Is there any difference in size between the hanger on the Type 26 and the River-Class? The Type 26 will embark the Merlin so presumably it would fit on the Rivers unless we reduced the hanger size from the original plan.
So two SeaHawks you say
Pretty sure the Type 26 hangar was built for two Merlins, not just one.
Probably could work out a face saving method. Reassign the CH-148 to CANSOF (while actually replacing those Cyclones with -92A+ models,) and get 50 for MH-60R for MH roles.
Not true.
Extended warranty? We do something similar in my business. We pay a fixed fee per month per machine to maintain a stock of spares. Saves us having to spend millions on spares. Penalties apply if a spare is not available when needed. Works pretty well, and dramatically simplifies stocktaking.
Can one bang his head against the wall when governments display lack of common sense & idiotic purchases?
Yes, of course, but it would be far more worthwhile - and satisfying - to bang government heads against that wall.
Warranty period is long gone.
The whole program is a boondoggle from Day 1. 1983 the RCAF started looking for SeaKing replacements - the S-92 wasn't off the drawing board until 1992.
"Extended" warranty. Very common in my industry. You basically negotiate a fixed monthly (or yearly) price for the extension of all (or portions) of the original warranty terms. Ours is for parts only, as we contract with a third party for the PM and CM. Not sure it would work in a military environment, but all terms can be negotiated. In our case, we have a requirement for critical parts delivery within 2 hours of the initial demand. To satisfy this, the OEMs established stocking locations near to (or in some cases inside) our facilities. They maintain the stock, and working with us regularly review historical usage and adjust the MAX/MIN levels. I would argue it's actually a good model for an orphan fleet, as it incentivizes the OEM to make the investments needed to maintain adequate spares for the duration of the Extended Warranty period. Not even sure it's more expensive, as we were able to get out of the parts inventory/warehousing game, which has saved us millions. Don't know if this would work in DND, however, but, if we wanted to get the most out of this platform, securing another 20 years of parts would be a good first step.
Those are all good ideas.
I think the takeaway is that the CAF has convinced ourselves that we get 50+ years out of an aviation asset. 20 years is about the timeframe where most of our allies looks at replacing their aircraft anyway.
I suspect that if the powers that be could manage to do it without anyone noticing....next Tuesday ?
breakingdefense.com
