Liberals purchase new SAR aircraft.

[Argus]

Just now, The_Squid said:

This plane, and others, were on the short list because they all met the specifications that were determined to be necessary. 

Ah yes, such explicit specifications, tailor made by politicians with vested interests in obtaining the desired result by ensuring aircraft they didn't want - like the Hercules, for example, wouldn't stand a chance.

I'd trust the SAR pilots over that lot any day.

 

[The_Squid]

1 minute ago, Army Guy said:

pilots

Where did I say pilots?  

[Army Guy]

2 minutes ago, dre said:

That should be considered but it is only one factor. SAR should provide their requirements. Range, speed, payload, etc. After that its out of their hands, and no matter how many times you use "money guys" in the pejorative, the fact is economics will always be a big part of any purchase.

Sounds to me like the government has bought a good new plane, that had been needed for a long time and saved a bit of money.

Cool deal!

 

 

 

So I will repeat myself.....what is the point in spending millions on the testing , and research by the military. if 95 % of the time the money guy is going to pick....and when he does pick what are his first priorities , saving the crown money or providing a product that will do his job.....because he knows squat about the product...what he knows is dollars and cents.... 

[The_Squid]

Just now, Argus said:

Ah yes, such explicit specifications, tailor made by politicians with vested interests in obtaining the desired result by ensuring aircraft they didn't want - like the Hercules, for example, wouldn't stand a chance.

I'd trust the SAR pilots over that lot any day.

 

The Liberal government never set the specifications.  You don't think aviation experts were consulted on the specifications for the plane?

[The_Squid]

1 minute ago, Army Guy said:

So I will repeat myself.....what is the point in spending millions on the testing , and research by the military. if 95 % of the time the money guy is going to pick....and when he does pick what are his first priorities , saving the crown money or providing a product that will do his job.....because he knows squat about the product...what he knows is dollars and cents.... 

You said yourself this plane can do the job.   If the Liberals had picked the other plane, you'd be complaining about that.

[dre]

Airforce brass are just as corrupt as government officials. The NRC found that they were rigging their spec to favor the C7J which is why this purchase was taken out of their  hands and the file was given to public procurement.

[Omni]

Just now, The_Squid said:

You said yourself this plane can do the job.   If the Liberals had picked the other plane, you'd be complaining about that.

I don't think I would let my 16 year old son pick out a car for himself (unless he was paying for it) He might like the Corvette, but the Chevrolet would be completely adequate. 

[Argus]

5 minutes ago, dre said:

That should be considered but it is only one factor. SAR should provide their requirements. Range, speed, payload, etc. After that its out of their hands, and no matter how many times you use "money guys" in the pejorative, the fact is economics will always be a big part of any purchase.

Sounds to me like the government has bought a good new plane, that had been needed for a long time and saved a bit of money.

Cool deal!

What I see is that we're replacing 13 Hercules and 6 Buffalos with 15 of these new airbus aircraft. So right off the bat we're downsizing the SAR fleet. Second, the new aircraft will have less range and payload than the Hercules aircraft it is replacing. Which means on searches it will have to RTB more frequently to refuel.

I have already stated that I consider certain functions of government 'core', and this is one of them. Those functions should be done to the best of government's ability, and if added money is needed then it should be spent to ensure those functions are carried out to peak efficiency. If that means spending less on the CBC or arts grants or corporate welfare or bringing in masses of refugees and non-taxpaying immigrants than that is what the government should be doing. You don't cheap out on stuff like this.

[Derek 2.0]

37 minutes ago, The_Squid said:

They rescue people...  they aren't aviation experts.

 

 

So you're saying those that operate the aircraft.....aren't experts? 

 

 

1 hour ago, The_Squid said:

They're better than the planes we currently have doing the same job and are used all over the world for the same duties.

 

You're full of it........Of the current military users, the majority use them as light transports or constabulary patrol aircraft.......Which users of the C295 use the aircraft as a SAR platform, a platform operating in such extremes as the North Atlantic and the Arctic? I can't think of any, perhaps you could support your statement.

 

Edited December 11, 2016 by Derek 2.0

[Argus]

5 minutes ago, The_Squid said:

The Liberal government never set the specifications.  You don't think aviation experts were consulted on the specifications for the plane?

Please, give me a break. We both know that this was a political decision. The best aircraft wasn't bought. The government cheaped out so it could spend more on natives or foreign aid to buy themselves a security council seat.

[dre]

4 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

So I will repeat myself.....what is the point in spending millions on the testing , and research by the military. if 95 % of the time the money guy is going to pick....and when he does pick what are his first priorities , saving the crown money or providing a product that will do his job.....because he knows squat about the product...what he knows is dollars and cents.... 

He doesn't know "squat" he has the results of all that testing, and he has a spec. He will go with the least costly option that satisfies the requirements set forth in the spec. And when you say "Crown" what you really mean is the canadian taxpayer.

[Army Guy]

3 minutes ago, The_Squid said:

The Liberal government never set the specifications.  You don't think aviation experts were consulted on the specifications for the plane?

what difference does the specs make....specs are develop by DND to give the money guys a chance to pick form available products out there, from there it goes back to DND for testing and evaluation.....DND submits its findings back to the money guys and the Cabinet.....they choose the equipment ...Not an expert amongst them.....all the testing and eval means squat.....what makes or breaks the decision is money, and off sets....it has nothing to do with picking the best equipment never is....

[Derek 2.0]

5 minutes ago, The_Squid said:

aviation experts were consulted on the specifications for the plane?

 

Yes, the personal in the SAR squadrons.......until the C-130J entered (then left) the competition, the actual experts in the RCAF favored the more capable C-27J

[The_Squid]

Quote

 

...may offer interesting cross-over possibilities by leveraging the HC-144A’s “mission pallet” approach . It has a longer cabin that can carry more pallets of cargo or medical litters, or offer more crew room, reportedly offers better range, and has a cruising time of 12 hours. Built-in air-to-air refueling capability can extend even that mission time, to the limit of the crew’s endurance. 

That last set of performance statistics may prove especially appealing, given Canada’s vast distances. The tradeoff is a slow cruise speed of just 260 KTAS, which also has implications for long-range rescue attempts. On the other hand, EADS-CASA says that Portugal picked the C-295 because it outperformed its competitor in precisely the kind of long-term low-speed, low-level handling that’s required for mountain search operations on Canada’s west coast.

 

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/rescue-required-canadas-searchandrescue-aircraft-program-03350/

 

Sounds like this plane will do just fine...  

It's unusual to see so many aviation experts on a forum like this...   I had no idea we had so many engineers and pilots here!  (SAR techs do not operate the aircraft Derek 2.0).

[Army Guy]

4 minutes ago, dre said:

Airforce brass are just as corrupt as government officials. The NRC found that they were rigging their spec to favor the C7J which is why this purchase was taken out of their  hands and the file was given to public procurement.

Really now your not happy with the way the specs were written.....they seemed to favor the wrong plane Martha.....after 14 years we are going to blame the specs....I'd like a source stating that DND has no longer a role to play in procurement......I get it it's the money guy that gets to write the specs , test each product, and choose.....what to buy....sounds about right... 

[dre]

3 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Really now your not happy with the way the specs were written.....they seemed to favor the wrong plane Martha.....after 14 years we are going to blame the specs....I'd like a source stating that DND has no longer a role to play in procurement......I get it it's the money guy that gets to write the specs , test each product, and choose.....what to buy....sounds about right... 

Quote

 

But defence contractors accused the air force of writing its requirements to favour the C-27J -- an echo of allegations levelled against the air force several years later with the F-35 stealth fighter.

Air force brass denied rigging the search-and-rescue plane's requirements, but a National Research Council report published in March 2010 backed up the allegation and called for the requirements to be rewritten.

The Conservative government subsequently took oversight of the project out of the military's hands -- as also happened with the F-35 -- and gave it to the Department of Public Procurement.

 

If you want to blame government for the airforce not getting plane they wanted ask the conservative party why they took the project away from the military and gave to to public procurement.

[Derek 2.0]

14 minutes ago, The_Squid said:

SAR techs do not operate the aircraft Derek 2.0).

 

Then why did all the proposed aircraft makers consult with our SARTECHS? I would think being able to fully stand-up in the back of the aircraft being an advantage, likewise having an equal or better top speed and range as our existing aircraft.

 

13 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

I get it it's the money guy that gets to write the specs

 

Further to money, why did the Liberal government only sign a 5 year support contract (with a 15 year option)? Clearly we will operate these aircraft longer then 5 years.....the answer is clear, the Trudeau government wants to dick around with the program costs.......doesn't seem too open and transparent to me. 

Edited December 11, 2016 by Derek 2.0

[Army Guy]

19 minutes ago, Omni said:

I don't think I would let my 16 year old son pick out a car for himself (unless he was paying for it) He might like the Corvette, but the Chevrolet would be completely adequate. 

Well here an example of how most Canadians feel about the military.......like 16 year olds.......not to be trusted with multi bil contracts....Because they might buy something that will be to expensive......something that might save more lives....we won't have that.......perhaps a source where DND has been found guilty of putting tax payers money in their own pockets......NONE.....just a bunch of guys trying to get the best for their soldiers....what a fucking crime.....because the current government or previous government have proven themselves that are the best stewards with our tax dollars......they have never misused any tax moneys, and have never put any of it in to their pockets, or for their own use or comfort.....and yet we still allow them to continue on .....as if it was normal, but allow the Military to buy their own equipment ....are you out of your mind......

[Army Guy]

8 minutes ago, dre said:

If you want to blame government for the airforce not getting plane they wanted ask the conservative party why they took the project away from the military and gave to to public procurement.

because the Specs were already written twice , because they did not like the first one.....if your implying that DND has no say in the project please provide a source....as far as I know DND was the one that did all the testing, and research.....meaning they are heavily involved in the process.....

[Omni]

4 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

Well here an example of how most Canadians feel about the military.......like 16 year olds.......not to be trusted with multi bil contracts....Because they might buy something that will be to expensive......something that might save more lives....we won't have that.......perhaps a source where DND has been found guilty of putting tax payers money in their own pockets......NONE.....just a bunch of guys trying to get the best for their soldiers....what a fucking crime.....because the current government or previous government have proven themselves that are the best stewards with our tax dollars......they have never misused any tax moneys, and have never put any of it in to their pockets, or for their own use or comfort.....and yet we still allow them to continue on .....as if it was normal, but allow the Military to buy their own equipment ....are you out of your mind......

I would simply direct your attention back to the F-35 debacle. 

[The_Squid]

2 minutes ago, Omni said:

I would simply direct your attention back to the F-35 debacle. 

Not the same thing...  This was a competitive bid and the winning plane meats all the criteria.  The self-proclaimed experts here are simply CPC hacks who would have complained with whatever plane was selected.

[Omni]

1 minute ago, The_Squid said:

Not the same thing...  This was a competitive bid and the winning plane meats all the criteria.  The self-proclaimed experts here are simply CPC hacks who would have complained with whatever plane was selected.

I was making the comparison to point out why independent oversight is required for these types of procurement's.

[The_Squid]

Just now, Omni said:

I was making the comparison to point out why independent oversight is required for these types of procurement's.

Certainly!  And the Auditor General has been doing quite a good job.  And DND alone should never be allowed to make these types of decisions.  We would have out-of-control defence spending.  They would buy a Cadillac SUV when a Jeep would do the same thing.

[Army Guy]

3 minutes ago, Omni said:

I would simply direct your attention back to the F-35 debacle. 

Once again your going to hang that whole fighter project around DND's neck.....like the liberals had nothing to do with interfering and introducing the new law that requires it be costed out to 40 years.....that's right the new law did nothing but cause sticker shock to most Canadians who know nothing on the procurement system and how it works but they do know a large number when they see it.....

But speaking of that where is that costing for this project.....Missing.....why is that because the project would not be a simple 2.4 bil dollar project but rather close to 14 bil or higher....now that number will cause some concern.... but your not very vocal on discovering where your tax dollars are going now are you. 

Given Canada's historical purchasing background why would DND not seek out the best Aircraft available to us.....and then write the specs towards that tech that was being developed.....

[Derek 2.0]

Just now, The_Squid said:

They would buy a Cadillac SUV when a Jeep would do the same thing.

 

The back of the "Jeep" the Liberals selected: 

 

 

 

Versus the back of the "Cadillac" the RCAF wanted to do their job:

 

 

 

One has a reinforced steel floor, with ample room for loading and unloading all sorts of equipment (through airdrops if needed) and the other looks suitable for flying parcels between Toronto and Montreal