C-27's going away
 

C-27J Chopped in U.S. Budget Cuts | Aviation International News

So let me understand this, XXXX millions spent to purchase something that shockingly the C-130 could have done all along ?

where do I get in on some of this contracting gravy ?

I asked this before and now can't remember the answer - - but wasn't the USCG getting some of these aircraft too?

USMCFLYR

No, we went with a Casa 235 variant, the HC-144A.

http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg7/cg711/c144a.asp

So the USCG was looking at the C-27J and then went with a different aircraft right?
These are for the Falcon replacement, not the C-130 right?

USMCFLYR

The C27 and C130 missions overlap. The C130 can't do at one end what the C27 can do and the C27 can't do at the other end what a C130 can do. There are missions for each...

Yes, they were selected to replace the aging Falcon; we still have C-130Hs and a few C-130Js with plans to buy more. From what I heard, along with a couple of other factors, the C-27J was priced out of competition during the selection process.

The C-27 emerged out of the FUTURE ARMY CARGO aircraft program as a replacement for the C-23 only found in the Army National Guard. The C-23 (Shorts 330) was the replacement for the Carribou. The Guard got the C-23 in 1991 after the active Air Force got rid of their C-23A models in Europe. We acquired additional aircraft to round out a fleet of about 44 airframes.

The C-27 was a CONUS only cargo asset. It is not a military airplane in any capacity. It has metal fuel tanks! It has no military radios either. The C-23 was deployed to combat in Iraq for political reasons steming from the age old fight between the Army and MAC over lift assets. It quickly became a valuable tool for the Army filling a gap between the C-130 requiring no outside approval.

We flew the aircraft in a tactical profile all over Iraq and suffered numerous casualties but luckily, no fatalities. She was the little plane who could. She was not only ugly, but slow and under powered too. We worked miracles with that plane to include flying it with NVGs with an expedient modification. We were the first to fly an Army aircraft with NVGs in combat.

The active Army was so impressed with the asset that they piggy backed on to the Guard's acquisition program and asked for 100 aircraft for the active component. The AF freaked out over this and began a political battle to stop it. The Guard was originally going to acquire about 30 airframes to replace the C-23 which did not threaten the AF. The Army Guard got screwed and here we are. The Guard did get some airframes but I don't know the current status as I now fly HH60s in the Air Guard.

I have had it explained to me that the only reason the AF ordered its limited number of airframes was just to lead us to this point. If they had part ownership in the program then they could have a say in when to kill it.

That is also what most of us believe who have been intimately involved in the program. The political side of this disgusts me. OPSEC considerations prevent me from speaking in full, but suffice it to say that several warriors in my unit shed blood over this BS! We faced enormous risk by flying this aircraft in combat.

You can bet that some people in the house or senate made millions on this.