Germany to pull out of the A400 program

[Uncle Ginsters]

Originally Posted by Wander00

But are we still leasing or have we bought them/any of them? In which case I guess the restriction on airframe we own, if any, would cease to be effective

The RAF now fully owns its own fleet of 8 aircraft.

Any restrictions now in place are down the the RAF Release to Service and capability requirement alone, which still prohibits much of the non-Strat role.

I think it's important to remember the climate at the time - the RAF was entering into a 4-year lease to cover a perceived short-term gap in Strat and outsized lift capability.
Faced with that task, do you,
a. Undertake full trials and staff-work to clear all roles (look at the C-130J for a loose comparison of timelines and complexity), or,
b. Simply insert the word "Prohibited" next to anything outside of the Strat AM concept.

I know what I'd do!

Back on thread though, what will be interesting will be to see if the RAF thinks we now need those roles; if so, let's see how long it takes for those prohibitions to be reversed in the now, post-Hadden-Cave environment in which we find ourselves.

[KenV]

The choice of a turboprop solution was driven by the need to perform Sarajevo approaches (aka Khe Sanh approaches), or so I was told at the time.

With it's inflight deployable thrust reversers and speed brakes, C-17 can make an approach far steeper than the Sarajevo approach. In addition, the C-17 can land using up to a 6 degree glideslope (normal glideslope is 2.5 to 3 degrees) on final (steeper than a carrier landing) with NO flare and do it into an unpaved field. And C-17 has turbofans, so that is not an issue for a properly designed turbofan equipped military transport.

[KenV]

Back on thread though, what will be interesting will be to see if the RAF thinks we now need those roles; if so, let's see how long it takes for those prohibitions to be reversed in the now, post-Hadden-Cave environment in which we find ourselves.

My understanding is that the RAF will use all of the C-17's tactical capabilities plus the prohibited strat capability: inflight refueling. Every RAF C-17 has been upgraded to the block 19 configuration (which BTW, not all USAF C-17s have). Block 19 includes, among other things, passive missile protection (ALE-47), active missile protection (LAIRCM), electroflourescent formation lights, NVG compatible cargo compartment lighting, combat lighting (IR landing and taxi lights in the wings and fuselage), a wide range of equipment airdrop systems/capabilities, multiple kinds of troop drop capabilities, satellite comms for both the aircrew and the embarked troops, non ambulatory combat aeromedical evac, etc etc. RAF is now qualifying their C-17s for troop drops and is in the process of purchasing equipment to qualify their C-17s for equipment drops. And the lease agreement notwithstanding, RAF has been operating their C-17s from austere unpaved fields in combat zones for nigh on two decades.

[salad-dodger]

FFS Ken, it's like listening to a C17 sales pitch on non stop looping play.

Actually, I'm not even sure if KenV is one person, more like a fecking non-stop sales pitch for the US of A, Boeing, LM, L3, you name it.....

S-D

[Uncle Ginsters]

...the RAF will use all of the C-17's tactical capabilities...

Nope.

inflight refueling. .

Nope.

RAF has been operating their C-17s from austere unpaved fields in combat zones for nigh on two decades.

Not once.

[rjtjrt]

I for one value KenV's posts, as they are informative.

[Lonewolf_50]

S-D, if you'll wind your neck in a bit you'll find less that annoys you.

[rjtjrt]

KenV
Is the last whitetail C-17 sold or earmarked for anyone?

[BBadanov]

KenV may know more...
but my understanding is that 14-0003 (msn 50273/F272) is currently still reg N272ZD, unsold at Boeing Long Beach.

AUS is crazy not to buy it, as there will soon be a demand on USAF second-hand aircraft, which they probably will not release.

[2805662]

Originally Posted by BBadanov

KenV may know more...
but my understanding is that 14-0003 (msn 50273/F272) is currently still reg N272ZD, unsold at Boeing Long Beach.

AUS is crazy not to buy it, as there will soon be a demand on USAF second-hand aircraft, which they probably will not release.

Especially since Australia's 2016 Integrated Investment Plan incorporates the acquisition of another two.

[dragartist]

Should we leave this thread to A400M and start a new one on C17. I would be interested to hear of the development of the Tac Capabilities of both a/c particularly airdrop. I noted a couple of weeks back that freefall para had taken place from RAF C17.
Top airbus man was one of the first to freefall from A400M on one of the very early flights (publicity stunts).


Drag

[KenV]

KenV Is the last whitetail C-17 sold or earmarked for anyone? ....my understanding is that 14-0003 (msn 50273/F272) is currently still reg N272ZD, unsold at Boeing Long Beach.

No. It's still in long term storage at the San Antonio depot with no customer in sight. The Long Beach plant no longer exists. Bldg 54, the C-17 final assembly building, is gutted and the flight line outside is derelict. Bldg 52 still has a few C-17 support engineers in it but they will be gone very soon and then Bldg 52 will be gutted. C-17 production is well and truly done. Forever.

As for the "C-17 sales pitches", they were all posted to refute the claims made about turbofan vs turboprop military airlifters. Almost all of the "tactical limitations" attributed to turbofans were a crock as the C-17 has been demonstrating for decades. And if the RAF is not planning on using the C-17's tactical capabilities as was asserted above, they're pi$$ing away a lot of money to upgrade and standardize their entire fleet to the block 19 standard, acquire airdrop and other tactical equipment, and to train their crews in the C-17's tactical systems/procedures. UK-1 (Fu-77) is in San Antonio now and I was aboard just a few minutes ago. Without violating ITAR or other export regulations, lets just say that the tactical systems installations are essentially complete, the UARSSI system is fully functional, and its on schedule for paint and final delivery. Is the RAF going to use all of the expensive upgrades they've paid for? That depends mostly on how much training they are willing and able to pay for. The tactical systems and equipment are bought, paid for, and installed, so now all they've got to do is train their crews to use it. I'm assuming (perhaps a big fat false assumption) that having paid for the equipment and its installation, that they'll find the money to train their crews. Of course that is uncertain. I don't know how it works in the UK, but there are different colors of money in the US. Some money can only be spent for acquisition and different color money must be used for operations, which in the US includes training. Maybe the RAF still needs to obtain the different color money to do the training.

[Pontius Navigator]

Ken, I think you will find we have funny money too. Problem is not enough so if you want some more then you need to take it from someone else.

[Just This Once...]

The RAF is in the C-17 block upgrade program, so it gets what it is included in that program. It is not purchasing capabilities above and beyond the wider program, only keeping pace with it. This is in an effort to reduce the total cost of ownership by avoiding the situation where the standard of our aircraft drifts away from the wider fleet. When new toys arrived (such as IR landing lamps) on our most recent C-17s it was not because we had specifically purchased them, they just happened to be part of that particular block standard.

[JAVELINBOY]

A400m Atlas over the house this afternoon low and slow looked like it was heading for St Athan, first sighting of this type for me.

[Uncle Ginsters]

The RAF C-17s operate to the Global Fleet concept, which keeps them supposedly in step with the rest of the world. The slight irony in that is that it actually puts us ahead of most of the USAF jets - I have no idea how the 'queue' (or 'line' for our Stateside buddies!) works for the upgrades. The fact is, we get each and every one of them.

What you (KenV) have to NB is that us "micro-fleets" of 4-10 jets work quite differently to the USAF with their 220+ frames. To put up a training jet takes a significant portion of our frames (1/6 on the line) and thus keeping the lowest possible training burden is paramount...to the point where, yes, it can even drive capability. Even synthetics suffer this same issue.
That's sadly just how it is operating in such relatively small numbers...

[TBM-Legend]

Time to dust off the plans for the Me-323 Gigant methinks. Fit six new RR AE2100D3's and away...

[ORAC]

AN-70 back on track.......

French Air Force charters An-70 to transport equipment from Africa to France | defenceWeb

News.Az - Ukraine and Turkey agreed to develop three models of aircraft

[KenV]

The RAF C-17s operate to the Global Fleet concept, which keeps them supposedly in step with the rest of the world. The slight irony in that is that it actually puts us ahead of most of the USAF jets - I have no idea how the 'queue' (or 'line' for our Stateside buddies!) works for the upgrades. The fact is, we get each and every one of them.

I understand that. So do several other nations. But not all nations opt for every upgrade. The Global Fleet concept does not require every aircraft in that fleet to have every upgrade. Indeed, some nations are prohibited from getting some of the upgrades/systems. Further, I attend the semi annual CORT and SORT gatherings of the global C-17 fleet. The UK folks who attended the last one (in March this year) indicated that since they now own their aircraft rather than lease them, they no longer have any operating restrictions and they intend to use every capability. They've already tested some of the troop drop capabilities, are buying equipment compatible with the C-17's equipment drop systems, and will test/qualify that equipment and systems at the earliest opportunity. And the UARSSI system was not fully functional when the aircraft were delivered to the UK, but every UK aircraft that goes thru San Antonio has that system made fully functional. And that has nothing to do with the block upgrade program.

[Uncle Ginsters]

Ken,
Check your PMs