Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Denmark Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Denmark ditched the Sagem Sperwer UAV
TheArmchairCmd    12/27/2005 9:21:45 PM
with reference to http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htproc/articles/20051224.aspx TARGET=_blank>Procurement: Canada Buys More UAVs. The Danish Armed Forces recently decided not use the Sperwer (Danish: Tårnfalken = Kestrel). The system will be sold off, if possible. The UAV never achieved operational status due to a variety of reasons. My interpretation is: Low accesibility to spares and vendor support, possibly due to badly drawn up contract. Shared responsibility. Ownership by Air Force and implementation by Army (arty Reg) was a bad idea.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Thomas3    RE:Denmark ditched the Sagem Sperwer UAV   12/27/2005 9:46:32 PM
I cannot understand this scandal either, but do note that the Major General Axelsen has resigned 2 years before his pension - or is rather on unpaid leave till re is pensioned.
 
Quote    Reply

TheArmchairCmd    RE:Denmark ditched the Sagem Sperwer UAV   12/27/2005 9:53:44 PM
...but do note that the Major General Axelsen has resigned 2 years before his pension - or is rather on unpaid leave till re is pensioned. The dots are getting connected, hehe. :)
 
Quote    Reply

Schackleford    RE:Denmark ditched the Sagem Sperwer UAV   1/2/2006 9:06:02 AM
What I am more interested in, is what are we going to do to replace it? UAV's are essential for 21st century assymetrical warfare. They would have been of great use in Iraq. We are already behind most others and this doesn't exactly improve on the situation...
 
Quote    Reply

TheArmchairCmd    RE:Denmark ditched the Sagem Sperwer UAV   1/2/2006 10:12:32 AM
I would like to know that too. There is absolutely no clue in the public domain as to what is going to happen... Three AS550 helos were sent to Iraq to be used for observation, they have now returned. But this mission would have been an excellent test of an UAV. Canada Shapes Plan for UAV Buy By DAVID PUGLIESE, OTTAWA December 05, 2005 Canada’s Air Force is crafting a multimillion-dollar plan to purchase medium- or high-altitude unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) to be fielded by the end of the decade. Work is under way on the Joint Unmanned Surveillance Target Acquisition System (JUSTAS), which calls for the acquisition of the UAVs by 2010. Funding for that project will be about 500 million Canadian dollars ($420 million), said Canadian Air Force Lt. Col. Gord Smith, the military’s section head for UAV requirements. “There is a hope that by 2010 we’ll have a pretty robust capability that is going to have a deployability context to it,” Smith said. “We will be able to put a unit overseas that can do that area surveillance work that a MALE [medium-altitude, long-endurance] type of airplane would fulfill, in context and concert with other UAV-type assets on the ground.” In the meantime, the Canadian Forces will be buying additional Sperwer tactical UAVs and mini-UAVs for use by troops in Kandahar in 2006. The Canadian Forces announced Nov. 29 it will spend 15 million Canadian dollars to purchase five more Sperwer UAVs from Oerlikon-Contraves Canada, St-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Quebec. Oerlikon is the Canadian prime contractor for Sagem, Paris, the original manufacturer of the Sperwer. Deliveries of the additional UAVs are expected early in 2006. Companies also will be asked to bid on another 10 million Canadian dollar program to acquire 10 miniature UAVs. Deliveries of those will begin in April 2006. The Canadian Army will create and train a mini-UAV troop to operate the systems, with that unit ready for deployment to Afghanistan in late summer of 2006. Col. Bob Gunn, the Army’s director of land requirements, said the service will take its existing Sperwers to Afghanistan, and have the new ones on hand for increased demand. The Army bought six Sperwer airframes for Canada’s 2003 Afghanistan deployment, but Gunn noted that two are beyond repair because of crashes. That original 33.8 million Canadian dollar program included the Sperwer airframes, UAV ground control equipment, data terminals, control software, launchers and simulators. The Sperwer had several widely publicized crashes in Afghanistan. The Canadian Forces flew it on 86 missions in support of tactical land operations in the Kabul area in 2003 and 2004. In a Sept. 8, 2004, report obtained by Defense News, Army officials said the Sperwer had problems because of the extreme operating environment. “The Sperwer sensor is one of the best in the world in its class,” according to the three-page document, entitled “Briefing Note for C4ISR Oversight Committee.” “Sperwer has significant growth potential.” Gunn said the Army pushed the operating parameters of Sperwer farther than any other military had at that point and, while it will remain in service, the Army also will be looking for more advanced UAVs. “We didn’t get the wrong one,” Gunn said. “We got the right one for the job which we understood we had to do at the time. It’s just not good enough for what we’re going to do tomorrow. “Now, having had a taste of [UAVs], we want more,” Gunn explained. “We want more of them, we want them to go farther, deeper, higher up,” Gunn said. That could involve the purchase of a medium- or high-altitude UAV as part of the JUSTAS program being handled by the Air Force, he said. Smith, who is JUSTAS project director, said he has a five-person team working on determining the Canadian Forces’ UAV needs. The aim is to employ UAVs for sovereignty missions such as surveillance of Canada’s coastlines as well as for overseas operations. By 2007, the military hopes to approach industry to meet its initial UAV needs, Smith said. The 500 million Canadian dollars is earmarked for the next eight years of development and the fielding of a full capability, Smith said. • E-mail: dpugliese@defensenews.com.
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas3    RE:Denmark ditched the Sagem Sperwer UAV   1/2/2006 9:38:55 PM
Well, what can we do? What we've always done, lean on our allies. We need a system that will not overtax feeble minds and with all the teething trouble sorted out. This is exactly what we should do in our present day: When something is to difficult for the easy solution, cut the losses on the unsatisfactory programme and try a new angle. We have the time for it now. To remind: In the 1950'ies the new Danish Air Force was a disaster, the planes had an unnerving habit of coming apart in the air, so we hired a British Air Conmmodore to tell the grease monkeys how to use a screwdriver and NOT a hammer. The problem was at the time, we did not have the time to organise properly: Group Captain Kaj Birkested, wo had the training and experience was not wanted by the system, so the AirForce bungled on to this very day, demanding that every General in the Air Force should be selected for his ability to actually occationally LAND an aeroplane - one recently has a missile man become general. This has meant that a full third of the possible generals was under parity.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics