Fixed-wing search and rescue, and Greg Weston of the Sun papers
Fred, a frequent commenter here, takes on Mr Weston in a comment at Norman's Spectator (links added):
Greg Weston's article today on the SAR aircraft procurement is a cheap drive by smear job, very short on facts, full of snide red herrings and is further proof that when it comes to Defense issues, Weston would be seriously out of his depth in parking lot puddle.Thanks, Fred. More from a Milnet.ca topic thread:
Bombardier has no aircraft that come even remotely close to meeting the SAR operational requirements. The Viking proposal is ludicrous - a slow, unpressurized aircraft [more on fixed-wing SAR here and here].
Contrary to what Weston states - there are no Canadian aircraft that come even close to being considered.
The EADS CASA 295 is an excellent aircraft, but maybe, just maybe Weston should take his head out of his butt for a moment and consider the operational benefits of having two aircraft in the fleet, the C130J and the 27's that have common engines, avionics and cockpits.
Wouldn't it be nice to have pilots qualified on two aircraft types ? Wouldn't it be nice to have maintenance crews able to repair engines and avionics on two aircraft?
Weston should stick to political gossip - maybe some day he'll be as good at as Jane Taber.
When he writes about defense procurement and aviation, he sounds crazier than Craig Oliver talking about economics.
This is quite laughable.
First, they [Viking] show the C-27J as an upgrade but try to portray the vaporware new Buffalo (which as we know doesn't exist) as a separate aircraft [the Viking piece is here--note the significantly greater weight, i.e. load, of the C-27J - MC].
As for the so-called fact that the C-27J can't operate on unprepared runways? This video is a pretty good demonstration of those capabilities!
http://www.c-27j.ca/tactical-takeoff-landing
Recent deployments of the C-27J in Afghanistan and for a humanitarian mission in Mali, under very difficult flight conditions show this is a real workhorse ideal for SAR
http://www.c-27j.ca/italian-air-force-c-27js-complete-five-month-deployment-to-afghanistan-0
http://www.c-27j.ca/files/new684_4.pdf
http://www.c-27j.ca/node/1437
Alenia can also offer a lot of opportunities to Canadian aerospace firms, arguably more than even Viking could with immediate access and participation in ongoing global supply lines for 200+ C-27Js going into production in North America starting next year.
posted by Mark, Ottawa at 4:06 p.m.
7 Comments:
Norman should have had that as his "Idiocy of the Day" not the first item in his "Column I Wished I'd Written" section.
In his attempt to make DND Procurement look stupid and the officer's in charge look like idiots, Weston simply made a fool of himself.
I suppose I shouldn't be surprised. Even the so called Defense Reporters in Ottawa have an alarming habit of being infected with a bad strain of "Gotcha journalism". Anything to sell that advertising space eh ?
I seem to recall awhile back that "they" were seriously questioning the C17 procurement, that it was rigged, that Ottawa was denying the Airbus A400M a fair chance, that the Air Force brain trust was rigging the competition so they could get the aircraft the old boys wanted.
Well thank god the Air Force got the C17s they knew were the right kit and didn't get pushed into accepting the yet to fly sky pig known as the A400M. It was a vapor plane then and is an aviation fiasco now.
Seems journalists can't understand how our senior Air Force Staff, people who have devoted their lives to their calling, could possibly know anything about military aircraft and airlift.
Maybe Weston should actually talk to some Air Force members who know what kit is needed. That might be too much work for an over burdened journalist.
Fred: Normnan has changed the name of that section of his site to "TODAY'S COLUMNS/EDITORIALS", so I suppose he decided the previous title, "OTHERS WORTH READING", implied too much endorsement :).
Mark
Ottawa
Give Viking a break. Good for them for trying to secure some new business, and perhaps resurrect a great plane design. They are doing some great work with the Beaver and Otter, and we should be congratulating them. They are a Canadian success story, and who can blame them for trying.
Viking is trying to inflame nationalistic passions to line their pockets and deprive the CF of proper gear. Their proposal is beyond ludicrous - it shows a complete lack of understanding of the SAR mission in 90% of the country and a self centered understanding of the SAR mission in the mountains of BC.
I'll give them a break when they come to their business senses, stop trying to achieve success by getting a liplock on the public teat and stop believing their "marketing bumpf".
Fred, all the aerospace firms act this way - Viking is just trying to compete, the same way they all are. I don't blame them for that.
And while I'm all for getting the folks in the CF the kit they need, let's not fool ourselves: they don't always get it right. The Sperwer was a poor choice. The proposed elimination of tanks was a bad idea that luckily got reversed. The 'must-have-it-now' purchase of the RG-31's has turned into a bit of a wash - great blast protection, crappy mechanical reliability.
The truth is that sometimes they get it right, and sometimes they don't. But I'm not going to trust a bean-counter at Public Works to make the choice more than I am a uniformed operator. Both can make mistakes, but the CF member will make them honestly, based upon performance requirements rather than just on the numbers.
I'm willing to forgive the odd lemon if it comes by trying to get away from the old military saw "remember: your weapon/vehicle/kit was built by the lowest bidder!"
I do think Viking is on to a good argument at least out here in B.C. Slow speeds, clime rate and the ability to get in close between those granite walls are the very reason their plane is used here. This is a very big country and very different challenges. I don't think a one size fits all plane is needed. If comonality of training and engines and spares are an issue in favour of the one proposal, why wouldn't the C130 fit the bill? Niether the C27 or the C130 are really ideal for bC were 2 out of 3 downed aircraft occur. The Buffalo with new wing design, engines avionics and a pressurized cockpit will fit the Bill between the walls.
I do think Viking is on to a good argument at least out here in B.C. Slow speeds, clime rate and the ability to get in close between those granite walls are the very reason their plane is used here. This is a very big country and very different challenges. I don't think a one size fits all plane is needed. If comonality of training and engines and spares are an issue in favour of the one proposal, why wouldn't the C130 fit the bill? Niether the C27 or the C130 are really ideal for bC were 2 out of 3 downed aircraft occur. The Buffalo with new wing design, engines avionics and a pressurized cockpit will fit the Bill between the walls.
Post a Comment
<< Home