There is, of course, an additional factor to add into that cost equation, and that is the additional cost of operating a third aircraft type.
Many moons ago the discussions around C130/A400M/C17 revolved, in part, about only being able to afford two types in service. In those days it was used as reason to explain why we didn't need/couldn't afford the C17 and why the A400M needed it's cruise speed performance etc.
Well, we now have the c17, and I don't think anyone thinks we are going to get rid of it, and in probability we'll end up with 2-3 more and it will form a core force for decades to come. Similarly we now have the C130J.
the question now being, with FRES fading into the distance, is there a justification for the A400M that makes it a necessity. If so, will it be able to do all the tasks the C130J does? If so, can we buy/lease more capacity to get through the time until it becomes available, then sell the C130Js? It would seem foolish to buy more.
If not, why not cancel the A400M and buy more C130J/C17s now, the savings from not having to operate a third logistic support and training system should make up any cost difference.
It just seems extraordinary that, in explaining why, year after year, we have retired so may FJ types, using the mantra over the additional savings of retiring a type over a squadron, we should even be contemplating adding another AT type.....
Last edited by ORAC; 29th Jun 2009 at 21:26.
Reason: sp