Heavy lift conundrum

[Ex-Dragoon]

Yes but don't forget the ships will also be used for at sea replenishment as well not just sea lift.

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Well that sounds good but aren't the ships at least 10 years off (3 or 4 govt's worth)?  All I'm saying is there is an option available now to reduce the stress and over tasking of the Hercs.

 

[canuck101]

If the Royal Air force can lease to own c-17 i think we could do the same. The Americans would be happy to sell us some but i doubt that the liberals would spend the money to get them.

 

[DJL]

The United Kingdom's defence budget is about four times larger than ours........

 

[R031button]

If the Royal Air force can lease to own c-17 i think we could do the same. The Americans would be happy to sell us some but i doubt that the liberals would spend the money to get them.

Some how I don't think the Liberals are going to try and buy any more used British kit.

 

[Sheerin]

Some how I don't think the Liberals are going to try and buy any more used British kit.

we wouldn't be buying C-17s from the British, and even if we were C-17s are made by Boeing (McDonnell Douglas).
http://www.sfu.ca/casr/101-fsa1.htm

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

I think he was refering to the whole sub thing.

 

[Zoomie]

If the Royal Air force can lease to own c-17 i think we could do the same.

The Brits are regretting that decision...  Since they don't own the planes, they are limited to what they can do with them.  Under no circumstances are they permitted to fly these aircraft anywhere where the "possibility" of being attacked is present.  Unlike the USAF which flies them directly into Baghdad international, the Brits are relegated to flying some friendly ally country and using other means from there.

The CF will need a substantial boost of cash ($8 billion surplus anyone?) in order for a C-17 to materialize at Trenton.  At close to $300 million (USD) a pop, they aren't cheap.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/c-17.htm

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

What if we leased them from the USAF?

 

[Slim]

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

Even Luxury!

Seriously though...From where I sit our C130's do seem to get an awful lot of work for unrequired aircraft. Is there anything out there that can match it?

Also we do need both the rough-field capability and the large (strategic lift) C-17 type transport capability in the CF...As well as the JSS, which will mean bigger tac helos...Where do you draw the line?

Slim

 

[Garry]

Forget heavy, think strategic vice tactical airlift.

Strategic lifts big loads long distances. tactical lifts smaller loads shorter distances. Strategic tends to avoid bad guys. tactical may well see a few.

Our Airbus is a strategic carrier, our Hercs are a tactical carrier. 

We do what what we can with what we've got.

Cheers-Garry

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Frankly, I could never figure out why the C-130J is still considered as the primary replacement for our current herc fleet.

If we have a LAV-based army, it makes inherent sense to me that I'd want to be able to deploy those vehicles by air to a place like Afghanistan.

With that in mind, I think you have to have C-17's at the top of your list, C-27J's for your lower weight stuff and backfill the best-conditioned existing C-130's for the middleweight roles until you have funds to replace them too....



Matthew.  

 

[canuck101]

one word and that is "Price"

$236.7 million (FY98 constant dollars) that is American not Canadian and it probably costs more now so getting 4 to six c-17 would cost about 2 billion to get them and that may not include spare parts.  With money like that you should be able to get more then 4 to 6 c130 probably more than 20 if you searched for low milage slightly used c130js with spare parts to. Don't get me wrong i think the cf should have 4 to six c-17's lets see if the gov will pony up the money first.

 

[Slim]

With the govt. whining about how much everythng costs...And the Liberals getting ready to take money away from the service again, now that the election is over?!

I don't think so.

I bet they'll even take the subs away to save money, claiming that they're not required or safe or some other rubbish.

I guess we can all hope though...

Slim

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

one word and that is "Price"

$236.7 million (FY98 constant dollars) that is American not Canadian and it probably costs more now so getting 4 to six c-17 would cost about 2 billion to get them and that may not include spare parts.   With money like that you should be able to get more then 4 to 6 c130 probably more than 20 if you searched for low milage slightly used c130js with spare parts to. Don't get me wrong i think the cf should have 4 to six c-17's lets see if the gov will pony up the money first.

The argument for C-130's is dumb.  It's like saying "I'm going to buy a bunch of cheaper jeans because they're well priced even though I can't fit my ass into them."  Bottom Line:  You need airlift than can carry LAV's.



Matthew.  ;D

 

[Kirkhill]

one word and that is "Price"

$236.7 million (FY98 constant dollars) that is American not Canadian and it probably costs more now so getting 4 to six c-17 would cost about 2 billion to get them and that may not include spare parts.  With money like that you should be able to get more then 4 to 6 c130 probably more than 20 if you searched for low milage slightly used c130js with spare parts to. Don't get me wrong i think the cf should have 4 to six c-17's lets see if the gov will pony up the money first.

As I and others have noted, this is a prime opportunity for P3 thinking.  Set up a private company in association with Air Canada and/or Westjet and/or Jetsgo and/ Purolator........ Have them buy the C17s (subsidized as required) and have them operate them commercially.  They would be required to make so many hours available each year for "routine" or "pre-planned" activities and they could sell the rest of the hours on the open market, either to private needs or the UN or to other militaries.  If flights to hot zones were required then use CF (Reg or Res) crews and indemnify the company against losses.

It ain't that difficult and it is already being done with the shipping industry.  Chartering logistic and transport support has a long and honourable tradition.  It's what got the Duke of Marlborough to Blenheim in good time in 1704.  (In fact just discovered in Blenheim: Battle for Europe by Charles Spencer (Diana's Brother) that they Artillery of the day was also a P3 operation).

Now C130s, they are a different matter.  They are more likely to be used rough and in hot zones.  P3 wouldn't work there I don't think.  But it would also work with sealift, air to air refuelling, Airbus replacements and VIP flights.

 

[Kirkhill]

OK.

After having the little discussion with Ex-Dragoon and Infanteer et all over at the thread on Small Carriers,  and having accepted your positions guys, I thought some more about what I was saying on this thread.

Question.

If there is no budget, and no real political base (ie nobody really wants to be a truck driver for the army) is it time to form Canada Logistics Corporation?

Canada Logistics Corporation is a crown corporation.  Its  Primary Mandate is to move Canadian Military Materiel over Strategic Distances.

It is equipped with 12-24 767 size passenger aircraft with Air-Air refuelling capability.  It is also equipped with 12-24 C-17s, and 4-6 LSD(A)s. 

It is manned by civilians that are also members of the Air Force and Navy Reserves. 

Surplus capacity, and there will be a lot can be sold/donated to our Allies, NATO, UN or Foreign Affairs.  Any additional underutilized capacity could be utilized on the commercial market to defray costs.

In time of crisis DND could take-over vessels and aircraft as needed.

Most activities would be in benign or relatively benign environments (no bullets).  Personnel get paid like civilian pilots.

If moving into areas that are risky, but under Canadian auspices they become members of the CF.

If moving into areas that are risky but not under Canadian auspices they become volunteers drawing high wages (think Blackwater type employees).

Our allies all appear to be short of lift.  Maybe this is a way to get that lift for them and for us.  We handle the financial costs.  They pay for the services on a pay as you go basis.

The Air Force can then concentrate on tactical transport with the Hercs and the Navy can continue with the JSS vessels but eliminate all of vehicular transport and most of the troop transport.  Make the hospital, command, logistic and maintenance facilities permanent.  Increase the helicopter capability to handle half a dozen Griffons and 4 Cyclones and leave room for a company of troops.

Infanteer asked where I got my Admiral's boards.... well I just promoted myself to Prime Minister

Thoughts?

Cheers.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Kirkhill ... I like the thrust of this line of thinking but from the maritime point of view I would take the US Military Sealift Command Naval Fleet Auxiliary Force Program as a best practice upon which to build. In other words, put the LSD's in the navy, and the tanker/AOR role in civvie hands.

Setting it up as a Crown corporation might also be cumbersome and prove to be inflexible, it must have directors and officers, file business plans, establish huge operating lines of credit and raise capital to finance acquisitions. All of these things diffuse central control over the organization, so it might be better to set it up as an in house "shop": part of supply and services/ public works.

Cheers!!

 

[Kirkhill]

No intended slam against unions here Whiskey wouldn't such an arrangement as you suggest be subject to union rules and strictures.  Or could the government hire personnel outside of both the CF and the Public Service?  That's why I was suggesting a more arms length arrangement.

However, if it could be done under the auspices of PWGSC I don't have any philosophical problems.

And as to your point on the Tanker vs  LSD division,  it seems like a good idea to me.  The Royal Fleet Auxilliary works the same way I believe, although they also operate the LSD(A)s - which are essentially transport vessels but not the LPDs which are Command and Assault vessels.

 

[Ex-Dragoon]

The problem with your Corporation is how often would it be utilized.

It is equipped with 12-24 767 size passenger aircraft with Air-Air refuelling capability.  It is also equipped with 12-24 C-17s, and 4-6 LSD(A)s. 

Thats a significant expenditure right there and while I am an advocate for air and sea lift capabilities I think a Corporation set up for said purpose would turn into another gun registry fiasco but at a much grander scale.