Search
Notices
Military Military Aviation

C-27J Update

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-24-2013, 04:23 AM
  #31  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: Flying a Desk
Posts: 197
Default

Originally Posted by Madhouse3x View Post
Back on the Future Cargo Aircraft (FCA) to Joint Cargo Aircraft (JCA) to No Cargo Aircraft replacement for the C23 discussion….. The requirements determination process is a long one and is often seen as separate from experiences of operational commanders….as all of you that have flown C23 and C12s in recent conflicts have probably thought to yourself. The Air Force position over the years was that they had sufficient assets to support the Army intra-theater missions. Many Army dudes believed the mission tasking cycle of the Air Force didn’t provide the flexibility and/or speed needed to properly/best support missions. The rest of the debate seems to come down to the efficiency versus effectiveness argument. It is not efficient to send an aircraft capable of hauling thousands of pounds of cargo on a mission to carry 100-200 pounds of cargo. It is not efficient to have an aircraft capable of hauling 20-30 troops on a mission to transport a key leader and his/her staff (5-10 pax) to meetings. As the Army dudes know, the combat support hospital commander that needs 100-200 pounds of blood to infuse casualties prioritizes effectiveness over being efficient. The commander doing key leader engagements with foreign governmental officials prioritizes effectiveness over efficiency. Certainly efficiency is a consideration, but not the prime consideration. Absent congressmen getting involved to put FCA back in the Army, I believe the next chance for Army Aviators to fly something that can better accomplish the high priority, time sensitive missions, the ground combat commander determines are necessary, is in the hands of the TRADOC capability manager-Lift (TCM-Lift). They are the ones that will need to work on the Future Utility Aircraft (FUA), or whatever it is called now, that will replace the C12 and UC35, 5-10-20 years down the road. Wish them luck as they work their way through the requirements determination process during a time when “efficiency” may be weighted higher in the decision making process due to the fiscal realities the DOD is facing. That’s all I have to say about that!!!
Just spent a few days with TCM-L and got a brief from them on the future. Last year the life cycle line of the UC-35 peeled off into the FUA around 2023. This year it just kept going...

I think it's going to be a very long time before we see any new airplanes.
schoolio is offline  
Old 11-30-2013, 02:18 PM
  #32  
On Reserve
 
jwlast's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: D6D (Desk 6 Drawer)
Posts: 15
Default

Saw several in the Boneyard two weeks ago......I think a couple flew directly from the factory
jwlast is offline  
Old 12-01-2013, 09:07 AM
  #33  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Atlas Shrugged's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2010
Position: 747 CA
Posts: 344
Default Somebody gets it!

Originally Posted by Madhouse3x View Post
. As the Army dudes know, the combat support hospital commander that needs 100-200 pounds of blood to infuse casualties prioritizes effectiveness over being efficient.
This!

Atlas Shrugged is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Nevets
Regional
215
07-24-2013 09:46 AM
gettinbumped
United
0
12-11-2012 11:29 AM
cactiboss
American
29
05-16-2012 06:24 PM
HSLD
Hiring News
2
11-14-2006 04:32 PM
HSLD
Hiring News
1
02-08-2006 10:37 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices