US Scraps Entire Fleet Of Afghan Cargo Planes

[Richard]

Daddy, can I borrow the keys to your C-130 tonight?

US Scraps Entire Fleet Of Afghan Cargo Planes
SS, 28 Dec 2012

The U.S. military is scrapping the Afghan air force’s entire fleet of Italian-made cargo planes, The Wall Street Journal reported Friday.

U.S. and Afghan officials told the paper that the Afghan military isn’t expected to have an independent and fully functioning air force until around 2017, well after the withdrawal of most U.S. and international troops.

On the west end of Kabul International Airport, twin-engine C-27As sit side by side, sunlight reflecting off their gray wings and the green, black, and red of the Afghan flag emblazoned on their tails. For more than a year, though, most of the planes had been little more than expensive aviation exhibitions, unable to fly due to lack of spare parts and maintenance.

Now, despite spending nearly $600 million on the program, the U.S. is canceling the contract for the aircraft and disposing of all 16 planes delivered to the Afghan Air Force, the Journal reported.

Alenia Aermacchi North America, a unit of Italian defense conglomerate Finmeccanica SpA, failed to meet the requirements of their contract to maintain the fleet, according to an email from U.S. Air Force spokesman Ed Gulick, who was quoted in the Journal.

“This decision comes after failed attempts by the contractor to generate a sufficient number of fully mission-capable aircraft that would provide an effective airlift capability for the AAF,” Gulick said in the email.

An Alenia representative was quoted in the Journal as saying the company had not received word of the decision and that the program had recently shown improvement.

“It’s all a bit surprising that this decision is being made now when the [remediation] plan is being fully implemented,” the representative said.

The entire fleet of C-27As was grounded in December 2011 and even recently only four to six planes have been able to operate at any one time, Afghan Air Force spokesman Col. Mohammad Bahadur said in an interview with Stars and Stripes.

“The basic problem is that these airplanes were purchased without spare parts,” Bahadur said. “For a small part, you need to wait for weeks or months.”

For the Afghan military, still struggling to operate independently, the lack of cargo aircraft has been a blow to an already shaky logistics system. The Afghan security forces have leaned heavily on their fleet of Russian helicopters and Cessna 208 planes. But those aircraft struggle to keep up with demand, especially on longer routes, such as the roughly 300-mile haul between the capital and Kandahar, Afghanistan’s second city and still a major center for fighting.

Shortages of fuel and parts are epidemic for Afghan troops, whose Humvees and pickups often lie dormant for days; many units complain of a shortage of ammunition.

The U.S. is set to deliver four C-130s, four-engine cargo planes that are the workhorses of the U.S. Air Force, to the Afghan Air Force in 2013, said Ministry of Defense spokesman Gen. Zahir Azimi said in an interview with Stars and Stripes.

“A military that doesn’t have a plane is like a man without legs,” Azimi said.

http://www.stripes.com/news/us-scrap...OOtJhLE.mailto

[JJ_BPK]

We should grab the C-27's. I think they won the bit for the AF Joint Cargo Aircraft (JCA). They look like C-130 midgets..

[Peregrino]

Grabbing the C-27s won't work; the USAF has been actively fighting to get rid of the ones already in US service. Personally I'm wondering how many AF generals work as Lockheed lobbyists and what they get paid. They're certainly earning their money. Annoying because I like the C-130 but there are things the C-27 can do on short haul/lighter loads that make a lot of sense. There are really good reasons US airlines adopted commuter aircraft and the C-27 is the military equivalent. Anyway - that's my observation from research and position papers we've prepared at work; afchic might be able to share a different perspective.

[Scott-O]

Grabbing the C-27s won't work; the USAF has been actively fighting to get rid of the ones already in US service. // Anyway - that's my observation from research and position papers we've prepared at work. afchic might be able to share a different perspective.

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2012/01/13/ar...argo-aircraft/

Article is old, but I thought we were still getting them purchased for AFSOC? I also thought the army took/was taking posession of around 35, this article says only 21...

Also the we cannot use the C-27As as a trade for the C130-- the are slight mods to the Airframe b/n the C-27A an C-27J that would not be able to be upgraded cost effectively.

[Box]

I went to the JALIS course a few years ago and during that time we were told that the C-23b fleet was going to be retired and the C-27 was going to replace it in the Army inventory...
...by the time I returned home from the course, and made a few jumps at the Test Board to do airdrop validation, we were already being told, "who told you that? The USAF is taking these AND the Sherpas from the Army"
...hahahaha, which reminds me, about two weeks after pulling the C-27/C-23b carpet out from under us the USAF issued the order calling for the removal of the bailout rigs from the C-130's and would no longer supply them for paradrop operations.


silly army folks are so gullible.

[Stras]

Originally Posted by Billy L-bach

...hahahaha, which reminds me, about two weeks after pulling the C-27/C-23b carpet out from under us the USAF issued the order calling for the removal of the bailout rigs from the C-130's and would no longer supply them for paradrop operations.


silly army folks are so gullible.

The bailout rigs won't matter... since we'll be back to jumping from a UH-2 1/2 ton driving across the DZ soon with the drawdown cuts...

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Stras

The bailout rigs won't matter... since we'll be back to jumping from a UH-2 1/2 ton driving across the DZ soon with the drawdown cuts...

Ah, the fun of walking back from the DZ and calling it training.

[afchic]

Originally Posted by Peregrino

Grabbing the C-27s won't work; the USAF has been actively fighting to get rid of the ones already in US service. Personally I'm wondering how many AF generals work as Lockheed lobbyists and what they get paid. They're certainly earning their money. Annoying because I like the C-130 but there are things the C-27 can do on short haul/lighter loads that make a lot of sense. There are really good reasons US airlines adopted commuter aircraft and the C-27 is the military equivalent. Anyway - that's my observation from research and position papers we've prepared at work; afchic might be able to share a different perspective.

My SA has been off, I hadn't seen this thread before today.

Long Story Short, Alenia couldn't maintain the aircraft as promised. There were many problems that came with Army writing the contract while they still owned the program, and then it being transferred to the AF. My understanding is Alenia believes they met the contractual obligations, we disagreed, and tried to get the contract ammended. Didn't happen. So now these particular aircraft will be expensive paperweights because Alenia will not allow us to sell them FMS.

The other ones coming off the production line will be eligible, and my understanding is Australia is really interested. When I was at AMC, I actually had to write a Point Paper for the boss on why Australia couldn't jump ahead of us in the production line

Here at the schoolhouse, we are actually starting a research project on the "who shot John" so that we can disect what all the issues that went wrong with this program.

[MK262MOD1]

I wish I knew more about these aircraft. I would think that the vendor had met the contract if there was an attempt at mending it. Why would the contract be amended unless it was met?

I think those AC sitting there with zero to no hours on them is a waste.

I also know people often don't think about the maintenance contracts that go with purchases like this( and therefore all costs are not factored in prior to the purchase) but it seems like a waste.

[PSM]

Seems the C-27 is being cut in the AF, too. I checked out the BaseOps forum and the pilots realize that the ground troops are getting screwed: BaseOps (Scroll up for the earlier posts.)

Interesting that one guy suggests bringing back the AAF.

Pat

[MK262MOD1]

I have heard this before. I'd be love to have been a fly on the wall when the AF discussed cutting this. I would like to have heard what was said.

[35NCO]

Anyone know the cost of a annual on a civillian registered model?

I think I might start a kickstarter project to fund one. Besides the hourly fuel cost, imagine how much could be acomplished with that aircraft!

I can dream cant I? Far more useful than a fantasy for a Ferrari...eh, or more like a Bill Gates Yacht. (C27J 100 Million new estimation...how about used? )

[Flagg]

Originally Posted by 35NCO

Anyone know the cost of a annual on a civillian registered model?

I think I might start a kickstarter project to fund one. Besides the hourly fuel cost, imagine how much could be acomplished with that aircraft!

I can dream cant I? Far more useful than a fantasy for a Ferrari...eh, or more like a Bill Gates Yacht. (C27J 100 Million new estimation...how about used? )

Interesting idea......

I just saw a bunch of those C27s in question coming in on a SAFI flight.....it was hard to tell if they've moved much since I saw them last in November.

I think I would have preferred a STOL hop out to a province on a C27 than the dodgy looking AN24 I flew on. Eek!

It's a shame really.....as I think I read somewhere there are/were supposed to have quite a bit of Herc compatability.

With a lot of Herc operators out there, adding some "Short Bus Hercs" to the fleet for short-medium distance, small-medium sized loads could be an economical tactical transport fleet mix.

And I'd hazard a guess the operating cost per hour for running static-line and MFF training would have potentially been a fair bit cheaper.

Plus "Son of Spectre" gunship options I would GUESS might make sense as well.


It was sad seeing them sitting there after having read this thread.

[ncart326]

It's eay. AirForce is the probem. They operate like an airline. Army fixed wing will fly,( in theate) no matter what the load factor is. AF is threatened by this. While I was in Iraq as a FE on the C-23, Af came over too see how we did it, and were horrified.

Originally Posted by afchic

My SA has been off, I hadn't seen this thread before today.

Long Story Short, Alenia couldn't maintain the aircraft as promised. There were many problems that came with Army writing the contract while they still owned the program, and then it being transferred to the AF. My understanding is Alenia believes they met the contractual obligations, we disagreed, and tried to get the contract ammended. Didn't happen. So now these particular aircraft will be expensive paperweights because Alenia will not allow us to sell them FMS.

The other ones coming off the production line will be eligible, and my understanding is Australia is really interested. When I was at AMC, I actually had to write a Point Paper for the boss on why Australia couldn't jump ahead of us in the production line

Here at the schoolhouse, we are actually starting a research project on the "who shot John" so that we can disect what all the issues that went wrong with this program.

[bravo22b]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-1...ion-spent.html