User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

A Tail Of Two Airplanes

Thu May 03, 2012 10:13 am

How is it we can afford a $395B airplane program, but cannot afford the "luxury" of a $2B airplane program?

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2012/04/30/a-tale-of-two-airplanes/

http://battleland.blogs.time.com/201...el-a-pentagon-procurement-program/
 
User avatar
STT757
Posts: 13199
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 1:14 am

RE: A Tail Of Two Airplanes

Thu May 03, 2012 10:48 am

I don't understand why they don't give the C-27s to the Army as originally intended.
Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
 
GDB
Posts: 12653
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: A Tail Of Two Airplanes

Thu May 03, 2012 11:23 am

Quoting STT757 (Reply 1):
I don't understand why they don't give the C-27s to the Army as originally intended.

That's probably what it's really all about, I don't see any need to compare with F-35.
The C-27 is the subject of inter service rivalry which might still rankle, there are not many of them, they in the minds of some at least, look to be short of a mission post 2014 as regards Afghanistan.
And there are budget cuts.
A perfect storm for this aircraft?
 
chuchoteur
Posts: 609
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 9:17 pm

RE: A Tail Of Two Airplanes

Thu May 03, 2012 11:48 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Thread starter):
How is it we can afford a $395B airplane program, but cannot afford the "luxury" of a $2B airplane program?

I sometimes get the feeling it is about numbers.
Big numbers mean important things...

A $2bn program for a fleet that is marginal in size (compared to the USAF or Army fleet) is clearly not essential... it is a luxury that one can afford to lose, whereas a $395bn program that will represent the bulk of the future fleet must be preserved...

...and at federal gvt level, writing off $2bn is not unheard of (alas!).

I personally believe the C27J was a good buy, providing a niche capability in the tactical supply/delivery domain, as seen today in Afghanistan.
 
aeroweanie
Posts: 1577
Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2004 9:33 pm

RE: A Tail Of Two Airplanes

Fri May 04, 2012 5:34 am

To me, it can be summed up very easily:
F-22 = Fighter airplane
C-27J = Not a fighter airplane

It was the same way with the A-10. The fighter mafia kept trying to retire them and then another war would start and everybody would see how valuable the A-10 is.

Back in 1967, the Air Force felt threatened by the Army's fixed-wing operations and grabbed the tactical airlift mission, getting the C-7 Caribous that were in service and the C-8 Buffalos that were on order. The Air Force promptly retired the Caribous and cancelled the Buffalo order. They did operate some C-123s, but retired them as soon as they could. This was despite the lessons learned in Vietnam, where the C-130 was just too big for many front-line airfields. This forced the Army to buy second-hand Short 360s, glue a Short 330 tail on them and use them for airlift as C-23s. Now that the C-23s are worn out, the Air Force played a con game on the Army, going in as a "partner" on the C-27J buy, grabbing the program and then terminating it. I personally think that every Air Force officer involved in the C-27J scam should be demoted to Airman First Class.
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11002
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: A Tail Of Two Airplanes

Fri May 04, 2012 2:07 pm

The C-27J can also be used by Spec Ops guys, it is the perfect airplane for them, small, good range and speed, and able to drop small groups of paratroops. It has also been proposed as the AC-27J Stinger gunship, freeing up the AC-130s for bigger targets.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests