Will the C17s Make it to the Ramp?
- Thread starter C1Dirty
- Start date
- Status
- Reaction score
- 16,446
- Points
- 1,010
I'm not a "truckie", but I am in the Air Force.
From what I have been able to gather from some really good sources that I trust, the C-17 is a done deal. In fact, it will likely beat the Cyclone to the flight line by well over a year (jealous...).
I'm not sure what has prompted this question. Even if an election is forced this spring and the Conservatives lose, why would another Party cancel an aircraft that is set to arrive in only a few months? Essentially, the money has been spent; the crew training is done; your new government now gets to reap the political rewards of sending a flashy new airplane all over Canada and the Globe doing newsworthy things, at no political cost (keeping in mind, purchasing transport aircraft is about the least politically risky thing a government can do in Canada, anyway)
From what I have been able to gather from some really good sources that I trust, the C-17 is a done deal. In fact, it will likely beat the Cyclone to the flight line by well over a year (jealous...).
I'm not sure what has prompted this question. Even if an election is forced this spring and the Conservatives lose, why would another Party cancel an aircraft that is set to arrive in only a few months? Essentially, the money has been spent; the crew training is done; your new government now gets to reap the political rewards of sending a flashy new airplane all over Canada and the Globe doing newsworthy things, at no political cost (keeping in mind, purchasing transport aircraft is about the least politically risky thing a government can do in Canada, anyway)
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
Normally I would agree with what you said SKT but we are talking about politicians, so common sense does necessarily come into play. When you look at the EH101, it seemed like a done deal too until the media and the liberals suddenly made it an issue. I don't count on new equipment I see it with a Canadian flag on it.
- Reaction score
- 16,446
- Points
- 1,010
While I agree that we can never actually count on an aircraft being purchased until the "rubber is on the ramp", I 'm pretty sure, no matter who forms the next government, that at least 4 C-17s will be owned and operated by the CF for the next few years. I do not believe that the EH-101 paradigm exists, here. The country is not running a deficit; there is actually cross-party support for increased defence spending. Heavy transports can do all sorts of handy things- not only can they fly tanks half way around the world, they can also fly aid supplies half way around the world. There is something for every political stripe, here.
I think there's considerably more public awareness/support of the military these days so the downside to cancelling the recent equipment buys would likely have any new government concerned. If the deals have been signed any attempt to bail would likely cost hundreds of millions in penalties, for nothing, so I'd imagine it'd be pretty hard to do these days. The Libs have enough
scandals to atone for without anything new added.
scandals to atone for without anything new added.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
I hope you are right but, like I said, when politics is involved, logic goes out the window. If they even smell the possibility of controversy over this I have no doubt the Liberals would run with it. What did it cost to cancel the 101? $700-800 million? And the 101 was not even an issue until it looked like an election was coming.
Standard election platform is to tear apart incumbent's policies. C17's price tag makes it a big target.
Don't think so. I think all that has happened so far is that the C17 has been identified as the a/c the gov intends to purchase. I could very well be wrong, but I don't think a contract has been signed with Boeing.
I don't mean to sound like a naysayer, just that yesterday's leadership race and the latest polls got me thinking. Hopefully SKT is right.
Had to weigh in on this one. We are talking about the Liberal Party here. I assume that we are making an assumption that there is a Spring election and the Liberals under Dion get into power. this is a guy that was brought into politics by Chretien. He is a Liberal. He is a Qebecois. His constitiuency is not the members of the CF and he knows that the public does not care at all about the CF (bitter medicine to swallow but true). If he thinks he can score political points to gain extra support somewhere to cancel the deal then it will be cancelled. There is no political reason not to? Ask yourselves the question. "What political damage could be the result of such a move?" The Liberals looked at C-17's and decided against them. Too much money. The birds didn't get any cheaper so they will still be seen as too much money. And besides what would stop them from cancelling the balance of the order? We may end up with only one or two of them. And then in a few years they could be sold off as an orphan fleet that is too expensive to operate. This is all speculation but not entirely unimaginable under yet another Liberal government.
..and besides he is probably the best person for the Conservatives to run against.
..and besides he is probably the best person for the Conservatives to run against.
- Reaction score
- 16,446
- Points
- 1,010
C1dirty-
Why the particular fixation on the C-17 purchase? Why not also include the JSS and the Chinook buy? Or even the Cyclone- after all, it hasn't been delivered; it is worth about $4 billion and could be walked away from too, using your logic?
I am making an assumption, based on your forum name, that you have some connection to the C-130 world. Instead of me trying answer your questions about rumours you have heard, why don't you tell us what you know. I have a feeling that there is more to you than you have been willing to share, so far...
Am I getting warm?
Why the particular fixation on the C-17 purchase? Why not also include the JSS and the Chinook buy? Or even the Cyclone- after all, it hasn't been delivered; it is worth about $4 billion and could be walked away from too, using your logic?
I am making an assumption, based on your forum name, that you have some connection to the C-130 world. Instead of me trying answer your questions about rumours you have heard, why don't you tell us what you know. I have a feeling that there is more to you than you have been willing to share, so far...
Am I getting warm?
I feel that if Dion gets in, bye bye C17s, C130Js, Chinooks, new ships & Gen Hillier. Chertien commented a few years ago that "we do not need great big plane parking on airport". They are gone!!!!!!!! New tanks, forget it, and I am willing to bet that when (not if) Dion pulls us out of A-Stan, he leaves the Loes there to rot.... With us outta A-Stan, he will tell Canadians we do not need these things, or any new defence spending. Can even cut it futher, claiming that A-Stan was reason all this $$ went to military.........
These are far closer to arriving than you would think, based upon past drawn-out purchases. People are already being trained on them in order that they can enter operational service immediately.
Should the Lieberals get in next spring, a reversal should be too late even for them unless they want to actually place ads in aviation magazines around the world for brand-new still-in-the-box aeroplanes.
There would be no political benefit for them to cancel this, as the Herc fleet will probably be smaller by a couple of airframes by that time and continuing to shrink (somewhere I have the retirement schedule but I don't think that that's intended for sharing anyway so I won't). Martin got criticized pretty heavily for the inability to deploy DART in a timely fashion following the tsunami a couple of years ago and I doubt that Dion would wish to risk a repeat.
As for the EH101 cost, it was $500M for contract cancellation penalties, and "$800M spent on the programme up to the point at which it was cancelled (the media seem to have forgotten the latter amount) for a total of $1.3B - the first of several "billion-dollar-boondoggles".
Should the Lieberals get in next spring, a reversal should be too late even for them unless they want to actually place ads in aviation magazines around the world for brand-new still-in-the-box aeroplanes.
There would be no political benefit for them to cancel this, as the Herc fleet will probably be smaller by a couple of airframes by that time and continuing to shrink (somewhere I have the retirement schedule but I don't think that that's intended for sharing anyway so I won't). Martin got criticized pretty heavily for the inability to deploy DART in a timely fashion following the tsunami a couple of years ago and I doubt that Dion would wish to risk a repeat.
As for the EH101 cost, it was $500M for contract cancellation penalties, and "$800M spent on the programme up to the point at which it was cancelled (the media seem to have forgotten the latter amount) for a total of $1.3B - the first of several "billion-dollar-boondoggles".
I still see Dion axing them, no doubt. Revert back to using rented AN-24s when needed. Axe all the new equip, divert the $$ somewhere else. Even if they are delivered, sell them to UK, Aussie, or back to the USAF. They will find a home. What we fail to realize here is that libs think small. They do not want us to have great equipment and capabilities because when folks came knocking and asking for help we would not have a ready made excuse (our military is not equipped to help you).
I HOPE I AM WRONG, I really do. If the military does not get some new kit soon we will collapes. Just think, we will need to replace F18`s soon, the LAV3s`with be old before we know it. In a normal military, the project to replace the new Sea King replacment should have already started......
I HOPE I AM WRONG, I really do. If the military does not get some new kit soon we will collapes. Just think, we will need to replace F18`s soon, the LAV3s`with be old before we know it. In a normal military, the project to replace the new Sea King replacment should have already started......
If the Liberals came into power, the C-17 purchase is the only big-ticket item I can realistically see them walking away from. But if the contract is signed before that, I think they would just go along with it. Spend no money to buy it, but quietly maintain the capability.
Continuing to short-term lease strategic airlifters, rather than buy, was the favoured option as stated by McCallum & Ujjal Dosanjh. So if a Liberal government cancelled a C-17 buy, they could at least say it was consistent with their policy. But the Liberals announced they would acquire JSS and a Sea King replacement in their 2004 budget. The 2005 budget funded a medium truck & medium helicopter. And Bill Graham announced the C-130 replacement just before the last election. So if they went back on any of these things, they would look more than a little foolish.
Plus, they wouldn't cancel JSS since it will be built in Canada and they want to create vote-getting jobs. Cyclone has been under contract for 2 years and is too far along to cancel. And you have to replace the C-130 & MLVW fleets since they are dying fast and everyone knows it. Delay them any longer and you soon won't be able to deploy anywhere - and everybody would know where to put the blame. Even Liberals don't want that kind of criticism - just like every other gov't, they want to show the flag at the next crisis or disaster, and get the pat on the back that goes along with it.
Continuing to short-term lease strategic airlifters, rather than buy, was the favoured option as stated by McCallum & Ujjal Dosanjh. So if a Liberal government cancelled a C-17 buy, they could at least say it was consistent with their policy. But the Liberals announced they would acquire JSS and a Sea King replacement in their 2004 budget. The 2005 budget funded a medium truck & medium helicopter. And Bill Graham announced the C-130 replacement just before the last election. So if they went back on any of these things, they would look more than a little foolish.
Plus, they wouldn't cancel JSS since it will be built in Canada and they want to create vote-getting jobs. Cyclone has been under contract for 2 years and is too far along to cancel. And you have to replace the C-130 & MLVW fleets since they are dying fast and everyone knows it. Delay them any longer and you soon won't be able to deploy anywhere - and everybody would know where to put the blame. Even Liberals don't want that kind of criticism - just like every other gov't, they want to show the flag at the next crisis or disaster, and get the pat on the back that goes along with it.
- Reaction score
- 16,446
- Points
- 1,010
Ok- this is getting stupid.
Firstly- What election?
Secondly- You have a crystal ball which shows Dion and the Libs winning said still as yet mythical election, for sure, just because they now have a leader?
Thirdly- Rubber will be on the ramp in June 07. The whole C-130 fleet house of cards is so precarious (as I understand it) that if we actually need C-17s to take enough pressure off of the C-130 guys long enough for them to recapitalize with C-130Js. The Libs are going to wipe out Canada's airlift capability- lock, stock and barrel, not accept 4 aircraft from Boeing worth a billion bucks that will already be paid for, just to spite the Cons?
Yeah, it could happen...
IMHO, way too much fearmongering here today.
Firstly- What election?
Secondly- You have a crystal ball which shows Dion and the Libs winning said still as yet mythical election, for sure, just because they now have a leader?
Thirdly- Rubber will be on the ramp in June 07. The whole C-130 fleet house of cards is so precarious (as I understand it) that if we actually need C-17s to take enough pressure off of the C-130 guys long enough for them to recapitalize with C-130Js. The Libs are going to wipe out Canada's airlift capability- lock, stock and barrel, not accept 4 aircraft from Boeing worth a billion bucks that will already be paid for, just to spite the Cons?
Yeah, it could happen...
IMHO, way too much fearmongering here today.
A
aesop081
Guest
SeaKingTacco said:
Right on all counts.
IMHO...the liberals, if there is to be an election.......IF, will be more concerned about taking the Conservatives to task on Kyoto, child care, gun control......then to bother with the CF.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
cdnaviator said:
I see a "domino effect" here though. If the A'stan mission is cancelled/drawn down/re-focussed (pick your "pulling out" synonym), the Libs will without a doubt use the excuse of having no current requirement for the kit as justification to cancel it's purchase.
With a minority conservative government, and the BQ, NDP and Grits all opposed to friendly relations with the US and the war in Afghanistan, I see it turning into an issue of cancelling purchases of US equipment used for Bush's wars :
, than realising the utility of having them for a myriad of different uses. On a somewhat related issue, I remember hearing that the CF could actually turn a profit with the C-17 by using surplus time to move air freight - recouping some of the tremendous costs of the Globemaster - any truth to that?
I am a hardcore airman, but I do think if elected (the libs) before they (C17s) come he'd axe them. Why, we are purchasing equipment based on the need to support operations oversea, not just A-Stan. If we pulled out of A-Stan, no need for some of the newer kit would be their excuse. Can rent AN-24s.
As I said, I pray I am wrong, I want to be wrong here!!! I am also thinking ahead to F18 replacment, the need for escort/attack helos, not going to happen under Dion. But your right, no election has been called, and Dion has not won. It is hard for me to trust libs after living through the CF of the 90's. If it wasn't for the high caliber, dedicated people I have worked with....... I am damm glad to be here now!!!!!!
As I said, I pray I am wrong, I want to be wrong here!!! I am also thinking ahead to F18 replacment, the need for escort/attack helos, not going to happen under Dion. But your right, no election has been called, and Dion has not won. It is hard for me to trust libs after living through the CF of the 90's. If it wasn't for the high caliber, dedicated people I have worked with....... I am damm glad to be here now!!!!!!
- Reaction score
- 114
- Points
- 680
GO!!! said:
A good point. I watched M. Chretien's speech yesterday with some interest as to exactly what he would have to say on the matter. I have been unable to find a transcript on-line, but his comments went something like this:
"Mr. Steven Harper, mind if we call you Stevie like George W.?? .....The Liberal Party, we are the party of Kyoto (and a whole bunch more "we are's" were listed)..... You say that we can't break promises made by the government of Canada to others, yet you did that with Kyoto; so you now will have a hard time saying that Canadian Governement can not break promises in Afghanistan."
M. Chretien's remarks (and when I find them on-line I will post) gave the overall impression that Canada should get out of Afghanistan now, and that the mission is a Conservative venture quite seperate from the Liberals.
At the Afghanistan remark, M. Chretien received a huge and extended standing ovation, which really made me think about just how short the Liberal memory seems to be.
Hmmm, it would seem to me that M. Chretien just doesn't get it. It was the Liberals who made that committment and promises to Afghanistan, the Tories just extended that promise until 2009. The Liberals want to get elected and pull out, because "we can cancel government of Canada promises like the Conservatives did with Kyoto...." they'd be going back on their own Liberal Governments promise. How typical.
- Status
Similar threads
