PDA

View Full Version : US scraps the entire fleet of Afghan C-27A's


NutLoose
29th Dec 2012, 21:08
These are the early ones apparently and does not effect the Spartan orders which were cancelled
.
See

US scraps entire fleet of Afghan cargo planes - News - Stripes (http://www.stripes.com/news/us-scraps-entire-fleet-of-afghan-cargo-planes-1.202220)

As a former pilot in this unit, I can provide FACTS:

1. This is not the newly-purchased and recently-cancelled C-27J. These aircraft are 1980-vintage, Italian surplus G.222 aircraft, very similar to the C-27As the USAF operated out of Howard AB, Panama during the 90s. They were purchased by DoD (not the Army or the USAF) with the express intent of "donating" them to the Afghan AF. For various legal reasons--and because the Afghans didn't want these unreliable, un-maintainable airplanes--they were never transferred to AAF control.

2. The performance of the G.222 is totally inadequate in high altitude, hot conditions. This makes the airplane unsuited to perform its mission a significant portion of the year in Afghanistan. DoD acquisitions folks should have known this before they inked the deal.

3. The G.222 has always required a lot of maintenance, something that the DoD acquisitions folks should have known before they inked the deal. Even fresh out of the refurbishment, they were often unable to make the flight from Italy to Afghanistan without breaking down along the way. The fleet in Kabul was plagued with fuel leaks, flap problems, landing gear problems, and several engine failures. That's why they were grounded from Dec 11 thru May 12.

3. Since the plane has been out of production for decades, most of its spare parts are no longer available. DoD acquisition folks should have known this before they inked the deal. I don't know whether Alenia misled them, or they just didn't ask the right questions. Consequently, most of the 16 planes on the ramp in Kabul were unflyable because they were cannibalized for parts to keep 4-5 airplanes flying.

Overall, the program was a fiasco, and its termination is long overdue. The USAF's inability to manage this program made us look incredibly stupid, so we lost a lot of credibility with the Afghan leadership and pilots we were trying to mentor.

rigpiggy
29th Dec 2012, 21:29
If you go to the link and read the comments, I have to agree with the comment of using Turbo-Dak's, or my preference Turbo Bou's. 20 aircraft, 6 million each and say 10 million in spares would carry roughly the same amount get into shorter strips, and would be easier/cheaper to maintain. the remaining 450M would fly a lot of missions

Al R
29th Dec 2012, 21:33
Why didn't the Americans provide surplus C130s at outset?

BBadanov
30th Dec 2012, 04:52
Maybe the US will now supply the ex-ANG C-27J fleet?
Evidently, the C-27J is a completely different beast to the C-27A (G.222).

Temp Spike
30th Dec 2012, 04:56
Who's brilliant idea was it to waste money on these pieces of crap anyway? No wonder we are drowning in debt!

Don't supply the Aghans with nothing. Tell them to flap their arms if they want to fly. I'm sick of it all.

enginesuck
30th Dec 2012, 07:17
3. The G.222 has always required a lot of maintenance, something that the DoD acquisitions folks should have known before they inked the deal. Even fresh out of the refurbishment, they were often unable to make the flight from Italy to Afghanistan without breaking down along the way. The fleet in Kabul was plagued with fuel leaks, flap problems, landing gear problems, and several engine failures.

Simply change G222 for Tornado, DoD for the MoD, Italy for the UK and Kabul for KAF !

NutLoose
30th Dec 2012, 15:06
Wouldn't something like the old Shorts Sherpa have been more useful as its a far simpler aircraft, shame its not built anymore

http://olive-drab.com/images/id_c23sherpa_01_700.jpg

jamesdevice
30th Dec 2012, 15:15
What happened to the Sherpas that the USAF used in Europe for their parts distribution network?
Were they scrapped or are they still lying around a boneyard somewhere? They ought to be excellent candidates for a rebirth if they still exist.

Temp Spike
30th Dec 2012, 20:12
I think we still have some old C-119s in the bone yard.

Don't say I didn't offer.

carlrsymington
30th Dec 2012, 20:21
Short C-23 Sherpa - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_C-23_Sherpa)

NutLoose
30th Dec 2012, 20:27
Sherpas were still in use in 2011

Sherpa serves as agile cargo transport over Iraq | Article | The United States Army (http://www.army.mil/article/59577/Sherpa_serves_as_agile_cargo_transport_over_Iraq/)

Though they were not used in Afghanistan as they can't cope with higher Altitudes..... Apparently the saying was "you'll only go Low and Slow with a load in your Shorts"....

Temp Spike
31st Dec 2012, 14:37
I hear that holding bottom rudder in a tight turn is suicide in one of those square boxes.