Problem: We need more ground handling equipment.
Answer: Buy more C17s.
Problem: We need more movers to better support our extant fleet.
Answer: Buy more C17s.
Problem: I need to paint my front door.
Answer: Buy a C17.
Problem: We need more Tac AT.
Answer: Buy more C17s.
Indie Cent puts forward a seemingly unbeatable comparison model and on the top bunk says that our infrastructure is already in place to support a further acquisition of extant fleet aircraft, both of which are massively simplistic.
Notwithstanding the simple fact that we wouldn't get anywhere near 18 x C17 for the same money as the A400M contract (please show how you get to these figures and I will try and show where you are incorrect)is a load more C17 something we need? Regardless of the cost, you would need to look long and hard at the C17 as a capability. Like it or not, we are already doing a serious amount of civil charter and have historically always done so. We can always get into the additional cost of trying to put the C17 into the tactical role if you want to expose more of the cost argument....
You asked 'What would I rather have 25 x A400M or 18 x C17' which is, frankly, a nonsense question...It depends what I was going to do with them, what capability they had, what threat environment we were operating in, what clearances they had, what the load was, etc etc etc. The answer to this could clearly be either, but the question MOD asked some time ago was 'What shall we replace the C130K with?' Unfortunately some can only see that great strategic asset, but Holy White Elephant, as the answer.
What would you prefer, a Porsche 911 or a Tractor...? Kylie or Nigella? Spoon or Knife.....?
The argument that we already have infrastructure for the C130J and C17 is also facile. Not quite sure how you define infrastructure, but I'll take a guess that you mean more than just 'hangarage'...
Clearly running a third fleet has a cost, but this doesn't disappear just because you're not buying A400M.
Your 'infrastructure' costs include a whole load of stuff we don't already have and need to use/buy for acquiring any more aircraft, European or American. Sims, crews, movers, ACHE, hangars, fuel, spares (and different spares), etc etc etc..
I've said it before but this argument isn't about us buying C17 and C130J to replace an A400M contract, it's about us justifying A400M to the treasury as something we need. If we don't win this argument, we won't be getting anything to replace the K.
One would not have to wait 3+ years to get the C-17 (or the J) in service and 5+ years to reach a level of maturity for squadron service. In other words, you can wait 5+ years to get what you can receive within the next 12 months, for a cheaper price.
