- Reaction score
Had the pleasure of jumping out of them in Fort Bragg years ago, sure were fun for that......no need to worry about squaring in the door..........WHOOOSH!
Heard a storey a some time back .Might be true ,might not roughly 8 or so years ago there was a joint Canada/US airpower conferences I understand it they offered us 18-24 C141B s the offer was turned down on the grounds that the 141's were rather old on the tooth( mind you the141's offered up had about half the hours our C130 E's had at the time.)KevinB said:Well no doubt some are -- I am sure a lot are in better shape than our Hercs though -- but I smell a potentialBritish Sub fiasco if the CF went that route.
It may be practical to get some from the USAF as a transition piece for the C17? But I am not airforce guru so I dont knwo if that would help or hinder -- and given we dont seem to be getting C17's anytime soon...
A400M Aircraft to Boost Armed Forces Capability, Says Najib
(Source: Bernama news agency; published Dec. 8, 2005)
(Copyright Bernama news agency; reproduced by permission)
LANGKAW, Malaysia --- Malaysia Thursday signed an agreement with Airbus Military to procure four A400M aircraft worth RM2.8 billion in efforts to beef up the defence forces' capabilities.
Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said the new aircraft would replace in stages the ageing fleet of its C130 transport aircraft currently in service.
He told this to reporters after witnessing the signing ceremony at the Mahsuri International Exhibition and Convention Centre (MIEC) in conjunction with the Langkawi International Maritime and Aerospace Exhibition (LIMA) 2005 here. He said two of the aircraft would be delivered on 2013 while the rest on 2014.
"The government decided to purchase the aircraft as we need aircraft with the latest technology and with high capability to replace the C130," he said. Najib, who is also the Defence Minister said, the C130 would continue its role until it is no longer economical to operate the aircraft.
Through the purchase of A400M, Malaysia is to benefit from the aircraft development whereby a Malaysian firm, Composites Technology Research Malaysia Sdn Bhd (CTRM), would undertake two development programmes worth RM907 in manufacturing composite components.
He said, Malaysia would also receive additional programmes worth RM800 million if there is more orders for the aircraft from all over the world.
"Based on additional orders for 196 aircraft of that type from all over the world, we are expected to receive additional work worth RM800 million," he said.
CTRM was established in November 1990 by Minister of Finance Malaysia Inc in line with the government's aspiration to start manufacturing composite parts for the aerospace industry.
After looking at the advantages and the opportunity to expand the nation's "aerospace" industry, the government made the decision to buy the four aircraft, said Najib.
"The procurement must be seen as a package, not only to fulfill the armed forces' needs but also as an effort to expand the nation's aerospace industry," he said.
Najib also witnessed the signing of several more contracts for the supply and delivery of military equipment between Malaysia and the respective suppliers, among others Selex Sistemi Integrati, Sapura Thales Electronics and Sapura Defense Sdn Bhd.
Apart from that, Najib also witnessed the delivery of an Agusta A109 Light Observation Helicopter by AgustaWestland for the army at the MIEC ground. (ends)
GK .Dundas said:Heard a storey a some time back .Might be true ,might not roughly 8 or so years ago there was a joint Canada/US airpower conferences I understand it they offered us 18-24 C141B s the offer was turned down on the grounds that the 141's were rather old on the tooth( mind you the141's offered up had about half the hours our C130 E's had at the time.)
April 17, 2005: The U.S. Air Force is desperately scrambling to get money to build its new F-22 and F-35 fighters. But in the meantime, an even more essential aircraft, the new C-17 transport, is being worked to death. The problem is that the C-17 is more in demand during the war on terror than are air force combat aircraft. Only the two dozen AC-130 gunships, and a hundred or so A-10 ground attack aircraft and F-16 fighter-bombers are getting steady work these days. But their workload is nothing compared to the C-17s, which are in constant demand to deliver personnel and material to American troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, and many other places where the war on terror is being fought.
The C-17 entered service ten years ago, and those first few aircraft quickly compiled 3,000 flight hours supporting peacekeeping operations in Bosnia. Each C-17 has a useful life of 30,000 flight hours, but the current force is flying such long, and hard (landing on rough fields) flights that many of the early model C-17s will be worn out within five or so years. This attrition is accelerated by the fact that the early model C-17s are structurally different, and weaker, than the later model C-17s. The wing box in the center of the fuselage was insufficiently strong for the loads placed on it. This was corrected later in the production run, but those early planes are going to wear out faster than later model planes of the same flight hours. Adding to this problem is the fact that many C-17s are landing on rough fields with heavy loads and are taking life time shortening structural damage. We have flown a lot of C-17s into northern Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and a bunch of other 'stans with rough/short strips in 2001 and 2003. The C-17 was built for this sort of thing, but lots of these landing come at the price of shorter useful life.
It's always been an uphill fight getting new air transports built. There were so many delays in the C-17 program that, when the 1991 Gulf War came along, the C-17 was not available and the the C-141 transports, that was supposed to keep flying until 2010, were basically worn out and had to be retired early. Now the C-17s are doing more work, to make up for the missing C-141s. Originally, there were to be 120 C-17s (at $135 million each), with production ending in 2004. After September 11, 2001, it was realized that more air transports would be needed, and the production run of the C-17 was increased to 180. It is now proposed to increase it again to 222 aircraft. But logistics planners insist that 300 will be needed, if wartime needs are to be met. Moreover, the rapid deterioration of the early model C-17s means that eventually 350, or more, will have to be built to maintain a fleet of 300 transports.
The major problem is that the air force is run by combat pilots. Although they recognize the importance of the C-17, they tend to focus on getting warplanes built. Additional C-17 construction comes at the expense of building new combat aircraft, and that's a hard sell inside the air force. Usually, it lobbying by the army, and other branches of the government, that compels Congress to strong arm the air force generals to build the needed C-17s. It's an ugly, messy and time consuming way to get aircraft built, but it works.
Kirkhill said:C130s and C141s are using up their remaining hours fast. The C5 I don't know about but can't think it is in any better shape.
2010 too late for new planes
By MICHAEL DEN TANDT
Tuesday, December 20, 2005 Posted at 4:05 AM EST
From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
Ottawa â â€ The first of 16 new military transport planes is not scheduled for delivery until 2010, two years after the Department of National Defence says its aging Hercules fleet will be inoperable, an internal government document obtained by The Globe and Mail shows.
The document, which the Defence Department submitted to the Treasury Board last month, raises fresh questions about the federal government's approval in the last days of its mandate of the $4.6-billion aircraft purchase.
DND officials for weeks have insisted that the procurement had to be completed urgently because the Hercules fleet must be replaced in about 36 months, or the lives of pilots and crew will be at undue risk.
"We know that three years and a little bit more than that, the fleet starts to become almost completely inoperational," General Rick Hillier, Chief of Defence Staff, said last month.
He added that Canadian troops need new planes "not another 15 years from now, not 10 years from now and actually not even five years from now."
Gen. Hillier reiterated the statement in a private briefing several weeks ago with the Bloc Québécois and New Democratic Party defence critics.
"They're trying to explain to us that if nothing is done today, the whole fleet will fall apart in three years," Bloc MP Claude Bachand said at the time.
The Treasury Board document thus raises new questions about DND's bidding process, which until now has effectively shut out competitors other than Lockheed Martin.
Asked about the document, the Defence Department said it has no comment. Defence Minister Bill Graham also declined to comment.
The accelerated process and in particular the contract specifications have been widely understood in the defence industry to favour Lockheed Martin over other potential contenders such as Airbus and Boeing.
Gen. Hillier and Mr. Graham have insisted that DND's conditions for the contract do not make the process uncompetitive, because the necessity for speedy delivery is incontrovertible.
They say any company is free to satisfy those conditions, if it can.
But according to a secret DND timetable and cost projection to the Treasury Board, dated Nov. 21 and signed by Mr. Graham, the timing of the delivery of the first aircraft is not three years out, but nearly five, in May, 2010. A copy of the document was obtained by The Globe and Mail.
A detailed table in the document sets out a schedule that would deliver four aircraft a year in each of 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013, for a total of 16.
A table, entitled Project Milestones, says that, given "preliminary project approval" in November of this year, the contract will be awarded in May, 2007.
The apparent two-year delay is significant. The Defence Department has been told by Airbus that the company can deliver two A400M transports by 2010, and the balance by 2014, as well as provide refurbished Hercules transports in the interim, should that be necessary.
"That is guaranteed," said Martin Sefzig, director of programs at EADS-Casa, Airbus's major shareholder.
"The production line has been designed to accommodate extra orders."
Although it remains unclear which aircraft bests suits DND's needs, this casts into doubt the most compelling argument against the Airbus craft, which is that it could not be available in time to meet DND's schedule.
Last month, after a plan to buy $12.2-billion worth of 50 military aircraft was criticized by industry insiders and opposition politicians for perceived unfairness of the bidding process, the Defence Minister announced an abridged plan, for transport planes only. Of the total $4.6-billion cost, $3-billion is directly related to procuring the aircraft, with $1.6-billion for servicing costs over 20 years.
At a news conference on Nov. 22, Mr. Graham and Gen. Hillier dismissed allegations that contract requirements were tailored so that only one plane, Lockheed Martin's Hercules C-130J, could fulfill them.
"The procurement process will be competitive, fair and transparent," Mr. Graham said. A spokesman for Mr. Graham reiterated this recently.
Kirkhill said:It would quickly become a plumber's nightmare of worn-out cannibalized parts, long lead Russian parts of unknown quality and domestically reverse engineered parts. If the aerotechs are having fits with the CP-140 they would love the IL-76.