C-17 Globemaster III (IAF)

nrj

New Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
9,658
Likes
3,911
Country flag
Different Strategy

I'm not making strong expression to buy C-17 -

But, i'm making few logical guesses after long exchange of dialogues between India-US & desperate predictions about different international lobbying being set-up by.

May be we are seriously looking for better role in Afganistan, pre or post American troop withdrawal. May be Obama Administration has long strategic policy in Asia.

These 10 (or more) C-17 can be solely used to ferry troops & cargo to Afganistan.
Say peacekeeping mission, Health-care setup, Infrastructure Development (which we are contributing on some level), or IAF BASE. We cannot deny the fact that IAF is striving to find another base in Asia (after Mongolia base is not confirmed & not coming any soon)

From the India's Interest:
(1)Afganistan can act as perfect spot for IAF to dominate Asia also to flex its muscle.
(2)Hopefully if Indo-Iran Gas pipeline is approved, we need to keep an eye on Pakistan.
(3)Showing this credibility of peacekeeping, Geographical responsibilities we can bargain more effectively for UNSC Seat.

People of USA just need to told that WAR is over, & Obama will surely take care of that in next 3 yrs, Keeping India as watchdog in here.

Now it is considered that induction of C-17 is not possible before 2013, since India will engage only in post-war scenario.

Waiting for your views people. :)
 

F-14

Global Defence Moderator
New Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
1,563
Likes
27
NEW DELHI: The stage is being set for what will be the largest-ever Indo-US defence deal till now. New Delhi has now formally approached Washington

Twitter Facebook Share


Email Print Save Comment


for a direct government-to-government deal for acquiring 10 C-17 GlobemasterIII giant strategic airlift aircraft, each of which comes for over a whopping $220 million.

This would well supplant the $2.1 billion contract for eight Boeing P-8I long-range maritime reconnaissance aircraft inked last year and the $962 million one for six C-130J `Super Hercules' planes clinched in 2007.

With US aggressively muscling into the lucrative Indian market, often bagging deals under its direct Foreign Military Sales (FMS) programme instead of vying in global tenders, the Europeans are getting increasingly upset.

Some of them even see "American influence'' at work behind the Indian defence ministry's scrapping of the almost-finalised deals like the $1 billion contract for 197 Eurocopter light utility helicopters and $1.5 billion project for six Airbus-330 MRTT mid-air refuelling aircraft.

Defence ministry officials, however, dismiss such `fanciful' claims. The biggest prize, of course, is still to be awarded: the $10.4 billion project to acquire 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft for IAF.

Two American fighters, F/A-18 `Super Hornet' and F-16 `Falcon', are competing with French Rafale, Russian MiG-35, Swedish Gripen and Eurofighter Typhoon in this hotly-contested race.

As for the Globemaster project, India sent `a letter of request' for the acquisition of 10 C-17s to the US government last week after getting the nod from the Defence Acquisitions Council headed by defence minister A K Antony. "Under FMS, we will get C-17s at the same price the US government buys them from Boeing, plus some service charges,'' said an MoD official.

IAF certainly needs to augment its strategic airlift capability to swiftly move large combat systems and troops over large national and international distances, given that it has barely a dozen Russian-origin IL-76 `Gajraj' aircraft. IAF's medium-lift fleet, in turn, includes 104 Russian AN-32 aircraft.

The massive four-engine C-17 dwarfs them all. Capable of carrying a payload of up to 170,000 pounds, it can transport tanks and troops over 2,400 nautical miles.

With mid-air refuelling, the C-17 can go even longer distances. Rugged as it is, a C-17 can even land at a small forward airbase on a semi-prepared runway or airdrop over 100 combat-ready paratroopers directly into a battlezone. "It can take-off and land in 3,000 feet or less,'' said an official.

There are 212 C-17s in service around the globe at present, with the major chunk of them deployed with US Air Force. Other customers include UK, Qatar, Canada, Australia and Nato.

Incidentally, India and US have already finalised the End-Use Monitoring Agreement (EUMA), and the inking of the Communication Interoperability and Security Memorandum of Agreement (CISMOA) is now on the cards, to smoothen defence deals. The two pacts are required under US domestic laws to ensure compliance with sensitive technology control requirements.

Indo-US defence deals

* 2002: $190 million for 12 AN/TPQ-37 firefinder weapon-locating radars

* 2006: $53.5 million for amphibious transport vessel USS Trenton, with another $39 million for six UH-3H helicopters to operate from it

* 2007: $962 million for 6 C-130J `Super Hercules' aircraft

* 2009: $2.1 billion for 8 P-8I maritime reconnaissance aircraft

* And now, stage set for $2.2 billion acquisition of 10 C-17 Globemaster-III aircraft

Govt set to ink record $2.2bn arms deal with US - India - The Times of India
 

Agantrope

New Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
1,247
Likes
77
I'm not making strong expression to buy C-17 -

But, i'm making few logical guesses after long exchange of dialogues between India-US & desperate predictions about different international lobbying being set-up by.

May be we are seriously looking for better role in Afganistan, pre or post American troop withdrawal. May be Obama Administration has long strategic policy in Asia.

These 10 (or more) C-17 can be solely used to ferry troops & cargo to Afganistan.
Say peacekeeping mission, Health-care setup, Infrastructure Development (which we are contributing on some level), or IAF BASE. We cannot deny the fact that IAF is striving to find another base in Asia (after Mongolia base is not confirmed & not coming any soon)

From the India's Interest:
(1)Afganistan can act as perfect spot for IAF to dominate Asia also to flex its muscle.
(2)Hopefully if Indo-Iran Gas pipeline is approved, we need to keep an eye on Pakistan.
(3)Showing this credibility of peacekeeping, Geographical responsibilities we can bargain more effectively for UNSC Seat.

People of USA just need to told that WAR is over, & Obama will surely take care of that in next 3 yrs, Keeping India as watchdog in here.

Now it is considered that induction of C-17 is not possible before 2013, since India will engage only in post-war scenario.

Waiting for your views people. :)
Really nice view.

India need Afghanistan to counter the pakistan, becasue pakistan in time will fallout in the afghan in case of any war with india.
Also Afghan airbase can be used to target western china in case of any undesired events
Also serves as platform to train the military, which has similar terrain like in Tibet

C-17 will make us to access contemporary western technologies where we can move forward to have similar airlifters.

BTW is CISMOS imposed or what???
 

nrj

New Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
9,658
Likes
3,911
Country flag
BTW is CISMOS imposed or what???
Uncle Sam will surely take care of that signature before selling any powerful technology to us!

My View:
We should make them wait till our indigenous Net-Centric Warfare infrastructure is ready & our forces complete mock trials to master those potent capabilities :)
 

LETHALFORCE

New Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
29,968
Likes
48,929
Country flag
There was an issue brought up by Gates where India was asked to sign some agreements I guess this issue has been resolved??

Obama shifts on cargo plane campaign pledge - TheHill.com

Obama shifts on cargo plane campaign pledge
By Roxana Tiron and Walter Alarkon - 09/30/09 07:19 PM ET
President Barack Obama has backed away from a campaign pledge to invest in more military cargo planes.

On the campaign trail and shortly after he was sworn in as president, Obama pressed for investments in programs such as the C-17 cargo aircraft, calling it the “backbone of our ability to extend global power.”



He shifted his stance on the C-17 shortly after Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced in April that the Pentagon wants to stop buying the planes made by Chicago-based Boeing Co. All the references to the cargo plane were promptly removed from the White House’s new website.


Just after Obama’s inauguration, the White House website said: “We need greater investment in advanced technology ranging from the revolutionary, like


Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and electronic warfare capabilities, to essential systems like the C-17 cargo and KC-X air refueling aircraft, which provide the backbone of our ability to extend global power.”


That statement echoed a similar statement Obama had on his campaign website.


Vice President Joe Biden, who as a senator from Delaware had Dover Air Force Base in his state, has also been a strong supporter for the Boeing cargo plane. Shortly before the presidential election, the two candidates updated their campaign website to make the case for systems such as the C-17 aircraft, “which may not be glamorous to politicians, but are the backbone of our future ability to extend global power.”


Obama has shifted to the other side of the debate as his administration — in particular Gates and the Office of Management and Budget — has pressed against additional congressional funding for the cargo planes and other programs seen as wasteful spending. The Pentagon did not request any funding for the planes in its 2010 budget request.


In a budget memo released in May, the OMB listed the termination of the C-17 program as part of a proposal to trim the 2010 spending by nearly $17 billion.


“The president clearly understood, from a strategic point of view, where Secretary Gates was trying to lead the department with this reform budget,” said


Geoff Morrell, Gates’s spokesman. “We can’t continue to be all things to all people. We have to allocate dollars based upon our current needs and future threats.


“We have more airlift than we require. We love the C-17. It is a fantastic aircraft.”


The White House did not comment by press time.


Obama has expended political capital and become closely involved in some fights over defense spending, but he has not personally threatened to veto defense bills over funding for the C-17s.


Obama wrote to lawmakers himself to threaten to veto bills over funding for the F-22 fighter jet earlier this summer. Obama dispatched senior administration officials, including White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and Gates, to personally lobby senators for their votes against the F-22.


Obama won that fight after the Senate voted to curtail production of the F-22.


The C-17 fight so far has been left to Gates, who this week wrote a letter to lawmakers pushing against funding 10 more C-17s, worth $2.5 billion, in the 2010 defense-spending bill under debate on the Senate floor.


Senators said they haven’t felt pressure on the C-17.


Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), who voted against new F-22 funding but has supported more C-17 planes, said it was the F-22 that became a symbol of unnecessary military spending for the administration, not the C-17.


“They clearly made the F-22 a line in the sand,” said Reed, an appropriator and senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.


Obama’s packed agenda — dominated by healthcare reform and a possible troop surge in Afghanistan — made it harder for him to stage a second full-court press on senators to strip military-plane funds, lobbyists said.


“In defense of the president, he’s got enough on his plate,” said Jim Dyer, an appropriations lobbyist at Clark & Weinstock and former Senate GOP appropriations staffer.


Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), the Armed Services Committee chairman who worked with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Obama to strip the F-22 funds, said he had no problem with the Obama administration not making the same kind of lobbying effort on the C-17.


McCain has lead the fight in the Senate to strip the C-17 funds from the $636 billion defense bill and has called on Obama to threaten a veto over the issue, but Levin declined to endorse that view.


The White House has “to pick and choose their priorities,” said Levin, who on Tuesday spoke out against the funding for the C-17. “Otherwise, it kind of weakens the veto threat.”


The Senate on Wednesday night rejected McCain's amendment on a budgetary point of order. But McCain plans to try to strike the funds with other amendments.


McCain argues that spending $2.5 billion to produce 10 more of the Boeing aircraft would take money away from more pressing needs. The White House has said that the military’s current cargo fleet would meet the Pentagon’s airlift needs.


“It’s really outrageous,” McCain told reporters Wednesday. “They took money out of operations maintenance, which is our equipment, our personnel, all the things that are necessary that all the military leaders say are wearing out and need to be replaced.”


Boeing has strong congressional support for the C-17 across the country, as the program keeps 30,000 people employed in 43 states.


Gates has called for ending production once the last plane on order rolls off the Long Beach, Calif., assembly line in 2011. But for several years, Congress has funded about two dozen more C-17s, despite attempts by Pentagon officials to end production.



Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said that stripping the funds could hurt the military’s effort in Afghanistan and Iraq, where the C-17, unlike the F-22, is currently being used.


“The C-17 has been essential to our combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as humanitarian missions worldwide,” she said. “It is the most flexible and versatile transport in the United States military today.”


Boeing has set up a website — c17foramerica.com — where it has gathered about 10,000 signatures from people in 48 states on a petition to keep the C-17 alive.
 

Parashuram1

New Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
57
Likes
0
By Gulshan Luthra
New Delhi, June 14 (IANS) The Indian Air Force (IAF) has shortlisted the Boeing C-17 Globemaster III as its new Very Heavy Lift Transport Aircraft (VHTAC).

Chief of Air Staff Air Chief Marshal P.V. Naik is quoted by the India Strategic defence magazine as saying that the aircraft had been chosen after a thorough study because of its capability to take off and land on short runways with heavy loads, long range, and ease of operation.

IAF was looking at acquiring ten C-17s initially through the US government’s Foreign Military Sales (FMS) route, and a proposal in this regard was being considered by the Ministry of Defence (MoD), he said adding that the aircraft should come in about three years after a contract is signed.

The air chief, who spoke to India Strategic on the eve of the Paris Air Show beginning Monday, is also quoted as saying in its report that flight trials for the six Medium Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCAs) would begin in July and end around March 2010. The chosen MMRCA should start coming to India by 2014.

Outlining the trial procedure, Air Chief Marshal Naik said that initially, test pilots from IAF’s elite Bangalore-based Aircraft and Systems Testing Establishment (ASTE) would visit the manufacturing facilities of the six contenders; in the second round, they would test the aircraft’s performance in humid, hot and cold weather in Bangalore, Jaisalmer and Leh; and in the third and final round, they would test live precision weapon firings from the aircraft in the country of their manufacturer or another country designated by them.

“There would be one team leader but two or three sub-teams, and the template would be common for all,” he was quoted as saying.

The six aircraft in the fray are European EADS Eurofighter, US Lockheed Martin F-16 Viper and Boeing F-18 Super Hornet, French Rafale, Swedish Gripen and Russian Mig 35. One of them would be chosen to supply 126 aircraft worth about $10 billion, but the order could go up by another 50 per cent to 189 aircraft, a clause for which is built in the tender (Request for Proposal or RfP) issued last year. The interview report has been published in the June edition of India Strategic, being released at the Paris Air Show.

Notably, except for the Su30-MKI, all the combat and transport aircraft of the IAF were acquired in the 1980s, and IAF needs new, and newer generation, aircraft to replace and augment that capacity.

India has about 100-plus medium An-32 and less than 20 heavy lift IL-76 aircraft. It is difficult to get their spares as the Soviet Union where they were made has disintegrated into Russia and other states. IAF has acquired old, refurbished IL-76 platforms for its AWACS and Midair Refueler requirements.

An agreement was being signed with Ukraine to upgrade and modernize the An-32s, the Air Chief said.

An IL-76 can carry a cargo of around 45 tonnes and has a crew of six while a C-17 can carry 70 tonnes, and is much easier to operate with a small crew of two pilots and one loadmaster (total three), thanks to its various power-assisted systems. Two observers though can also be seated.

Despite its massive size - 174 ft length, 55 ft height and about 170 ft wingspan - a pilot can fly the C-17 with a simple joystick, much like a fighter aircraft, which can be lifesaving in a battlezone as the aircraft can take off quickly and at steep angles. It is powered by four Pratt & Whitney F-117-PW-100 turbofan engines.

Air Chief Marshal Naik said that IAF required contemporary and futuristic aircraft and systems, and that there was an urgency to acquire modern aircraft. The government shared the concern of the armed forces, and the pace to renew IAF’s assets was on schedule. By 2020-25, IAF would achieve its optimum level (of 45 squadrons).

At present, it is down from its sanctioned strength of 39.5 squadron to around 30-32, but this trend has been arrested, particularly with the induction of more Su30-MKIs and Jaguars. India has given a repeat order of 40 Su30-MKIs to Russia to take their total number to 230.

The requirement today is for technologically better, easier to maintain, and a larger number of combat and other aircraft, including helicopters, due to the strategic scenario around India and the need to ferry troops, men and material even within India in times of contingency and natural disasters.

He observed: “The IAF of the future, post-2025, would consist of FGFA (Fith Generation Fighter Aircraft), Su30-MKIs, MRCAs and Tejas/MCA (indigenous Medium Combat Aircraft) with multi-role as well as significant swing role capability.”

“They would employ advanced technologies, sensors and precision weapons. The larger aircraft, i.e. FGFA and Su30 would focus on Air Dominance and specialise in similar roles in long ranges over land and sea, while the MRCAs would don a variety of medium-range and tactical roles. These assets would be capable of all weather, day and night attack with adequate self-protection capability… these assets would be immensely capable and are not going to be confined to the strictly stereotyped roles. They would carry out a number of roles in the same mission.”

Air Chief Marshal Naik, who assumed charge May 31 from Air Chief Marshal F.H. Major, would be visiting the Paris Air Show along with top IAF officers to witness what new technologies are being introduced and displayed there by various aircraft manufacturers.

The Air Chief said that IAF was also looking at more AWACS but after studying how the first lot of three Phalcon AWACS functions. The first of these aircraft was delivered last month, and the remaining two would be delivered by Israel in 2010.

He indicated that IAF had short-listed the Airbus A330 MRTT to augment its Midair Refueller requirement, and that the proposal was being processed by the Ministry of Defence. IAF already has six IL-76-based aerial refuellers, designated as IL-78.

As for the C-17, Boeing has brought the aircraft several times to India for its literal catwalk on IAF tarmacs, including at the Aero India 2007 and 2009 in Bangalore. Indian military officials and journalists have been invited for the aircraft’s flight displays during the Paris Air Show.

The C-17 is the mainstay of the US forces for worldwide deployment, and can be refuelled midair. It is in fact the lifeline of US and NATO troops deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq.

According to the Boeing company, the high-wing, 4-engine, multi-service T-tailed military-transport C-17 can carry large equipment including tanks, supplies and troops directly to small airfields in harsh terrain anywhere in the world day or night.

The massive, sturdy, long-haul aircraft tackles distance, destination and heavy, oversized payloads in unpredictable conditions. It has delivered cargo in every worldwide operation since the 1990s. It can take off from a 7,600-ft airfield, carry a payload of 160,000 pounds, fly 2,400 nautical miles, refuel while in flight for longer range, and land in 3,000 ft or less on a small unpaved or paved airfield day or night.

The aircraft can also be used as an aerial ambulance.

IAF chooses Boeing’s latest C-17 for heavy-lift transport aircraft
Wasn't this supposed to be a done deal by now from your government's side? I heard about a similar news more than two months back. I don't understand what point does your government want to stress on by reiterating the same news again and again. Don't you think that you should de-glamorize your government and ought to choose your ministers of calibre rather than only lip service?

From what I know, your incumbent president had made a lot of promises in the year 2008 and from what reports have been flowing in afterwards into the defense world, none of those promises have been fulfilled to their completion. Don't the citizens of India demand answers from your government? I mean what is the point of having a democratic system when the citizenry has literally no intention to keep their government in check or the media interested to be sold off to certain political parties?
 

Agantrope

New Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
1,247
Likes
77
Uncle Sam will surely take care of that signature before selling any powerful technology to us!

My View:
We should make them wait till our indigenous Net-Centric Warfare infrastructure is ready & our forces complete mock trials to master those potent capabilities :)
i can equate this to
"You are giving a toy to the baby with a condition like when to use and where to use it. :D"
I think politician may not place their interest over national sovereignty:thank_you2:

Defence offset policy is a upset for the US Companies :D
 

nrj

New Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
9,658
Likes
3,911
Country flag
i can equate this to
"You are giving a toy to the baby with a condition like when to use and where to use it. :D"
I think politician may not place their interest over national sovereignty:thank_you2:

Defence offset policy is a upset for the US Companies :D
Indian CCS (Cabinet Committee of Security) and South Block policy makers are first time making bold & systemic decisions :goodstuff:. Coming years will be very interesting & exciting...


Wasn't this supposed to be a done deal by now from your government's side? I heard about a similar news more than two months back. I don't understand what point does your government want to stress on by reiterating the same news again and again. Don't you think that you should de-glamorize your government and ought to choose your ministers of calibre rather than only lip service?

From what I know, your incumbent president had made a lot of promises in the year 2008 and from what reports have been flowing in afterwards into the defense world, none of those promises have been fulfilled to their completion. Don't the citizens of India demand answers from your government? I mean what is the point of having a democratic system when the citizenry has literally no intention to keep their government in check or the media interested to be sold off to certain political parties?

:D Again we are the democracy, even a primitive interest of government is shown as a final order delivery by media.
We work in systematic manner, RFI, RFP, Actual order, Delivery though ToT or FMS, acting as a responsible nation.
I agree this process sometimes involve delays but strategic military deals like above can take such delays Unless we are invading neighboring countries tomorrow. We are not in hurry for that :)

And as far as INDO-US deals are concerned we have worked very good,
couple of years & P8 Posoidon in our service making us the only other country after US to have such powerful tech, and YES a true Indian citizen recognizes this development. The people who criticize government are able to do so because we are democracy, everybody can have their opinion but we don't beat or throw them in prisonr. We are a free country. :icon_salut:

And who knows this glamorizing can be a part of our policy to let workers in US know that we can bring back their job keeping the production line alive! :india:
 

Sridhar

House keeper
New Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
3,474
Likes
1,062
Country flag
India Submits Letter of Request for Potential Boeing C-17 Order

BY : BOEING PR

The Boeing Company announced today that the U.S. government has received a Letter of Request from India’s Ministry of Defence (MOD) and the Indian Air Force regarding the potential acquisition of 10 C-17 Globemaster III advanced airlifters.
“Boeing is very pleased that the Indian government has expressed interest in acquiring the C-17 to modernize its airlift capabilities, and we look forward to working closely with them,” said Vivek Lall, vice president and India country head, Boeing Defense, Space & Security. “We believe the C-17 can fulfill India’s needs for military and humanitarian airlift to help it meet its growing domestic and international responsibilities.”
The C-17 conducted demonstration flights in February at Aero India 2009 in Bangalore, where members of the MOD and Indian Air Force had the opportunity to see the aircraft’s capabilities in action. The Indian Air Force wants to replace and augment its fleet of Russian-made AN-32 and IL-76 airlifters.
“Nations looking to modernize their airlift capabilities turn to the C-17 because it has the highest reliability and mission-capable rate of any airlift aircraft,” added Tommy Dunehew, Boeing Global Mobility Systems vice president of Business Development. “It is available right now, without any development risk. Plus, the C-17 is an acquisition success story, with deliveries on or ahead of schedule for the past decade.”
A tactical and strategic airlifter, only the C-17 can carry large combat equipment and troops or humanitarian aid across international distances and deliver them directly to small austere airfields anywhere in the world. It can land combat-ready troops on semi-prepared runways or airdrop them directly into the fight. The C-17’s ability to back up allows it to operate on narrow taxiways and congested ramps. With a payload of up to 170,000 pounds, the C-17 can take off and land in 3,000 feet or less.
There are currently 212 C-17s in service worldwide, including 19 with international customers. The U.S. Air Force, including active Guard and Reserve units, has 193. Other customers include the United Kingdom (which recently announced a contract for a seventh airlifter), Qatar, the Canadian Forces, the Royal Australian Air Force, and the 12-member Strategic Airlift Capability initiative of NATO and Partnership for Peace nations. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) Air Force and Air Defence announced Jan. 6 that the UAE has signed a contract for the acquisition of six Boeing C-17s.


India Submits Letter of Request for Potential Boeing C-17 Order idrw.org
 

Sridhar

House keeper
New Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
3,474
Likes
1,062
Country flag
Check this guys , may help your discussions.

Friday, October 30, 2009 C-17 use in the United States Air Force

An index of all posts

The US Air Force uses a term called "Allowable Cabin Load" (ACL) for its transport aircraft. It is a planning figure used to determine the optimum average load its transport aircraft would carry during deployments.

Although the C-17 can carry a Maximum Payload of about 77 to 74 tonnes (according to the model), carrying such a load either reduces the range to non-trans-Atlantic distances, or requires in-flight refuelling, which requires a second aircraft to be sent to refuel it. With about 50 metric tonnes, the C-17 has a range of about 3,200NM, allowing a non-stop Charleston to Ireland flight, for example. To make it non-stop to Germany, the payload needs to be reduced to less than 40 tonnes. It may be possible with 40 tonnes from an Air Base farther north, such as Dover.

So to allow the aircraft to fly across the Atlantic non-stop and un-refuelled, the C-17's ACL is 45 short tons, so 40,8 metric tonnes (That's the plan anyway) .

I just found a paper that provides a few numbers, based on actual use of C-17 missions during Operation Enduring Freedom (OIF) , which is the Afghanistan Operation, and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF).

The average C-17 load during both of these missions averaged just around 18 tonnes (metric) on deployments and around 13 tonnes on redeployments. That's it. Barely C-130 Hercules-sized loads.

Of course, when a C-17 is used to carry personnel, with a full load of 102 troops (without the pallets), at 200 Kg each, it just has a payload of 20 tonnes, half of the C-17s' ACL. It's better to put them on a commercial flight. A CRAF B-747 can carry 350 and is much cheaper for flying troops than a C-17.

The US Air Force, in its planning documents, plans on an average daily use of 14.5 hours for its C-17 in times of crisis (The aircraft, I have no doubt, would be quite capable of maintaining such a tempo if it was operated by an effecient organisation).

Yet, at the peak of these two Operations, C-17 use never went above 5.84 hours per day.

Two of the reasons for the lack of hours (there are many) is lack of pilots and mis-management of the pilots they do have. You'd think the pilots were overworked?

US Air Force pilots are allowed to fly a Maximum of 120 hours in a 30 day period, and can get waivers to fly up to 150 hours in times of crisis.

Yet the average US C-17 pilot flies 43.2 hours a month, and in peak periods, the highest monthly average reached was 49.3 hours per pilot.

An average US airline pilot flies 78 hours a month.

Does anyone reading this Blog believe that the Canadian Air Force is more effecient with their Boeing C-17s than the US Air Force is with theirs?

We'll never know, since it's highly unlikely that the CF will ever publish such statisitics with the secrecy mentality that has prevailed at DND ever since the "New" government took power.
 

enlightened1

Member of The Month JANUARY 2010
New Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
880
Likes
60
The upgraded An-124 with glass cockpit is going to be ready only by 2014-15, that's too much to wait...with the fleet of IL-76s ageing, IAF had no choice but to go for the Globemasters.
 

Blitz

Founding Member
New Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
93
Likes
8
good to see IAF concentrating on logistics aswell together with the new fighters
the globemaster -111 is quite a capable platform but with 80 add MTA to be accquired in the future isnt the price a big no -no for this platform also c-130 are already to be delivered soon and when the IL can still last till 2025 it would have been better to develop our own heavy lift platform
 

A.V.

New Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
6,503
Likes
1,159
good to see IAF concentrating on logistics aswell together with the new fighters
the globemaster -111 is quite a capable platform but with 80 add MTA to be accquired in the future isnt the price a big no -no for this platform also c-130 are already to be delivered soon and when the IL can still last till 2025 it would have been better to develop our own heavy lift platform
The IAF presently operates 17 Russian-made Ilyushin Il-76MD 'Candid' transport aircraft capable of carrying cargo of around 45 tons, as well as some 104 medium-lift Russian-built Antonov An-32 'Cline' twin-turboprop transport aircraft that are undergoing an upgrade in Ukraine under a USD400 million contract.

this is what i got from janes going by the future induction certainly globemaster 3 wont harm when money is not a major oncern
 

nrj

New Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
9,658
Likes
3,911
Country flag
it would have been better to develop our own heavy lift platform

:goodstuff::goodstuff:

We need to speed up this initiative, it is very important to have indigenous Heavy Lift Platform like having a fifth gen bird in inventory.
Within couple of decades we might need large scale deployment in remote regions.
ADA along with HAL & DRDO should draw out a roadmap for such development.
It is a need of the time. I hope the Mr. Antony will not keep in mind such issue while shaping the much-awaited re-structuring of DRDO.
Lets hope for the best...
 

hellfire101

New Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2009
Messages
4
Likes
0
:goodstuff::goodstuff:

We need to speed up this initiative, it is very important to have indigenous Heavy Lift Platform like having a fifth gen bird in inventory.
Within couple of decades we might need large scale deployment in remote regions.
i cannot agree with you more, now that we are talking about Cold Start Military doctrine which requires rapid deployment of armed forces.

:goodstuff::goodstuff:
ADA along with HAL & DRDO should draw out a roadmap for such development.
It is a need of the time. I hope the Mr. Antony will not keep in mind such issue while shaping the much-awaited re-structuring of DRDO.
Lets hope for the best...
We may not have that capability currently but it wouldn't hurt going with Joint ventures.:icon_salut:
 

palash_kol

New Member
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
22
Likes
1
Sorry if posted before...

America Conveys impatience over pending defence agreement

by Ajai Shukla
Business Standard, 21st Jan 2010

The United States, according to credible recent press reports, is training Special Forces to “grab” Pakistan’s nuclear weapons if they seem about to fall into terrorist hands. And if the Indian Army is to play a role in the operations, here is how it might play out.

While US Special Forces are heli-dropped onto known Pakistani nuclear missile sites, and the US Air Force suppresses Pakistan’s air defences, the IAF’s newly acquired C-130J Hercules aircraft take off from Udhampur, flying Indian commandos to an unused airstrip near Kahuta which American Green Berets have temporarily secured. The Hercules’ electronic jammers blind Pakistani radars before entering Pakistani airspace; the Green Berets give the all-clear to the airborne Indian commander on secret frequencies that cannot be intercepted or jammed.

The Hercules lands in pitch darkness, satellite navigation directing the aircraft precisely to the landing site. Indian assault teams spill out to secure and deactivate the endangered nukes.


But there’s a hitch! India will only be eligible to receive key equipment on the Hercules --- electronic jammers; secure communications; and satellite navigation aids --- if New Delhi sheds its reluctance to sign a long-pending agreement that Washington insists upon for safeguarding its technologies: the Communications Interoperability and Security Memorandum of Agreement (CISMOA).

The US is also insisting upon another agreement for protecting its space technology: the Basic Exchange and Cooperation Agreement for Geo-spatial Cooperation (AGC).

Visiting US Defence Secretary Robert Gates, has strongly urged India’s government to sign these agreements. MoD sources say that, in his meeting with Defence Minister AK Antony, Gates conveyed Washington’s impatience at New Delhi’s delay. Without a CISMOA, Gates suggested, the C-130J would be just a top-notch transport aircraft; the CISMOA was necessary for fitting the electronics that would transform it into the world’s most formidable Special Forces aircraft.

Addressing the press, Gates explained, “[These agreements] will lead to greater interoperability and a greater capability of our forces to work together whether they are working together to provide Indian Ocean security… or in a disaster relief activity, or any number of other military operations.”

Gates also urged Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to sign a long-pending Logistics Support Agreement (LSA), which would allow Indian and American forces, ships and aircraft to obtain logistics from each others’ bases. While less immediate than the CISMOA, the LSA is an important step towards deeper military cooperation.

Growing US impatience at India’s inaction was also evident from Gates’ elaboration that, “These agreements have been laying around for quite a while… this is not some new requirement that has just emerged. [These agreements] are preponderantly in India’s benefit, because they give high-tech systems additional high-tech capabilities… are enablers, if you will, to the very highest quality equipment in the Indian armed forces.”

Gates played the diplomat in suggesting, “I think we have not done an adequate job on the American side in spelling out for our Indian partners the benefits to India of signing these agreements…. I promised the PM last night that we (the US) would do a better job of putting on paper, and using concrete examples (to illustrate) the benefits to India of all of these agreements.”

In July 09, India and the US had implemented the crucial End User Monitoring (EUM) Agreement, which safeguards US technology by disallowing India to pass on US military equipment to any third party, without permission from Washington. The EUM Agreement allows Washington to physically verify that equipment sold to India remains in Indian hands.
 

Agantrope

New Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2009
Messages
1,247
Likes
77
Simple US need some reason to stay in the South Asia and Indian Ocean :thank_you2:
 

RPK

Indyakudimahan
New Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
4,970
Likes
229
Country flag
Obama rejects C-17 funding in new budget

Obama rejects C-17 funding in new budget - Press-Telegram

President Barack Obama strongly rejected continued funding for Boeing's C-17 in his proposed fiscal year 2011 budget Monday, calling future spending on the Long Beach-built jet "waste, pure and simple."

"We save money by eliminating unnecessary defense programs that do nothing to keep us safe," Obama said. "One example is the $2.5 billion that we're spending to build C-17 transport aircraft. Four years ago, the Defense Department decided to cease production because it had acquired the number requested - 180. Yet every year since, Congress had provided unrequested money for more C-17s that the Pentagon doesn't want or need. It's waste, pure and simple."

Boeing officials reacted to the statement diplomatically, saying they believe there is future need for the aircraft both domestically and internationally.

"While we do not comment on our lobbying activities, we can say that Boeing is focusing our efforts on the demand for affordable, reliable and capable airlift globally," said Boeing spokesman Jerry Drelling. "We intend to aggressively seek international sales of the C-17."

The C-17 supports some 5,000 jobs at Boeing's production, sales and research plant in Long Beach.

The president had also suggested in 2009 that Congress not support additional dollars for the heavy airlift cargo plane. Despite his request, Congress funded 10 jets for the U.S. Air Force at a cost of $2.5 billion.

The president's suggested budget is


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Advertisement

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
only a proposal, as Congress holds ultimate authority on spending, so his call to end C-17 production will need approval by both the House and Senate. Obama can veto spending projects approved by Congress, but federal law allows a presidential veto to be overridden by a two-thirds majority of both houses.
Area Congress members could not be reached Monday for reaction to the President's latest call to end C-17 funding, but California Sen. Barbara Boxer said in a statement that she strongly disagreed with Obama's assessment.

"While I agree with President Obama's focus on job creation in his new budget, this is one area where we don't agree," Boxer said. "I will work to restore funding for this program that is important for so many of our military and humanitarian missions."

The plane has traditionally enjoyed strong support from lawmakers in California and the 44 states where suppliers are based.

The C-17 has seen extensive use in Iraq, Afghanistan, and more recently, ferrying relief aid to earthquake-stricken Haiti. Along with the United States, C-17s are owned by Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, Qatar, United Arab Emirates and a NATO-led consortium based in Hungary.

The Indian Air Force is also considering purchasing 10 of the jets.

But while Boeing looks for international orders, company officials believe domestic production is vital to keep the plant and its suppliers across the country operating. Boeing estimates it needs 12 to 15 orders annually to justify high production costs.

"U.S. orders will ultimately be needed in the future to keep the line open," Drelling said. "It is important to preserve this vital airlift program that is the only military wide-body manufacturing capability in the United States."

Currently, C-17 production is expected to end in mid- to late 2012, though Boeing has entered into formal negotiations with India for 10 planes, which could push production into 2013.

Other recent orders have come from the United Arab Emirates, which purchased six C-17s in early January and the United Kingdom, which added one to its existing fleet of six a few days later.

Increasingly, the C-17 has been used for humanitarian efforts.

The plane has been used to haul tons of medical aid, food, water and personnel in the wake of such disasters as Hurricane Katrina, the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami, the earthquake and tsunami that struck American Samoa and Tonga in September and most recently, the earthquake in Haiti.

The plane can carry up to 170,000 pounds of equipment and land on remote, unpaved runways as short as 3,000 feet, making it unique among the world's heavy-lift aircraft.

The U.S. Air Force has a C-17 fleet of about 194 with roughly a dozen more on order. It was first introduced in the early 1990s as a more-efficient alternative to Lockheed's C-5 aircraft.

Last year, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., led a spirited attempt to strip funding for more C-17s in the federal defense budget, but his amendment was eventually voted down in a bipartisan 68-30 vote.

And in October, over strong objections from the White House, the Senate and House jointly agreed to purchase 10 more C-17s.

The federal government estimates restarting the plant after closure would cost in excess of $1 billion.

"Preserving this program provides an affordable option to the U.S. Air Force and Congress if they need to fill what we believe is a growing demand for airlift," Drelling said.
 

Articles

Top