Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Sun Apr 04, 2010 2:50 pm

Reported in Defense News.

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=4564377&c=EUR&s=AIR

Quote:
Paris - France's Direction Générale pour l'Armement (DGA) has ordered eight Casa CN-235 transport aircraft for 225 million euros ($305 million) as a stopgap measure pending delivery of the larger A400M airlifter, the procurement office said April 1.

I am left to wonder what adding more of these small transports will achieve, if the real intent is to provide additional lift in the near term to substitute for the delays on the A400M? As I noted on the tanker thread, this would have been a splendid opportunity for the French to "lead the way" and provide an example of reciprocal benefits on defense purchases by leasing or buying some C-130Js. Instead, they opted to stay with the "home team". Not that I have issues with preferring one's own domestic industry; I don't, and have long advocated that for that reason alone, the USAF tanker procurement should have NEVER been competed, but sole sourced to the "home team". I do find the juxtaposition with Sarko, et al, decrying U.S. "protectionism" and this sole source purchase from EADS rather hypocritical at this sensitive time.

Do as we say, not as we do, say's M. Sarko & friends.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5216
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Sun Apr 04, 2010 10:51 pm

I'll repost what I posted in the other thread in reply.....

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 152):

Quote:
one would think that after all their lectures of "protectionism", they would have bought or leased C-130Js to underscore the two-way nature of defense purchases?

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 153):

Quote:
The CN-235 does not have near the capability of the C-130J,

This is the more telling aspect of it and flies in the face of all the noises they made re the Herc's limited capability. After all, stopgap or not, they suddenly upped and went for an even more incapable aircraft. They wouldn't even go for the C-295 --- its very own stretched version. I wonder what's wrong with that plane.....

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Ricardo Aysa Calahorra
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alejandro Hdez Leon


.....Hecho en Espana?

The Spartan would have been a better stopgap.....

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Md Faridz
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dean West

"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Sun Apr 04, 2010 11:19 pm

Where are the screams from the EU over this 'protectionist' contract? Was LM even allowed to bid the C-130J? Was there an RFP, or is this just a support our industries contract?

Yet, the French are in the front line screaming about US protectionism on the KC-X.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23079
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Mon Apr 05, 2010 3:41 am

Maybe CASA cut them a great deal to atone for being late on the A400M? CASA (now EADS-Spain) is assembling the A400M, after all.

Still, it does make Le President look a bit hypocritical...
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Mon Apr 05, 2010 9:11 am

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 1):
.....Hecho en Espana?

And that says it all.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
Still, it does make Le President look a bit hypocritical...

More than a little bit at that.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Mon Apr 05, 2010 11:11 am

Haven't we forgotten that France already operates aircraft of this type?
Originally ordered as far back as 1990?
So really, all the objections about imagined 'protectionism' are invalid.
Since it appears this latest top up is more about easing the burden on the current fleet in lieu of delays to A400M.
Not as a substitute.

Remember the French already operate the C-130.

This link for a top up order is from 2002;

http://www.eads.com/1024/en/investor...s_ir/2002/en_20020628_cn235_e.html

So this is hardly stunning news is it?

France does not pretend to be in favour of totally free markets, so objections to some protectionism miss the point, since they've not been pressuring, lecturing and boring the world for decades about this, when the US is just as protectionist.

Oddly, there seem to be no pics of a French AF CN-235 on this sites database, so;

http://www.pictaero.com/en/pictures/picture,79674

[Edited 2010-04-05 04:14:55]
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Mon Apr 05, 2010 12:19 pm

Quoting GDB (Reply 5):
So really, all the objections about imagined 'protectionism' are invalid.

I disagree entirely. I would have been willing to buy that if they had done this via public tender, but they choose to sole source apparently.

Quoting GDB (Reply 5):
Remember the French already operate the C-130.

Exactly. So why not opt for more of the larger and more capable planes, rather than more little planes? Wouldn't that provide "best value for the [French] warfighter"? If the stated goal is a "stop gap" to tide them over until the long delayed A400M arrives, wouldn't it be more economical purchase say 4 C-130s, rather than twice the number of little CN-235s?

Again, they missed a splendid opportunity to make a case for strong bilateral defense trade. And so soon after M. Sarko left Barak's house!

Mind you, I don't think this is the wrong approach. I've been advocating this on our tanker procurement for years. And if that means we're "protectionist", then so be it. Call it what it is.

[Edited 2010-04-05 05:20:52]

(Note: the concern expressed above for the French "warfighter" is sarcasm and intended as irony. I hope no one takes this wrong way buy I have more concern about who will win tonight's NCAA Basketball final, than for the French warfighter. And that's not a bad thing, just not my concern its the people of France. I wince every time I see a non-US poster telling me what's best for the U.S. warfighter WRT the USAF tanker procurement, when the actual reality is that they could care less as well. N'est-ce pas?)


[Edited 2010-04-05 05:27:44]
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Mon Apr 05, 2010 12:34 pm

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 6):
wouldn't it be more economical purchase say 4 C-130s, rather than twice the number of little CN-235s?

It might be that it's part of a 'grovel package' from EADS since it's delays to another of their products that seem to have generated this latest order.
They can also make the case, that once A400M is is service, having a refreshed CN-235 fleet is useful for all those taks where a A400M is too much aircraft, releasing them for their main taskings.

Worth remembering that back when the CN-235 was first ordered, the ATR group (half French), lobbied hard for a military version of the ATR commuterliner.
When the French AF did not want to wait for (and effectively pay to develop) a rear ramp version of the ATR, the company mocked up a side cargo door version in an attempt to sell it as a decent alternative.
It was not very convincing, instead despite all the pressure, they went out and brought Spanish, back then CASA was not part of a larger grouping, this was 10 years before EADS.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Mon Apr 05, 2010 1:22 pm

Quoting GDB (Reply 5):
Haven't we forgotten that France already operates aircraft of this type?
Originally ordered as far back as 1990?
So really, all the objections about imagined 'protectionism' are invalid.
Since it appears this latest top up is more about easing the burden on the current fleet in lieu of delays to A400M.
Not as a substitute.

Remember the French already operate the C-130.

Well, the French does currently fly the C-235, as well as the C-130. So what? They currently do not fly the A-400 or A-330MRTT, but have one on order and will order the other.

What ever happened to the French commitment to buying the C/KC-390? Seems they were interested in sell French built fighters to Brazil.

Quoting GDB (Reply 5):
France does not pretend to be in favour of totally free markets, so objections to some protectionism miss the point, since they've not been pressuring, lecturing and boring the world for decades about this

Oh really? Have you been following the French insistance on the US allowing EADS to build the KC-X? I guess you are right afterall. France does not pretend to favor totally free markets, they demand on building everything for everyone, even if the product they build is inferior or does not fully suit what the customer wants/needs.
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Mon Apr 05, 2010 1:46 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8):
Oh really? Have you been following the French insistance on the US allowing EADS to build the KC-X? I guess you are right afterall. France does not pretend to favor totally free markets, they demand on building everything for everyone, even if the product they build is inferior or does not fully suit what the customer wants/needs.

1) Not a wholly French aircraft.
2) They are as bewildered as others at the procurement (sorry, lawyer money machine), at the Pentagon. First it's selected, then it's not. Not a transatlantic issue either, witness the Chinook selection for the CSAR requirement that went the same way, only without a proper alternative. And screw the warfighter's requirements. (Boeing did not seem to think having the biggest of the competing types was a bad thing that time did they? They sold it on that).

Who is insisting anyway?

I often think that main objection for some in the US, to France, is simply because they do, on a smaller scale, what the US does very often.
It resonates. If they put France first, never mind prior agreements, it's bad. Patriotic when the US does the same though.

Example, how absurd was it that France objected to a foreign buy out of what was essentially, a yogurt company, citing 'national economic sovereignty'.
Now go to civil aviation and check the continuing objections to Virgin US, due to it's doubts, not even real ones, about US ownership. It's just a small domestic carrier for heavens sake, why are there even those rules?
Then Dubai Ports.

As we say here, six of one, half a dozen of the other.
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Mon Apr 05, 2010 2:42 pm

Quoting GDB (Reply 9):
Now go to civil aviation and check the continuing objections to Virgin US, due to it's doubts, not even real ones, about US ownership. It's just a small domestic carrier for heavens sake, why are there even those rules?


The U.S. DOT quashed the Virgin American foreign ownership claims. Dubai ports was kind of ugly, but AFAIK, no one had to plead guilty over bribery!

The U.S. DOD continues to insist on competing for the tanker when it could easily get this sole sourced via an exception to the procurement regs through the Congress. So far they haven't asked for this permission, but this whole procurement is wearing very, very thin on a lot of people over here. Frankly, it may just be too hard. I personally would love to see it and would welcome the cries of "protectionism". I would even agree they are warranted in that case! IMO, the french procurement of these small aircraft are a "thumb in the eye" to Ashton Carter & the entire DOD acquisition team involved in the tanker procurement. It makes them look like a pack of horses @$$es!

Unquestionably, the french are acting in their own best interest and that of their infrastructure by buying these little planes. However, when we do the same, or even intimate that we may do it, we are subjected to (1) The Darleen gambit; (2) the "best interests of the warfighter" argument; (3) "the most capable tanker" nonsense. Again, "do as we say, not as we do" seems to be the take away here.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23079
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Mon Apr 05, 2010 2:57 pm

Quoting GDB (Reply 9):
Now go to civil aviation and check the continuing objections to Virgin US, due to it's doubts, not even real ones, about US ownership.

That is a US company, Alaska Airlines, trying to use the regulation to fight a competitor. The DOT investigated the claim because, well, that is part of their job function. But as Lumberton notes, they denied said claim, so the US government certainly does not seem to have machinations on denying VA access to the US domestic market.
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Mon Apr 05, 2010 8:41 pm

There are times when it seems a French reluctance to buy American hurts them, for instance, it is most unusual that they have nothing in the Chinook/CH-53 class, given the size of their forces and how much deploying they do.
It's a real gap, they built some Super Frelon's years back, not quite in the same class but above Puma/Super Puma, the latter certainly true if they had upgraded theirs like Israel did.
But no, they just built a small number for ASW/SAR and a very secondary, barely used, transport role.

On the other hand, when they wanted both land based and carrier AEW aircraft, where did they go?
And when they needed some carrier compatible LGB's, though this was to support Afghan operations early on.

Had the CN-235 been new in French service with this recent order, I'd understand the negativity towards it.
But, they are aiming for eventually, a two tier transport fleet, A400M and CN-235.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2637
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Mon Apr 05, 2010 9:41 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
they denied said claim

Kinda, They did make VA jump through some new hoops....

Quoting GDB (Reply 7):
They can also make the case, that once A400M is is service, having a refreshed CN-235 fleet is useful for all those taks where a A400M is too much aircraft, releasing them for their main taskings.

Yet, for some reason some posters can only see graft and handouts when the USAF trys to replace KC135 with the cheapest plane that meets KC135R specs.

I really don't care about this stopgap, but France should alteast learn to keep thier mouth shut if they are going to sole source contracts like this.
 
keesje
Posts: 8747
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Mon Apr 05, 2010 11:34 pm

Quoting Lumberton (Thread starter):
Instead, they opted to stay with the "home team"

  The aircraft are from CASA, Spain.

Are the C130J even in the same class? Would it be smart to operate a few alongside the new A400M fleet?

Never let facts ruin a good story line..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
astuteman
Posts: 6341
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:42 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 6):
I disagree entirely. I would have been willing to buy that if they had done this via public tender, but they choose to sole source apparently.

You might be missing a point here..
I would suggest that the reason for the choice of this aircraft is that it is co-produced by the manufacturer of the A400M, and can thus be offered as part of a "settlement" process with the least impact to both parties..

Quoting GDB (Reply 7):
It might be that it's part of a 'grovel package' from EADS since it's delays to another of their products that seem to have generated this latest order.

I suspect you're right.  

Rgds
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Tue Apr 06, 2010 9:13 am

Quoting keesje (Reply 14):
he aircraft are from CASA, Spain.

Which is part of EADS. France is a major shareholder in EADS.

Quoting keesje (Reply 14):
Never let facts ruin a good story line..

See above.   
Quoting astuteman (Reply 15):
I would suggest that the reason for the choice of this aircraft is that it is co-produced by the manufacturer of the A400M, and can thus be offered as part of a "settlement" process with the least impact to both parties..

It could, or it could just be a knee jerk response to a requirement by buying local. The timing leaves lots to be desired, coming as it does so soon after Sarko left the White House. There has been so much noise from some about U.S. "protectionism" just for framing a request for proposals. One would think at some point that those leveling the charge would want to set an example and at least go out with a public tender for cosmetic reasons?

But there are different standards of behavior at work, are there not?

[Edited 2010-04-06 02:16:26]
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:33 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 6):
If the stated goal is a "stop gap" to tide them over until the long delayed A400M arrives, wouldn't it be more economical purchase say 4 C-130s, rather than twice the number of little CN-235s?

Operating very small subfleets is not economical. Whole new supply chains need to be setup, maintainers need to be trained on a new type, and spares need to be purchased. From my understanding, although it shares the Hercules parentage, and general fuselage shape, the C-130J is essentially a whole new airplane compared to the older Herc's. And finding used C-130H's in decent shape is next to impossible.
 
keesje
Posts: 8747
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:49 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 16):
Which is part of EADS. France is a major shareholder in EADS.

Quoting keesje (Reply 14):
Never let facts ruin a good story line..

See above.   

You obviously don't know how EADS/EU works. It's all a big evil entity to you.. The benefits Sarko would get from buying CN-235 is neglectible. The CN-235 investments, supply chain was set up 15 years before EADS took over. It's really made in Spain. If it would be ATR's it would be different..

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 16):
But there are different standards of behavior at work, are there not?

Yes, we all have seen embarrasing examples recently. Some are still trying to justify them at every remote opportunity.

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 17):
Operating very small subfleets is not economical.

  
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Tue Apr 06, 2010 11:46 am

Quoting GDB (Reply 9):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8):
Oh really? Have you been following the French insistance on the US allowing EADS to build the KC-X? I guess you are right afterall. France does not pretend to favor totally free markets, they demand on building everything for everyone, even if the product they build is inferior or does not fully suit what the customer wants/needs.

1) Not a wholly French aircraft.
2) They are as bewildered as others at the procurement (sorry, lawyer money machine), at the Pentagon. First it's selected, then it's not. Not a transatlantic issue either, witness the Chinook selection for the CSAR requirement that went the same way, only without a proper alternative. And screw the warfighter's requirements. (Boeing did not seem to think having the biggest of the competing types was a bad thing that time did they? They sold it on that).

1.) I see, that makes all the difference.

2.) I might point out that at this point, both the KC-767 and KC-30 have been selected, at one time or another.

Quoting GDB (Reply 9):
Who is insisting anyway?

The President of France.

Quoting GDB (Reply 12):
a two tier transport fleet, A400M and CN-235.
Quoting keesje (Reply 14):
Are the C130J even in the same class? Would it be smart to operate a few alongside the new A400M fleet?

The British seem to think so. They already fly the C-17 and C-130, and still have some 20-22 A-400s on order.

Quoting keesje (Reply 14):
Never let facts ruin a good story line..

Just trying to follow your lead in that respect.

Quoting keesje (Reply 18):
You obviously don't know how EADS/EU works.

Does anybody?
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Tue Apr 06, 2010 12:11 pm

Quoting keesje (Reply 18):
EADS/EU works. It's all a big evil entity to you.

I agree its big; the "evil" is your characterization.

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 17):
Operating very small subfleets is not economical.

Agreed. But there are often strategic and tactical considerations that outweight the simple economic consideration. Not to minimize this, but it isn't the only consideration.

Here the french had a chance to make a positive statement on the benefits of two way defense procurement; they opted to stay with the home team. And speaking of tactical considerations, what benefits are derived from these smaller aircraft versus leasing or purchasing C-130Js as an interim measure?

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 19):
The British seem to think so. They already fly the C-17 and C-130, and still have some 20-22 A-400s on order.

  
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
keesje
Posts: 8747
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Tue Apr 06, 2010 12:48 pm

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 20):
Here the french had a chance to make a positive statement on the benefits of two way defense procurement; they opted to stay with the home team. And speaking of tactical considerations, what benefits are derived from these smaller aircraft versus leasing or purchasing C-130Js as an interim measure?

Help me out here, we are talking the 6.000 kg max payload C235 versus a 20.000 kg max payload C130J right?

Someties specification and requirements seem to become unimportant side lines and the grant scheme of things here..

Should we consider C-17s to replace our Fokker 50s ?
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Tue Apr 06, 2010 1:45 pm

Quoting keesje (Reply 21):
Help me out here,

The aircraft are being purchased as a "stop gap" for the A400M. Yes, it is really ridiculous to buy these little planes when you think about it.

Quoting keesje (Reply 21):
Someties specification and requirements seem to become unimportant side lines and the grant scheme of things here..

Yes, a CN-235 is not nearly as good as a "stop gap" for the A400M as the larger C-130J, but it is made in the one of the airbus countries, and that makes it OK.

Quoting keesje (Reply 21):
Should we consider C-17s to replace our Fokker 50s ?

Well, if a CN-235 is a suitable stop gap for an A400M, why not?

[Edited 2010-04-06 06:47:17]
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
LifelinerOne
Posts: 1497
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:30 pm

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Tue Apr 06, 2010 2:21 pm

It's about long-term planning. If you want your transport fleet to consist off two types, then why start adding a third by introducing a stop gap plane for which you won't have a need later on? It would be a waste of money.

Also, operating new C-130J's or C-27's would, in one way, add a new type to the fleet, with all the challenges. Keeping it on C-235's tackles that issue.

I think this order isn't about supporting the "home team", but more about spending your money wisely if you need a stop gap.

Cheers!   

[Edited 2010-04-06 07:39:33]

[Edited 2010-04-06 07:40:25]
Only Those Who Sleep Don't Make Mistakes
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Tue Apr 06, 2010 5:45 pm

Be fair, the shape of the RAF's fleet has emerged over 15 years.
The older and most hard worked C-130K's needed replacement in the near term by the 1990's, the only game in town then was the C-130J.
But they were always looking at something more substantial, post Cold War with out of NATO area deployability being more important.
The twists and turns of the politics (and limited budgets), meant that the A400M was not formally launched by 2003.

With these delays a lease for 4 C-17's was arranged in 2000, a direct response to airlift shortfalls in the 1999 Kosovo campaign.

The rapid tempo of operations after 2001 required some more C-17's, the lease turned into a buy.
Even the most optimistic A400M delivery dates would not have changed this, the later C-17's were effectively 'Urgent Operational Requirement' buys.

The rest of the C-130K fleet to be replaced by A400M.

The French President says this and that, how much is actually translated into policy?

As stated, they could have ordered the more home grown ATR, some military version of it, but never did, despite heavy lobbying.
They did not this time either, it does not do the job.

My own airline are, this year, getting some Boeing's as part of compensation for 787 delays, not really in the same size class but nonetheless allowing savings on having to run aging types now the planning for their retirement was changed by the 787 being so late.

The same is clearly happening here.
It's just a few CN-235's, to refresh the existing fleet, allowing more flying hours.
LM are not responsible for A400M delays, why should they gift the French AF?
 
Pihero
Posts: 4196
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Tue Apr 06, 2010 6:12 pm

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 22):
The aircraft are being purchased as a "stop gap" for the A400M.

That's US B.S
To think that the CN-235 could replace an A400 is ridiculous. Might as well buy a Caravan for that purpose.
But repeating the BS may make it reality. As usual.
The truth is that the plan for purchasing 8 CN-235 was on a defence document in April 2008 and initially thought for FY 2011. The money became available on the A400m delay.
The real stopgap measures - that none of our US cousins have mentioned - are twofold :
-1/ 10 Transalls will undergo some modernisations and more modifications to allow them another 10 years of operational life.
-2/ Augment the aircraft leases through the SALIS agreement. For those who don't know, SALIS is the acronym for "Strategic Airlift Interim Solution" which allows - in this case - France to use two An-124 with pre-payed hours.

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 6):
Again, they missed a splendid opportunity to make a case for strong bilateral defense trade

And why should we always be the ones to make a case for strong bilateral defense trade ? Isn't the US already the dominant purveyor of armament in Europe ? To the point that how much non-US equipment do you find in the Nettherlands, Denmark, Norway, Poland (since it joined the EU)...
So who should give the good example ?
Certainly not us.

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 16):
The timing leaves lots to be desired, coming as it does so soon after Sarko left the White House

Don't know what timing you're referring to.
I'm a bit puzzled about this fascination on the French. As far as I know, Germany, the UK, the EU commission.... have all commented on the US decision... and that fact is NEVER mentioned by our US posters... Only the French are talked about...Bloody strange, n'est-ce-pas ?
And frinally, I shall repeat what I've said in a now-locked thread : "No one has asked the US to make the choice of its new tanker an international competition. After all, France - to my knowledge - has never done so. But once you have that competition, basic ethics would ask you to proceed in fairness. That the US did not abide by the rules of honesty and openness is nobody else's fault. The US just shot their own foot and now look bad in the eyes of anybody interested in aviation for cheating in their own game (outside the US of course).
Now to look for the French as scapegoats for alleged bad team play is bloody rtich and to me the epitome of intellectual dishonesty.
Contrail designer
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Tue Apr 06, 2010 6:39 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 25):
To think that the CN-235 could replace an A400 is ridiculous. Might as well buy a Caravan for that purpose.

Here it is from a french publication. This certainly qualifies as a "stop gap", or is this "French B.S."?
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...s-8-casa-235-light-transports.html

Quote:
This acquisition is an interim measure to maintain French air transport capabilities pending the delivery of the A400M airlifter.
Quoting Pihero (Reply 25):
And why should we always be the ones to make a case for strong bilateral defense trade ?

Why not? Why not practice what the tanker RFP critics in Europe are preaching?

Quoting Pihero (Reply 25):
Now to look for the French as scapegoats for alleged bad team play is bloody rtich and to me the epitome of intellectual dishonesty.

Like "do as I say, not as I do"? Buy our tanker, but we will not buy your (more capable) transport?

BTW, for those maintaining that the French aren't doing any bitching about the tanker RFP, is this guy a frenchman?

Quote:
French President Nicolas Sarkozy accused the U.S. of protectionism on Friday as political tensions heightened over a controversial $40 billion military-aircraft deal.

Mr. Sarkozy, speaking in London, said he was disappointed that a long-delayed contract to supply a fleet of aerial-refueling tankers to the U.S. Air Force appeared likely to go to Boeing Co.

Earlier this week, a rival consortium composed of Northrop Grumman Corp. and European Aeronautic Defence & Space Co. withdrew from the competition, in part because it said the terms favored Boeing.

"Such methods by the United States are not good for its European allies, and such methods are not good for the United States, a great, leading nation with which we are on close and friendly terms," Mr. Sarkozy said. "If they want to be heard in the fight against protectionism, they should not set the example of protectionism."


[Edited 2010-04-06 11:46:54]


[Edited 2010-04-06 11:47:36]
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
Pihero
Posts: 4196
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:47 pm

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 26):
Here it is from a french publication. This certainly qualifies as a "stop gap", or is this "French B.S."?

Te top of your article says it all, and it's not from the French : "(Issued in French only; unofficial translation by defense-aerospace.com)"
So, it's not BS from this part of the world.
The same article contradicts itself somehow when it says : "...The eight new aircraft will join the 19 CASA CN 235s already in service, and will provide greater flexibility in assigning missions among the three transport aircraft in service: C-160 Transall, C-130 Hercules and CASA CN 235...."
which means, contrarily to the amused claim from your side of the Atlantic, that the CN-235 would allow a better task distributiuon amongst the cargo lifters in the FAF, therefore reducing the pressure of air transport of the Transalls/C-130s for the lighter loads.

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 26):
BTW, for those maintaining that the French aren't doing any bitching about the tanker RFP, is this guy a frenchman?

I have noticed that the tactics some posters use is what we call "drown the fish" amidst so much noise and unnecessary logorrhea that the main point is forgotten.
Why don't you instead answer my questions about Mrs Merkel - et al - and my points about the US idea of a fair competition ?
Because, really that's what I am interested in, and not the morbid interest in Mr Sarkozy's life or declarations.
But in a funny way, I'm quite pleased that this little country of mine could be so much of a pain in the a..errr...neck of some in the US of A.
Contrail designer
 
Pihero
Posts: 4196
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Tue Apr 06, 2010 9:00 pm

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 1):
The Spartan would have been a better stopgap.....

That's why the USAF - and the CIA - fly CN-235 ?
427th special ops squadron
(I notice that you didn't purchase them on an RFP ).

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 6):
why not opt for more of the larger and more capable planes, rather than more little planes?

Because to carry 5 tons of cargo is a waste of a Transall.
Contrail designer
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Tue Apr 06, 2010 9:55 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 27):
Te top of your article says it all, and it's not from the French

I said it was from a French publication. Defense-Aerospace is a French publication. Their editorial slant is heavily pro-european aerospace, not being critical, that's just obvious from reading the magazine.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 27):
But in a funny way, I'm quite pleased that this little country of mine could be so much of a pain in the a..errr...neck of some in the US of A.

France always has been rather a "pain in the...err...neck", but it is much loved by many Americans. Of that, have no doubt.

Just get Sarko to quit lecturing & preaching and we'll all feel better.

[Edited 2010-04-06 14:55:59]
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
Lumberton
Topic Author
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Tue Apr 06, 2010 9:59 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 27):
Why don't you instead answer my questions about Mrs Merkel - et al - and my points about the US idea of a fair competition ?

To the best of my knowledge, the Germans haven't selected any "stop gap" airlift yet.

The French passed on a very good chance to set a very good example. IMO, they erred.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
flyingwaeldar
Posts: 103
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 11:10 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Wed Apr 07, 2010 1:09 am

Quoting GDB (Reply 12):
Had the CN-235 been new in French service with this recent order, I'd understand the negativity towards it.

Which leads me to a question for our American friends. Should the USAF issue a RFP every time they top up a fleet of existing aircraft, lets say C-17s?
Maybe some members should reflect on who the real hypocrites are around here..........................
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5216
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Wed Apr 07, 2010 2:13 am

Quoting Pihero (Reply 28):

That's why the USAF - and the CIA - fly CN-235 ?

The C-27J was not yet available when they bought it. Note that the caption says it's the lone example of its type in USAF service.....

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Reika


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Leandro Rocha - AzoresAirPhotos
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © John Padgett

Quoting Pihero (Reply 28):
(I notice that you didn't purchase them on an RFP ).

I guess you didn't notice the flag after my user ID.   Chances are they did, but on a sole-source. The cost of conducting an open competition for a single (or a handful of aircraft, for that matter) would have been disproportionate.

The HC-144s, on the other hand, were not stopgap buys but duly selected for the role, even though the Coast Guard was also using C-130s for the same mission --- demonstrating the US's willingness to acquire EADS aircraft when it fits the requirement.....

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew Compolo
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © A. Muñiz Zaragüeta


Meanwhile, the CASA C-212 was just right for the Army SpecOps buy, as the CN-235 would have been overkill for parachute jump training and demonstration.....

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Dunn - Global Aviation Resource
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Bill Shull


As to RFPs and the better candidate, the C-27J Spartan did win over its rivals for the US Army and Air Force Joint Cargo Aircraft tender, and even had a SpecOps version in the works until the current economic conditions put a hold on those.

No saying if these are grouped with the more exotic organization.....

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mark Carlisle
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sunbird Photos by Don Boyd

 

If it's any consolation, PANAM also acquired CASA C-212CDs in the civilian front.....

Click here for bigger photo!

©



[Edited 2010-04-06 19:55:54]
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Wed Apr 07, 2010 5:34 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 20):
Here the french had a chance to make a positive statement on the benefits of two way defense procurement; they opted to stay with the home team. And speaking of tactical considerations, what benefits are derived from these smaller aircraft versus leasing or purchasing C-130Js as an interim measure?

With an aircraft they already operate... and no, a small subfleet of C-130J's is not economical, and it is not a good use of resources. The C-130J is essentially a whole new airplane, not much on the C-130J is the same as the older C-130H's and E's.
 
keesje
Posts: 8747
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Wed Apr 07, 2010 7:01 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 26):
BTW, for those maintaining that the French aren't doing any bitching about the tanker RFP, is this guy a frenchman?

Brown equally slamped the tanker proces but somehow . Somehow that got less attention.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/03...sarkozy-slam-protectionism-plane//

Quoting Pihero (Reply 28):
Because to carry 5 tons of cargo is a waste of a Transall.

That's probably the background. By using smaller aircraft the french AF can reduce the cycles on the Transall and Hercules fleets extending their service live.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Pihero
Posts: 4196
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:44 am

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 32):
Note that the caption says it's the lone example of its type in USAF service.....

The photographer wasn't well informed :
See this
On another site, there are pics of four of these airplanes, so there could be more.

Quoting keesje (Reply 34):
Brown equally slamped the tanker proces but somehow that got less attention.

Thanks, keesje, but I'm not naive enough to put that as fair and equal treatment.

Quoting keesje (Reply 34):
That's probably the background. By using smaller aircraft the french AF can reduce the cycles on the Transall and Hercules fleets extending their service live.

  

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 32):
As to RFPs and the better candidate, the C-27J Spartan did win over its rivals for the US Army and Air Force Joint Cargo Aircraft tender,

With LM as prime contractor and a whole 130J suite, hardly unexpected. I have to say that on the 2007 le Bourget show, the Spartan made the best flight demo. A really impressive piece of piloting

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 30):
To the best of my knowledge, the Germans haven't selected any "stop gap" airlift yet.

The Germans do not have the needs of the French as the involvements are way different.

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 30):
The French passed on a very good chance to set a very good example. IMO, they erred.

Fifth time you uttered that idea and you're five times biasedly wrong (if I may say so...)
Contrail designer
 
Eagleboy
Posts: 1700
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:29 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:46 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 2):
Was LM even allowed to bid the C-130J? Was there an RFP, or is this just a support our industries contract?

While the US insist on tender for every piece of equipment perhaps this was a simple as the French military saying "If the A400M is delayed we want to excercise those options we have on extra CN-235s,that way we can keep the C-130/C-160 free for larger cargos as we won't get the A440M when we want" Perhaps this way they extend the life of the Transall/Herc until the A400M enters service.

Maybe the easier and quicker option for the French was to get extra CN-235s. Perhaps getting C-130s would have needed a tendering process or too long to get aircraft in active service. Now if they had put out an official tender and chosen the CN-235 over the C-130 when the C-130 was more suited then you can cry foul.

In the same way with the USAF tanker contest/tender. The second tender is written to suit the Boeing offering. Personally I think the USAF should have been allowed to just get new tankers from Boeing at the start, the money wasted on the KC-X competition is wasted US taxpayers money. Competition is good but it can be wasteful in its own way. If they had just chosen Boeing at the very start the USAF may have new tankers entering service within a year.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 25):
To think that the CN-235 could replace an A400 is ridiculous. Might as well buy a Caravan for that purpose............The truth is that the plan for purchasing 8 CN-235 was on a defence document in April 2008 and initially thought for FY 2011. The money became available on the A400m delay.

Seems sensible to me, you have the cash, why not use it for something as your predicted purchase is currently unavailiable......

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 33):
The C-130J is essentially a whole new airplane, not much on the C-130J is the same as the older C-130H's and E's.

I read in Combat Aircraft a month or two ago that the USAF do not allow pilots to go back to the C-130E/H after training on the C-130J.
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2480
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Wed Apr 07, 2010 10:18 am

Quoting Eagleboy (Reply 36):
Maybe the easier and quicker option for the French was to get extra CN-235s. Perhaps getting C-130s would have needed a tendering process or too long to get aircraft in active service. Now if they had put out an official tender and chosen the CN-235 over the C-130 when the C-130 was more suited then you can cry foul.

I know for a fact that finding used C-130's in decent shape is next to impossible, and the wait list for C-130J's is pretty long, unless you can get the USAF to swap slots with you, and that can be iffy in itself as the USAF need new Herc's to replace worn out ones.
 
Devilfish
Posts: 5216
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Wed Apr 07, 2010 10:40 am

Quoting Pihero (Reply 35):

The photographer wasn't well informed :
See this
On another site, there are pics of four of these airplanes, so there could be more.
Four is still only a handful, and "could be" is so indefinite. Calling all resident photo "sleuths" out there.
  

Quoting Pihero (Reply 35):

With LM as prime contractor and a whole 130J suite, hardly unexpected.

Lockheed Martin left the partnership a long while prior to the bid (and was in a sense, a competitor). L-3 was the prime. Boeing was supposed to be the integrator, but negotiations with Alenia weren't fruitful.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 35):
I have to say that on the 2007 le Bourget show, the Spartan made the best flight demo. A really impressive piece of piloting

Surely part of it could be attributable to the aircraft's capabilities? Don't the French still hold some interests in Alenia through ATR?

[Edited 2010-04-07 03:48:34]
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
Pihero
Posts: 4196
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Wed Apr 07, 2010 11:07 am

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 38):
Surely part of it could be attributable to the aircraft's capabilities? Don't the French still hold some interests in Alenia through ATR?

There doesn't seem to be any future for ATR past the 42/72 family.
Diverging industrial interests on the global scale, I guess.
Contrail designer
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Wed Apr 07, 2010 1:51 pm

Quoting keesje (Reply 21):
Quoting Lumberton (Reply 20):
Here the french had a chance to make a positive statement on the benefits of two way defense procurement; they opted to stay with the home team. And speaking of tactical considerations, what benefits are derived from these smaller aircraft versus leasing or purchasing C-130Js as an interim measure?

Help me out here, we are talking the 6.000 kg max payload C235 versus a 20.000 kg max payload C130J right?

So what exactly can the CN-235 do that a C-130 cannot?

Quoting keesje (Reply 21):
Someties specification and requirements seem to become unimportant side lines and the grant scheme of things here..

Should we consider C-17s to replace our Fokker 50s ?
Quoting Lumberton (Reply 22):
Well, if a CN-235 is a suitable stop gap for an A400M, why not?

Correct.

Quoting LifelinerOne (Reply 23):
Also, operating new C-130J's or C-27's would, in one way, add a new type to the fleet, with all the challenges. Keeping it on C-235's tackles that issue.
Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 33):
With an aircraft they already operate... and no, a small subfleet of C-130J's is not economical, and it is not a good use of resources. The C-130J is essentially a whole new airplane, not much on the C-130J is the same as the older C-130H's and E's.

Doesn't the French AF also operate a sub-fleet of two A-340-200s and two A-330s?

Quoting Pihero (Reply 25):
To think that the CN-235 could replace an A400 is ridiculous.

No one suggested these are replacements for the A-400s. They will 'fill the gap' until the A-400s arrive, whenever that is.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 25):
Might as well buy a Caravan for that purpose.

You cannot do that, it is built in the US.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 25):
"No one has asked the US to make the choice of its new tanker an international competition. After all, France - to my knowledge - has never done so. But once you have that competition, basic ethics would ask you to proceed in fairness. That the US did not abide by the rules of honesty and openness is nobody else's fault. The US just shot their own foot and now look bad in the eyes of anybody interested in aviation for cheating in their own game (outside the US of course).
Quoting Pihero (Reply 25):
Now to look for the French as scapegoats for alleged bad team play is bloody rtich and to me the epitome of intellectual dishonesty.
Quoting Lumberton (Reply 26):
Like "do as I say, not as I do"? Buy our tanker, but we will not buy your (more capable) transport?
Quoting Lumberton (Reply 26):
BTW, for those maintaining that the French aren't doing any bitching about the tanker RFP, is this guy a frenchman?


Quote:
French President Nicolas Sarkozy accused the U.S. of protectionism on Friday as political tensions heightened over a controversial $40 billion military-aircraft deal.

Mr. Sarkozy, speaking in London, said he was disappointed that a long-delayed contract to supply a fleet of aerial-refueling tankers to the U.S. Air Force appeared likely to go to Boeing Co.

Earlier this week, a rival consortium composed of Northrop Grumman Corp. and European Aeronautic Defence & Space Co. withdrew from the competition, in part because it said the terms favored Boeing.

"Such methods by the United States are not good for its European allies, and such methods are not good for the United States, a great, leading nation with which we are on close and friendly terms," Mr. Sarkozy said. "If they want to be heard in the fight against protectionism, they should not set the example of protectionism."
Quoting Pihero (Reply 27):
Why don't you instead answer my questions about Mrs Merkel - et al - and my points about the US idea of a fair competition ?
Because, really that's what I am interested in, and not the morbid interest in Mr Sarkozy's life or declarations.

Maybe we Americans are not getting accurate information on this side of the Atlantic? Here it is reported that Sarkozy is the French President, and Merkel heads up Germany.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 28):
Quoting Devilfish (Reply 1):
The Spartan would have been a better stopgap.....

That's why the USAF - and the CIA - fly CN-235 ?
427th special ops squadron
(I notice that you didn't purchase them on an RFP ).

The C-27J was not avaible then, and the USCG also ordered them.....from an RFP.

In the USAF, there are just 4 CN-235s, and one of them carries civilian markings and a FAA registration "N" number.
 
keesje
Posts: 8747
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Wed Apr 07, 2010 2:32 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):

Maybe we Americans are not getting accurate information on this side of the Atlantic?

Are questioning the objectivity of some US news sources?

I think the trick is selecting & repeating info that fits existing believes and ignoring other that doesn't confirm them.

"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
LifelinerOne
Posts: 1497
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:30 pm

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Wed Apr 07, 2010 5:46 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
Doesn't the French AF also operate a sub-fleet of two A-340-200s and two A-330s?

So what? The A310's and A340's are passengerplanes. That's a whole other mission than hauling cargo. Are you suggesting that the Air Force should use it's C-32's and VC-25's to haul cargo as well?

Cheers!   

[Edited 2010-04-07 10:47:15]
Only Those Who Sleep Don't Make Mistakes
 
LifelinerOne
Posts: 1497
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:30 pm

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Wed Apr 07, 2010 5:51 pm

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 37):
I know for a fact that finding used C-130's in decent shape is next to impossible

Indeed, look how long it took to get our "new" C-130's up and running. We ordered two half a decade ago and the first one just arrived from Cambridge.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
So what exactly can the CN-235 do that a C-130 cannot?

Lighten the load on the current C-130 and C-160 fleet for minimal cost.

Cheers!   
Only Those Who Sleep Don't Make Mistakes
 
Pihero
Posts: 4196
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Wed Apr 07, 2010 8:42 pm

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
So what exactly can the CN-235 do that a C-130 cannot?

Carry up to 6000kg of cargo at a cost that the Herc can never match. I thought that was obvious !

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
The C-27J was not avaible then, and the USCG also ordered them.....from an RFP.

Wrong or dishonest statement. the Spartan has been in use in the USAF for more than twenty years. The "J" is a natural follow-up on the previous batch of G-222 s/ C-27s.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
In the USAF, there are just 4 CN-235s, and one of them carries civilian markings and a FAA registration "N" number.

Not sure about the number but it must have something quite special to be on the USAF black OPS roster and the CIA needs... Maybe the French know something...   
Contrail designer
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:27 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 44):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
The C-27J was not avaible then, and the USCG also ordered them.....from an RFP.

Wrong or dishonest statement. the Spartan has been in use in the USAF for more than twenty years. The "J" is a natural follow-up on the previous batch of G-222 s/ C-27s.

The USAF operated 10 C-27As from 1990-1999, all retired ar were transferred to other US government agencies by 2000. The US State Dept. currently operates 4 of these airplanes. So, who is being dishonest by saying the USAF has operated the C-27 for 20 years?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-27A_Spartan

The US currently has some 78 C-27Js on order for the USAF, ANG, and US Army. Another order for up to another 82 airplanes may be made by the US bringing the total to 160 C-27Js, not including the AC-27J version that may be ordered years from now.

In 2008, C-27A, USAF tail # 90-0170 was removed from AMRAC to Eglin AFB for fit and engineering studies, including the feasability of mounting 30 mm (GAU-8s) and 40 mm (Bofors) for the AC-27J Stinger II program. But, since the USAF has now delayed the Stinger II program in favor of the AC-130J, at least for a few years, I don't know where this program is now.
 
Pihero
Posts: 4196
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Thu Apr 08, 2010 8:45 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 45):
The USAF operated 10 C-27As from 1990-1999
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 45):
The US State Dept. currently operates 4 of these airplanes
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 45):
So, who is being dishonest

...or, another possibility : with weak mathematics ? as 2010 -1990 = 20 years. QED.
As usual your semantics are bizarre.
The USAF had the experience of the Spartan, and quite a few of the official services, too, when they purchased the CN-235 for USAF / CIA black ops.
You can twist that story the way you want, it doesn't change the fact that the US have had the use of the Spartan for twenty years.
I'll give you one thing, though : to have an airplane just for nine years of service doesn't say a lot about its qualities inside the said service. Thay it got chosen eight years later in a new upgraded version is another story.
(I guess...)
Contrail designer
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Thu Apr 08, 2010 2:46 pm

Quoting Pihero (Reply 46):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 45):
The USAF operated 10 C-27As from 1990-1999
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 45):
The US State Dept. currently operates 4 of these airplanes
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 45):
So, who is being dishonest

...or, another possibility : with weak mathematics ? as 2010 -1990 = 20 years. QED.
As usual your semantics are bizarre.
The USAF had the experience of the Spartan, and quite a few of the official services, too, when they purchased the CN-235 for USAF / CIA black ops.
You can twist that story the way you want, it doesn't change the fact that the US have had the use of the Spartan for twenty years.

Minus the ten years the USAF has not operated the type. Have them available for use, because they are in storage in AMRAC is not the same thing as operting them. If it did, then there are some C-123s still in storage from the Vietnam War at AMARC. Also all the KC-135Es in storage, is the USAF operating any KC-135Es or C-123s?

Quoting Pihero (Reply 46):
I'll give you one thing, though : to have an airplane just for nine years of service doesn't say a lot about its qualities inside the said service. Thay it got chosen eight years later in a new upgraded version is another story.
(I guess...)

That is not the same as flying or operating C-27A # 90-0170. They are only using the cargo compartment, which is the same as the C-27J.

As for the CN-235s, those airplanes have a unique mission, much like the Mig fighters the USAF has in the inventory.
 
Pihero
Posts: 4196
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:11 am

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Thu Apr 08, 2010 3:43 pm

are all those C-127 pilots dead ?
are all the engineers and Mechanics who maintain them gone to Russia ?
No !
In this case, there is still experience.
Your definition of experience as "continuous service" is flawed ( but it suits your argument, in which case it is also specious).

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 47):
As for the CN-235s, those airplanes have a unique mission,

I'm sure you're not going to define that mission. It involves some rather good performance in and out of short / unprepared airfields.
But to recap : When the USAF/CIA needed an airplane with some "!performance", instead of going to the Spartan. of which they had a rather extensive experience, they went to buy the CN-235 which they considered suitable to their needs.
And what is wrong with that statement ?
Contrail designer
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: French Buy C-235s As A400M "Stop Gap" Measure

Thu Apr 08, 2010 7:02 pm

Another example of those French not buying American................oh wait!

http://www.dsca.mil/PressReleases/36-b/2010/France_10-04.pdf

Clearly this proposed buy is for current operational requirements in the field, even though France, as part of the pan European MDBA is looking to develop a new system in this class to replace current aging systems post 2015.

Honours even?
(They'll be top up buys of the above given their likely rate of use on operations).

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests