RUMINT of Canada wanting more C-17's

[ringo]

Why not Kawasaki C2?

 

[lenaitch]

Why not Kawasaki C2?

About 1/2 the size.

 

[lenaitch]

Fire up the AN-124 line again!

Well, I think there's one still chillin' at Toronto Pearson.

 

[my72jeep]

Well, I think there's one still chillin' at Toronto Pearson.

Didn’t Canada give that to Ukraine?

 

[Seyek]

Didn’t Canada give that to Ukraine?

Not sure where that situation stands legally, but I'm pretty sure I saw it the other week driving by still sitting there.

 

[GR66]

Not sure where that situation stands legally, but I'm pretty sure I saw it the other week driving by still sitting there.

It was still there last Thursday when we flew out of Pearson

 

[Maxman1]

Didn’t Canada give that to Ukraine?

We gave Toronto Pearson Airport to Ukraine?

 

[Good2Golf]

We gave Toronto Pearson Airport to Ukraine?

We should give it to the Russians…that would shut the war down within a few hours…

 

[lenaitch]

We should give it to the Russians…that would shut the war down within a few hours…

Better still, get the Canadian government to run Russia's military procurement.

 

[GK .Dundas]

Better still, get the Canadian government to run Russia's military procurement.

Wow ! You REALLY hate the Russians that much ?
That's just cruel.

 

[MilEME09]

we'll take 20

Paris Air Show 2025: Boeing confirms “very early infancy” C-17 Globemaster III production restart discussions as European market opportunity looms | Shephard

The discussion of the C-17 comes off the back of Boeing’s focus on a growing European demand for defence equipment amid a growing threat on the continent.

www.shephardmedia.com

 

[ytz]

we'll take 20

Paris Air Show 2025: Boeing confirms “very early infancy” C-17 Globemaster III production restart discussions as European market opportunity looms | Shephard

The discussion of the C-17 comes off the back of Boeing’s focus on a growing European demand for defence equipment amid a growing threat on the continent.

www.shephardmedia.com

We bought half a squadron. Maybe we can finally get a full squadron like the UK and AUS and India...

 

[GR66]

We bought half a squadron. Maybe we can finally get a full squadron like the UK and AUS and India...

IF production of C-17's should actually restart I'd suggest that significantly expanding our fleet would be one of the best contributions to NATO/the Indo-Pacific that we could make. Strategic logistics support is definitely an area where the non-US West is seriously lacking. Two squadrons (one active and one Reserve) would make us very popular with our allies.

 

[captloadie]

While getting more C-17s would be an extreme benefit for the CAF, what would we decide not to do in order to train and man a full Squadron or 2? The RCAF is tapped out as it is, so we'd need to look at other L1 activities divest in order to bring this expanded capability on. Would the CA give up 100-200 positions to benefit the increased Strat capability?

A Reserve Sqn would likely never get off the ground, both figuratively and literally. Qualified commercial airline pilots would never have enough flight hours available to do both jobs based on the type of flying we do with the C-17 (long haul strat lift). We'd also never get the techs or LMs needed, as the reason most leave the Reg F is they want more pay and less military BS, or are literally too broken to continue to do the job. There also isn't the same mentality here in Canada as in the US to support an Air National Guard type organization.

 

[Halifax Tar]

While getting more C-17s would be an extreme benefit for the CAF, what would we decide not to do in order to train and man a full Squadron or 2? The RCAF is tapped out as it is, so we'd need to look at other L1 activities divest in order to bring this expanded capability on. Would the CA give up 100-200 positions to benefit the increased Strat capability?

A Reserve Sqn would likely never get off the ground, both figuratively and literally. Qualified commercial airline pilots would never have enough flight hours available to do both jobs based on the type of flying we do with the C-17 (long haul strat lift). We'd also never get the techs or LMs needed, as the reason most leave the Reg F is they want more pay and less military BS, or are literally too broken to continue to do the job. There also isn't the same mentality here in Canada as in the US to support an Air National Guard type organization.

All very fair questions. I think some sacred cows would be well worth sacrificing for more strat air lift capability.

I think giving us the ability to get more sustainment easily is easily worth at least one RCD and a CDC. I am sure the NWO and Ops Room gods all just clutched their pearls.

 

[GR66]

While getting more C-17s would be an extreme benefit for the CAF, what would we decide not to do in order to train and man a full Squadron or 2? The RCAF is tapped out as it is, so we'd need to look at other L1 activities divest in order to bring this expanded capability on. Would the CA give up 100-200 positions to benefit the increased Strat capability?

A Reserve Sqn would likely never get off the ground, both figuratively and literally. Qualified commercial airline pilots would never have enough flight hours available to do both jobs based on the type of flying we do with the C-17 (long haul strat lift). We'd also never get the techs or LMs needed, as the reason most leave the Reg F is they want more pay and less military BS, or are literally too broken to continue to do the job. There also isn't the same mentality here in Canada as in the US to support an Air National Guard type organization.

Strategic airlift to my mind is VERY high on the list of priorities for the CAF and GOC so yes, I'd be happy to give up 100-200 positions elsewhere to expand that capability. As as for a "Reserve" squadron it doesn't necessarily have to be Reserve as in the sense of an additional active Squadron conducting regular operations using Reservists but more as a Squadron in Reserve for use when we need it in time of crisis. Rotate use of the aircraft to minimize the flight hours on each to keep them longer.

We might need to look at the way we treat Reserve pilots for our airlift needs to better suit surge needs as opposed to maintaining ongoing currency. As for the techs we need to do a better job of keeping and growing the trades to cover potential conflict needs. They are a valuable asset that we've invested in and we should do what is necessary (specialty pay, resigning bonuses, whatever) in order to make military positions more desirable.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I think any time we invest in more air or sea lift capability its a good thing and will pay dividends. The problem is its not cool.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

At least buy enough to replace every aircraft we currently have, then mothball the older ones at one of those US bases for mothballed aircraft. If we can grow the number of pilots and maintainers, then start pulling them out one at a time, get them refurbished and bring them back into service.

 

[Kirkhill]

Strategic airlift to my mind is VERY high on the list of priorities for the CAF and GOC so yes, I'd be happy to give up 100-200 positions elsewhere to expand that capability. As as for a "Reserve" squadron it doesn't necessarily have to be Reserve as in the sense of an additional active Squadron conducting regular operations using Reservists but more as a Squadron in Reserve for use when we need it in time of crisis. Rotate use of the aircraft to minimize the flight hours on each to keep them longer.

We might need to look at the way we treat Reserve pilots for our airlift needs to better suit surge needs as opposed to maintaining ongoing currency. As for the techs we need to do a better job of keeping and growing the trades to cover potential conflict needs. They are a valuable asset that we've invested in and we should do what is necessary (specialty pay, resigning bonuses, whatever) in order to make military positions more desirable.

How about having the aircraft flown by RCAF types that fly a desk in peace time?