Is one DART enough?
- Thread starter edadian
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
C17 is a caddilac..... a small one but a caddilac nevertheless
The Antonov... (built in the Ukraines BTW) would be the Lada... a real big one but a Lada nevertheless.
I would be concerned with the ongoing & continued need for parts. You can't walk into the parts dept of a major NATO ally's airbase and expect to find parts for your grounded aircraft....
No Antonovs in the inventory of any major NATO partner means.... you're on your own buddy.
Hmmm.... Buy american!
The Antonov... (built in the Ukraines BTW) would be the Lada... a real big one but a Lada nevertheless.
I would be concerned with the ongoing & continued need for parts. You can't walk into the parts dept of a major NATO ally's airbase and expect to find parts for your grounded aircraft....
No Antonovs in the inventory of any major NATO partner means.... you're on your own buddy.
Hmmm.... Buy american!
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
??????????????
Hello.... reality calling....
Cdn CC130 is flying from Canada to Kabul... has mechanical problems while flying over US, Britain, France, Italy, Egypt, Turkey, India, Pakistan or pretty much any other place in the world... they can visit the military airport's parts department and get/scrounge/beg/borrow/steal/sign for the part that is broke...
Part goes into aircraft and plane sitting on ground can get back into the air... a simple concept.
If you are flying an "exotic" aircraft that everyone has heard about but nobody else owns.... guess what.... your plane stays on the ground, possibly becomes a hangar queen until such time as you can search the world and get the replacement part....
so which part of the concept "being realistic" do you have trouble grasping?
Hello.... reality calling....
Cdn CC130 is flying from Canada to Kabul... has mechanical problems while flying over US, Britain, France, Italy, Egypt, Turkey, India, Pakistan or pretty much any other place in the world... they can visit the military airport's parts department and get/scrounge/beg/borrow/steal/sign for the part that is broke...
Part goes into aircraft and plane sitting on ground can get back into the air... a simple concept.
If you are flying an "exotic" aircraft that everyone has heard about but nobody else owns.... guess what.... your plane stays on the ground, possibly becomes a hangar queen until such time as you can search the world and get the replacement part....
so which part of the concept "being realistic" do you have trouble grasping?
- Reaction score
- 114
- Points
- 680
Read the other threads. The bar for the DART is to be on the way to a deployment anywhere in the world within 24hrs, and the DART is capable of this. Once again, as brought up in other threads, the DART is an organization consisting of CF members (and a civilan Sup Tech employed in the DART Warehouse year round) that belongs to the PMO. This is the Prime Minister's Office. He controls where we go and when we go. The fact that the DART gets in too late (and anyone on the DART team will agree with you here) is once, again not within the control of the CF. It's all politics. Perhaps, instead of bashing the capabilities of the DART to get someplace quick (because the DART is more than capable of doing this), perhaps instead Canadians should be asking their elected politicos why is it that they, despite being elected by the people to be in Ottawa to perform their jobs, they never seem to actually be there? Why are CF DART pers required to be on constant 24NTM with pagers, yet the politicians who are responsible to say "go!!" never seem to be at their place of work to give that go ahead? It's called DF'n until a poll comes out which shows that popular Canadian opinion is in support of a DART deployment. After all, they want to be re-elected and don't have enough gonads to make the decision immeditely...must bide their time till a poll comes out. If our elected official's got over their teen age squabbles in the House, acted like professionals instead of children, and actually spent some time performing their jobs, we would not be having this discussion.sjm said:
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
geo said:
No one is suggesting replacing CC-130 with the Antonov. We replace the CC-130 with the C-130J and aument or ability with strategic airlift. Only 2 options available neither of which have parts widely spread. Only the US uses the C-5 series as far as I know and only Russian and the Ukraine use the Antonov.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 110
Funny how the RAF site mentions Hercs C-17A but no strategic airlift aircraft.
http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/acref.html
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/c17/c17spec.htm
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/wms/findPage.do?dsp=fec&ci=15051&rsbci=11168&fti=0&ti=0&sc=400
check the stats on the company sites and see
http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/acref.html
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/c17/c17spec.htm
http://www.lockheedmartin.com/wms/findPage.do?dsp=fec&ci=15051&rsbci=11168&fti=0&ti=0&sc=400
check the stats on the company sites and see
- Reaction score
- 6,431
- Points
- 1,360
Quote from edadian,
and Canada being a good little colony buying from master
MODERATOR WARNING:
This is your freebie lad, keep the rhetoric to yourself.
and Canada being a good little colony buying from master
MODERATOR WARNING:
This is your freebie lad, keep the rhetoric to yourself.
- Reaction score
- 114
- Points
- 680
Well gee, funny how, when you go to your very first link and click on the "C17 Globemaster III" you will be taken to the following:edadian said:
http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/c-17.html
Roles of the RAFs 4 leased and 1 owned C17 Globemaster IIIs:
Strategic Air Transport (AT). The movement of personnel and support equipment over long distances."
Perhaps you just missed it? I've helped unload one (an RAF one!!), they'd definetely be an asset to us.
Similar threads
