Any of you heard of this yet? http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/04/navy-coast-guard-c27j-042012w/
The commandant had mentioned to Congress that he and the AFCOS were discussing it. Guess they're going for it. Works out well for everyone - the Coasties get free airplanes, the AF gets rid of planes it doesn't want and gets Congress off it's back for dumping brand-new airplanes. Tell you what, though: sort of calls bullshit on the AF's argument that it "can't afford" to operate the Spartan and the Herk together if the dang Coast Guard says it can. The Air Force just doesn't want the mission, but politically it doesn't want to let the Army into its kitchen. Not unlike my toddler breaking a toy she doesn't even like, because it "wouldn't be fair" for one of the other kids to have "her" toy. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Yup...I expected to see this announcement any day. With "budget constraints" buying a fleet of more or less built and delivered planes provides a large and direct bump to our medium fixed wing asset pool. With the Falcon on it's way out (like it or not)-We need another option ASAP. Waiting for the 1 or 2 CASAs per year until 2020 or beyond just isn't going to cut it. I hope this works out with a minimum of fuss.
Seems way too easy, smart, and efficient. I'm sure a Congressman somewhere will have a problem with it.
If this goes through, would they be outfitted to match the -144's mission, I still need to do spec comparison between the 2 airframes? I had very small hope to fly these after I switched to fixed-wing had the Army kept them, but they would've gone to the Guard anyway.
It sounds like they're going to use them to augment the Herks, rather than the C-144s? Using them to, say, do a lot of the logistics missions and free up the Herks would be the cheaper option, since you wouldn't have to buy all the mission equipment. And the C-27s were designed specifically for dropping into austere fields.
Does this mean a mass-Exodus from the helo community to the fixed wing side for the CG (like the CASA draft), or are there enough Falcon bodies to cover? Will this then create another helo vacuum?
. . . and they're still buying more of them (HC-144/CN-235). Since the USCG apparently isn't using these a/c as light transports, could any CG aviator tell us what the CASA a/c does better than the ES-350 (Super King Air) ? Does the USCG hope to become an "all-european" aircraft community?
Their concern was more the flaws with the Deepwater process and how the CASA was selected and outfitted.
We have a contract to buy them-that is why we continue to purchase them. We also have a niche that needs to be filled (medium-range, fixed wing), so the HC-144 is what we've been given. Way back, when we were looking at proposals to replace the Falcon (and the C-130 originally), we had two fixed wing assets offered: the Spartan and the CASA (sorry, no Super King Air in either proposal). The Spartan was much more expensive (at the time...it might be a wash except for operating costs as it burns more fuel than the CASA), and word on the street is that there were politcal reasons as well (bringing Spain on board in the War on Terror). Now getting a bunch of Spartans in our lap would be tremendous. Budgetary constraints have slowed down the numbers of CASAs coming our way to a trickle, and you need at least 3 aircraft to stand up an air station, so it would take more than a decade to replace all of the Falcons. We also have plussed up the number of aviators in preparation for the CASA, so we've been carrying extra pilots at many air stations which is never a good thing (professionally). As for Super King Air vice the CASA: I'm not sure the capabilities of the Super King Air as a logistics platform. I know the Falcon didn't do logistics, but our proposal to replace it did call for having logistics capabilities (and the CASA has that ramp that you can roll a pallet on to). Also, can you drop stuff from the air in the Super King Air? I'm guessing it would take a mod to put a hatch in the belly like the Falcon - not sure if this has been done already. My take on it is I wish we had always had Spartans, and that we could get rid of the CASA completely and have a fleet of Spartans/C-130s. The CASA is much more capable, and having a common engine as the C130J would make being a wrench turner much easier.
Wow, this is pretty cool news. Although I find it difficult to get overly excited about moving eventually into a prop, this is a step in the right direction!
That's really too bad. They look like good aircraft, especially compared to what I've heard about the 144. And they have the same engines as the Hercs...
We had an aircraft program manager stop by and talk about it for a few minutes...looks like the proposal is past the Commandant and has to (slowly) make its way through Congress. With budgetary belts tightening the concerns are how it will affect us short- and medium-term, and the USAF may not be able to let go of the program. Also, rumor has it that a member of Congress who has an Air Guard unit in his/her district doesn't want to lose an bunch of aviation assets that are under his/her purview, so might try to derail it.
No citation for it - but the gouge mill says the AF balked at selling these and the whole plan is dead in the water.
Can I assume the USCG will never again go for some sort of long-range, amphib-capable aircraft (something that can land on the water and takeoff again) for "big ocean" SAR? Not my bailiwick, I understand, but that seems to be niche capability worth having, however rarely used.
Probably a study somewhere that talks about the likelihood of needing to rescue a distressed crew in calm/fair weather you could actually park an flying boat on vs the likelihood of that rescue taking place in the middle of a shit storm of waves and weather. As much as I love Seaplanes (Im sick... really) Outside that rare case like stumbling across the crew of the Indianapolis while carrying freight and staying with them, the benefits of a purpose designed sea plane seem to be far out weighed by an aircraft optimized for operation in the regime it spends 99% of its job in.
It's not so much the virtues of rescuing by landing as opposed to hovering, as the extreme long range/high capacity you get from a flying boat. I've often thought that it'd be a good capability for the Navy/CG/ANG to have out in the Pac for long-range SAR. Put a few in Kodiak, Guam, and K-Bay, for example. The Japanese are still building and flying this big bastard, and apparently the Indians are looking at buying them too:
