KrisYYZ From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1575 posts, RR: 0 Posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 8050 times:
According to several Canadian news reports today, the Canadian government is planning on acquiring 4 C-17 globemasters along with around 20 short-haul aircraft for the replacement of the Herc's as well as around 10 heavy lift helicopters. This welcomed news, and long over due. Even thought the government is not confirming any C-17 orders yet, I bet we will see them soon as they are badly need by the Canadian forces.
Lumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 21 Reply 1, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 8052 times:
I just read the article from the link you posted and it doesn't confirm that Canada is buying the C-17. Just talks about Boeing advising them that "time is running out"! Did I miss something?
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
CF188A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 7993 times:
Canada will be acquiring C-17s. They have been looking at them for 4 years now and they are pretty much waiting for the slots to open. Orders can be placed but they will not get them for some time .... Australia has yet to get theirs and the C-17 assembly line is not HUGE... according to my knowledge, correct me if I'm wrong?
Oroka From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 788 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 7918 times:
Quoting Migfan (Reply 3): Will four make a difference?
Well, considering we don't have a heavy lift capacity right now, yes it will. C-17s have been flying Canadian equipment around for a while... just someone else owns them.
The Hercs will probably get replaced with more Hercs, I am not sure about the heavy lift helos. I didn't even know the CAF was looking for heavy lift helicopter capacity
I wonder what is bringing this around now? New government maybe? Ol Harper seems keen on the idea of collecting less money and spending money he cant afford... I guess we will just have to do it like the rest of the world and live in the red
N328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6222 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 7851 times:
Quoting CF188A (Reply 2): Australia has yet to get theirs and the C-17 assembly line is not HUGE... according to my knowledge, correct me if I'm wrong?
USAF granted the RAAF some of their production slots, so first delivery is in a few months. Since USAF has so many, they apparently didn't mind waiting a little longer for the last few units. I would think that an RCAF buy would be done the same way.
Quoting Migfan (Reply 3): Will four make a difference?
Ask the RAF if four made a difference.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
StealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5431 posts, RR: 49 Reply 6, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 7826 times:
Quoting Migfan (Reply 3): Will four make a difference?
Quoting Oroka (Reply 4): C-17s have been flying Canadian equipment around for a while... just someone else owns them.
Quoting N328KF (Reply 5): USAF granted the RAAF some of their production slots, so first delivery is in a few months. Since USAF has so many, they apparently didn't mind waiting a little longer for the last few units. I would think that an RCAF buy would be done the same way.
On the question of ..will 4 make a difference.. for sure!
Given the level of co-operation between the 4 countries that operate the C-17.... OK 2 that do, 1 that will and 1 that might!! They almost constitute a single fleet( I can see a flaming coming for that comment!!) and with 4(maybe 5) for the RAF, 4 for the RAAF and maybe 4 for RCAF that is almost a 10% increase in global (C-17) airlift capability that the USAF doesn't have to budget for.. why wouldn't they give up production slots.
And every new order keeps the line open longer giving the USAF more time to convince those in charge of the purse strings to loosen up a little!
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11708 posts, RR: 52 Reply 7, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 7763 times:
Quoting CF188A (Reply 2): Australia has yet to get theirs and the C-17 assembly line is not HUGE...
Quoting N328KF (Reply 5): USAF granted the RAAF some of their production slots, so first delivery is in a few months.
Since the RAAF only finalized their C-17 order a few months ago, they are getting a rapid delivery. Our Canadian friends can get this same deal.
CF188A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 7705 times:
has the ONE AND ONLY AN-225 made a difference? I think so. But then again, the guys who make it to the top and fly in the CAF, will have the luxery of flying the C-17.
Defence Minister is pushing for funding now. There is some opposition due to the perception of favouritism, ie there has been no competition. The Government's arguement is "sole source", in that this is the only aircraft in production that fits requirements. Besides, open contracts & competitions have not prevented government meddling & purchase of inferior equipment (in general, not C-17) in the past, so why not save time?
Quoting Oroka (Reply 4): C-17s have been flying Canadian equipment around for a while... just someone else owns them.
By & large the bulk of our stuff is being moved on Il-76 (weekly supply to Afghanistan) & An-124. I understand the contract is with http://www.skylinkaviation.com/
Quoting KrisYYZ (Thread starter): around 20 short-haul aircraft for the replacement of the Herc's
Sounds like they're leaning toward the C-130J again, but I think EADS has offered a really sweet deal- rebuilt C-130H's until the A-400 is ready. Apparently Lockheed Martin has said the C-130J can't be certified on the timeline Canada wants either.
Quoting Oroka (Reply 4): I guess we will just have to do it like the rest of the world and live in the red
There's enough money for everything, as long as politicians stop lining their pockets, paying off friends & funding social engineering experiments.
Atmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 39 Reply 12, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 7617 times:
Quoting StealthZ (Reply 6): the USAF doesn't have to budget for.. why wouldn't they give up production slots.
And every new order keeps the line open longer giving the USAF more time to convince those in charge of the purse strings to loosen up a little!
I thinking spreading out the planned purchases helps. The units costs should be lower when the line is operating at full speed, which would otherwise encourage the USAF to get them sooner than they might otherwise want to.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
Atmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 39 Reply 13, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 7614 times:
Quoting CF188A (Reply 8): But then again, the guys who make it to the top and fly in the CAF, will have the luxery of flying the C-17.
Well if only the guys who make it to the top of the CAF get to fly the C-17, there wouldn't be a point in getting any. Oh, you meant pilot the C-17.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
The C17 will serve Canada well. I was privileged to work in C17 development inspection at Douglas and I spent a lot of time under the floor spotting locations for hydraulic components and mechanical installations.
It is a heavy lifter par excellence with excellent performance, and it was designed around carrying an M1 Abrams tank in and out of 5,000 foot unimproved airfields. There's nothing like it on the market right now that's readily available. Although it looks like Canada is getting out of the main battle tank line of work, the capacity and floor loading capability should prove most useful.
And....it's a McDonnell Douglas C17, folks, made in Long Beach. The only thing Boeing about it is the nameplate.
Columba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 6798 posts, RR: 5 Reply 15, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 7555 times:
Quoting Dougloid (Reply 14): And....it's a McDonnell Douglas C17, folks, made in Long Beach. The only thing Boeing about it is the nameplate.
Right on, it give me shivers if I hear people refering to the Boeing MD 80 or Boeing MD 11......it just does not sound right. MD means McDonnel Douglas and nothing else and the C-17 was the last product being made by this great company.
I remember reading aviation magazines in the early 90s where it was stated that Airbus has outsold MDD this year and is no No.2 after Boeing.
Airbus did a lot of catching up during those years. It is sad that MDD has gone.
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
KrisYYZ From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1575 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 7527 times:
Looks like Russia is offering the Il-76 and Mi-17 to Canada. I doubt we will see the Canadian forces be interested in either of these aircraft.
"The Russians are trying to interest Canada in their Ilyushin Il-76 MD-90 four-engine long-range cargo plane and their Mi-17V heavy lift transport helicopter, and they're offering the incentive of leasing instead of buying and delivering directly to Afghanistan where they're needed most. The Russians also say they can beat the delivery time of the nearest competitors by almost half by getting them into the hands of the Canadian Forces by late next year."
474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9 Reply 17, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 7499 times:
The real problem is that all three aircraft (C-130J, A400 and C-17) are all designed for different missions. The C-130J is a tactical airlifter, the C-17 is a strategic airlifter and the A-400 fits somewhere in between. Notice in the referenced web site some places they call the A400 a tactical airlifter and in others a strategic airlifter.
Not only is the A400 not certified, it has yet to even fly.
Dougloid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 7349 times:
Quoting CF188A (Reply 18): so "it" the A400M and the 787 are in the same boat then ..on a :this is what the plane will do" basis... to satisfy customers?... how wonderful
S'fars I've heard the latest development is the first tests of the engine and prop in a built up nacelle...not a whole lotta progress to be found in publicity there...that's one that's been on the back burner while they've been pouring euros down the A380 dry hole.
Oroka From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 788 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 7091 times:
Quoting Dougloid (Reply 14): Although it looks like Canada is getting out of the main battle tank line of work, the capacity and floor loading capability should prove most useful.
Definitely, especially for bringing heavy loads into the northern regions. Lots of large flat places to land up there!
Funny thing about the tanks... I discovered last week I am a 1 hour drive from one of their tank training grounds
Quoting KrisYYZ (Reply 16): The government headed by Stephen Harper appears to favor the American built C-17 Boeing Globemaster long-range cargo plane, and heavy Chinook transport helicopters
C-17, good. Chinook, would look good in Yellow, good. Not putting 'Prime Minister' in front of Harper's name, great!
Lumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 21 Reply 23, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6974 times:
Quote: OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canada's Conservative government is about to decide to spend a total of C$4.5 billion ($4.1 billion) on the purchase and maintenance of four giant Boeing (NYSE:BA - News) C-17 transport aircraft, the opposition Liberal Party said on Monday.
USD$4.1 Billion??? This can't be correct.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
Oroka From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 788 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (6 years 11 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 6907 times:
Quoting KrisYYZ (Reply 22): if ordered at all, they would never appear in the yellow SAR markings as they would be tactical heavy lifters for the army.
I know... I just kinda miss hearing a Lab chugging along on its way.
The man just gives me shivers... I know the Liberals screwed up bad, but heck, I would have rather seen Jack Layton running Canada.
25 KrisYYZ: "The contract includes 1.35 bln usd for the planes itself and further payment for the conversion and servicing of the aircraft for a period of twenty
27 KrisYYZ: I thought that was weird too, they must mean upgrades. KrisYYZ
28 Lumberton: Latest inducement, Boeing is offering offsets. Can a counter from EADS or Lockheed be forthcoming? http://www.canada.com/montrealgazett...55f-49e4-aee
29 AerospaceFan: Anything that keeps aircraft production open in California is welcome news, indeed! It's a shame that Boeing decided to terminate 717 production and
30 Dougloid: Far's I know Canada operates a hundred or so Leopard Is that are being product improved, but if they're going to be built into Leopard IIs is unknown
31 Atmx2000: Canada is probably going to buy C130s as well But EADS/Airbus is miffed they haven't been invited to the party: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/32cbced2-ffb1
32 Dougloid: Why am I not surprised at that LOL? Even the guys at Airbus would have a tough time with that version of Le Sales Pitch...I can see it all now. If Ca
33 MrChips: Unrelated, but anyone willing to hazard a guess as to what the C-17s will be called in Canadian service? My guess is that it will be simply CC-170 Glo
34 Lumberton: With all respect, Atmx2000, it is far away!. I believe the Canadian forces would be offered one of the later builds from the USAF inventory to get st
35 MissedApproach: How about "CC-170 Maybenextyear"? Skylink Aviation is offering to contract service now. They say that for $42 million per year they would base two An
36 AislepathLight: I read the LA times article about the Boeing plant in Long Beach in the paper today. It said that the Canadians were going to buy 3 of them. Just a te
37 SkySurfer: I really don't see what the big fuss is all about in here, most ppl have answered the ? perfectly. Canada is operating equipment that is basically 'pa
38 MigFan: I think I see your point. Too bad for those facts. Do you think Canada would go for Su-30s? /M
39 Bmacleod: How much room is left for Canadian equipment on those U.S. C-17s? Over 90% of them are tied up in Iraqi Freedom. I thought we were renting AN-124s at
40 KrisYYZ: some more info: http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/cdnmilitary/procurement.html I bet we will hear about the C-17 order relatively soon. Just my guess!
41 AirRyan: AvWeek says the CAF will buy 4 C-17's, 17 C-130J's, and a "handfull" of medium-lift helicopters. The only thing that confuses me is that at the end of
42 KrisYYZ: CH-148 Cyclone- (Sikorsky H92 Superhawk) Maritime, ship-born helicopter meant as a replacement for the Sea Kings. CAF orders 28, first being delivered
43 MissedApproach: I'm not so sure anymore. After all this talk about "transformation" all that's happened so far is that new commands have been created. More command l
44 AirRyan: Sounds like an excellent aircraft to supplement the USMC medium-lift V-22 fleet with. If Canada were smart they'd pass on the Boeing tandem-rotored p
45 WrenchBender: The next available number should be the CC157 but convention has been broken before, CF188 for the 18, CH147 for the Chinook. We will probably keep t
46 Lumberton: If you put it that way, then there really is only 1 "heavy" lift helo in the world! I must be out of touch because I wasn't aware that Canada got rid
47 Bmacleod: Yes. Prime Minister Jean Creatien ordered a complete gutting of Canada's Defence when he took power in 1993. Even the desert camouflage uniforms were
48 AirRyan: As far as the US military is concerned, the H-47 and the H-53 are heavy-lift helicotpers. No joke!
49 Don81603: A-FREAKING-MEN!!!!!!!!!!! As a former serviceman (RCN), I agree totally our equipment isn't outdated, it antiqued! Our former subs were dive limited
50 GDB: Hate to break this news, but Airbus Military are separate from Airbus SAS. Besides, like it or not (and LM won't like it), A400M is on the way, the pr
51 Lumberton: Yes, correct to date. There is a consensus building in the Congress right now to procure more. This is one I think the Secretary of Defense will lose
52 GDB: Which would be very wise. European NATO nations, including to a degree the UK, have suffered from a cold war legacy in transport aircraft equipment. P
53 Atmx2000: No doubt the reason Congress wants to buy more is because MD spread the supplier base for the C-17 over a large number of districts and states to red
54 Lumberton: The Canadian government has confirmed the purchase of 4 C-17s. Announcement expected on the C-130 replacement tomorrow. Canada confirms purchase of fo
55 MissedApproach: According to the press conference today the airplanes will be parked at YTR by April of next year. Can Canada get new-build C-17s that fast, or will t
56 Ha763: As mentioned before, what will probably happen is the same thing that is allowing Australia to get their C-17s quickly. The USAF will give some of th
58 Bmacleod: The word from Ottawa is that they've decided on the Boeing Chinook since they're ordering the C-17. Those package deals are soooo nice, eh?
59 Lumberton: This article (from the small part that I can read without registering) indicates that EADS is not happy and is weighing all its "options" including le
Sponsor Message: 
From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1575 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, 
From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5431 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 6798 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
