User avatar
STT757
Topic Author
Posts: 13200
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:49 am

The Army was to award a contract this June for 33 aircraft to replace their C-23 Sherpa and some C-12s. The competition was between Lockheed Martin/Alenia for the C-27J and EADS for the Casa C-295.

This January the Army signed a new memorandum with the US Air Force for a joint Procurement of 145 of the Future Cargo Aircraft, they will select the winning contractor in December.

The Army hopes to have Initial Operational capability of the new aircraft by 2010, of the 145 aircraft the Army would procure 75 and the Air Force 70.

Both the Lockheed Martin/Alenia C-27J and the EADS/Casa C-295 are in the new competition as well as any new proposals, again they want to choose by December.

The requirements are for fixed-wing transport aircraft capable of performing rapid-response intratheater missions with cargo, equipment and soldiers, as well as medevac duties and airdrop delivery. The aircraft must be able to operate off of a 2,000ft prepared runway, and be compatible with USAF/NATO cargo pallets.

Any comments?..

Some great C-27J pictures..

http://www.c-27j.com/photo_gallery.htm#

C-295
http://www.team-futurecargoaircraft.com/index.html

C-27J:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrea Colombo
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Thierry Deutsch



C-295


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andreas Heilmann
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Krzysztof Godlewski (EPGD Spotters)

Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
CX747
Posts: 5576
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Feb 23, 2006 12:01 pm

Are you sure that the Army is going to operate them? I thought that the Air Force was going to fly all of them. Also, my pic would be the C-27J. That would be a pretty neat aircraft to fly.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
User avatar
STT757
Topic Author
Posts: 13200
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Feb 23, 2006 12:16 pm

Originally the Army was going to order 33 FCA's to replace their C-23s, now they are teaming up with the Air Force for a much larger order for 145 FCA's. Of that 145 the Army would procure 75 to replace the C-23s as well as C-12s.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
AR1300
Posts: 1686
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 1:22 pm

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Feb 23, 2006 12:19 pm

Doesn't the Coast guard already fly the C-295??


Mike
You are now free to move about the cabin
 
UH60FtRucker
Posts: 3252
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 9:15 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Feb 23, 2006 12:36 pm

Quoting CX747 (Reply 1):
Are you sure that the Army is going to operate them?

Yes... they will be replacing the Shirpa, hopefully starting by '08.

This is interesting times in Army aviation... the LUH competition is currently underway. Once the on going fly-off is complete, and the airframe is chosen, the Guard will get the vast majority of them. But thank god we're finally phasing out the Shirpa. - Great aircraft, but showing it's age.

-UH60
Your men have to follow your orders. They don't have to go to your funeral.
 
PADSpot
Posts: 1637
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:31 pm

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Feb 23, 2006 4:35 pm

Quoting AR1300 (Reply 3):
Doesn't the Coast guard already fly the C-295??

USAF Special Forces also fly (at least) one C-295. Could be seen at Bagram and in the States. It wears a quite simple paint scheme and small markings. Our US friends probably know the exact unit which flies it ...
 
CX747
Posts: 5576
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Fri Feb 24, 2006 1:03 am

Do we happen to have a press release? I know that the Army and Air Force had to delay this program for 90 days while they re-wrote the criteria the airframe needs to meet. Either way its another MWS to choose from!
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
 
User avatar
STT757
Topic Author
Posts: 13200
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:54 pm

Total purchase could be more than 200 aircraft.

Quote:
Air Force, Army agree on light cargo aircraft

By Michael Fabey
Times staff writer

The Air Force and Army have agreed on a new name and a new joint program to develop a fleet of light cargo aircraft, Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne and Gen. Michael Moseley, the service chief of staff, told lawmakers March 1.

The two services could buy a total of more than 200 aircraft.

The plane will now be called the Joint Cargo Aircraft, the Air Force leaders told the House Armed Services Committee. Until now, the Army had called its aircraft the Future Cargo Aircraft and the Air Force called its version the Light Cargo Aircraft.

Last year, contractors competed for an Army deal to replace the service’s roughly four dozen C-23 Sherpas. But as the Army began to seek more and more aircraft, Air Force officials became concerned that the Army might infringe on its turf. The two services began to work on a joint plan at the end of the year.

Moseley said there is no interservice “squabbling” on the plane.

The Army will buy about 70 planes to replace its Sherpa fleet, Moseley said after the committee hearing.

The Air Force might buy 150, but has not determined a number yet, he said.

“The Sherpa is not really an intra-theater plane,” Moseley said. “What we’re talking about is a no-kidding intra-theater aircraft that can defend itself.”

http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1569794.php
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Sat Mar 25, 2006 6:10 am

Another good comparison of the two conteners here.
Anyone know if Boeing is still contemplating an entry based on the An-72?
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:28 am

New development...FI is reporting that Boeing may join the C-27J team.

Quote:
Boeing is believed to be negotiating to join the Global Military Aircraft Systems (GMAS) company set up by Alenia Aeronautica and L-3 Communications to offer the C-27J. “Boeing is interested in competing for the JCA programme. We have entered into discussions with a number of different entities,” the company says.

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...e+for+US+Joint+Cargo+Aircraft.html

Lockheed Martin is also expected to join the fray:

Quote:
Lockheed is “considering potential options” for JCA, but is expected to offer the C-130J. The company is a key subcontractor on the C-27J, although Giordo says responsibility for the propulsion system has been transferred to Alenia. Lockheed still supplies the avionics, but “can offer an aircraft not in the C-27J segment” for JCA, Giordo says.

Isn't the C-130J too large?

From a quick comparison of the two leading contenders, C-27 & C-295, it appears that the C-27 is the more robust of the two, with better range, payload, and speed. There is also the benefit of engine commonality with the existing C-130J.

And, of course, there is probably a political angle as well. To point out the obvious, but this would be a chance to give RR & Alenia (UK and Italy) a chunk of the defense pie, and snub "you know who"....  

[Edited 2006-03-28 16:37:18]
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
Dougloid
Posts: 7248
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:44 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Wed Mar 29, 2006 1:29 am

The C27 looks a lot like the C123 Provider with turboprops.

http://www.theaviationzone.com/factsheets/c123.asp
If you believe in coincidence, you haven't looked close enough-Joe Leaphorn
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Wed Mar 29, 2006 2:17 am

Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 4):
Yes... they will be replacing the Shirpa, hopefully starting by '08.

This is interesting times in Army aviation... the LUH competition is currently underway. Once the on going fly-off is complete, and the airframe is chosen, the Guard will get the vast majority of them. But thank god we're finally phasing out the Shirpa. - Great aircraft, but showing it's age.

-UH60

Sounds like a good time to go WOFT!
 
CX747
Posts: 5576
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Wed Mar 29, 2006 3:15 am

Would Warrants fly fixed wing? For some reason, I thought that the majority of fixed wingers in the Army were Commissioned Officers.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
FlagshipAZ
Posts: 3192
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 12:40 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Wed Mar 29, 2006 4:14 am

I'll place my money on the C-27J. As Lumberton pointed out, the C-27J has the same engine as the C-130J, not to mention various other components as well since Lockheed nearly rebuilt the basic C-27 airframe into a "little sister" of the C-130. The US Army wants total control of it fleet of FCAs, away from the USAF, which wants control over all fixed-wing aircraft the Army needs. This is a hotly contested battle between the Army & the Air Force. I hope the Army wins & gets its own independent C-27J fleet.
Regards.
"Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." --Ben Franklin
 
CX747
Posts: 5576
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Wed Mar 29, 2006 4:34 am

I think that the Army has already "won" control over the aiframes it will receive. The Air Force is going to purchase the same thing but operate them to USAF standards. If memory serves me correctly, the Army is getting the majority of the aircraft.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
KCmike
Posts: 531
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2004 10:13 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Wed Mar 29, 2006 5:15 am

Yea there are plenty of fixed wing warrants out there.
Cleared for the option...
 
User avatar
STT757
Topic Author
Posts: 13200
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Wed Mar 29, 2006 9:21 am

Quote:
of the 145 aircraft the Army would procure 75 and the Air Force 70.

.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
CX747
Posts: 5576
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Wed Mar 29, 2006 10:08 am

Quoting STT757 (Reply 8):
The Army will buy about 70 planes to replace its Sherpa fleet, Moseley said after the committee hearing.

The Air Force might buy 150, but has not determined a number yet, he said.

This is where I'm getting confused.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
User avatar
ptrjong
Posts: 4102
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:38 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Wed Mar 29, 2006 6:34 pm


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Peter de Jong
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Peter de Jong



Just photographed two Army National Guard Sherpas probably on their way home from Iraq. I'm told Army National Guard Sherpas are heavily commited there - maybe this is a factor in the FCA requirement?

Peter wave 
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
 
Dougloid
Posts: 7248
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:44 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:18 am

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 19):
Just photographed two Army National Guard Sherpas probably on their way home from Iraq. I'm told Army National Guard Sherpas are heavily commited there - maybe this is a factor in the FCA requirement?

Peter

It's like they used to say about the P47 Jug-there was lots of room for the pilot to run around inside dodging bullets.


 Smile
If you believe in coincidence, you haven't looked close enough-Joe Leaphorn
 
CX747
Posts: 5576
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Mar 30, 2006 2:43 am

The massive use of the Sherpas in Iraq is one of the main driving factors in this competition. The Sherpas were part of forgotten Army aviation before the war. They are operated by ANG units and nobody really paid any attention to them. Now they are playing a crucial part in the Iraq war. They Sherpas are old and the crews are using a lot of duck tape to keep them together. They are small, old and cranky. They need a replacement ASAP and thats why the Army and Air Force are working on fielding a replacement.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
User avatar
ptrjong
Posts: 4102
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:38 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:42 am

CX,

Can you elaborate on what the Sherpas do in Iraq? I presume it's lust logistics-type flights between bases. However, I noted what I think is a FLIR under their noses?
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8004
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Tue Apr 04, 2006 12:21 am

Don't discount the possibility of a FCA buy based on the Antonov An-72.

If the Antonov design bureau can allow the plane to be produced under license in the West, and the An-72 uses an engine derived from the Pratt & Whitney PW6000 (which is a far more fuel-efficient and quieter engine than the current Lotarev D-36 turbofans), the plane would be perfect as a short-range logistical transport because of its superb STOL ability. The ability to do steep landings and climbouts would also enhance survivability flying in and out of airfields near hostile environments.
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Tue Apr 04, 2006 3:08 am

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 23):
Don't discount the possibility of a FCA buy based on the Antonov An-72.

I haven't read where Boeing has dropped the idea, but the article referenced in Reply 10 seems to point to where they want to hook up with Alenia. It would make good sense since they already have a strong working relationship with them on the 787 program.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Apr 27, 2006 10:08 pm

Well, it appears that Boeing has decided to cast it's lot with Alenia & L-3 Communications and compete for the FCA.
Boeing enters U.S. cargo aircraft competition

Quote:
Boeing's Integrated Defense Systems unit will partner with Italy's Finmeccanica SpA (SIFI.MI: Quote, Profile, Research), and L-3 Communications Holdings Inc. (LLL.N: Quote, Profile, Research), the three said in a joint statement.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
SlamClick
Posts: 9576
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:09 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Fri Apr 28, 2006 12:33 am

Damn Army! When I was in fixed-wing flight school, MacNamara gave the Caribous to the Air Force.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chris Starnes



The Air Force didn't even want them. They changed the designation from CV-2 to C-7A, dropping the V-for STOL which was very revealing of their attitude toward the plane. They discontinued LOLEX (which the AF calls LAPES) and they dropped service to hundreds of small airfields in Vietnam, which meant that Special Forces camps got resupplied by Hueys instead of Caribous. Talk to an old sneaky pete from that era for some insight into having the Army do its own short haul cargo work. Don't get me wrong, the USAF is great, but it is just not the same.

The Army had even been looking at the DHC-5 Buffalo. By the time I left the Army the only fixed wing they had was the U-21 and the OV-1. If they'd kept larger airplanes like these I might have stayed in.

So, question: Does DHC still make the Buffalo? If so, shouldn't the Army consider it?
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
 
Longbow
Posts: 23
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 1:07 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Fri Apr 28, 2006 11:43 pm

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 25):
Boeing's Integrated Defense Systems unit will partner with Italy's Finmeccanica SpA (SIFI.MI: Quote, Profile, Research), and L-3 Communications Holdings Inc. (LLL.N: Quote, Profile, Research), the three said in a joint statement.

Yea, it also says in that article that LM plans to offer the C-130J. How does that work? I that that the development of the C-27J was done under a joint venture between LM and Alenia (subsidiary of Finmeccanica). How come LM isn't mentioned on the C-27J team at all?
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Sat Apr 29, 2006 12:03 am

Quoting Longbow (Reply 27):
it also says in that article that LM plans to offer the C-130J. How does that work? I that that the development of the C-27J was done under a joint venture between LM and Alenia (subsidiary of Finmeccanica). How come LM isn't mentioned on the C-27J team at all?

This is puzzling to me as well. Hope someone out there can explain it. Personally, I don't see the point in offering the heavy, 4 engine, C-130 to the Army.  Confused It almost sounds like Lockeed "recused" themselves to pitch the C-130!
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5210
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Sat Apr 29, 2006 3:07 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 25):
Well, it appears that Boeing has decided to cast it's lot with Alenia & L-3 Communications and compete for the FCA.
Boeing enters U.S. cargo aircraft competition

Quote:
Boeing's Integrated Defense Systems unit will partner with Italy's Finmeccanica SpA (SIFI.MI: Quote, Profile, Research), and L-3 Communications Holdings Inc. (LLL.N: Quote, Profile, Research), the three said in a joint statement.



Quoting Longbow (Reply 27):

Yea, it also says in that article that LM plans to offer the C-130J. How does that work? I that that the development of the C-27J was done under a joint venture between LM and Alenia (subsidiary of Finmeccanica). How come LM isn't mentioned on the C-27J team at all?

I can't seem to figure out how LM got shut out of the C27J program. Was there bad blood between them and Alenia? Anything to do with risk taking or workshare, or just plain old politics? It's like preparing all the ingredients and cooking the meal only to have someone else eat it. Doesn't that leave a bad taste in the mouth? Not that it's already a foregone conclusion, but the Spartan is undeniably the perfect candidate for the job.

[Edited 2006-04-28 20:09:50]

[Edited 2006-04-28 20:10:54]
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu May 04, 2006 12:14 am

Not really big news, but it appears the planets are aligning for the C-27 in this competition....

GMAS Partner Alenia Signs Agreement with Rolls-Royce to Power C-27J
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5210
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu May 04, 2006 4:54 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 30):
but it appears the planets are aligning for the C-27 in this competition....

As in any race, the favorite gets all the bets, while the dark horse must content itself with hopes of a big dividend.
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
AirRyan
Posts: 2398
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 9:57 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu May 04, 2006 11:58 pm

A shortened C-130J certainly has the appeal of parts commonality with the existing logistics and training pipelines - the USAF has got to be interested in that.
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5210
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Tue Aug 08, 2006 7:53 am

"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
RAPCON
Posts: 651
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 7:20 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Tue Aug 08, 2006 8:20 am

Quoting CX747 (Reply 13):
Would Warrants fly fixed wing? For some reason, I thought that the majority of fixed wingers in the Army were Commissioned Officers

I'm almost positive that WO's fly fixed wing, but they have to be pretty senior to get the shot--it's not about skill, but about rewarding seniority.

Quoting AR1300 (Reply 3):
Doesn't the Coast guard already fly the C-295??

They got a contract for 2 CN235-300M's for maritime patrol. Expected delivery is during this year. Future purchases will be dependent upon out year funding.

IN OTHER WORDS: After the little stunt that the current Spanish government pulled in Iraq--something within their rights--I do not expect that they will receive further orders. Alternatively, in light of the Italian support for the US, and taking into account the commonality advantages with the 130J, no doubt the C-27J is the winner.
MODS CAN'T STOP ME....THEY CAN ONLY HOPE TO CONTAIN ME!!!
 
MigFan
Posts: 710
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:50 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Tue Aug 08, 2006 9:22 am

Woundn't the C-27J be a better logistical choice since shares a degree of commonality with the C-130J. Plus it looks less like an airliner.

/M
UH-60's suck!!!
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5210
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Tue Aug 08, 2006 11:21 am

Quoting MigFan (Reply 35):
Woundn't the C-27J be a better logistical choice since shares a degree of commonality with the C-130J

The commonality is a very desirable factor, plus for in-theater operations, I think the Spartan's more compact size is ideal for quickly getting in and out of tight situations, which could only work to its advantage.
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
AirSpare
Posts: 570
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 1:13 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:25 pm

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 20):
It's like they used to say about the P47 Jug-there was lots of room for the pilot to run around inside dodging bullets.

OT but funny! It was also said that if somebody built a runway around the world, Republic would build an aircraft that need all of it.

To bad that only warmed over designs are contending. It would be nice to see a modern design. I can't help thinking, wasn't the Osprey supposed to due this mission? Oh, nevermind.
Get someone else for your hero worship fetish
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5210
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Sun Aug 13, 2006 3:29 am

What I don't get about LM is how they allowed the partnership with Alenia to wither away, and now they come grumbling like a kid who's had his candy taken from him. Were they too overloaded with work on the JSF at the time, and still flush from the success of the Raptor? Or was that part of the horsetrading for the alliance with Boeing on the F-22?

[Edited 2006-08-12 20:46:43]
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
elmothehobo
Posts: 967
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:10 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Sun Aug 13, 2006 4:43 am

Quoting CX747 (Reply 13):
Would Warrants fly fixed wing? For some reason, I thought that the majority of fixed wingers in the Army were Commissioned Officers.

Correct, most all fixed wing flying is done by Warrant officers. A Warrant Officer received a Commission upon their promotion to W-2.

Generalist Officers (i.e. 2LT-GEN) fly rotary wing aircraft. Most rotary wing trainers are W-4s and W-5s. These W-5s often have three decades of service behind them.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Sun Aug 13, 2006 11:43 am

I talked to an AKANG Sherpa Driver at Arctic Thunder 2006 today.

Basicily what I was told is that the NG is seriously thinking of picking up 2 of the C-27's on their own. This is becasue when the ANG was running the project they where going to make a decision next year, when the uncle USAF desided they wanted some of the airplanes they also pushed the decision period back to 2010.

As far as the C-27J vs C-295. The big factor in favor of the C-27 is that while the while CASA claims that the C-295 will fit a M1097, they haven't demonstrated it, and by the book it is a really tight fight.

The C-27 however has demonstrated the ability to carry 2 Humvees.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5210
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Aug 24, 2006 4:45 am

It's now official. LockMart has filed a formal protest against the C130J's exclusion from the JCA competition. This could delay the program further as the requirements are still not fully defined.
http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...of+C-130J+Hercules+from+Joint.html

Interesting times indeed!
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Aug 24, 2006 5:22 am

Sounds like the Army is going to push for the evaluation to proceed:

Quote:
The company wants a stay of any contract award until the Government Accountability Office has completed a 100-day review, but the US Army says it can proceed with a flight evaluation of the two aircraft remaining in the competition, the Alenia Aeronautica C-27J and EADS Casa C-295.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5210
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Aug 24, 2006 6:25 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 42):
Sounds like the Army is going to push for the evaluation to proceed:

If they do and a type wins the evaluation, could they award a contract based on that? The result would likely not be binding for all the services, and the USAF and LM will surely contest it.
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Aug 24, 2006 7:21 am

The answer, as is always the case with U.S. government procurement and contracting, is: it depends. Every contract I've ever worked had a protest at the outset. One the ones that the company I worked for won, we proceeded with phase-in and the government dismissed them. Very few go to the litigation phase. Given the $ amount, this one might, but not having read the solicitation, I can't venture an informed opinion. Obviously, L-M thinks they have a case.

Sorry, I just can't see the U.S. Army in the C-130 business.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5210
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Aug 24, 2006 8:00 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 44):
Sorry, I just can't see the U.S. Army in the C-130 business.

Me, too.  Smile
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Aug 24, 2006 10:40 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 44):
Sorry, I just can't see the U.S. Army in the C-130 business.

I think the only reason the C-130 is now being considered is because of the USAF's sudden newfound interest in this mission.

Like I said earlier the AKANG is starting to get pissed in the delays and apparently they are seriously considering picking up two C27's on their own.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Aug 24, 2006 7:21 pm

Quoting L-188 (Reply 46):
the AKANG is starting to get pissed in the delays and apparently they are seriously considering picking up two C27's on their own.

THAT I'd like to see! Not that it will happen but maybe a couple of more governors should weigh in and get this procurement moving? From what I've been reading, the Sherpas are simply not going to cut it in a few years.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
MigFan
Posts: 710
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:50 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Thu Aug 24, 2006 8:23 pm

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 44):
Sorry, I just can't see the U.S. Army in the C-130 business.

 checkmark  I have to agree and for the same reasons that the USAF is not fielding squadrons of AH-64s. Tactical/Strategic transport in not within the Army's charter of operations.

/M
UH-60's suck!!!
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5210
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: US Army Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA)

Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:40 am

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 45):
Quoting Lumberton (Reply 44):
Sorry, I just can't see the U.S. Army in the C-130 business.

Me, too.

Sorry, I spoke too soon. Is the C-27J business the same as the C-130's? Isn't it to handle the Sherpa's work for the Army? Or does the Sherpa's mission rightfully belong to the Air Force but the Army finds the arrangement cumbersome?

Quoting L-188 (Reply 46):
I think the only reason the C-130 is now being considered is because of the USAF's sudden newfound interest in this mission.

Maybe they figured it is a great way to get additional C-130Js without going through the whole justification process all over again.
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: TheF15Ace, Yahoo [Bot] and 5 guests