Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,935
- Points
- 1,160
Would the P-8 based on the 737 be gravel runway capable? If so that means they could land to refuel and rest in the arctic, during the summer months.
WPA said:support for the ground troops. :
Support for the ground troop would SOMETIMES better served but a fleet of Reapers UAV that will be purchased thanks to the Manely report. Reaper can do the job better than the upgraded CP140 and P-8 at super large fraction of cost in operation and maintenance cost alone. The reaper is less of a target and more stealthy, does not put pilot and sensor personel lives at risk.
i read in Aviation weekly
Some time think outside the box works.
a lesson could be learned here.
CDN Aviator said:You will notice that i am not taking my lessons on MPAs from AW&ST
Baden Guy said:I always thought of AW&ST as a very good magazine regards military equipment ??
Mind you Jane's is tops.
Would the P-8 based on the 737 be gravel runway capable? If so that means they could land to refuel and rest in the arctic, during the summer months.
Colin P said:Would the P-8 based on the 737 be gravel runway capable? If so that means they could land to refuel and rest in the arctic, during the summer months.
CDN Aviator said:Whats wrong with the way we do it now ?
benny88 said:Pardon me for my inexperience, but could you describe the way we do it now?
CDN Aviator said:Roll you eyes all you want. This is part of the LRP mission in this country and in many others.
That Funny. You still did not answer the question/ statement that a Reaper UAV is the Better and First Choice to use. (Many countries including the US, UK, Italy etc.) Countries are buying the UAV.
Some say Astor project for the UK bases on the Global Express from Bombardier as late and over due.
It is late. ASTOR is not the solution for us.
Yes late just like most gov. projects around the world for many countries. I never said that the ASTOR is a solution for Canada i said the CRJ could and should be promoted as platform for such technology.
:
At the very least, some of us here know what the box looks like because we work in and around the box.
Are you stating the Country of Israel does not know what the box look like? Are you stating Israel does not have a prov-en track record of thinking out the box coming up with new tactics in warfare and the use of technology like UAVs and armour and coastal patrols that have been adopted around the world.
You still failed to stated that if there is a market a medium size MPA and AEW aircraft of the size of CRJ.
If there is a market are you saying Canadian business and Canadian Government should not look at option of building the product?
You also failed to state how big of a fleet of P-8s Canada afford not just purchase of the aircraft, but also operation cost of just doing the normal patrols?
Patrol of CP-140 have been canceled recently for lack of funds.
You will notice that i am not taking my lessons on MPAs from AW&ST
WPA said:Not worth to comment
Patrol of CP-140 have been canceled recently for lack of funds.
not worth to comment
You still failed to stated that if there is a market a medium size MPA and AEW aircraft of the size of CRJ.
If there is a market are you saying Canadian business and Canadian Government should not look at option of building the product?
Are you stating the Country of Israel does not know what the box look like? Are you stating Israel does not have a prov-en track record of thinking out the box coming up with new tactics in warfare and the use of technology like UAVs and armour and coastal patrols that have been adopted around the world.
You also failed to state how big of a fleet of P-8s Canada afford not just purchase of the aircraft, but also operation cost of just doing the normal patrols?
FoverF said:WPA:
You should maybe look at some of the numbers for the ASTOR program before you suggest it as a cheaper alternative to the P-8
The total program cost, to develop and deliver FIVE airframes, was around $2 Billion ("just over 1 bn pounds")
Flug-Revue quotes an airframe production cost of $131 million (68.6 million pounds) per airframe. So a quick and dirty calculation for the infrastructure and development costs (but mostly development) comes to around $1.35 billion dollars. That's the harm in building a prototype. Similarly, when Germany developed the mission equipment package for their GlobalHawks, the cost was around three quarters of a billion dollars, just for a modular pallet that fits into an existing and unmodified airframe. And neither of these a/c have any kind of armament, sono-bouys, MAD gear, or any of the other stuff that you need to kill submarines.
And while I haven't looked too deep for the delivered program costs of the Heyl Havir G550 CAEW, the initial contract specified a cost of about $120 million per airframe, and this was in 2003 while it was still a paper airplane (I guarantee you it didn't get any cheaper since then).
So we'd be paying enormous development costs to develop an MPA version of the CRJ (while Boeing and the USN are going to pay for the development cost of the P-8 for us), to get airframes that are shorter ranged, unarmed, less capable, but probably just as expensive to purchase.
And we STILL need to buy something that can KILL SUBMARINES.
www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/FRASTOR.htm
http://www.armedforces.co.uk/raf/listings/l0025.html
http://www.gulfstream.com/news/releases/2003/082803.html
WPA said:Not worth to comment
WPA said:sorry that was for the "You will notice that i am not taking my lessons on MPAs from AW&ST" only
CRJ 900 / 1000 purchase as follows:
2 MPA with refueling (one with the converted with the sensor package firt for flight testing. second full convert jet with 1 or 2 bomb bay in the cargo area forward and aft of the wings (location not sure), hadpoint on the wings 2 each and finally a refueling probe.
2 AEW&C planes. Israel uses a G550 with conformal AESA radar for a full 360 view and the first on has beem deliveried
2 Astor for the ground forces
2 light weight refuel planes (wait wait crazy idea but hear me out) for emergency cases for Canada as the Airbus 310 AR are located in Ontario. plus could be bases in the Arctic and costal bases for refueling MPA and SAR Planes, Helicopters (chinnook purchase, UAVS .
WPA said:I am not questioning the sensors or weapons of the aircraft.
All i am stating is that we could use others platform that could be used.
development of the mission equipment package has already been design contracted out with the CP-140 upgrades.
Plus i am sure i will be blasted for saying there is a difference development costs mission equipment and intergration costs on a aircraft.
For example most of the cost for the ASTOR aircraft is for the radar hardware, software and ground station and not the integration cost on the aircraft.
NO the ASTOR is not my suggestion as a cheaper alternative to the P-8choice .
The US cannot afford to replace each P-3 for a P-8 it is more like every 2 to 3 P-3 for each P-8.
How could Canada afford a fleet large enough to do the job 18 to 20 aircraft.
Also the operating cost for the large jet maybe to much for the DND budget.
On DND budget already has:
JSS
halifax refit
sub refit
new tanks
UAV's
the Artic deep port
Artic underwater sensor system proposed
CF-18 upgrades
CP-140 upgrades
Tow missile purchase
130J purchase
C17 purchase
CH-47 purchase
apov purchase
new polar icebreaker(CCG budget but has i high cost to build)
777 gun
purchase of new truck fleet for the forces
There is the need to start, continue or restart the programs to replace the following and the money for it:
New fighter aircraft
new derstroiers
new frigates
new subs
new maritime patrol air craft
next generation of LAV's and TLAV
etc....
Now some of this has already been paid for or money set aside for the purchace.
However in the eyes of the voters this does not matter. If they feel that the enough money is spent on the military then things can change very quickly.
Face it the liberals proved this last time in power. The military was given just enough to look like progress was being made with some of the project that i list above.
The Conservatives did great progress to improve the Army and Air force with purchases they made. Most of this purchases are on the low end of the price tag for new procurements i mention above. Plus the Conservatives are already say we need to be careful in spending money for the budgets for the next little while.
However most of the really big price items still need to be taken care of before thing get really bad like the seakings, AOR ship, subs, trucks etc....
The equipment are rusted out, high maintenance cost for every hour of flight or simply the lost of the capability completely.
Other words there is going to be some tough choice to be made.
Plus i am not the only one out there would like to know?
PS i support spending money on the military.