MOD CUTS C17 NOs 7 & 8

[Blighter Pilot]

Serious rumours doing the rounds in the AT world that the MOD has shelved C17 nos 7 and 8.

Not good news with the current ageing, overstretched AT fleet.

Anyone got any more info or is this just another rumour?

Hope not:mad:

[collbar]

Apparently it wouldn't look good to buy such an expensive beast in the current climate, so the Marxist in charge wouldnt sign up for one, never mind two!!! May be after the election...Oh hang on the prod line will be closed!!

[Red Line Entry]

Where exactly was it announced that the RAF were ever getting more than 6 C17s?

Wishful thinking is a wonderful thing...

[Archimedes]

True, REL, but serial numbers were set aside for another four airframes in addition to the six confirmed, so there was clearly an aspiration to obtain up to that number.

[Chris Kebab]

...not too sure that's a good indicator. There are still 9 tail numbers allocated for AEW Nimrod!

[mike1964]

Wot, the 159 serial numbers allocated to TSR 2s aren't (all) going to be used? And I thought the delay in that programme was just a pre-planned capability gap.:confused:

[pma 32dd]

Capability gap....nonononono

Capability holiday :ugh:

[mike1964]

Sorry, was thinking of gap years:sad:

[Pontius Navigator]

Capability gap....nonononono

Capability holiday :ugh:

I torpted he'd gone on holiday and the new man would befaced with a GAP.

[MooseJaw]

Don't give up hope just yet. Watch the news for US "Budget Supplementals" and, more importantly, sales annouincements to cutomers outside N. America and Europe.

Should struggle along - with v.minimum output -for a few years more. But unit price can only rise.... and its already mucho-expensive!

[MooseJaw]

Dear Red Line,

See your point about where was it announced there was to be more than 6... but consider, as recently as 2005 there wasn't a public requirement to keep the 4 we leased in 2001 - and were supposed to return in 2008!

C-17 was temporarily acquired as a short term strat airlift (STSA)solution in 2001 to fill a gap (forecast in 1996-97) caused by A400M delays! Funny how nothing changes much.

Perhaps a more apt question is ....why do we still insist on a requirement for 25 A400M ....now, if there was to be a program tradeoff.......with fund transfer to C-17 & C130J......hmmmm. But then, rats! that wouldn't meet the 'Hug a Euro' test.

Moosejaw:rolleyes:

[Double Zero]

The C-17 is a magniciently designed aircraft, just what we need, therefore stands to reason we won't get any more, as ' suitable for task ' and ' politician ' are very rarely seen in the same sentence.

Even in the 'credit lunch'-clustre grabbing climate the procurement of such things - and helicopters - would have been accepted well by the British public, we're not all wearing shell suits with an attack dog on a lead !

( for other political parties read that as rent-boy on a lead, having no wish to exprience such things I'll defrain ).

So if there's any chance, give Westlands & Boeing a contract - no, I'm nothing to do with them...

[Uncle Ginsters]

Serious rumours doing the rounds in the AT world that the MOD has shelved C17 nos 7 and 8.

Serious rumours that that rumour has now been reversed....UK-7, anybody?

Not to mention the reduced Typhoon order announced today....232 down to 120, and it only takes 3 Typhoons-worth to fund a C17. Also leaving plenty of petty cash to cover the rotary and C130 shortfall.

All we need now is the people to fix and fly them all!

Uncle G :ok:

[pr00ne]

Uncle Ginsters,

Except that it's 160, with an option on an additional 48 in Tranche3B........

[Uncle Ginsters]

Oops... That'll teach me for believing Sky News and Sir Glenn:

When the Cold War ended, Britain committed to buying 232 Eurofighters - originally designed to shoot down Soviet bombers.
It will now take just 120. Saudi Arabia has agreed to buy 72. Which leaves 40 no longer needed.

[skaterboi]

I do hope you are correct Uncle G.

I had heard that UK 7 and 8 were deemed too politically sensitive to acquire with the recession and the need for cash elsewhere. Admittedly this was before the escalation of the calls for more equipment so it's possible that has influenced the argument..

It's been said before but if we don't get our finger out and make a decision soon the Mil AT fleets will be in a world of pain around 2012-2015.

[hello1]

the Mil AT fleets will be in a world of pain around 2012-2015

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, so what do you call our current state;)

[skaterboi]

Yes we're pretty bad right I grant you ;)

But in 2012 you've got Lyneham's closure and the associated move to Brize, OSD of the C-130K, and the re-winging of the fatigue fleet leader C-130Js.

Looking towards 2015 you've got OSD of the VC-10 whilst the FSTA ramps up and the earliest possible ISD of the A400M if we even get it.

So you tell me if we're badly off now and things are going to get better or worse! We need those two C-17s and we need a decision ASAP on the A-400M.

[hello1]

Agree entirely with you. We do need a decision and accordingly we are completely screwed!

Actually I think that we needed a decision about 3 years ago........... A330 will deliver the goods but A400M is just going to be another world of procurement pain TFN. Why do we need a transport aircraft when instead we have the opportunity for Brown and his idiotic crowd of useless cronies to make a grand Euro gesture instead of properly resourcing the Armed Forces for what they are doing now.