It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Canada to acquire fifth C-17

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 06:33 PM
link   
a reply to: thebozeian

It's up to five months. Even though it's not technically a PDM, it involves many of the same checks as one. Almost all the skin removed, and depending on what they find, wing removal. A check that doesn't find anything can be done faster.

Military checks are more strenuous. Commercial aircraft get more cycles, but tend to not go screaming through valleys and hills at low level.
edit on 12/27/2014 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 06:36 PM
link   
Canada no longer is going to stay as a peace keeping force thanks to Harper and Cons they want to turn Canada into an War Mongering county just as on the same level as Britain and America.


Maybe Harper should run for the presidency of the Republicans in 2016.



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Agent_USA_Supporter

Since when do five C-17s and potentially a handful of F-35s equate to war mongering?



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 09:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58
I'm curious, why do they remove most of the fuselage(?) skin. Are they concerned with corrosion or cracking in either the skin or frames? NDI checks should detect this without removal unless there are known concerns with fastener holes in which case you may need to pull rivets/hylocks for a HFEC check? I have done a few of these recently on flap trailing links and main doors, usually on an overnighter or long transit check. IIRC didn't the C-17 suffer from wing tank leaks through fasteners back in the early/mid nineties when it was still MDC? Makes me wonder if there is an underlying issue that will just have to be managed for life.

BTW, the Australian requirement is for a minimum of 2 extra airframes with up to four possible. We should know when the defence review is released soon. Either way expect a minimum order for 2 very soon from the remaining "whitetails".

LEE.

edit on 27-12-2014 by thebozeian because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2014 @ 09:51 PM
link   
a reply to: thebozeian

Corrosion and deep structure cracks from being slammed around on low level flights. They've had a few aircraft in the past that they caught problems after a clean NDI check. It wasn't enough to show up on the NDI inspection but it did on a visual.

They've pretty much solved the leak and engine issues. There are a couple other minor issues they still have to watch, but nothing really to worry about.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 02:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Psynic

The Russians never stole AVRO technology. Diefenbaker gave it away. He capitulated to Eisenhower's Military Industrial Complex. Most of the engineers and tradesmen went on to work for NASA, Boeing, McDonald-Douglass.

Canada lost its' courage to stand up for itself. And it's something that we lost and never regain again. Canada would not have to depend on the U.S. for protection. But now the U.S needs it allies to help them cover the cost of fighting terrorism in Afghanistan and against ISIS

There is a military paradox that says to maintain peace, one must prepare for war. Canada would always be a more kinder and gentler nation in comparison to our neighbours to south.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 07:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: RossWellOldMexico
a reply to: Psynic

The Russians never stole AVRO technology. Diefenbaker gave it away. He capitulated to Eisenhower's Military Industrial Complex.


According to recently released classified documents, AVRO had been infiltrated by Russian agents.
This is not up for debate.

Technological advances by AVRO making the largest titanium castings yet produced were incorporated into the MIG-25.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 07:49 AM
link   
So why is it Canada needs these exactly say as apposed to schools or hospitals?, what will they actualy be used for?



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 07:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Dabrazzo

Moving large amounts of supplies and equipment, both military and humanitarian.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 08:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Well if their actualy being used for good, fair enough I suppose.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 08:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dabrazzo
a reply to: Zaphod58

Well if their actualy being used for good, fair enough I suppose.


And the bombs we're dropping in Syria are full of candy canes.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 08:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Psynic

They're also not being flown by Canadian C-17s.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 09:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Psynic

Ah to be fair Canada does seem to actualy use them for ferrying cargo to disaster sights.

The real reason for their purchase seems to be however they are no longer leasing air transport from Russia seeing as how the Ruskies are now back to being the baddies.

I dont know the financials behind that if its cheaper or whatever. Canada can probably chin it though they seem to be doing ok financialy, well comparable to most.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 09:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Dabrazzo

It's cheaper, and they don't have to rely on the availability of someone else's aircraft.



posted on Dec, 28 2014 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Yeah they do, much like when America carries out space launches.

Royal Canadian Air Force


Canada's air arm has had a long-standing need for strategic airlift for humanitarian and military operations around the world. It had followed a pattern similar to the German Air Force in leasing Antonovs and Ilyushins for many of its needs, including deploying the Disaster Assistance Response Team (DART) to tsunami-stricken Sri Lanka in 2005. The air service was forced to rely entirely on leased An-124 Ruslan for a Canadian Army deployment to Haiti in 2003.[citation needed] The service has also used a combination of leased Ruslans, Ilyushins and USAF C-17s for moving heavy equipment into Afghanistan



posted on Jan, 2 2015 @ 06:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Psynic

They're also not being flown by Canadian C-17s.


Not yet but lets wait and see what happens?
You never know.
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Jan, 2 2015 @ 11:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Psynic

Provide a link to these truths you post of.



posted on Jan, 3 2015 @ 08:18 AM
link   
a reply to: RossWellOldMexico

The latest edition of Storms of Controversy by Palmiro Campagna contains the most recently declassified documents.



posted on Jan, 5 2015 @ 11:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Psynic

Not good enough. You offer no actual declassified files. I ain't buying a book to see these allegations you state. The dude you recommend is a UFO conspiracy theorist that begs people to do his leg work. C'mon, Psynic. you can do better.



posted on Jan, 6 2015 @ 06:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: RossWellOldMexico
a reply to: Psynic

Not good enough. You offer no actual declassified files. I ain't buying a book to see these allegations you state. The dude you recommend is a UFO conspiracy theorist that begs people to do his leg work. C'mon, Psynic. you can do better.



Where did you get "UFO Conspiracy theorist" from ???

Campagna is an Engineer with the Department of National Defence in Ottawa and Canada's representative to NATO on various technical matters.

He has produced the definitive text on the Arrow and has updated it several times over the last decade as new documents become declassified.

Worth reading if you have any interest in the subject.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join