Army Guy

All of them that were re written, .........the DND SOR had more than one aircraft that could have been included....

WOW....sounds like a liberal politician response....had nothing to do with the question I asked....reminds me ....squirrel .....what were we talking about....

what does that even mean.....that only those that agree with your statements can use that It's our dime excuse.....and those that disagree, well WTF do they know, shit do they even pay taxes ? I get it only your opinion counts here....not other opinions, nor the military, nor any one else....

Yes now were talking about a secret code, only made available to liberals.....got it, should of know better.....never did get that decoder ring......or may be DND used the examples of aircraft already in service to many times, and this is NRC telling them "The capabilities required should not refer explicitly to those provided by existing DND FWSAR fleets" maybe there is no code, no aliens, no misguided sentences, maybe it is as it is written....what do I know I never got the code.....

Sure, it's your Dime....that's why they mention current serving SAR fleet aircraft....and that is why the para above that statement the one I provided lists more reasons that have nothing to do with the C-27J.....this is simple reading comprehension....

Good question the NRC SOR list dozens of them and the reasons they are not valid....such as cabin height, speed, range, NRC even went as far to dismiss that current levels of SAR service that DND wrote the policy on were not valid because the Government has not written a policy yet.....So any reasons list as to keep current levels of service valid...are omitted from the SOR....that services levels could or would be down graded to allow for additional aircraft to compete.....meaning it now forces the government to write a new policy on Service levels to Canadians which are lower than what DND currently has..... You and I know both regardless of which government is serving they are not going to make public why this choice....but follow the project, conns screw it up royally.....making the C-27J an aircraft with to be avoided .....why pick it....why not stay away from it.....

Nice try lets put all of that into context shall me......listed below is the para found under RECOMENDATIONS.....it goes on to put your statement into context.....It does not ref to the C-27J.....but rather Capabilites already within DND SAR fleet.....last time I checked , no C-27J......I guess you glossed over the para above that which goes on to explain the resons why the NRC SOR was commissioned.....

DND did have a preference , they made no attempt to cover that up.....they had access to the aircraft before and during the testing process....they put all the aircraft through their paces....and stated to the public and in their reports back to PWSG and the government they preferred the C-27J, it meet or exceeded all of its requirements....These are the guys that will be using the aircraft and it's sensors on a daily basis.....their recommendation was over turned, for political reasons.....as it always is..... Canada has a history of keeping it's military equipment well past it due date, at the cost of untold millions in extra maintence and repairs, buying parts not made any more....to deceive the public into thinking they are getting the best bang for their buck.....keep in mind the Buffalo is over "50 years old"...... this project is over 14 years in the making.....how can we blame DND for wanting to spend a few extra dollars on the next one....50 years old.....with that in mind ...may be meeting the standard , was not good enough.....but you don't see that.....

Another guy that does not read all the posts....this was Smallc statement as well.....And it is bullshit.....here is what the NRC say about why the SOR is rewrriten...I provided you with the link of the NRC SOR, it lists all the reasons for all the changes made to DND SOR ..... Note "no where" does it state that DND SOR was written directly to the C-27J....there were more than 1 aircraft that meet DND's SOR.....of course you'd already know that if you had read the NRC SOR.... http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/about-reports-pubs/fixed-wing-search-rescue-aircraft-2010.page

what I am saying is this, you have not read the existing NRC SOR , had you read it, you would have changed your argument....because the NRC SOR counters everything in your augment.... As to what info PWSG has or has not used , no one knows as it has not been released has it....The liberals have already used political gains to choose purchases of military equip in their recent history.......Did Justin have full access to the entire F-35 file before he was PM .....when he came out and said we will not buy the F-35 .... not even with a competition....The C-27J already had the stench of the CONS all over it.....the C295 never won anything....it was decided long before the competition was completed....

I can not find a unit price for the new C295W, with all the sar sensors ......as that price has not been released yet.....I have asked you for a source but all I got was crickets....And like I said the per unit price does not tell the whole tale does it....offsets , other considerations can still reflect on end price of contract..... The requirements had to be rewritten for the C295....but no red flag here....

No what I have been saying all along was this C295 purchase was one based of costs, and political choice...capabilities had nothing to do with it....My reference to costing was in responding to your and Smallc stating that the C-27J was double the price....which when we do the math that is not true...... Yes we do have a SAR aircraft being purchased , but it does not mean it was the better choice...

I guess Mongolia does not have a debating team does it, which would account for your fantastic debating technique, if that's what you call it........something like my dad can kick your dads ass anytime na na na....."come on" bring something to the table.....anything....

What you mean to say is this project has not been costed to 40 years, but rather only 33 years...which we have not seen so how can we simple say the C295W is cheaper....have you seen the costing...and comparison...do you have a source for that info.....I did not think so....So how can you make that claim..... Unit costs on their own do not tell the whole tale do they......we need to see the cost comparison for the full 33 years, and that info has not been released yet has it ? Also it does not include some of the NRC recommendations such as new SAR bases closer to the north, which was used to exclude the speed and range capabilities.....those are not going to be cheap....

Have you even gone to see what the contract consists of ....NO you have not....what you have done is simple discounted because it does not support your argument.....and even if it did not include all the SAR sensors we are looking for ....those will not double the costs as you were saying it would......You also discount or brush aside all that comes with the C-27J, such as common spares, with the C-130J which over the course of 33 years....would be in the hundreds of millions...when you take a look at warehouse space, training requirements for both pilots, crew and ground crew....to mention a few...

you might give a us a source and where you got your prices..... I used the prices according to the Australian contract..... even if you double the contract adjusted for inflation from 2012 you'd only be looking at 400 million more....than already spent....subtract the gains made from training, and logistics because they share a lot of the same parts as the C-130J and over 33 years that 400 million is not as bad as you make it out to be......

where in the hell did I say that.......what I did say is the NRC SOR debunks most of your argument.....DND did not write the specs to suit the C-27J as you lead us to believe.....that is a myth.....it also explains in its SOR that because they are no clear government policy in writing, DND could not use the excuse that those items were required to maintain SAR quality of service or was required for SAR duties.....as there is no governmental policy ...just one set out by DND....it is funny that while they did throw out most of DND want list , they did mange to keep the ramp requirement.....wow.....read the NRC SOR again they spell it out for you in black and white....they also state that DND might have to move SAR bases closer to northern population centers to maintain it's range, and time to delivery of services, due to the lowered standards....that is pretty danming....oh one more thing the cost of those new bases not in the contract....pitty and here I thought it was clear, sunny ways yes indeed....

Let see, $ 2.4 was the contract we signed on to was it not...........I just gave an example of Australia signing a contract for 1.4 bil for 10 C-27J.....you do the math.....the contracts are similar, with some exceptions....those exceptions are not major costs, or cost Bils... please explain it to me....and most of the sources I have checked do not list costing for the C298W, but rather the last version of C298....

SO what you are saying is the Cons purchased this new SAR aircraft.....? or has the Liberals taken what was left them and went the opposite direction.....

The evidence is clearly laid out for you if you read the NRC SOR, which I provided.........it states the reasons for re writing the specs, it does so by line item by line item.....Show me where it states as you have said it was DND writing the specs for the C-27J......which is not true....at all.... each standard is clearly defined....and when they changed them they stated why.......the main reason or reason that was used repeatedly was DND kept refering to Standards of SAR service...which were laided out, and written by DND, since DND does not write Government policy, all those requirements listed "to ensure this level of service is required " were denied....for no other reason other than DND wrote those specs.....That those specs are to high.... Yes your right ...unless we are talking F-35.....the contracts are almost the same while they may be off by a couple hundred thousand but they are close enough for comparison....

No i'm not getting your point......What was said is each aircraft is built to have a minimum safety standard.....some companies have said those are not good enough we want to surpass the minimum standard.....so each plane is not of the same safety standard....but each plane does meet the minimum standard big fuc*ing deal......unless you have proof that the C-295 meets or exceeds the same safety standard as the C-27J, what is your point.....all the other capabilities see the C-27J in front....with exception of one price.....

And I have said before, it is a good thing that any government has took this file and done something with it....But the liberals seen this as a political opportunity and seized it....they wanted nothing to do with the C-27J , because it already had a target marked on its back......The rewriting of DND specs had nothing to do with the C-27J, in fact I have already posted the reasons they changed the specs....nothing is mentioned about the C-27J.....it also states there was More than one aircraft that would have passed the specs....the C295 was not one of them..... They go as far as stating that DND's SAR policies and specs are not backed up by governmental policy, that that level of service does not have to be followed and is nul and void....there for all those conditions that are set by DND are also nul and void.....after reading the source I provided you still have no flashing lights going off in your head.....then your right.....and im wrong....our government will go to any length it has to go to get its way.....including rewriting SAR policy, and standards...now it won't go up, it will not surpass DND's standards because that would mean the C-295 would not be picked....it means the quality of SAR service is going to go down..... It also does not preclude the building of new SAR bases in the north, so range and speed requirements are not lost forever......which costs have not been included in any costing yet... One more point to mention Australia purchased 10 C-27 J for 1.4 Bil dollars in 2012.....lets assume we still wanted 16 the cost would be just over 2.6 is a rough estimate....Not the double the cost as you said....in fact pretty comparable ....

This for you squid because you can't be bother to read all the posts....this was in reponse to Eyeball....and his above comment...thanks for keeping up....

I'm not sure why we are talking safety , or what you are going on about......I have said clearly more than once.....Canada sets minimum safety standards for aircraft.....it does not mean that aircraft can not be built to higher standards....IN regards to safety....not sure what you gold toilet has to do with anything...but I see this as a distraction on your part because it seems like you did not know what your talking about.....

No it does not guarantee anything, but 90 % of time it does....most of the time better does mean it cost more.....