Harper government may face rough ride over military purchase

[MarkOttawa]

Cdn Blackshirt:

WTF is that?

A smear obviously--you know, like those "American-style" SUVs the RCMP are now using in the PM's protective detail.
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/politics/story.html?id=9d545fe4-c050-4a6b-ba16-72fde9a5fdad&k=70961

Most of our media have what is called an "agenda".

Mark
Ottawa

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Good Lord.

Just...buy...the...friggin...airplanes...already!!

Perfect is the enemey of good enough.  And after 13 years of dithering on this (and most other defence projects) we have pretty much run out of room to "explore other options".  We are in a corner, procurement-wise on airlift.  We either buy this year or next, or the whole TAL house of cards collapses.  It's that simple.

Cheers.

 

[Pendant]

yea i agree, if we dont get these pronto then we will be without another capability in the near future, buy them and get them here as soon as possible is what im sayin

 

[MarkOttawa]

Does anyone really think the A400M will be delivered on time (and on budget)?

Airbus warns of expensive, new A380 production delays

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060614.RAIRBUS14/TPStory/Business

'Airbus SAS revealed new delays of at least six months in deliveries of its A380 superjumbo yesterday, in an embarrassing new setback expected to blow a €2-billion ($2.8-billion) cash hole in parent EADS NV starting in 2007.

The European plane maker said it will still deliver the first aircraft to Singapore Airlines Ltd. in 2006, but will slow down deliveries from next year onwards because of problems with the installation of electrical wiring harnesses.

"We have had an industrial delay. It will shift the program to the right by six to seven months," said John Leahy, Airbus' chief commercial officer...

Airbus upset airlines earlier in the A380 production cycle by announcing a six-month delay in deliveries after insisting that the program was running to schedule...'

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Enzo]

Does anyone really think the A400M will be delivered on time (and on budget)?

Nope to both. As was pointed out prior, the C-17 is tried, tested, currently integral with vital allies and available. What is the issue aside from politics?

 

[Bobbyoreo]

I really hope they just buy them and get them...this has dragged on way too long.

 

[Pendant]

whats new though, every procurement project in the past 30 years has dragged on far to long

 

[Bobbyoreo]

Well lets try something new...cause the old way aint working!!!

 

[Colin Parkinson]

It’s simple, just post that anyone interested in selling us a Heavy lift aircraft has 1 month to have an in production aircraft on the tarmac in Trenton to carry a load of supplies (greater than a Herc capacity)  to Afghanistan, in a limited time and return to Trenton. Competitors will be chosen from successful participants. 

That means it will be the Russians and the C-17, at the very worst we will get some supplies delivered for free.

 

[Hebridean]

A thought.  All this opppostion talk on the planes is simply opposition talk.  Last November you had Gordon O'Connor saying the same stuff on how we need a bidding proccess- the roles now are simply reversed.  The opposition is not going to agree with the government even if it is a good idea.  This is a debate for the sake of a debate.  I do think it is interesting the the four C-17's will likely be the first to be purchased since they are strategic airlift.  However, the funny thing in Canada is that  tactical airlift is employed strategically so it might be better to get a bunch of C-130 J's first since out CF pilots are already quite familiar with the aircraft by virtue of using their older brothers. With regard to the C-17's how come there has not been consideration to using civilian cargo aircraft? Do we really need the C-17's?  I mean you can carry alot of stuff on a 747 Cargo plane why is this not being considered?  Why not steal (nationalize them for national security purposes)  some planes from Air Canada and paint them green or blue and use them as strategic airlift until we replace the workhorse of the Airforce -the mighty Hercules? 

 

[Bob Terwilliger]

Check out http://www.sfu.ca/casr/id-strategicair.htm for an eye opening comparison (capabilities and costs) between the AN 24 and the C 17. The C 17 will cost a lot more than what is being reported.

 

[Armymatters]

Check out http://www.sfu.ca/casr/id-strategicair.htm for an eye opening comparison (capabilities and costs) between the AN 24 and the C 17. The C 17 will cost a lot more than what is being reported.

With the Antonov, spare parts availability is an issue. For example, the Germans had trouble getting spare parts for their MiG-29 fleet and they are down the road from Russia (hence the reason why the Germans got rid of their MiG's). We may end up with a grounded Antonov fleet right when we need them.

 

[Bob Terwilliger]

I tend to agree with you. The AN 124 would not be my first choice, but the article does illustrate the real cost of leasing or buying C 17s. Perhaps an upgraded IL 76,  with western avionics and engines, may be a cost efficient alternative.

 

[George Wallace]

I tend to agree with you. The AN 124 would not be my first choice, but the article does illustrate the real cost of leasing or buying C 17s. Perhaps an upgraded IL 76,  with western avionics and engines, may be a cost efficient alternative.

We have been covering this discussion in detail in another Topic.

 

[Kirkhill]

Further to GW's:

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/37145.0.html
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/44825.0.html
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/41184.0.html
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/23889.0.html
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/32015.0.html
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/36075.0.html

And of course, this

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/44423.0.html

 

[FSTO]

Check out http://www.sfu.ca/casr/id-strategicair.htm for an eye opening comparison (capabilities and costs) between the AN 24 and the C 17. The C 17 will cost a lot more than what is being reported.

SFU has decided that it will fall on its sword regarding the C17. My personnel choice is that we should stay away from European machinery in general and Russian equipment in particular. The Navy's experience with French engines in its ships have been a costly problem for years. We all breathed a heavy sigh relief when we found out that the ORCA's would be equipped with CAT Marine Diesels.

 

[GK .Dundas]

SFU has decided that it will fall on its sword regarding the C17. My personnel choice is that we should stay away from European machinery in general and Russian equipment in particular. The Navy's experience with French engines in its ships have been a costly problem for years. We all breathed a heavy sigh relief when we found out that the ORCA's would be equipped with CAT Marine Diesels.

I am at the point where I really want to know who is really funding the SFU Webpage?They have this incredible attraction to Russian made gear  to the point it almost seems obsessive.

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

CASR is the bright-ideas gang.  Too many copies of Jane's and Air Forces Monthly and not enough experience...  IMHO, of course.

 

[Nemo888]

One thing for certain. If a car salesman knew he was the only game in town you would pay through the nose for his vehicles. The more noise about buying Russian equipment the better

 

[Teddy Ruxpin]

The more noise about buying Russian equipment the better

Have you read any of the threads on this subject?  :