USCG to bid on AF C-27J

[Flash]

I may be misinterpreting your post, but the US-2 in my logbook, was a Grumman 'Tracker" (w/ASW gear removed) ... and only made water landings when experiencing a double engine failure on a carrier launch.
BzB

The Japanese refer to their newest flying boat as the US-2, the previous version was the US-1 which itself was a version of the PS-1 (aren't you glad you asked? ). They also have/had C-2s and T-2s, not the kind you are thinking of though.

 

[BusyBee604]

The Japanese refer to their newest flying boat as the US-2 ...

(aren't you glad you asked? )..

Ah so desu ka!

I am glad, I learned sumpin' today Flasher...

*JMSDF US-2
Curious BzB

 

[707guy]

Heard about this last week - then remembered it when I was reading this thread:

"Three U.S. Senators have introduced a bill that would transfer 14 surplus C-27J Spartan aircraft from the Department of Defense to the U.S. Forest Service to be used as air tankers."

http://wildfiretoday.com/2012/07/26...uces-bill-to-transfer-c-27j-aircraft-to-usfs/

 

[SynixMan]

It's my understanding a USCG -60 with the three aux tanks has almost 6 hrs of legs. Seems like a good SAR platform to me.

 

[707guy]

Sounds like a great general statement for any aircraft...."It can do anything.....once..."

 

[scoolbubba]

But you do know that the 60, no matter how much gas and endurance, doesn't fly as fast as the slowest fixed wing? But, in can land on water (once)~

Yup.

 

[Fog]

Heard about this last week - then remembered it when I was reading this thread:

"Three U.S. Senators have introduced a bill that would transfer 14 surplus C-27J Spartan aircraft from the Department of Defense to the U.S. Forest Service to be used as air tankers."

http://wildfiretoday.com/2012/07/26...uces-bill-to-transfer-c-27j-aircraft-to-usfs/

If this plane ends up as a water-bomber in US service, IMO it'll be the greatest waste of a new air asset in our history. I'm not sure any longer that the USAF can successfully purchase a pickup truck these days w/out totally FUBARing the entire process.

 

[Jim123]

I'm not sure any longer that the USAF can successfully purchase a pickup truck these days w/out totally FUBARing the entire process.

The trucks would have parts made in all fifty states, cost $100,000 each, and it would be ten years before they made it into service- at which time someone would finally notice that steering wheels somehow got left out of the original specification...

 

[scoolbubba]

No brakes.

And if someone else needed a truck with no brakes that could only turn left, the AF would suddenly rediscover an urgent need for their 100,000 dollar trucks with no brakes that could only turn left and refuse to share their toys for fear of losing their "unique capability" to someone else in the DOD who could use it.

 

[ftrooper]

So, if the Air Force has no need for these, and the Army was so dissatisfied with the support (and found the justification) to spend a buttload of their limited FW budget on these really nice C-27s, why not just give them back to the Army? I know it's to keep the Army from getting any FW and putting their camel's nose in the tent, but we're going to give brand new C-27s to the Forestry Service just so the AF can tell the Army to go F themselves? Seems as the budgets shrinking, might not hurt to give them to the Army and have them help out on Tactical Air Lift.

 

[707guy]

If this plane ends up as a water-bomber in US service, IMO it'll be the greatest waste of a new air asset in our history. I'm not sure any longer that the USAF can successfully purchase a pickup truck these days w/out totally FUBARing the entire process.

The trucks would have parts made in all fifty states, cost $100,000 each, and it would be ten years before they made it into service- at which time someone would finally notice that steering wheels somehow got left out of the original specification...

AND - the driver would not be able to breath with the windows rolled up...

 

[Lawman]

But you do know that the 60, no matter how much gas and endurance, doesn't fly as fast as the slowest fixed wing? But, in can land on water (once)~

They (and the Navy SH-3) had an amphibious helicopter capability with the Pelican. Still I doubt it was ever used often enough to justify the compromise in engineering to make it happen.

The only thing I really see a Sea Plane doing or bringing capability wise would be long range medical evacuation of an injured crew member. And you'd have to be a long way out to really be away from the reach of a land based Helo with AR capability.

 

[KBayDog]

I was thinking something along the lines of an amphibious tiltrotor.

"Joint," of course.

 

[Sapper!]

So, if the Air Force has no need for these, and the Army was so dissatisfied with the support (and found the justification) to spend a buttload of their limited FW budget on these really nice C-27s, why not just give them back to the Army? I know it's to keep the Army from getting any FW and putting their camel's nose in the tent, but we're going to give brand new C-27s to the Forestry Service just so the AF can tell the Army to go F themselves? Seems as the budgets shrinking, might not hurt to give them to the Army and have them help out on Tactical Air Lift.

My thoughts exactly. Meanwhile we are wearing out the hooks and the AF pulled this program out from under the Army as a power play.

So no one is getting screwed here except for the joe that has to wait 4 extra days to go on leave because there aren't enough -47s around to run the ring route or the guys out in the valleys who have to wait a lot longer for that pallet of 155 shells. The US Army has lost a BDE's worth of aircraft so far and 30 something -58s to hostile fire and spending money on a blk 3 apache, wtf? At least they finally dropped the -60 fly by wire crap.

So between the Army tooling around without direction and the AF not playing ball, not sure where that is going to leave army FW.

 

[Lawman]

My thoughts exactly. Meanwhile we are wearing out the hooks and the AF pulled this program out from under the Army as a power play.

So no one is getting screwed here except for the joe that has to wait 4 extra days to go on leave because there aren't enough -47s around to run the ring route or the guys out in the valleys who have to wait a lot longer for that pallet of 155 shells. The US Army has lost a BDE's worth of aircraft so far and 30 something -58s to hostile fire and spending money on a blk 3 apache, wtf? At least they finally dropped the -60 fly by wire crap.

So between the Army tooling around without direction and the AF not playing ball, not sure where that is going to leave army FW.

We need Block III.

Good god we need Block III. We gain so much capability specific to the environmental shortcomings we face in the current environment its not even funny but thats a whole other thread.


The Guard was going to take the budgetary burden for the C-27. So really what active duty is spending their money on isnt that big an impact. In fact as we upgrade our rotory wing fleet on the Active side we will finally be able to retire a lot of the ancient Guard/Reserve aircraft. Hell in another year or two we might actually be able to finally put the Alpha model Apache out to pasture.