Hey, waitaminute! How about the Composite Dreamliner? Can they do anything with that?
Comes online in '08.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
Posted on 03/23/2006 5:07:23 PM PST by SandRat
WASHINGTON (ARMY NEWS SERVICE, March 23, 2006) – Army and Air Force officials announced March 17 that a new Joint Cargo Aircraft, designed to enhance the combat readiness of both services, will be developed by a combined team. Fielding of the new aircraft is expected within two years.
The Request for Proposals was released March 17 after the Acquisition Strategy Report was signed that morning, according to Pentagon officials. A Joint Program Office, comprised of personnel from both branches of service, will open Oct. 1 in Huntsville, Ala., with the Army taking the lead.
“This is a big day for both of us in terms of joint cooperation and capability,” said Brig. Gen. Stephen D. Mundt, Army Aviation director. “This aviation program is going to bring tremendous capability to both of our services and, more importantly, to the Department of Defense.”
Air Force Brig. Gen. Andrew Dichter, deputy director of Operational Capability Requirements, underscored Mundt’s enthusiasm for the new program and added that the program is an important example of the value of the joint capability and integration system (JCIDS).
“The Army and the Air Force have not always agreed, particularly at the beginning of this program,” he said. “But joint doctrine has always provided the ability for each service to have organic lift capability: the Army’s Sherpas, the Marine Corps’ KC-130 and the Navy’s COD are good examples of this. And the Air Force and the Army are committed to taking the new Joint Cargo Aircraft program, develop this important capability and deliver it to the joint warfighter.”
He said that the Air Force has accepted the Army’s need to recapitalize its aging fleet, and that the Air Force also identified a need for a light cargo aircraft – not only to transform itself because of mutual interdependencies, but also to be used for Homeland Defense missions and to support civil authorities in disasters or crises.
“The aircraft we field will provide a key capability to the joint force commander,” said Dichter. “For 59 years, the Air Force has been the service provider of intra-theater airlift, and for approximately 40 years, we’ve done that with essentially one airplane – the C-130.”
While the C-17 does perform a limited intra-theater role, Dichter added, the Air Force was long overdue in diversifying its intra-theater airlift fleet. The challenge, he said, is to transform the air fleet with the limited dollars available, to meet the transformational needs of not only the Army but of all the services and combatant commanders.
“The Air Force is prepared to meet that challenge,” said Dichter, “and fielding this Joint Cargo Aircraft capability along with the Army is a significant step toward that goal.”
On the Army side, Mundt said that the new aircraft would replace what he called a “very, very old and tired airframe in terms of the C-23 Sherpa, C-12 and C-26. Our Soldiers deserve better than that – we can also get them off the roads so they don’t have to be exposed to improvised explosive devices.”
The Air Force leads the world in the ability to perform operational and strategic intra-theater lift, he said. But because of the changing battlefield, the brigade combat teams modularity and the logistics concept of support changing to a push system, the Army needs additional intra-theater lift capability to fill the last tactical mile.
“Historically,” Mundt said, “the Air Force does not perform missions in the tactical spectrum, down to that point. Tactical wheeled vehicles and helicopters have performed that role.” Combining the two aircraft was a natural step because of the similarities in the capability gaps of each service, he added.
The Air Force and the Army have agreed that the aircraft each needs will have the same basic platform, with some intra-service requirements. The services are developing a memorandum of agreement (MOA) which outlines missions, roles, command and control, service responsibilities and the way ahead for doctrine, organizations, training, maintenance, logistics, leadership, personnel and facilities, according to Mundt.
He anticipates that an MOA will be approved by each service’s vice chief of staff by May 1.
I guess the Air Force should never have gotten rid of their C-23 Sherpas. They Army has used them with good utility. Now the JROC has this new program.
Very interesting.
But, a 2 year acquisition cycle? That's just not feasible, unless they modify an existing airframe.
Tactical Boeing 737s?
Or DH-7s, perhaps?
C'mon, we need some aviator input here!
Hey, waitaminute! How about the Composite Dreamliner? Can they do anything with that?
Comes online in '08.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
Something bigger than a Twin Otter and smaller than a C-130...an updated C-7 or C/K-123?
I can it it now, a C-7 'bou with turboprops......
Well, why not?
Aerobus
Mark my words.
Not bad, but they want a new airframe...which leaves the 737 out!
Man, throw business to the Frogs?
We called 'em "Mini Herc"
A shame that only 300+ were ever built
Thanks for the pics, couldn't find one in a quick Google-ing
A pox on your house for mentioning the Sherpa!!! That POS is a disgrace to aviation...we have 4 in our task force right now. Useless when it gets hot here. Slow, no weapons, puny carrying capacity...just crap salad.
I'd like to see the Airforce and Army cooperate, but I'll believe it when I see it. Fixed-wing pilots are the red-headed stepchildren of Army Aviation. That's unlikely to change...I'll stick to my UH-60.
A pox on your house for mentioning the Sherpa!!! That POS is a disgrace to aviation...we have 4 in our task force right now. Useless when it gets hot here. Slow, no weapons, puny carrying capacity...just crap salad.
I'd like to see the Airforce and Army cooperate, but I'll believe it when I see it. Fixed-wing pilots are the red-headed stepchildren of Army Aviation. That's unlikely to change...I'll stick to my UH-60.
double post stooge. sorry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.