Will the C17s Make it to the Ramp?

[Globesmasher]

....... what you meant by the old way versus the new way?  and thank God for that.

With the old ways flying the CC-130, if we lose an engine of a vital part at some remote location ... we need to phone home to Trenton.  They then scramble trying to find a spare part and an MRT (Maintenance Repair Team).  Then they have to scramble to find a serviceable aircraft and an available crew at no notice.  Then they have to get it all together and fly that lot out to the "broken down" location.

As an example ... back in '98 I lost an engine coming out of Bangui, Central African Repbulic.  I cruised back to Abidjan, Ivory Coast.  I then spent 17 days on the ground in Abidjan while this whole MRT process took place.  It takes a couple of days for home base to react, then a few days to get out to where we are, a few days to repair the broken aircraft, and then a few more days to fly home.  Too long and expensive despite the very best efforts of the maintainers to get us up and running again.

Those old days and old ways will now be few and far between.

 

[Globesmasher]

By the way I ran across this nice C-17 pic.

Ohh that's an awful photo!!! 
That's one of the new block 17s that Hickam just got last year.

Shows you what can go wrong when a TR (thrust reverser) mafunctions ... !!!  yikes.
Sometimes brand new doesn't mean it's perfect!! Yikes.

 

[Astrodog]

Is that a compressor stall?

 

[eurowing]

It's just a wee compressor stall.  Don't be a baby.   ;D

I am quite curious about the maintenence that CF maintainers will get to do on the CC-177.  I envision techs being limited to generic servicing tasks.... everything else out the door to specialists and eventually we will be called crew chiefs...  nice title for a servicing tech.  I hope this won't be the case.

 

[Globesmasher]

For those who doubt the "tactical capabilities" of the aircraft ... here's a link of a couple of articles that The Maple Leaf asked of me back in 2003/2004:

While I hate the media, The Maple Leaf didn't quote me out of context nor does it have a hidden socialist agenda ....

http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/news/2003/10/01b_e.asp
http://www.airforce.forces.gc.ca/news/2003/10/01_e.asp

 

[Globesmasher]

It's just a wee compressor stall.  Don't be a baby.   ;D

I am quite curious about the maintenence that CF maintainers will get to do on the CC-177.  I envision techs being limited to generic servicing tasks.... everything else out the door to specialists and eventually we will be called crew chiefs...  nice title for a servicing tech.  I hope this won't be the case.

Our techs will only do first line maintenance on the aircraft.  Second and third line will go back down to the "vendor", Boeing as is part of the contract stipulation.

 

[observor 69]

Globesmasher

From this retired Avionics tech many thanks for taking the time to provide the info and comments on this exciting new aircraft.

I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Per ardua ad astra

 

[IN HOC SIGNO]

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2007/q1/070202d_nr.html

Here's a link to Boeing with "Canadian" C17 pic......

Wow nice pic...and the Parliament bldgs right below...I'm feeling very patriotic.

 

[Rigger]

Looks like a nice aircraft, to bad there is no job for a FE on her (Maybe in the future...). Just wait for A4 Maint to get there fingers in the pie, with there P "0" series CFTOs. Maintenance is going to come to grinding halt/slow down with all the hoops that the techs have to jump through to get qualified. We'll have to buy another aircraft just for tech training.

 

[eurowing]

Rigger, if the techs are trained the American way, not to worry.  It will only be servicing level duties as their idea of first level maint is quite different from ours.  The most complex job might be a tire change. So indepth knowledge needed would be minimal.  I hope I am wrong though.

 

[Meridian]

Goes to show you the size of the US military.. ACcording to Boeing, they operate 160 C-17s right now, to Australias, RAFs and Canadas 4 each otal requirement!

In addition to the 160 C-17s now in service with the U.S. Air Force, the United Kingdom's Royal Air Force operates four C-17s, and the Royal Australian Air Force in late 2006 took delivery of its first of four C-17s.

 

[GAP]

Canada jumps U.S. queue to acquire military jets
Updated Sat. Feb. 3 2007 2:41 PM ET Canadian Press
Article Link

OTTAWA -- The American air force is letting Canada jump the assembly-line queue to acquire four giant Boeing transport planes within about 18 months.

"The United States air force, which has a fairly large order in train at the moment, has allowed us to step into the assembly line so we will get the aircraft quickly," Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor said Friday.

The first Canadian C-17 is expected to arrive by the end of August, with a second by the end of the year and the last two coming in the middle of next year. Under normal conditions, it would take years to build the Canadian order.

The $3.4 billion contract - $1.8 billion for the planes and $1.6 billion for 20 years of spares and maintenance - will be a windfall for Canadian industry, said Public Works Minister Michael Fortier and Industry Minister Maxime Bernier .

They said Boeing and Pratt and Whitney, maker of the plane's engines, have agreed to invest the face value of the contract in Canada and the benefits will boost defence and aerospace firms across the country.

Neither minister would offer any regional breakdown of the benefits, saying Boeing will be announcing a number of deals in the coming weeks.
More on link

 

[Astrodog]

Don't know if this has been asked, but how many pilots will be needed for 4 airframes? Looks like I'm missing the big influx by a few years  :crybaby:

 

[Globesmasher]

Don't know if this has been asked, but how many pilots will be needed for 4 airframes? Looks like I'm missing the big influx by a few years  :crybaby:

16 crews = 32 pilots and about 24 loadmasters.

 

[Astrodog]

Gollee that was a quick reply! Thanks globe... I still can't believe these things are actually coming online, and so fast! Great recruiting tool for guys like me.. nothing like a new piece of kit to help motivate!

 

[geo]

tough thing will be to keep pilots trained on the big birds in uniform............

After getting qualified on these multi engined behemoths, major airlienes will be knocking on doors.

 

[Globesmasher]

Looks like a nice aircraft, to bad there is no job for a FE on her (Maybe in the future...). Just wait for A4 Maint to get there fingers in the pie, with there P "0" series CFTOs. Maintenance is going to come to grinding halt/slow down with all the hoops that the techs have to jump through to get qualified. We'll have to buy another aircraft just for tech training.

There will be NO Flight Engineer on-board the C-17 / CC-177, just as there is no FE on-board the Airbus A310.  This is not meant as any sort of professional "slight" or "slam", but merely a statement of fact.  In addition, the position of the FE on-board the CC-130J (ACP-T) is also up for debate, but I would not put any money on there being an FE on-board the J either.

We will not be using any "CFTO" in the classic sense.  As part of the JUG and the GSP we will be adopting the Boeing Tech Orders as they are, no changes and no adaptations or anything.  Unlike the CC-130 world, we will not be taking "Lockheed manuals" and turning them into CFTOs.  There is no point re-inventing the wheel.  We will simply have to learn how to adapt to using a new type of wheel.

There will be no tech training done on any static aircraft.  All their training is accomplished in the USA and they return to Canada fully qualified.  With only four aircraft we will not be able to have a perfectly serviceable aircraft parked on the ramp for tech training.  Again, this is not meant to spark heated debate - just a mere statement of fact.  In much the same way the aircrew (pilots) will NOT be using the aircraft to do routine quarterly basic flying training - they'll be doing that in the simulator.

This aircraft marks a whole new paradigm shift in terms of how we use aircraft and how we train our aircrew and maintenance technicians.

The old days are gone - not saying these new days are going to be any better or not - they're just going to be different.

 

[Globesmasher]

tough thing will be to keep pilots trained on the big birds in uniform............

After getting qualified on these multi engined behemoths, major airlienes will be knocking on doors.

Granted - it will be a very marketable asset on a resume for the airlines, but the ongoing hiring boom has (currently and historically) taken pilots from all disciplines ... transport, the Maritime Patrol world and also the fighter community.  A great deal hinges on the "interview" and the personality of the individual being hired, but "heavy, multi-engine, glass cockpit" time sure looks good on a resume there is no debating that.

 

[Astrodog]

Globesmasher,

Could you elaborate on what quarterly basic flight training consists of? Is sim time loggable? Just trying to get an idea of how many hours will be spent in the sims as compared to actual seat time..

 

[Globesmasher]

Goes to show you the size of the US military.. ...... they operate 160 C-17s right now,

Their final order will put their fleet at 180 in total.  USAF AMC wanted 220 in their original order, but Congress reduced the order (yes, they too are under going cutbacks and reductions) to 180.

That was actually good news for us since Boeing then went on a marketing spree and offered a price reduction in order to get other people (Australia and Canada) to purchase.  The USAF is still trying to get their order increased back to the original 220 and is lobbying hard .... but these are expensive aircraft.

Another indicator of the size of the USAF is the fact that they operate in excess of 500 C-130s as compared to our 32 .... now 28 since we have mothballed 4.