Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6 ... 8  Next

The A400 never had a snowballs chance of hell in winning the contract for a few reasons...

1) The C-17 is more capable (the A400 is more of a rivial to the Herc than the C-17).

2) The C-17 is proven, while the A400 hasn't even flown.

3) The C-17 is being delivered now and our first C-17 has already flown its first operational mission. If we had gone with the A400 we would be waiting until 2010 or later for any aircraft.

4) Pratt and Whitney Canada was one of two companies on the short list to produce the engines for the A400 (thereby giving the aircraft signifigant Canadian content and making it more appealing to purchase). The other company, EuroProp, was given the contract even though the Canadian company had the superior bid. The European governments interferred to prevent P&W Canada from winning the bid.

And then the Europeans (Airbus) have the nerve to accuse Canada of unfair procurement processes considering what they did to P&W Canada. Bunch of bloody hypocrits.

   

Antonov was far more capable, and a whole lot less expensive.

   

Just remember you get what you pay for. Russian equipment quality is rather low in comparison to western equipment... going with the lowest bidder is often not the best idea.

   

The Antonov was certified for civilian operation pretty much everywhere, though, so presumably it's a safe machine.

The only reason we didn't buy it is that our military still has a knee-jerk prejudice against anything not made in the US.

   

Yes, so thats why we buy such wonderful American products like EH-101 helicopters, Leopard 2 tanks, G-Wagens, Nyalas, ERYX anti tank missiles, M777 howitzer, Coyotes, LAV III's, LG1 howitzer, Polaris transports, Griffons, Victoria class SSK's....

In case you haven't clued in, none of the above equipment is American.

   

My point still stands.

All else being equal, they will still run like lemmings for Uncle Sam's wares.

   

No, it doesn't. You're just won't admit it, besides I don't see the problem with buying American equipment, they build some of the highest quality military gear around. Better us buying American/European equipment than Russian or Chinese junk.

   

So why is it good enough to rent to fly the Leo2s we bought from Europe to Afghanistan? Canada (and most of NATO) has used the AN-124 for years with no real problems. Look up SALIS if you don't believe it. It is certified to operate worldwide and can carry more farther distances using less fuel. The AN-124-100 that was submitted has Western-made avionics and equipment. Only the ariframe is Russian/Ukrainian.

I do agree that the Airbus A-400M was never an option. Airbus can call it a strategic airlifter if it wants, but its payload and cargo space are too low to be compared to the AN-124 or C-17. Had we waited for the A-400M, we wouldn't get any for about a decade, as it already has orders from almost a dozen NATO countries (South Africa too I think).

The fact is that Dubya called in a favour and Harper, said sure, why not. Otherwise the C-17 factory would have closed at the end of this year. With the purchases from his buddies (Canada, Asutralia and the UK), it will remain open until 2009. This decision was all about supporting the US defence industry, nothing less. We had a choice between a mini-van and a Ferrari and bought the Ferrari. For the cost of 4 C-17s, we could have had a fleet of 10-12 AN-124s, which would have meant we wouldn't need so many Hercs. That would have freed up more money for heavy icebreakers, Arctic ports, new destroyers, whatever.

   

That would all be fine except the Russian stuff (or Ukrainian, in the case of the Antonov?) isn't junk.

Time to take the blinders off.

   

And it's better to support the industry of North-America than Russia or Europe.

   

I concur, Amercian and European equipment have stood the test of time. My husband flew the equivalant of the EH101 for five years offshore. It was and still is the best choice for the Sea King replacement.

Streaker you sig is insulting, you care more for the Radical Insurgents than you do for our solidiers. Please spare me the usual tripe of innocents civies, Muslims killing Muslims make up for 80 percent of the death toll in Iraq. Blah blah blahhhhhhhhhhh grieve away for terrorists gag.

   

What does my sig have to do with the topic, soldiers or Muslims?

My God, woman, you're even dumber than I thought.


PS You should really look into taking some remedial English lessons.

   

With a contract of this size. we need to keep an eye where the parts are made and how fast we can get spares. Boeing does a huge ammount of business in Canada and that's money that stays in Canada.

You lefties should finally accept we have more in common with the US than anybody esle.

   

Rain, we could have bought an icebreaker or three with the cost difference.

   

All the money that is spent on foreign manufacturers is gone.
Boeing does almost 40% of it's manufature in Canada. Manufacturing jobs keep Canada strong and keeps aerospace workers here.

   

Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6 ... 8  Next