CH47 Chinook

[mover1]

What about Maintenance? would this mean that it would suddenly become a "Purple" Trade. And we can have a mixture of uniforms on the flight line.  With different training standards. IE Army has to do Army JLC manwhile the  Airforce and Navy guys can go where ever.
Would their maintenance doctrine, procedures and paperwork be armyafied?
I don't think the Army or Navy Owning these assets would help anything in the long run. In Fact it just may hurt it. As the public and the politicians see things that fly as Airforce Things that Float as Navy and things that walk run or drive as Army.
The Pilot trade would become purple as well.  As people become cross trained on other platforms the whole essence of the Airforce would eventually get blurred and cease to exist therefore killing it as two of its core trades dissapear into tri service nothinghood.
Why not just concentrate on learning how to properly use these assets and educate those who commit them on their proper uses and limitations.
At the end of the day I don't know  what the difference of the color of a T-shirt or hat will help anything.

 

[Zoomie]

There is no logical reason to retain what are rightfully Army and Navy resources in the a** f**ce.

This rant is getting tiresome - really, give it a rest. 

As it has been previously mentioned by others in the know - it was a CLS driven decision to rid the CF of our Hooks in the first place - how do you think our current post-Cold War CF would fare with separate aviation wings?

 

[Good2Golf]

...it was a CLS driven decision to rid the CF of our Hooks in the first place...

Well, Comd FMC, but yeah...

 

[MarkOttawa]

Three Torch posts that may be relevant:

The spectre haunting the defence budget
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2008/11/spectre-haunting-defence-budget.html

Defence equipment: The shoe drops
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2008/11/defence-equipment-shoe-drops.html

The Conservative government's January 2008 budget
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2009/01/conservative-governments-january-2008.html

As far as I can see the words "defence" and "Canadian Forces" do not appear in the budget...

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

When, if ever, will we sign the contract for CH-47Fs?  A Torch post, with lots of background:

Aussies look like buying CH-47F Chinooks; when will we?
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2009/05/aussies-look-like-buying-ch-47f.html

Mark
Ottawa

 

[GAP]

DND Looks to Buy Fewer Choppers
Josh Pringle Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Article Link

The Defence Department has asked Boeing whether Canada's order for 16 heavy-lift Chinooks can be cut to 14.

The Canadian Press reports the Federal Government is looking to trim its order for new battlefield helicopters because of budget concerns.

DND wants to keep the $4.7 billion program within budget.

A spokesman for DND insists the Federal Government is still committed to the project
end of article

 

[MarkOttawa]

Torch post, with lots of further links:

New Chinooks: The Foxtrot goes on...and on...
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2009/05/new-chinooks-foxtrot-goes-onand-on.html

Mark
Ottawa

 

[MarkOttawa]

Latest:

CHINOOK CONTRACT TO BE ANNOUNCED IN THE SUMMER: BOEING
http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/defencewatch/archive/2009/05/27/chinook-contract-to-be-announced-in-the-summer-boeing.aspx

Boeing says it is expecting a contract to be announced this summer for the acquisition of 16 [see two previous posts--only 14 maybe?] Chinook F model helicopters for the Canadian Forces. According to Richard Meanor, manager of Business Development for International Rotorcraft Integrated Defense Systems, negotiations are in their final stages. The contract will include the establishment of an in-service support program using domestic industry but, similar to the C-130J deal, involving Boeing as the prime contactor. Boeing will select domestic companies for the work and then present the package to government for approval. When (if) the contract is announced this summer it will mark the end of a long process of discussions and negotiations on the Chinooks (by then three years in total).

Mark
Ottawa

 

[karl28]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20090810/canada_choppers_090810/20090810?hub=Canada


Apparently the Fed have given Boeing the green light for a 1.2 billion contract  for 15 choppers  and delivery is in the 2013 - 2014 range . For those in the  know more than me does that mean we will still be able to keep the 6 chinooks that we have in Afghanistan ? Plus the 15 new ones ?

 

[dapaterson]

There were old announcements that the six were a temporary measure, to be traded back once we get new ones.

As we have no desire to fly another split fleet, the final number will be whatever we buy new from Boeing.  The others will go back to BOeing who will do whatever they want with them.

 

[dapaterson]

Official DND news release:

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/news-nouvelles/view-news-afficher-nouvelles-eng.asp?id=3085

DND Backgrounder:

http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/news-nouvelles/view-news-afficher-nouvelles-eng.asp?id=3084

 

[karl28]

dapaterson

To bad we couldn't keep the extra 6 I know there not the newest but extra choppers can't be a bad thing but thanks for the heads up .

Cheers Karl

 

[MarkOttawa]

A post at The Torch:

CH-47F Chinooks: Three years to negotiate a contract
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2009/08/ch-47f-chinooks-three-years-to.html

Mark
Ottawa

 

[DocBacon]

To bad we couldn't keep the extra 6 I know there not the newest but extra choppers can't be a bad thing but thanks for the heads up .

It may be that we don't want to keep those particular aircraft, anyways.  They may not be in mint condition.

 

[Loachman]

They are not.

And even if they were, they are completely different aircraft.

Another fleet to support.

And who would crew and maintain the additional six? What do we give up in trade?

 

[HercFE]

No word yet on were they will be based? Last word a year ago or so was possibly Bagotville.

 

[Loachman]

Nope. Just speculation.

 

[MarkOttawa]

Petawawa speculation:
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Forces+buying+Chinook+helicopters/1877617/story.html

...

The Chinooks would be operated from a single base, with CFB Petawawa in the Ottawa Valley seen as the front-runner for that location.

The Canadian Forces had originally planned to operate the helicopters from two bases. The government has yet to announce what base will be selected as home to the new aircraft...

Mark
Ottawa

 

[dapaterson]

Given that we have a minority government situation, I fully expect a decision and announcement to be made for maximum political impact, vice timed to give DND/CF maximum time to react.

 

[SARgirl]

I thought a similar news story had already been posted on the forum, but I couldn't find it when I did a search.


$1.15 billion U.S. for 15 choppers: Canadian Forces
The Gazette
August 10, 2009

Link:
http://www.montrealgazette.com/business/billion+choppers+Canadian+Forces/1877846/story.html

News Story:
MONTREAL -- The Federal Government has placed a much-delayed order for 15 new CH-47F Chinook heavy-lift helicopters with the Boeing Co. The contract is worth about $1.15 billion U.S.

The twin-turbine aircraft will be produced at a Boeing plant in Pennsylvania and deliveries are set for 2013-2014. They will have Honeywell engines and have a load capacity of 21,000 pounds.

Defence Minster Peter MacKay said last week Canada will deal with a shortage of military transport helicopters in Afghanistan by buying six used machines from the U.S. and also by leasing Russian-built aircrafts.

Boeing has undertaken to match every dollar spent by Canada under the CH-47F contract by partnering and issuing contracts to companies in Canada – so-called offset work. About $500 million U.S. of offset contracts have already been signed with Canadian companies, Boeing said in Chicago Monday.