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
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
Abstract Résumé i
ii
Executive Summary iii
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
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
vi
Sommaire vii
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
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
x
Table of Contents xi
xii
List of Figures xiii
xiv
List of Tables xv
xvi
1 Introduction 1.1 Aeronautical SAR in Canada Table 5. CF SAR Aircraft WING SQUADRON MOB AIRCRAFT 8 424 Trenton, ON CC-130 Hercules, CH-149 Cormorant 9 103 Gander, NF CH-149 Cormorant 14 413 Greenwood, NS CC-130 Hercules, CH-149 Cormorant 17 435 Winnipeg, MB CC-130 Hercules 19 442 Comox, BC CC-115 Buffalo, CH-149 Cormorant 1
Figure 5. Locations of Canadian Forces SAR MOBs 1.2 SAR Transformation 2
Figure 6. Potential SAR Base Locations distressfalse alarm aeronautical, maritime, humanitarian, or unknown 3
Figure 7. SAR Incident Locations 1.3 Report Organization 4
2 SAR Metrics R R R R 2.1 The Total Range-Limited SAR Distance Travelled (TRANSIT) Metric R RR R R 5
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
R R Figure 8. Notional Cumulative Distribution of Incident to Nearest Base Distances: TRANSIT Metric R R R R 2.2 Other SAR Metrics 2.2.1 Number of Incidents Covered ri B R xi B R x i ii 7
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 2.2.2 Total Distance Travelled r B di b T ii bb 8
p-median problem B r T BB R Figure 10. Notional Cumulative Distribution of Incident to Nearest Base Distances: Total Distance Travelled 2.2.3 Combinations of Incident Coverage and Distance Travelled 9
x R R Figure 11. Notional Cumulative Distribution of Incident to Nearest Base Distances: SAR Level of Service 10
3 SAR Basing Analysis 3.1 Optimal Base Locations R R 11
R 12
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 1,331,448 919 144,914 Combination b) 1,357 1,165,370 751 187,837 Combination c) 365 1,468,062 681 32,023 Combination d) 1,396 1,382,506 1,006 214,038 13
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 1,468,062 681 922,707 Combination b) 2,813 1,165,370 751 1,261,118 Combination c) 2,894 1,468,062 681 922,707 Combination d) 2,813 1,165,370 751 1,261,118 14
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) 1,946 911,293 617 202,533 Combination b) 1,844 823,792 567 249,075 Combination c) 833 1,030,736 484 55,509 Combination d) 1,889 866,639 650 278,683 15
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 1,468,250 639 894,532 Combination b) 2,952 823,792 567 1,563,461 Combination c) 3,052 1,030,736 484 1,336,018 Combination d) 2,936 829,089 576 1,564,672 16
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) 2,275 779,219 537 243,204 Combination b) 2,220 697,749 508 309,510 Combination c) 1,157 909,788 418 101,422 Combination d) 2,207 711,735 532 321,587 Current 2,225 705,863 530 285,468 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, 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) 3,037 969,231 453 933,620 Combination b) 2,886 697,749 508 1,245,993 Combination c) 3,010 909,788 418 999,970 Combination d) 2,877 704,772 521 1,247,138 Current 2,846 797,887 574 1,146,281 Current fixed-wing SAR bases are in Comox, Winnipeg, Trenton, and Greenwood. 18
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) 2,430 703,917 501 287,808 Combination b) 2,323 618,877 413 326,389 Combination c) 1,557 810,273 362 138,569 Combination d) 2,327 662,913 509 350,836 19
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) 3,078 958,395 481 928,775 Combination b) 2,997 618,877 413 1,297,810 Combination c) 3,017 810,273 362 1,098,206 Combination d) 2,997 618,877 413 1,297,810 20
3.2 Discussion 3.2.1 Trends in the Location of SAR Bases 3.2.2 Evaluation of the Metrics: Small SAR Radii 21
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%) 3.2.3 Evaluation of the Metrics: Large SAR Radii R 22
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 190 23
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 3.2.4 Evaluation of the Metrics: Additional Considerations 24
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 2 11 1 1 6 3 15 1 1 7 4 15 1 1 7 5 15 1 1 9 25
Table 17. Incremental Robustness AVERAGE DISPLACEMENT (NM) INCIDENT COVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE SAR LEVEL OF SERVICE TRANSIT Helicopters 65 62 202 10 Fixed-Wing Aircraft 228 62 202 52 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 1,682 710,399 Travel Distance 1,650 697,749 TRANSIT 1,475 839,690 26
4 Conclusions and Recommendations 27
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
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
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
Canadian Forces Search and Rescue Level of Service and Roles and Responsibilities Heuristic Methods for Estimating Generalized Vertex Median of a Weighted Graph 31
Annex A Potential SAR Base Location Table 21. Airfield Locations BRITISH COLUMBIA SASKATCHEWAN Abbotsford 49.03 122.36 Moose Jaw 50.33 105.56 Comox 49.71 124.89 Regina 50.43 104.67 Cranbrook 49.61 115.78 Saskatoon 52.17 106.70 Dease Lake 58.42 130.03 MANITOBA Fort Nelson 58.84 122.60 Brandon 49.91 99.95 Fort St. John 56.24 120.74 Churchill 58.74 94.06 Kamloops 50.70 120.44 Gimli 50.63 97.04 Kelowna 49.96 119.38 Portage la Prairie 49.90 98.27 Penticton 49.46 119.60 The Pas 53.97 101.09 Port Hardy 50.68 127.37 Winnipeg 49.91 97.24 Prince George 53.89 122.68 ONTARIO Prince Rupert 54.29 130.44 Dryden 49.83 92.74 Terrace 54.47 128.58 Earlton 47.70 79.85 Vancouver 49.20 123.18 Hamilton 43.17 79.94 Victoria 48.65 123.43 London 43.04 81.15 Williams Lake 52.18 122.05 Muskoka Lakes 44.97 79.30 ALBERTA North Bay 46.36 79.42 Calgary 51.11 114.02 Ottawa 45.32 75.67 Cold Lake 54.41 110.28 Sault Ste. Marie 46.49 84.51 Edmonton 53.31 113.58 Sudbury 46.63 80.80 Edson 53.58 116.47 Thunder Bay 48.37 89.32 Fort McMurray 56.65 111.22 Timmins 48.57 81.38 Grande Prairie 55.18 118.89 Toronto (Downsview) 43.74 79.47 Jasper 53.00 118.06 Toronto (Pearson) 43.68 79.63 Lethbridge 49.63 112.80 Trenton 44.12 77.53 Pincher Creek 49.52 114.00 Windsor 42.27 82.96 32
Table 17. Airfield Locations (Continued) QUÉBEC NOVA SCOTIA Bagotville 48.33 71.00 Greenwood 44.98 64.92 Baie-Comeau 49.13 68.21 Halifax 44.88 63.51 Bonaventure 48.07 65.46 Shearwater 44.64 63.50 Chibougamau 49.77 74.53 Sydney 46.16 60.05 Gatineau 45.52 75.56 Yarmouth 43.83 66.09 Kuujjuaq 58.10 68.43 NEWFOUNDLAND La Grande Rivière 53.63 77.70 Deer Lake 49.21 57.39 Mont-Joli 48.61 68.21 Gander 48.94 54.57 Montréal (Dorval) 45.47 73.74 Goose Bay 53.32 60.43 Montréal (Mirabel) 45.68 74.04 St. John s 47.62 52.75 Québec 46.79 71.39 Stephenville 48.54 58.55 Rivière-du-Loup 47.76 69.58 Wabush 52.92 66.86 Rouyn-Noranda 48.21 78.83 YUKON Sept-Iles 50.22 66.27 Whitehorse 60.71 135.07 Sherbrooke 45.44 71.69 NORTHWEST TERRITORIES Saint-Hubert 45.52 73.42 Fort Simpson 61.76 121.24 Val-D or 48.05 77.78 Fort Smith 60.02 111.96 NEW BRUNSWICK Hay River 60.84 115.78 Charlo 47.99 66.33 Inuvik 68.30 133.48 Fredericton 45.87 66.53 Norman Wells 65.28 126.80 Gagetown 45.83 66.43 Yellowknife 62.46 114.44 Moncton 46.11 64.68 NUNAVUT Saint John 45.32 65.89 Iqaluit 63.76 68.56 PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND Rankin Inlet 62.81 92.12 Charlottetown 46.29 63.12 Summerside 46.44 63.83 33
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
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
Annex D Optimal Location Analysis Results R R R R 36
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 1,165,370 751 5,528 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 18 1,468,062 681 381 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 1,165,370 751 27,342 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 64 1,468,062 681 2,251 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 1,165,370 751 69,438 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 134 1,468,062 681 7,237 d: Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) 1,055 1,481,270 1,084 89,055 a: Comox Trenton 1,300 1,377,606 1,006 145,888 b: Comox Fredericton 1,190 1,165,370 751 124,194 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 241 1,468,062 681 16,905 d: Vancouver Trenton 1,274 1,382,506 1,006 146,984 a: Port Hardy Gatineau 1,438 1,331,448 919 144,914 b: Comox Fredericton 1,357 1,165,370 751 187,837 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 365 1,468,062 681 32,023 d: Vancouver Trenton 1,396 1,382,506 1,006 214,038 a: Port Hardy Fredericton 1,579 1,220,876 758 208,627 b: Comox Fredericton 1,562 1,165,370 751 206,503 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 593 1,468,062 681 55,731 d: Comox Trenton 1,510 1,377,606 1,006 286,787 a: Prince George Sherbrooke 1,803 1,326,421 802 165,183 b: Comox Fredericton 1,687 1,165,370 751 341,581 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 843 1,468,062 681 92,015 d: Comox Trenton 1,594 1,377,606 1,006 364,283 37
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 1,326,421 802 263,431 b: Comox Fredericton 1,818 1,165,370 751 429,142 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 1,022 1,468,062 681 138,987 d: Comox Trenton 1,686 1,377,606 1,006 446,163 a: Prince George Sherbrooke 2,206 1,326,421 802 370,197 b: Comox Fredericton 1,926 1,165,370 751 522,913 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 1,344 1,468,062 681 196,343 d: Comox Trenton 1,765 1,377,606 1,006 532,334 a: Prince George Québec 2,310 1,310,648 771 476,207 b: Comox Fredericton 2,091 1,165,370 751 623,520 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 1,917 1,468,062 681 279,199 d: Comox Saint-Hubert 2,200 1,228,576 870 634,212 a: Grande Prairie Rivière-du-Loup 2,423 1,393,542 708 468,835 b: Comox Fredericton 2,309 1,165,370 751 733,169 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 2,303 1,468,062 681 384,256 d: Comox Saint-Hubert 2,292 1,228,576 870 746,946 a: Fort St. John Mont-Joli 2,629 1,430,549 695 549,895 b: Comox Fredericton 2,547 1,165,370 751 855,574 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 2,571 1,468,062 681 506,711 d: Comox Saint-Hubert 2,372 1,228,576 870 863,466 a: Fort St. John Mont-Joli 2,748 1,430,549 695 684,506 b: Comox Fredericton 2,675 1,165,370 751 986,283 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 2,740 1,468,062 681 639,393 d: Comox Fredericton 2,675 1,165,370 751 986,283 a: Edmonton Mont-Joli 2,842 1,468,062 681 779,375 b: Comox Fredericton 2,749 1,165,370 751 1,121,849 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 2,842 1,468,062 681 779,375 d: Comox Fredericton 2,749 1,165,370 751 1,121,849 a: Edmonton Mont-Joli 2,894 1,468,062 681 922,707 b: Comox Fredericton 2,813 1,165,370 751 1,261,118 c: Edmonton Mont-Joli 2,894 1,468,062 681 922,707 d: Comox Fredericton 2,813 1,165,370 751 1,261,118 38
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 362 823,792 567 7,292 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 31 1,030,763 484 640 d: Victoria Comox Vancouver 561 4,452,249 2,582 14,963 a: Vancouver Trenton Greenwood 1,069 886,667 674 47,971 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 846 823,792 567 36,230 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 77 1,030,763 484 3,208 d: Comox Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) 936 1,450,314 1,084 52,378 a: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Halifax 1,458 865,402 642 108,236 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 1,270 823,792 567 90,761 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 199 1,030,763 484 9,787 d: Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) Halifax 1,388 870,628 648 111,429 a: Comox Trenton Halifax 1,724 861,748 646 187,397 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 1,605 823,792 567 162,633 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 428 1,030,763 484 25,697 d: Vancouver Trenton Halifax 1,698 866,639 650 188,493 a: Port Hardy Gatineau Summerside 1,946 911,293 617 202,533 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 1,844 823,792 567 249,075 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 833 1,030,763 484 55,509 d: Vancouver Trenton Halifax 1,889 866,639 650 278,683 a: Port Hardy Gatineau Sydney 2,196 889,123 577 287,600 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2,139 823,792 567 347,904 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 1,565 1,030,763 484 113,972 d: Comox Trenton Halifax 2,046 861,748 646 376,798 a: Prince George Gatineau Sydney 2,468 963,694 547 301,326 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2,355 823,792 567 461,158 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 2,179 1,030,763 484 206,981 d: Comox Trenton Halifax 2,196 861,748 646 482,665 39
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 2,637 988,322 520 379,551 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2,527 823,792 567 583,199 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 2,521 1,030,763 484 324,585 d: Comox Trenton Charlottetown 2,429 836,811 615 598,788 a: Prince George Montréal (Mirabel) Deer Lake 2,752 989,740 506 526,235 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2,667 823,792 567 713,174 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 2,744 1,030,763 484 456,207 d: Comox Trenton Charlottetown 2,592 836,811 615 724,755 a: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 2,836 1,030,763 484 596,074 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2,729 823,792 567 848,333 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 2,836 1,030,763 484 596,074 d: Comox Trenton Charlottetown 2,655 836,811 615 856,170 a: Grande Prairie Sault Ste. Marie Stephenville 2,920 1,150,307 512 616,600 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2,793 823,792 567 986,474 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 2,901 1,030,763 484 739,820 d: Comox Trenton Charlottetown 2,733 836,811 615 990,919 a: Fort St. John Sault Ste. Marie Deer Lake 2,982 1,190,718 534 719,934 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2,846 823,792 567 1,127,629 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 2,935 1,030,763 484 885,722 d: Comox Trenton Sydney 2,837 829,089 576 1,130,946 a: Fort St. John Thunder Bay Stephenville 3,022 1,279,512 588 780,480 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2,889 823,792 567 1,271,068 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 2,987 1,030,763 484 1,033,774 d: Comox Trenton Sydney 2,878 829,089 576 1,273,840 a: Fort St. John Winnipeg Deer Lake 3,055 1,427,782 628 781,909 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2,930 823,792 567 1,416,455 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 3,026 1,030,763 484 1,184,093 d: Comox Trenton Sydney 2,912 829,089 576 1,418,507 a: Fort Nelson Thunder Bay Gander 3,076 1,468,250 639 894,532 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Sydney 2,952 823,792 567 1,563,461 c: Prince George Timmins Stephenville 3,052 1,030,763 484 1,336,018 d: Comox Trenton Sydney 2,936 829,089 576 1,564,672 40
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 744 843,446 641 13,995 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 434 697,749 508 8,744 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 108 909,788 418 2,780 d: Victoria Comox Vancouver Shearwater 664 1,188,241 780 17,000 a: Port Hardy Vancouver Trenton Greenwood 1,227 840,940 656 55,393 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 1,018 697,749 508 44,268 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 235 909,788 418 11,168 d: Comox Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) Shearwater 1,126 845,860 649 61,388 a: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Halifax Gander 1,682 710,399 511 122,976 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 1,650 697,749 508 113,166 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 419 909,788 418 27,365 d: Comox Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) Halifax 1,475 839,690 641 127,118 a: Comox Trenton Halifax Gander 2,010 706,906 529 215,020 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 1,980 697,749 508 204,765 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 728 909,788 418 55,556 d: Vancouver Trenton Halifax Gander 1,984 711,735 532 216,115 a: Port Hardy Trenton Fredericton Deer Lake 2,275 779,219 537 243,204 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2,220 697,749 508 309,510 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 1,157 909,788 418 101,422 d: Vancouver Trenton Halifax Gander 2,207 711,735 532 321,587 a: Port Hardy Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2,513 788,686 506 319,445 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2,450 697,749 508 426,421 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 1,921 909,788 418 176,552 d: Comox Trenton Halifax Gander 2,379 706,906 529 436,122 a: Prince George Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2,695 866,902 450 345,911 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2,588 697,749 508 552,663 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 2,460 909,788 418 285,106 d: Comox Trenton Halifax Gander 2,533 706,906 529 558,980 41
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 2,785 895,327 433 447,765 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2,695 697,749 508 685,080 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 2,739 909,788 418 415,077 d: Comox Trenton Moncton Gander 2,674 704,772 521 689,373 a: Prince George Dryden Saint-Hubert Gander 2,886 917,070 432 546,893 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2,759 697,749 508 821,520 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 2,881 909,788 418 556,267 d: Comox Trenton Moncton Gander 2,740 704,772 521 824,794 a: Prince George Gimli Montréal (Dorval) Gander 2,953 914,875 442 694,306 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2,806 697,749 508 960,733 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 2,942 909,788 418 701,947 d: Comox Trenton Moncton Gander 2,786 704,772 521 962,991 a: Prince Rupert Saskatoon Earlton Stephenville 3,000 1,017,315 457 739,917 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2,855 697,749 508 1,102,446 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 2,981 909,788 418 850,193 d: Comox Trenton Moncton Gander 2,847 704,772 521 1,103,961 a: Terrace The Pas Montréal (Mirabel) Gander 3,037 969,231 453 933,620 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2,886 697,749 508 1,245,993 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 3,010 909,788 418 999,970 d: Comox Trenton Moncton Gander 2,877 704,772 521 1,247,138 a: Dease Lake Cold Lake North Bay Gander 3,062 1,188,278 589 866,449 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2,917 697,749 508 1,390,986 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 3,027 909,788 418 1,150,787 d: Comox Trenton Moncton Gander 2,906 704,772 521 1,391,598 a: Fort Nelson Dryden La Grande Rivière St. John's 3,086 1,447,699 627 755,164 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2,949 697,749 508 1,537,511 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 3,048 909,788 418 1,302,656 d: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2,949 697,749 508 1,537,511 a: Fort Nelson Thunder Bay Iqaluit Gander 3,106 1,442,747 636 909,584 b: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2,968 697,749 508 1,685,401 c: Prince George Dryden Montréal (Dorval) Deer Lake 3,065 909,788 418 1,455,465 d: Comox Muskoka Lakes Moncton Gander 2,968 697,749 508 1,685,401 42
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 823 818,623 637 15,673 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 440 618,877 413 9,287 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 106 810,273 362 2,048 d: Victoria Comox Vancouver Montréal (Dorval) Shearwater 736 876,509 656 18,987 a: Port Hardy Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) Ottawa Greenwood 1,363 801,942 655 61,033 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 1,118 618,877 413 47,830 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 305 810,273 362 10,947 d: Comox Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) Montréal (Dorval) Shearwater 1,256 791,450 641 68,426 a: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Québec Halifax Gander 1,856 654,697 508 131,725 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 1,720 618,877 413 121,368 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 635 810,273 362 34,220 d: Comox Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) Montréal (Dorval) Halifax 1,646 786,547 640 141,927 a: Comox Muskoka Lakes Québec Halifax Gander 2,206 651,986 506 229,757 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2,074 618,877 413 216,334 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 991 810,273 362 75,879 d: Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) Montréal (Dorval) Halifax Gander 2,111 663,497 509 238,884 a: Port Hardy Muskoka Lakes Rivière-du-Loup Halifax Gander 2,430 703,917 501 287,808 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2,323 618,877 413 326,389 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 1,557 810,273 362 138,569 d: Vancouver Toronto (Downsview) Saint-Hubert Halifax Gander 2,327 662,913 509 350,836 a: Port Hardy Edson Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2,620 734,734 415 331,907 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2,527 618,877 413 447,587 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2,405 810,273 362 236,222 d: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Saint-Hubert Halifax Gander 2,476 657,748 509 471,043 a: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2,796 810,273 362 365,770 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2,680 618,877 413 577,848 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2,796 810,273 362 365,770 d: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Québec Halifax Gander 2,606 654,697 508 598,302 43
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 2,899 842,516 371 463,407 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2,792 618,877 413 714,794 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2,872 810,273 362 507,543 d: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Québec Halifax Gander 2,691 654,697 508 730,733 a: Prince George The Pas Timmins Bonaventure St. John's 2,961 875,919 380 576,126 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2,871 618,877 413 856,470 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2,919 810,273 362 652,256 d: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Bagotville Halifax Gander 2,759 651,081 502 867,533 a: Prince George Gimli Montréal (Dorval) Kuujjuaq St. John's 3,010 893,850 429 697,276 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2,916 618,877 413 1,001,148 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2,959 810,273 362 799,323 d: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Bagotville Halifax Gander 2,813 651,081 502 1,006,811 a: Comox Fort Simpson Gimli Ottawa Gander 3,039 732,603 454 1,011,590 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2,973 618,877 413 1,148,529 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 2,989 810,273 362 948,040 d: Comox Toronto (Downsview) Bagotville Halifax Gander 2,860 651,081 502 1,148,851 a: Terrace The Pas Ottawa Iqaluit St. John's 3,078 958,395 481 928,775 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2,997 618,877 413 1,297,810 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 3,017 810,273 362 1,098,206 d: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 2,997 618,877 413 1,297,810 a: Dease Lake Cold Lake North Bay Iqaluit St. John's 3,094 1,187,961 587 852,211 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 3,021 618,877 413 1,448,207 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 3,036 810,273 362 1,249,627 d: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 3,021 618,877 413 1,448,207 a: Fort Smith Prince Rupert Sault Ste. Marie Iqaluit St. John's 3,110 1,147,704 567 1,047,423 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 3,038 618,877 413 1,599,599 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 3,056 810,273 362 1,401,904 d: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 3,038 618,877 413 1,599,599 a: Vancouver Hay River Sault Ste. Marie Iqaluit St. John's 3,117 929,160 568 1,420,598 b: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 3,048 618,877 413 1,751,757 c: Prince George Gimli Sudbury Fredericton St. John's 3,068 810,273 362 1,554,968 d: Comox Gimli Trenton Moncton Gander 3,048 618,877 413 1,751,757 44
List of Acronyms 45
Report Distribution DISTRIBUTION OF ORD TECHNICAL REPORT TR 2005/15 SUPPORT TO AIR FORCE TRANSFORMATION (SEARCH AND RESCUE) 46
47
48
49 (NON-CONTROLLED GOODS) DMC A REVIEW: GCEC JUNE 2010
50