NAO report questions UK's ability to meet future airlift requirements

[WE Branch Fanatic]

From Janes (http://www.janes.com/news/defence/jdw/jdw080630_1_n.shtml).

Alison Terry, a co-author of the report, said that the difference in the availability rates between the 'K' and 'J' variant aircraft is primarily down to a comparative shortage of spares for the C-130J, which has necessitated the cannibalisation of some aircraft to keep the rest of the fleet flying. The C-130K fleet currently has an abundance of spares, which explains its exceptionally high availability rate.

Why the shortage of spares? That's a question I know the answer to (cost) but it's still hard to believe.

[Roland Pulfrew]

WEBF

Probably down to "just in time" rather than "just in case".

Oh, that and RAB of course. No doubt all the spares were sold off to avoid depreciation and cost of capital charges accrued if they were "on balance sheet" .:hmm:

[VinRouge]

Couldnt they have been purchased through PFI? That way, we could hide them off the balance sheet, like gordon has with approximately 35% of GDP...

[WE Branch Fanatic]

Here is an analytical article by Craig Hoyle:

UK Royal Air Force facing potential tactical transport crisis (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/06/27/224950/uk-royal-air-force-facing-potential-tactical-transport.html)

NAO recommendations include investigating the possible purchase, lease or charter of interim airlift capability, upgrading simulators and addressing spare parts shortages for the C-130J, and filling more than 100 engineering vacancies at RAF Lyneham in Wiltshire. These and other efficiency improvements could lead to aircraft being available for an extra 800 days a year, it estimates.

These 100 engineering vacancies wouldn't be the ones that were LEANed, would they?

On a positive note, the RAF's sixth C-17 has arrived (http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/DefenceNews/EquipmentAndLogistics/SixthC17SwoopsIntoBritain.htm)- according to the MOD website.