Heavy lift conundrum

[Scoobie Newbie]

Do we need to replace every C130 with an equivalent new plane or could we reduce the number of planes by getting larger planes ie the C-17?   Also how would this effect current taskings by have fewer yet larger planes?

http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=92

http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=86

 

[Cloud Cover]

CFL: whenever you post in the Navy/Airforce forum, it reminds me of the Marine Lieutenant in A Few Good Men: "I like you navy boys, you always give us a ride when we have to go fight somewhere."   

I think there is no question the C130 will not be replaced on a 1 for 1 basis. The first step will probably entail acquiring the new SAR fixed wing aircraft and determining how many "excess" C130 are freed up, then delete the sum of those 2 numbers from the flight line (+/-).

Or, take a look at how many Australia has and subtract about 25%, that seems to be our formula when we don't scrap a capability altogether. 

It seems to me the C130 fulfills a tactical role not easily replaced by another aircraft, [especially the tanker variant] so we'll pick up a few new or slightly used C130J along the way along with some used C17's or other airframe. I am wondering if the new SAR aircraft will be dedicated to SAR and MP, or will it have a secondary [non-domestic] tactical role assigned?

The CASR site has a good write up on the issue, but I know there are lurkers out there who could add to the info on this site!!

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

whiskey is that a slam or a good thing?  I always liked Kiefer Sutherland.

 

[Cloud Cover]

It's a good thing in a non pusser sort of way .. Do the army types really care how they get in theatre, as long they get there safe and can be resupplied/reinforced on a routine basis?  

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

 

[Cloud Cover]

LMFAO!!!!!! ;D

 

[Cloud Cover]

Frankly, if you want to deploy in fine style, here's the way:

 

[DJL]

Though I agree, that picture translates into DND's total budget for two plus years  :-

Seriously though, Sealift and Airlift shouldn't be an either/or ddecision.........Sealift trumps airlift in purchase price, capacity and eefficiency but airlift is light years ahead in terms of speed of delivery and global access.



And for those that like to think outside the box (or in this case bag):

http://www.atg-airships.com/


Nicht Ihr Großeltern Graf Zepplin!!! 

 

[Cloud Cover]

At least 5 years if you include all the accessories, like Harriers, choppers, aclc, etc. I believe this little fleet could accomodate our entire infantry corps and more! Just think, this is but a small expression of the power projection of the US. The surface escort for this TG numbers about 35 + support ships. In total, probably about 100 billion all in, not including GST and sponsorship skimming.    

 

[Zoomie]

I am wondering if the new SAR aircraft will be dedicated to SAR and MP, or will it have a secondary [non-domestic] tactical role assigned?

TAL - Tactical Air Lift - is not a role that is practised by any of our FW SAR Squadrons.  Both aircraft (Herc and Buff) are built for taking battle damage and landing on mud strips, but we don't do that.  Our TAL Squadrons are based out of Trenton (429 and 436) and they do not have a dedicated SAR posture.  The new FWSAR replacement will hopefully be the C-27J Spartan (as it is the only contender) and will most likely be painted bright yellow with red stripes - not very tactical.

Ever since the C-17 idea was shelved by the higher-uppers, there hasn't been any other word of actively replacing the C-130's.  An alternate to replacing them would be exactly what Whiskey already mentioned - the reduction of SAR Hercs will relieve a considerable pressure on the Trenton fleet as all of the available birds will go there.  Most likely 435 (Winnipeg squadron) will lose its air-to-air tactical refueling and be strictly SAR with the new plane.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

All good points however I think even more pressure would be relieved by having an aircraft like the C 17 deliver goods to say Aviano Air Base in Italy and then by Herc to your tactical zone, esp if the runway won't accomidate a C-17.

 

[Inch]

I didn't want to weigh into this discussion since it's not my forte, but I do have opinions on it, so here they go.

CFL, you hit the nail on the head.  In today's budget crunch we're constantly looking at similar fleets to save money, in a perfect world the issue shouldn't be saving money at the expense of getting the right equipment for the job.  It's supposed to work just like you said, strategic airlift (C-17) to get the goods overseas, and TAL (C-130) to disperse them once they're over there. You're absolutely right, TAL should be able to operate from small unprepared airfields and be equipped with self defense suites (ie flares and chaff and even JATO if the situation dictates), strategic airlift doesn't necessarily need to be able to do that.

In my humble opinion, strategic airlift is one of the most important capabilities that we're lacking. With the amount of deployments we have going on, we have absolutely no way to get our guys and their equipment to the hot spots.

Cheers

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Both have their place in warfare but the question is how do you see your expeditionary force deployed? Rapid..you want heavy airlift...the problems with air you have to use so many flights to keep your force stocked up in beans and bullets and you still have to keep up with it. With heavy sealift...you bet its slow but how much can you offload with the troops in one sitting....Many many planeloads of C17. You need a balance of both, its too bad the government cannot see that.

 

[Cloud Cover]

You need a balance of both, its too bad the government cannot see that.

Well, here's an idea. Let's build a squadron of troop carrying aircraft carriers that are so huge we can fly the C17's and Herc's off the flight deck!! 

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

Hey give me an Imperial Star Destroyer any day...firepower, trooplift, support and intimidation. Who needs more?

 

[PPCLI Guy]

CFL, you hit the nail on the head.

He sure did - aircraft (like most things military) are generally optimised for one, and perhaps two roles.   When you try to go multi-role, you lose capability across the spectrum.

In my humble opinion, strategic airlift is one of the most important capabilities that we're lacking. With the amount of deployments we have going on, we have absolutely no way to get our guys and their equipment to the hot spots.

I agree.   I still think that the "shared fleet" idea is a good one.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Ex-D: Who do we appoint as Darth Vader?

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

The question is whats more important rapid deployment or heavy lift?

Darth Vader....hmmmm well Infanteer I am told has the Star Wars PJ set so I think he should be Vader.

I wonder if we can convince Brin to wear the Princess Leah cinnamon rolls

 

[Sam69]

The question is whats more important rapid deployment or heavy lift?

Actually, the question is: what is the scenario? Because the type of strat lift required varies according to the scenario. For situations like NEO, DART, Humanitarian Relief, and  Contingency Ops speed matters most. However, if you are moving a battle group into theatre, then you are probably going to be more dependant on sea lift. From a recent historical perspective, about 90% of our deployable goods have gone by sea and 10% by air. The statistical outlier in that group (there is always one) is the OP ATHENA deployment.

The question becomes more difficult when you also add the dimension of ownership: owned assets? leased assets? shared assets? guaranteed access deals? or open market bidding?

To my mind, the strat air lift question is a slam dunk. We don't currently have any strat air lifter. We need one. The C-17 is the only logical choice currently available.

But the question is not an "either or" type of question. We also need a certain amount of strat sea lift which we will be getting in the post-2010 timeframe when the first JSS comes online.

And, for the record, the C-17 purchase was not shelved by the military. It was killed by a certain former PM on a whim.

Sam

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

The planes are built, designed and proven.  The ships are not.