±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: HighestAce
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6648

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 200
Total: 200
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Downloads
02: Home
03: Community Forums
04: Member Screenshots
05: Community Forums
06: Home
07: Home
08: Home
09: Statistics
10: Statistics
11: Community Forums
12: Member Screenshots
13: Home
14: Your Account
15: Member Screenshots
16: Community Forums
17: Home
18: Community Forums
19: Home
20: Home
21: Downloads
22: Community Forums
23: Home
24: Community Forums
25: Home
26: Downloads
27: Community Forums
28: Downloads
29: Home
30: Home
31: Community Forums
32: Downloads
33: Home
34: Downloads
35: Community Forums
36: Community Forums
37: Home
38: Home
39: Community Forums
40: Home
41: Community Forums
42: Community Forums
43: Home
44: Home
45: Home
46: Downloads
47: Downloads
48: Photo Gallery
49: Member Screenshots
50: Community Forums
51: Member Screenshots
52: Home
53: Community Forums
54: Home
55: Community Forums
56: Home
57: Community Forums
58: Home
59: Home
60: Member Screenshots
61: Community Forums
62: Member Screenshots
63: Home
64: Community Forums
65: Home
66: Home
67: Home
68: Home
69: Community Forums
70: Home
71: Home
72: Home
73: Home
74: Member Screenshots
75: Community Forums
76: Home
77: Home
78: News Archive
79: Home
80: Home
81: Photo Gallery
82: Home
83: Home
84: Home
85: Community Forums
86: Community Forums
87: Home
88: Home
89: Home
90: News Archive
91: Home
92: Community Forums
93: Photo Gallery
94: Home
95: Home
96: Member Screenshots
97: Community Forums
98: Home
99: Home
100: Community Forums
101: Home
102: Community Forums
103: Community Forums
104: Community Forums
105: Photo Gallery
106: Home
107: Home
108: Home
109: Home
110: Home
111: Home
112: Home
113: Home
114: Home
115: Home
116: Home
117: Member Screenshots
118: Community Forums
119: Home
120: Home
121: Home
122: Photo Gallery
123: Home
124: Community Forums
125: Home
126: Home
127: Photo Gallery
128: Photo Gallery
129: Home
130: Community Forums
131: Home
132: Home
133: Home
134: Home
135: Home
136: Home
137: Home
138: Community Forums
139: Community Forums
140: Community Forums
141: Community Forums
142: Home
143: Home
144: Community Forums
145: Community Forums
146: Community Forums
147: Home
148: Home
149: Community Forums
150: Statistics
151: Member Screenshots
152: Home
153: Home
154: Community Forums
155: Home
156: Community Forums
157: Home
158: Home
159: Home
160: Community Forums
161: Community Forums
162: Home
163: Home
164: Statistics
165: Home
166: Home
167: Community Forums
168: Home
169: Home
170: Member Screenshots
171: Home
172: Community Forums
173: Community Forums
174: Home
175: Home
176: Community Forums
177: Community Forums
178: Home
179: Home
180: Home
181: Community Forums
182: Home
183: Home
184: Home
185: Member Screenshots
186: Home
187: Home
188: Home
189: Home
190: Community Forums
191: Home
192: Home
193: Community Forums
194: Home
195: Home
196: Home
197: Home
198: Photo Gallery
199: Home
200: Home

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
OT, Airbus lost to Lockheed Martin
The AFV ASSOCIATION was formed in 1964 to support the thoughts and research of all those interested in Armored Fighting Vehicles and related topics, such as AFV drawings. The emphasis has always been on sharing information and communicating with other members of similar interests; e.g. German armor, Japanese AFVs, or whatever.
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page     Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board

View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 11:33 am
Post subject: OT, Airbus lost to Lockheed Martin

Hi Folks!

I know aircraft can be way off topic, but I think this one will be of interest to some of members of the CIA group. After all this is about aircraft that can airlift some AFVs.

The Canadian gov. is looking for some new cargo planes to replace their aging C-130H airlifters.

They looked at the A400M by Airbus (which I understand NO prototypes have been completed yet) and Lockheed's C-130J (which I understand is currently in service and flying with the U.S.A.F.).

A contact is being put together for 17 aircraft.

www.defense-update.com....htm#c130j

Now I wonder why someone would go out and buy a current airframe that is flying (which also means the bugs are being worked out of that new airframe) rather that something that is still just a scale model and a large pile of blue prints?

I have heard a number of times (over at the old web site) that the answer to the problem of limiting AFV weight, to that of a C-130, could be fixed if the US would only buy the A400M LIKE ALL the Europians are doing.

The U.S. Army is standing up it's seventh SBCT. The C-130 is currently flying. The A400M is still just a dream by a company that is losing possible customers with each passing week. If the management of Airbus doesn't get it's act together, it's just might be that the A400M will NEVER get built.

Spot report and some chewing on an old bone.
Sgt, Scouts out!

_________________
"You can never have too much reconnaissance."
General G.S. Patton Jr.
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Al_Bowie
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 34

PostPosted: Thu Nov 23, 2006 9:23 pm
Post subject: Re: OT, Airbus lost to Lockheed Martin

Buying of the blueprint can be a dangerous proposition whether it is Aircraft or Armour. The Australian Government bought the F111 off the blueprint and had a ten year multi million dollar delay. Whilst it is true that we got one of the worlds best (still) attack aircraft the fact is we had a gap (temporarily filled by F4E) in our defence capability for over ten years.
The new Mega Airbus is another point in case with Qantas very warily revising its purchase after the trouble plagued aircraft actually flew. It seems the engines have a very short life (Not related to the engine design as they are highly successful on other airframes) span.
A proven design is the way to go particularly regarding the Herc.
Cheers
Al
Back to top
View user's profile
Maple_Leaf_Eh
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 517

PostPosted: Fri Nov 24, 2006 4:34 am
Post subject: Re: OT, Airbus lost to Lockheed Martin

The Canadian Herc fleet is downright ancient. These are the oldest flying Hercs on the planet. Flown long and hard, well maintainted, but not nimble and nubile anymore. (Remind anyone of themselves maybe?) It is a miracle none have fallen out of the sky from old age yet. I don't think they are all Hs; something tells me the fleet is four models including original 1960's buys, attrition replacements in the 70's and 80's, a couple of ex-civilian stretches, and a few relative youngster military patterns.

The Canadian strategic air fleet consists of four combi A310s that were foisted on the military when the number two national airline went broke. The air force wasn't too interested in them because they were pax only. After much politicking and contracting out, they all had side doors and reinforced floors installed. Same tail numbers, virtually new fuselages. The other airplane type are the Hercs. The airbridges to Bosnia and now to the sandbox are chewing up the airframe hours across the fleets. Hence the urgency to buy a small handful of C17s and a few dozen C130Js. With this government the planes will be delivered early or on time.

Airbus apparently made several invitations for the acquisition team to try their SIMULATOR, but there were already crews CROSS-TRAINING on flying Js. Simple logic when time is short.
Back to top
View user's profile
Hanno_Spoelstra
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jun 04, 2006
Posts: 185

PostPosted: Sun Nov 26, 2006 11:36 am
Post subject: Re: OT, Airbus lost to Lockheed Martin

- Roy_A_Lingle
Now I wonder why someone would go out and buy a current airframe that is flying (which also means the bugs are being worked out of that new airframe) rather that something that is still just a scale model and a large pile of blue prints?


It is quite simple - if you have a need for an aircraft NOW, go and buy one off the production line. If you are in need of an aircraft in the future, go and pay a company to design and build you one. You then have the possibility to influence the design to suit your future needs.

Since a very long time, no single aircraft has been designed & built without pre-orders from customers, be they civilian or military.
Back to top
View user's profile
tankmodeler
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 42
Location: Ontario
PostPosted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 5:26 am
Post subject: Re: OT, Airbus lost to Lockheed Martin

- Maple_Leaf_Eh
Airbus apparently made several invitations for the acquisition team to try their SIMULATOR, but there were already crews CROSS-TRAINING on flying Js. Simple logic when time is short.

That must have been a real "Hail Mary" from Airbus to imagine thaht we'd buy A400s. Not that they don't offer a lot of what we would really like in a medium sized airlifter, but we are on short rats for money, have a desperate need for airframes now and have a 40+ year familiarisation on the Herc. Anyting else just isn't in the cards.

I'm sure the blue suits also knew that if they even sniffed the hydraulics of an A400 sim, then the Canadian press would be all over it and muddy the waters at a point when replacements are needed real-soon-now.

Notice that we're also buying more Chinooks 10 years after we got rid of our last batch due to the previous government's inability to understand the military.

Paul Roberts
President
AMPS

_________________
Paul Roberts
President
Armor Modeling and Preservation Society
Back to top
View user's profile
Al_Bowie
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 25, 2006
Posts: 34

PostPosted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 8:56 pm
Post subject: Re: OT, Airbus lost to Lockheed Martin

We have similar histories. We mothballed all our A model Chooks then traded them (plus a small fortune) for a half dozen D models. We also traded our E model Hercs for J model Hercs and bought a small number of C17's (4?). They are deciding what to do about the H Model Hercs as I type (then again they have been deciding what to do about the Caribou replacement for 15 years past its retirement date - still flying) . It's a pity that you didn't go the same way on Heavy Armour.
Cheers
Al
Back to top
View user's profile
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 6 Hours



Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum