USAF and US Army C-27J Aircraft On the Way

[Birdstrike]

Not in a million years.

Everything is negotiable or waiverable and comes full circle, usually more than once. If the Army starts flying its own tactical multi-engine fixed wing again, that's step 3. The C-12 was step 1 , Citations/Gulfstreams, step 2. Step by step.

 

[Scrapdog]

Everything is negotiable or waiverable and comes full circle, usually more than once. If the Army starts flying its own tactical multi-engine fixed wing again, that's step 3. The C-12 was step 1 , Citations/Gulfstreams, step 2. Step by step.

Coming from the fighter community and knowing a bunch of A-10 bubba's, I'll second what Deuce said...

Not in a million years.

 

[JungleJett]

If I remember correctly, the A-10 thing was discussed back in the late 80's right before the airplane was going to be decommissioned. They were also working on a version of the F-16 called the A-16 with a bigger gun and some wing mods. They brought some stock (camo green) Vipers to Ft. Hood to work the ranges there with the Apaches in an effort to see how the two could work together in an Army environment.

I think the AF bitched that that type of mission was the responsibility of the AF and not the Army.

Edited: Just found this. I was not sure if my memory was that good anymore. I guess I am doing ok.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article18.html

 

[pkober]

Also remeber they will not be deployable for at least 1-2 years once they are on property. Until the whole unit spins up ans is proficient they wont be going anywhere. Just look at the J model units. Took awhile to get that bird to the sandbox.

Kind of like the C-130J. If I remember we got the first ones in 1998/1999 time frame and they didn't deploy to OEF/OIF until 2004/2005. When I got activated in March 2003 the Brits, I-talians and Aussie were all flying them in Iraq. We embarassed ourselves with the way the "J" was integrated. Hopefully we learned our lesson and will do a better job with the C-27J.

Not a slam on the "J" guys, just a slam on the typical USAF snails pace of aircraft certification. Except the V-22, that gem is just hualing A$$ into combat. :laugh:

 

[Blueliner]

I belive the CG has casa 235's

 

[Oh-ryan]

Everything is negotiable or waiverable and comes full circle, usually more than once. If the Army starts flying its own tactical multi-engine fixed wing again, that's step 3. The C-12 was step 1 , Citations/Gulfstreams, step 2. Step by step.

Don't forget about those sweet, sweet Sherpas!


I know why the Army doesn't fly A-10s, but could someone please explain why it's not part of the USMC inventory? I know it's not carrier certified, but I am pretty sure that the USMC has EA-6B and F-18 squadrons that are land based. They also have land based C-130 squadrons (obviously). Couldn't they also have a land based A-10 squadron, or do all of their tactical (non C-130) planes have to be carrier deployable even if the squadron is land based?

Jarheads, your thoughts?

 

[dtfl]

Kind of like the C-130J. If I remember we got the first ones in 1998/1999 time frame and they didn't deploy to OEF/OIF until 2004/2005. When I got activated in March 2003 the Brits, I-talians and Aussie were all flying them in Iraq. We embarassed ourselves with the way the "J" was integrated. Hopefully we learned our lesson and will do a better job with the C-27J.

Not a slam on the "J" guys, just a slam on the typical USAF snails pace of aircraft certification. Except the V-22, that gem is just hualing A$$ into combat. :laugh:

You can thank AMC active duty types for THAT. They dont trust the plane and the folks they have "running" the program are old E model types that will not let go of the old outdated ways, nor will they realize the J model has capabilities the legacy aircraft don't. If the ANG and AFRES were in charge of getting the J online..it would be getting a PI on every drop (vs most) and it would have been in the desert 5 years ago.

 

[pkober]

You can thank AMC active duty types for THAT. They dont trust the plane and the folks they have "running" the program are old E model types that will not let go of the old outdated ways, nor will they realize the J model has capabilities the legacy aircraft don't. If the ANG and AFRES were in charge of getting the J online..it would be getting a PI on every drop (vs most) and it would have been in the desert 5 years ago.[/quote]

Amen, brother !!!!

 

[MaxTorque]

Deepwater chose the CASA over the 27 on cost per unit. C27 advocates played up the commonality with the C-130J but may have overstated it and weakened their case. The first CASAs already have some significant issues (like the rest of the massive Deepwater procurement). Where the CG can piggyback on a larger deal (like the Blackhawk/Jayhawk) they usually do well. When they strike out on their own - Falcon & Dauphin they learn some expensive lessons. They usually work them out but the corporate memory in acquisition is only short term. They will likely relearn some lessons on the CASA.

MT

 

[flyboyike]

Is it me or does that thing strongly resemble the Aeritalia G222?

 

[pkober]

Well done, grasshopper. It's an upgraded G-222. New props, engine and avionics.

 

[propsarebest]

All of your tactical airlift are belong to us.

 

[flyboyike]

Well done, grasshopper. It's an upgraded G-222. New props, engine and avionics.

Oh good, I thought I was losing it.

 

[erj-145mech]

Well done, grasshopper. It's an upgraded G-222. New props, engine and avionics.

The C-27J is equipped with two AE 2100D3 turboshaft engines, supplied by Rolls-Royce Defence North America (formerly Allison). The engines are rated at 5,000shp. Messier-Dowty supply the six-bladed composite propellers.
"The C-27J has a floor strength equal to that of a Hercules transporter."
The aircraft's propulsion system allows the C-27J Spartan to access a wide range of airfields, including short, unprepared strips in hot and high-altitude conditions while transporting heavy loads. The Spartan can perform 3g tactical airlift operations under severe conditions. The navigation and night piloting systems allow the aircraft to fly just above tree height even at night.
The propulsion system provides an increase in aircraft range by 35% and cruise ceiling by 30%, in comparison to the current G-222 tactical transporter configuration from Alenia.

 

[McGillicutty]

Lets put some 30mm's and maybe a 105mm on it and call it a day!

 

[frog_flyer]

Lets put some 30mm's and maybe a 105mm on it and call it a day!

AC-27J.

I like.

 

[AvroGuy]

If I remember correctly, the A-10 thing was discussed back in the late 80's right before the airplane was going to be decommissioned. They were also working on a version of the F-16 called the A-16 with a bigger gun and some wing mods. They brought some stock (camo green) Vipers to Ft. Hood to work the ranges there with the Apaches in an effort to see how the two could work together in an Army environment.

I think the AF bitched that that type of mission was the responsibility of the AF and not the Army.

Edited: Just found this. I was not sure if my memory was that good anymore. I guess I am doing ok.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article18.html

isn't there or wasn't there a ANG or AFRES unit flying around with 30mm gun pods??

On a side note, my brother was a ROMAD and absolutely hated working with the viper. He said the couldn't do the CAS tactics as well as the Hog guys.

 

[propsarebest]

This whole Army/AF thing is going to turn out just like the 'bou. the AF will get all of them and the army will go away with its tail tucked between its legs.

 

[McGillicutty]

isn't there or wasn't there a ANG or AFRES unit flying around with 30mm gun pods??

On a side note, my brother was a ROMAD and absolutely hated working with the viper. He said the couldn't do the CAS tactics as well as the Hog guys.

All depends on the unit. From my latest experiences, the F-15E guys were hands down better than the A-10 guys.... still not better than us, though :uzi:

 

[727C47]

Don't forget about those sweet, sweet Sherpas!


I know why the Army doesn't fly A-10s, but could someone please explain why it's not part of the USMC inventory? I know it's not carrier certified, but I am pretty sure that the USMC has EA-6B and F-18 squadrons that are land based. They also have land based C-130 squadrons (obviously). Couldn't they also have a land based A-10 squadron, or do all of their tactical (non C-130) planes have to be carrier deployable even if the squadron is land based?

Jarheads, your thoughts?

in a perfect world Marine Air would have A-10's,and an improved ,updated A-6F or G .