Will the C17s Make it to the Ramp?

[Command-Sense-Act 105]

So guys, I have heard that "tail" is short form for aircraft, which are usually referred to as "tail number".  Is this right? >

Maybe we could go back to talking about the Mortar Blast Attenuation Device again... ;D

 

[vonGarvin]

So guys, I have heard that "tail" is short form for aircraft, which are usually referred to as "tail number".  Is this right? >

Maybe we could go back to talking about the Mortar Blast Attenuation Device again... ;D

Don't get me started!  >

 

[Inch]

So guys, I have heard that "tail" is short form for aircraft, which are usually referred to as "tail number".  Is this right? >

Maybe we could go back to talking about the Mortar Blast Attenuation Device again... ;D

Tail is slang for aircraft. Just like when you're talking about a guy that's a good stick. It doesn't mean he's made of wood, but that he's a good pilot.

 

[mover1]

A pilot turns from a good stick to an idiot if he wears his flightsuit down town at the bar


Seriously my boss is leaving for the states in a month or so for training on the C-17 our only question on them is...will we see them come in here (YZX) or will they use Halifax like the current US airforce does.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Why CC-177? No "nyets"
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/02/why-cc-177-no-nyets.html

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Nasty piece in Halifax Chronicle Herald:

Purchase of Boeings raises share of questions
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Opinion/558388.html

IN JUNE 2006, just before the government issued a tender for four strategic aircraft to carry military gear to far-off airports, the Canadian Forces changed the size of its payload requirement to 37 tonnes from 19.5 tonnes.

Only one aircraft in the world — the Boeing C-17 Globemaster — met the new requirement. Boeing’s biggest competitor in the class, the Airbus A400, can carry only 37 tonnes.

In July, the government issued an advance contract award notice, a document asking any (mythical) competitor to step forward with another offer before Ottawa bought four Boeings...

Defence Department internal e-mails about the purchase unearthed by the Ottawa Citizen suggest DND made the change to eliminate Airbus as a competitor...

This procurement raises several other, tougher questions [actually two only]:

Do we need these airplanes?..

Instead of buying them, we could have joined 15 NATO countries that are negotiating to buy several C-17s to share or signed a contract with a commercial provider guaranteeing us access whenever we want it...

At the same time that the military is buying these Boeings, it is looking at retiring two supply ships and a destroyer. It also plans to replace long-distance maritime surveillance aircraft with drones.

Retired naval officers are screaming blue murder about these cuts to the navy, a sure sign that their colleagues still in the service are muttering darkly into their rum...

Is this the best way to buy an airplane?..

By changing the payload requirement, DND appears to have manipulated the procurement process to steer the work to Boeing.

"Sure, this is an open competition, but we’ll only accept companies whose names start with a ‘Boe’ and end with an ‘ing,’ " says Steve Staples, a defence analyst with the left-leaning Rideau Institute [emphasis added--at least "left-leaning" is noted]...

Of the $3.4 billion DND will spend on these Boeings, about $1.9 billion will be spent in Canada.

The contracts haven’t been announced, but some are worried that Canadian firms may not get as much high-end work as we would like. Without intellectual property rights to aerospace technology, Canadian firms can’t use their know-how to win other work...

And buying so many aircraft from one supplier looks bad.

Mr. O’Connor is a former defence lobbyist [emphasis added--why not mention that he, er, lobbyied for Boeing competitor Airbus?--talk about innuendo], one of the guys who used to make his living by helping defence contractors land contracts.

Under his watch, the government is steering $13 billion to Boeing, without competition...

Mark
Ottawa

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

Yeah I read that this morning over my Wheaties and was totally unimpressed :rage: This is a Liberal rag anyway so I wouldn't take too much notice of it. The Editorial cartoon speaks volumes of their bias...guy sitting reading a newspaper with the headline "Harper's first anniversary" and a thought balloon from him saying "Can I get a divorce?" :clown:

 

[gaspasser]

A pilot turns from a good stick to an idiot if he wears his flightsuit down town at the bar


Seriously my boss is leaving for the states in a month or so for training on the C-17 our only question on them is...will we see them come in here (YZX) or will they use Halifax like the current US airforce does.

Probably will see them the odd time in ZX on thier way thru.  Can't see ZX putting one or two on the ramp.  Not much space, one will take up the entire east of 11, north and south of 10.  I think they're going to improve what is here in TR to accommadate the behemeths.  
Cheers.

 

[Globesmasher]

"Sure, this is an open competition, but we’ll only accept companies whose names start with a ‘Boe’ and end with an ‘ing,’ " says Steve Staples, a defence analyst with the left-leaning Rideau Institute

Yes, and when that "Boe" ...... "ing" company does win the deal, they can only divide up the IRBs with Canadian Aviation Companies starting with "Bom" and ending with "Bardier" ......  : ....  :

 

[Globesmasher]

...will we see them come in here (YZX) or will they use Halifax like the current US airforce does.

It all depends on the weather and the fuel requirements that we need for an Atlantic crossing ... either westbound or eastbound.  It all depends on how far south the jet stream is, where the winds are, how heavy we are, ..... where the NAT tracks are ..... etc.

It all depends ....it changes from day to day.

In the C-130 I've used Greenwood, Halifax, St Johns, Gander, Goose Bay, St Anthony's, ... even Iqaluit from time to time when we cross way North ..... it all depends on the route of flight and winds etc ...

 

[Globesmasher]

Here is something from the MND .......
May as well hear another side of the story instead of just the looney left.


PUBLICATION:    National Post
DATE:  2007.02.09
BYLINE:        GORDON O'CONNOR

The government of Canada recently announced the purchase of four
Boeing C-17 strategic lift aircraft, with deliveries beginning this
summer. This capability marks a new era for Canada and for the
Canadian Forces. This strategic lift capability will be a "Canada
First" asset -- to be used on our own terms and at times of our own
choosing. No longer will we have to join the international queue,
negotiating against other countries for scarce commercial strategic-
lift options. Canada will be better able to protect Canadians from
coast to coast, including those in the Arctic, and provide rapid
assistance when domestic emergencies arise.


Strategic lift is a needed and necessary requirement for the Canadian
Forces. We live in the second largest country in the world. We have a
land-mass of over nine million square kilometres. Air travel is a fact
of life for all of us. It is how we go from Victoria to Halifax to
Iqualuit to Toronto. Ours is a country of close neighbours separated
by significant distances but intimately interconnected. When disasters
strike -- whether they be floods in Quebec or forest fires in British
Columbia -- that connection becomes all the more real. And the desire
to help our neighbours out becomes overwhelming.


The Canadian Forces, with a footprint as big as the country itself, is
the embodiment of that desire. Whether here in Canada or in crises
around the globe, ours is a caring nation. We want to help. Our
Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) has for years represented
Canada with great distinction around the globe. And, without putting
too fine a point on it, a strategic airlift capability will enable us
to assist those in need more quickly, more effectively and more
reliably than ever before.


A C-17 strategic lift aircraft would be capable of transporting our
entire DART team virtually anywhere in the world in the event of a
natural disaster. We will be able to fly heavy equipment such as
generators that can power entire cities, water purification equipment,
hospital units or the equivalent of an entire grocery store worth of
food supplies to areas that desperately need our support.


Our new strategic lift aircraft will provide a rapid, reliable and
flexible capability to move heavy equipment quickly over long
distances in response to domestic emergencies and international
crises. This includes ensuring that the Canadian Forces in Afghanistan
receive the supplies and equipment they need to get the job done.


Not only will this increase our capacity, strategic lift is the best
and most efficient way to cover vast distances as it reduces the
number of crews and stopovers required. In fact, the average monthly
cost to charter aircraft to support Canadian Forces operations in
Afghanistan alone is about $11- million dollars. Having our own
strategic lift capability will greatly reduce that cost. It will also
reduce the workload for our tactical Hercules fleet.


The procurement process has been thorough. We have engaged industry to
identify solutions that meet our high-level performance requirements.
We have taken literally years off the process, saving taxpayers
millions of dollars, by using a pragmatic and efficient process that
was nevertheless fair and open. We have protected members of the
Canadian Forces and taxpayers by requesting proven, "off the shelf "
aircraft, thus avoiding the high risk and potential delays that often
accompany developmental technologies. The speed at which government
departments have been able to work together to get the Canadian Forces
the equipment they need is admirable. And most importantly, we have
ensured that the Canadian Forces receive the equipment they need to do
a demanding and necessary job.


I am proud of the work done by our Canadian Forces. I am proud of
their sacrifice and courage. And I am proud that this government is
delivering on its promises including strengthening Canada's
independent capacity. This is a new era for the Canadian Forces -- one
of support from their government and equipment that will allow them to
be self-sufficient.

 

[geo]

well, well, well... from the horse's mouth itself

Having the aircraft will make the actual move to do something in a far off place a lot faster..... once the gov't has decided to move forward..... till then, the aircraft will be nailed to the ground.

 

[observor 69]

And note the MND referred to the aircraft as  "Our new strategic lift aircraft ."

Ain't no tactical, scratch the paint flyin', bein' done with this  new aeroplane. 

 

[Cloud Cover]

Is there any particular reason they bought only 4 of these things?  We are going to look awfully stupid if they take delivery of these and continue to use third parties for additional lift.  [and.. what if that lift is refused to us?]

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

Is there any particular reason they bought only 4 of these things?  We are going to look awfully stupid if they take delivery of these and continue to use third parties for additional lift.  [and.. what if that lift is refused to us?]

Way out of my lane but isn't this because we will be part of a Joint User Group? We will have resources to bring to the table to help our Allies so they in turn will help us?

 

[vonGarvin]

From what I understand, we are not part of this "joint user group", a criticism of some of those in Ottawa.  These will be CF planes, for use by the CF.

Some of our allies are pitching in on some time sharing aircraft.  Honestly, I don't see how that would work, with various peeing matches over stuff like "We want to use them" and "You can fix them".

 

[geo]

given that we have made do without and only resorted to contracting out our lifts on a once in a while basis, I would venture to say that the 4 should suffice for us to cut our teeth on..... once we are in the strategic lift business, we can then determine if there is a need for more..... more planes, tanks, LAVs, troops, etc....

 

[Flip]

I think Australia bought four as well.
I would like us to buy 8 - but times are still tight military budget wise.

Mind you, 4 of these is a lot of plane.
I call it a good  excellant start.

I like Gordon O'Conner for the job he seems to be doing behind closed doors.
But I think maybe Harpers team should do what the wiley liberals
did and let General Hillier speak for MDM.

The C17 is common to our closest allies and this purchase is about as "off the shelf"
as it gets.  This is a major paradigm shift for MDM.  It's pragmatic.......It's elegant......
....It's beautiful.

 

[C1Dirty]

In fact, the average monthly
cost to charter aircraft to support Canadian Forces operations in
Afghanistan alone is about $11- million dollars. Having our own
strategic lift capability will greatly reduce that cost.

By the sounds of this quote we'll still be chartering some of our airlift requirements.  Not so sure about the greatly reduced costs part.

The C17 is an awesome addition to our capabilities but I don't think it's going to save us any money.  Even the purchase price alone spread over  30 years would equate to 3.6 million/month (1.3B/360months).  Never mind the fuel (burn 20000lbs/hr?), labour costs, and required infrastructure changes.  The C17 will reduce the cost of chartering, but I don't think it will reduce the cost of actually moving our kit from pt A to pt B.

Having said that, I'm stoked that we're adding the C-17 to our inventory.  Hard to put a price on flexibilty.

 

[eurowing]

Another point is the 15 NATO countries sharing C-17s. 

It really needs to be noted that these countries combined possibly have a smaller footprint than Alberta, certainly most are postage stamp size.  They don't have the domestic need that we do for fast/heavy airlift ... say .. to move DART to BC when the big one happens.  Scheduled for April 08 now apparently.