Author Topic: Interesting sidenote on the C-17  (Read 38775 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TSKslover

  • Guest
  • *
  • 0
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3
Re: Interesting sidenote on the C-17
« Reply #75 on: December 17, 2006, 08:45:45 »

"It is better to have and not need, than need and not have!"


That's all I have to say about that.






Offline ringo

  • Member
  • ****
  • 4,995
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 154
Re: Interesting sidenote on the C-17
« Reply #76 on: December 28, 2006, 16:36:50 »
RAF seek's additional C-17's, to add to four in service and a fifth aircraft to be delivered 2007, 3 additional aircraft to follow for a total of 8.

Offline geo

  • Army.ca Legend
  • *****
  • 26,410
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 10,648
Re: Interesting sidenote on the C-17
« Reply #77 on: December 28, 2006, 18:44:07 »
Something like peanuts, you eat one and you've gotta have more n'more

As the UK Military rationalises and contracts, it has to do more with less in every corner of the world at a moment's notice..... thus, the need for mobility, instant mobility.  Without their own air and sea transports, the UK cannot project their forces at the whim of their government.  So.... yeah, more C17s and more modern RORO maritime support vessels - it's the cost of projecting international power.
« Last Edit: December 28, 2006, 18:47:13 by geo »
Chimo!

aesop081

  • Guest
Re: Interesting sidenote on the C-17
« Reply #78 on: December 28, 2006, 19:00:59 »
RAF seek's additional C-17's, to add to four in service and a fifth aircraft to be delivered 2007, 3 additional aircraft to follow for a total of 8.

This isnt news.  The RAF decided roughly 2 years ago to sell-off its Short model C-130Js in order to buy the C-17s they are currently leasing and buy additional aircraft.

Offline ringo

  • Member
  • ****
  • 4,995
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 154
Re: Interesting sidenote on the C-17
« Reply #79 on: December 29, 2006, 01:11:50 »
The RAF did try to sell off short model C-130J's but as yet have had no takers.



Mod pins hopes on Boeing C17 amid Airbus doubts.


« Last Edit: December 29, 2006, 01:49:59 by ringo »

aesop081

  • Guest
Re: Interesting sidenote on the C-17
« Reply #80 on: December 29, 2006, 04:15:46 »
The RAF did try to sell off short model C-130J's but as yet have had no takers.



Mod pins hopes on Boeing C17 amid Airbus doubts.




If you are going to put up a link...you should add....well.....a LINK !!!!!!

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 218,220
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,235
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Interesting sidenote on the C-17
« Reply #81 on: December 29, 2006, 15:50:09 »
The J's are noticeably different in configuration performance reductions than H's and L's that we have.  Based on the marginal difference in operating requirements between the -10 and -30 J's (short and stretch) yet the much larger bulk that the -30 will carry, I suspect a lot of "mainstream" J operators will transition to -30's and take a hit on trading off -10's to smaller nations around the world who want to slightly upscale compared to their E/H-operating neighbours.

G2G

Offline Journeyman

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 563,095
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 13,251
Re: Interesting sidenote on the C-17
« Reply #82 on: December 29, 2006, 20:03:32 »
The J's are noticeably different in configuration performance reductions than H's and L's that we have.  Based on the marginal difference in operating requirements between the -10 and -30 J's (short and stretch) yet the much larger bulk that the -30 will carry, I suspect a lot of "mainstream" J operators will transition to -30's and take a hit on trading off -10's to smaller nations around the world who want to slightly upscale compared to their E/H-operating neighbours.
I just love it when you talk 'trash-hauler'   ;)
Don't vote?  Don't complain.   www.elections.ca

Offline Globesmasher

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 435
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 348
Re: Interesting sidenote on the C-17
« Reply #83 on: December 29, 2006, 23:28:54 »
I just love it when you talk 'trash-hauler'   ;)

LMAO ............. and he's not even a trash hauler!!!!
But he does talk the talk ... I've seen him.  He tries to walk the walk on the odd occasion as well.

Nobody has picked up the short versions of the RAF's J model C-130s.  After a visit to Lyneham to chat with them about their program they gave us a couple of lessons learned for when we really sink our teeth into ACP-T (The J model).  One thing they mentioned was to NOT buy the two versions of the C-130J - the stretch and the stubby (only buy one variant, don't mix the fleet).  Their second lesson learned was they wished they had simply bought a fleet of all C-130 J-30 stretch versions.

Canada did not buy the RAF's "steal of a deal" offer for their stubby J's.
One - because they told us not to buy those types.
Two - because we only want a single configured fleet, and
Three - because we want the stretch variant. 
One side note too - we were still reeling from the submarine incident ... so anything that came from the UK as second hand did not float too well in the opinion polls or with the media.

The RAF will be buying their 4 currently leased C-17s from Boeing when the lease expires (in 2008 I think - not sure) ... and they plan on adding to the fleet as well by more straight purchases (between 1 and 3 more).

The Airbus A400M has turned out to be a European Political Quagmire ...... and the UK/RAF is regretting it.

Offline Good2Golf

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Legend
  • *
  • 218,220
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 11,235
  • Dammit! I lost my sand-wedge on that last jump!
Re: Interesting sidenote on the C-17
« Reply #84 on: December 29, 2006, 23:55:38 »
Globe, thanks for not slagging me too badly, bud!  ;D

If you're still down when I do a little x-ctry in a few months, I'll look you and the guys up!

Have fun in OK!

G2G