A possible C-130H Replacement?

[dimsum]

Sources said the $4.6-billion purchase of 17 C-130Js received funding approval last Thursday, but a contract has yet to be signed with U.S. aircraft giant Lockheed Martin.

We're only getting 17 Js to replace the 30-odd Es and Hs still kicking around the squadrons?  I guess a Nav posting to a Herc isn't really out of the question after all...

 

[Kirkhill]

One of these is not like the other.

Xinhua November 23, 2005 - "Canadian Defense Minister Bill Graham announced Tuesday that Ottawa will purchase 16 military transport planes to replace some of its Lockheed C-130 Hercules"

Canadian Press December 20, 2007 "A replacement for the air force's aging C-130E and C-130H fleets was first proposed in the summer of 2006 by former defence minister Gordon O'Connor. "

Which to believe?  The official news agency of the Communist Party of China?  OR.  Canadian Press? 

It is a puzzlement.

Home >> World
UPDATED: 16:50, November 23, 2005
Canadian military to purchase 16 transport aircraft
       


Canadian Defense Minister Bill Graham announced Tuesday that Ottawa will purchase 16 military transport planes to replace some of its Lockheed C-130 Hercules aircraft.

"The government is moving forward with the process to purchase new tactical lift aircraft to replace significant parts of our aging Hercules aircraft fleet," Graham said.

The total value of the purchase would be about 4.6 billion Canadian dollars (3.7 billion US dollars), said the minister.

The military has not decided on the type of the aircraft, but it would like to finish the purchase as soon as possible, he said. Aircraft companies will be invited to bid for the deal during the two-step procurement process, he added.

The four-engine Hercules, in production since 1954, is widely used as military transports. It can carry 17 tons of cargo or 90 soldiers with light equipment.

Canada got its first C-130 series in 1960. Of the 32 C-130 Hercules planes currently in service, most are C-130Es produced in the 1960s. Nine C-130Hs were added to the fleet in 1996.

Source: Xinhua

 

[newfin]

There certainly is nothing controversial about replacing 40+ year old aircraft - except that the media "needs" to spin it that way so the editors will approve their stories.  I thought 17 was not enough either but some of the "H's" are being retained and they do have 4 C-17's to carry some of the burden.

 

[prom]

Isn't some of the reason also to do with other airframes for FWSAR? though it is late my mind maybe slipping

 

[Zoomie]

Isn't some of the reason also to do with other airframes for FWSAR?

That would be correct.

We also do not conduct TAL (tactical airlift) quite to the same extreme as we did in the Cold War Era.

 

[prom]

Thanks Zoomie!

 

[Haletown]

"
Yes Airbus made some mistakes with the A380 but it's selling very well now and will be in service in 4 months."

The A380 sales have been stalled/non-existent for the last three years.  They sold a few in 2007, but they very likely had to discount heavily in price negotiations.

AB will likely lose $Billions on the project because they can never sell enough of the planes fast enough to cover the Development + Carrying Costs of the program.  It has been estimated that they needed to have sold 500+ tails as of now to hit the break even point.  They are about half that number now and sales are not brisk.

The A380 is in service now with Singapore Airlines

Nice plane actually, I visited the plant in Toulouse recently and saw it up close.  Problem is great planes don't always mean great marketing analysis.  It will be a niche plane, kind of like the Concorde.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Kirkhill: Trust Xinhua of course:
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=1371996&C=airwar

Canada will purchase 16 new tactical transport aircraft, but Defence Minister Bill Graham is already fending off accusations that the multibillion-dollar program is rigged in favor of Lockheed Martin’s C-130J.

Graham announced on Nov. 22 that the government hopes to quickly acquire the aircraft for 4 billion to 5 billion Canadian dollars ($3.3 billion to $4.2 billion), a price tag that includes 20 years of industry-provided maintenance and support.

“The procurement process for this will be competitive, fair and transparent,” Graham said in a televised news conference from Ottawa [emphasis added].

The expected candidates for the program are the C-130J, EADS’ A400M and Boeing’s C-17.

But military analysts, aerospace industry officials and opposition politicians argue that the requirements set out by the Canadian government eliminate the latter two.

They say the Boeing entrant will by ruled out by the announced price target, while the Airbus plane won’t be able to meet the requirement to have its airworthiness certification when the purchase contract is signed in about a year. The A400M won’t be flying until at least 2007, aerospace industry officials said.

“It’s going to be a pretty short competition because the C-130J will be the only aircraft able to compete,” said one official.

Graham acknowledged the certification requirement is different than from some previous Canadian military aircraft procurements, but he denied the government has pre-selected the C-130J...

Conservative Party defense critic Gordon O’Connor and Bloc Quebecois defense critic Claude Bachand accused the Liberal government of designing the program to eliminate the A400M and C-17 from competition.

“[Graham] has fixed the requirements so there is only one possible outcome,” O’Connor said. “Why is this sole-source contract for the Lockheed C-130J aircraft being spun as a competition when it is not?” [emphasis added--some chutzpah in light of later events]

Graham said the opposition parties are standing in the way of re-equipping the Canadian Forces...

Oh, the joy of our politics; the names may change but the carping stays the same.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[geo]

Kirkhill: Trust Xinhua of course:
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?F=1371996&C=airwar

Oh, the joy of our politics; the names may change but the carping stays the same.

Mark
Ottawa

Mark

The process was compteitive.  In the end, you can say that the order was split between the two aricraft manufacturers with aircraft on the Tarmac.  Splitting our needs between strategic & tactical airlift requirements prolly addressed problems with our aging fleet of hercs.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Geo: My point was just that this CP statement is inaccurate:

Canadian Press December 20, 2007 "A replacement for the air force's aging C-130E and C-130H fleets was first proposed in the summer of 2006 by former defence minister Gordon O'Connor. "

The Liberals were planning a replacement in Nov. 2005, as Xinhua reported.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[CougarKing]

The Liberals were planning a replacement in Nov. 2005, as Xinhua reported.

Wow...CBC or whatever other news source you used before must be that bad if you've resorted to using Xinhua.  :rofl:

 

[geo]

Geo: My point was just that this CP statement is inaccurate:

The Liberals were planning a replacement in Nov. 2005, as Xinhua reported.

Mark
Ottawa

Yeah Mark
Actualy I thoiught a lot of Mr Graham as MND.  He and Gen Hillier made a great team.  Most of the programs that Mr O'Connor & McKay have announced were initiated several years ago.... in the days of a Liberal gov't.

 

[thunderchild]

why not kill two birds with one stone, replace the remainding 'H' hercs and Buffalo's with the c-27J? not entirely a one for one exchange but it's better than nothing.  Don't forget 5 of those 'H' models are tankers that will have to be replaced as well.

 

[aesop081]

why not kill two birds with one stone, replace the remainding 'H' hercs .........with the c-27J?

You cant do the job of a C-130H with a C-27.....for starters !

 

[thunderchild]

Not implying that it can the Herc is hard to beat, what I'm thinking is what is the c-130 doing that is better done by other airframes.

 

[Michael OLeary]

Not implying that it can the Herc is hard to beat, what I'm thinking is what is the c-130 doing that is better done by other airframes.

thunderchild,

it's time for you to stop and read for a while.  There's a lot more to selection of equipment that just picking something cool off a website, a television show or out of a book.  Suck back, reload, and read the posts you've been getting about considering the entire system that comes with an aircraft.

If you don't you're going to run out of room to manoeuvre here really fast and may soon find yourself on an enforced listening watch.

Consider this formal advice to slow down.

Milnet.ca Staff

 

[Zoomie]

This whole topic is rather dated.  The E and H model Hercules aircraft are being replaced by J models - the ink is dry on that contract.  Let's move on.

FWSAR is another subject and has its own topic.

 

[geo]

who knows..... if Viking air starts to produce Ye olde Buffalo, we can once again speculate on new ones to replace the old ones in the SAR role.  Not much else able to do the job - De Haviland set the bar pretty high when they came up with the design

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I think we should start arguing about adopting the K model, that way we can be ready when the J models wear out!

 

[aesop081]

I think we should start arguing about adopting the K model, that way we can be ready when the J models wear out!

The K model already exists and has been in service with the RAF for many years.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/raflyneham/aboutus/hercc130k.cfm