RAAF buys 2 more C-17s

[dimsum]

Australia has begun the process for the purchase of two more C-17s, bringing the total to eight.

http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/2014/10/03/minister-for-defence-purchase-of-two-c-17a-globemaster-aircraft/

 

[ringo]

Canada need's to act quickly and add 4 more C-17's.

 

[dimsum]

Canada need's to act quickly and add 4 more C-17's.

Why?  Honestly, without sarcasm or ridicule, why?  Unless 429 Sqn is as tasked as 36 Sqn (RAAF) is, then yes.  B/c 36 Sqn is gone a LOT.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

429 Sqn is on the road constantly, from what I can see.

The C17 has got to be the most sought after aircraft in the RCAF. They are endlessly useful in a country the size of ours.

If it was up to me, I would increase the C17 fleet size in Canada, too.

 

[George Wallace]

429 Sqn is on the road constantly, from what I can see.

The C17 has got to be the most sought after aircraft in the RCAF. They are endlessly useful in a country the size of ours.

If it was up to me, I would increase the C17 fleet size in Canada, too.

Along with the recent rise in overseas Deployments within NATO, in assistance to Africa and the Middle East, I would imagine that the current fleet is starting to reach the limits of its availability.  Don't forget the amount of 'down time' required for servicing and maintenance and you can only agree that a few more aircraft would be a great asset.

 

[GAP]

The original ones were bought with the Afghan urgency mindset, not so now....it would take 15 years just to decide on make & model, let alone price............ :

 

[George Wallace]

The original ones were bought with the Afghan urgency mindset, not so now....it would take 15 years just to decide on make & model, let alone price............ :

LOL.....So true.......But with the talks in Parliament currently going on about contributing to fighting ISIL/ISIS in Syria/Iraq.....there may be hope. 

 

[GAP]

LOL.....So true.......But with the talks in Parliament currently going on about contributing to fighting ISIL/ISIS in Syria/Iraq.....there may be hope.

That would be a good argument for buying the A-10's.....just say'in..... ;D

 

[Colin Parkinson]

The C-17 were a dammed good idea and considering the likelihood of the Antov fleet wearing out and not being replaced, I would support buying 2 more as well. Just tell them to build them exactly like the rest of them.

 

[OTR1]

From the article linked by Dimsum;

The RAAF could operate a total fleet of up to 10 Boeing C-17A Globemasters after Defence Minister Senator David Johnston announced on Friday that Australia is to acquire at least two additional C-17s and is considering the acquistion of a further two examples of the heavylift transport.

the Minister said that the government has requested pricing and availability data through the US government’s Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program for a further two C-17s, which would take the total RAAF fleet to 10. Decisions regarding the acquisition of the ninth and tenth aircraft are being informed by the Force Structure Review being develped as part of the 2015 Defence White Paper process........

Am reliably advised that the additional 'white paper' two are more-or-less already OK'd . Standby for a pool of 10, Mr Dimsum, Sir!  8)

 

[observor 69]

The C-17 were a dammed good idea and considering the likelihood of the Antov fleet wearing out and not being replaced, I would support buying 2 more as well. Just tell them to build them exactly like the rest of them.

Couldn't agree more ....  but

Harper..... balanced budget.....2015 election. I'm thinkin' maybe not. 

 

[Loachman]

Maybe, maybe not........

 

[MilEME09]

Couldn't agree more ....  but

Harper..... balanced budget.....2015 election. I'm thinkin' maybe not. 

Well so far everything has been put off till late 2015 or later, take the MSVS SMP project, testing is almost done but we wont get an announced winner until near the end of 2015 and delivery not until 2016. our capital budget was pushed off, so wheres the money to buy the planes? :/

 

[a_majoor]

Couldn't agree more ....  but

Harper..... balanced budget.....2015 election. I'm thinkin' maybe not. 

There are some compelling reasons to purchase more C-17's, ranging from the vast expanse of Canada itself (a tactical move in Canada is about the same as a strategic move in most parts of the world) to the fact that the current fleet of C-17's will all be sent for contractual servicing by Boeing at roughly the same time, putting a big dent in availability. Four more will allow the Air force to know they will always have several C-17's on call.

As for the budget thing, there is no reason to stop the government entering into negotiations to examine purchasing (say) two in 2016 and two more in 2017 or 2018 if it is felt there is a really compelling reason to have 8 (for that matter we can discuss purchasing two a year until we have a fleet of 16, if that is what is really needed).

Too bad Boeing essentially priced themselves out of the market with the ridiculously high per unit price.

 

[dapaterson]

C-17 production ceases in mid 2015, so any additional a/c need to be ordered now. (http://boeing.mediaroom.com/Boeing-Updates-Timing-of-C-17-Production-Line-Closure)

That said, the Canadian fleet will not all go in for servicing at the same time; the fleet managers stagger that sort of work to ensure that there is airlift available.  That said, additional aircraft mean that the periods of reduced availability have a reduced impact on fleet operations.

 

[ringo]

Cancel FWSAR program use funds for C-17's, use legacy Hercs C-130J's Aurora's Griffin's Chinnok's Cyclone's and Cormorant's for SAR.

 

[dimsum]

Cancel FWSAR program use funds for C-17's, use legacy Hercs C-130J's Aurora's Griffin's Chinnok's Cyclone's and Cormorant's for SAR.

 

[ringo]

Certainly always thought FWSAR program was RCAF trying to get more airlift using SAR as cover.

 

[Ostrozac]

Certainly always thought FWSAR program was RCAF trying to get more airlift using SAR as cover.

Isn't the secondary transport role of the new FWSAR aircraft pretty much out in the open without any cover?  None of our current squadrons using FWSAR aircraft even call themselves Rescue Squadrons -- the squadron names all say Transport and Rescue. It's not an undercover transport capability if "TRANSPORT" is painted on the hanger wall in big letters.

By the way -- is Utility Transport Aircraft (the Twin Otter replacement project) going to be rolled in with FWSAR? I heard a rumour to that effect almost a decade ago, specifically the rumour was that Air Command wanted to eliminate the Twin Otter microfleet -- or is that entirely dependant on whether or not the FWSAR aircraft selected is capable of austere operations?

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I would expect there would be political flak for taking out the twin otter fleet, just as Viking is producing new ones. I don't think any of the contenders come close to doing what a twin Otter can do. Now if you built a brand new Buff then you could role the 2 functions into one aircraft.