- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 60
I wonder what this is going to be about...
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=915869&tp=3
http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=915869&tp=3
Oldgateboatdriver said:I don't understand your calcs, Kirkhill.
If you want to calculate $/tonnes-Km, you have to divide the hourly cost by the number of Km's in an hour and then divide by the number of tonnes on the plane (i will use metric tonnes, since you put the cargo capacity in Kgs - which is 1,000 kg to a tonne)
This means that:
C-17: $23,279 / 830 / 72.6 = $0.39 $/tonnes-Km.
C-130: $13,644 / 657 / 21.7 = $0.96/tonnes-Km.
The C-17 wins again, even for weight.
Kirkhill said:You're right. I was wrong. Trying to be too clever by half. :-[
http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/ottawa-to-buy-5th-c-17-aircraft-1.2155642Ottawa to buy 5th C-17 aircraft
CTV News
19 Dec 2014
Ottawa has procured another C-17 military transport aircraft, bringing the total number of C-17s in the Royal Canadian Air Force's fleet to five.
Defence Minister Rob Nicholson announced the purchase of the Boeing-made plane on Friday at Canadian Forces Base Trenton
He said the additional C-17 will ease the burden on the current fleet, and will extend the life expectancy of all five planes by about seven-and-a-half years.
"Having a fifth C-17 will significantly augment the flexibility of the Canadian Armed Forces strategic airlift," Nicholson said.
The C-17 Globemaster III – which in Canada is designated as the CC-177 Globemaster III -- is a four-engine long-haul aircraft that can transport large equipment, supplies and troops directly to small airfields anywhere in the world, according to Boeing.
It has a carrying capacity of nearly 75,000 kilograms and has been used in cargo deliveries since the 1990s.
Gen. Tom Lawson, chief of the defence staff, said in a statement that the massive planes allow the military to remain flexible, as they can perform several different operations on short notice.
The Department of Defence said the acquisition project cost (meaning the cost of the plane during its entire lifespan) is estimated at $415 million, with an additional $30 million for 12 years of in-service support.
With the purchase of the additional plane, it is estimated that the RCAF will have at least three C-17s available more than 90 per cent of the time to respond to any type of international or domestic crises, Nicholson said in a statement.
Currently, Canada's C-17s are being used to ferry supplies to Canadian Forces in Kuwait who are participating in Operation Impact. They have also been used to deliver supplies to Canada's CF-18s, which are stationed in Lithuania and taking part in Operation Reassurance in response to the crisis in Ukraine.
The planes have also been used in humanitarian operations, such as in 2013, when they were used to support French troops fighting in Mali.
In addition to Canada, the plane is currently used by the U.S., U.K., Kuwait, Australia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.
Bearpaw said:From the announcement of the decision to buy a fifth C-17, it was noted that this would extend the fleet life by 7.5 years. A little math will show that this implies an expected life of 37.5 years per aircraft(in a fleet of 5 assuming constant utilization rate). A sixth aircraft would extend this to 45 years per aircraft(using constant utilization rate)----this is much more in line with how the CAF/RCAF
has used its initial Hercules fleet. For an expected readiness of at least 90% for 5 aircraft, a seventh aircraft would be highly recommended.
Bearpaw
Different accounting standards.whiskey601 said:How is it that Australia can but 4 C17 with full life cycle cost of 1.6billion AD and we can buy 1 for 1.5Billion CAD?
E.R. Campbell said:Good decision ... let's hope there's room for a 6th C-17 in FY 15/16, and that there's still a "white tail" left.
whiskey601 said:How is it that Australia can but 4 C17 with full life cycle cost of 1.6billion AD and we can buy 1 for 1.5Billion CAD?
Bearpaw said:From the announcement of the decision to buy a fifth C-17, it was noted that this would extend the fleet life by 7.5 years. A little math will show that this implies an expected life of 37.5 years per aircraft(in a fleet of 5 assuming constant utilization rate). A sixth aircraft would extend this to 45 years per aircraft(using constant utilization rate)----this is much more in line with how the CAF/RCAF
has used its initial Hercules fleet. For an expected readiness of at least 90% for 5 aircraft, a seventh aircraft would be highly recommended.
Bearpaw
HB_Pencil said:This typical breakdown for the fleet state at any one time:
one for heavy maintenence
one for training
one in "reserve"
one on operations.
So Canada only has one aircraft available to do actual operations.
SupersonicMax said:I don't think HB_Pencil says there are actual "training" and "reserve" assignment, but rather saying that in general, this is the breakdown of missions for the aircraft at any given time. Obviously subject to change with the operationnal tempo...
bradley247 said:Not quite...Without getting too much into specifics, there is no such aircraft allocation, and it's not uncommon for the majority of the fleet to be operationally employed on any given day (YFR permitting).