precontact

And electric seats!

C-17 was almost cancelled due to an array of designs issues but had emerged to be an excellent weapons system. https://www.airforcemag.com/article/1113line/ “But the project was hardly an engineering milk run. The C-17 was being asked to do things a giant airlifter had never done before, such as land on unimproved airstrips, land on short fields, taxi in a tight space, and even back up on a runway, all while delivering superheavy, outsize cargo at strategic distances. The C-17 had to overcome flight-control problems, wings that were unable to carry their designed maximum load, automation growing pains, and a crew size reduced to just two pilots and a loadmaster. There were also teething problems in using new computer-aided design methods. The program’s early years were troubled. Several generals and a host of company managers were fired during development and initial production. The C-17 was threatened with cancellation, and Pentagon leaders delivered an ultimatum that if it couldn’t be shaped up, some other transport aircraft—such as a cargo version of the Boeing 747—would be substituted.”

The KC-46 is a great airframe and will be the preeminent tanker going forward. The underlying design is solid, but decisions made by Boeing in the name of saving money have hit it hard. We're gaining more confidence in the airplane everyday and its potential to be more than a tanker will be interesting to follow.

Meanwhile FedEx and UPS are watching these developments with bated breath!

I disagree. AC should have hired you as a homegrown applicant. Doesn't send a good message if they don't hire their own, especially with great scores, unit experience, etc. Did they explain why they turned you down?

Honestly I don't know, was just trying to say that the philosophy of years ago with engine failures has changed.

That's why in the airline world shutting engines down is not a Boldface/Memory item procedure anymore.

Unfortunately pilot error along with command deficiencies compounding equipment failure. https://www.afjag.af.mil/Portals/77/AIB-Reports/2020/June/F-16 Mishap AIB 30 June 2020 Shaw AFB (ACC).pdf

Wow - bringing back the memories of doing this process in the late 90s. About 50 applications, 3 invites, 1 job offer. It's always been a competitive process but hang in there. Ironically was still receiving invites after graduation UPT!

Would it be acceptable for the Thunderbirds to fly around T-37s these days when it has been out of active service for over 10 years (like the Tutor)? It has served them well, but the risk/reward today isn't justifiable when other newer options are out there. CF-18s, BAe Hawks, etc would be better choices.

Summary is as follows: Tudor jet was identified as needing replacement almost 10 years ago. Substandard technology, including limited ejection seat capability. Canada has slow-rolled its replacement, placing undue risk to aircrew and others. Jets have a lifespan, this one is past its effective timeframe.

The air force is also looking at the purchase of a new trainer for fighter pilots, according to a report in late June in the U.S. publication Flightglobal. No cost was provided for that potential purchase. Dan Dempsey, a former Snowbirds commanding officer and team leader, said the air force’s decision to start moving on a replacement aircraft was welcome news. “This is a very, very positive development,” said Mr. Dempsey, a retired lieutenant colonel. He said there are always going to be budget pressures on the Canadian Forces, but he pointed out that a new aircraft will last the team for another 30 or 40 years. “Yes, it’s not a hard-core combat capability, but it is an essential, and in my mind integral, component of the Canadian Forces because recruiting and public relations are always going to be vital.” But spending $755-million on new aircraft for the Snowbirds is an extravagance, says Steve Staples of the Rideau Institute, the Ottawa research and communications group. “The Snowbirds, while entertaining, are a luxury at a time when people are losing their jobs, the economy is hurting and the government is in debt,” said Mr. Staples, who argues that too much is being spent on the military. “It’s a huge cost for air show entertainment.” The air force has put in place a maintenance contract that will cover the Snowbirds aircraft until 2020. In February the government awarded a contract to IMP Aerospace in Halifax to maintain the military’s fleet of 25 CT-114 Tutor aircraft, the RCAF email to Postmedia News said. The three-year contract is for routine preventive maintenance and repairs, with the work taking place at Canadian Forces Base Trenton, Ont. After that the contract has the provision to be renewed annually over seven years, each time for a one-year period. The planes have been in the Canadian Forces inventory since 1963 and have been used by the Snowbirds team since 1971. In the past the air force has examined leasing aircraft for the Snowbirds. It also looked at, but rejected, a suggestion to substitute the CF-18 fighter aircraft for the Tutors. Using CF-18s would increase the ability of the Snowbirds to perform around the world but reduce their availability for smaller venues in Canada that have runways too short to accommodate the jets, the air force concluded. In addition, the CF-18s would be 20 times more expensive to operate than the Tutors. From 2016: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/snowbirds-tutor-jets-replacement-1.3689876 Military studies extending life of Snowbird aircraft 20 years past retirement The military's aging fleet of Tutor Snowbird jets could remain in flight until 2030 — two decades past their scheduled retirement date, according to documents obtained by CBC News under an Access to Information request. The Royal Canadian Air Force show team, the Snowbirds, perform the diamond formation pass over the Peace Tower during Canada Day celebrations on Parliament Hill on July 1, 2016. (Justin Tang/Canadian Press) The military's aging fleet of Tutor jets flown by the Snowbirds demonstration team could remain in flight until 2030 — two decades past the scheduled retirement date. Documents obtained by CBC News under an Access to Information request show the Department of National Defence is studying the feasibility of keeping the Canadian-built CT-114 Tutors in operation until 2025 and 2030, despite some "significant concerns" about the aircraft. CBC camera flies with Snowbirds Fighter jet debate rages Sajjan consults on CF-18 replacement The aerobatic show team thrills spectators by swirling the skies in precise formations, demonstrating the superior skills of pilots commanding the planes. But there have also been serious safety incidents in the past, ranging from seatbelt malfunctions to fiery fatal crashes. The 1960s-era jets were set to retire in 2010, but that date was extended 10 years, despite an internal 2003 report that warned of escalating technical, safety and financial risks and urged the fleet be replaced "immediately." Little progress in replacement More than 13 years later, there has been little progress in procuring new planes. A report from the fall of 2014 cleared the fleet as "technically airworthy," but noted "significant" concerns, including some caused by financial restraints. "Repairs have been reduced to bare bones (one year support) necessitating to put main items in repairable reserves and depleting our stock levels to nothing," it reads, adding this has the effect of creating "more robbing actions and additional maintenance costs." It also noted a "lag in data analysis/reporting" was causing the Snowbirds 431 Squadron to continue flying aircraft "with an unknown condition." A briefing note for the air force, also released under Access to Information, said the department is carrying out a robust life-expectancy extension study to "validate" the option of using the Tutors beyond 2020 to ensure an "uninterrupted" capacity. "Maintaining a military air demonstration team is considered to be a government-mandated requirement," said the memo, written when the Conservatives were in office. Pushing the retirement planes to 2030 would make some of them roughly 67 years old at that point. The life-extension study is expected to be complete by the end of 2016, but the most recent Defence Acquisition Guide, a public listing of anticipated procurements, suggests the contract award and replacement delivery could be between 2026 and 2036. Tutor 'extremely reliable' Retired lieutenant-colonel Dan Dempsey, a former Snowbird pilot who has written a book about Canada's military air show history, said the Tutors have proven extremely reliable over the years. The planes, used as training aircraft until 2000, are tested by technical experts who leave "no stones unturned" to ensure structural integrity, he said. While Dempsey would have liked to see earlier steps to replace the fleet — and have it in place for Canada's 150th birthday next year — he suggested 2025 is a "reasonable limit" as budget cuts pushed the procurement behind other operational priorities. "I'm not surprised this has happened. It's a little disappointing, but I think the main thing is that everybody recognizes the importance of the Snowbirds to the country, to the Canadian Forces, to the RCAF," he said. "And therefore the desire is to keep these flying as long as necessary until a new aircraft can be purchased, and I think that's a very positive thing." Kim Nossal, a professor with the Queen's University Centre for International and Defence Policy, sees no problem with extending the lifespan, since most accidents involving Tutors have resulted from risky manoeuvres or pilot error, not aging parts. "As long as the aircraft has updates and refits, you can extend the life of an airframe however long you like," he said. "The real risk for the demonstration team is what they end up doing — the kind of performances they put on." Snowbirds showcase never-before-seen footage from belly of plane 0:58 Retired colonel Paul Maillet, a former RCAF planner, says the concern is less about safety than value for money. He doesn't believe the demonstration team adds to the operational capacity of the military other than to entertain and help recruit — functions other military planes could fulfil, he said. Scrap Snowbirds? At a time of tight budgets, he questions if the Snowbirds should remain a funding priority. "You start to cut non-essential things to fund essential things," he said. "Basically, it's recruiting, it's public relations stuff.… and does the taxpayer want to pay for that?" According to figures provided by National Defence, hourly operational costs are $14,350 and the total annual cost to run the squadron is $4.3 million. Retired lieutenant-general Lloyd Campbell, former chief of the air staff, said the fleet is relatively economical and he believes Canadians would be disappointed if the Snowbirds were grounded. "They're a tremendously unifying national organization that Canadians find appealing," he said. "They're a great recruiting tool, but the whole question of should we keep them, can we afford them … that is really less military in nature and more political and national in scope. Is this something Canadians want? If so, how do we make it affordable, how do we make it safe?" A spokeswoman for Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan said the Liberal government remains committed to the Snowbirds, noting the life-expectancy study will help guide the decision-making process for a replacement fleet. "We have full confidence in the RCAF's ability to ensure aircraft reliability going forward, while our government will continue to build Canada's defence capabilities to ensure our men and women in uniform have safe, reliable equipment," said Renée Filiatrault. 'Safe and effective' aircraft A RCAF spokesman said the number of aircraft grounded due to safety or maintenance concerns varies from day to day and is managed by maintenance crews to meet airworthiness standards. "The CT-114 is a safe and effective aircraft," Maj. Scott Spurr said in an email. "DND is dedicated to ensuring that the fleet will remain effective until the fleet is retired. The Snowbirds, and the entire RCAF, maintains a robust flight safety and airworthiness program to ensure the safety of the public, as well as our personnel and aircraft." The famous Snowbirds touch down at the Cold Lake Airshow to show off their stuff.0:58

Time to ground them...Too many crashes with an outdated airplane...sad.

Time for an upgrade: https://www.aviationtoday.com/2020/04/16/avionics-upgrade-for-u-2s-to-feature-open-mission-systems/

Actually the USAF screwed this one up. They awarded Northrop Grumman bonus points for additional AR offload beyond the contractual minimum but that extra wasn't supposed to be scored per the contract, right or wrong. In Boeing's defense, they would have offered up a 777-based tanker since it would be able to offload more fuel. The GAO agreed with Boeing and the rest is history.