Challenger/"VIP" Jet/CF Chopper Use (CDS, others) [merged]

[The Bread Guy]

More from The Canadian Press:

The air force has been cleared of any wrongdoing in its decision to approve a helicopter flight in Labrador last year that the military had said was intended to reward crew members for completing maintenance.

The military police says it found no evidence that assets were misused when the CH-146 Griffon flew to No Name Lake on June 8, 2012.

Members of 5 Wing Goose Bay came under criticism after a provincial politician posted a photo on Facebook showing crew members fishing during the trip.

At the time, the airbase said the trip was meant to recognize the effort of ground crews in finishing maintenance and inspection of an aircraft that returned from a deployment in Jamaica.

A spokesman for 5 Wing Goose Bay also said at the time that crew members conducted a reconnaissance mission and survival training in the area of No Name Lake, including fishing.

The Canadian Forces National Investigation Service, the military police’s investigative wing, says the chopper was used for local training and to clear brush from a landing pad, and not as survival training as the air force originally reported.

 

[Edward Campbell]

And now, the Government announces that it "will reduce the Royal Canadian Air Force's fleet of CC-144 Challenger aircraft from six to four effective immediately." The savings are expected to be in the order of $1.5 Million per year.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

...and will be promptly spent on pearl grey badges...

^-^

 

[upandatom]

.yepp just saw that, I thought I hit one of the numbers on the top.

*Edited, content, Grammar, spelling and way to old post.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I take it John10 is a cop, or speaking on behalf of their righteous hand of justice?

1. Look at the amount of excessive use of force in the past 10 years,
2. How many deaths have been caused by police forces using excessive force?
3. How many Police Officers, are currently on "Paid Suspension" for excessive force? and for how long, ( theres currently a female Montreal cop on year two or three of a paid suspension for excessive force by beating on a homeless guy, and it was caught on video, clear as day)
4. How .......................................

You realize you're responding to a post almost 3 years old made by a member who was banned in Jan of this year?

 

[The Bread Guy]

And now, the Government announces that it "will reduce the Royal Canadian Air Force's fleet of CC-144 Challenger aircraft from six to four effective immediately." The savings are expected to be in the order of $1.5 Million per year.

Be careful what you wish for, haters ....

With two of Canada's controversial Challenger jets grounded and the fate of two more up in the air, the Canadian military is scrambling to figure out how to fill the fleet's often unheralded role as emergency life-savers.

Two of the aging jets, best known for ferrying around VIPs and government officials, were retired last week by the Conservative government, which used the decision to burnish its fiscal management credentials.

A news release said the estimated $1.5 million in savings per year would be redirected to other "higher operational needs," such as search and rescue.

But internal documents, obtained by The Canadian Press, show that a smaller fleet means the air force may have to use larger, more costly aircraft for important military missions, including medical evacuation.

Absent from Friday's news release from National Defence was the fact that the two jets were due to be retired anyway — they're old, spare parts are scarce and their outdated avionics prevent them from being flown overseas.

Internal air force memos show two of the remaining four jets are in the same situation and must be decommissioned before the end of the year, leaving just two jets based with 412 Transport Squadron in Ottawa.

The executive jets have long been juicy political targets — especially for the Conservatives, who railed against their use while in opposition, casting the sleek CC-144s as emblematic of Liberal excess.

Since coming to office in 2006, the Conservatives have repeatedly pointed out how little they use them, but have also been caught out in their own controversies — notably high-flying trips by both former defence minister Peter MacKay and retired general Walt Natynczyk.

The Conservatives have often said the jets spend more time flying empty just to keep the pilots trained than they do shuttling dignitaries.

But the Challengers also have a much more significant job: transporting wounded and injured troops back to Canada, and helping out with non-combat evacuations and disaster assistance.

The remaining jets will still be reserved for use by the prime minister and Governor General, and can be on stand-by for medical evacuations ....

 

[Journeyman]

.... may have to use larger, more costly aircraft for important military missions, including medical evacuation.

"May" -- nice hypothetical; I'd like to think that a credible journalist would have followed up with "...and how many times HAS it happened?"

But the Challengers also have a much more significant job: transporting wounded and injured troops back to Canada......

Again, nice muck-raking; name two incidents.

 

[PuckChaser]

They had to send one for that guy that had a heart attack in the Caribbean on vacation. Even made the papers. Civilian flights wouldn't take him that far so DND had to do it.

 

[Journeyman]

They had to send one for that guy that had a heart attack in the Caribbean on vacation. Even made the papers. Civilian flights wouldn't take him that far so DND had to do it.

Thanks; hence "name two."

....if it's justifiable keeping the fleet alive for 1.5 patient transfers



Edit: typo

 

[Ostrozac]

For the occasional time that we need international air medavec, isn't it more cost effective to simply charter a private executive jet when we need one?

That's what an international business working in a war zone would do -- just call the charter company and ask them to pick up the casualty, fly them to the hospital, and send an invoice.

Or is this one of those occasions where chartering a jet for $500,000 to pick up a casualty is more complicated than it should be because of our procurement and contracting regulations? So if we need the jets to be on standby quickly, then we actually have to have them sitting around as part of the fleet?

 

[captloadie]

The Challengers also do many other short notice taskings. Many HA recces go out on a challenger. The boys on the hill use them for quick deployments. And to add to the international medivac list, when a member was severely injured while skydiving on vacation, the challenger went to pick him up.

l

 

[RubberTree]

The Challengers are also used for domestic medevac, and not too (that being relative) infrequently.
Although true that on occasion a charter would probably be cheaper, is there not something to be said for being able to support our own troops through the repatriation process? I would personally feel better about going...somewhere...knowing that Canada will be there to bring me back.

 

[Remius]

The Challengers also do many other short notice taskings. Many HA recces go out on a challenger. The boys on the hill use them for quick deployments. And to add to the international medivac list, when a member was severely injured while skydiving on vacation, the challenger went to pick him up.

l

there was also that motorcycle accident Capt. I think in the US a few years ago too.

I'm not sure what the cost is but I would wager when you factor that those planes fly empty anyways that it might be cheaper than a charter andn cheaper to have care provided for here in Canada when all is said and done.  But form I gather, these planes were set to be grounded anyways due to age.  :dunno:

 

[Rifleman62]

there was also that motorcycle accident Capt. I think in the US a few years ago too.

If it is the same fellow (formally RSS 26 Fd Regt, RCA), then PAFFO at NORAD, he was DOA at the scene.

 

[a_majoor]

Another case of trying to make the "least worst" choice.

Spend lots of money having a few planes on standby for out of the ordinary events?

Spend lots of money on old aircraft nearing the end of their service life to deal with out of the ordinary events?

Spend lots of money to charter a business jet when an out of the ordinary event happens?

Any choice you make is going to attract nay sayers. If the out of the ordinary events are not too frequent, then it may make the most sense to simply charter the appropriate size of aircraft when the time comes (also gives you flexibility, since the Challenger sized business jet might not be the right plane anyway).

 

[George Wallace]

Another case of trying to make the "least worst" choice.

Spend lots of money having a few planes on standby for out of the ordinary events?

Spend lots of money on old aircraft nearing the end of their service life to deal with out of the ordinary events?

Spend lots of money to charter a business jet when an out of the ordinary event happens?

Any choice you make is going to attract nay sayers. If the out of the ordinary events are not too frequent, then it may make the most sense to simply charter the appropriate size of aircraft when the time comes (also gives you flexibility, since the Challenger sized business jet might not be the right plane anyway).

Now the question of "Unlimited Liability" comes into question.  Would a "charter" fly into locations where an "out of ordinary event" is taking place?

 

[PuckChaser]

Now the question of "Unlimited Liability" comes into question.  Would a "charter" fly into locations where an "out of ordinary event" is taking place?

Do Challengers actually fly into places a normal civilian business jet wouldn't? I always figured Hercs/C17s would be the ones flying airevac in and out of hostile airspace.

 

[captloadie]

The charter option would only be valid if we actual bought x hours per year with a charter company. Otherwise we would never be able to get a contract in place in time to be useful.

 

[Edward Campbell]

OK, suppose, just for the sake of argument, that we, the Government of Canada, actually, decides to scrap all the Challengers and also decides to not have executive jets at all ...

    Will there still be a need for some urgent VIP flights for which commercial air is not suitable? Yes. Can the CC-150 Polaris meet most needs? Yes.

    Will there still be some emergency jobs for which a large aircraft like the Polaris or even the Hercules might not be suitable? Yes. Can the Buffalo or Twin Otter (or their urgently needed replacement(s))
    meet those needs? Yes.

    Do we really need executive jets?  :waiting:

 

[George Wallace]

How much of that fleet is actually at 17 Wing and used as Training platforms?