Will the C17s Make it to the Ramp?

[C1Dirty]

Globesmasher

Just curious as to whether or not the UK's plans will push our initial delivery further to the right (assuming a Feb signing) or did tail P-180 already take that into account? 

 

[geo]

Considering that the Liberals & Mr Graham were working on the C17, the Chinooks and the 130Js before the Conservatives came to power, it doesn't make any sense that these same projects would go down the tubes on the next political go-round.

New MBTs are not on the table right now - not even worth discussing at this time.

 

[C1Dirty]

Considering that the Liberals & Mr Graham were working on the C17

J's, Chinooks and FWSAR yes, but favoured leasing our strat lift based on fiscal restraints as I remember it.

In any event, hopefully things don't  get pushed back any further.

 

[rmacqueen]

Considering that the Liberals & Mr Graham were working on the C17, the Chinooks and the 130Js before the Conservatives came to power, it doesn't make any sense that these same projects would go down the tubes on the next political go-round.

Might not make sense but you can be guaranteed that if they believe than can make political points they would kill it in a second.

 

[geo]

yeah.... something like the Conservatives with Kyoto

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

yeah.... something like the Conservatives with Kyoto

Apples and Oranges....

The Conservative Party has been against the Kyoto Accord for years based on legitimate reasoning that they've presented ad nauseum.

The Liberal Party cancelling the C-17's would be based on scoring cheap points from ignorant left-leaning citizens and not based on legitimate reasoning of any sort. 


Matthew. 

 

[GO!!!]

What we need to do in the CF is sell this stuff to the public properly via the PAffOs.

"the C17 will no longer be referred to as 'strategic lift', instead being permanently known as an HAT(A) - Humanitarian Aid Transport (Air) you will notice the paratroopers jumping out of the brand new HAT(A) - their heavy rucksacks laden with ...... aid!"

 

[gaspasser]

Apples and Oranges....

The Conservative Party has been against the Kyoto Accord for years based on legitimate reasoning that they've presented ad nauseum.

The Liberal Party cancelling the C-17's would be based on scoring cheap points from ignorant left-leaning citizens and not based on legitimate reasoning of any sort. 

Matthew. 

The EH101 was cancelled for same silly political claptrap reasons.  Maybe more misplaced persons would be alive today if we had the Cormorant or EH101 or equivelant (and Aircrew / SAR Techs) back then. 

RIP 113315

 

[Globesmasher]

Just curious as to whether or not the UK's plans will push our initial delivery further to the right (assuming a Feb signing) or did tail P-180 already take that into account? 

Nope.

Even after initial contract talks with Boeing and the US Govt back in Jan 2006, our aircraft (based on a June 07 delivery) slotted in well with the overall plan for the USA, UK and Australia.  This also included the proposed "NATO buy" as well - which only existed at that time as an etherial thought.  Strangely enough, our 4 aircraft actually bumped the USAF delivery plans back a little bit - we cut in front of some of the Dover, McGuire and Travis aircraft .... however we were bumped off the Northrup-Gruman LAIRCM "Nemesis" line - the USAF would not let us cut to the front on that one - but no big deal.

Let's all hope now for a Jan- Feb 2007 signing so that we can take delivery of our first tail in Oct 2007 (tail P-180) and get on with the job.

Here's hoping ......

 

[Globesmasher]

Considering that the Liberals & Mr Graham were working on the C17, the Chinooks and the 130Js before the Conservatives came to power, .....

Definitely NOT.

The Liberal Govt, under the former PM Paul Martin, only approved $4.6 billion funding from the Treasury Board for 17 tails of the C-130J.  This did not occur until Nov 2005 when a CF team was very quickly thrown together (to make up and ad-hoc DAR/PMO team) at short notice and told to "... go buy 17 x J models .... NOW".

The federal election results in Jan 2006 changed all that ............ the $4.6 billion was diverted to the ACP-T project which aimed at the Herc replacement and continued to focus on the 17 x C-130 J models from Lockheed ... and then ACP-S was stood up in Jan 06 and given $3 billion to begin looking at 4 tails of the Boeing C-17.

The C-17 was NEVER on the Liberal shopping list.  Probably safe to say that it still isn't.  The Lockheed C-130 J was in the works prior to the 2006 election and I am sure that ACP-T will remain safe in Liberal hands  :-\  .... but not the C-17 project.

I can't speak for the Chinook program - I know nothing about it.

 

[Allen]

The Liberal gov't didn't select the Chinook explicitly, but the requirement for the "medium-to-heavy lift helicopter" mentioned in the 2005 DPS and subsequent budget was supposedly crafted with the Chinnok in mind.

 

[geo]

globemashed....
Might have gotten it wrong.  Believe that MND Graham was pushing for the C17s.  Might not have been a budget item but something the MND agreed with CDS was something we required.

 

[Globesmasher]

Believe that MND Graham was pushing for the C17s.  Might not have been a budget item but something the MND agreed with CDS was something we required.

Nope.

Trust me on this one.  I was "summoned" to Ottawa one cold and grey, rainy day to stand tall in my "Sunday best" and address various Defence and Commons committees and "present" the C-17.  Someone else presented the C-130 J model.. Each of us was presenting based on our exchange experiences on the two aircraft.

Everybody agreed ..... towards the end of Nov 05 .... that the J model was the way to go and money was made immediately and readily available.  The C-17 and "strat lift" was dismissed by both the Minister, Deputy Minister and several Generals, both blue and green.

The C-17 did not gain foothold or traction until the election when it was pushed by the new Conservative Govt - and it was basically "thrust upon us" whether we liked it or not.  However, none of us were going to look a gift horse in the mouth ...... money was still going towards the Herc replacement and now we suddenly had funding for another capital project.

This is first hand info .... I have been way too involved in these two projects since summer/late fall 2005.  From McCallum through to Graham .... none of them and no Liberal wanted the C-17.  This project has been a real shock to one and all ..... A spring election will put this project on very thin ice. 

 

[MarkOttawa]

MoD pins hopes on Boeing C17 amid Airbus doubts
The Times, Dec. 28
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,5-2520962,00.html

The Ministry of Defence is facing a new procurement crisis as it tries to boost the strength of its heavy transport aircraft.

As fears grow that the delivery schedule for Airbus’s rival transport aircraft will slip further, The Times has learnt that the MoD is planning to buy three Boeing C17 Globemaster IIIs for about $660 million (£337 million). But its plans are threatened by the potential closure of the C17 production line in the United States...

...Airbus was supposed to start to deliver the A400M this year, but the date slipped to 2008. Several analysts believe that 2009 or 2010 may be more likely. Airbus, which has been dogged by a two-year delay to its civil A380 project, denied that there would be further delays.

But note:

Boeing snags $2 billion contract for C-17s
Seattle Times, Dec. 19
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2003484254_bizbriefs19.html

Boeing won a U.S. Air Force contract valued at as much as $2 billion to produce more C-17 transport aircraft.

The award will fund the purchase of 10 aircraft, the U.S. Defense Department said Monday.

The purchase adds to the 180 C-17 aircraft bought by the Air Force and extends production through October 2009, the Pentagon's statement said.

Boeing lobbied to sell as many as 40 more C-17s and had said its Long Beach, Calif., assembly plant might close after 2008 without additional orders.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[GAP]

Opposition MPs to examine aircraft selection process
DANIEL LEBLANC
Article Link

OTTAWA -- Opposition parties will start probing $14-billion in "de facto sole-sourced" military contracts next month, arguing the interests of taxpayers are at risk as the Canadian Forces acquire new planes and helicopters with minimal competitions.

The defence committee of the House of Commons will start its examination in February, after it finishes a study into the current mission in Afghanistan. As part of that investigation, MPs are set to travel to the Canadian base in Kandahar.

Sources said the MPs are ready to leave in the near future, but they have been jokingly warned that they "will be shot" if they reveal details of their travel plans, because of security concerns.

The committee's decision to investigate procurement issues was prompted by Ottawa's decision to buy $11-billion worth of aircraft last year. In each of the cases then, only the winning bids were considered as they were the only products that met the specifications of the Canadian Forces.
More on link

 

[Babbling Brooks]

HAT(A) - Humanitarian Aid Transport (Air)

Loving that line.  I wonder if we could get away with rearranging it a bit, though: Aircraft - Humanitarian Aid Transport so the acronym would be A-HAT.  Just for those who believe the new spun title, of course. 

I'm with the skeptics here: it ain't done until it's done.  A press-conference isn't an aircraft on the ramp.  I sell stuff for a living these days, and I don't count the sale complete until I have money in my hands, and have successfully delivered the product to the customer.  Given the fact that the CF was able to cobble together rented strat-lift and overusing tac-lift for so many years to get the job done (no criticism of the CF there, just of the political masters who refused to buy them better tools), I think the C-17 purchase would be a very convenient one to axe if a new government was looking for money to spend elsewhere.  Especially since it seems to be considered a fourth priority among DND planners (after BHH, tac-lift, and FWSAR).

 

[civmick]

If the industrial benefits aren't agreed, is there provision for a new govt to pull the deal as incomplete, or do a deal with the UK and/or NATO for them to take the slot positions?

 

[Badanai]

I don't know how this threat is going but Here at CFB Trenton everything is going ahead for the arrival of the C-17's the original date was in march it is now moved to June. They is a lot of building construction set to start this year. Projects and proposal have already gone through the fire department for project review. CFB Trenton will be a different looking base than it is now that's for sure.

 

[Globesmasher]

.... is there provision for a new govt to pull the deal as incomplete, or do a deal with the UK and/or NATO for them to take the slot positions?

Nope - not really required.  Due to the demands for the aircraft Boeing is not overly concerned whether or not we actually go ahead and buy the 4 tails we are hoping for ..... if the Govt cancels the deal with Boeing, then the other customers simply slide forward by 4 slots ..

 

[Globesmasher]

They is a lot of building construction set to start this year. Projects and proposal have already gone through the fire department for project review. CFB Trenton will be a different looking base than it is now that's for sure.

Yes, Trenton was appointed as the MOB for the C-17 in a CANAIRGEN back late last year, and the Site Activation Visit took place in late Nov 2006.  8 Wing did very well in general terms.  That being said there are some huge infrastructure modifications and improvements required in order for the Wing to be ready for the C-17, and then the C-130 J .... and then later on the FWSAR platform when it finally arrives.

Concrete should start being poured this Spring to get ready for a summer time delivery of the first C-17.

Huge changes to the firehall will also have to be made (it was a "stopping" issue).  The current fire trucks are too small for the C-17 category of aircraft, and the new trucks won't fit into the current firehall .... huge changes coming and you're absolutely right Cutter .... if the infrastructure overhaul plans go according to what the CF wants ... people won't recognize Trenton in about 5 or 10 years.