RAF to get additional C-17
Thread Starter
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
From: West Sussex
RAF to get additional C-17
The Prime Minister has just announced that the U.K will, because of recent savings made in the defense budget, be in a position to purchase 'an additional C-17'. The PM made this announcement at PMQs just now (@12:25, 08-02-12).
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,144
Likes: 232
From: In the State of Denial
This might be good news but I would be more cheered if the PM announced more spares and support for the aircraft we already have.
Still, some of the victims of Project Fawkes might get a C17 slot now....
Still, some of the victims of Project Fawkes might get a C17 slot now....
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
From: In the Ether
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
From: Glesga, Scotland
Is this a uncle sam slot?
very very quick delivery , either that or it was ordered a long time ago but only officialy been made public?
Could the Goverment do such a thing?
On the plus side nice to hear some good news
very very quick delivery , either that or it was ordered a long time ago but only officialy been made public?
Could the Goverment do such a thing?
On the plus side nice to hear some good news
Last edited by fallmonk; 8th February 2012 at 17:38. Reason: error
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,144
Likes: 232
From: In the State of Denial
The UK operates the second-largest fleet of C-17s, behind the US Air Force, although India recently completed the process of ordering a fleet of 10 to enter use from later this decade.
How much aid do we give India?
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
From: Belgium
We give aid to specific areas of India to help alleviate poverty and make the lives of very poor people a little better. It is a humanitarian thing to do.
You could ask why the Indian govt spends so much on defence when so many of their people are so poor, but that's not the fault of the UK.
Good news on the C17.
You could ask why the Indian govt spends so much on defence when so many of their people are so poor, but that's not the fault of the UK.
Good news on the C17.
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,144
Likes: 232
From: In the State of Denial
I know that the causes we give aid to are worthwhile but as you say why is India spending £2billion on C17s & not in alleviating their own poverty? I guess the answer might be that they don't need to as we do it for them?
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
From: In a house(with wheels)
All very good for 99 Sqn and the C17 community, but just how many of the J hercs could have been serviced for the money spent?
Too many of them posted as U/S
And another thing. I thought all the money saved was to fill the 'Black hole'
sounds like the same logic Mrs Bythebackdoor uses with shoes and sales.
Too many of them posted as U/S
And another thing. I thought all the money saved was to fill the 'Black hole'
sounds like the same logic Mrs Bythebackdoor uses with shoes and sales.
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,046
Likes: 28
From: Zummerset
Geehova,
I think the £20Bn+ spent on Typhoon is quite enough on the "fighting arm" with god know's how many £Bn's to be thrown at F35 to come....the RNZAF is doing OK with RW/MPA/AT....
The recent largesse poured into AT/SH only serves to make up a fraction of the shortfall over past decades when FJ programmes have gobbled up the budget with indecent haste. Oh, btw, one could argue that AT/SH do constitute a large % of the fighting arm nowadays; they've been in harms way a lot more than the FJ boys and have taken significant combat attrition - the old boundary between front and second line is somewhat blurred by recent Ops.
Not meant to be a dig fella - in an ideal world we'd have a balanced budget and funds for all the toys we want.
Well done on C17 #8, now stop pratting around and buy 2 more, a sim and re-wing the C130Js......
I think the £20Bn+ spent on Typhoon is quite enough on the "fighting arm" with god know's how many £Bn's to be thrown at F35 to come....the RNZAF is doing OK with RW/MPA/AT....
The recent largesse poured into AT/SH only serves to make up a fraction of the shortfall over past decades when FJ programmes have gobbled up the budget with indecent haste. Oh, btw, one could argue that AT/SH do constitute a large % of the fighting arm nowadays; they've been in harms way a lot more than the FJ boys and have taken significant combat attrition - the old boundary between front and second line is somewhat blurred by recent Ops.
Not meant to be a dig fella - in an ideal world we'd have a balanced budget and funds for all the toys we want.
Well done on C17 #8, now stop pratting around and buy 2 more, a sim and re-wing the C130Js......
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,196
Likes: 20
From: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
the RNZAF is doing OK with RW/MPA/AT....
Yeah, if you never intend to use or rely on your Air Force to actually defend your country maybe.
We need all elements of our Air Force to well equipped to deal with whatever situation we might need to face.
We need Typhoon and another strike aircraft to equip the two carriers. We also need an MPA to replace Nimrod. We probably need at least 10 C17s.
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,046
Likes: 28
From: Zummerset
Out of trim,
And what did a slack handful of Skyhawks/Macchis do? Really? Yep, they could do "stuff" just not coalition "stuff" and would have merely inconvenienced any serious aggressor. What would the tiny force of F16s proposed have provided apart from an ego chariot? At what cost? War is changing; it's getting more expensive to play in the first division - we've made the choice to cling on by our fingernails by distorting the budget to buy totemic capabilities and culling some core ones. Perhaps a little rebalancing of thought as well as budgets would do the UK good. The RNZAF, albeit probably with a metaphorical pistol to its temple, has rebalanced to face the political-economic realities it faces. AT/SH/MPA are essential to it's future path; the airshows might lack some whizz and zoom but their sailors are protected and their troops have mobility.
And what did a slack handful of Skyhawks/Macchis do? Really? Yep, they could do "stuff" just not coalition "stuff" and would have merely inconvenienced any serious aggressor. What would the tiny force of F16s proposed have provided apart from an ego chariot? At what cost? War is changing; it's getting more expensive to play in the first division - we've made the choice to cling on by our fingernails by distorting the budget to buy totemic capabilities and culling some core ones. Perhaps a little rebalancing of thought as well as budgets would do the UK good. The RNZAF, albeit probably with a metaphorical pistol to its temple, has rebalanced to face the political-economic realities it faces. AT/SH/MPA are essential to it's future path; the airshows might lack some whizz and zoom but their sailors are protected and their troops have mobility.
Joined: Aug 2009
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 9,334
Likes: 2,182
From: Texas
Question from a Yank somewhat in the dark:
First off, congrats on another C-17, it helps RAF retain global reach in supporting ops in a variety of venues. (Also, might that not help the Falklands airbridge requirement somewhat?)
Considering the retirement of Nimrod, is the P-8A Maritime Patrol aircraft something the RAF would consider if the initial operations in the USN, India, and elsewhere prove it to be a good platform?
Boeing (and BAE as a sub? They seem to have some play in this) seems to be building the aircraft with a modular methodology, so that you could customize the design to meet UK-unique requirements.
(No, I don't work for, and don't own stock in, Boeing.)
One advantage to this, were the MPA capability to be revived, would be some logistic support / parts commonality during coalition operations. But I may get getting ahead of myself here ...
First off, congrats on another C-17, it helps RAF retain global reach in supporting ops in a variety of venues. (Also, might that not help the Falklands airbridge requirement somewhat?)
Considering the retirement of Nimrod, is the P-8A Maritime Patrol aircraft something the RAF would consider if the initial operations in the USN, India, and elsewhere prove it to be a good platform?
Boeing (and BAE as a sub? They seem to have some play in this) seems to be building the aircraft with a modular methodology, so that you could customize the design to meet UK-unique requirements.
(No, I don't work for, and don't own stock in, Boeing.)
One advantage to this, were the MPA capability to be revived, would be some logistic support / parts commonality during coalition operations. But I may get getting ahead of myself here ...
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 9th February 2012 at 14:32.