# air-to-air refuellers



## canuck101 (18 Jul 2004)

Can some one tell me when the air force is going to get air-to-air refuellers back?


----------



## Zoomie (18 Jul 2004)

Currently the CF possesses the ability to tactically refuel its CF-18's via the C-130 Hercules posted in Winnipeg.  If you are referring to Strategic Air-to-air refueling a la 707 days, we should see refitted Airbus (aka Polaris) aircraft back from Germany soon!


----------



## canuck101 (19 Jul 2004)

cool thanks.  Now we just need to replace the c-130 but i won't hold my breath.


----------



## Inch (19 Jul 2004)

We need to replace a lot of stuff, Hercs, Buffs, Sea Kings (contract should be announced this week, we still won't see one till 2008), and there's a few more that will make the list by 2010.  Not a cheap endevour by any means.


----------



## ags281 (19 Jul 2004)

Inch said:
			
		

> We need to replace a lot of stuff, Hercs, Buffs, Sea Kings (contract should be announced this week, we still won't see one till 2008), and there's a few more that will make the list by 2010.   Not a cheap endevour by any means.


Announced this week? Finally! It's about time.

As for the buffs, imo an ideal replacement would be... NEW BUFFS!!!   ;D


----------



## Inch (19 Jul 2004)

I agree, I think the Buff is a great airframe too bad De Havilland doesn't make it anymore. New Buffs and J model Hercs would be sweet.

Yep, the buzz in Shearwater is that as soon as the new Minister of National Defense is sworn in, it'll be announced.


Cheers


----------



## Sheerin (20 Jul 2004)

With me being the kid who could never sleep on Christmas eve (or Birthday eve) I'm wondering what you CH-124 drivers (as you so ably put it) hear will be the replacement?  

And on similar note, which you guys prefer the EH-101 or the H-92


----------



## Inch (20 Jul 2004)

I think it's pretty split on who wants what, the H92 is cheaper but the EH101 is a fantastic airframe, however they're both great aircraft.  So we'll see, I think everyone will be happy with whatever we get, it's been 11 years since the initial contract was cancelled. There's no inside info on what we're actually getting, though the concensus seems to be the H92 because of the price.


----------



## childs56 (20 Jul 2004)

get new Seakings for the Navy, less modifications to the ships, get De havilland (or Bombardier) to make new Buff's (awesome aircraft) as for the Hercs yes buy the new J models (actually strive for the Z model it will take to long to approve the J model then the J will be outdated) the airbus refueler  is a good idea, buy new F18's screw the other crap, get some starlifters or galaxy's, chinook's, blackhawks , or the eurocopter medium and heavy and maybe an attack hellicopter or two, these could be on lease, oh the prospects of good aircraft and more employability, hmmmmm a well equiped airforce my 2 cents worth


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (20 Jul 2004)

CTD said:
*get new Seakings for the Navy*

Ummm hello? Earth to CTD... don't you think the replacement of the Seakings have been delayed long enough, what you are proposing is pushing the program back at least another 8-10 years.  :


----------



## Sundborg (20 Jul 2004)

Does anyone know when the Sea Kings are actually going to start being replaced?  Have they found a replacement? Or are they still shopping?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (20 Jul 2004)

Suppose to be announced this summer...maybe even this week if Inch's rumour is correct.


----------



## Inch (20 Jul 2004)

The word is it'll be announced this week, we should have rubber on the ramp sometime in 2008. If they don't cancel the sonofabitch again!

Cheers,


----------



## childs56 (20 Jul 2004)

I said BUY new seakings, they are a good robust helicopter that if they were new they would do the job fine. it would also save alot of hassle for the modification of the Navy Ships to fit either of the new helos that are proposed.


----------



## Sheerin (21 Jul 2004)

Are Seakings even in production anymore?


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (21 Jul 2004)

I know you said to buy new ones but like I pointed out that would only elay the program longer. We can't afford to delay and longer.


----------



## canuck101 (21 Jul 2004)

When I went to augusta westland site they did not even have the sea king as a product that they sell anymore so i guess they don't. I would have liked the liberals to pick the NH90 but i think they will pick the EH101.  We already have 15 search and rescue versions which are the commercial versions but are basically the same helicopter. You save money on parts and training if i am not wrong but i may be  ;D


----------



## canuck101 (21 Jul 2004)

I know that the NH90 was not a choice. It was just my pick if it was a perfect world. ;D


----------



## canuck101 (21 Jul 2004)

we will also have to spend alot of money to modify the frigates to fit the EH101 if we get them.  We will just have to fire a few generals and civilians getting the same pay level


----------



## ringo_mountbatten (21 Jul 2004)

The first Polaris regulars should soon return from its modifications and testing it will allow the second one to go over to France and start getting its mods done.   The first one should be back sooner than later now allowing Canada to return to the strategic refueling business and allowing the new upgraded CF18s to deploy more frequently and quickly to where they can be used.    

Just a few replies for some of the ideas that have been thrown out in this thread.   First off the MPF were built with the EH101 in mind therefore very minimal requirements would be needed.   The H92 is smaller so it is not a big deal and will fit easily.   Secondly with the idea to simply build new Seakings, it is a horrible idea for the main reason as it would be extremely cost prohibitive.   You just cannot reopen a manufacturing line that has been closed for quite a few years.   Even if you could where are you going to get all the parts that you need to keep the Seakings operational?   It is already hard enough to find Seaking parts and a Canadian purchase of new builds would hardly get any more parts rolling off the line any time soon.   You couldn't expect to operate the exact same Seaking we have now so a redesign would have to take place.   So if we bought new Seakings, by the time that the redesign, updates and testing would take many years while the current Seakings just get older and more dangerous.   

As for the idea to bypass the C130J and just go for the new "Z" model that idea is just as full of holes.   The "Z" model is not even off the drawing board yet, so really it is the same situation as the Seakings.   While Canada waits for an aircraft that is the better part of a decade off we use our old Hercs until then.   The wait for J models will be as long as the new whitepaper on foreign policy takes.   Once it is written the Air Force will know what role it will have to play and the government, like it or not will have to equip them for it.   

I also believe that the C130J has tainted some views of how easy it is to simply throw new engines and systems into proven designs and watch how easy they mesh.   I say this because your answer to replace the CF18s and the CC115s is to simply build new ones again.   The idea to do that with the Buffalos is the same as the Seakings.   However, for the CF18 it could actually be done by acquiring the new Super Hornets.   That would be a lot easier if Canada had not already invested in the new Joint Strike Fighter (JSF).   

The idea for C141s and C5s is also not realistic by any means.   The C141 is on its last leg and the C5 is old and not very reliable, but will stay around for the simple reason that there is just no alternative to replace it right now.   The more logical conclusion would be to order a small number of C17s and reduce the number of C130J needed to replace the current E/Hs and to be able to deal with outsized cargo without calling the US or leasing spotty Russian planes with drunk flight crew.   

A simpler answer for Canada's rotary wing answer for support and cargo is to pick the EH101 for the new maritime helo and then order the support variant to replace the Griffons and in the Army support role.   Canada could then streamline their helicopter operations with just the operation of one main type, and save on maintenance and training.   As for attack helos, unless the Conservatives are elected to a strong majority government they are a dream.   

Concerning the Buffalo replacement the answer should be in a year or so, with the two types competing being the C27J and the C295.   Both have their own advantages, the C27J being that it shares the same engine as the C130J.   As for the C295 it is a nice aircraft that is a little cheaper, but its main advantage is political as it has Pratt & Whitney Canada engines and all the jobs that come with it.   So who really knows which will be chosen in the end there?


----------



## canuck101 (21 Jul 2004)

getting three to four C17 would be great but the cost would be high. Don't get me wrong i am all for it.  The choice of getting the army version of the eh101 would be great to but we would have to buy about 100 unless we get a discount for buying that many the cost would be really high.  The government see short term gains and can not think long term.all your ideas are great and i wish the government would follow your thoughts. We can only hope ;D


----------



## ringo_mountbatten (21 Jul 2004)

The number of C17s DND planners throw around is 6, and they tought they were going to get them unitl the Chretien put and end to the stat airlift purchase.


----------

