halifax 1, , ,397 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 1, , ,633 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 428 1,030, ,697 d: Vancouver Trenton Halifax 1, , ,493 a: Port Hardy Gatineau Summerside 1, , ,533 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 1, , ,075 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 833 1,030, ,509 d: Vancouver Trenton Halifax 1, , ,683 a: Port Hardy Gatineau Sydney 2, , ,600 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2, , ,904 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 1,565 1,030, ,972 d: Comox Trenton Halifax 2, , ,798 a: Prince George Gatineau Sydney 2, , ,326 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2, , ,158 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 2,179 1,030, ,981 d: Comox Trenton Halifax 2, , ,665 39

60 SAR RADIUS 400 nm 450 nm 500 nm 550 nm 600 nm 650 nm 700 nm 750 nm BASE LOCATIONS INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE (NM) SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE (NM) TRANSIT (NM) a: Prince George Earlton Sydney 2, , ,551 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2, , ,199 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 2,521 1,030, ,585 d: Comox Trenton Charlottetown 2, , ,788 a: Prince George Montréal (Mirabel) Deer Lake 2, , ,235 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2, , ,174 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 2,744 1,030, ,207 d: Comox Trenton Charlottetown 2, , ,755 a: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 2,836 1,030, ,074 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2, , ,333 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 2,836 1,030, ,074 d: Comox Trenton Charlottetown 2, , ,170 a: Grande Prairie Sault Ste. Marie Stephenville 2,920 1,150, ,600 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2, , ,474 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 2,901 1,030, ,820 d: Comox Trenton Charlottetown 2, , ,919 a: Fort St. John Sault Ste. Marie Deer Lake 2,982 1,190, ,934 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2, , ,127,629 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 2,935 1,030, ,722 d: Comox Trenton Sydney 2, , ,130,946 a: Fort St. John Thunder Bay Stephenville 3,022 1,279, ,480 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2, , ,271,068 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 2,987 1,030, ,033,774 d: Comox Trenton Sydney 2, , ,273,840 a: Fort St. John Winnipeg Deer Lake 3,055 1,427, ,909 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2, , ,416,455 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 3,026 1,030, ,184,093 d: Comox Trenton Sydney 2, , ,418,507 a: Fort Nelson Thunder Bay Gander 3,076 1,468, ,532 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2, , ,563,461 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 3,052 1,030, ,336,018 d: Comox Trenton Sydney 2, , ,564,672 40

61 Table 24. Optimal Four Base Configurations SAR RADIUS BASE LOCATIONS INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE (NM) SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE (NM) TRANSIT (NM) 50 nm 100 nm 150 nm 200 nm 250 nm 300 nm 350 nm a: Victoria Comox Toronto (Downsview) Halifax , ,995 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander , ,744 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake , ,780 d: Victoria Comox Vancouver Shearwater 664 1,188, ,000 a: Port Hardy Vancouver Trenton Greenwood 1, , ,393 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 1, , ,268 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake , ,168 d: Comox Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) Shearwater 1, , ,388 a: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Halifax Gander 1, , ,976 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 1, , ,166 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake , ,365 d: Comox Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) Halifax 1, , ,118 a: Comox Trenton Halifax Gander 2, , ,020 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 1, , ,765 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake , ,556 d: Vancouver Trenton Halifax Gander 1, , ,115 a: Port Hardy Trenton Fredericton Deer Lake 2, , ,204 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2, , ,510 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 1, , ,422 d: Vancouver Trenton Halifax Gander 2, , ,587 a: Port Hardy Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2, , ,445 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2, , ,421 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 1, , ,552 d: Comox Trenton Halifax Gander 2, , ,122 a: Prince George Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2, , ,911 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2, , ,663 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 2, , ,106 d: Comox Trenton Halifax Gander 2, , ,980 41

62 SAR RADIUS 400 nm 450 nm 500 nm 550 nm 600 nm 650 nm 700 nm 750 nm BASE LOCATIONS INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE (NM) SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE (NM) TRANSIT (NM) a: Prince George Sault Ste. Marie Rivière-du-Loup Gander 2, , ,765 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2, , ,080 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 2, , ,077 d: Comox Trenton Moncton Gander 2, , ,373 a: Prince George Dryden Saint-Hubert Gander 2, , ,893 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2, , ,520 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 2, , ,267 d: Comox Trenton Moncton Gander 2, , ,794 a: Prince George Gimli Montréal (Dorval) Gander 2, , ,306 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2, , ,733 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 2, , ,947 d: Comox Trenton Moncton Gander 2, , ,991 a: Prince Rupert Saskatoon Earlton Stephenville 3,000 1,017, ,917 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2, , ,102,446 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 2, , ,193 d: Comox Trenton Moncton Gander 2, , ,103,961 a: Terrace The Pas Montréal (Mirabel) Gander 3, , ,620 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2, , ,245,993 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 3, , ,970 d: Comox Trenton Moncton Gander 2, , ,247,138 a: Dease Lake Cold Lake North Bay Gander 3,062 1,188, ,449 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2, , ,390,986 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 3, , ,150,787 d: Comox Trenton Moncton Gander 2, , ,391,598 a: Fort Nelson Dryden La Grande Rivière St. John's 3,086 1,447, ,164 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2, , ,537,511 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 3, , ,302,656 d: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2, , ,537,511 a: Fort Nelson Thunder Bay Iqaluit Gander 3,106 1,442, ,584 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2, , ,685,401 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 3, , ,455,465 d: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2, , ,685,401 42

63 Table 25. Optimal Five Base Configurations SAR RADIUS BASE LOCATIONS INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE (NM) SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE (NM) TRANSIT (NM) 50 nm 100 nm 150 nm 200 nm 250 nm 300 nm 350 nm a: Port Hardy Victoria Comox Toronto (Downsview) Halifax , ,673 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander , ,287 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's , ,048 d: Victoria Comox Vancouver Montréal (Dorval) Shearwater , ,987 a: Port Hardy Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) Ottawa Greenwood 1, , ,033 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 1, , ,830 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's , ,947 d: Comox Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) Montréal (Dorval) Shearwater 1, , ,426 a: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Québec Halifax Gander 1, , ,725 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 1, , ,368 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's , ,220 d: Comox Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) Montréal (Dorval) Halifax 1, , ,927 a: Comox Muskoka Lakes Québec Halifax Gander 2, , ,757 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2, , ,334 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's , ,879 d: Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) Montréal (Dorval) Halifax Gander 2, , ,884 a: Port Hardy Muskoka Lakes Rivière-du-Loup Halifax Gander 2, , ,808 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2, , ,389 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 1, , ,569 d: Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) Saint-Hubert Halifax Gander 2, , ,836 a: Port Hardy Edson Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2, , ,907 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2, , ,587 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2, , ,222 d: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Saint-Hubert Halifax Gander 2, , ,043 a: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2, , ,770 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2, , ,848 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2, , ,770 d: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Québec Halifax Gander 2, , ,302 43

64 SAR RADIUS BASE LOCATIONS INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE (NM) SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE (NM) TRANSIT (NM) 400 nm 450 nm 500 nm 550 nm 600 nm 650 nm 700 nm 750 nm a: Prince George The Pas Earlton Bonaventure St. John's 2, , ,407 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2, , ,794 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2, , ,543 d: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Québec Halifax Gander 2, , ,733 a: Prince George The Pas Timmins Bonaventure St. John's 2, , ,126 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2, , ,470 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2, , ,256 d: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Bagotville Halifax Gander 2, , ,533 a: Prince George Gimli Montréal (Dorval) Kuujjuaq St. John's 3, , ,276 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2, , ,001,148 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2, , ,323 d: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Bagotville Halifax Gander 2, , ,006,811 a: Comox Fort Simpson Gimli Ottawa Gander 3, , ,011,590 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2, , ,148,529 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2, , ,040 d: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Bagotville Halifax Gander 2, , ,148,851 a: Terrace The Pas Ottawa Iqaluit St. John's 3, , ,775 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2, , ,297,810 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 3, , ,098,206 d: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2, , ,297,810 a: Dease Lake Cold Lake North Bay Iqaluit St. John's 3,094 1,187, ,211 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 3, , ,448,207 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 3, , ,249,627 d: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 3, , ,448,207 a: Fort Smith Prince Rupert Sault Ste. Marie Iqaluit St. John's 3,110 1,147, ,047,423 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 3, , ,599,599 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 3, , ,401,904 d: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 3, , ,599,599 a: Vancouver Hay River Sault Ste. Marie Iqaluit St. John's 3, , ,420,598 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 3, , ,751,757 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 3, , ,554,968 d: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 3, , ,751,757 44

65 List of Acronyms 45

66 Report Distribution DISTRIBUTION OF ORD TECHNICAL REPORT TR 2005/15 SUPPORT TO AIR FORCE TRANSFORMATION (SEARCH AND RESCUE) 46

67 47

68 48

69 49 (NON-CONTROLLED GOODS) DMC A REVIEW: GCEC JUNE 2010

70 50

Annual General Meeting May 8, 2008

Annual General Meeting May 8, 2008 Disclaimer CAUTION REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION Certain statements in this presentation may contain statements which are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking