Chinooks and Globemasters
According to David Akin of CTV, the CF is about to get four C-17 Globemaster transport aircraft, and sixteen CH-47 Chinook heavy-lift helicopters.
Delivery of the Globemasters looks prompt, but I'm disappointed that the C-47's apparently won't come through until 2010. We have guys on the ground in Afghanistan who could really use the support much quicker than that.
No word on tactical-lift Hercules replacements, although some have noted the C-17 is touted by Boeing as having tactical-lift capabilities. I hope that's not the route the CF is going to take: let the heavy-lifters do what they do best, and buy the C-130J's for the tac-lift job.
The only other option I can figure is if the CF buys the C-17's and gets quick delivery, they can take some flying-time pressure off the C-130 fleet, and maybe delay the tac-lift procurement long enough to let Airbus field a working copy of an A-400M. That way you get some competition for the 130J's, which have apparently had problems of their own.
I don't know about that, though - until somebody else proves they can compete, the Hercules airframe is the best tac-lift in the world.
Thoughts?
Delivery of the Globemasters looks prompt, but I'm disappointed that the C-47's apparently won't come through until 2010. We have guys on the ground in Afghanistan who could really use the support much quicker than that.
No word on tactical-lift Hercules replacements, although some have noted the C-17 is touted by Boeing as having tactical-lift capabilities. I hope that's not the route the CF is going to take: let the heavy-lifters do what they do best, and buy the C-130J's for the tac-lift job.
The only other option I can figure is if the CF buys the C-17's and gets quick delivery, they can take some flying-time pressure off the C-130 fleet, and maybe delay the tac-lift procurement long enough to let Airbus field a working copy of an A-400M. That way you get some competition for the 130J's, which have apparently had problems of their own.
I don't know about that, though - until somebody else proves they can compete, the Hercules airframe is the best tac-lift in the world.
Thoughts?
posted by Babbling Brooks at 10:46 AM
11 Comments:
Nice to see the new conservative government care about the military.
we should be buying a couple dozen of the newest UH-60M Blackhawks NOW . . work a deal to get an immediate delievry of older machines until they can be replaced with M's.
The Blackhawks would be invaluable in Afghanistan right now.
Fred, Where are we supposed to get the Blackhawks "NOW". Buying anykind of military aircraft is not like buying off a lot (unless you want black market ex-soviet stuff). The stuff still has to be built and building doesn't start until after contracts are awarded. This is the number one reason military planners have to think 20 to 50 years ahead....it is called having a forward vision...something the previous government did not have. 4 years to deliver 16 Chinooks? That is actually a very fast turn around considering there are others ahead of us in line.
There are a few options that would allow the current C130 fleet to maximize the service life. The C-17 option will take some of the load off, but the best way to remove tasking from the Hercules fleet and free up funding would be to go ahead with the Fixed Wing SAR replacement program - that would free up the equivalent of ten C-130 airframes. If you take the original 32 airframes, take workload of ten by replacing the FWSAR, and take the workload of another ten by buying C-17 aircraft, the urgency to replace the C-130 has been greatly reduced. You only have workload for twelve aircraft - and the CF currently has 13 relatively low time H model C-130 aircraft. I recognise that the CF is "on a roll" with procurements and wants to keep pushing for more as fast as possible, but given that the urgency can be reduced, a bit of sober second thought might be advisable. The reason is that although the E model aircraft are rapidly running out of hours, the 13 H model C-130 aircraft have a significant amount of life left - in fact, they have only used about half of their service life and can be safely operated for at least another fifteen years. Not only that, the H models are actually preferable to the J models for tactical airlift, they have a reputation of being more robust.
Simply put, the C-17 and FWSAR acquisitions would take the load off the current Hercules fleet to allow an informed decision to be made about the best future aircraft for Canada's tactical airlift fleet. There is no need to rush - with the C-17 and FWSAR purchases, the current C-130 aircraft could safely and effectively operate until at least 2020. An open and transparent competition with a delivery date at any time between 2012 and 2015 would provide a significant overlap to get the new fleet operational prior to the retirement of the H models, and would meet the requirements of the Air Force while ensuring best value for the taxpayer - the question of C-130J aircraft vs A-400 will be significantly easier to answer.
Not only that, but the FWSAR should be significantly cheaper to operate than the C-130 (admittedly depends on which aircraft is selected), which will help the military cope with the costs of operating all these new fleets.
Well said, RLP.
Here's my problem: one of the big pluses for the supposed frontrunner for the FWSAR replacement, the C-27J, is the similarities and economies of scale with a C-130 fleet. If we buy the C-27J and don't buy C-130's to replace C-130's, we miss out on a lot of the benefits under which the Spartans are sold. The purchases really need to be coordinated.
But how do we do that with the operational pressure on the current Herc fleet?
BB
Give Transport Canada a grant of $XM over five years to lease and fly Dash8s in the SAR role. Leave the Hercs available for emergency missions only. Then in 2012 we can begin the Herc replacement programme, and decide whether we have a military role for a C27-type A/C. In the meantime, TransCan can learn to do SAR, which is somewhere in its mandate, with CF Air as a backup, Aid to the Civil Authorities, etc. And Bombardier can prove its capability to produce quality products sans CF money.
Cheers
Is that practical, ETL? Could Transport Canada pick up those duties quickly enough to make a difference, and would they be willing to give it up once we got our FWSAR purchase straightened out? And if not, is the CF willing to give up that capability for good?
ETL: TC has no SAR mandate or experience. The other government agency with a significant SAR role is the Canadian Coast Guard which does the surface marine part.
In theory CCG could also do aerial SAR (like the USCG) but this would be something new. Learning how to do it would take a lot of time and cause huge disruption (CCG is already desperately underfunded and stretched just doing its current jobs).
Moreover the CF would be loathe to give up SAR as it is very warm and fuzzy and gets lots of good PR.
Much more sensible would be contracting aerial SAR to the private sector as I believe Australia is doing.
Mark
Ottawa
I might be able to add a bit of clarity to the Coast Guard Dash 8 and C-27J discussion.
In Canada, the Coast Guard is not under the unlimited terms of service that the military signs up to. As well, they do not have any personnel who are parachute qualified, or trained to do medical procedures, arctic and bush survival, or mountain rescue such as our Search and Rescue Techs. The ships are trained in Marine SAR, but the Coast Guard aircrew are not - and SAR is not something that you can just do as a secondary duty. The learning curve would be too much to handle without a significant handover period. The same is true of the discussion of civilianizing the role, the only ones who are trained and qualified are the SAR techs and SAR aircrew, and based on their qualifications, you will pay them far more as a civilian to do the same job.
The Dash 8 is a great aircraft, but without a ramp, it is of marginal use for delivery of parachutists and equipment, such as toboggans filled with survival gear, medical gear, pumps for vessels in distress, or life rafts for survivors in the water. Bombardier is advertising a sliding door in the side of the aircraft, but realistically, you need to have a winch to recover personnel and gear that are hung up on deployment - and a sliding door will not work. Furthermore, when you are loading flares or specialized equipment, the time required to load through a sliding door will significantly delay a response time to a SAR emergency. A FWSAR aircraft really needs a ramp.
As far as the C-27J is concerned, the engine has similar engines to the C-130J, but they are not identical. Furthermore, the only customers for the C-27J have been Greece, Italy, Bulgaria, and Lithuania - and only Greece has actually taken delivery of any aircraft (five at last count). None are operational. No one plans to use the aircraft in the SAR role. Finally, the aircraft is quite expensive to operate, it is basically a 1960 Alenia G-222 airframe, designed by Fiat, with 1980 vintage props and engines. As a result, it cannot compete with newer platforms in terms of fuel economy, maintenance costs, etc.
The argument of commonality of systems sounds good at first blush, and was used by the Air Force to bolster the case for the C-130, but closer examination shows that it is not as simple as portrayed.
Hopefully this helps explain some of the complexity involved with the FWSAR issue.
I got an upclose, hands on, look-see, walk-thru on both the C130 Jercules and a C17 - nice new one,still all clean.
Had a long talk with the load master onthe 17, - 25 year vet . . he loves the plane, showed lotsa little things that make load handling just superior to anything else he has ever worked on. Performance, handling, load management . . sweet machine.
Same for the Jercules . . our Forces will be very happy with these equipments . . too bad the are not in inventory right now.
Well, that's the end of that discussion: when a loadmaster likes a plane, shut up and buy the damned thing. ;)
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home